159
School Years 2006–07 through 2014–15 The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform the School Wellness Environment Through Policy Elizabeth Piekarz-Porter, JD Jamie F. Chriqui, PhD, MHS Rebecca M. Schermbeck, MPH, MS, RD Julien Leider, MA Wanting Lin, JD

The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

  • Upload
    others

  • View
    1

  • Download
    0

Embed Size (px)

Citation preview

Page 1: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

School Years 2006–07 through 2014–15

The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform the School Wellness Environment Through Policy

Elizabeth Piekarz-Porter, JD Jamie F. Chriqui, PhD, MHS Rebecca M. Schermbeck, MPH, MS, RD Julien Leider, MA Wanting Lin, JD

Page 2: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

Acknowledgments

This report was written by staff from the National Wellness Policy Study at the University of Illinois at Chicago which is currently supported by the U.S. Department of Agriculture School Wellness Policy Cooperative Agreement (USDA-FNS- OPS-SWP-15-IL-01) and previously by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation as part of the Bridging the Gap program and the National Wellness Policy Study. The contents of this publication do not necessarily reflect the view or policies of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, or the University of Illinois at Chicago, nor does mention of trade names, commercial products, or organizations imply endorsement.

The authors would like to gratefully thank Joseph Huang and Yadira Herrera for their contribution to this work. Graphic design and layout were provided by Paige Blumer and Claudia Grosz, www.claudiagrosz.com. The USDA program officers were Alice Ann Gola, PhD and Holly Figueroa MSW; the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation program officers were Tracy C. Orleans, PhD, and Tina Kauh, PhD. Photos obtained from the publicly accessible U.S. Department of Agriculture Flickr website available at https://www.flickr.com/photos/usdagov/ and from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Public Health Image Library available at https://phil.cdc.gov/phil/home.asp.

Suggested Citation: Piekarz-Porter E, Chriqui JF, Schermbeck RM, Leider J, Lin W. The Active Role States Have Played in Helping to Transform the School Wellness Environment through Policy, School Years 2006-07 through 2014-15. Chicago, IL: Bridging the Gap Program and the National Wellness Policy Study, Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago, 2017, www.go.uic.edu/NWPSproducts.

For questions about the content of this report, contact: Jamie F. Chriqui, Ph.D., M.H.S. Principal InvestigatorNational Wellness Policy Study Institute for Health Research and Policy University of Illinois at Chicago (312) 996-6410 E-mail: [email protected]

Page 3: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

Table of ContentsEXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................................1

Federal wellness policy requirements for school districts .................................................................................................1

Report overview ............................................................................................................................................................................................2

Major findings ................................................................................................................................................................................................2

The critical role that states play ..........................................................................................................................................................2

Scope and intensity of state wellness-related laws over time ........................................................................................3

Continued opportunities for success .............................................................................................................................................4

INTRODUCTION ............................................................................................................................5

What is a local wellness policy? .........................................................................................................................................................5

The critical role that states play ..........................................................................................................................................................6

Report overview ............................................................................................................................................................................................7

STUDY METHODS .........................................................................................................................8

State law collection and coding .........................................................................................................................................................8

Scope and intensity of state wellness-related laws ...............................................................................................................9

WHICH STATES REQUIRE THAT SCHOOL DISTRICTS ADOPT LOCAL WELLNESS POLICIES? ...............................................................................................................11

STATE WELLNESS POLICY-RELATED LAWS: HOW DO STATES MEASURE UP? ........................12

Nutrition education ..................................................................................................................................................................................12

Physical activity and physical education ....................................................................................................................................12

School meals ...............................................................................................................................................................................................14

Competitive foods and beverages .................................................................................................................................................16

Marketing .......................................................................................................................................................................................................19

Stakeholder input and communications ....................................................................................................................................21

Implementation, evaluation, and reporting ...............................................................................................................................21

Staff wellness ..............................................................................................................................................................................................24

UNDERSTANDING THE SCOPE AND INTENSITY OF STATE WELLNESS-RELATED LAWS OVER TIME ................................................................................................................................25

How does state law comprehensiveness and strength vary by state characteristics? .................................27

STATE LAW CONTINUED OPPORTUNITIES FOR SUCCESS .......................................................29

REFERENCES .............................................................................................................................30

Page 4: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

Table A-1 Percentage of States with Wellness Policy Provisions, All Grades, School Years 2006-07 through 2014-15

Table A-2. States Nationwide with Wellness Policy Provisions, Elementary School Level, School Years 2006-07 through 2014-2015

Table A-3. States Nationwide with Wellness Policy Provisions, Middle School Level, School Years 2006-07 through 2014-2015

Table A-4. States Nationwide with Wellness Policy Provisions, High School Level, School Years 2006-07 through 2014-2015

Table B. States Nationwide with Wellness Policies Addressing Competitive Food and Beverage Content Restrictions by Location of Sale and Provision, School Year 2014-15

Table C-1. States Nationwide with Wellness Policies Addressing Competitive Food and Beverage Content Restrictions by Location of Sale and Provision, All Grades, School Years 2008-09 through 2013-2014

Table C-2. States Nationwide with Wellness Policies Addressing Competitive Food and Beverage Content Restrictions by Location of Sale and Provision, Elementary School Level, School Years 2008-09 through 2013-2014

Table C-3. States Nationwide with Wellness Policies Addressing Competitive Food and Beverage Content Restrictions by Location of Sale and Provision, Middle School Level, School Years 2008-09 through 2013-2014

Table C-4. States Nationwide with Wellness Policies Addressing Competitive Food and Beverage Content Restrictions by Location of Sale and Provision, High School Level, School Years 2008-09 through 2013-2014

Table D-1. Mean Levels of Comprehensiveness and Strength Scores by Year and State Characteristic, State Level, All Grades, School Years 2006-07 through 2014-15

Table D-2. Mean Levels of Comprehensiveness and Strength Scores by Year and State Characteristic, Elementary School, School Years 2006-07 through 2014-15

Table D-3. Mean Levels of Comprehensiveness and Strength Scores by Year and State Characteristic, Middle School, School Years 2006-07 through 2014-15

Table D-4. Mean Levels of Comprehensiveness and Strength Scores by Year and State Characteristic, High School, School Years 2006-07 through 2014-15

Table E. States with Given Characteristics by School Year, School Years 2006-07 through 2014-15

APPENDICES ..............................................................................................................................39

Page 5: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

1

Executive SummaryAs Americans attempt to raise the healthiest generation, the role that schools play in the wellness of students continues to expand. Children spend a majority of their waking hours at school, so it becomes vital that schools are a healthy place to learn, play, and eat. For close to a decade, Congress and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) have required that school districts adopt and implement wellness policies aimed at nutrition and physical activity goals.1-3

However, between Federal and district-level policy efforts, state-level rulemaking can prove tremendously impactful in creating a culture of wellness within each state. When Federal, state, and district polices work together to promote healthy eating, physically active lifestyles, and healthy school environments, the knowledge and good habits that students assemble in the process can help prepare the next generation to truly be one of the healthiest.

Federal wellness policy requirements for school districtsSchool districts that participate in any of the Federal Child Nutrition Programs have been required to have a wellness policy in place since the 2006-07 school year when the Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act of 2004 provided the first guidelines.1 In 2010, wellness policy requirements were renewed and expanded in the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act.2

Recently, in 2016, the USDA issued a final rule entitled Local School Wellness Policy Implementation under the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010.3 The wellness policy final rule further strengthens district wellness policy requirements, and takes effect at the start of the 2017-18 school year.

Under the local wellness policy final rule,3 wellness policies are required to include, at a minimum:

■ Goals for nutrition promotion and education, physical activity, and other school-based activities that promote student wellness after reviewing and considering evidence-based strategies;

■ Nutrition guidelines for all foods and beverages available on each school campus during the school day that are consistent with Federal school meal standards and Smart Snacks in School nutrition standards;

■ Nutrition standards for all foods and beverages provided, but not sold, to students during the school day;

■ Policies for food and beverage marketing that allow advertising of only those foods and beverages that meet Smart Snacks in School;

■ Permission for stakeholders (parents, students, teachers, school food authority, teachers of physical education, school health professionals, school board, school administrators, and the public) to participate in policy development, implementation, review, and updates;

■ A requirement that the district annually inform and update the community about the policy’s content, implementation and any updates;

■ A requirement that the district triennially measure and make available to the public an assessment on implementation, including school compliance, alignment with model wellness policies, and a description of progress made in attaining the wellness policy goals; and

■ Designating one or more district and/or school officials responsible for ensuring school-level compliance with the wellness policy as wellness policy leadership.

Incorporated by reference into the wellness policy final rule are two regulations that are independently required by all districts that participate in the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs: (1) Nutrition Standards in the National School Lunch and Breakfast Programs,4 (effective SY 2012-13) and (2) Smart Snacks in School 5,6 (effective SY 2014-15). In addition, the USDA rule on Administrative Reviews in School Nutrition Programs 7 imposes additional requirements on state agencies charged with implementing these food programs, such as providing technical assistance, corrective action plans, and penalties for non-compliance with Federal nutrition standards.

Page 6: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

2

Report overviewThis report provides data on state laws in effect from school year 2006-07 through 2014-15. Importantly, this report does not evaluate implementation at the district or school level, but rather evaluates the content of on-the-books policies adopted at the state level. Understanding the state law environment in this area can help to provide insights as to where and how local wellness policy implementation is occurring in districts and at the school level nationwide.

This National Wellness Policy Study Report will provide:

■ Historical data on state wellness policy-related laws, beginning with the 2006-07 school year through school year 2014-15,

■ Baseline information on state laws related to the first year of the Smart Snacks regulation,

■ Insights as to how state laws align with the provisions of the wellness policy final rule given the forthcoming implementation effective date (SY 2017-18), and

■ An assessment of the scope of (i.e., comprehensiveness) and intensity of requirements (i.e., strength) included in state laws governing the local wellness policy environment for all years, across all topic areas, and by selected state characteristics.

Major findingsBy the start of the 2014-15 school year, 20 states’ laws explicitly addressed district adoption of local wellness policies. However, every state had adopted at least one law that addressed a wellness policy-related component area.

■ Goals for nutrition education have been consistently included in state law since the 2006-07 school year and were addressed in 86% of states’ laws for 2014-15, but there is room for improvement when it comes to evidence-based component areas.

■ The number of states that included goals for physical activity in their laws has increased since 2006-07. By the start of the 2014-15 school year, 24 states’ laws, 19 states’ laws, and 17 states’ laws addressed such goals at the elementary, middle, and high school levels, respectively. Still, laws that specified an amount of time for physical activity on a daily or weekly basis were seen less often, and varied by grade level.

■ Every state except for Hawaii adopted a codified law on physical education at the start of the 2014-15 school year. However, state physical education laws were not consistently addressed across grade levels. For example, 33 states required development of a physical education curriculum for each elementary school grade and 32 states required such provisions for middle schools; however, only 25 states’ laws required a physical education curriculum for all high school grades as of school year 2014-15.

■ The number of states requiring that school meals meet Federal standards increased from 44% at the start of the 2006-07 school year to 55% at the start of school year 2014-15.* Florida and Kansas required compliance and provided a link to the full text of the Federal rule; however, the other 27 states’ laws provided generic language that simply required compliance with the Federal rule by providing the citation to the Federal rule in the Code of Federal Regulations.

■ Competitive food standards became stronger since the 2006-07 school year and by 2014-15, 50% of states had strong laws and 13% of states had weak laws that established some nutrition standards. However, only 9 states required compliance with Smart Snacks during its first year of implementation.*

The critical role that states playAlthough states are not required to adopt and specifically implement the wellness policy components into the text of their laws, they often do. In fact, state laws play a critical role by:

1. Establishing a framework to guide state implementation and oversight of district policies,

2. Incorporating Federal rule requirements into the text of their laws, and

3. Providing stronger requirements than are provided by minimum Federal standards.

* This analysis simply examined on-the-books language in codified state laws to assess the extent to which state laws make specific note of the Federal school meal and Smart Snacks standards. Of course, all schools participating in Child Nutrition Programs are required by Federal law to adhere to the Federal standards. This report does not suggest otherwise; rather, we sought to identify to what extent states were reinforcing this requirement in their laws.

Page 7: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

3

■ Restricted advertising and marketing provisions have been rarely addressed in state law since 2006-07. Alabama, the District of Columbia, and Maine were the only states to have restrictive marketing policies in their laws across all three grade levels for the 2014-15 school year.

■ Some states have included formal requirements or suggested language in their laws for districts to follow relative to stakeholder input. Arkansas, South Carolina, and West Virginia required that the original six stakeholders be involved in the development of the local wellness policy during the 2014-15 school year. New Mexico has been the only state to require participation of the original six stakeholders in the review and update of wellness policies and has done so every year since first tracked during the 2011-12 school year.

■ More than 1 in 5 states’ laws required state agencies to monitor district and/or school-level compliance with state and/or Federal requirements as of the start of the 2014-15 school year. One-quarter of states’ laws addressed providing technical assistance to districts to support implementation and compliance efforts.

■ Staff wellness and modeling provisions have been rarely addressed in state law historically, with Rhode Island being the only state during the course of this study to encourage and/or require school districts to provide for physical activity for staff, staff wellness programs, and staff modeling.

Scope and intensity of state wellness-related laws over timeState laws that govern wellness policy-related areas have become increasingly more comprehensive and stronger since the 2006-07 school year.

■ Nutrition education has and continues to be the most comprehensive and strongest area addressed in state law. That being said, on average, only 50% of all nutrition education items were addressed (comprehensiveness) and only 35% were required (strength) in state laws at the start of the 2014-15 school year.

■ Competitive food provisions increased more in strength over the last 9 years than any other component area. However, during the 2014-15 school year, still only about 19% of competitive food provisions were required in state law; of course, many states defer to the Federal laws in this area rather than enacting their own laws.

When analyzing the comprehensiveness and strength of state laws by the state-level characteristics, several notable trends stand out over time.

■ States with at- or above-mean rates of child overweight/obesity have consistently more comprehensive and stronger laws overall and by each of the wellness policy-related component areas as compared to states with below-mean rates of child overweight/obesity.

■ States with majority African-American student populations (≥50% non-Hispanic African-American) had consistently more comprehensive and stronger laws as compared to states with majority white (≥66% non-Hispanic white), Hispanic (≥50% Hispanic/Latino), or diverse student populations (not falling into the previous three categories).

■ Laws in states with higher rates of student eligibility for free- and reduced-price lunch (FRPL; i.e., lower socioeconomic status) are consistently more comprehensive and stronger than states with low- to medium- rates of FRPL participation.

■ Southern states have consistently more comprehensive and stronger wellness-related laws than states in other regions of the country, across all component areas.

Page 8: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

4

Continued opportunities for successAs the bridge between Federal law and district policies, state law is in a position to ensure that Federal rules are implemented correctly and that district policies become stronger than base requirements. Key policy areas for states to focus on for success include but are not limited to:

■ Require that districts that participate in Federal Child Nutrition Programs adopt and implement a local wellness policy that at least meets the Federal requirements.

■ Make nutrition and physical education key components of the state’s school curriculum, relying on evidence-based practices.

■ Adopt nutrition standards for school meals that at least meet the Federal standards and nutrition standards for foods and beverages sold outside of school meals that at least meet the Smart Snacks standards.

■ Establish a state fundraiser exemption policy, limiting the number of exemptions so that the spirit of Smart Snacks is not overridden by non-compliant food and beverage sales.

■ Provide technical assistance relative to the promotion of healthy options and prohibitions on marketing of less healthy options.

■ Set up means of providing technical assistance to districts and school food authorities as they transition into new wellness policy rules and provide guidance on reporting to the state and to the district/community on wellness policy implementation and compliance efforts.

■ Ensure that parents and the community are informed on the content of their district’s wellness policy.

Page 9: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

5

IntroductionAs Americans attempt to raise the healthiest generation, the role that schools play in the wellness of students continues to expand. Children spend a majority of their waking hours at school, so it becomes vital that schools are a healthy place to learn, play, and eat.

For close to a decade, Congress and the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) have required that school districts adopt and implement wellness policies aimed at nutrition and physical activity goals.1-3 In 2012, improved nutrition standards provided students with healthier school meals4 and in 2014, the USDA Smart Snacks standards5,6 did the same for food and beverages sold outside of the school meal program.

However, between Federal and district-level policy efforts, state-level rulemaking can prove tremendously impactful in creating a culture of wellness within each state. When Federal, state, and district polices work together to promote healthy eating, physically active lifestyles, and healthy school environments, the knowledge and good habits that students assemble in the process can help prepare the next generation to truly be one of the healthiest.

What is a local wellness policy?A local wellness policy is “a written document of official policies that guide a school district’s effort to establish a school environment that promotes students’ health, well-being, and ability to learn by supporting healthy eating and physical activity.”8 School districts that participate in USDA Child Nutrition Programs have been required to have a wellness policy in place since the 2006-07 school year when the Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act of 20041 provided the first guidelines.

Wellness policy requirements were later updated by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010,2 and were once again strengthened in 2016 by the USDA’s final rule entitled, Local School Wellness Policy Implementation under the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010. 3 Figure 1 depicts the history of the congressional and USDA wellness policy-related policy making to date.

Implementation of USDA’s wellness policy final rule is scheduled to begin at the start of the 2017-18 school year. Under this rule, local wellness policies must include, at a minimum:

■ Goals for nutrition promotion and education, physical activity, and other school-based activities that promote student wellness after reviewing and considering evidence-based strategies;

■ Nutrition guidelines for all foods and beverages available on each school campus during the school day that are consistent with Federal school meal standards and Smart Snacks in School nutrition standards;

■ Nutrition standards for all foods and beverages provided, but not sold, to students during the school day;

■ Policies for food and beverage marketing that allow advertising of only those foods and beverages that meet Smart Snacks in School nutrition standards;

■ Permission for stakeholders (parents, students, teachers, school food authority, teachers of physical education, school health professionals, school board, school administrators, and the public) to participate in policy development, implementation, review, and updates;

■ A requirement that the district annually inform and update the community about the policy’s content, implementation and any updates;

Figure 1. Historical Progression of Local Wellness Policy Requirements

Page 10: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

6

■ A requirement that the district triennially measure and make available to the public an assessment on implementation, including school compliance, alignment with model wellness policies, and a description of progress made in attaining the wellness policy goals; and

■ Designating one or more district and/or school officials responsible for ensuring school-level compliance with the wellness policy as wellness policy leadership.

As restated in the wellness policy final rule, districts that participate in the National School Lunch Program must also follow the nutrition standards adopted for school meals4 (first effective school year 2012-13) and for foods and beverages sold outside of school meals5,6 (commonly referred to as Smart Snacks, first effective school year 2014-15). One final Federal standard not mentioned above but that often overlaps with other wellness policy component areas is the USDA rule on Administrative Reviews in School Nutrition Programs.7 This latter rule imposes additional requirements on state agencies charged with implementing these food programs, such as providing technical assistance, corrective action plans, and penalties for non-compliance with Federal nutrition standards.

The critical role that states playAlthough states are not required to adopt and specifically implement the wellness policy components into the text of their laws, they often do. In fact, state laws play a critical role in three distinct ways:

1. State laws often establish a framework for guiding state implementation and oversight of district policies that are governed by Federal rules. For example, the USDA requires states to enforce the requirements of the Child Nutrition Programs,7 and some states, such as Kentucky9 and West Virginia,10,11 have been enforcing penalties for non-compliance with nutrition standards for many years.

2. Some states will incorporate the Federal rule requirements into the text of their law. For example, New Mexico has in place a law that restates the Federal requirements for school wellness policies, including what component areas are required.12 The inclusion, and eventual strengthening, of Federal requirements within state law can be beneficial at the district and school level. In fact, district policies are often stronger in states that have adopted strong laws on specific topics.13-15

3. State law is also vital because it can and often does provide stronger requirements than are provided in Federal minimum requirements. For example, Connecticut law creates a healthy food certification program within the state.16 Under this program, the Connecticut Board of Education is responsible for drafting nutrition standards that at least meet, if not exceed, Federal law. Districts that certify compliance with the nutrition standards receive additional reimbursement funds from the state.17 In Minnesota, state law establishes the

The Key Players

• United States Department of Agriculture. The Federal agency that sets the standards for local wellness policies, school meals, competitive foods (Smart Snacks), and administrative reviews of Child Nutrition Programs.

• Individual States. State agencies are generally responsible for administering the Child Nutrition Programs established by the Federal government and are subject to the rules on administrative reviews. Importantly, states have the power to adopt their own laws to support a culture of health and wellness for the schools in their states.

• School Districts. Local education agencies or school districts are the bodies responsible for drafting and overseeing implementation of local wellness policies according to the Federal rules and any applicable laws in their own state.

• Schools. Schools, teachers, staff, and parents are all responsible for implementing the policies established by the players named above. However, since the focus of this report is on policies developed at state level, school-level implementation will not be discussed further, but is essential to ensure policy works correctly.

Page 11: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

7

Healthy Kids Award Program.18 As a result, if schools meet the physical activity, nutrition, and healthy food indicators, among others, they receive a “Healthy Kids Award” on their school report card.18 Under Mississippi law, if schools in their state meet the requirements of the HealthierUS School Challenge,19 they can receive up to $8,000 for their efforts.20

As the sections that follow will demonstrate, numerous states excel in promoting and providing strong laws on various wellness policy component areas such as instituting strong nutrition standards, promoting nutrition education, and requiring nationally-recommended minutes of daily physical education. This report will highlight areas where some states excel in meeting and exceeding Federal requirements and nationally accepted standards within the text of their laws.†

Report overviewThis report provides data on state laws in effect from school year 2006-07 through 2014-15. Importantly, this report does not evaluate implementation at the district or school level, but rather evaluates the content of on-the-books policies adopted at the state level. Understanding the state law environment in this area can help to provide insights as to where and how local wellness policy implementation is occurring in districts and at the school level nationwide.

This National Wellness Policy Study Report will provide:

• Historical data on state wellness policy-related laws, beginning with the 2006-07 school year through school year 2014-15,

• Baseline information on state laws related to the first years of the Smart Snacks regulation,• Insights as to how state laws align with the provisions of the wellness policy final rule given the

forthcoming implementation effective date (SY 2017-18), and• An assessment of the scope of (i.e., comprehensiveness) and intensity of requirements (i.e.,

strength) included in state laws governing the local wellness policy environment for all years, across all topic areas, and by selected state characteristic.

† This analysis examined on-the-books language in codified state laws to assess the extent to which state laws make specific note of the Federal wellness policy-related requirements. Of course, all schools participating in the Federal Child Nutrition Programs are required to adhere to all Federal rules. This report does not suggest otherwise; rather, we sought to identify to what extent states were reinforcing these requirements in their own laws.

Page 12: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

8

Study MethodsState law collection and codingState laws for all 50 states and the District of Columbia (collectively referred to as “states”) were compiled using primary legal research methods. Boolean keyword searches and reviews of tables of contents were conducted in two commercial legal databases, LexisNexis and Westlaw. “State laws” were defined to include codified statutes (i.e., enacted legislation), regulations, and any policy or standards that were incorporated by reference into the law. Laws governing school wellness-related issues were included each year if in effect as of the day after Labor Day, which served as the proxy for the start of each school year from 2006-07 through 2014-15. Results were verified against any available secondary sources, such as the National Cancer Institute’s Classification of Laws Associated with School Students,21 the National Association of State Boards of Education State School Health Policy Database,22 and reports from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention,23 SHAPE America,24 Voices for Healthy Kids,25 the Pew Charitable Trusts,26 and others as they were published in relevant school years. State laws were analyzed by two trained analysts using an adaption of a wellness policy coding scheme developed by Schwartz et al.,27 presented in Chriqui et al.,28 and modified over time by the National Wellness Policy Study team and presented in related district policy reports.28-32 State laws were compiled and evaluated in 10 wellness policy-related component areas, presented in Table 1. Topic areas were expanded over the years to better capture new Federal provisions and other school health, nutrition, and physical activity related-components that garnered particular attention.

