INTRODUCTION: Municipalities can improve access to food through transit planning. The primary objective of this study was to describe the prevalence of public transit supports for food access among a sample of US municipalities and their association with the municipalities' sociodemographic characteristics. METHODS: This study used a nationally representative sample (N = 1,956) of US municipalities with a population of at least 1,000 that responded to the 2021 National Survey of Community-Based Policy and Environmental Supports for Healthy Eating and Active Living. We assessed 4 outcomes: public transit availability and planning, presence of demand responsive transportation (DRT), DRT services to food retail destinations (farmers markets and supermarkets), and consideration of these locations in transit planning. We used χ(2) tests to compare the prevalence of outcomes by municipal characteristics and multivariable logistic regression to calculate odds ratios to assess the relationship between municipal characteristics and having DRT. RESULTS: Approximately half (weighted 53.2%) of municipalities reported having or planning for public transit, of which 27.1% and 52.6% reported considering service to farmers markets or supermarkets, respectively. Approximately one-third (35.5%) of municipalities reported having DRT, of which 52.0% and 84.4% reported services to farmers markets or supermarkets, respectively. All outcomes significantly differed by municipal characteristics. We found higher odds of having DRT in municipalities with 2,500 to 50,000 people or more (vs <2,500 people); those with 50% or less of the population being non-Hispanic White (vs >50% non-Hispanic White); and municipalities containing low-income/low-access tracts. The odds of having DRT were lower in rural (vs urban) municipalities and in those in Northeast and South (vs the Midwest). CONCLUSION: Results suggest opportunities for municipalities to use transit planning to improve food access, especially in northeastern, southern, smaller, or rural communities.

The COVID-19 pandemic has disproportionately affected the health of food system (FS) essential workers compared with other essential and non-essential workers. Even greater disparity exists for workers in certain FS work settings and for certain FS worker subpopulations. We analyzed essential worker respondents (n = 151,789) in May–Novem-ber 2021 data from the National Immunization Survey Adult COVID Module (NIS-ACM) to assess and characterize COVID-19 vaccination uptake (≥1 dose) and intent (reachable, reluctant), attitudes about COVID-19 and the vaccine, and experiences and difficulties getting the vaccine. We compared rates, overall and by certain characteristics, between workers of the same group, and between FS (n = 17,414) and non–food system (NFS) worker groups (n = 134,375), to determine if differences exist. FS worker groups were classified as “agriculture, forestry, fishing, or hunting” (AFFH; n = 2,730); “food manufacturing facility” (FMF; n = 3,495); and “food and beverage store” (FBS; n = 11,189). Compared with NFS workers, significantly lower percentages of FS workers reported >1 dose of COVID-19 vaccine or vaccine requirements at work or school, but overall vaccine experiences and difficulties among vaccinated FS workers were statistically similar to NFS workers. When we examined intent regarding COVID-19 vaccination among unvaccinated FS workers compared with NFS counterparts, we found a higher percentage of FMF and FBS workers were reachable whereas a higher percentage of AFFH workers were reluctant about vaccination, with differences by sociodemographic characteristics. Overall, results showed differences in uptake, intent, and attitudes between worker groups and by some sociodemographic characteristics. The findings reflect the diversity of FS workers and underscore the importance of collecting occupational data to assess health inequalities and of tailoring efforts to worker groups to improve confidence and uptake of vaccinations for infectious diseases such as COVID-19. The findings can inform future research, adult infectious disease interventions, and emergency management planning. © 2024 by the Authors.

BACKGROUND: Changes to policies at the federal, state, and local levels over the last decade have influenced the school nutrition environment and services. METHODS: This systematic review includes an analysis of individual research articles and government reports published from 2010 to 2021 that examine interventions to improve the school nutrition environment and services and increase the availability, selection, and consumption of healthier foods and beverages in K-12 schools in the United States. RESULTS: Nutrition standards for school meals and food outside of meals improved access to healthier options in school. Providing school nutrition professionals with professional development, improving the palatability of school meals, offering taste tests, pre-slicing fruit, providing recess before lunch, offering incentives for trying healthier options, and providing access to drinking water resulted in increased selection and consumption of healthier items. There were inconclusive or mixed findings for some intervention strategies including adequate seat time for meals. CONCLUSIONS: Despite demonstrated improvements to school meal programs and competitive foods, more work is needed to change the selection and consumption of healthier options among K-12 students. Schools can use multiple interventions to improve the school nutrition environment and services and help students adopt food and beverage choices that support health.