Department of Nutrition, University of California-Davis, Davis, CA, USA.
J Nutr Educ Behav. 2012 Jul-Aug;44(4):379-83. doi: 10.1016/j.jneb.2011.08.001. Epub 2012 Jan 10.
To compare the applicant schools (AS) to non-applicant schools (NAS) residing in the same school districts for the California Instructional School Garden Program and identify barriers to the application process.
A case-control, cross-sectional study design was used to compare resources and school environments. Pearson chi-square and logistic regression were conducted.
Public schools throughout California participated (n = 1,662). The response rates for AS and NAS were 43.2% and 48.2%, respectively. Applicant schools had greater access to garden coordinators and parent/community volunteers dedicated to school gardens, and they had other sources of funds/grants to support school gardens compared to NAS (P < .001).
Access to certain garden resources played a significant role in predicting whether schools would decide to participate in the California Instructional School Garden Program.
将申请学校（AS）与位于同一学区的非申请学校（NAS）进行比较，以了解加利福尼亚州教学学校花园计划的申请过程中的障碍。
采用病例对照、横断面研究设计比较资源和学校环境。进行皮尔逊卡方检验和逻辑回归分析。
加利福尼亚州的所有公立学校都参与了（n=1662）。AS 和 NAS 的回复率分别为 43.2%和 48.2%。与 NAS 相比，申请人学校有更多的机会获得花园协调员和专门从事学校花园的家长/社区志愿者，并且有其他资金/赠款来源来支持学校花园（P<0.001）。
获得某些花园资源对预测学校是否决定参加加利福尼亚州教学学校花园计划起着重要作用。
