The aim was to develop, refine and assess the usefulness of the Go for Green® (G4G) 2.0 Program Fidelity Assessment (PFA) tool. G4G 2.0 is a Department of Defense programme designed to optimise access, availability and knowledge of high-performance nutritious foods in military dining facilities (DFAC).

During a multi-site study to evaluate G4G 2.0 on meal quality and diner satisfaction, subject matter experts developed and refined a PFA tool based on eight programme requirements (PR). They identified tasks critical to programme success and corresponding benchmarks, then proposed expansion of several PR and developed a scoring system to assess adherence. Three PFA were conducted (Site 1, Site 2A and Site B).

Two DFAC in the USA implementing the G4G 2.0 programme.

Military DFAC participating in a G4G 2.0 evaluation study.

After G4G 2.0 implementation, Site 1 conducted a PFA and met benchmarks for eight of fifteen sections. At Site 2, a PFA was conducted after G4G 2.0 implementation (Site 2A) and one 3 months later (Site 2B) with twelve of fifteen and ten of fifteen sections meeting benchmarks, respectively.

Research highlights the need to maximise implementation quality to ensure interventions are effective, achievable and efficient. Using a PFA tool to objectively assess nutrition interventions can inform programme fidelity, successes and opportunities for improvement. Results identify key areas that require additional training and resources to optimise access to nutrient-dense foods that support nutritional fitness. This feedback is critical for assessing potential programme impact on Service Members.

To examine the impact of front-of-package (FOP) labels on perceived healthfulness, purchasing intentions and understanding of common FOP systems.

A parallel, open-label design randomised participants to different FOP labelling conditions: ‘high in’ warning labels (WL), multiple traffic light labelling (TLL), health star ratings (HSR) (all displayed per serving) or control with no interpretive FOP labelling. Participants completed a brief educational session via a smartphone application and two experimental tasks. In Task 1, participants viewed healthy or unhealthy versions of four products and rated healthiness and purchasing intention on a seven-point Likert-type scale. In Task 2, participants ranked three sets of five products from healthiest to least healthy.

Online commercial panel.

Canadian residents ≥ 18 years who were involved in household grocery shopping, owned a smartphone and met minimum screen requirements.

Data from 1997 participants (n 500/condition) were analysed. Task 1: across most product categories, the TLL and HSR increased perceived healthiness of healthier products. All FOP systems decreased perceived healthiness of less healthy products. Similar, albeit dampened, effects were seen regarding purchasing intentions. Task 2: participants performed best in the HSR, followed by the TLL, WL and control conditions. Lower health literacy was associated with higher perceived healthiness and purchasing intentions and poorer ranking task performance across all conditions.

All FOP labelling systems, after a brief educational session, improved task performance across a wide spectrum of foods. This effect differed depending on the nutritional quality of the products and the information communicated on labels.

Trial Registration: NCT03290118.