Review of WIC Food Packages Proposed Framework for Revisions: Interim Report (2016) / Chapter Skim
Currently Skimming:
Summary
Summary
Pages 1-12
The Chapter Skim interface presents what we've algorithmically identified as the most significant single chunk of text within every page in the chapter.
Select key terms on the right to highlight them within pages of the chapter.
From page 1... ...
In the final report, recommendations for revisions to the WIC food packages will build on the revisions recommended in the 2006 IOM WIC report (implemented in 2009) and the evidence presented here, including an update and additional analyses.
|
From page 2... ...
data were evaluated to determine the contribution of WIC foods to household food expenditures. Approaches to a sensitivity analysis and a regulatory impact analysis were developed, to be completed in phase II.
|
From page 3... ...
Therefore, a comparison of nutrient or food intakes among WIC participants before the 2009 food package changes to those after the changes could not be conducted. Moreover, although the 2009–2010 NHANES data allowed comparison of WIC participants to WIC-eligible nonparticipants, this period covered the change in food packages and was not considered appropriate for the evaluation of pre- or post-food package change intakes.
|
From page 4... ...
Here, the committee presents the overall conclusions, based on the phase I review and resulting findings. The findings, conclusions, and supporting evidence will be used in conjunction with additional planned analyses to develop the committee's recommendations in phase II.
|
From page 5... ...
, unless otherwise noted. b Based on the committee's literature review findings of a high risk of low iron intakes in breastfeeding infants.
|
From page 6... ...
Small sample sizes for some of the population subgroups are likely to limit further disaggregation into WIC participants and WIC- ligible e nonparticipating individuals. Therefore, in phase II, mean intakes can be compared among groups and to recommendations, but a population-level comparison to recommended intakes for women before and after the 2009 food package changes is unlikely to be possible.
|
From page 7... ...
It is important to consider the feasibility of potential future food package changes from the perspectives of vendors and food manufacturers. The committee's phase II activities will include an update to the comprehensive scientific literature review that was conducted for this interim report, an evaluation of nationwide costs and distribution of foods to ensure that the recommended new food packages are efficient for nationwide distribution, and sensitivity and regulatory impact analyses.
|
From page 8... ...
The committee's literature review found no evidence to support that specific food group intakes are low among breastfeeding infants, although low intake of iron-containing foods may be of concern.
|
From page 9... ...
GUIDING PRINCIPLES AND FRAMEWORK FOR REVISION OF THE WIC FOOD PACKAGES The criteria that the committee established to underpin the phase II analyses and evaluation and to guide development of its recommendations are presented in Box S-1 and incorporated into Figure S-1. The final criteria were only slightly modified from those applied by the IOM (2006)
|
From page 10... ...
A regulatory impact analysis will then be conducted to assess the impact of changes in WIC food packages on program participation, the value of the food packages as selected,1 and program costs and administration. 1 The value that individuals place on the change resulting from a particular regulatory alternative.
|
From page 11... ...
* The sensitivity analysis includes considerations for maintaining the cost neutrality of the overall WIC food packages.
|
Key Terms
This material may be derived from roughly machine-read images, and so is provided only to facilitate research.
More
information on Chapter Skim is available.