1<strong>14</strong>80. Ratcliffe, M.M. A sample theory-based logic model toimprove program development, implementation, andsustainability of Farm to School programs. Child Obes.2012;8(4):315–22.81. IOM (Institute of Medicine). School Meals: BuildingBlocks for Healthy Children. Washington, D.C.: TheNational Academies Press;82. Kandiah, J., Jones, C. Nutrition Knowledge and FoodChoices of Elementary School Children. Early Child DevCare. 2002 Jun 1;172(3):269–73.83. Farm to Preschool Snapshot [Internet]. National Farmto School Network; 2012. Available from: http://farmtopreschool.org/documents/SurveyFlyer_LowRes_FINAL.pdf84. Schafft, K., Hinrichs, C.C., Bloom, D.J. PennsylvaniaFarm-to-School programs and the articulation of localcontext. J Hunger Environ Nutr. 2010;5(1):23–40.85. 85. Waters, A. Edible Schoolyard: A Universal Idea. SanFrancisco, CA: Chronicle Books; 20<strong>08</strong>.86. Carney, P., Hamada, J., Rdesinski, R., Sprager, L.,Nichols, K., Liu, B., et al. Impact of a communitygardening project on vegetable intake, food securityand family relationships: A community-basedparticipatory research study. J Community Health.2012;37(4):874–81.87. Beckman, L.L., Smith, C. An evaluation of inner-cityyouth garden program participants’ dietary behaviorand garden and nutrition knowledge. J Agric Educ.20<strong>08</strong>;49(4):11–24.88. Lautenschlager, L., Smith, C. Beliefs, knowledge, andvalues held by inner-city youth about gardening,nutrition, and cooking. Agric Hum Values. 2007 Jun1;24(2):245–58.89. Nowak, A.J., Kolouch, G., Schneyer, L., Roberts, K.H.Building food literacy and positive relationships withhealthy food in children through school gardens. ChildObes. 2012;8(4):392–5.90. Ng, S., Bednar, C., Longley, C. Challenges, benefits andstrategies of implementing a farm-to-cafeteria programin college and university foodservice operations. JFoodserv Mangement Educ. 2010;4(1):22–7.91. Market Ventures, Inc., Karp Resources, Center forHealth & Public Service Research, New York University.SchoolFood Plus Evaluation Interim Report Phase 3School Year 2005-2006. Market Ventures, Inc.; 2007.92. SchoolFood Plus Evaluation, Interim Evaluation, Phase2 Report. New York, NY: A Report of SchoolFood Plus;2005.93. Izumi, B.T., Wynne, W.D., Hamm, M.W. Marketdiversification and social benefits: Motivations offarmers participating in farm to school programs. JRural Stud. 2010 Oct;26(4):374–82.94. Gleason, P., Briefel, R., Wilson, A., Dodd, A.H.,Mathematica Policy Research I. School Meal ProgramParticipation and Its Association with Dietary Patternsand Childhood Obesity. Final Report [Internet].Mathematica Policy Research, Inc.; 2009 Jul. Availablefrom: http://stats.lib.pdx.edu/proxy.php?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eric&AN=ED507478&site=ehost-live (requires accountlogin)95. Rothman, K.J. BMI-related errors in the measurementof obesity. Int J Obes. 20<strong>08</strong>;32:S56–S59.96. Schmalz, D.L. “I feel fat”: Weight-related stigma,body esteem, and BMI as predictors of perceivedcompetence in physical activity. Obes Facts. 15-21;2010(3):1.97. MacLean, L.M., Meyer, M., Walsh, A., Clinton, K., Ashley,L., Donovan, S., et al. Stigma and BMI screeningin schools, or “Mom, I hate it when they weighme.”Childhood Obesity Prevention: InternationalResearch, Controversies and Interventions. OxfordScholarship Online; 2010.98. Puhl, R.M., Latner, J.D. Stigma, obesity, and the health ofthe nation’s children. Psychol Bull. 2007;133(4):557–80.99. Daniels, S.R., Khoury, P.R., Morrison, J.A. The utilityof Body Mass Index as a measure of body fatness inchildren and adolescents: Differences by race andgender. Pediatrics. 1997;99(6):804–7.100. Dietz, W.H. Benefits of Farm-to-School Projects,Healthy Eating and Physical Activity for School Children.Testimony before the Committee on Agriculture,Nutrition & Forestry United States Senate, Washington,DC. [Internet]. CDC Congressional Testimony. 2010[cited 2010 Dec 12]. Available from: http://www.cdc.gov/washington/testimony/2009/t20090515.htm101. French, S.A., Story, M., Hannan, P., Breitlow, K.K., Jeffery,R.W., Baxter, J.S., et al. Cognitive and demographiccorrelates of low-fat vending snack choices amongadolescents and adults. J Am Diet Assoc. 1999Apr;99(4):471–5.102. Neumark-Sztainer, D., Story, M., Perry, C., Casey, M.A.Factors influencing food choices of adolescents:findings from focus-group discussions withadolescents. J Am Diet Assoc. 1999 Aug;99(8):929–37.EVALUATION FOR TRANSFORMATION
