Evaluation of the Thrifty Food PlanSylvia Lane and Joyce Vermeersch

Menus based on the Thrifty Food Plancannot assure dietary adequacy

Indicator NutrientsUsually Used

ProteinAscorbic acidNiacinThiaminRiboflavinVitamin ACalciumIron

SummaryNutritional adequacy of the Thrifty Food Plan was evaluated

by analysis of 10-day sample menus suggested by the U.S.Department ofAgriculture for a four-person family. CombinedRecommended Dietary Allowances (RDA)for two differentfam­ities, and for the father separately, were computed. Eight of 17nutrients plus energy were below the RDAfor bothfamilies; thesame was true for the father, except that thiamin was also lowwhile iron was adequate. Inadequacies in the plan were dueprimarily to the use ofenriched, refined bread and cereals and toa lack ofdark green vegetables. The authors suggest a revision ofthe Thrifty Food Plan based on a Modified Basic Four Plan.

The Thrifty Food PlanThe Thrifty Food Plan of the U.S. Department of Agriculture

(USDA) has been widely disseminated as a dietary guide for low­income households, particularly those receiving Food Stamps.The intent of this plan is to enable households who follow it tohave palatable and economical diets that meet established stand­ards for nutrient intake (1, 2). The purpose of this study was toevaluate the nutritional adequacy of the Thrifty Food Plan.Foods,included in USDA sample menus for 10 days were ana­lyzed to determine whether seven index nutrients found byPennington (3) to be the best indicators of overall nutritionaladequacy are present in amounts that meet the RecommendedDietary Allowances (RDA) (4).

The Thrifty Food Plan is the least costly of four food plansdeveloped by the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) of theUSDA in 1974-75. The other three plans are the Low Cost,Moderate Cost, and Liberal Cost plans. Each plan specifiesamounts of food from 17 different categories that in combinationwill provide nutritious diets for men, women, and children ofdifferent ages and for pregnant and lactating women (1). Thesequantities are based on the 1965-66 consumption patterns (4).

The 1974 RDA was used to define the lower limits for nutri­ents and the lower and upper limits for food energy. The planallowed the RDA plus 5070 for food energy, protein, calcium,vitamin A, thiamin, riboflavin, niacin, and ascorbic acid. Theextra 5% was to account for the discard of edible food (1).

Since higher enrichment levels for bread and flour proposedby the Food and Drug Administration in 1973 were assumed inthe development of the plan but were not adopted, the plan doesnot meet 100% of the RDA for iron for young children, teenagegirls, and women of child-bearing age under current enrichmentlevels when average selections within food categories are made(6).

The limits for vitamin B-6 and magnesium were intentionallyset at 80% ofthe RDA in the development of the plan. Althoughplans meeting the full RDA for vitamin B-6 and magnesiumcould be developed, such plans were considered to be unjustifiedbecause they would contain two to three times the amounts ofvegetables, fruits, and cereals that were common in the con­sumption patterns of some sex-age groups in 1965-66 (2).

The RDA for vitamin B-12, vitamin E, folacin, zinc, andpantothenic acid were not taken into consideration when setting

THE A UTHORS are, respectively, Professor, Department ofAgricultural Economics; and formerly Assistant Professor ofCommunity Nutrition, Department of Nutrition, both of theUniversity of California, Davis, CA 95616.

nutrient requirements for the plan. However, estimates of vita­min B-12 levels derived from average food selections followingthe Thrifty Food Plan were found to exceed the RDA. Estimatesfor levels of vitamin E, folacin, and zinc to be provided by theplan were not made by USDA (1).

The ARS has prepared sample menus and market lists forfamilies on Food Stamps and for others who wish to use theThrifty Food Plan to economize on food. The amounts of foodsto purchase on the market lists are supposed to be sufficient toprovide nutritious diets for four-person families with an averagesex-age composition. ARS has noted that some families, such asthose with teenage boys, may need to make adjustments in thetypes and amounts of food purchased to meet nutrient allow­ances within cost limits (7).