Table 1. Number of wellness policy-related variables captured by year

* Includes a total of 70 location-specific variables coded specifically for vending machines, school stores, á la carte, class parties, and fundraisers. **Includes a total of 73 location-specific variables coded specifically for vending machines, school stores, á la carte, class parties, and fundraisers.

***Includes a total of 109 location-specific variables coded specifically for vending machines, school stores, á la carte, class parties, and fundraisers.

For each of the individual policy provisions, state laws were evaluated to assess the extent to which state laws were definitively required, encouraged or suggested (or required with exceptions), or not addressed. STRONG POLICY PROVISIONS were defined as those that were definitively required and specified an implementation plan or strategy. Strong policy provisions included language such as shall, must, will, require, comply, and enforce. When evaluating competitive food provisions, strong policies were also broken out based on whether or not the provision was required and met Smart Snacks standards5,6 (SY 2014-15) and/or the 2007 Institute of Medicine (IOM) Nutrition Standards for Foods in Schools33 (SY 2008-09 through 2013-14) or were required but did not reach these benchmarks.

WEAK POLICY PROVISIONS were those that included vague terms, suggestions, or recommendations, as well as those that required action but noted exceptions for certain grade levels or times of the day. Weak policy provisions included language such as should, might, encourage, some, make an effort to, partial, and try.

Page 13: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

9

State laws were coded accordingly at each applicable grade level: elementary, middle, and high school levels. To ensure consistency across states, this study defined elementary school to include grades 1-5, middle school to include grades 6-8, and high school to include grades 9-12. The appendices present the prevalence of each policy provision both as an average across all grade levels as well as separate tables for elementary, middle, and high school level coding. As a result, “all grades” tables are presented as percentages of states, while individual grade level tables provide both the number of states as well as the percentage for each provision.

Appendix A provides aggregate information across the states for each of the policy provisions coded, across all grade levels (Appendix A-1) and separately by grade level (Appendices A-2 through A-4). Appendix B presents aggregate information on the prevalence of state competitive food and beverage laws benchmarked to the Federal Smart Snacks standards by each location of sale and across all grade levels and by grade level separately for school year 2014-15. Appendix C presents historical competitive food and beverage law data benchmarked to IOM standards by each location of sale and across all grade levels and by grade level separately for school years 2006-07 through 2013-14.

Scope and intensity of state wellness-related lawsAppendix D presents information on the scope (i.e., comprehensiveness) and intensity (i.e., strength) of state laws across and within all 10 of the wellness policy component areas captured in this report. Comprehensiveness scores reflect a measure of scope or the proportion of provisions analyzed that were addressed in each state’s laws (regardless of whether the provisions were required or encouraged/suggested). Strength scores reflect the proportion of provisions analyzed that were definitively required.

Calculating Comprehensiveness and Strength Scores

Comprehensiveness Scores represent the proportion of policy provisions that were addressed (required or encouraged/suggested).

Strength Scores represent the proportion of policy provisions that were definitively required in each state’s law.

Both the comprehensiveness and strength scores were multiplied by 100 to reflect a scale of 0 to 100. Separate scores were calculated for each of the 10 policy areas examined herein as well as for overall comprehensiveness and strength across all 10 areas for each year and for each state. In one example, if state X’s law addressed three of six nutrition education provisions examined and two of these provisions were definitively required, the state’s nutrition education comprehensiveness score would be 50 out of 100 (three divided by six, times 100) while the nutrition education strength score would equal 33.33 out of 100 (two divided by six, times 100).

For all topic areas except reporting requirements, the comprehensiveness and strength scores were based on those provisions included in Table 1 that were coded for all study years, 2006-07 through 2014-15 to ensure comparability over time. A total of 66 policy provisions were included in these computations for all years. In the area of reporting requirements, comprehensiveness and strength scores were computed based on when these variables were first added, school years 2010-11 through 2014-15.

Appendix D also examines how comprehensiveness and strength varied by state obesity rates as well as by sociodemographic and socioeconomic-related categories over time. Data for each of these characteristics were obtained as follows:

■ Overweight or obese: Defined as being at the 85th percentile of body mass index or above, data were obtained from the 2007 and 2011 National Survey of Children’s Health (NSCH).34,35 Data from 2007 NSCH were used for school years 2006-07 through 2010-11, while data from 2011 NSCH were used for school years 2011-12 through 2014-15.

■ Race/ethnicity: The proportion of students that were non-Hispanic white, non-Hispanic African-American, or Hispanic/Latino were used to categorize the racial/ethnic distribution into four categories using O’Malley et al.’s analysis of school characteristics associated with middle and high school student obesity rates.36 Categories included: majority white (≥66% non-Hispanic white), majority African-American

Page 14: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

10

(≥50% non-Hispanic African-American), majority Hispanic/Latino (≥50% Hispanic/Latino), and diverse (not falling into the previous three categories). Data were obtained from the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES) Common Core of Data (CCD).37-42

■ Free and reduced-price lunch (FRL) participation: FRL eligibility was used as a proxy for socioeconomic status43 and is based on verified family income or categorical eligibility for participation in federal assistance programs (i.e. Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families).44 Data were obtained from the NCES CCD.37-42 Tertiles of FRL eligibility were computed by year across all states, except where there were missing data due to FRL data quality issues (one state in SY 2006-07, 3 states in SY 2007-08, one state in SY 2008-09, two states in SY 2011-12).

■ Census Divisions: These represent the nine regions utilized by the U.S. Bureau of the Census.45

Page 15: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

11

Which States Require that School Districts Adopt Local Wellness Policies?Although at this point in time every state has adopted at least one law that regulates a wellness policy-related component area (e.g., nutrition education, physical activity, etc.), only 20 states’ laws have explicitly addressed district adoption of local wellness policies (Figure 2)‡

As of the start of school year 2014-15, Colorado,46 Kansas,47 Illinois,48 and Massachusetts49,50 had adopted laws that recommended or encouraged school districts to adopt local wellness policies. Colorado and Illinois also included the Federal wellness policy requirements1 in the text of their laws as component areas to be addressed.

At the same time, as of school year 2014-15, 16 states explicitly required that districts adopt local wellness policies. In one of these states, Kentucky, the requirement only applied to elementary schools.51 However, in New Jersey, in addition to requiring that all districts adopt a wellness policy, state law also established the minimum standards that must be included in the New Jersey School Nutrition/Wellness Policy 52 which all districts must follow.

‡ This analysis examined on-the-books language in codified state laws to assess the extent to which state laws make specific note of the Federal wellness policy requirement. Of course, all districts participating in the Federal Child Nutrition Programs are required by Federal law to adopt a local wellness policy. This report does not suggest otherwise; rather, we sought to identify to what extent states were reinforcing these requirements in their own laws.

State spotlight...New Jersey

The New Jersey regulations include an appendix that contains the New Jersey School Nutrition/Wellness Policy. 53 Under the regulation, each school district must adopt a policy that at least meets the requirements as written, and the New Jersey Nutrition/Wellness Policy itself is “a minimum standard and does not preclude the adoption of a more stringent policy by the school district/sponsor.”52 The New Jersey policy includes detailed nutrition standards for meals and competitive foods, adequate time to eat, and ensures that curriculum incorporates the New Jersey nutrition and physical activity standards. Although this state-level policy had not been updated as of the time of this report, proposed regulations were pending that would update the wellness policy to include the new Federal wellness policy requirements as the minimum standard that would be applied in school districts across the state.

Figure 2. State laws addressing the creation of local wellness policies, SY 2014-15

Page 16: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

12

State Wellness Policy-Related Laws: How do States Measure Up?This section evaluates each of the required and commonly found wellness policy-related component areas and showcases the way in which some states’ laws excel at incorporating, if not exceeding, the Federal standards. As noted in Table 1, wellness policy-related component areas evaluated for each state’s laws include nutrition education and promotion; physical activity and physical education; school meals; competitive foods and beverages; marketing; communication and stakeholder input; implementation, evaluation, and reporting; and staff wellness. Each wellness policy-related component area will be presented in the following manner:

■ Brief overview of the importance of each component area

■ Summary of the extent to which states are supporting the wellness policy-related component area within the text of their own laws

Data for all state wellness policy-related provisions that were analyzed by the National Wellness Policy Study can be found in Appendix A. Specific competitive food provision analysis can be found in Appendix B (SY 2008-09 through 2013-14) and Appendix C (SY 2014-15).

Nutrition educationWhen children receive nutrition education, research has shown that they are better at making healthier food choices.54 When the nutrition education that is provided is evidence-based, important tools are used such as incorporating nutrition education into the entire school curriculum where appropriate and ensuring that students are taught behavior-focused skills.55 The USDA Team Nutrition toolkit points out that good nutrition education gives students the knowledge, skills, and confidence to make healthy eating choices.56

How are states supporting nutrition education in their own laws?

Goals for nutrition education have been consistently included in state law since the 2006-07 school year. However, some key evidence-based component areas are not routinely addressed. Notably:

■ At the start of the 2014-15 school year, 86% of states’ laws addressed goals for nutrition.

■ Aside from goals for nutrition education, the most commonly addressed topics in state law related to requiring or encouraging a nutrition curriculum for each grade level (54% as of 2014-15 school year) and requirements that behavior-focused skills (e.g., reading the nutrition facts label) be taught in nutrition education lessons (64% as of 2014-15 school year).

■ While most nutrition education topics did not see marked changes in state law over time (see Appendix A), one notable area of progress related to nutrition education training for teachers providing nutrition education instruction. Only 7 states’ laws addressed training of nutrition education teachers in 2006-07, but 5 states (AL, CO, IL, OR, SC) added language that addressed nutrition education training by the start of the 2014-15 school year.

■ Only 3 states (Delaware, the District of Columbia, and New Hampshire) required that nutrition education be integrated into core subjects such as reading, math, and science as of the 2014-15 school year.

■ See the Marketing section below for information on state laws that address promotion or marketing of healthy options in schools.

Data for all nutrition education provisions analyzed in the state laws can be found in Appendix A.

Physical activity and physical educationThe Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans recommend that school-aged children have at least 60 minutes of physical activity every day,57,58 and including this evidence-based practice may help improve academic performance.59 In order to reach the recommended amount of time every day, schools must take an active role in providing comprehensive physical activity programs.60,61 Physical education, while not required to be part of district wellness policies, is the primary opportunity to provide physical activity during the school day, and is often addressed in both district policies and state laws. Notably, state laws regulating physical activity and physical education have been

Page 17: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

13

shown to have a positive impact on student physical activity participation. For example, girls were more likely to attend physical education class if they attended schools in states with strong physical education laws.62 And, schools in states with safe routes to school laws were less likely to have barriers in place that would prevent active commuting at the elementary school level.63 And, importantly, as states work to develop a new “well-rounded education” under the Every Student Succeeds Act,64 physical education can become a vital curricular component.

How are states supporting physical activity and education in their own laws?

Although most states have adopted laws in the areas of physical activity and physical education, the quality and strength of individual requirements varied greatly. Notably:

■ The number of states that included goals for physical activity in their laws has increased since the 2006-07 school year. As of 2006-07, 18 states’ laws at the elementary school level, 14 states’ laws at the middle school level, and 12 states’ laws at the high school level addressed goals for physical activity. By the start of school year 2014-15, 24 states’ laws, 19 states’ laws, and 17 states’ laws addressed such goals at the elementary, middle, and high school levels, respectively.

■ However, at the start of 2014-15, laws that specified an amount of time for physical activity on a daily or weekly basis were seen less often, and varied by grade level. Eleven states’ laws required an amount of time for physical activity at the elementary school level, five states’ laws at the middle school level, and only Tennessee’s law required time for physical activity at the high school level.

■ As of school year 2014-15, daily recess for elementary school students was recommended or required in 13 states. Connecticut, the District of Columbia, Missouri, and Oklahoma law noted that recess should/would be held for 20 minutes per day, while the rest did not specify a time. An additional 5 states recommended recess on a less-than-daily basis (CO, MN, MS, SC, VT).

■ State laws that allow for community use of school facilities for physical activity have increased in prevalence since the 2006-07 school year. However, while 39 states authorized school districts to enter into joint use agreements and open facilities for public use, only Georgia, Hawaii, Kentucky, and New Mexico had adopted laws as of the start of the 2014-15 school year that definitively required their school facilities to be open for public recreation.

■ Every state except for Hawaii adopted a codified law on physical education at the start of the 2014-15 school year. Note that our coding reflects codified statutes and regulations; Hawaii has adopted board policies regulating physical education that are not captured herein.65

■ State physical education laws were not consistently addressed across grade levels. For example, 33 states required development of a physical education curriculum for each elementary school grade and 32 states required such provisions for middle schools; however, only 25 states’ laws required a physical education curriculum for all high school grades as of school year 2014-15. Likewise, state laws addressing the minimum time per week for physical education varied greatly by grade level (22 states’ laws addressed it at the elementary school level, 17 at the middle school level, and only 7 at the high school level as of school year 2014-15).

■ State laws that required moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (MVPA) in physical education were seen most often at the elementary school level, and during the 2014-15 school year, 17 states had weak laws suggesting MVPA or otherwise requiring some percent of class time less than 50% to be filled with MVPA at the elementary school level. This was an increase since school year 2006-07 when only 8 states had a weak policy at the elementary level. Strong requirements for MVPA were only seen in West Virginia at the start of school year 2014-15.

Data for all physical activity and physical education provisions that were analyzed in the state laws can be found in Appendix A.

Page 18: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

14

School mealsSchool meals were responsible for serving 30.4 million students lunch in FY 2016, 22.1 million of whom received meals through free and reduced-price lunch.68 Moreover, states are provided with cash operating assistance for meals served as part of the National School Lunch and Breakfast Programs,69 and under the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, school food authorities receive an additional 6 cents per lunch if certified by their State agency as being in compliance with the updated meal pattern and nutrition standards.2 In recent years, Federal school meal standards have been significantly strengthened to align with the recommendations of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans.4,70 Under the new standards, school meals are required to include more fruits, vegetables, and whole grain-rich products, as well as reductions in the amount of saturated and trans fats, sodium, and calories.4, *

How are states supporting school meal standards in their own laws?

Overall, the number of states requiring that school meals meet Federal nutrition standards has increased since the 2006-07 school year. At that time, under half (44%) of all states’ law explicitly required the Federal standards. However, by the start of the 2014-15 school year, 55% of states’ laws explicitly required compliance with the school meal Federal rule.§ State approaches to requiring compliance varied greatly, as depicted in Figure 3. Florida and Kansas required compliance and provided a link to the full text of the Federal rule; however, the other 27 states’ laws provided generic language that simply required compliance with the Federal rule by providing the citation to the Federal rule in the Code of Federal Regulations.

* On May 1, 2017, Secretary of Agriculture Sonny Perdue announced that USDA would begin the regulatory process to provide greater flexibility for school meals in the areas of whole grains, sodium, and milk fat of flavored milk. United States Department of Agriculture, Office of the Secretary. A commitment to school meals: A proclamation. May 1, 2017. https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/secretary-perdue-child-nutrition-proclamation.pdf. On May 5, 2017, Congress included language in Division A Section 747 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017 (P.L. 115-31) that requires USDA to provide flexibility around the whole grain-rich, sodium, and flavored milk requirements for school year 2017-2018. Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2017. PL 115-31, 2017(115th Congress). https://www.congress.gov/115/bills/hr244/BILLS-115hr244enr.pdf. As a result, for school year 2017-2018, States may grant exemptions to the whole grain rich requirements and flavored milk requirements, and schools that meet sodium Target 1 will be considered compliant with USDA sodium requirements.

§ This analysis simply examined on-the-books language in codified state laws to assess the extent to which state laws make specific note of the Federal school meal standards. Of course, all schools participating in the Federal Child Nutrition Programs are required by Federal law to adhere to the school meal standards. This report does not suggest otherwise; rather, we sought to identify to what extent states were reinforcing this requirement in their laws.

State spotlight...the District of Columbia

State law can play a role in strengthening student opportunities for physical education during the school day. In DC, time requirements for elementary and middle school physical education that met those recommended by SHAPE America66 (150 minutes/week in elementary school, 225 minutes/week in middle school) were phased in over the course of three school years.67 In addition, the law required that at least 50% of class time be devoted to physical activity. All courses were required to meet curriculum standards adopted by the DC’s Board of Education,67 providing another opportunity to promote physical education as an integral piece of the curriculum.

Page 19: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

15

Other provisions to ensure that the school meal environment is a pleasant and healthy one were less commonly addressed in state laws. For example:

■ State laws requiring strategies to increase participation in school meals, such as grab and go programs, student input on the menu, or altered bus schedules, were only seen in the District of Columbia, Kentucky and West Virginia’s laws at the start of the 2014-15 school year.

■ When recess is held before lunch, children tend to throw less food away.71,72 As of the beginning of school year 2014-15, four states’ laws (DC, MS, NJ, WV) at least recommended that students be allowed to play before they eat.

■ Although the American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that children be provided with at least 20 minutes to eat lunch,73 only 6 states’ laws required at least 20 minutes for lunch at the elementary school level and 5 states’ laws required it at the middle and high school levels.

■ The number of states addressing farm-to-school programs in their laws has significantly increased since the 2006-07 school year. At that time, only 8 states’ laws discussed farm-to-school programs in their laws; as of school year 2014-15, 26 states’ laws addressed and one state’s law (DC) required the implementation of farm-to-school programs. Note that the laws captured herein exclude procurement-related laws.

■ In addition to providing nutrition standards, the Federal school meal rule requires that free drinking water be made available wherever meals are served. Although schools may be providing water in practice,74 48 states had not yet included that requirement in the text of their laws at the start of the 2014-15 school year. California, the District of Columbia, and West Virginia required that free, potable water be made available.

Data for all school meal provisions that were analyzed in the state laws can be found in Appendix A.

Figure 3. State laws that meet school meal nutrition standards, SY 2014-15

Page 20: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

16

Competitive foods and beveragesChildren consume approximately one-third of their daily food intake while at school, and historically will choose to eat less healthy foods when they are available.75-77 Importantly, studies have found that student consumption of foods that do not meet established nutrition standards off-campus often declines or at least does not increase as the nutrition standards are implemented.78 Moreover, students attending schools in states with strong restrictions governing competitive food and beverage sales gained, on average, 0.25 fewer BMI units and were less likely to remain overweight or obese over time when compared to students at schools in states with no laws.79

Starting with school year 2014-15, all food and beverages sold outside of the school meal program, during the school day, must meet Smart Snacks nutrition standards. Smart Snacks applies in any school that participates in the National School Lunch or School Breakfast Program and typically includes items sold through vending machines, school stores, à la carte lines, and fundraisers held during the school day. Importantly, Smart Snacks provides a minimum standard on which states may choose to adopt standards that are stricter than those issued by USDA.

Under Smart Snacks, food sold must meet both general and specific nutrient standards. First, any food sold must: (1) be a “whole grain-rich” product; or (2) have as the first ingredient a fruit, vegetable, dairy product, or a protein food; or (3) be a combination food that contains at least ¼ cup of fruit and/or vegetable; or (4) until 2016, contain 10% of the Daily Value of one of the nutrients of public health concern (calcium, potassium, vitamin D, or dietary fiber). Next, foods must meet nutrient requirements that limit calories, sodium, fat, saturated fat, trans fat, and sugar of each product. Beverages are also restricted, with elementary and middle schools limited to low-fat or fat-free unflavored milk, fat-free flavored milk, 100% juice, and plain water. Additional beverages may be sold in high schools, subject to calorie restrictions. Serving size limits vary based on grade level and beverage choice. Although caffeine is not allowed in elementary and middle schools, it may be included in beverages sold at the high school level.

As part of Smart Snacks, states are allowed to set a certain number of exempt fundraisers per year during which any foods or beverages may be sold, regardless of whether they follow the nutrition standards. If a state fails to adopt a policy on exempt fundraisers, it defaults under the rule to zero exemptions allowed.

How are states supporting nutrition standards for competitive foods in their own laws?

State law provisions that regulate competitive food and beverage sales have increased dramatically since first evaluated at the beginning of school year 2006-07. At that time, 25% of states had strong laws and 22% of states had weak laws that established nutrition standards for competitive foods and beverages. Over the next nine years, many states strengthened competitive food standards or adopted standards for the first time. As of school year 2014-15, 50% of states had strong laws and 13% of states had weak laws that established some nutrition standards.

Page 21: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

17

Nevertheless, the number of states’ laws that explicitly required Smart Snacks standards was relatively low. At the start of the 2014-15 school year, 9 states required compliance with the Smart Snacks nutrition standards.** However, the way in which state law incorporated the nutrition standards varied (Figure 4). Iowa was the only state to adopt the full text of the nutrition standards into its law. Arkansas, Arizona, Florida, and Mississippi required compliance either by including a link to the USDA website or to another state-adopted policy (e.g. implementation plan, state nutrition standards) that included the full text of the Smart Snacks standards. The District of Columbia, Georgia, Illinois, and Utah required compliance with Smart Snacks only through a general reference to the Federal rule.

Although 42 states’ laws did not adopt or reference Smart Snacks standards by the start of the 2014-15 school year, 19 states’ laws did include provisions that met some Smart Snacks nutrition standards even if they failed to rise to the level of meeting Smart Snacks in all venues, although the addition of specific nutrient standards was generally lower for fundraisers (Table 2).

Elementary/Middle School

High School

**This analysis simply examined on-the-books language in codified state laws to assess the extent to which state laws make specific note of the Federal Smart Snacks nutrition standards. Of course, all schools participating in the Federal Child Nutrition Programs are required by Federal law to adhere to Smart Snacks. This report does not suggest otherwise; rather, we sought to identify to what extent states were reinforcing this requirement in their laws.

Figure 4. State laws that meet Smart Snacks nutrition standards, SY 2014-15

Page 22: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

18

Table 2. State law inclusion of individual Smart Snacks nutrient standards

Additional trends that have emerged relative to state law regulation of competitive foods and beverages include:

■ In every year of this study, state laws regulating competitive foods and beverages were seen most at the elementary school level, followed by middle and then high school.

■ During the 2014-15 school year, complete bans on competitive food sales were seen only in laws targeting elementary school students.

■ There has been increased regulation in vending machines in state law over time. The number of strong vending machine regulations, in particular, has grown the most in recent years, from 13% of states’ laws in 2006-07 to 37% of states’ laws in 2014-15.

■ Nineteen states’ laws at the elementary school level, 20 states’ laws at the middle school level, and 22 states’ laws at the high school level failed to regulate what could be sold in à la carte lines during the 2014-15 school year.

■ Arkansas, the District of Columbia, and West Virginia are the only states to regulate food as a reward since this study began in 2006. Arkansas’ policy has been in place since the 2006-07 school year, and is strong at the elementary school level but weak for middle and high school students. DC has also regulated food as a reward since 2006-07, but its policy became strong across the board at the start of the 2012-13 school year. West Virginia’s policy first applied as of 2008-09.

■ Regulations on what can be provided during classroom parties continued to be minimally addressed in state law. At the start of the 2014-15 school year, only 9 states’ laws at the elementary school level, 7 states’ laws at the middle school level, and 6 states’ laws at the high school level addressed nutrition standards for classroom parties.