115103. Story, M., Neumark-Sztainer, D., French, S. Individualand environmental influences on adolescenteating behaviors. J Am Diet Assoc. 2002 Mar;102(3Suppl):S40–51.104. Grimm, G.C., Harnack, L., Story, M. Factors associatedwith soft drink consumption in school-aged children. JAm Diet Assoc. 2004 Aug;104(8):1244–9.105. Skinner, J.D., Carruth, B.R., Bounds, W., Ziegler, P.J.Children’s Food Preferences: A Longitudinal Analysis. JAm Diet Assoc. 2002;102(11):1638–47.106. Blanchette, L., Brug, J. Determinants of fruit andvegetable consumption among 6-12-year-old childrenand effective interventions to increase consumption. JHum Nutr Diet. 2005;18(6):431–43.107. Neumark-Sztainer, D., Wall, M., Perry, C., Story, M.Correlates of fruit and vegetable intake amongadolescents: Findings from Project EAT. Prev Med.2003;37(3):198–2<strong>08</strong>.1<strong>08</strong>. Larson, N.I., Neumark-Sztainer, D., Harnack, L.J., Wall,M.M., Story, M.T., Eisenberg, M.E. Fruit and vegetableintake correlates during the transition to youngadulthood. Am J Prev Med. 20<strong>08</strong> May <strong>14</strong>;35(1):33–7.109. Subramaniam, A. Garden-based Learning in BasicEducation: A Historical Review. Monograph.2002;Summer.110. Kirks, B.A., Wolff, H.K. A comparison of methodsfor plate waste determinations. J Am Diet Assoc.1985;85(3):328–31.111. Adams, M.A., Pelletier, R.L., Zive, M.M., Sallis, J.F. Saladbars and fruit and vegetable consumption in elementaryschools: A plate waste study. J Am Diet Assoc.2005;105(11):1789–92.112. Barriers to Recess Placement Prior to Lunch inElementary Schools. Hattiesburg, MS: National FoodService Management Institute, The University ofMississippi; 2005.113. Bergman, E.A., Buergel, N.S., Femrite, A., Englund, T.F.Relationships of meal and recess schedules to platewaste in elementary schools. Insight Publ Child NutrProf Natl Food Serv Manag Inst. 2004;Spring.Chapter 4.31. Lyson, T.A., Stevenson, G.W., Welsh, R., editors. Foodand the Mid-Level Farm. Cambridge, MA: The MITPress; 20<strong>08</strong>.2. Stevenson, G.W., Clancy, K., King, R., Lev, L., Ostrom, M.,Smith, S. Midscale food value chains: An introduction. JAgric Food Syst Community Dev. 2011;1(4):27–34.3. Stevenson, G.W., Pirog, R. Values-Based Supply Chains:Strategies for Agrifood Enterprises-of-the-Middle. Foodand the Mid-Level Farm: Renewing an Agriculture of theMiddle. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press;4. Economic Impacts of Local and Regional FoodSystems: Response to Questions from May 20, 2013Webinar. Ann Arbor, MI: Michigan State UniversityCenter for Regional Food Systems; 2013.5. O’Hara, J.K., Pirog, R. Economic impacts of local foodsystems: Future research priorities. J Agric Food SystCommunity Dev [Internet]. 2013; Advance onlinepublication. Available from: http://dx.doi.org/10.5304/jafscd.2013.034.0036. Gunter, A., Thilmany, D. Rural Connections: EconomicImplications of Farm to School for a Rural ColoradoCommunity. Logan, UT: Western Rural DevelopmentCenter; 2012.7. Conner, D.S., Knudson, W.A., Hamm, M.W., Peterson,C. The food system as economic driver: Strategiesand applications for Michigan. J Hunger Environ Nutr.20<strong>08</strong>;3(4):371–83.8. Tuck, B., Haynes, M., King, R., Pesch, R. The EconomicImpact of Farm-to-School Lunch Programs: A CentralMinnesota Example. University of Minnesota ExtensionCenter for Community Vitality and University ofMinnesota Department of Applied Economics; 2010.9. Martinez, S., Hand, M., Da Pra, M., Pollack, S., Ralston, K.,Smith, T., et al. Local Food Systems: Concepts, Impacts,and Issues. United States Department of AgricultureEconomic Research Service; 2010. Report No.: 97.10. Kane, S.P., Wolfe, K., Jones, M., McKissick, J. The LocalFood Impact: What if Georgians Ate Georgia Meat andDiary? The University of Georgia; 2010. Report No.:Cr-10-07.11. Kane, S.P., Wolfe, K., Jones, M., McKissick, J. The LocalFood Impact: What if Georgians Ate Georgia Produce?The University of Georgia; 2010. Report No.: Cr-10-03.12. The World Bank. What is Local Economic Development(LED)? [Internet]. [cited 20<strong>14</strong> Mar 5]. Available from:http://go.worldbank.org/EA784ZB3F013. Geographic Preference: What It Is and How to UseIt Factsheet [Internet]. The Farm to School Program:United States Department of Agriculture; 20<strong>14</strong>. Availablefrom: http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/F2S_GeographicPreference_March20<strong>14</strong>.pdfNATIONAL FARM TO SCHOOL NETWORK