Pennington Index NutrientsIn a detailed analysis of the nutrient composition of foods,

Pennington found that seven nutrients most consistently indi­cate the presence of other nutrients; so if the RDA for thesenutrients is met, adequacy of the remaining nutrients is ensured.The Pennington index nutrients differ from the ones usually usedin dietary assessments:

PenningtonIndex Nutrients

FolacinVitamin B-6Pantothenic acidMagnesiumVitamin ACalciumIron

Vitamin E is not well correlated with the other nutrients in theindex. Inclusion of adequate amounts of vitamin A and folacinwill contribute to the vitamin E requirement but will not ensureit. However, since vitamin E deficiency is not commonlyreported in the U.S., Pennington did not feel justified in includ­ing it as an index nutrient.

King et al. have evaluated menus planned to include USDArecommended selections from the Four Food Groups (8, 9).They found that, on the average, these menus failed to meet theRDA for one-half of the nutrients analyzed. Furthermore, thedeficiencies were similar to the ones Pennington identified.

In view of these results, it seemed worthwhile to subjectmenus based on the Thrifty Food Plan to the same type of anal­ysis. Although the Thrifty Food Plan menus appear adequatefor the indicators usually used, two of Pennington's seven indexnutrients, vitamin B-6 and magnesium, were intentionally setbelow the RDA. Iron also falls short for some age-sex groupsaccording to the RDA (1). Other predictors, such as folacin,pantothenic acid, and vitamin E, were not considered in thedevelopment of the plan and have not been analyzed.

Analysis of MenusFoods from the lO-day market list for sample menus issued in

September 1976 for those using the Thrifty Food Plan by theUSDA were used in the analysis. Two typical examples of these

96 Journal of Nutrition Education Vol. 11 No.2 April-June 1979

Figure 1

Sample Menus from the Thrifty Food Plan 1

Wednesday Thursday

menus are given in Figure 1. Weights of foods as purchased fromthe market list were converted to cooked yield of edible portionsusing a standard reference (7). No adjustments in quantitieswere made for the possible discard of edible food.

All weights were converted to metric equivalents so theymight be processed using the computer program developed byPennington (3). The program print-out gave average amountsfor each nutrient available to the four-person family per day over

1 Commercially prepared enriched bread and ready-ta-eat cereals are used almostexclusively in plan

BreakfastGrape juice

Ready-to-eat cerealToast

Beverage

LunchPeanut butter-raisin sandwiches

Celery sticksDoughnutsBeverage

DinnerBeef stew with vegetables

Sliced tomatoesBread

l Ice milkBeverage

SnackGraham crackers

BreakfastOrange juice

EggsGritsToast

Beverage

LunchChicken rice soupSaltine crackers

Carrot stripsCake

Beverage

DinnerHamburger on roll

French fried potatoesMolasses-glazed beans

PlumsBeverage

SnackPudding

the lO-day period. These figures were then divided by the fam­ily's combined RDA for each nutrient to determine whether thetotal nutrients available on an average day were sufficient tomeet the needs of the family. The allowances for folacin andiodine were set at 50070 of the RDA, since only free folacin iscounted in the food composition values and the contribution ofiodine from iodized salt is not included.

Combined RDAs for two different families were computed inthe analysis. The first family was composed of two adult parentsand two elementary school-aged children, an 8-year-old girl anda lO-year-old boy. In the second family, the age of the boy wasraised to 13 years. The same market list of foods was used forboth families with no adjustments in quantity or types of foodsto account for the increased needs of the teenage boy, since nosuch adjustments are made in recommended menus and theUSDA market list is for average four-person families (7). TheUSDA has stated that families with teenage boys may need toadjust their purchases by increasing cereal purchases and reduc­ing the amount of meat, poultry, and fish to meet food needswithin cost limits (8). Since no specific menus incorporating thisrecommendation were given by USDA, they could not be ana­lyzed. The RDA for the father, a reference male, was computedseparately (Table I) for comparison with another study (8).

Lack of Dietary AdequacyPercentages of the RDA for 17 nutrients and energy supplied

by the Thrifty Food Plan for each of the two families and, in ad­dition, for the father are presented in Table 1. For purposes ofcomparison, the results for a reference male obtained by King etal. using similar procedures for menus planned using the BasicFour paradigm are also shown (9).

The nutrients which were at or above 100% of the RDA forthe families and the father, i.e., the reference male, were protein,calcium, iodine, vitamin A, ascorbic acid, phosphorus, and

Table 1 Comparison of energy and nutrient content on an average day from sample menus for 10 days of the Thrifty Food Plan for twofamilies and reference male with Basic Four menus analyzed by King et al.

