Food banks and pantries have become a lifeline for millions of Americans struggling to afford food. Researchers looked at 79 studies to understand what helps food banks successfully teach people about nutrition and provide healthier food options. They found that successful programs combine education, special deals on fresh produce, and partnerships with other organizations. However, many food banks face challenges like limited money and staff. The study shows that while nutrition programs in food banks are growing, we need more research to understand what works best, especially in rural areas and soup kitchens.

The Quick Take

  • What they studied: How well nutrition and health programs work in food banks and pantries, and what helps or hurts their success
  • Who participated: Researchers reviewed 79 published studies about food banks and pantries across the United States that tried to help people eat better
  • Key finding: Most successful programs combined multiple approaches like teaching about nutrition, offering discounts on fresh produce, and partnering with community organizations. However, lack of money and staff were the biggest obstacles to success.
  • What it means for you: If you use a food bank or pantry, programs that combine education and fresh food access may help you make healthier choices. If you work at a food bank, partnerships and understanding what your community needs are key to success.

The Research Details

This was a scoping review, which means researchers searched through many existing studies to get a complete picture of what we know about nutrition programs in food banks. They looked at 79 different studies published in scientific databases and other sources up to November 2023. The researchers only included studies about programs in the United States that focused on food banks, pantries, and similar charitable food organizations.

The researchers organized their findings using a framework called the Consolidated Framework for Implementation Research. This framework helps scientists understand what makes programs work or fail by looking at different factors like resources, people involved, and organizational support. By reviewing all these studies together, the researchers could identify common patterns about what helps and what hurts nutrition programs in food banks.

Food banks have changed from emergency-only services to permanent sources of food for millions of Americans. Understanding what makes nutrition programs successful in these settings is important because it affects the health of vulnerable populations. This review helps identify what’s working and what gaps still need to be filled so food banks can better serve their communities.

This is a systematic review, which is a strong type of research that looks at many studies together. The researchers searched multiple databases and included studies of different types, which gives a comprehensive view. However, the quality depends on the studies they reviewed, and they noted that many important questions still haven’t been studied enough.

What the Results Show

The researchers found 71 different nutrition interventions across 79 studies. Most programs took place in cities rather than rural areas, and food banks and pantries were the most common locations. The most successful programs combined multiple strategies: nutrition education classes, behavioral economics (like making healthy choices easier), produce prescriptions (where doctors recommend fresh vegetables), direct food provision, and changes to food bank policies.

The biggest barriers to success were limited money and staff at food banks, and challenges with the people using the services (like transportation issues or health problems). The most helpful factors were partnerships with other organizations, understanding what the community actually needed, and making sure the nutrition program matched the food bank’s overall mission.

The researchers found that most programs focused on nutrition education and providing fresh produce, but there was less information about whether these programs actually changed people’s eating habits long-term. They also noted that very few studies looked at programs in rural areas or soup kitchens.

The review found that multicomponent programs (those combining several strategies) appeared more promising than single-strategy programs. Partnerships with health organizations, schools, and community groups seemed to strengthen programs. Programs that were flexible and adapted to their specific community’s needs were more likely to succeed. The research also showed that most studies measured whether programs were implemented, but fewer studies measured whether they actually improved people’s health.

This review builds on earlier research showing that food insecurity is a major health problem in America. Previous studies showed that food banks are now the main food source for many struggling families. This review adds to that knowledge by specifically examining what makes nutrition programs in these settings work or fail, filling an important gap in our understanding.

The researchers noted several important limitations. Many studies they reviewed were small and didn’t measure long-term health outcomes. There’s very little research on rural food banks or soup kitchens, so the findings may not apply everywhere. Many studies didn’t clearly explain how their programs were set up or what barriers they faced. Additionally, the quality and type of studies varied widely, making it hard to compare results directly.

The Bottom Line

Food banks should consider combining multiple strategies (education, fresh food access, and partnerships) rather than relying on just one approach. Organizations should invest in understanding their community’s specific needs and build partnerships with other groups. Policymakers should fund more research on rural food banks and soup kitchens to understand what works in those settings. (Confidence: Moderate - based on patterns across multiple studies, but more research is needed)

Food bank staff and directors should care about these findings to improve their programs. People who use food banks may benefit from understanding that combined programs work better. Public health officials and policymakers should use this information to fund and support better nutrition programs. Healthcare providers should know about these programs to refer patients. People in rural areas should advocate for more research and programs in their communities.

Changes in eating habits typically take 2-3 months to become noticeable, but long-term health improvements may take 6-12 months or longer. Food banks implementing these recommendations should expect to see operational improvements within weeks, but measuring actual health impact requires tracking over several months.

Want to Apply This Research?

  • Track weekly servings of fresh produce obtained from food bank programs. Set a goal to increase from current baseline by 2-3 servings per week, and log daily intake to monitor progress toward healthier eating patterns.
  • If your food bank offers nutrition education classes or produce prescription programs, commit to attending one class per month or picking up prescribed produce weekly. Use the app to set reminders for class times and track which programs you’ve participated in.
  • Create a monthly check-in to review which food bank programs you’ve used, track dietary changes, and note any health improvements. Compare month-to-month to see if combined programs (education + fresh food) lead to better results than single programs.

This review summarizes research about nutrition programs in food banks but does not provide medical advice. If you have specific health concerns or dietary needs, please consult with a healthcare provider or registered dietitian. The findings represent patterns across multiple studies but individual results may vary. This information is intended for educational purposes and should not replace professional medical guidance.