Data for all competitive food provisions that were analyzed in the state laws can be found in Appendices A, B, and C.

Page 23: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

19

MarketingThe promotion and marketing of healthy food options and the prohibition of unhealthy food advertisements work together to create a healthier school food environment.56 Healthy food promotion through taste tests, pricing incentives, and marketing campaigns supports the nutrition environment and services pillar of the Whole School, Whole Community, Whole Child model developed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) 80 and is a critical overarching component of CDC’s Comprehensive Framework for Addressing the School Nutrition Environment and Services.81

In addition, school campuses often allow for advertisements through posters, vending machine covers, morning announcements, and incentive programs.56 Historically, food and beverage advertising to youth tends to be for items that are high in sugars, fats, sodium, and other items that are now regulated under the Smart Snacks nutrition standards.82 Unsurprisingly, children who are exposed to advertising will choose the advertised food products at significantly higher rates than children who were not exposed.83 Of note is the fact that starting with school year 2017-18, school districts will be required to review and consider evidence-based goals for nutrition promotion and must prohibit advertisements of foods and beverages that do not meet Smart Snacks.3

How are states encouraging the promotion of healthy options in their own laws?

Provisions that address marketing healthy food choices have only been captured in a handful of states since 2006-07. As goals for nutrition promotion become a required wellness policy component area at the start of the 2017-18 school year, districts may benefit from state technical assistance to help develop new healthy marketing ideas.

■ Promotion of healthy food options continued to be seldom addressed in state law for school year 2014-15. Only Alabama, Kansas, Mississippi, and Oklahoma addressed marketing healthy choices in their laws at the start of the 2014-15 school year, and Oklahoma’s law only addressed such promotion at the high school level.

State spotlight...Mississippi

Promotion and marketing of healthy food items can take a variety of forms, and a mixed approach could be the best to target student sensibilities. Mississippi’s law suggests that healthy selections be priced lower, positioned prominently, and promoted in a fun way.84 Food service staff are also trained in new cooking and marketing techniques to make healthy foods more visually pleasing.84 Finally, in order to introduce new foods, the law suggests tasting parties, serving line sampling, and serving line promotion.84

State spotlight...Fundraiser exemption policies

Under the Federal rule, state agencies may adopt a policy that allows for a certain number of exempt fundraisers per year during which any foods and beverages may be sold, regardless of whether they meet the Smart Snacks nutrition standards. During the first year of Smart Snacks, Arizona and the District of Columbia prohibited any exempt fundraisers from being held. Florida and Illinois regulated the number of exempt fundraising days. Florida allowed 5 exempt days for elementary schools, 10 exempt days for middle schools, and 15 exempt days for high schools. Illinois allowed 9 exempt days for elementary and middle schools and 36 exempt days for high schools. Utah allowed exempt fundraisers to occur 3 times per year, and Arkansas allowed for 9 exempt events. Although the data here look specifically at codified policies, quarterly updates to state fundraiser exemption policies that include both codified laws and informal state policies are available on the National Wellness Policy Study website, www.go.uic.edu/NWPSproducts.

Page 24: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

20

How are states restricting the advertising and marketing of less healthy foods and beverages in their own laws?

Restricted advertising and marketing provisions have been rarely addressed in state law since 2006-07. Given that this is also an area that districts will be required to include in their wellness policies beginning with school year 2017-18,3 this may be an opportunity for state guidance and/or action.

■ Alabama, the District of Columbia, and Maine were the only states to have restrictive marketing policies in their laws across all three grade levels. All three of these laws used strong, required language.

■ West Virginia also had a law that applied only at the high school level. Its law suggested that schools should minimize the marketing of other foods and beverages by locating distribution in low traffic areas and by ensuring vending machines do not depict commercial logos of products.

Data for all marketing provisions that were analyzed in the state laws can be found in Appendix A.

State spotlight...Marketing can be everywhere

As state laws begin to consider ways to implement the restriction in the wellness policy final rule that limits marketing on school campus to foods and beverages that meet Smart Snacks standards, it is important to remember that students are exposed to marketing in a wide variety of ways. Alabama limits the marketing on vending machine displays to water or 100% juice with no added sweeteners.85 Maine prohibits certain brand-specific advertising but specifically excludes broadcast and print media such as newspapers and magazines from these restrictions.86 On the other hand, the District of Columbia prohibits the advertisement or marketing of non-compliant foods and beverages through posters, signs, book covers, scoreboards, supplies, equipment, or other means.87 When drafting new laws on marketing, states should consider all sources of advertisements that might exist on the school campus during the school day.

Page 25: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

21

Stakeholder input and communicationsWhen stakeholders from a variety of backgrounds are included in the wellness policy process, the results are beneficial to the creation of a well-rounded policy.88,89 Preliminary analyses by the study team suggest that when physical education teachers are included in the development, review, or update of the local wellness policy, physical education provisions tend to be stronger and more comprehensive at the district level.90 The USDA wellness policy toolkit encourages active participation from as many interested parties as possible.56 Moreover, the CDC’s Whole School, Whole Community, Whole Child model places increased emphasis on the positive role that both families and the community more generally play in successfully encouraging good student health.80,91

Starting with the 2006-07 school year, districts were required to involve parents, students, representatives of the school food authority, the school board, school administrators, and the public in the development of the school wellness policy.1 Then, in 2010, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act continued these rules for the development, implementation, periodic review, and update of the local wellness policy.2 The wellness policy final rule adds language to require inclusion of school health professionals and physical education teachers (along with the original six stakeholders required as of 2006-2007) in the wellness policy process beginning in school year 2017-18. States have a role to play in helping provide guidance to and oversight of districts to ensure stakeholder involvement in decisions related to wellness policy development, implementation and review.

How are states supporting stakeholder and communication provisions in their own laws?

Although states are not required by Federal law to involve stakeholders in their oversight efforts, some states have included formal requirements or suggested language in their laws for districts to follow relative to stakeholder input for some time. Notably:

■ Arkansas, South Carolina, and West Virginia required that the original six stakeholders be involved in the development of the local wellness policy during the 2014-15 school year. However, none of these states addressed stakeholder involvement in the review or update of district-level local wellness policies.

■ New Mexico is the only state that has required the participation of the original six stakeholders in the review and update of wellness policies every year since first tracked during the 2011-2012 school year.

Data for all stakeholder and communication provisions that were analyzed in the state laws can be found in Appendix A.

Implementation, evaluation, and reportingWhen parents and the community are aware of what is included in the local wellness policy, they are better able to hold schools and districts accountable to the creation of the healthy school environment the policy is targeting. Such accountability, along with effective planning and organization, is critical to quality implementation of wellness policies.92

At the district level, wellness policies have always been required to provide plans for implementation. By the start of school year 2017-18, the local school wellness policy final rule also requires districts to inform and update the public about the content of the wellness policy and progress towards meeting goals, conduct triennial

State spotlight...IndianaIndiana requires that each school board establish a coordinated school health advisory council and this council is made up of 7 of the 8 key stakeholders mentioned in the wellness policy final rule, including: parents, food service directors and staff, students, nutritionists or certified dietitians, health care professionals, school board members, a school administrator, and representatives of interested community organizations. However, the law uses permissive language, saying that the council “may review the corporation’s wellness policies on a yearly basis and suggest to the school board for approval changes to the policies that comply with the requirements of Federal law.” The addition of physical education teachers to the council and a requirement that the stakeholders review and update the wellness policy would make this law stronger and directly aligned with the final Federal rule.

Page 26: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

22

assessments and update the wellness policy based on results as necessary, and identify the district official responsible for overseeing compliance within the policy itself.

States have an important role to play in implementation oversight as the local school wellness policy final rule requires state agencies to ensure district-level compliance with the provisions of the final rule.3 And, the Federal rule on Administrative Reviews in the School Nutrition Programs, states that state agencies should provide training and technical assistance to school food authorities, must monitor compliance with the National School Lunch and Breakfast Programs, and must take corrective action and/or fiscal action for violations of the school meal nutrition standards.7 Thus, state agencies have a number of roles to play in providing oversight of district policies and practices related to the wellness policy components.

How are states supporting district-level implementation, evaluation, and reporting in their own laws?

States have minimally addressed district-level implementation compliance in their laws (Figure 5). As of the start of school year 2014-15, more than 1 in 5 states’ laws required state agencies to monitor district and/or school-level compliance with state and/or Federal requirements. Notably, no state had established provisions for corrective action plans for non-compliance during the 2014-15 school year.

Laws in the District of Columbia and New Jersey allowed agencies to impose penalties for non-compliance with state and/or Federal wellness and nutrition standards but did not require that fines be imposed. Florida, Kentucky, Texas, and West Virginia laws required that penalties be imposed when districts failed to meet state and/or Federal nutrition standards.

Finally, only one-quarter of the states’ laws addressed the provision of technical assistance to districts to support implementation and compliance efforts. This is clearly an area of opportunity for continued progress at the state level, particularly as Smart Snacks and the local wellness policy final rule requirements are implemented.

Figure 5. Prevalence of state laws that include selected evaluation provisions, SY 2014-15

Due to rounding, some percentages may not sum exactly to 100.

Page 27: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

23

As part of the states’ role in providing oversight to districts to support wellness policy compliance, states may and, to some extent, have adopted policies that require or encourage district-level reporting relative to the wellness policy. Although not prevalent, as of the start of school year 2014-15, one-quarter of the states required districts to report to the state on wellness policy implementation efforts and several other states (nearly 10%) encouraged such reporting. At the same time, over 26% of the states required or encouraged districts to report to the public on wellness policy implementation efforts as of the start of the 2014-15 school year. Only Kentucky, Massachusetts, and Texas required that districts report on how the public can become involved in the wellness policy process at the start of the 2014-15 school year. And, only the District of Columbia, Minnesota, and California required that district wellness policies be posted either on the web or elsewhere publicly, while Colorado recommended that districts post their wellness policies online when available.

Notably, although transparency is a large driving force behind many of the Federal reporting and evaluation provisions for districts, many reporting variables that were evaluated as part of this study were not addressed in any state laws, including:

■ reporting a summary of school events or activities related to wellness policy implementation,

■ reporting on the official leading the wellness policy team, and

■ reporting to other groups and/or stakeholders beyond the state, district, or public in general regarding wellness policy compliance or standards.

Data for all implementation, evaluation, and reporting provisions that were analyzed in the state laws can be found in Appendix A.

Figure 6. Prevalence of state laws that include selected reporting provisions, SY 2014-15

Due to rounding, some percentages may not sum exactly to 100.

Page 28: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

24

Staff wellnessWhen there are opportunities for school staff to be physically active and utilize a wellness program, they are in turn more productive, miss less work, and are better able to provide a support system for the health and academic success of their students.95 Moreover, when staff demonstrate healthy behaviors during the school day, students are more likely to also perform such healthy actions.96,97 Although staff wellness is not a required district wellness policy component under the Federal wellness policy rule, it has been incorporated as part of the Whole School, Whole Community, Whole Child model developed by the CDC80 which many states have already started using to guide new policies to promote wellness within school districts. While not required for states to address in their laws or policies, states interested in providing guidance and technical assistance to districts may want to address the issue of staff wellness to provide a whole-school approach to wellness.

How are states supporting staff wellness in their own laws?

Staff wellness and modeling provisions have rarely been addressed in state law over the last 9 years. Notably:

■ Rhode Island was the only state during the course of this study to encourage and/or require school districts to provide for physical activity for staff, staff wellness programs, and staff modeling. Rhode Island has included all three provisions in its law since the 2009-10 school year.

■ In addition to Rhode Island, Mississippi law also required districts to implement staff wellness programs at the start of the 2014-15 school year. New Mexico and Texas law encouraged such programs for their school staff during the same year.

■ California and Rhode Island laws required districts to promote staff role modeling healthy behaviors at the start of the 2014-15 school year. Alabama and the District of Columbia law encouraged the practice in their districts.

Data for all staff wellness provisions that were analyzed in the state laws can be found in Appendix A.

State spotlight...Pennsylvania

One way in which states can take a more active role in the implementation and evaluation of district wellness policies is through ongoing technical assistance efforts. In Pennsylvania, a school district may submit its local wellness policy to the Department of Education for inclusion in a clearinghouse.93 That clearinghouse includes wellness policies and information regarding child health, nutrition, and physical education submitted by districts across the state.94 In addition, to the extent possible the Department of Education will maintain information related to teaching about nutrition, obesity, and healthy eating on its website.94

State spotlight...Rhode Island

Rhode Island’s employee wellness efforts are housed within policies to recruit, support, and retain highly effective staff.98 However, as noted above, when such supports are provided to school staff, students benefit as well. Rhode Island mandates that each school district must “develop and implement policies and protocols that promote the health of the school employees to support their overall well-being and performance as educators and role models.”98 Efforts to help school staff maintain healthy lifestyles support the overall culture of wellness within the school environment.

Page 29: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

25

Understanding the Scope and Intensity of State Wellness-Related Laws over Time State laws that govern wellness policy-related areas have become increasingly more comprehensive (i.e., addressing more topics) and stronger since the 2006-07 school year (Figure 7). Appendix D presents data on the overall comprehensiveness and strength of state laws for school years 2006-07 through 2014-15. (The Study Methods section above explains how comprehensiveness and strength scores were computed.) Notably:

■ Nutrition education has and continues to be the most comprehensive and strongest area addressed in state law. That being said, on average, only 50% of all nutrition education items were addressed (comprehensiveness) and only 35% were required (strength) in state laws at the start of the 2014-15 school year.

■ Comprehensiveness scores for physical education showed the most progress since the 2006-07 school year. At that time, only 37% of physical education items were addressed in state law; however, by the start of the 2014-15 school year, 47% of items were addressed.

■ Competitive food provisions increased more in strength over the last 9 years than any other component area. However, during the 2014-15 school year, still only about 19% of competitive food provisions were required in state law; of course, many states defer to the Federal laws in this area rather than enacting their own laws.

■ Marketing and staff wellness provisions were addressed the least often and were the weakest across all years of data.

Page 30: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

26

Figure 7. Progress in state comprehensiveness scores and strength scores, SY 2006-07 through 2014-15

*Reporting requirements coding was added in School Year 2010-11.

*Reporting requirements coding was added in School Year 2010-11.

*

Comprehensiveness

Strength

*

*

Page 31: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

27

The maps below in Figures 8 and 9 compare comprehensiveness and strength scores for each state’s set of wellness-related laws at the start of the 2006-07 school year compared to the start of school year 2014-15. These images show that state laws are consistently stronger and more comprehensive in the South—the region with the highest rates of childhood overweight/obesity—than in any other region.

How does state law comprehensiveness and strength vary by state characteristics?Aggregate data on the demographic, socioeconomic, and child overweight/obesity-related characteristics across the 50 states and the District of Columbia are presented in Appendix E. When analyzing the comprehensiveness and strength of state laws by the state-level characteristics several notable trends stand out over time:

■ States with higher rates of child overweight/obesity have taken concerted action to address the problem through state laws governing the school wellness environment. In fact, states with at- or above-mean rates of child overweight/obesity have consistently more comprehensive and stronger laws overall and by each of the wellness policy-related component areas as compared to states with below-mean rates of child overweight/obesity.

■ States with majority African-American student populations (≥50% non-Hispanic African-American) had

SY 2006-07 SY 2014-15

SY 2006-07 SY 2014-15

Figure 8. Comprehensiveness scores in each state as of SY 2006-07 vs. SY 2014-15

Figure 9. Strength scores in each state as of SY 2006-07 vs. SY 2014-15

Page 32: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

28

consistently more comprehensive and stronger laws as compared to states with majority white (≥66% non-Hispanic white), Hispanic (≥50% Hispanic/Latino), or diverse student populations (not falling into the previous three categories). This variation by racial/ethnic composition of the student population holds true for the comprehensiveness and strength of all wellness-related component areas except for physical activity where states with predominantly Hispanic/Latino student populations have more definitive requirements for physical activity (outside of physical education) in their laws.

■ Laws in states with higher rates of student eligibility for free- and reduced-price lunch (FRPL; i.e., lower socioeconomic status) are consistently more comprehensive and stronger than states with low- to medium- rates of FRPL participation, across all component areas and by specific component areas.

■ Southern states have consistently more comprehensive and stronger wellness-related laws than states in other regions of the country, across all component areas and by specific component areas.

■ As of school year 2014-15, the strength of state laws governing physical education did not vary by the racial/ethnic composition of the states’ student populations.

■ While few states address staff wellness in their laws, staff wellness provisions are most often addressed in states with predominantly African-American or Hispanic/Latino populations (as compared to predominantly white or diverse populations). Few states require staff wellness provisions but when they do, they are primarily in states with predominantly Hispanic/Latino populations.

Page 33: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

29

State Law Continued Opportunities for SuccessAs the bridge between Federal law and district policies, state law is in a position to ensure that Federal rules are implemented correctly and that district policies become stronger than base requirements. States can promote the health and wellness of their students. Key areas where states may choose to expand their school wellness-related policies include, but are not limited to:

■ Require that districts that participate in Federal Child Nutrition Programs adopt and implement a local wellness policy that at least meets the Federal requirements.

■ Make nutrition and physical education key components of the state’s school curriculum, relying on evidence-based practices.

■ Adopt nutrition standards for school meals that at least meet the Federal standards and nutrition standards for foods and beverages sold outside of school meals that at least meet the Smart Snacks standards.

■ Establish a state fundraiser exemption policy, limiting the number of exemptions so that the spirit of Smart Snacks is not overridden by non-compliant food and beverage sales.

■ Require physical activity during the school day for children and encourage the integration of physical activity into the classroom.

■ Provide technical assistance relative to the promotion of healthy options and prohibitions on marketing of less healthy options.

■ Insist that all eight key stakeholders are a part of development, implementation, review, and update of district wellness policies in your state.

■ Set up means of providing technical assistance to districts and school food authorities as they transition into new wellness policy rules and provide guidance on reporting to the state and to the district/community on wellness policy implementation and compliance efforts.

■ Ensure that districts have identified a “point person” responsible for implementation and oversight of the district wellness policy as per the Federal rule.

■ Ensure that the parents and the community in your state are informed on the content of their district’s wellness policy.

Page 34: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

30

References1. Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act of 2004. PL 108-265; 118 Stat 729. 2004(108th

Congress):Sec. 204. https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-108publ265/pdf/PLAW-108publ265.pdf.

2. Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010. PL 111-296; 124 Stat 3183. 2010(111th Congress). https://

www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/PLAW-111publ296/pdf/PLAW-111publ296.pdf.

3. Local school wellness policy implementation under the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, final rule.

81 FR 50151. 2016. https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-07-29/pdf/2016-17230.pdf.

4. Nutrition standards in the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs. 77 FR 4088. 2012.

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2012-01-26/pdf/2012-1010.pdf.

5. National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program: Nutrition standards for all foods sold in

school as required by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, final rule. 81 FR 50132. 2016. https://

www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-07-29/pdf/2016-17227.pdf.

6. National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program: Nutrition standards for all foods sold in

school as required by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, interim final rule. 78 FR 39068. 2013.

https://www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2013-06-28/pdf/2013-15249.pdf.

7. Administrative reviews in the School Nutrition Programs, final rule. 81 FR 50170. 2016. https://www.gpo.

gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2016-07-29/pdf/2016-17231.pdf.

8. United States Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. School meals: Local school

wellness policy. 2016. https://www.fns.usda.gov/school-meals/local-school-wellness-policy. Accessed

April 1, 2017.

9. Promulgation of administrative regulations by Kentucky Board of Education; voluntary compliance; penalty.

KY Rev. Stat. 156 160. 2016.

10. Local wellness policy. W Va. Code Regs, 126-86-12. 2016.

11. Requirements and accountability for foods and beverages sold/served. W Va. Code Regs. 126-85-121.

2016.

Page 35: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

31

12. School district wellness policy. NM Admin. Code 6.12.6.8. 2016.

13. Turner L, Chriqui J, Chaloupka F. Classroom parties in US elementary schools: The potential for policies

to reduce student exposure to sugary foods and beverages. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior.

2013;45(6):611-9.

14. Nicholson L, Turner L, Schneider L, Chriqui J, Chaloupka F. State farm-to-school laws influence the

availability of fruits and vegetables in school lunches at US public elementary schools. Journal of School

Health. 2014;84(5):310-316.

15. Slater SJ, Nicholson L, Chriqui J, Turner L, Chaloupka F. The impact of state laws and district policies on

physical education and recess practices in a nationally representative sample of US public elementary

schools. Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine. 2012;166(4):311-316.

16. Certification that food meets nutrition standards. Conn. Gen. Stat. 10-215f. 2015.

17. Duties of state board of education re feeding programs. Conn. Gen. Stat. 10-215b. 2015.

18. Healthy kids awards program. Minn. Stat. 124D.955. 2014.

19. United States Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. HealthierUS school challenge:

Smarter lunchrooms. 2017. https://www.fns.usda.gov/hussc/healthierus-school-challenge-smarter-

lunchrooms.

20. Healthier school initiative; purpose, financial incentives and awards; technical assistance for schools

participating in federal challenge; dissemination of information; criteria; application for certification.

Miss. Code Ann. 37-11-8.

21. National Cancer Institute. Classification of Laws Associated with School Students. 2017.

http://class.cancer.gov.

22. National Association of State Boards of Education. State school health policy database. 2014.

http://www.nasbe.org/healthy_schools/hs/index.php.

23. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Competitive Foods and Beverages in U.S. Schools: A State

Policy Analysis. 2012. https://www.cdc.gov/healthyschools/nutrition/pdf/compfoodsbooklet.pdf.

Page 36: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

32

24. SHAPE America. Shape of the nation 2016. 2016. http://www.shapeamerica.org/advocacy/son/2016/

upload/Shape-of-the-Nation-2016_web.pdf.

25. Voices for Healthy Kids. Building a culture of health for all children. 2016. http://voicesforhealthykids.org/

wp-content/uploads/2016/10/Voices-for-Healthy-Kids-2016-Progress-Report_facing.pdf.

26. The Pew Charitable Trusts. State and National School Snack Policies: How They Compare. http://www.

pewtrusts.org/en/research-and-analysis/fact-sheets/2015/01/state-and-national-school-snack-policies.

Updated 2015. Accessed April 1, 2017.

27. Schwartz MB, Lund AE, Grow HM, et al. A comprehensive coding system to measure the quality of school

wellness policies. Journal of American Dietetic Association. 2009;109(7):1256-1262.

28. Chriqui JF, Schneider L, Chaloupka FJ, Ide K, Pugach O. Local wellness policies: Assessing school district

strategies for improving children’s health. School years 2006-07 and 2007-08. Vol 1. Chicago, IL:

Bridging the Gap, Health Policy Center, Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at

Chicago; 2009. http://www.bridgingthegapresearch.org/_asset/hxbby9/WP_2009_monograph.pdf.

Accessed April 1, 2017.

29. Chriqui JF, Resnick EA, Schneider L, et al. School district wellness policies: Evaluating progress and

potential for improving children’s health five years after the federal mandate. School years 2006-

07 through 2010-11. Vol 3. Chicago, IL: Bridging the Gap, Health Policy Center, Institute for Health

Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago; 2013. http://www.bridgingthegapresearch.org/_

asset/13s2jm/WP_2013_report.pdf. Accessed April 1, 2017.

30. Piekarz E, Schermbeck R, Young S, Leider J, Ziemann M, Chriqui J. School district wellness policies:

Evaluating progress and potential for improving children’s health eight years after the federal mandate.