Percent of RDA

Item and Unit A verage Amount Family Family of Father ReferenceProvided by Thrifty ofFour with Four with (Reference Male) Male onFood Plan per Day Boy Aged 10 Boy Aged 13 on Thrifty Food Basic Four

Plan' Menu

Energy, kcal 8,231.0 86.6 83.1 77 80Protein, g 278.0 159.9 152.9 134 149Calcium, mg 3,619.0 113.1 100.5 102 130Phosphorus, mg 5,046.0 157.7 140.2 138 180Magnesium, mg 997.0 86.7 79.8 64 78Zinc, mg 39.0 77.2 70.2 70 84Iron, mg 45.0 94.2 80.7 119 69a

Iodine, p.g 343.0 I52.4b 146.0b 120b 178bVitamin A, IV 20,791.0 133.3 120.2 111 187Vitamin E, IV 33.0 69.6 66.7 77 81Ascorbic acid, mg 339.0 199.4 193.7 195 269Thiamin, mg 4.8 100.0 96.0 88 86Riboflavin, mg 6.6 127.9 120.9 100 124Niacin, mg 54.7 86.8 84.2 83 90Vitamin B-6, mg 4.4 68.1 64.1 58 72Vitamin B-12, p.g 12.2 121.6 110.6 97 155Folacin, p.g 631.0 90.lb 84.lb 70b 89bPantothenic acid, p.g 19,294.0 77.6c 73.OC 65c d

, Where quantities were obvious, e.g., four sandwiches appeared in the menu, food was divided equally among family members. Where quantities were not obvious,e.g., five sandwiches, the extra portion was allocated to the father.a Recommendation revised to 18 mg iron per dayb Recommendation revised to 50"70 RDA for iodine and folacinc Recommendation is 7,000 I'g for adults and 5,425 I'g for children under age 12.d Not available

April-June 1979 Vol. 11 No.2 Journal of Nutrition Education 97

Table 2 Comparison of Thrifty Food Plan menus to Modified BasicFour Plan menus

a Based on at least one cup milk and one serving of a milk product for adults andtwo cups milk and one cup of a milk product for children

b Only used in recipes; not indicated on menus

Assuring Nutritional Adequacy. The consistency of these findings indicates that nutritionaladequacy cannot be assured when only those nutrients tradi­tionally considered in dietary evaluations are taken into

riboflavin. Vitamin B-I2 was above the RDA for the families andslightly below the RDA for the father. Overall, the family withtwo elementary school-aged children had slightly higher per­centages of the combined RDA supplied by the Thrifty FoodPlan, but the nutrients failing to meet current standards wereessentially the same for both families. Eight of the 17 nutrientsplus energy were below the RDA. These nutrients were mag­nesium, zinc, iron, vitamin E, niacin, vitamin B-6, folacin, andpantothenic acid. Also, thiamin was marginal when the boy isage 13.

Of the eight nutrients that are low, five are among Penning­ton's seven index nutrients. Only vitamin A and calcium met theacceptable level of at least 100010 RDA. Vitamin E, though notpart of Pennington's index, is also well below standard, meetingless than 70010 of the RDA for both families. The same nutrientsplus energy, except for iron, which was adequate, and thiamin,which was low, were also low for the reference male.

These results coincide remarkably well with the results pre­dicted by Pennington. From her analysis of diets from differentpopulation groups, she concluded that when only two indexnutrients are present in adequate amounts, an average of eightnutrients will be deficient (3). The analysis by King et al. usedthe RDA for the reference male as the basis for their calcula­tions. Their results are similar to those predicted by Penningtonand those found for the reference male when analyzing theThrifty Food Plan. Although the magnitudes differ somewhat,the same eight nutrients plus energy, except iron for the father,are below the RDA in the Basic Four menus and in the ThriftyFood,Plan.