- Page 1 and 2:
CHAPTER #: NAME OF CHAPTERIEvaluati
- Page 3 and 4:
IIITable of ContentsVVI010717252835
- Page 5 and 6:
VForewordDespite the investments ma
- Page 7 and 8:
VIILyn Kathlene®°Megan Kemple®°
- Page 9 and 10:
101IntroductionImage created by att
- Page 11 and 12:
CHAPTER 01: INTRODUCTION3approaches
- Page 13:
CHAPTER 01: INTRODUCTION5Policy-Lev
- Page 16 and 17:
8CHAPTER 02: BACKGROUNDThe Evolutio
- Page 18 and 19:
10CHAPTER 02: BACKGROUNDFigure 1Edu
- Page 20 and 21:
12CHAPTER 02: BACKGROUNDFigure 2Fig
- Page 22 and 23:
14CHAPTER 02: BACKGROUNDFigure 4: T
- Page 25 and 26:
CHAPTER 03: FRAMEWORK DEVELOPMENT P
- Page 27 and 28:
CHAPTER 03: FRAMEWORK DEVELOPMENT P
- Page 29 and 30:
CHAPTER 03: FRAMEWORK DEVELOPMENT P
- Page 31 and 32:
CHAPTER 03: FRAMEWORK DEVELOPMENT P
- Page 34 and 35:
26 CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, I
- Page 36 and 37:
28 CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, I
- Page 38 and 39:
30 CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, I
- Page 40 and 41:
32 CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, I
- Page 42 and 43:
34 CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, I
- Page 44 and 45:
36 CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, I
- Page 46 and 47:
38 CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, I
- Page 48 and 49:
40 CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, I
- Page 50 and 51:
42 CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, I
- Page 54 and 55:
46 CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, I
- Page 57 and 58:
CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, INDI
- Page 59 and 60:
CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, INDI
- Page 61:
CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, INDI
- Page 65 and 66:
CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, INDI
- Page 68 and 69:
60 CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, I
- Page 70 and 71:
62 CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, I
- Page 72 and 73: 64 CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, I
- Page 74 and 75: 66 CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, I
- Page 76 and 77: 68 CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, I
- Page 78 and 79: 70 CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, I
- Page 80 and 81: 72 CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, I
- Page 82 and 83: 74 CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, I
- Page 84 and 85: 76 CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, I
- Page 86 and 87: 78 CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, I
- Page 88 and 89: 80 CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, I
- Page 90 and 91: 82 CHAPTER 04: PRIORITY OUTCOMES, I
- Page 93 and 94: CHAPTER 05: CONCLUSION AND NEXT STE
- Page 95 and 96: CHAPTER 05: CONCLUSION AND NEXT STE
- Page 97 and 98: CHAPTER 05: CONCLUSION AND NEXT STE
- Page 99 and 100: CHAPTER 05: CONCLUSION AND NEXT STE
- Page 101 and 102: CHAPTER 05: CONCLUSION AND NEXT STE
- Page 103 and 104: CHAPTER 05: CONCLUSION AND NEXT STE
- Page 105 and 106: CHAPTER 05: CONCLUSION AND NEXT STE
- Page 107 and 108: CHAPTER 05: CONCLUSION AND NEXT STE
- Page 109 and 110: CHAPTER 05: CONCLUSION AND NEXT STE
- Page 111 and 112: CHAPTER 05: CONCLUSION AND NEXT STE
- Page 113 and 114: 105ReferencesChapter 11. Joshi, A.,
- Page 115 and 116: 10746. Langellotto, G.A., Gupta, A.
- Page 117 and 118: 10918. Schneider, L., Chriqui, J.,
- Page 119 and 120: 11112. Mary, P.D.S., Karen, M., Kap
- Page 121: 11360. Zarling, P. When farm-to-sch
- Page 125 and 126: 11736. Eisner, R., Foster, S., Hans
- Page 127 and 128: 11910. Fusco, D. Creating relevant
- Page 129 and 130: 12158. Vermont Law School, Center f
- Page 131 and 132: 12352. Physicians for Social Respon
- Page 133 and 134: 12506Appendices
- Page 135 and 136: APPENDICES127Appendix 1Evaluation R
- Page 137 and 138: APPENDICES129• Evaluation Plannin
- Page 139 and 140: APPENDICES131Appendix 2Farm to Scho
- Page 141 and 142: APPENDICES133procurement and a guid
- Page 143 and 144: APPENDICES135Farm to School Core El
- Page 145 and 146: APPENDICES137Appendix 3 References1
- Page 147 and 148: APPENDICES139Appendix 5Sample Evalu
- Page 149 and 150: APPENDICES141• Healthy Eating, Ac
- Page 151 and 152: APPENDICES143Appendix 6Ideas for Fu
- Page 153: APPENDICES145• Amount of acres se