School years 2006-07 through 2013-14. Vol 4. Chicago, IL: Bridging the Gap, Health Policy Center,

Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago; 2016. http://www.ihrp.uic.edu/

files/District-Monograph-1Jul16-norw.pdf. Accessed April 1, 2017.

31. Chriqui JF, Schneider L, Chaloupka FJ, et al. School district wellness policies: Evaluating progress and

potential for improving children’s health three years after the federal mandate. School years 2006-07,

2007-08, 2008-09. Vol 2. Chicago, IL: Bridging the Gap, Health Policy Center, Institute for Health

Page 37: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

33

Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago; 2010. http://www.bridgingthegapresearch.org/_

asset/r08bgt/WP_2010_report.pdf. Accessed April 1, 2017.

32. Bridging the Gap. District wellness policies. 2016. http://www.bridgingthegapresearch.org/research/

district_wellness_policies/.

33. Institute of Medicine. Nutrition standards for food in schools: Leading the way towards healthier youth.

Washington, DC: National Academies Press; 2007.

34. Data Resource Center for Children & Adolescent Health: A Project of the Child and Adolescent Health

Measurement Initiative. National survey of children’s health, all states, 1.4a: Weight status – BMI for age

categories, age 10-17. 2007. http://childhealthdata.org/browse/survey/allstates?q=218#.

Accessed April 1, 2017.

35. Data Resource Center for Children & Adolescent Health: A Project of the Child and Adolescent Health

Measurement Initiative. National survey of children’s health, all states, indicator 1.4a: Weight status:

Underweight, normal weight, or overweight/obese, age 10-17. 2011. http://childhealthdata.org/browse/

survey/allstates?q=2415. Accessed April 1, 2017.

36. O’Malley P, Johnston L, Delva J, et al. Variation in obesity among American secondary school students by

school and school characteristics. American Journal of Preventitive Medicine. 2007;33((4, Supplement

1)):S187-S194.

37. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Common Core of Data

(CCD). State nonfiscal public elementary/secondary education survey directory data. 2014-15 v.1a.

Retrieved from NCES Elementary/Secondary Information System at https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/elsi/.

Accessed April 1, 2017.

38. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD).

State nonfiscal public elementary/secondary education survey. 2006-07 v.1c to 2013-14 v.1a. Retrieved

from NCES Elementary/Secondary Information System at https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/elsi/. Accessed

April 1, 2017.

39. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD).

Public elementary/secondary school universe survey. 2013-14 v.2a. Retrieved from NCES Elementary/

Page 38: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

34

Secondary Information System at https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/elsi/. Accessed April 1, 2017.

40. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD).

Public elementary/secondary school universe survey free lunch data. 2014-15 v.1a. Retrieved from NCES

Elementary/Secondary Information System at https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/elsi/. Accessed April 1, 2017.

41. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD).

Public elementary/secondary school universe survey membership data. 2014-15 v.1a. Retrieved from

NCES Elementary/Secondary Information System at https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/elsi/. Accessed April 1, 2017.

42. U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data (CCD).

Public elementary/secondary school universe survey. 2006-07 v.1c to 2013-14 v.2a. Retrieved from NCES

Elementary/Secondary Information System at https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/elsi/. Accessed April 1, 2017.

43. Nicholson L, Slater S, Chriqui J, Chaloupka F. Validating adolescent socioeconomic status: Comparing

school free or reduced price lunch with community measures. Spatial Demography. 2014;2(1):55-65.

44. Child Nutrition Programs, Food and Nutrition Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture. Eligibility manual

for school meals. Washington, DC: 2014. https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/SP58_

CACFP14_SFSP20-2014a.pdf. Accessed April 1, 2017.

45. U.S. Department of Commerce Economics and Statistics Administration U.S. Census Bureau. Census

regions and divisions of the United States. http://www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/maps-data/maps/

reference/us_regdiv.pdf. Accessed April 1, 2017.

46. Children’s nutrition - healthful alternatives - information - facilities - local wellness policy - competitive

foods. Colo. Rev. Stat. 22-32-136. 2016.

47. Nutrition and health education guidelines; adoption by state board. KS Stat. Ann. 72-5128. 2016.

48. School wellness policies; taskforce. 105 ILCS 5/2-3 139. 2016.

49. Nutritional standards for sale or provision of foods or beverages in public schools; school wellness

advisory committees; food safety inspections at public schools. MA Gen. Laws Ann. 111, 223. 2016.

50. Standards for school wellness committees. 105 CMR 215.100. 2016.

Page 39: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

35

51. Definitions, required adoption of school councils for school-based decision making; composition;

responsibilities; professional development; exemption; formula for allocation of school district funds;

intentionally engaging in conduct detrimental to school-based decision making by board member,

superintendent, district employee, or school council member; complaint procedure; disciplinary action;

rescission of right to establish and powers of council; wellness policy. KY Rev. Stat. 160.345. 2016.

52. New Jersey school nutrition/wellness policy. NJAC 2:36-1.7. 2014.

53. New Jersey school nutrition/wellness policy. NJAC 2:36 Appx. 2014.

54. Food and Nutrition Services. Nutrition education and promotion: The role of NHS in helping low-income

families make healthier eating and lifestyle choices. 2010. http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/

NutritionEdRTC.pdf.

55. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Guidelines for school health programs to promote lifelong

healthy eating. Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report. 1996;45(RR-9):1-33.

56. United States Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Local school wellness policy

outreach toolkit. 2017. https://www.fns.usda.gov/tn/local-school-wellness-policy-outreach-toolkit.

Accessed April 1, 2017.

57. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2008 Physical Activity Guidelines for Americans. 2008.

http://health.gov/paguidelines/pdf/paguide.pdf.

58. Youth physical activity guidelines toolkit. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention Web site. http://

www.cdc.gov/healthyschools/physicalactivity/guidelines.htm. Updated 2015. Accessed April 1, 2017.

59. U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The Association Between School-Based Physical Activity,

Including Physical Education, and Academic Performance. 2010. http://www.cdc.gov/healthyschools/

health_and_academics/pdf/pa-pe_paper.pdf.

60. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Comprehensive School Physical Activity Programs: A Guide

for Schools. 2013. https://www.cdc.gov/healthyschools/physicalactivity/pdf/13_242620-A_CSPAP_

SchoolPhysActivityPrograms_Final_508_12192013.pdf. Accessed April 1, 2017.

Page 40: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

36

61. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Comprehensive School Physical Activity Program (CSPAP).

2015. https://www.cdc.gov/healthyschools/physicalactivity/cspap.htm. Accessed April 1, 2017.

62. Taber DR, Chriqui JF, Perna FM, Powell LM, Slater SJ, Chaloupka FJ. Association between state physical

education (PE) requirements and PE participation, physical activity, and body mass index change.

Preventitive Medicine. 2013;57(5):629-633.

63. Chriqui JF, Taber DR, Slater SJ, Turner L, Lowrey KM, Chaloupka FJ. The impact of state safe routes to

school-related laws on active travel to school policies and practices in U.S. elementary schools. Health

Place. 2012;18(1):8-15.

64. U.S. Department of Education. Every student succeeds act (ESSA). 2015. http://www.ed.gov/essa?src=rn.

65. State of Hawaii Board of Education. Health and wellness policy 103-1. 2006. http://boe.hawaii.gov/

policies/Board%20Policies/Health%20and%20Wellness.pdf. Accessed April 1, 2017.

66. Moving into the future: National standards for physical education. 2nd ed. Reston, VA: National Association

for Sport & Physical Education; 2004.

67. Physical and health education requirements. DC Code 38-824.02. 2014.

68. United States Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. National School Lunch Program:

Participation and lunches served. 2017. https://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/pd/slsummar.pdf.

Accessed April 1, 2017.

69. National School Lunch, Special Milk, and School Breakfast Programs, national average payments/maximum

reimbursement rates. 80 FR 42470. 2015. http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/cn/NAPS15-

16nslp.pdf. Accessed April 1, 2017.

70. U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Dietary Guidelines

for Americans. 7th Edition ed. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office; 2010.

71. Price J, Just DR. Lunch, recess and nutrition: Responding to time incentives in the cafeteria. Preventitive

Medicine. 2015;71:27-30.

72. Ramstetter CL, Murray R, Garner AS. The crucial role of recess in schools. Journal of School Health.

2010;80(11):517-526.

Page 41: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

37

73. American Academy of Pediatrics. Food and nutrition services: 5-07 school meal scheduling. http://www.

nationalguidelines.org/guideline.cfm?guideNum=5-07. Accessed April 1, 2017.

74. Demissie Z, Brener N, et al. Centers for disease control and prevention. School Health Profiles 2014.

Characteristics of Health Programs Among Secondary Youth. https://www.cdc.gov/healthyyouth/data/

profiles/pdf/2014/2014_profiles_report.pdf. Accessed April 1, 2017.

75. Briefel RR, Wilson A, Gleason PM. Consumption of low-nutrient, energy-dense foods and beverages at

school, home, and other locations among school lunch participants and nonparticipants. Journal of the

American Dietetic Association. 2009;109(2, Supplement):S79-S90.

76. Terry-McElrath YM, O’Malley PM, Johnston LD. Factors affecting sugar-sweetened beverage availability in

competitive venues of US secondary schools. Journal of School Health. 2012;82(1):44-55.

77. Story M, Nanney MS, Schwartz MB. Schools and obesity prevention: Creating school environments and

policies to promote healthy eating and physical activity. Milbank Quarterly. 2009;87(1):71-100.

78. Woodward-Lopez G, Gosliner W, Samuels S, Craypo L, Kao J. Lessons learned from evaluations of California’s

statewide school nutrition standards. American Journal of Public Health. 2010;100(11):2137-2145.

79. Taber DR, Chriqui JF, Perna, FM, Powell L, Chaloupka FJ. Weight status among adolescents in states that

govern competitive food nutrition content. Pediatrics. 2012;130(3):437-444.

80. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Components of the Whole school, Whole Community, Whole

Child (WSCC). http://www.cdc.gov/healthyschools/wscc/components.htm. Updated 2015. Accessed

April 1, 2017.

81. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Comprehensive Framework for Addressing the School

Nutrition Environment and Services. 2016. http://www.cdc.gov/healthyschools/nutrition/pdf/school_

nutrition_framework_508tagged.pdf. Accessed April 1, 2017.

82. Powell LM, Schermbeck RM, Chaloupka FJ. Nutritional content of food and beverage products in

television advertisements seen on children’s programming. Childhood Obesity. 2013;9(6):524-531.

83. Coon K, Tucker K. Television and children’s consumption patterns. Minerva Pediatrics. 2002;54:423-436.

84. Nutrition standards. Miss. Admin. Code 7-3:4011. 2014.

Page 42: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

38

85. Alabama State Board of Education. Alabama’s healthy snack standards for foods and beverages at school. 2005.

https://docs.alsde.edu/documents/53/ala%20healthy%20snack%20standards.pdf. Accessed April 1, 2017.

86. Foods outside school meal program. 20-A M R S A § 6662. 2014.

87. Healthy vending, fundraising, and prizes in public schools. DC Code 38-822.06. 2014.

88. Agron P, Berends V, Ellis K, Gonzalez M. School wellness policies: Perceptions, barriers, and needs

among school leaders and wellness advocates. Journal of School Health. 2010;80(11):527-35.

89. Kehm R, Davey C, Nanney M. The role of family and community involvement in the development and

implementation of school nutrition and physical activity policy. Journal of School Health. 2015;85(2):90-9.

90. Young SK, Leider J, Piekarz E, Schermbeck R. Association between PE teacher and school health

professional involvement and local wellness policy provisions. Presentation at APHA. 2016.

91. Lewallen TC, Hunt H, Potts-Datema W, Zaza S, Giles W. The Whole School, Whole Community, Whole

Child model: A new approach for improving educational attainment and healthy development for

students. J Sch Health. 2015;85(11):729-739.

92. Budd EL, Schwarz C, Yount BW, Haire-Joshu D. Factors influencing the implementation of school

wellness policies in the united states, 2009. Preventing Chronic Disease. 2012;9(110296).

93. Local wellness policy. 24 PS 14-1422.1. 2014.

94. Duties of the Department of Education. 24 PS 14-1422.3. 2014.

95. Eaton DK, Marx E, Bowie SE. Faculty and staff health promotion: Results from the school health policies

and programs study 2006. Journal of School Health. 2007;77(8):557-566.

96. Donnelly JE, Greene JL, Gibson CA, et al. Physical activity across the curriculum (PAAC): A randomized

controlled trial to promote physical activity and diminish overweight and obesity in elementary school

children. Preventive Medicine. 2009;49(4):336-341.

97. Perikkou A, Gavrieli A, Kougioufa M, Tzirkali M, Yannakoulia M. A novel approach for increasing fruit

Consumption in Children. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. 2013;113(9):1188-1193.

98. Basic education program. CRIR 08-010-025. 2014.

Page 43: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

Appendices

Page 44: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

Table A-1. Percentage of States with Wellness Policy Provisions, All Grades, School Years 2006-07 through 2014-15

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ALL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

% % % % % % % % %

NUTRITION EDUCATION

Nutrition education goals None 16.34% 14.38% 14.38% 14.38% 14.38% 14.38% 14.38% 14.38% 14.38%

Weak 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61%

Strong 81.05% 83.01% 83.01% 83.01% 83.01% 83.01% 83.01% 83.01% 83.01%

Nutrition curriculum for each grade

None 28.10% 28.10% 28.10% 28.10% 28.10% 28.10% 28.10% 28.10% 24.18%

Weak 19.61% 19.61% 18.30% 18.30% 18.30% 18.30% 18.30% 18.30% 22.22%

Strong 52.29% 52.29% 53.59% 53.59% 53.59% 53.59% 53.59% 53.59% 53.59%

School gardens None -- -- 88.24% 88.24% 86.27% 86.27% 86.27% 84.31% 86.27%

Weak -- -- 11.76% 11.76% 13.73% 11.76% 11.76% 13.73% 11.76%

Strong -- -- 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Nutrition education training for teachers

None 86.27% 86.27% 84.31% 84.31% 80.39% 80.39% 78.43% 78.43% 78.43%

Weak 9.80% 9.80% 9.80% 9.80% 13.73% 13.73% 15.69% 15.69% 15.69%

Strong 3.92% 3.92% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88%

Nutrition education integrated into other subjects

None 88.24% 88.24% 86.27% 86.27% 86.27% 86.27% 84.31% 82.35% 82.35%

Weak 5.88% 5.88% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 9.80% 11.76% 11.76%

Strong 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88%

Nutrition education teaches behavior-focused skills

None 32.68% 28.76% 28.76% 28.76% 28.76% 28.76% 28.76% 28.76% 29.41%

Weak 8.50% 8.50% 8.50% 6.54% 6.54% 6.54% 6.54% 6.54% 6.54%

Strong 58.82% 62.75% 62.75% 64.71% 64.71% 64.71% 64.71% 64.71% 64.05%

Number of nutrition education courses or hours specified

None 70.59% 68.63% 66.67% 66.67% 68.63% 67.32% 67.32% 67.32% 67.32%

Weak 29.41% 31.37% 33.33% 33.33% 31.37% 32.68% 32.68% 32.68% 32.68%

Strong 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ALL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

% % % % % % % % %

PHYSICAL ACTIVITY (PA)

Goals for PA None 71.24% 70.59% 66.01% 64.05% 62.75% 62.75% 62.75% 60.78% 60.78%

Weak 0.00% 0.00% 0.65% 0.65% 0.65% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Strong 28.76% 29.41% 33.33% 35.29% 36.60% 37.25% 37.25% 39.22% 39.22%

PA for every grade level None 78.43% 79.74% 76.47% 73.86% 72.55% 72.55% 72.55% 70.59% 68.63%

Weak 10.46% 10.46% 11.76% 13.07% 13.73% 15.03% 14.38% 16.34% 16.34%

Strong 11.11% 9.80% 11.76% 13.07% 13.73% 12.42% 13.07% 13.07% 15.03%

Amount of time for PA None -- -- 88.24% 85.62% 84.31% 81.70% 81.70% 81.70% 79.74%

Weak -- -- 4.58% 5.88% 6.54% 8.50% 8.50% 8.50% 9.15%

Strong -- -- 7.19% 8.50% 9.15% 9.80% 9.80% 9.80% 11.11%

PA opportunities throughout the day (e.g., classroom breaks)

None 90.85% 90.20% 87.58% 86.27% 86.27% 84.31% 84.31% 83.66% 83.66%

Weak 7.19% 7.84% 10.46% 11.76% 11.76% 13.73% 13.73% 14.38% 14.38%

Strong 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Community use of facilities for PA

None 86.27% 86.27% 86.27% 86.27% 84.31% 84.31% 80.39% 78.43% 78.43%

Weak 11.76% 11.76% 11.76% 11.76% 11.76% 11.76% 13.73% 13.73% 13.73%

Strong 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92% 5.88% 7.84% 7.84%

Safe active routes to school None 97.39% 97.39% 97.39% 97.39% 97.39% 95.42% 95.42% 95.42% 96.08%

Weak 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 3.92%

Strong 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

40

Page 45: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ALL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

% % % % % % % % %

Prohibit using PA as punishment

None 94.12% 94.12% 96.73% 96.73% 96.73% 96.73% 94.77% 92.81% 92.81%

Weak 1.96% 1.96% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92%

Strong 3.92% 3.92% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 1.31% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27%

Daily recess (ES level only)

None 86.27% 84.31% 78.43% 76.47% 74.51% 74.51% 74.51% 76.47% 74.51%

Weak 7.84% 9.80% 13.73% 13.73% 13.73% 15.69% 15.69% 15.69% 17.65%

Strong 5.88% 5.88% 7.84% 9.80% 11.76% 9.80% 9.80% 7.84% 7.84%

Less than daily recess (ES level only)

None -- -- 98.04% 98.04% 96.08% 94.12% 94.12% 92.16% 90.20%

Weak -- -- 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 5.88% 5.88% 7.84% 9.80%

Strong -- -- 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

PA opportunities before/after school (excl. intra/extramural sports)

None -- -- -- -- -- 88.24% 86.27% 84.31% 84.31%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- 9.80% 11.76% 13.73% 13.73%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Law authorizing joint use of recreational facilities

Not mentioned -- -- -- -- -- 23.53% 23.53% 23.53% 23.53%

Addressed -- -- -- -- -- 76.47% 76.47% 76.47% 76.47%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ALL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

% % % % % % % % %

POLICIES GOVERNING PHYSICAL EDUCATION (PE)

Physical education provisions No policy 6.54% 3.92% 3.27% 3.27% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

PE addressed 93.46% 96.08% 96.73% 96.73% 98.04% 98.04% 98.04% 98.04% 98.04%

PE curriculum for each grade None 10.46% 9.80% 9.80% 9.80% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84%

Weak 37.91% 37.25% 35.29% 33.33% 35.29% 34.64% 34.64% 33.33% 33.33%

Strong 51.63% 52.94% 54.90% 56.86% 56.86% 57.52% 57.52% 58.82% 58.82% PE requirement: ≥150 mins/week (ES); ≥ 225 mins/week (MS/HS)

None 69.28% 66.67% 68.63% 69.93% 69.28% 69.28% 69.28% 69.93% 69.93%

Weak 26.14% 27.45% 26.80% 25.49% 26.14% 26.14% 24.18% 24.18% 22.88%

Strong 4.58% 5.88% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 6.54% 5.88% 7.19%

PE required to teach about a physically active lifestyle

None 35.29% 30.07% 22.22% 20.26% 16.34% 18.30% 18.30% 18.95% 18.30%

Weak 7.84% 9.15% 11.11% 7.19% 9.15% 9.15% 7.19% 7.19% 6.54%

Strong 56.86% 60.78% 66.67% 72.55% 74.51% 72.55% 74.51% 73.86% 75.16% PE competency assessment required

None 39.87% 34.64% 26.80% 24.84% 20.92% 20.92% 20.92% 20.92% 20.92%

Weak 5.88% 7.19% 9.15% 5.23% 7.19% 7.19% 7.19% 7.19% 7.19%

Strong 54.25% 58.17% 64.05% 69.93% 71.90% 71.90% 71.90% 71.90% 71.90%

PE classes, courses, or credits (HS level only)

None 19.61% 13.73% 13.73% 13.73% 13.73% 13.73% 13.73% 15.69% 15.69%

Weak 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88%

Strong 72.55% 78.43% 78.43% 78.43% 80.39% 80.39% 80.39% 78.43% 78.43% Frequency of PE (strong=daily)

None 94.12% 92.81% 92.81% 92.81% 92.81% 92.81% 92.81% 94.77% 94.77%

Weak 2.61% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Strong 3.27% 5.23% 5.23% 5.23% 5.23% 5.23% 5.23% 3.27% 3.27%

Daily PE waiver Not mentioned -- -- 98.04% 98.04% 98.04% 98.04% 98.04% 98.04% 98.04%

May apply for waiver -- -- 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Teacher-student ratio for PE None 84.31% 81.70% 81.70% 79.74% 77.78% 77.78% 77.78% 77.78% 77.78%

Weak 7.84% 10.46% 10.46% 12.42% 12.42% 12.42% 12.42% 12.42% 12.42%

Strong 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 9.80% 9.80% 9.80% 9.80% 9.80%

Safe/adequate facilities for PE

None -- -- 71.24% 73.20% 71.24% 71.24% 71.24% 71.24% 73.20%

Weak -- -- 25.49% 23.53% 25.49% 25.49% 25.49% 25.49% 23.53%

Strong -- -- 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27%

41

Page 46: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ALL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

% % % % % % % % %

PE time devoted to moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (strong= at least 50.00%)

None 87.58% 86.93% 84.31% 83.01% 77.12% 77.12% 77.12% 75.16% 73.20%

Weak 12.42% 13.07% 15.69% 16.99% 22.88% 22.88% 22.88% 24.84% 25.49%

Strong 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.31%

Requires PE to be taught by state-authorized physical educator

None 81.70% 74.51% 69.93% 69.93% 67.97% 64.05% 62.75% 60.78% 60.78%

Weak 4.58% 8.50% 11.76% 9.80% 7.84% 9.80% 8.50% 10.46% 12.42%

Strong 13.73% 16.99% 18.30% 20.26% 24.18% 26.14% 28.76% 28.76% 26.80%

Requires PE teachers to be trained in PE skills

None 94.77% 94.77% 94.77% 94.77% 92.81% 92.81% 90.85% 90.85% 90.85%

Weak 3.27% 3.27% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58%

Strong 1.96% 1.96% 2.61% 2.61% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58%

Prohibits waivers to get out of PE

None 90.85% 90.85% 90.85% 90.85% 91.50% 91.50% 91.50% 89.54% 89.54%

Weak 3.92% 3.92% 3.27% 3.27% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61%

Strong 5.23% 5.23% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 7.84% 7.84%

Requires annual health assessment in PE class

None 75.82% 69.93% 61.44% 60.13% 49.67% 47.71% 47.71% 45.75% 43.79%

Weak 22.22% 30.07% 38.56% 39.87% 50.33% 50.33% 50.33% 52.29% 54.25%

Strong 1.96% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Requires provision of free drinking water in gymnasium

None -- -- -- -- -- 96.08% 96.08% 96.08% 96.08%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ALL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

% % % % % % % % %

POLICIES GOVERNING SCHOOL MEALS

School meal nutrition guidelines must meet Federal standards

None 56.21% 54.25% 47.06% 45.10% 45.10% 45.10% 45.10% 45.10% 45.10%

Weak 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Strong 43.79% 45.75% 52.94% 54.90% 54.90% 54.90% 54.90% 54.90% 54.90% School Breakfast Program None 42.48% 40.52% 35.95% 35.95% 34.64% 33.99% 33.99% 33.99% 32.03%