The similarity of deficiencies in the Thrifty Food Plan menusand the Basic Four menus provides clues about how the ThriftyFood Plan could be improved. Comparison of the ModifiedBasic Four Food Guide by King et al. (Table 2) suggests inade­quacies in the Thrifty Food Plan are due primarily to the almostexclusive use of enriched, refined bread and cereals rather thanwhole grains and to a lack of dark green vegetables (Figure 1).Low levels of vitamin E can be traced to relatively limited sup­plies of oils and other vegetable sources such as legumes andnuts. Zinc deficits are probably related to the limited servings ofcertain animal protein foods other than dairy products.

account. The distribution of nutrients in foods is such that spe­cific attention must be paid to those nutrients for which theRDA has been set in more recent years. These nutrients form themajority of Pennington's index nutrients. Our finding of lowvitamin E values for users of the Thrifty Food Plan and the lowvalues found by King et al. for users of the Basic Four paradigmsuggest vitamin E should be evaluated apart from the Penning­ton index, since its adequacy is not ensured by other indexnutrients.

Although data on food composition for the index nutrientsare fragmentary at present, sources that are available should beused more extensively in dietary planning. This is especiallyimportant to assure that good food sources for the index nutri­ents are included in plans that are intended for populationgroups whose typical intakes place them at nutritional risk.Since the Thrifty Food Plan is explicitly designed for low-incomefamilies who are known from surveys of nutritional status to beone of the most vulnerable segments of the population, it isnoteworthy that over one-half of the nutrients evaluated, usingmenus based on the plan, fall below recommended standards.

In conclusion, it appears from this analysis that menusplanned by the USDA to illustrate the use of the Thrifty FoodPlan are less than satisfactory examples of "good nutrition" forlow-income families, especially for certain nutrients. The natureof the deficiencies suggests the Thrifty Food Plan itself should berevised along lines similar to the Modified Basic Four Plan.

The changes required to improve the nutritional adequacy ofthe Thrifty Food Plan would be a departure from food con­sumption patterns discovered among lower food-expenditurehouseholds in 1965-66. The rationale for insisting on these pat­terns, especially in setting the limits for vitamin B-6 andmagnesium, seems unjustified in view of the role these nutrientsplayas indices of other nutrients. Food consumption patternsthat supply adequate intakes of only one-half of the nutrientswhich currently have the RDA should not be maintained as amatter of public policy simply because they were common morethan 10 years ago. While nutrition education can lead to im­provements in food choices, low-income families could beassisted in making food choices compatible with good nutritionif adequate dietary guidelines for them and those upon whomthey may depend for information were made available. D

References1 Peterkin, B., The Thrifty Food Plan, U.S., Department of Agricul­

ture, Agricultural Research Service, Nutrition Program News,January-April, Washington, DC, 1976.

2 Peterkin, B., J. Chassy, and R. Kerr, The Thrifty Food Plan, U.S.,Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Hyatts­ville, MD, 1975.

3 Pennington, J. A., Dietary Nutrient Guide, Avi Publishing Co.,Westport, CT, 1976.

4 U.S., Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service,Food Consumption of Households by Money Value of Food andQuality of Diet, Household Food Consumption Survey, 1965-66,Report no. 17, Washington, DC, 1972.

5 National Academy of Sciences, National Research Council, Foodand Nutrition Board, Recommended Dietary Allowances, 8th ed.,National Academy of Sciences, Washington, DC, 1974.

6 U.S., Office of the Federal Register, Federal Register, 43;38, 575,August 29, 1978.

7 U.S., Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service,Food for Thrifty Families, Washington, DC, September, 1976.

8 Cromwell, C., and B. McGreary, Economical meals for a month,U.S., Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service,Family Economics Review, Fall, Hyattsville, MD, 1975.

9 King, J. C. et al., Evaluation and modification of the basic fourfood guide, J. NutL Ed., 10;27, 1978.

10 U.S., Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service,Family Food Buying, Home Economics Report, no. 37, Washing­ton, DC, 1974.

8a

1o

104

10

o

No. oj Thrifty FoodPlan Menus in IO-day

Period withRecommended Svg

Milk or milk products, 2 svg

Protein foodsAnimal sources, 2 svgVegetable sources, 2 svg

Fruits and vegetablesVitamin C source, 1 svgDark green vegetable, 1 svgOther, 2 svg

Whole grain cereal produc~s, 4 svg

Fat and/or oil, 4 tbl.

Food Group and Svg/dayUsing

Modified Basic FourFood Plan

98 Journal of Nutrition Education Vol. 11 No.2 April-June 1979