Author: cbp15396

The webinar, Incorporating Traditional Foods in Child Nutrition Program Menus, from April 2016 discusses practices for incorporating traditional foods into child nutrition programs. Traditional foods were defined by Alaska State Director of Child Nutrition Programs, Jo Dawson, as food that have traditionally been prepared and consumed by an Indian tribe. Today, if there is a way to save money, we typically lean in that direction. MPRO Farm to School Lead, Bob Gorman pushed that instead of paying to have food prepared and shipped to schools, local farming and hunting groups are great ways to save money. Gorman continued by giving an Alaskan traditional meal, but surprisingly enough his other example of a traditional meal was from Georgia. This included local chicken, egg corn squash, corn bean soup, a roll, and some lettuce and looked a lot better than I remember my options being in grade school.

Jo Dawson helped start “Let’s Eat More of Alaska’s Traditional Foods!” This project was funded by the US Department of Health and Human Services and pushed to keep Alaskans healthy by sharing local hunted and gathered foods to food service programs, senior meals, food banks, schools, and hospitals. Their flyer was easy to understand and clearly displays what is acceptable and unacceptable to donate.

“Fish for Kids” gave local commercial fisherman the opportunity to participate in a monthly donation day, since 2007 has averaged 12,000 pounds of fish per year. They are able to build community pride by eating the donated fish once per week with their children at school and even share with a senior center another school district. Dawson noted that many districts in Alaska have partnerships with local fish processing plants. State and Federal Regulations and supply were the top two barriers for incorporating traditional foods in schools.

Nutritionist, Jenny Montague, gave the presentation with the most takeaways for those not living in Alaska. She highlighted techniques for food substitutions, including growing traditional food, and using traditional ingredients and recipes. Another substitution technique was by meal component, which focused on finding alternative sources of protein, grains, fruit, vegetable, and carb/starch and then from those five categories, individually looking to find healthier, locally available options that could be substituted in. This approach is easily adaptable for any state/district.

The climate, region, and weather all play a role, but many schools can grow and cook local, traditional options that they can eat. Doing so will help save money, but can also bring the community closer together and allow students to work and learn about this field. Grants, partnerships, or funds of any kind certainly help these kinds of projects because startup resources or donations are necessary. With all of the agriculture and farming in the state of Georgia, I am sure that many districts have local partnerships to help incorporate healthy, traditional foods in our school lunches.

The “Effective Walking and Walkability Interventions” webinar part 1, from August 2016, highlighted different evidence-based strategies that would increase physical activity, specifically walking in communities. Important populations, vulnerable or underrepresented racial, ethnic, and socioeconomic groups at risk for inactivity was a group that they wanted to include throughout their discussion. Dr. Gregory Heath began by highlighting a few improvement areas needed to progress in order to move forward as a whole; an increased knowledge about physical activity benefits, increased awareness about ways to increase physical activity in the community, explain how to overcome barriers and negative attitudes about physical activity, and increase participation in community-based activities. By improving in these four areas, as a whole, we should be much more active and healthier.

Dr. Heath continued by addressing successful characteristics specific to community-wide campaigns, with examples. “Wheeling Walks” was a community-wide campaign that targeted 50-65-year-old for adults meeting CDC/ACSM physical activity recommendations. Making the campaign as specific as possible helps the target population know that this is available and helps generate the needed participants. In public health, basing the design off of theories like the planned behavior and trans theoretical model as behavioral guides will often help your argument when applied correctly. Dr. NiCole Keith made the point that implementation of community-based physical activity campaigns have many barriers and challenges. She suggests that the Multiple streams framework could help move physical activity into population’s health because this theory addresses problems of politics and policy changes.

Practitioners would be able to use this information in many ways. Including minority groups and not just focusing on the majority groups was often discussed in this webinar. Dr.  Keith made the point that often times those minority groups are the ones at risk and more needing of assistance, whether informational or resources. Dr. Chanam Lee promoted to design communities in a way that makes it safe and easy for people of all ages and abilities to walk. Doing that, along with promoting programs and policies to support walking where people live, learn, work, and play are two ways to improve walkability.

Improve our roadways (make more inviting with sidewalks, crossing lights, and bicycle lanes), local walking/bicycle days, and the opportunities to save money while being active are all common ways try to get communities to use more active transportation routes.

Any other (hopefully low-cost) ways that come to mind that could increase community walkability?

(I remember hearing of a weekend carnival type setup with a few location spots. Each location has few games/activities and can get stamp/sticker, then walk or bike to the other locations and get all stamps to get some prize (certificate, t-shirt, food coupons, local businesses). But that takes many volunteers and resources, so I am curious to hear if anyone has any local ideas that could promote more active transportation?

Where the Rubber Meets the Road: Promoting Active Transportation in Rural Areas is a round table discussion from 2012 that I listened to. This discussion promoting active transportation tied in well with our class discussion from a few weeks ago about community walkability and street-scale design. Proper planning makes active transportation much easier, safer, and increases the chances for people to walk/bicycle, instead of drive. Topics covered included; limitations specific to rural environments, the Complete-Streets initiative, community design including sidewalks and bike lanes, safe routes to schools, and suggestions related to active transportation for all individuals moving forward.

From what we covered in class, we know that “local” stores, schools, and jobs are sometimes located very far from homes, which makes it very difficult to commute without a well-functioning car. Many rural environments usually lack pedestrian amenities, like crosswalks with lights, sidewalks, and bicycle lanes, which makes active transportation more of an inconvenience. Back in 2012, all five public-health experts in this discussion agreed that active living was gaining momentum in every region of the country, and since then it appears that we have made a true effort to move forward by updating recreation facilities, parks, connecting sidewalks, and bicycle lanes.

Bicycling to school and work is something that has become more popular since this discussion and this helps you save money, as well as reach your weekly active minutes. Many renovations, like adding bicycle lanes, still needs to be made in order for these number to continue to rise. Having a separate lane for people on bicycles is much safer and inviting than having to share the road with cars. This discussion was tied into the Complete Streets initiative.

Jennifer Rice, from the Humboldt Area Foundation, followed with the point that the US lack methods and tradition for engaging communities in solving transportation problems. State officials say they are doing something for the community, in that community, but not working with the community. Ronald Cossman, from the Social Science Research Center, made the point that local officials need to notify and educate state officials, by showing proof of why and what kind of assistance they need. This requires local officials to spend time listening to better understand and connect with the community, but can lead to better results for all.

Mark Duncan, from Starkville in Motion, said that local officials need proof in order to get a grant in rural communities. Tracy Hadden Loh, from California, made a point that it is important to market towards parents. The opportunity to reduce transportation cost with a safe and healthier option is a great way to engage communities. In rural communities, having a school bus dropoff near the school and have a walking school bus was an option to help reduce congestion. Another takeaway moving forward from this discussion was to educate everyone (walkers, bicyclers, & drivers) on how to share the road properly and keep safety in mind.