Weak 18.95% 18.95% 18.30% 18.30% 19.61% 20.26% 20.26% 20.26% 20.26%

Strong 38.56% 40.52% 45.75% 45.75% 45.75% 45.75% 45.75% 45.75% 47.71% Low-fat cooking methods None 92.81% 92.81% 89.54% 89.54% 89.54% 87.58% 87.58% 85.62% 88.89%

Weak 7.19% 7.19% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 9.80% 9.80% 11.76% 6.54%

Strong 0.00% 0.00% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 4.58%

Strategies to increase participation in meals

None 83.66% 83.66% 81.70% 79.74% 77.78% 77.78% 79.08% 79.08% 81.05%

Weak 11.11% 11.11% 13.07% 15.03% 16.34% 16.34% 15.03% 15.03% 13.07%

Strong 5.23% 5.23% 5.23% 5.23% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% Closed campus at lunch None 96.08% 96.08% 96.08% 96.08% 96.08% 96.08% 96.08% 96.08% 98.04%

Weak 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 0.00%

Strong 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.96%

Recess before lunch (ES level only)

None -- -- 94.12% 92.16% 92.16% 90.20% 90.20% 90.20% 92.16%

Weak -- -- 5.88% 7.84% 7.84% 9.80% 9.80% 9.80% 7.84%

Strong -- -- 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% Adequate time to eat meals (20 mins for lunch; 10 mins for breakfast)

None 72.55% 72.55% 70.59% 68.63% 68.63% 66.67% 67.97% 67.97% 69.93%

Weak 20.92% 20.92% 20.92% 20.92% 20.92% 22.88% 21.57% 21.57% 19.61%

Strong 6.54% 6.54% 8.50% 10.46% 10.46% 10.46% 10.46% 10.46% 10.46%

Nutrition-related training for food service staff

None 84.31% 80.39% 80.39% 80.39% 70.59% 70.59% 72.55% 72.55% 68.63%

Weak 13.73% 17.65% 15.69% 15.69% 25.49% 25.49% 23.53% 25.49% 27.45%

Strong 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 1.96% 3.92%

42

Page 47: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ALL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

% % % % % % % % %

Nutrition information for school meals

None 97.39% 97.39% 97.39% 97.39% 95.42% 95.42% 95.42% 95.42% 95.42%

Weak 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Strong 0.65% 0.65% 0.65% 0.65% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61%

Farm-to-school/ cafeteria program

None 84.31% 76.47% 70.59% 68.63% 56.86% 50.98% 54.90% 47.06% 47.06%

Weak 15.69% 23.53% 29.41% 31.37% 43.14% 47.06% 43.14% 50.98% 50.98%

Strong 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Only 1%/skim milk at meals None -- -- -- -- -- -- 45.10% 45.10% 43.79%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00% 0.00% 1.31%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- 54.90% 54.90% 54.90%

At least 1/2 of grains served are whole grains

None -- -- -- -- -- -- 45.10% 45.10% --

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00% 0.00% --

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- 54.90% 54.90% --

Specifies number of fruits & vegetables served at meals

None -- -- -- 88.89% 86.93% 86.93% 86.93% 86.93% --

Weak -- -- -- 1.96% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% --

Strong -- -- -- 9.15% 13.07% 13.07% 13.07% 13.07% --

Fat content of flavored milk None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 45.10%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 54.90%

Provisions for free drinking water at meals

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 43.14%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 56.86%

Restrictions on flavored milk at meals

None -- -- -- -- -- -- 94.12% 92.16% --

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00% 0.00% --

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- 5.88% 7.84% --

Whole grain-rich requirement None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 45.10%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 54.90%

Whole grain exemption Not mentioned -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 100%

Exemptions allowed -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00%

No exemptions allowed -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00%

Number of whole grains served

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 43.14%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 54.90%

Number of fruits and/or vegetables served

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 43.14%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 54.90%

Juice as fruit or vegetable serving

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 43.14%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 54.90%

Number of meat/meat alternatives served

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 43.14%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 54.90%

Number of milk/milk alternatives served

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 43.14%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 54.90%

43

Page 48: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ALL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

% % % % % % % % %

Min/max calories daily None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 45.10%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 54.90%

Calories from saturated fat None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 43.79%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.31%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 54.90%

Sodium None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 43.79%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.31%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 54.90%

Trans-fat None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 45.10%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 54.90%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ALL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

% % % % % % % % %

SELECTED POLICIES FOR COMPETITIVE FOODS & BEVERAGES (See Table 2 for additional provisions)

Nutrition guidelines for competitive foods & beverages

None 53.59% 46.41% 35.95% 35.95% 32.68% 32.68% 30.72% 28.76% 37.25%

Weak 21.57% 26.14% 32.68% 30.72% 30.07% 28.10% 28.10% 30.07% 13.07%

Strong 24.84% 27.45% 31.37% 33.33% 37.25% 39.22% 41.18% 41.18% 49.67%

Nutrition guidelines apply to food & beverage contracts

None 84.97% 83.01% 81.05% 79.08% 77.12% 79.08% 79.08% 79.08% 83.01%

Weak 5.23% 7.19% 7.19% 7.19% 9.15% 7.19% 7.19% 7.19% 5.23%

Strong 9.80% 9.80% 11.76% 13.73% 13.73% 13.73% 13.73% 13.73% 11.76%

Meets IOM fruit & vegetable and/or whole grain standard

None -- -- 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% --

Weak -- -- 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% --

Strong -- -- 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% --

Requires only whole, unprocessed & fresh food

None 79.08% 73.20% 66.67% 64.71% 58.82% 56.86% 56.86% 49.02% --

Weak 20.92% 26.80% 32.68% 33.99% 37.91% 37.91% 35.95% 43.79% --

Strong 0.00% 0.00% 0.65% 1.31% 3.27% 5.23% 7.19% 7.19% --

Prohibits using food as a reward

None 96.08% 96.08% 94.12% 94.12% 94.12% 94.12% 94.12% 94.12% 94.12%

Weak 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31%

Strong 0.65% 0.65% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58%

Nutrition information for competitive foods and beverages

None 94.77% 94.77% 94.12% 94.12% 92.16% 92.16% 92.16% 92.16% 92.16%

Weak 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92%

Strong 1.31% 1.31% 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92%

Requires free drinking water to be accessible throughout school (not just in cafeteria or gym)

None 94.12% 94.12% 92.16% 92.16% 90.20% 90.20% 90.20% 90.20% 90.20%

Weak 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92%

Strong 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88%

ACCESS RESTRICTIONS

Competitive food &/or beverage ban

None 95.42% 95.42% 95.42% 95.42% 95.42% 94.77% 94.77% 94.77% --

Weak 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% --

Strong 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% --

Bans fast food sales on campus

None 98.04% 98.04% 98.04% 98.04% 98.04% 98.04% 98.04% 98.04% 96.08%

Weak 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Strong 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.96%

44

Page 49: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ALL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

% % % % % % % % %

Vending machine restrictions during the school day

None 57.52% 50.33% 50.33% 48.37% 42.48% 38.56% 38.56% 38.56% 41.18%

Weak 29.41% 32.68% 27.45% 26.80% 32.03% 35.95% 33.99% 33.99% 21.57%

Strong 13.07% 16.99% 22.22% 24.84% 25.49% 25.49% 27.45% 27.45% 37.25%

School store restrictions during the school day

None 61.44% 54.25% 54.25% 52.29% 46.41% 44.44% 44.44% 44.44% 47.06%

Weak 27.45% 30.72% 27.45% 26.80% 32.03% 33.99% 32.03% 32.03% 18.30%

Strong 11.11% 15.03% 18.30% 20.91% 21.56% 21.56% 23.53% 23.53% 34.64%

À la carte restrictions during meal times

None 55.56% 48.37% 40.52% 41.83% 35.29% 33.33% 33.33% 33.33% 39.87%

Weak 28.10% 31.37% 33.99% 31.37% 35.95% 37.91% 36.60% 36.60% 24.84%

Strong 16.34% 20.26% 25.49% 26.80% 28.76% 28.76% 30.06% 30.06% 35.29%

Classroom parties None 85.62% 82.35% 81.70% 81.70% 81.70% 81.70% 81.70% 81.70% 85.62%

Weak 14.38% 17.65% 16.34% 16.34% 16.34% 14.38% 14.38% 14.38% 6.54%

Strong 0.00% 0.00% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 7.84%

Fundraisers during the school day

None -- -- 71.90% 69.93% 67.97% 64.05% 64.05% 64.05% 55.56%

Weak -- -- 14.38% 15.69% 16.99% 20.92% 18.95% 16.99% 13.07%

Strong -- -- 13.73% 14.38% 15.04% 15.04% 17.00% 18.96% 31.37%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ALL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

% % % % % % % % %

MARKETING AND PROMOTION

Marketing healthy choices None 95.42% 95.42% 93.46% 93.46% 93.46% 95.42% 95.42% 95.42% 93.46%

Weak 3.92% 3.92% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 1.96%

Strong 0.65% 0.65% 0.65% 0.65% 0.65% 0.65% 0.65% 0.65% 4.58%

Restricted marketing None 96.73% 94.77% 93.46% 93.46% 93.46% 93.46% 93.46% 93.46% 93.46%

Weak 0.00% 0.00% 0.65% 0.65% 0.65% 0.65% 0.65% 0.65% 0.65%

Strong 3.27% 5.23% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ALL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

% % % % % % % % %

COMMUNICATION & STAKEHOLDER INPUT

State requires district to include stakeholders in development of WP

None 92.16% 92.16% 88.24% 88.24% 86.27% 86.27% 86.27% 86.27% 86.27%

Weak 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92% 5.88% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84%

Strong 5.88% 5.88% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88%

State provides methods for districts to solicit input into WP dev/revision

None 85.62% 85.62% 80.39% 80.39% 80.39% 78.43% 80.39% 80.39% 80.39%

Weak 6.54% 6.54% 11.76% 11.76% 11.76% 13.73% 11.76% 11.76% 11.76%

Strong 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84%

State provides methods for districts to engage parents/community

None 86.27% 86.27% 84.31% 84.31% 82.35% 82.35% 82.35% 82.35% 82.35%

Weak 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92%

Strong 9.80% 9.80% 11.76% 11.76% 13.73% 13.73% 13.73% 13.73% 13.73%

State requires district to include stakeholders in periodic reviews of WPs

None -- -- -- -- -- 92.16% 92.16% 92.16% 92.16%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

State requires district to include stakeholders in wellness policy update

None -- -- -- -- -- 94.12% 94.12% 94.12% 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

45

Page 50: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ALL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

% % % % % % % % %

EVALUATION & IMPLEMENTATION

State addresses district role in measuring implementation

None 86.93% 86.93% 83.01% 81.05% 81.05% 81.05% 81.05% 81.05% 81.05%

Weak 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92%

Strong 11.11% 11.11% 15.03% 15.03% 15.03% 15.03% 15.03% 15.03% 15.03%

State addresses district plan for implementation

None 88.89% 88.89% 86.93% 84.97% 84.97% 84.97% 84.97% 84.97% 84.97%

Weak 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27%

Strong 9.80% 9.80% 11.76% 11.76% 11.76% 11.76% 11.76% 11.76% 11.76%

State requires district to establish ongoing health advisory committee

None 70.59% 68.63% 64.71% 62.75% 60.78% 60.78% 60.78% 60.78% 62.75%

Weak 11.76% 11.76% 13.73% 13.73% 13.73% 11.76% 13.73% 13.73% 13.73%

Strong 17.65% 19.61% 21.57% 23.53% 25.49% 27.45% 25.49% 25.49% 23.53%

State requires district to measure BMI

None 78.43% 72.55% 66.67% 64.71% 56.86% 54.90% 54.90% 54.90% 54.90%

Suggested/ encouraged 15.03% 19.61% 25.49% 25.49% 33.33% 29.41% 29.41% 28.10% 28.10%

Req’d for only some grades

2.61% 5.88% 5.88% 7.84% 7.84% 10.46% 10.46% 11.76% 11.76%

Req’d w/o parent reporting

3.92% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27%

Req’d w/ parent reporting 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

State requires district plan for evaluation

None 88.89% 88.89% 86.93% 86.93% 86.93% 84.97% 84.97% 84.97% 84.97%

Weak 9.15% 9.15% 9.15% 9.15% 9.15% 9.15% 9.15% 9.15% 9.15%

Strong 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88%

State requires district reporting on policy compliance

None 92.16% 92.16% 92.16% 92.16% 92.16% 88.24% 88.24% 86.27% 86.27%

Weak 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Strong 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 11.76% 11.76% 13.73% 13.73%

State provides funding for policy implementation

None 98.04% 98.04% 98.04% 98.04% 96.08% 96.08% 96.08% 94.12% --

Weak 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% --

Strong 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% --

Triennial assessment of wellness policy

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5.88%

State requires district plan for policy revision

None 92.16% 92.16% 92.16% 92.16% 90.20% 90.20% 90.20% 90.20% 88.24%

Weak 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Strong 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 9.80%

State requires district to report to the state

None 73.20% 71.24% 65.36% 61.44% 58.17% 58.17% 58.17% 58.82% 60.78%

Weak 3.92% 5.88% 7.84% 3.92% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88%

Strong 22.88% 22.88% 26.80% 34.64% 35.95% 35.95% 35.95% 35.29% 33.33%

State provides technical assistance to district for policy implementation

None 87.58% 85.62% 75.82% 73.86% 69.93% 69.93% 69.93% 71.90% 73.86%

Weak 5.88% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84%

Strong 6.54% 6.54% 16.34% 18.30% 22.22% 22.22% 22.22% 20.26% 18.30%

State monitors schools/ districts for compliance with state requirements

None 87.58% 81.70% 77.78% 73.86% 69.93% 71.90% 69.93% 69.93% 75.82%

Weak 5.88% 9.80% 5.88% 5.88% 7.84% 5.88% 3.92% 3.92% 1.96%

Strong 6.54% 8.50% 16.34% 20.26% 22.22% 22.22% 26.14% 26.14% 22.22%

State penalties for district failure to comply w/ state competitive food laws

None 92.16% 92.16% 92.16% 90.20% 88.24% 88.24% 90.20% 88.24% 88.24%

Weak 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 3.92%

Strong 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 3.92% 5.88% 7.84%

46

Page 51: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ALL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

% % % % % % % % %

State institutes corrective action plan for school/ district non-compliance

None 98.04% 98.04% 98.04% 96.08% 96.08% 96.08% 96.08% 96.08% 100%

Weak 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Strong 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 0.00%

State evaluation and reporting required

None 91.50% 91.50% 79.08% 79.74% 73.86% 72.55% 69.28% 68.63% 72.55%

Weak 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 1.96% 0.00% 0.00% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31%

Strong 6.54% 6.54% 16.99% 18.30% 26.14% 27.45% 29.41% 30.07% 26.14%

Penalties for district failure to comply w/ state wellness-related laws

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 98.04%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ALL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

% % % % % % % % %

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS (added in SY 10-11)

State requires district post wellness policy on website

None -- -- -- -- 92.16% 92.16% 92.16% 94.12% 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 3.92% 3.92% State requires district to post wellness policy elsewhere (non-website)

None -- -- -- -- 94.12% 94.12% 94.12% 96.08% 96.08%

Weak -- -- -- -- 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 0.00% 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% State requires district to submit wellness policy to state

None -- -- -- -- 90.20% 90.20% 90.20% 90.20% 90.20%

Weak -- -- -- -- 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84%

State posting district wellness policies online

None -- -- -- -- 94.12% 94.12% 94.12% 96.08% 96.08%

Weak -- -- -- -- 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 3.92% 3.92%

State requires district to report to public on WP implementation

None -- -- -- -- 78.43% 74.51% 72.55% 70.59% 72.55%

Weak -- -- -- -- 7.84% 5.88% 7.84% 5.88% 5.88%

Strong -- -- -- -- 13.73% 19.61% 19.61% 23.53% 21.57% State requires district to report to board on WP implementation

None -- -- -- -- 88.24% 86.27% 85.62% 86.27% 84.31%

Weak -- -- -- -- 1.31% 1.31% 1.96% 0.00% 1.96% Strong -- -- -- -- 10.46% 12.42% 12.42% 13.73% 13.73%

State requires district to report to the state on WP implementation

None -- -- -- -- 71.90% 64.71% 66.01% 63.40% 64.71% Weak -- -- -- -- 8.50% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 9.80%

Strong -- -- -- -- 19.61% 27.45% 26.14% 28.76% 25.49% State requires district to report to other group/ other stakeholders

None -- -- -- -- 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Weak -- -- -- -- 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

State requires district to report on food safety inspections

None -- -- -- -- 98.04% 98.04% 98.04% 96.08% 96.08%

Weak -- -- -- -- 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92%

State requires district to report wellness policy compliance data

None -- -- -- -- 92.16% 88.24% 86.27% 84.31% 84.31%

Weak -- -- -- -- 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92%

Strong -- -- -- -- 5.88% 9.80% 9.80% 11.76% 11.76%

State requires district to report on school meal program participation

None -- -- -- -- 96.08% 92.16% 94.12% 94.12% 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- 0.00% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- 3.92% 5.88% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92%

47

Page 52: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ALL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

% % % % % % % % %

State requires district to report on nutritional quality of meal program

None -- -- -- -- 98.04% 96.08% 96.08% 96.08% 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- 1.96% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92%

State requires district to report on competitive foods and beverages sold

None -- -- -- -- 92.16% 88.24% 90.20% 90.20% 92.16%

Weak -- -- -- -- 1.96% 1.96% 0.00% 0.00% 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- 5.88% 9.80% 9.80% 9.80% 5.88%

State requires district to report on PE/PA requirements

None -- -- -- -- 88.89% 84.31% 80.39% 77.78% 79.08%

Weak -- -- -- -- 3.92% 6.54% 10.46% 8.50% 8.50%

Strong -- -- -- -- 7.19% 9.15% 9.15% 13.73% 12.42%

State requires district to report aggregate fitness assessment results

None -- -- -- -- 94.12% 90.20% 90.20% 90.20% 88.24%

Weak -- -- -- -- 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 3.92%

Strong -- -- -- -- 3.92% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84%

State requires district to report on student BMI screening (in aggregate)

None -- -- -- -- 84.31% 84.97% 84.97% 84.97% 84.97%

Weak -- -- -- -- 3.92% 1.96% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27%

Strong -- -- -- -- 11.76% 13.07% 11.76% 11.76% 11.76%

State requires district to report on meeting WP goals/progress

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 96.08%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1.96%

State requires district to report on summary of events

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 100%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00%

State requires district to report on official leading the team

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 100%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00%

State requires district to report on how the public can be involved

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5.88%

State requires district to report on other results, e.g., School Health Index

None -- -- -- -- 96.08% 94.12% 90.20% 88.24% 88.24%

Weak -- -- -- -- 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 1.96% 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- 1.96% 3.92% 5.88% 9.80% 11.76%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ALL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

% % % % % % % % % STAFF WELLNESS & MODELING PA opportunities for school staff

None 98.04% 98.04% 96.08% 96.08% 96.08% 96.08% 96.08% 96.08% 96.08%

Weak 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92%

Strong 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Staff wellness programs None 98.04% 98.04% 98.04% 94.12% 94.12% 96.08% 96.08% 92.16% 92.16%

Weak 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92% 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92%

Strong 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92%

Staff to role model healthy behaviors

None 98.04% 98.04% 96.08% 94.12% 92.16% 92.16% 92.16% 90.20% 92.16%

Weak 0.00% 0.00% 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92%

Strong 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 5.88% 3.92%

48

Page 53: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

Table A-2. States Nationwide with Wellness Policy Provisions, Elementary School Level, School Years 2006-07 through 2014-

2015

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ELEMENTARY

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

NUTRITION EDUCATION

Nutrition education goals None 9 17.65% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 41 80.39% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35%

Nutrition curriculum for each grade

None 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 12 23.53%

Weak 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 10 19.61%

Strong 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 29 56.86%

School gardens None -- -- -- -- 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 44 86.27%

Weak -- -- -- -- 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 6 11.76%

Strong -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Nutrition education training for teachers

None 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69%

Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Nutrition education integrated into other subjects

None 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 42 82.35%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Nutrition education teaches behavior-focused skills

None 16 31.37% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 30 58.82% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 33 64.71%

Number of nutrition education courses or hours specified

None 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27%

Weak 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ELEMENTARY

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

PHYSICAL ACTIVITY (PA)

Goals for PA None 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 30 58.82% 29 56.86% 27 52.94% 27 52.94% 27 52.94% 27 52.94% 27 52.94%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong 18 35.29% 19 37.25% 20 39.22% 21 41.18% 23 45.10% 24 47.06% 24 47.06% 24 47.06% 24 47.06%

PA for every grade level None 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 35 68.63% 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 31 60.78%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 5 9.80%

Strong 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 15 29.41%

Amount of time for PA None -- -- -- -- 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 36 70.59%

Weak -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong -- -- -- -- 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 11 21.57%

PA opportunities throughout the day (e.g., classroom breaks)

None 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39%

Weak 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Community use of facilities for PA

None 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 40 78.43%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

49

Page 54: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ELEMENTARY

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Safe active routes to school

None 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 49 96.08%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Prohibit using PA as punishment

None 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Daily recess (ES level only)

None 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 39 76.47% 38 74.51%

Weak 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 9 17.65%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Less than daily recess (ES level only)

None -- -- -- -- 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 46 90.20%

Weak -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 5 9.80%

Strong -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

PA opportunities before/after school (excl. intra/extramural sports)

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Law authorizing joint use of recreational facilities

Not mentioned -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 12 23.53% 12 23.53% 12 23.53% 12 23.53%

Addressed -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 39 76.47%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ELEMENTARY

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

PHYSICAL EDUCATION (PE)

Physical education provisions

No policy 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

PE addressed 48 94.12% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04%

PE curriculum for each grade

None 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Weak 16 31.37% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 14 27.45% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 14 27.45% 14 27.45%

Strong 30 58.82% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 33 64.71% 33 64.71%

PE requirement: ≥150 mins/week (ES); ≥ 225 mins/week (MS/HS)

None 28 54.90% 26 50.98% 27 52.94% 28 54.90% 28 54.90% 28 54.90% 28 54.90% 29 56.86% 29 56.86%

Weak 18 35.29% 19 37.25% 19 37.25% 18 35.29% 18 35.29% 18 35.29% 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 16 31.37%

Strong 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 6 11.76%

PE required to teach about a physically active lifestyle

None 18 35.29% 16 31.37% 12 23.53% 11 21.57% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 9 17.65%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong 29 56.86% 31 60.78% 34 66.67% 37 72.55% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 39 76.47%

PE competency assessment required

None 20 39.22% 18 35.29% 14 27.45% 13 25.49% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 11 21.57%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong 28 54.90% 30 58.82% 33 64.71% 36 70.59% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 37 72.55%

PE classes, courses, or credits (HS level only)

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Frequency of PE (strong=daily)

None 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Daily PE waiver Not mentioned -- -- -- -- 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04%

May apply for waiver -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Teacher-student ratio for PE

None 43 84.31% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 39 76.47%

Weak 4 7.84% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

50

Page 55: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ELEMENTARY

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Safe/adequate facilities for PE

None -- -- -- -- 37 72.55% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 38 74.51%

Weak -- -- -- -- 13 25.49% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 12 23.53%

Strong -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

PE time for moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (strong: ≥ 50%)

None 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 39 76.47% 38 74.51% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 34 66.67% 33 64.71%

Weak 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 17 33.33% 17 33.33%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96%

