This content analysis examines the arguments used to support or oppose the USDA’s proposed rule that all SNAP-authorized retailers carry more nutritious foods. A random sample of public comments posted to the U.S. Federal Register was analyzed. Three main themes were discussed throughout the comments: 1) arguments used in opposition to the rule; 2) arguments used in support of the rule; and 3) facilitators to assist the stores in implementing the rule. This study’s findings could help guide rule implementation by understanding the viewpoints of stakeholder’s that would be impacted by the policy change.
Arguments Used in Public Comments to Support or Oppose the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Minimum Stocking Requirements: A Content Analysis
The purpose of this project is to examine rural store owners’ perceptions about the United States Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) proposed rule that updates the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) vendor requirements and to understand the barriers and facilitators to implementation. The study will include a content analysis on the … More
Evaluating the implementation and impact of a healthier checkout programme at a regional convenience store chain
This study aimed to test the feasibility of implementing and evaluating a healthier checkout pilot study in a convenience store chain in New Hampshire. A quasi-experimental study was conducted comparing a 3-month ‘healthier checkouts’ intervention in ten convenience stores which stocked eight healthier items in the checkout space and ten … More
The USDA Online Purchasing Pilot, which allows SNAP participants to shop and pay for groceries online, rapidly expanded during the COVID-19 pandemic. From March 2020 to March 2021, the number of participating states increased from 5 to 47. This brief assesses whether the Pilot promotes healthy food access (using the … More