Farm to School Project, 2012

Executive Summary

Final Report

Slide Presentation

Policy Briefs

Technical Paper About the Survey

 

 

Overview

Purpose:  To inform the development of Farm to School initiatives in Washington state so that scarce resources can be use most effectively to increase the use of Washington grown foods in Washington's schools.

 

 Objectives of the Washington State Department of Agriculture Farm-to-School Project:  

1.      Use existing survey data to describe the current state of farm to school activities and capacities as well as interest in building stronger programs in schools across the state.

2.      Develop recommendations for the next steps for farm to school in the state including the most promising opportunities and the needs for further information.

The project will be divided into "deliverables."   Students will work on these deliverables in teams.

Readings:

All class members should complete these readings:

 The following will be useful for preparation of reports:

 

Deliverables

Phase One:  What do we know?

Student groups develop data tables using the results of a Survey of 82 School Nutrition Directors from school districts in Washington State. The de-identified survey data are posted on the computers in the Health Sciences Library as an SPSS file.  Team A will work with an additional file that currently has only the unique identifier and the name of the district.  These files will be merged once the district information is entered as described below and the names of the districts are deleted. You may access the data and the SPSS software in the library.  Use your UW NETID to login at the learning commons, the files are on network drive J: the folder is J:\CDATA\nutr531. The files are read-only.  Please save to another location if you want to make modifications. Here's a copy of the survey questions:

Team A:  Describe the sample (using the file named districts_12_15.sav)

Map the districts that responded to the survey:

  • Map the districts on a map of the state to depict geographic distribution

  • Log in to Google. Then go to "My Maps" and "Create a new map" that is public.
  • Zoom to locations of interest and right-click, then "Add a placemark," and edit the title and description.
  • Other icons can be selected by clicking the icon in the upper right of the same callout that allows editing of the title and description.
  • Icons can be added from URLs,.  Click for an example.
  • Once the map is completed, click "Done."
  • The maps can be shared by clicking the "link" in the upper right and copying the URL to an e-mail message.

 

Create a database of district characteristics

  • Using data from OSPI ( http://reportcard.ospi.k12.wa.us/summary.aspx?year=2010-11), find % FRPL, % white, and total enrollment for each district.  Create a database using the same unique identifier that is used on the master database that includes the unique identifier, % FRPR, % white and total enrollment for each district.

  • Create a table that describes these three district characteristics in  categories that make sense based on the distribution of the data (e.g., large/medium/small districts; districts with < 25% FRPL, 25% < FRPL < 75% FRPL, > 75% )

Team B:  Create tables to describe survey responses (using the file named surveyresults_12_15.sav)

  • Describe exsiting efforts and current capacity based on questions 8, 9,10,11,12, 13, 14, 15

  • Describe the foods that are currently being used and that schools are interested in using questions 6,6,16,32,33

  • Describe perceived possibilities for expanding FTS actions (questions 17, 23, 24,30, 38, 39)

  • Describe policies (questions 25,26,27,29,31)

  • Describe perceptions about FTS (questions 34,35,36,37)

Team C:  Describe the evidence for best FTS practices

  • Conduct a search of peer reviewed (pubmed & agricola) and "grey" literature about policies and practices that seem to work to support FTS.

  • Build a table of the policies and practices that emerge, the references that support each policy & practice, and the level of the science (i.e., controlled trial, comparative study based on "natural experiments, "case study, practice-based evidence, etc. )

  • Develop a list of the top ~10 policies and practices that emerge from this review

Team D:  Describe comparative data

  • Assemble similar data from other sources

  • Prepare a matrix with the name of the source and the kinds of data from each that are similar to the data from the WA State 2011 Survey.

 

Team E:  Explore the test responses to each question:

  • What are the completion rates for each question? (Indicating that respondents are confused or unable to answer some questions.)

  • Does the completion rate fall off at the end of the survey (Indicating that the survey might be too long.)

  • Are there inconsistencies in responses across related survey items?

  • Are there common responses in the "others" write-in sections that seem to deserve their own response options?

  • Are there other concerns about responses that could be addressed in future versions of the survey?

 

Phase Two:  What does it mean?

Phase Two Team A:  Associations within the data

·   Based on the class decisions on January 27, run tests for associations between characteristics of the districts (enrollment, % FRPL, etc.) and key survey responses.

·   Develop a bulleted list of the highlights of these analyses

Phase Two Team B:  Divide up and provide insight and technical assistance to the other teams

Phase Two Team C:  Compare top best practices & policies to survey responses

Phase Two Team D:  Compare WA state responses to those from other states

Phase Two:  Team E:  Develop list of sample questions and structural recommendations for a follow-up survey

 

Phase Three:  Dissemination & Communication

  1. A full report of all the findings and recommendations

  2. Executive Summary

  3. A forty five minute PowerPoint presentation to Stakeholders for March 13

  4. Four one-page briefing documents with highlights of the findings and recommendations for :

    • Guidance to WSDA:  what programs are needed, why is work important, what are schools asking for?

    • The general public:  state of F2S, celebrate successes/increases, awareness and support

    • Advocates:  what policy solutions are needed, why is work important, what are schools asking for?

    • Stakeholders:  farmers, food companies - quantify school interest as market opportunity

    • Stakeholders:  schools - nutrition programs and administrators - state of F2S in WA, WSDA programs that can assist

 

Schedule

January 6

Introduction and Background

Tricia Kovacs, MSc

Shoko Kumagai, MPH

Becky Elias, MBA

Washington State Department of Agriculture - Slide Presentation

  • Introduction to FTS
  • What's the context for the project in WA State?
  • How will this project be helpful to FTS in WA State? 

 

Donna Johnson

  • Expectations of students - "deliverables," due dates and level of commitment
  • Evaluation of student performance

Getting Organized for Phase One & Phase Two

  • Meet with fellow team members and determine action steps and responsibilities

January 13

Phase One: Teamwork

January 20

Phase One: Check in with Donna & Teamwork

January 27

Phase One: Class meets as a group - presentation of phase one results & Plans for Phase two

February 3

Phase Two:  Teamwork

February 10

Phase Two:  Class meets as a group - presentation of preliminary phase one and phase two results to WSDA preceptors

February 17

Phase Three:  Teamwork

February 24

Phase Three: Class meets as a group - check in with Donna & further teamwork

March 2

Phase Three: Teams prepare final deliverables

March 9

Phase Three: Class meets as a group - check in with Donna & Teams prepare final deliverables

March 13

10:30-12:20

Presentation to Stakeholders

 

Evaluation

 

Points

Group

 

Each of products demonstrates comprehension and appropriate application of basic concepts learned in class for cultural competence, evidence based practice, practical program evaluation, and strong links between assessment finding and recommendations.  

85

Organization and presentation of final products

15

Individual

 

Successful participation in steps of data collection, data compilation and analysis, and policy development 

40

Role in phase one & two and final presentations

10

Rating of individual effort by other members of group:  Rating Sheet (please post to class dropbox:

  https://catalyst.uw.edu/collectit/dropbox/djohn/18739

 

50

Total

200

 

NUTR 531 Homepage