Requires PE to be taught by state-authorized physical educator

None 40 78.43% 37 72.55% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 30 58.82% 30 58.82%

Weak 4 7.84% 6 11.76% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65%

Strong 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 12 23.53%

Requires PE teachers to be trained in PE skills

None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Prohibits waivers to get out of PE

None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 46 90.20%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Requires annual health assessment in PE class

None 38 74.51% 35 68.63% 30 58.82% 29 56.86% 23 45.10% 22 43.14% 22 43.14% 21 41.18% 20 39.22%

Weak 12 23.53% 16 31.37% 21 41.18% 22 43.14% 28 54.90% 28 54.90% 28 54.90% 29 56.86% 30 58.82%

Strong 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Requires provision of free drinking water in gymnasium

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ELEMENTARY

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

SCHOOL MEALS

School meal nutrition guidelines must meet Federal standards

None 28 54.90% 27 52.94% 23 45.10% 22 43.14% 22 43.14% 22 43.14% 22 43.14% 22 43.14% 22 43.14%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong 23 45.10% 24 47.06% 28 54.90% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 29 56.86%

School Breakfast Program

None 20 39.22% 19 37.25% 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 15 29.41%

Weak 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61%

Strong 21 41.18% 22 43.14% 25 49.02% 25 49.02% 25 49.02% 25 49.02% 25 49.02% 25 49.02% 26 50.98%

Low-fat cooking methods None 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 44 86.27%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 4 7.84%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88%

Strategies to increase participation in meals

None 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 40 78.43%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 8 15.69%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Closed campus at lunch None 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 50 98.04%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 0 0.00%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% Recess before lunch (ES level only)

None -- -- -- -- 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 47 92.16%

Weak -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 4 7.84%

Strong -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Adequate time to eat meals (20 mins for lunch; 10 mins for breakfast)

None 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 35 68.63%

Weak 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 10 19.61%

Strong 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

51

Page 56: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ELEMENTARY

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Nutrition-related training for food service staff

None 43 84.31% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 35 68.63%

Weak 7 13.73% 9 17.65% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 14 27.45%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 2 3.92%

Nutrition information for school meals

None 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Farm-to-school/ cafeteria program

None 43 84.31% 39 76.47% 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 29 56.86% 26 50.98% 28 54.90% 24 47.06% 24 47.06%

Weak 8 15.69% 12 23.53% 15 29.41% 16 31.37% 22 43.14% 24 47.06% 22 43.14% 26 50.98% 26 50.98%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Only 1%/skim milk at meals

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 22 43.14% 22 43.14% 21 41.18%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 29 56.86%

At least 1/2 of grains served are whole grains

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 22 43.14% 22 43.14% -- --

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% -- --

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 29 56.86% 29 56.86% -- --

Specifies number of fruits & vegetables served at meals

None -- -- -- -- -- -- 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% -- --

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% -- --

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- 6 11.76% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% -- --

Fat content of flavored milk

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 22 43.14%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 29 56.86%

Provisions for free drinking water at meals

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 21 41.18%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 30 58.82%

Restrictions on flavored milk at meals

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 48 94.12% 47 92.16% -- --

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% -- --

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 4 7.84% -- --

Whole grain-rich requirement

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 22 43.14%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 29 56.86% Whole grain exemption Not mentioned -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 51 100%

Exemptions allowed -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

No exemptions allowed

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Number of whole grains served

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 21 41.18%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 29 56.86% Number of fruits and/or vegetables served

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 21 41.18%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 29 56.86%

Juice as fruit or vegetable serving

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 21 41.18%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 29 56.86%

Number of meat/meat alternatives served

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 21 41.18%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 29 56.86%

52

Page 57: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ELEMENTARY

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Number of milk/milk alternatives served

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 21 41.18%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 29 56.86%

Min/max calories daily None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 22 43.14%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 29 56.86%

Calories from saturated fat

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 21 41.18%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 29 56.86%

Sodium None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 21 41.18%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 29 56.86%

Trans-fat None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 22 43.14%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 29 56.86%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ELEMENTARY

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

SELECTED POLICIES FOR COMPETITIVE FOODS & BEVERAGES (See Table 4 for additional provisions)

Nutrition guidelines for competitive foods & beverages

None 25 49.02% 21 41.18% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 14 27.45% 13 25.49% 17 33.33%

Weak 10 19.61% 13 25.49% 16 31.37% 15 29.41% 14 27.45% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 7 13.73%

Strong 16 31.37% 17 33.33% 19 37.25% 20 39.22% 22 43.14% 23 45.10% 24 47.06% 24 47.06% 27 52.94%

Nutrition guidelines apply to food & beverage contracts

None 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 42 82.35%

Weak 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88%

Strong 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 6 11.76%

Meets IOM fruit & vegetable and/or whole grain standard

None -- -- -- -- 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% -- --

Weak -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% -- --

Strong -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% -- --

Requires only whole, unprocessed & fresh food

None 40 78.43% 37 72.55% 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 29 56.86% 28 54.90% 28 54.90% 24 47.06% -- --

Weak 11 21.57% 14 27.45% 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 19 37.25% 19 37.25% 18 35.29% 22 43.14% -- --

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% -- --

Prohibits using food as a reward

None 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Nutrition information for competitive foods and beverages

None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% Requires free drinking water to be accessible throughout school (not just in cafeteria or gym

None 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

ACCESS RESTRICTIONS

Competitive food &/or beverage ban

None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% -- --

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% -- --

Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% -- --

53

Page 58: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ELEMENTARY

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Bans fast food sales on campus

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96%

Vending machine restrictions during the school day

None 27 52.94% 23 45.10% 23 45.10% 22 43.14% 19 37.25% 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 19 37.25%

Weak 11 21.57% 13 25.49% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 13 25.49% 15 29.41% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 10 19.61%

Strong 13 25.49% 15 29.41% 17 33.33% 18 35.29% 19 37.25% 19 37.25% 20 39.21% 20 39.21% 22 43.14%

School store restrictions during the school day

None 29 56.86% 25 49.02% 25 49.02% 24 47.06% 21 41.18% 20 39.22% 20 39.22% 20 39.22% 22 43.14%

Weak 11 21.57% 13 25.49% 12 23.53% 12 23.53% 14 27.45% 15 29.41% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 9 17.65%

Strong 11 21.57% 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 15 29.41% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 20 39.22%

À la carte restrictions during meal times

None 26 50.98% 22 43.14% 18 35.29% 18 35.29% 16 31.37% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 19 37.25%

Weak 13 25.49% 15 29.41% 16 31.37% 15 29.41% 16 31.37% 17 33.33% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 11 21.57%

Strong 12 23.53% 14 27.45% 17 33.33% 18 35.29% 19 37.25% 19 37.25% 20 39.21% 20 39.21% 21 41.18%

Classroom parties None 43 84.31% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 42 82.35%

Weak 8 15.69% 10 19.61% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 4 7.84%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 5 9.80%

Fundraisers during the school day

None -- -- -- -- 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 34 66.67% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 28 54.90%

Weak -- -- -- -- 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong -- -- -- -- 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 17 33.33%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ELEMENTARY

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

MARKETING & PROMOTION

Marketing healthy choices

None 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 3.92%

Restricted marketing None 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ELEMENTARY

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

COMMUNICATIONS & STAKEHOLDER INPUT

State requires district to include stakeholders in development of WP

None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

State provides methods for districts to solicit input into WP dev/revision

None 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

State provides methods for districts to engage parents/community

None 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

54

Page 59: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ELEMENTARY

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % State requires district to include stakeholders in periodic reviews of WPs

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

State requires district to include stakeholders in wellness policy update

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ELEMENTARY

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

EVALUATION & IMPLEMENTATION

State addresses district role in measuring implementation

None 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69%

State addresses district plan for implementation

None 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% State requires district to establish ongoing health advisory committee

None 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 32 62.75%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 12 23.53%

State requires district to measure BMI

None 40 78.43% 37 72.55% 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 29 56.86% 28 54.90% 28 54.90% 27 52.94% 28 54.90%

Suggested/ encouraged 7 13.73% 10 19.61% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 17 33.33% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 14 27.45%

Req’d for only some grades

2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Req’d w/o parent reporting

2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Req’d w/ parent reporting

0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

State requires district plan for evaluation

None 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% State requires district reporting on policy compliance

None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% State provides funding for policy implementation

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% -- --

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% -- --

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% -- -- Triennial assessment of wellness policy

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 48 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% State requires district plan for policy revision

None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 45 88.24%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80%

State requires district to report to the state

None 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 32 62.75% 31 60.78% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 30 58.82% 31 60.78%

Weak 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 15 29.41% 18 35.29% 19 37.25% 19 37.25% 19 37.25% 18 35.29% 17 33.33%

55

Page 60: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ELEMENTARY

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % State provides technical assistance to district for policy implementation

None 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 36 70.59% 37 72.55%

Weak 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 12 23.53% 12 23.53% 12 23.53% 11 21.57% 10 19.61%

State monitors schools/ districts for compliance with state requirements

None 44 86.27% 41 80.39% 39 76.47% 37 72.55% 35 68.63% 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 38 74.51%

Weak 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96%

Strong 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 9 17.65% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 12 23.53% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 12 23.53%

State penalties for district failure to comply w/ state competitive food laws

None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 46 90.2% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 46 90.2% 45 88.24% 45 88.24%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 4 7.84%

State institutes corrective action plan for school/ district non-compliance

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 51 100%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 0 0.00%

State evaluation and reporting required

None 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 39 76.47% 40 78.43% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 35 68.63% 34 66.67% 36 70.59%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 15 29.41% 16 31.37% 14 27.45%

Penalties for district failure to comply w/ state wellness-related laws

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 50 98.04%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ELEMENTARY

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS (Added in SY ’10-’11)

State requires district post wellness policy on website

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

State requires district to post wellness policy elsewhere (non-website)

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

State requires district to submit wellness policy to state

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

State posting district wellness policies online

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

State requires district to report to public on WP implementation

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 40 78.43% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 37 72.55%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 7 13.73% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 12 23.53% 11 21.57%

State requires district to report to board on WP implementation

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 44 86.27% 43 84.31%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

State requires district to report to the state on WP implementation

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 36 70.59% 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 33 64.71%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 10 19.61% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 15 29.41% 13 25.49%

56

Page 61: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ELEMENTARY

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % State requires district to report to other group/ other stakeholders

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

State requires district to report on food safety inspections

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

State requires district to report wellness policy compliance data

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 47 92.16% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 5 9.80 % 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

State requires district to report on school meal program participation

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 49 96.08% 47 92.16% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

State requires district to report on nutritional quality of meal program

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

State requires district to report on competitive foods and beverages sold

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 47 92.16% 45 88.24% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 47 92.16%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 3 5.88%

State requires district to report on PE/PA requirements

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 44 86.27% 42 82.35% 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 40 78.43%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% State requires district to report aggregate fitness assessment results

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 48 94.12% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 45 88.24%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

State requires district to report on student BMI screening (in aggregate)

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

State requires district to report on meeting WP goals/progress

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 49 96.08%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% State requires district to report on summary of events

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 51 100%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% State requires district to report on official leading the team

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 51 100%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% State requires district to report on how the public can be involved

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 48 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% State requires district to report on other results, e.g., School Health Index

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 45 88.24%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 6 11.76%

57

Page 62: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- ELEMENTARY

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

STAFF WELLNESS & MODELING

PA opportunities for school staff

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Staff wellness programs

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Staff to role model healthy behaviors

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 47 92.16%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 2 3.92%

58

Page 63: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

Table A-3. States Nationwide with Wellness Policy Provisions, Middle School Level, School Years 2006-07 through 2014-

2015

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- MIDDLE

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

NUTRITION EDUCATION

Nutrition education goals

None 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 42 82.35% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31%

Nutrition curriculum for each grade

None 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 12 23.53%

Weak 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 9 17.65%

Strong 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 30 58.82% 30 58.82% 30 58.82% 30 58.82% 30 58.82% 30 58.82% 30 58.82%

School gardens None -- -- -- -- 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 44 86.27%

Weak -- -- -- -- 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 6 11.76%

Strong -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Nutrition education training for teachers

None 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69%

Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Nutrition education integrated into other subjects

None 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 42 82.35%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Nutrition education teaches behavior-focused skills

None 16 31.37% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 15 29.41%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong 31 60.78% 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 33 64.71%

Number of nutrition education courses or hours specified

None 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 40 78.43%

Weak 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 11 21.57%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- MIDDLE

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

PHYSICAL ACTIVITY (PA)

Goals for PA None 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 32 62.75%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 17 33.33% 18 35.29% 18 35.29% 18 35.29% 18 35.29% 19 37.25% 19 37.25%

PA for every grade level

None 41 80.39% 42 82.35% 40 78.43% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 35 68.63%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61%

Strong 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76%

Amount of time for PA None -- -- -- -- 46 90.20% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 41 80.39%

Weak -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80%

PA opportunities throughout the day (e.g., classroom breaks)

None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Community use of facilities for PA

None 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 40 78.43%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

59

Page 64: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- MIDDLE

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Safe active routes to school

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Prohibit using PA as punishment

None 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Daily recess (ES level only)

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Less than daily recess (ES level only)

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

PA opportunities before/after school (excl. intra/extramural sports)

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Law authorizing joint use of recreational facilities

Not mentioned -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 12 23.53% 12 23.53% 12 23.53% 12 23.53%

Addressed -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 39 76.47%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- MIDDLE

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

PHYSICAL EDUCATION (PE)

Physical education provisions

No policy 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

PE addressed 48 94.12% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04%

PE curriculum for each grade

None 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Weak 18 35.29% 17 33.33% 16 31.37% 15 29.41% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 15 29.41% 15 29.41%

Strong 28 54.90% 29 56.86% 30 58.82% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 32 62.75% 32 62.75%

PE requirement: ≥150 mins/week (ES); ≥ 225 mins/week (MS/HS)

None 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 34 66.67% 34 66.67%

Weak 18 35.29% 18 35.29% 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 16 31.37% 15 29.41% 14 27.45%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88%

PE required to teach about a physically active lifestyle

None 17 33.33% 15 29.41% 11 21.57% 10 19.61% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88%

Strong 29 56.86% 31 60.78% 34 66.67% 37 72.55% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 39 76.47%

PE competency assessment required

None 20 39.22% 18 35.29% 14 27.45% 13 25.49% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 11 21.57%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong 28 54.90% 30 58.82% 33 64.71% 36 70.59% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 37 72.55%

PE classes, courses, or credits (HS level only)

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Frequency of PE (strong=daily)

None 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Daily PE waiver Not mentioned -- -- -- -- 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04%

May apply for waiver -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

60

Page 65: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- MIDDLE

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Teacher-student ratio for PE

None 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43%

Weak 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Safe/adequate facilities for PE

None -- -- -- -- 36 70.59% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 37 72.55%

Weak -- -- -- -- 13 25.49% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 12 23.53%

Strong -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

PE time for moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (strong: ≥ 50%)

None 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 39 76.47%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 11 21.57%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96%

Requires PE to be taught by state-authorized physical educator

None 41 80.39% 37 72.55% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 34 66.67% 32 62.75% 31 60.78% 30 58.82% 30 58.82%

Weak 2 3.92% 4 7.84% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 6 11.76%

Strong 8 15.69% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 15 29.41%

Requires PE teachers to be trained in PE skills

None 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Prohibits waivers to get out of PE

None 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 45 88.24%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Requires annual health assessment in PE class

None 39 76.47% 36 70.59% 32 62.75% 31 60.78% 26 50.98% 25 49.02% 25 49.02% 24 47.06% 23 45.10%

Weak 11 21.57% 15 29.41% 19 37.25% 20 39.22% 25 49.02% 25 49.02% 25 49.02% 26 50.98% 27 52.94%

Strong 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Requires provision of free drinking water in gymnasium

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- MIDDLE

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

SCHOOL MEALS

School meal nutrition guidelines must meet Federal standards

None 29 56.86% 28 54.90% 24 47.06% 23 45.10% 23 45.10% 23 45.10% 23 45.10% 23 45.10% 23 45.10%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong 22 43.14% 23 45.10% 27 52.94% 28 54.90% 28 54.90% 28 54.90% 28 54.90% 28 54.90% 28 54.90% School Breakfast Program

None 22 43.14% 21 41.18% 18 35.29% 18 35.29% 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 16 31.37%

Weak 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 11 21.57%

Strong 19 37.25% 20 39.22% 23 45.10% 23 45.10% 23 45.10% 23 45.10% 23 45.10% 23 45.10% 24 47.06% Low-fat cooking methods

None 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 46 90.20%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 3 5.88% Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92%

Strategies to increase participation in meals

None 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 42 82.35%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Closed campus at lunch

None 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 50 98.04%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Recess before lunch (ES level only)

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

61

Page 66: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- MIDDLE

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Adequate time to eat meals (20 mins for lunch; 10 mins for breakfast)

None 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 34 66.67% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 36 70.59%

Weak 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 10 19.61%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Nutrition-related training for food service staff

None 43 84.31% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 35 68.63%

Weak 7 13.73% 9 17.65% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 14 27.45%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 2 3.92%

Nutrition information for school meals

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Farm-to-school/ cafeteria program

None 43 84.31% 39 76.47% 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 29 56.86% 26 50.98% 28 54.90% 24 47.06% 24 47.06%

Weak 8 15.69% 12 23.53% 15 29.41% 16 31.37% 22 43.14% 24 47.06% 22 43.14% 26 50.98% 26 50.98%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Only 1%/skim milk at meals

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 23 45.10% 23 45.10% 22 43.14%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 28 54.90% 28 54.90% 28 54.90%

At least 1/2 of grains served are whole grains

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 23 45.10% 23 45.10% -- --

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% -- --

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 28 54.90% 28 54.90% -- --

Specifies number of fruits & vegetables served at meals

None -- -- -- -- -- -- 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% -- --

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% -- --

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 7.84% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% -- --

Fat content of flavored milk

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 23 45.10%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 28 54.90%

Provisions for free drinking water at meals

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 22 43.14%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 29 56.86%

Restrictions on flavored milk at meals

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 48 94.12% 47 92.16% -- --

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% -- --

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 4 7.84% -- --

Whole grain-rich requirement

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 23 45.10%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 28 54.90%

Whole grain exemption

Not mentioned -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 51 100%

Exemptions allowed -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

No exemptions allowed -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Number of whole grains served

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 22 43.14%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 28 54.90%

Number of fruits and/or vegetables served

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 22 43.14%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 28 54.90%

Juice as fruit or vegetable serving

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 22 43.14%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 28 54.90%

62

Page 67: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- MIDDLE

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Number of meat/meat alternatives served

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 22 43.14%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 28 54.90%

Number of milk/milk alternatives served

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 22 43.14%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 28 54.90%

Min/max calories daily None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 23 45.10%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 28 54.90%

Calories from saturated fat

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 22 43.14%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 28 54.90%

Sodium None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 22 43.14%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 28 54.90%

Trans-fat None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 23 45.10%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 28 54.90%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- MIDDLE

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

SELECTED POLICIES FOR COMPETITIVE FOODS & BEVERAGES (See Table 4 for additional provisions)

Nutrition guidelines for competitive foods & beverages

None 27 52.94% 23 45.10% 18 35.29% 18 35.29% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 15 29.41% 14 27.45% 19 37.25%

Weak 12 23.53% 14 27.45% 17 33.33% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 16 31.37% 7 13.73%

Strong 12 23.53% 14 27.45% 16 31.37% 17 33.33% 19 37.25% 20 39.22% 21 41.18% 21 41.18% 25 49.02%

Nutrition guidelines apply to food & beverage contracts

None 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 42 82.35%

Weak 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88%

Strong 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 6 11.76%

Meets IOM fruit & vegetable and/or whole grain standard

None -- -- -- -- 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% -- --

Weak -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% -- --

Strong -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% -- --

Requires only whole, unprocessed & fresh food

None 40 78.43% 37 72.55% 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 30 58.82% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 25 49.02% -- --

Weak 11 21.57% 14 27.45% 17 33.33% 18 35.29% 20 39.22% 20 39.22% 19 37.25% 23 45.10% -- --

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% -- --

Prohibits using food as a reward

None 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Nutrition information for competitive foods and beverages

None 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Requires free drinking water to be accessible throughout school (not just in cafeteria or gym)

None 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

63

Page 68: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- MIDDLE

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % ACCESS RESTRICTIONS

Competitive food &/or beverage ban

None 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% -- --

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% -- --

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% -- --

Bans fast food sales on campus

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96%

Vending machine restrictions during the school day

None 29 56.86% 25 49.02% 25 49.02% 24 47.06% 21 41.18% 19 37.25% 19 37.25% 19 37.25% 21 41.18%

Weak 17 33.33% 18 35.29% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 18 35.29% 20 39.22% 19 37.25% 19 37.25% 11 21.57%

Strong 5 9.80% 8 15.69% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 12 23.53% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 19 37.25%

School store restrictions during the school day

None 31 60.78% 27 52.94% 27 52.94% 26 50.98% 23 45.10% 22 43.14% 22 43.14% 22 43.14% 24 47.06%

Weak 16 31.37% 17 33.33% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 18 35.29% 19 37.25% 18 35.29% 18 35.29% 9 17.65%

Strong 4 7.84% 7 13.73% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 18 35.29%

À la carte restrictions during meal times

None 28 54.90% 24 47.06% 20 39.22% 21 41.18% 17 33.33% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 20 39.22%

Weak 16 31.37% 17 33.33% 18 35.29% 17 33.33% 20 39.22% 21 41.18% 20 39.22% 20 39.22% 13 25.49%

Strong 7 13.73% 10 19.61% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 18 35.29%

Classroom parties None 44 86.27% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 44 86.27%

Weak 7 13.73% 9 17.65% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 3 5.88%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 4 7.84%

Fundraisers during the school day

None -- -- -- -- 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 34 66.67% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 28 54.90%

Weak -- -- -- -- 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 12 23.53% 11 21.57% 10 19.61% 7 13.73%

Strong -- -- -- -- 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 16 31.37%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- MIDDLE

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

MARKETING & PROMOTION

Marketing healthy choices

None 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 3.92% Restricted marketing None 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Strong 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- MIDDLE

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % COMMUNICATIONS & STAKEHOLDER INPUT State requires district to include stakeholders in development of WP

None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

State provides methods for districts to solicit input into WP dev/revision

None 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

State provides methods for districts to engage parents/community

None 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

64

Page 69: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- MIDDLE

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % State requires district to include stakeholders in periodic reviews of WPs

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

State requires district to include stakeholders in wellness policy update

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- MIDDLE

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

EVALUATION & IMPLEMENTATIONS

State addresses district role in measuring implementation

None 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69%

State addresses district plan for implementation

None 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

State requires district to establish ongoing health advisory committee

None 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 32 62.75%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 12 23.53%

State requires district to measure BMI

None 40 78.43% 37 72.55% 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 30 58.82% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 30 58.82% 29 56.86%

Suggested/ encouraged 8 15.69% 10 19.61% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 16 31.37% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 13 25.49% 14 27.45%

Req’d for only some grades

1 1.96% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Req’d w/o parent reporting

2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Req’d w/ parent reporting

0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

State requires district plan for evaluation

None 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

State requires district reporting on policy compliance

None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

State provides funding for policy implementation

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% -- --

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% -- --

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% -- --

Triennial assessment of wellness policy

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 48 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88%

State requires district plan for policy revision

None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 45 88.24%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80%

State requires district to report to the state

None 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 34 66.67% 31 60.78% 30 58.82% 30 58.82% 30 58.82% 30 58.82% 31 60.78%

