College of Social Work, Department of Health Promotion, Education, and Behavior, and Center for Research in Nutrition and Health Disparities, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC.
Center for Research in Nutrition and Health Disparities, Arnold School of Public Health, University of South Carolina, Columbia, SC.
Adv Nutr. 2018 Jan 1;9(1):1-8. doi: 10.1093/advances/nmx008.
In recent years, school-based food backpack programs (BPPs) have come into national prominence as a response to a perceived crisis of child hunger in America. Distributing bags of free food directly to schoolchildren for their own personal consumption each weekend, BPPs bring together private donors, faith communities, and public schools around an intuitively appealing project: children are hungry, and so we give them food. Perhaps because of their intuitive appeal, BPPs have expanded rapidly, without rigorous evaluation to determine their impacts on children, families, and schools. This Perspective aims to open up thinking about BPPs, first articulating the implicit conceptual model that undergirds BPPs, drawing on documentation offered by major program providers and on our own experience working with several schools implementing BPPs, to provide a window into what BPPs do and how and why they do it. We focus in particular on how the crisis narrative of child hunger has shaped the BPP model and on the related interplay between public sympathy and the neoliberal climate in which structural solutions to family poverty are eschewed. We then assess the BPP model in light of existing knowledge, concluding that BPPs fit poorly with the needs of the majority of children living in food-insecure households in the United States and consequently put children at risk of negative consequences associated with worry, shame, stigma, and disruptions to family functioning. Finally, we provide recommendations for practice and research, emphasizing the importance of 1) responding to children's actual needs throughout program implementation, 2) avoiding unnecessary risks by effective targeting of services to only those children who need them, and 3) rigorously evaluating program outcomes and unintended consequences to determine whether, even for the small number of US children who experience hunger, the benefits of the BPP model outweigh its psychosocial costs.
近年来,学校食品背包计划 (BPP) 作为美国儿童饥饿危机的应对措施而受到全国关注。BPP 直接向学童分发免费的食物袋,供他们每个周末个人食用,将私人捐赠者、信仰社区和公立学校聚集在一起,围绕一个直观上吸引人的项目:孩子们饿了,所以我们给他们食物。也许是因为它们的直观吸引力,BPP 迅速扩张,没有进行严格的评估来确定它们对儿童、家庭和学校的影响。本观点旨在开启对 BPP 的思考,首先阐明支撑 BPP 的隐含概念模型,借鉴主要计划提供者提供的文件以及我们自己在与几所实施 BPP 的学校合作的经验,深入了解 BPP 的具体内容、操作方式和原因。我们特别关注儿童饥饿危机叙事如何塑造 BPP 模式,以及公共同情与回避解决家庭贫困结构性解决方案的新自由主义气候之间的相互作用。然后,我们根据现有知识评估 BPP 模型,得出的结论是,BPP 与美国大多数生活在粮食不安全家庭中的儿童的需求不太匹配,因此使儿童面临与担忧、羞耻、污名和家庭功能障碍相关的负面后果的风险。最后,我们提供了实践和研究建议,强调以下几点的重要性:1)在整个计划实施过程中满足儿童的实际需求;2)通过将服务有针对性地提供给真正需要的儿童,有效避免不必要的风险;3)严格评估计划结果和意外后果,以确定即使对于美国少数经历饥饿的儿童而言,BPP 模式的收益是否超过其心理社会成本。