Weak 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 13 25.49% 18 35.29% 18 35.29% 18 35.29% 18 35.29% 18 35.29% 17 33.33%

65

Page 70: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- MIDDLE

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % State provides technical assistance to district for policy implementation

None 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 39 76.47% 38 74.51% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 37 72.55% 38 74.51%

Weak 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 10 19.61% 9 17.65%

State monitors schools/ districts for compliance with state requirements

None 45 88.24% 42 82.35% 40 78.43% 38 74.51% 36 70.59% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 39 76.47%

Weak 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96%

Strong 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 8 15.69% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 11 21.57%

State penalties for district failure to comply w/ state competitive food laws

None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 45 88.24%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 4 7.84%

State institutes corrective action plan for school/ district non-compliance

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 51 100%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 0 0.00%

State evaluation and reporting required

None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 38 74.51%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 13 25.49%

Penalties for district failure to comply w/ state wellness-related laws

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 50 98.04%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- MIDDLE

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS (Added in SY ’10-’11)

State requires district post wellness policy on website

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

State requires district to post wellness policy elsewhere (non-website)

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

State requires district to submit wellness policy to state

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

State posting district wellness policies online

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

State requires district to report to public on WP implementation

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 40 78.43% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 37 72.55%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 7 13.73% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 12 23.53% 11 21.57%

State requires district to report to board on WP implementation

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

State requires district to report to the state on WP implementation

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 37 72.55% 33 64.71% 34 66.67% 32 62.75% 33 64.71%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 10 19.61% 14 27.45% 13 25.49% 15 29.41% 13 25.49%

66

Page 71: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- MIDDLE

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % State requires district to report to other group/ other stakeholders

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

State requires district to report on food safety inspections

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

State requires district to report wellness policy compliance data

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 47 92.16% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

State requires district to report on school meal program participation

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 49 96.08% 47 92.16% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

State requires district to report on nutritional quality of meal program

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

State requires district to report on competitive foods and beverages sold

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 47 92.16% 45 88.24% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 47 92.16%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 3 5.88%

State requires district to report on PE/PA requirements

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 46 90.20% 43 84.31% 41 80.39% 39 76.47% 40 78.43%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 4 7.84% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 7 13.73% 6 11.76%

State requires district to report aggregate fitness assessment results

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 48 94.12% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 45 88.24%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

State requires district to report on student BMI screening (in aggregate)

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 43 84.31% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

State requires district to report on meeting WP goals/progress

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 49 96.08%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

State requires district to report on summary of events

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 51 100%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

State requires district to report on official leading the team

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 51 100%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

State requires district to report on how the public can be involved

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 48 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88%

State requires district to report on other results, e.g., School Health Index

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 45 88.24%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 6 11.76%

67

Page 72: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- MIDDLE

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

STAFF WELLNESS & MODELING

PA opportunities for school staff

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Staff wellness programs

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Staff to role model healthy behaviors

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 47 92.16%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 2 3.92%

68

Page 73: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

Table A-4. States Nationwide with Wellness Policy Provisions, High School Level, School Years 2006-07 through 2014-2015

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- HIGH SCHOOL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

NUTRITION EDUCATION

Nutrition education goals

None 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 41 80.39% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35%

Nutrition curriculum for each grade

None 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 13 25.49%

Weak 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 15 29.41%

Strong 22 43.14% 22 43.14% 23 45.10% 23 45.10% 23 45.10% 23 45.10% 23 45.10% 23 45.10% 23 45.10%

School gardens None -- -- -- -- 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 44 86.27%

Weak -- -- -- -- 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 6 11.76%

Strong -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Nutrition education training for teachers

None 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69%

Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Nutrition education integrated into other subjects

None 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 42 82.35%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Nutrition education teaches behavior-focused skills

None 18 35.29% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 16 31.37%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong 29 56.86% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 32 62.75%

Number of nutrition education courses or hours specified

None 21 41.18% 20 39.22% 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 18 35.29% 18 35.29% 18 35.29% 19 37.25% 19 37.25%

Weak 30 58.82% 31 60.78% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 32 62.75%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- HIGH SCHOOL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

PHYSICAL ACTIVITY (PA)

Goals for PA None 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 34 66.67% 34 66.67%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong 12 23.53% 12 23.53% 14 27.45% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 17 33.33% 17 33.33%

PA for every grade level

None 42 82.35% 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 39 76.47%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% Strong 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Amount of time for PA None -- -- -- -- 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 45 88.24%

Weak -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% Strong -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

PA opportunities throughout the day (e.g., classroom breaks)

None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Community use of facilities for PA

None 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 40 78.43%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Safe active routes to school

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

69

Page 74: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- HIGH SCHOOL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Prohibit using PA as punishment

None 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Daily recess (ES level only)

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Less than daily recess (ES level only)

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

PA opportunities before/after school (excluding intra- and extramural sports)

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Law authorizing joint use of recreational facilities

Not mentioned -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 12 23.53% 12 23.53% 12 23.53% 12 23.53%

Addressed -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 39 76.47%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- HIGH SCHOOL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

PHYSICAL EDUCATION (PE)

Physical education provisions

No policy 4 7.84% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

PE addressed 47 92.16% 49 96.08% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04%

PE curriculum for each grade

None 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Weak 24 47.06% 25 49.02% 23 45.10% 22 43.14% 23 45.10% 22 43.14% 22 43.14% 22 43.14% 22 43.14%

Strong 21 41.18% 21 41.18% 23 45.10% 24 47.06% 24 47.06% 25 49.02% 25 49.02% 25 49.02% 25 49.02%

PE requirement: ≥150 mins/week (ES); ≥ 225 mins/week (MS/HS)

None 46 90.20% 44 86.27% 45 88.24% 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27%

Weak 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

PE required to teach about a physically active lifestyle

None 19 37.25% 15 29.41% 11 21.57% 10 19.61% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61%

Weak 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 29 56.86% 31 60.78% 34 66.67% 37 72.55% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 37 72.55%

PE competency assessment required

None 21 41.18% 17 33.33% 13 25.49% 12 23.53% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61%

Weak 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong 27 52.94% 29 56.86% 32 62.75% 35 68.63% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 36 70.59%

PE classes, courses, or credits (HS level only)

None 10 19.61% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 8 15.69%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong 37 72.55% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 40 78.43%

Frequency of PE (strong=daily)

None 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 50 98.04% 50 98.04%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Daily PE waiver Not mentioned -- -- -- -- 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04%

May apply for waiver -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Teacher-student ratio for PE

None 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43%

Weak 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

70

Page 75: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- HIGH SCHOOL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Safe/adequate facilities for PE

None -- -- -- -- 36 70.59% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 37 72.55%

Weak -- -- -- -- 13 25.49% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 12 23.53%

Strong -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

PE time for moderate-to-vigorous physical activity (strong: ≥ 50%)

None 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 40 78.43%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 11 21.57%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Requires PE to be taught by state-authorized physical educator

None 44 86.27% 40 78.43% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 35 68.63% 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 33 64.71%

Weak 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 4 7.84%

Strong 6 11.76% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 14 27.45%

Requires PE teachers to be trained in PE skills

None 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Prohibits waivers to get out of PE

None 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 46 90.20%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Requires annual health assessment in PE class

None 39 76.47% 36 70.59% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 27 52.94% 26 50.98% 26 50.98% 25 49.02% 24 47.06%

Weak 11 21.57% 15 29.41% 19 37.25% 19 37.25% 24 47.06% 24 47.06% 24 47.06% 25 49.02% 26 50.98%

Strong 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Requires provision of free drinking water in gymnasium

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- HIGH SCHOOL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

SCHOOL MEALS

School meal nutrition guidelines must meet Federal standards

None 29 56.86% 28 54.90% 25 49.02% 24 47.06% 24 47.06% 24 47.06% 24 47.06% 24 47.06% 24 47.06%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong 22 43.14% 23 45.10% 26 50.98% 27 52.94% 27 52.94% 27 52.94% 27 52.94% 27 52.94% 27 52.94%

School Breakfast Program

None 23 45.10% 22 43.14% 20 39.22% 20 39.22% 19 37.25% 19 37.25% 19 37.25% 19 37.25% 18 35.29%

Weak 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61%

Strong 19 37.25% 20 39.22% 22 43.14% 22 43.14% 22 43.14% 22 43.14% 22 43.14% 22 43.14% 23 45.10%

Low-fat cooking methods

None 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 46 90.20%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 3 5.88%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92%

Strategies to increase participation in meals

None 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 42 82.35% Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Closed campus at lunch

None 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 50 98.04%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 0 0.00%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% Recess before lunch (ES level only)

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- --

71

Page 76: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- HIGH SCHOOL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Adequate time to eat meals (20 mins for lunch; 10 mins for breakfast)

None 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 34 66.67% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 36 70.59%

Weak 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 10 19.61%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Nutrition-related training for food service staff

None 43 84.31% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 35 68.63%

Weak 7 13.73% 9 17.65% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 14 27.45%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 2 3.92%

Nutrition information for school meals

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Farm-to-school/ cafeteria program

None 43 84.31% 39 76.47% 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 29 56.86% 26 50.98% 28 54.90% 24 47.06% 24 47.06%

Weak 8 15.69% 12 23.53% 15 29.41% 16 31.37% 22 43.14% 24 47.06% 22 43.14% 26 50.98% 26 50.98%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Only 1%/skim milk at meals

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 24 47.06% 24 47.06% 24 47.06%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 27 52.94% 27 52.94% 27 52.94%

At least 1/2 of grains served are whole grains

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 24 47.06% 24 47.06% -- --

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% -- --

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 27 52.94% 27 52.94% -- --

Specifies number of fruits & vegetables served at meals

None -- -- -- -- -- -- 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% -- --

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% -- --

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 7.84% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% -- --

Fat content of flavored milk

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 24 47.06%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 27 52.94%

Provisions for free drinking water at meals

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 23 45.10%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 28 54.90%

Restrictions on flavored milk at meals

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 48 94.12% 47 92.16% -- --

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% -- --

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 4 7.84% -- --

Whole grain-rich requirement

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 24 47.06%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 27 52.94%

Whole grain exemption

Not mentioned -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 51 100%

Exemptions allowed -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

No exemptions allowed

-- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Number of whole grains served

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 23 45.10%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 27 52.94%

Number of fruits and/or vegetables served

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 23 45.10%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 27 52.94%

Juice as fruit or vegetable serving

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 23 45.10%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 27 52.94%

72

Page 77: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- HIGH SCHOOL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % Number of meat/meat alternatives served

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 23 45.10% Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 27 52.94%

Number of milk/milk alternatives served

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 23 45.10%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 27 52.94%

Min/max calories daily None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 24 47.06%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 27 52.94%

Calories from saturated fat

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 24 47.06%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 27 52.94%

Sodium None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 24 47.06%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 27 52.94%

Trans-fat None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 24 47.06%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 27 52.94%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- HIGH SCHOOL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

SELECTED POLICIES FOR COMPETITIVE FOODS & BEVERAGES (See Table 4 for additional provisions)

Nutrition guidelines for competitive foods & beverages

None 30 58.82% 27 52.94% 21 41.18% 21 41.18% 19 37.25% 19 37.25% 18 35.29% 17 33.33% 21 41.18%

Weak 11 21.57% 13 25.49% 17 33.33% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 16 31.37% 6 11.76%

Strong 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 16 31.37% 17 33.33% 18 35.29% 18 35.29% 24 47.06%

Nutrition guidelines apply to food & beverage contracts

None 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 43 84.31%

Weak 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92%

Strong 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 6 11.76%

Meets IOM fruit & vegetable and/or whole grain standard

None -- -- -- -- 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% -- --

Weak -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% -- --

Strong -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% -- --

Requires only whole, unprocessed & fresh food

None 41 80.39% 38 74.51% 35 68.63% 34 66.67% 31 60.78% 30 58.82% 30 58.82% 26 50.98% -- --

Weak 10 19.61% 13 25.49% 16 31.37% 17 33.33% 19 37.25% 19 37.25% 18 35.29% 22 43.14% -- --

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% -- --

Prohibits using food as a reward

None 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Nutrition information for competitive foods and beverages

None 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Requires free drinking water to be accessible throughout school (not just in cafeteria or gym)

None 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

73

Page 78: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- HIGH SCHOOL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % ACCESS RESTRICTIONS

Competitive food &/or beverage ban

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% -- --

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% -- --

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% -- --

Bans fast food sales on campus

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96%

Vending machine restrictions during the school day

None 32 62.75% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 28 54.90% 25 49.02% 23 45.10% 23 45.10% 23 45.10% 23 45.10%

Weak 17 33.33% 19 37.25% 16 31.37% 15 29.41% 18 35.29% 20 39.22% 19 37.25% 19 37.25% 12 23.53%

Strong 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 6 11.76% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 16 31.37%

School store restrictions during the school day

None 34 66.67% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 30 58.82% 27 52.94% 26 50.98% 26 50.98% 26 50.98% 26 50.98%

Weak 15 29.41% 17 33.33% 15 29.41% 14 27.45% 17 33.33% 18 35.29% 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 10 19.61%

Strong 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 15 29.41%

À la carte restrictions during meal times

None 31 60.78% 28 54.90% 24 47.06% 25 49.02% 21 41.18% 20 39.22% 20 39.22% 20 39.22% 22 43.14%

Weak 14 27.45% 16 31.37% 18 35.29% 16 31.37% 19 37.25% 20 39.22% 20 39.22% 20 39.22% 14 27.45%

Strong 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 15 29.41%

Classroom parties None 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 45 88.24%

Weak 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 3 5.88%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88%

Fundraisers during the school day

None -- -- -- -- 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 29 56.86%

Weak -- -- -- -- 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 12 23.53% 11 21.57% 10 19.61% 7 13.73%

Strong -- -- -- -- 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 15 29.41%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- HIGH SCHOOL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

MARKETING & PROMOTION

Marketing healthy choices

None 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 47 92.16%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 3 5.88% Restricted marketing None 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- HIGH SCHOOL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % COMMUNICATIONS & STAKEHOLDER INPUT State requires district to include stakeholders in development of WP

None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

State provides methods for districts to solicit input into WP dev/revision

None 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

74

Page 79: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- HIGH SCHOOL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % State provides methods for districts to engage parents/community

None 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

State requires district to include stakeholders in periodic reviews of WPs

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

State requires district to include stakeholders in wellness policy update

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- HIGH SCHOOL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

EVALUATION & IMPLEMENTATION

State addresses district role in measuring implementation

None 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 5 9.8% 5 9.8% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

State addresses district plan for implementation

None 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% State requires district to establish ongoing health advisory committee

None 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 32 62.75%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 12 23.53%

State requires district to measure BMI

None 40 78.43% 37 72.55% 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 28 54.90% 27 52.94% 27 52.94% 27 52.94% 27 52.94%

Suggested/ encouraged 8 15.69% 10 19.61% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 18 35.29% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 15 29.41% 15 29.41%

Req’d for only some grades

1 1.96% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Req’d w/o parent reporting

2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Req’d w/ parent reporting

0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

State requires district plan for evaluation

None 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% State requires district reporting on policy compliance

None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% State provides funding for policy implementation

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% -- --

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% -- --

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% -- -- Triennial assessment of wellness policy

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 48 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88%

75

Page 80: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- HIGH SCHOOL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % State requires district plan for policy revision

None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 45 88.24%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% State requires district to report to the state

None 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 34 66.67% 32 62.75% 30 58.82% 30 58.82% 30 58.82% 30 58.82% 31 60.78%

Weak 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 13 25.49% 17 33.33% 18 35.29% 18 35.29% 18 35.29% 18 35.29% 17 33.33%

State provides technical assistance to district for policy implementation

None 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 39 76.47% 38 74.51% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 37 72.55% 38 74.51%

Weak 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 10 19.61% 9 17.65%

State monitors schools/ districts for compliance with state requirements

None 45 88.24% 42 82.35% 40 78.43% 38 74.51% 36 70.59% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 39 76.47%

Weak 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96%

Strong 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 8 15.69% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 11 21.57%

State penalties for district failure to comply w/ state competitive food laws

None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 45 88.24%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 4 7.84%

State institutes corrective action plan for school/ district non-compliance

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 51 100%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 0 0.00%

State evaluation and reporting required

None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 37 72.55%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 13 25.49%

Penalties for district failure to comply w/ state wellness-related laws

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 50 98.04%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- HIGH SCHOOL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS (Added in SY ’10-’11)

State requires district post wellness policy on website

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% State requires district to post wellness policy elsewhere (non-website)

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

State requires district to submit wellness policy to state

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

State posting district wellness policies online

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

State requires district to report to public on WP implementation

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 40 78.43% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 37 72.55%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 7 13.73% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 12 23.53% 11 21.57%

76

Page 81: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- HIGH SCHOOL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

State requires district to report to board on WP implementation

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

State requires district to report to the state on WP implementation

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 37 72.55% 33 64.71% 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 33 64.71%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 10 19.61% 14 27.45% 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 13 25.49%

State requires district to report to other group/ other stakeholders

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

State requires district to report on food safety inspections

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

State requires district to report wellness policy compliance data

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 47 92.16% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

State requires district to report on school meal program participation

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 49 96.08% 47 92.16% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

State requires district to report on nutritional quality of meal program

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

State requires district to report on competitive foods and beverages sold

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 47 92.16% 45 88.24% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 47 92.16%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 3 5.88%

State requires district to report on PE/PA requirements

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 46 90.20% 44 86.27% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 41 80.39%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

State requires district to report aggregate fitness assessment results

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 48 94.12% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 45 88.24%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

State requires district to report on student BMI screening (in aggregate)

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

State requires district to report on meeting WP goals/progress

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 49 96.08%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

State requires district to report on summary of events

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 51 100%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

State requires district to report on official leading the team

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 51 100%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

77

Page 82: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- HIGH SCHOOL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

State requires district to report on how the public can be involved

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 48 94.12%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88%

State requires district to report on other results, e.g., School Health Index

None -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 45 88.24%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 0 0.00%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 6 11.76%

POLICY PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year of Policy Applicability- HIGH SCHOOL

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15

N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N % N %

STAFF WELLNESS & MODELING

PA opportunities for school staff

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Staff wellness programs

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Staff to role model healthy behaviors

None 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 47 92.16%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 2 3.92%

78

Page 83: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

Table B. States Nationwide with Wellness Policies Addressing Competitive Food and Beverage Content Restrictions by

Location of Sale and Provision, School Year 2014-15

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

ALL GRADES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MIDDLE SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL

’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15

% N % N % N %

VENDING MACHINES

General Smart Snacks requirement None 79.08% 38 74.51% 41 80.39% 42 82.35%

Weak 2.61% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Meets Smart Snacks: Does not define standards 7.19% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Meets Smart Snacks: Defines standards 8.50% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84%

Strong: Ban 2.61% 4 7.84% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

General competitive food standard None 78.43% 37 72.55% 41 80.39% 42 82.35%

Weak 2.61% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong: Undefined standard 7.19% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong: Defines standards 8.50% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84%

Strong: Ban 3.27% 5 9.80% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Nutrition standards for foods None 43.14% 20 39.22% 22 43.14% 24 47.06%

Weak 32.03% 16 31.37% 17 33.33% 16 31.37%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 15.69% 7 13.73% 9 17.65% 8 15.69%

Strong: Ban 3.27% 5 9.80% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Regulates sugar content None 50.33% 23 45.10% 26 50.98% 28 54.90%

Weak 8.50% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 10.46% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 5 9.80%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 26.14% 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 13 25.49%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 1.31% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 0 0.00%

Strong: Ban 3.27% 5 9.80% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Artificial sweeteners: food None 90.20% 42 82.35% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak 2.61% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong: Prohibits artificial sweeteners 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong: Ban 3.27% 5 9.80% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Regulates fat content None 48.37% 22 43.14% 25 49.02% 27 52.94%

Weak 9.80% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 6 11.76%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 16.34% 9 17.65% 8 15.69% 8 15.69%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 19.61% 9 17.65% 11 21.57% 10 19.61%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 2.61% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 0 0.00%

Strong: Ban 3.27% 5 9.80% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits trans-fat None 55.56% 26 50.98% 29 56.86% 30 58.82%

Weak 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong: Limits trans-fat 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 23.53% 11 21.57% 13 25.49% 12 23.53%

Strong: Ban 3.27% 5 9.80% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits saturated fat None 54.90% 26 50.98% 28 54.90% 30 58.82%

Weak 7.19% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 15.03% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 7 13.73%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 19.61% 9 17.65% 11 21.57% 10 19.61%

Strong: Ban 3.27% 5 9.80% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

79

Page 84: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

ALL GRADES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MIDDLE SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL

’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15

% N % N % N % Regulates sodium: snacks None 67.32% 31 60.78% 35 68.63% 37 72.55%

Weak 2.61% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 18.95% 9 17.65% 11 21.57% 9 17.65% Strong: Meets IOM standards 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong: Ban 3.27% 5 9.80% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Limits calorie content: snacks None 58.82% 29 56.86% 30 58.82% 31 60.78%

Weak 9.80% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 2.61% 0 0.00% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks/IOM standards 25.49% 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 12 23.53% Strong: Ban 3.27% 5 9.80% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Accompaniments None 76.47% 36 70.59% 40 78.43% 41 80.39% Weak 4.58% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 15.69% 7 13.73% 9 17.65% 8 15.69% Strong: Ban 3.27% 5 9.80% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Nutrition standards: ES/MS beverages None 47.06% 23 45.10% 25 49.02% -- -- Weak 12.75% 5 9.80% 8 15.69% -- --

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 21.57% 13 25.49% 9 17.65% -- -- Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 15.69% 7 13.73% 9 17.65% -- --

Strong: Ban 2.94% 3 5.88% 0 0.00% -- -- Nutrition standards: HS beverages None 52.94% -- -- -- -- 27 52.94%

Weak 27.45% -- -- -- -- 14 27.45% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 15.69% -- -- -- -- 8 15.69%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 3.92% -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% Strong: Ban 0.00% -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Artificial sweeteners: beverages None 86.93% 41 80.39% 45 88.24% 47 92.16% Weak 7.19% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 2 3.92%

Strong: Prohibits artificial sweeteners 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% Strong: Ban 1.96% 3 5.88% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits fat content of milk None 56.86% 27 52.94% 29 56.86% 31 60.78% Weak 10.46% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks/IOM standard 30.72% 15 29.41% 17 33.33% 15 29.41% Strong: Ban 1.96% 3 5.88% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits fat: flavored milk None 66.67% 33 64.71% 34 66.67% 35 68.63% Weak 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks/IOM standard 15.69% 7 13.73% 9 17.65% 8 15.69% Strong: Ban 1.96% 3 5.88% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Restrictions on juice None 51.63% 25 49.02% 26 50.98% 28 54.90% Weak 7.19% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong: Requires 50-99% juice 4.58% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks (ONLY 100% juice) 34.64% 18 35.29% 19 37.25% 16 31.37%

Strong: Ban 1.96% 3 5.88% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Restrictions on water None 49.02% 23 45.10% 25 49.02% 27 52.94%

Weak 32.03% 17 33.33% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks 16.99% 8 15.69% 10 19.61% 8 15.69%

Strong: Ban 1.96% 3 5.88% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

80

Page 85: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

ALL GRADES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MIDDLE SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL

’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15

% N % N % N % Serving size limits: beverages None 51.63% 25 49.02% 26 50.98% 28 54.90%

Weak 20.92% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 12 23.53% Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 21.57% 11 21.57% 13 25.49% 9 17.65% Strong: Meets IOM standards 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong: Ban 1.96% 3 5.88% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Limits caffeine: ES/MS None 51.96% 25 49.02% 28 54.90% -- --

Weak 6.86% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% -- -- Strong: Meets Smart Snacks/IOM standards 38.24% 20 39.22% 19 37.25% -- --

Strong: Ban 2.94% 3 5.88% 0 0.00% -- -- Limits caffeine: HS None 84.31% -- -- -- -- 43 84.31%

Weak 5.88% -- -- -- -- 3 5.88%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 9.80% -- -- -- -- 5 9.80% Strong: Ban 0.00% -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

ALL GRADES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MIDDLE SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL

’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15

% N % N % N %

SCHOOL STORES

General Smart Snacks requirement None 80.39% 40 78.43% 41 80.39% 42 82.35% Weak 2.61% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Meets Smart Snacks: Does not define standards 7.19% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% Meets Smart Snacks: Defines standards 8.50% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% General competitive food standard None 80.39% 40 78.43% 41 80.39% 42 82.35%

Weak 2.61% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% Strong: Undefined standard 7.19% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% Strong: Defines standards 8.50% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Nutrition standards for foods None 49.02% 23 45.10% 25 49.02% 27 52.94%

Weak 28.10% 16 31.37% 14 27.45% 13 25.49% Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 15.69% 7 13.73% 9 17.65% 8 15.69% Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Regulates sugar content None 52.94% 25 49.02% 27 52.94% 29 56.86% Weak 9.15% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 5 9.80%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 9.15% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 26.14% 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 13 25.49%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 1.31% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Artificial sweeteners: food None 92.16% 45 88.24% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% Weak 2.61% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong: Prohibits artificial sweeteners 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

81

Page 86: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

ALL GRADES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MIDDLE SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL

’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15

% N % N % N % Regulates fat content None 50.98% 24 47.06% 26 50.98% 28 54.90%

Weak 10.46% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 15.03% 9 17.65% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 19.61% 9 17.65% 11 21.57% 10 19.61% Strong: Meets IOM standards 2.61% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 0 0.00%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Limits trans-fat None 60.13% 29 56.86% 31 60.78% 32 62.75%

Weak 10.46% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% Strong: Limits trans-fat 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 21.57% 10 19.61% 12 23.53% 11 21.57%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Limits saturated fat None 57.52% 28 54.90% 29 56.86% 31 60.78%

Weak 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 13.73% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 6 11.76%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 19.61% 9 17.65% 11 21.57% 10 19.61% Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Regulates sodium: snacks None 69.28% 34 66.67% 35 68.63% 37 72.55% Weak 2.61% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 18.95% 9 17.65% 11 21.57% 9 17.65%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits calorie content: snacks None 62.75% 31 60.78% 32 62.75% 33 64.71% Weak 9.15% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 5 9.80%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 1.31% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks/IOM standards 25.49% 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 12 23.53%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Accompaniments None 78.43% 39 76.47% 40 78.43% 41 80.39%

Weak 4.58% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 15.69% 7 13.73% 9 17.65% 8 15.69%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Nutrition standards: ES/MS beverages None 50.98% 25 49.02% 27 52.94% -- --

Weak 11.76% 5 9.80% 7 13.73% -- -- Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 19.61% 12 23.53% 8 15.69% -- --

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 15.69% 7 13.73% 9 17.65% -- -- Strong: Ban 1.96% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% -- --

Nutrition standards: HS beverages None 56.86% -- -- -- -- 29 56.86% Weak 23.53% -- -- -- -- 12 23.53%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 15.69% -- -- -- -- 8 15.69% Strong: Meets IOM standards 3.92% -- -- -- -- 2 3.92%

Strong: Ban 0.00% -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% Artificial sweeteners: beverages None 87.58% 42 82.35% 45 88.24% 47 92.16%

Weak 7.19% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 2 3.92% Strong: Prohibits artificial sweeteners 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

82

Page 87: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

ALL GRADES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MIDDLE SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL

’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15

% N % N % N % Limits fat content of milk None 58.82% 28 54.90% 30 58.82% 32 62.75%

Weak 9.15% 6 11.76% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks/IOM standard 30.72% 15 29.41% 17 33.33% 15 29.41%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Limits fat: flavored milk None 66.67% 33 64.71% 34 66.67% 35 68.63%

Weak 16.34% 9 17.65% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks/IOM standard 15.69% 7 13.73% 9 17.65% 8 15.69%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Restrictions on juice None 52.94% 25 49.02% 27 52.94% 29 56.86%

Weak 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% Strong: Requires 50-99% juice 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks (ONLY 100% juice) 33.99% 18 35.29% 18 35.29% 16 31.37% Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Restrictions on water None 52.94% 25 49.02% 27 52.94% 29 56.86% Weak 28.76% 16 31.37% 14 27.45% 14 27.45%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks 16.99% 8 15.69% 10 19.61% 8 15.69% Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Serving size limits: beverages None 52.94% 25 49.02% 27 52.94% 29 56.86% Weak 20.26% 11 21.57% 9 17.65% 11 21.57%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 21.57% 11 21.57% 13 25.49% 9 17.65%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits caffeine: ES/MS None 53.92% 26 50.98% 29 56.86% -- -- Weak 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% -- --

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks/IOM standards 36.27% 19 37.25% 18 35.29% -- -- Strong: Ban 1.96% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% -- --

Limits caffeine: HS None 86.27% -- -- -- -- 44 86.27% Weak 3.92% -- -- -- -- 2 3.92%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 9.80% -- -- -- -- 5 9.80% Strong: Ban 0.00% -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

ALL GRADES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MIDDLE SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL

’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15

% N % N % N %

Á LA CARTE LINES

General Smart Snacks requirement

None 80.39% 40 78.43% 41 80.39% 42 82.35% Weak 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Meets Smart Snacks: Does not define standards 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% Meets Smart Snacks: Defines standards 8.50% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

General competitive food standard

None 80.39% 40 78.43% 41 80.39% 42 82.35% Weak 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong: Undefined standard 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% Strong: Defines standards 8.50% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

83

Page 88: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

ALL GRADES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MIDDLE SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL

’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15

% N % N % N %

Nutrition standards for foods

None 47.06% 22 43.14% 24 47.06% 26 50.98% Weak 31.37% 17 33.33% 16 31.37% 15 29.41%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 16.34% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 8 15.69%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Regulates sugar content

None 52.94% 25 49.02% 27 52.94% 29 56.86% Weak 8.50% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 10.46% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 25.49% 14 27.45% 13 25.49% 12 23.53%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 1.31% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Artificial sweeteners: food

None 95.42% 48 94.12% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% Weak 1.31% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong: Prohibits artificial sweeteners 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Regulates fat content

None 50.98% 24 47.06% 26 50.98% 28 54.90% Weak 9.80% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 6 11.76%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 14.38% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 20.26% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 10 19.61%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 3.27% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits trans-fat

None 58.17% 28 54.90% 30 58.82% 31 60.78% Weak 9.15% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong: Limits trans-fat 3.27% 3 5.88% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% Strong: Meets IOM standards 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 24.18% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 12 23.53% Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits saturated fat

None 57.52% 28 54.90% 29 56.86% 31 60.78% Weak 7.19% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 15.69% 9 17.65% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 18.30% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 9 17.65%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Regulates sodium: snacks

None 71.24% 35 68.63% 36 70.59% 38 74.51% Weak 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 19.61% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 9 17.65%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Regulates sodium: entrées

None 73.20% 36 70.59% 37 72.55% 39 76.47%

Weak 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks/IOM

standards 3.27% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks/IOM standards 20.26% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 10 19.61%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits calorie content: snacks

None 62.75% 31 60.78% 32 62.75% 33 64.71%

Weak 8.50% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 3.27% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks/IOM standards 24.18% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 11 21.57%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

84

Page 89: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

ALL GRADES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MIDDLE SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL

’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15

% N % N % N %

Limits calorie content: entrées

None 69.28% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 36 70.59% Weak 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 7.19% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 16.34% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 8 15.69%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Accompaniments

None 78.43% 39 76.47% 40 78.43 41 80.39% Weak 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 16.34% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 8 15.69% Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Nutrition standards: ES/MS beverages

None 49.02% 24 47.06% 26 50.98% -- -- Weak 10.78% 4 7.84% 7 13.73% -- --

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 21.57% 13 25.49% 9 17.65% -- -- Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 16.67% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% -- --

Strong: Ban 1.96% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% -- --

Nutrition standards: HS beverages

None 54.90% -- -- -- -- 28 54.90% Weak 25.49% -- -- -- -- 13 25.49%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 15.69% -- -- -- -- 8 15.69% Strong: Meets IOM standards 3.92% -- -- -- -- 2 3.92%

Strong: Ban 0.00% -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Artificial sweeteners: beverages

None 88.89% 44 86.27% 45 88.24% 47 92.16% Weak 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 2 3.92%

Strong: Prohibits artificial sweeteners 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits fat content of milk

None 58.82% 28 54.90% 30 58.82% 32 62.75% Weak 9.15% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 4 7.84%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks/IOM standard 30.72% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 15 29.41% Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits fat: flavored milk

None 67.97% 33 64.71% 35 68.63% 36 70.59% Weak 14.38% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks/IOM standard 16.34% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 8 15.69% Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Restrictions on juice

None 53.59% 26 50.98% 27 52.94% 29 56.86% Weak 5.23% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong: Requires 50-99% juice 4.58% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks (ONLY 100% juice) 35.29% 19 37.25% 19 37.25% 16 31.37%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Restrictions on water

None 50.98% 24 47.06% 26 50.98% 28 54.90% Weak 30.07% 16 31.37% 15 29.41% 15 29.41%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks 17.65% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 8 15.69% Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Serving size limits: beverages

None 53.59% 26 50.98% 27 52.94% 29 56.86% Weak 17.65% 9 17.65% 8 15.69% 10 19.61%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 23.53% 12 23.53% 14 27.45% 10 19.61%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

85

Page 90: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

ALL GRADES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MIDDLE SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL

’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15

% N % N % N %

Limits caffeine: ES/MS

None 51.96% 25 49.02% 28 54.90% -- -- Weak 6.86% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% -- --

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks/IOM standards 39.22% 21 41.18% 19 37.25% -- -- Strong: Ban 1.96% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% -- --

Limits caffeine: HS

None 84.31% -- -- -- -- 43 84.31% Weak 3.92% -- -- -- -- 2 3.92%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 11.76% -- -- -- -- 6 11.76% Strong: Ban 0.00% -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

ALL GRADES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MIDDLE SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL

’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15

% N % N % N %

CLASSROOM PARTIES

General Smart Snacks requirement None 96.08% 48 94.12% 49 96.08% 50 98.04% Weak 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Meets Smart Snacks: Does not define standards 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Meets Smart Snacks: Defines standards 2.61% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 1 1.96%

Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% General competitive food standard None 96.08% 48 94.12% 49 96.08% 50 98.04%

Weak 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Strong: Undefined standard 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Strong: Defines standards 2.61% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 1 1.96%

Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Nutrition standards for foods None 86.27% 43 84.31% 44 86.27% 45 88.24%

Weak 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 3.27% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Regulates sugar content None 86.27% 43 84.31% 44 86.27% 45 88.24% Weak 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 5.23% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Artificial sweeteners: food None 95.42% 48 94.12% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% Weak 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong: Prohibits artificial sweeteners 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Regulates fat content

None 86.27% 43 84.31% 44 86.27% 45 88.24% Weak 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 3.27% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

86

Page 91: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

ALL GRADES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MIDDLE SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL

’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15

% N % N % N % Limits trans-fat None 90.20% 45 88.24% 46 90.20% 47 92.16%

Weak 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% Strong: Limits trans-fat 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 3.27% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96%

Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Limits saturated fat None 88.24% 44 86.27% 45 88.24% 46 90.20%

Weak 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 5.23% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Regulates sodium: snacks None 92.16% 46 90.20% 47 92.16% 48 94.12% Weak 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 3.27% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits calorie content: snacks None 90.20% 45 88.24% 46 90.20% 47 92.16% Weak 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks/IOM standards 5.23% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92%

Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Accompaniments None 96.08% 48 94.12% 49 96.08% 50 98.04%

Weak 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 3.27% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96%

Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Nutrition standards: ES/MS beverages None 86.27% 43 84.31% 45 88.24% -- --

Weak 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% -- -- Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 2.94% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% -- --

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% -- -- Strong: Ban 0.98% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% -- --

Nutrition standards: HS beverages None 90.20% -- -- -- -- 46 90.20% Weak 7.84% -- -- -- -- 4 7.84%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 1.96% -- -- -- -- 1 1.96% Strong: Meets IOM standards 0.00% -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Strong: Ban 0.00% -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% Artificial sweeteners: beverages None 97.39% 49 96.08% 50 98.04% 50 98.04%

Weak 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% Strong: Prohibits artificial sweeteners 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Limits fat content of milk None 87.58% 43 84.31% 45 88.24% 46 90.20%

Weak 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks/IOM standard 3.92% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 1 1.96%

Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

87

Page 92: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

ALL GRADES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MIDDLE SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL

’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15

% N % N % N % Limits fat: flavored milk None 90.20% 45 88.24% 46 90.20% 47 92.16%

Weak 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks/IOM standard 3.27% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96%

Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Restrictions on juice None 87.58% 43 84.31% 45 88.24% 46 90.20%

Weak 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% Strong: Requires 50-99% juice 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks (ONLY 100% juice) 3.92% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Restrictions on water None 87.58% 43 84.31% 45 88.24% 46 90.20% Weak 8.50% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks 3.27% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Serving size limits: beverages None 88.24% 44 86.27% 45 88.24% 46 90.20% Weak 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 3.27% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits caffeine: ES/MS None 86.27% 43 84.31% 45 88.24% -- -- Weak 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% -- --

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks/IOM standards 8.82% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% -- -- Strong: Ban 0.98% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% -- --

Limits caffeine: HS None 94.12% -- -- -- -- 48 94.12% Weak 1.96% -- -- -- -- 1 1.96%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 3.92% -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% Strong: Ban 0.00% -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

ALL GRADES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MIDDLE SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL

’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15

% N % N % N %

IN-SCHOOL FUNDRAISING

General Smart Snacks requirement None 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% Weak 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Meets Smart Snacks: Does not define standards 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% Meets Smart Snacks: Defines standards 9.15% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% General competitive food standard None 79.74% 40 78.43% 41 80.39% 41 80.39%

Weak 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% Strong: Undefined standard 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% Strong: Defines standards 9.15% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Nutrition standards for foods None 61.44% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 32 62.75%

Weak 16.34% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 8 15.69% Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 16.99% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

88

Page 93: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

ALL GRADES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MIDDLE SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL

’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15

% N % N % N % Regulates sugar content None 61.44% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 32 62.75%

Weak 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 5.23% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 22.88% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 12 23.53% Strong: Meets IOM standards 1.31% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 0 0.00%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Artificial sweeteners: food None 92.81% 46 90.20% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% Strong: Prohibits artificial sweeteners 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Regulates fat content None 61.44% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 32 62.75%

Weak 7.19% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 18.95% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% Strong: Meets IOM standards 1.31% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 0 0.00%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Limits trans-fat None 66.67% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 34 66.67%

Weak 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% Strong: Limits trans-fat 1.31% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 18.95% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Limits saturated fat None 61.44% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 32 62.75%

Weak 7.19% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 11.11% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 5 9.80%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 18.95% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Regulates sodium: snacks None 72.55% 36 70.59% 37 72.55% 38 74.51% Weak 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 18.30% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 9 17.65%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits calorie content: snacks None 66.67% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% Weak 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 2.61% 0 0.00% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks/IOM standards 21.57% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 11 21.57%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Accompaniments None 79.74% 40 78.43% 41 80.39% 41 80.39%

Weak 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 16.99% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Strong: Ban 1.31% 2 3.92% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Nutrition standards: ES/MS beverages None 56.86% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% -- --

Weak 10.78% 4 7.84% 7 13.73% -- -- Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 14.71% 9 17.65% 6 11.76% -- --

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 16.67% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% -- -- Strong: Ban 0.98% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% -- --

89

Page 94: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

ALL GRADES ELEMENTARY SCHOOL MIDDLE SCHOOL HIGH SCHOOL

’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15 ’14–’15

% N % N % N % Nutrition standards: HS beverages None 58.82% -- -- -- -- 30 58.82%

Weak 19.61% -- -- -- -- 10 19.61% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 17.65% -- -- -- -- 9 17.65%

Strong: Meets IOM standards 3.92% -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% Strong: Ban 0.00% -- -- -- -- 0 0.00%

Artificial sweeteners: beverages None 90.20% 45 88.24% 46 90.20% 47 92.16% Weak 5.23% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92%

Strong: Prohibits artificial sweeteners 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits fat content of milk None 63.40% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 33 64.71% Weak 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks/IOM standard 26.14% 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 13 25.49% Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits fat: flavored milk None 70.59% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% Weak 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks/IOM standard 16.99% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Restrictions on juice None 58.17% 30 58.82% 29 56.86% 30 58.82% Weak 7.19% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong: Requires 50-99% juice 4.58% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks (ONLY 100% juice) 29.41% 15 29.41% 16 31.37% 14 27.45%

Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Restrictions on water None 57.52% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 30 58.82%

Weak 23.53% 12 23.53% 12 23.53% 12 23.53% Strong: Meets Smart Snacks 18.30% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 9 17.65%

Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Serving size limits: beverages None 60.13% 31 60.78% 30 58.82% 31 60.78%

Weak 15.03% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% Strong: Does not meet Smart Snacks standards 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong: Meets Smart Snacks standards 20.26% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 10 19.61% Strong: Meets IOM standards 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong: Ban 0.65% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Limits caffeine: ES/MS None 59.80% 30 58.82% 31 60.78% -- --

Weak 6.86% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% -- -- Strong: Meets Smart Snacks/IOM standards 32.35% 17 33.33% 16 31.37% -- --

Strong: Ban 0.98% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% -- -- Limits caffeine: HS None 84.31% -- -- -- -- 43 84.31%

Weak 3.92% -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% Strong: Meets IOM standards 11.76% -- -- -- -- 6 11.76%

Strong: Ban 0.00% -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% Fundraiser exemption Not mentioned or no limits 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24%

Allows exemptions 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% No exemptions 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Limits on number of fundraisers that meet established nutrition standards

Not mentioned or no limits 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 50 98.04%

Limits number of fundraisers that meet established nutrition standards

1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

90

Page 95: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

Table C-1. States Nationwide with Wellness Policies Addressing Competitive Food and Beverage Content Restrictions by

Location of Sale and Provision, All Grades, School Years 2008-09 through 2013-2014

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ALL

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

% % % % % %

VENDING MACHINES

Sugar content of foods

None 64.71% 62.75% 58.82% 54.90% 54.90% 54.90%

Weak 10.46% 10.46% 8.50% 12.42% 10.46% 10.46%

Strong <IOM 13.07% 13.07% 18.95% 18.95% 20.92% 20.92%

Strong Meets IOM 7.19% 9.15% 9.15% 9.15% 9.15% 9.15%

Ban 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58%

Limits on candy None 72.55% 71.90% 71.90% 71.90% 71.90% 71.90%

Weak 18.30% 18.30% 18.30% 18.30% 18.30% 18.30%

Strong 4.58% 5.23% 5.23% 5.23% 5.23% 5.23%

Ban 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58%

Fat content of foods None 61.44% 59.48% 53.59% 51.63% 51.63% 51.63%

Weak 11.76% 11.76% 11.76% 13.73% 11.76% 10.46%

Strong <IOM 15.69% 17.65% 21.57% 22.88% 24.84% 26.14%

Strong Meets IOM 6.54% 6.54% 8.50% 7.19% 7.19% 7.19%

Ban 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58%

Trans fats in foods None 80.39% 74.51% 70.59% 63.40% 63.40% 61.44%

Weak 6.54% 8.50% 8.50% 13.73% 11.76% 11.76%

Strong <IOM 6.54% 6.54% 5.23% 5.23% 5.23% 5.23%

Strong Meets IOM 1.96% 5.88% 11.11% 13.07% 15.03% 16.99%

Ban 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58%

Sodium content of foods None 83.66% 83.66% 79.74% 75.82% 75.82% 75.82%

Weak 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 5.88% 3.92% 3.92%

Strong <IOM 7.84% 7.84% 11.76% 11.76% 11.76% 11.76%

Strong Meets IOM 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92%

Ban 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58%

Calorie content per individual serving of snack item

None 80.39% 76.47% 71.24% 67.32% 67.32% 67.32%

Weak 3.92% 5.88% 5.88% 9.80% 7.84% 7.84%

Strong <IOM 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92%

Strong Meets IOM 7.19% 9.15% 14.38% 14.38% 16.34% 16.34%

Ban 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58%

Sugar content of beverages None 67.32% 65.36% 63.40% 59.48% 59.48% 59.48%

Weak 18.30% 19.61% 20.92% 23.53% 21.57% 20.92%

Strong 11.11% 11.76% 12.42% 13.73% 15.69% 16.34%

Ban 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27%

Calorie content of beverages None 84.31% 81.70% 81.70% 79.74% 79.74% 79.74%

Weak 5.88% 8.50% 8.50% 8.50% 8.50% 8.50%

Strong 6.54% 6.54% 6.54% 8.50% 8.50% 8.50%

Ban 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27%

Regular soda None 52.94% 50.98% 49.02% 45.10% 45.10% 45.10%

Weak 13.07% 11.11% 11.11% 13.07% 11.11% 11.11%

Strong <IOM 19.61% 22.88% 24.18% 24.84% 24.84% 24.18%

Strong Meets IOM 11.11% 11.76% 12.42% 13.73% 15.69% 16.34%

Ban 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27%

91

Page 96: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ALL

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

% % % % % %

SSBs other than soda None 74.51% 72.55% 71.90% 67.97% 67.97% 67.32%

Weak 11.11% 12.42% 12.42% 15.03% 13.07% 13.07%

Strong 11.11% 11.76% 12.42% 13.73% 15.69% 16.34%

Ban 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27%

Sugar/calorie content of milk None 80.39% 78.43% 78.43% 76.47% 76.47% 75.16%

Weak 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.96% 0.00% 0.00%

Strong <IOM 16.34% 18.30% 18.30% 18.30% 18.30% 19.61%

Strong Meets IOM 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.96% 1.96%

Ban 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27%

Fat content of milk None 71.90% 69.93% 67.97% 66.01% 66.01% 66.01%

Weak 11.76% 11.11% 11.11% 13.07% 11.11% 11.11%

Strong 13.07% 15.69% 17.65% 17.65% 19.61% 19.61%

Ban 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27%

Serving size limits for beverages

None 67.32% 63.40% 63.40% 59.48% 59.48% 59.48%

Weak 18.95% 20.92% 20.92% 24.84% 22.88% 22.88%

Strong <IOM 10.46% 12.42% 11.76% 11.76% 11.76% 11.76%

Strong Meets IOM 0.00% 0.00% 0.65% 0.65% 2.61% 2.61%

Ban 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27%

Caffeine content of beverages None 72.55% 72.55% 71.90% 68.63% 68.63% 67.97%

Weak 6.54% 5.88% 5.88% 7.84% 5.88% 5.88%

Strong 17.65% 18.30% 18.95% 20.26% 22.22% 22.88%

Ban 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27%

Require water for sale None -- -- -- 57.52% 55.56% 55.56%

Weak -- -- -- 26.80% 25.49% 24.84%

Strong -- -- -- 12.42% 15.69% 16.34%

Ban -- -- -- 3.27% 3.27% 3.27%

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ALL

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

% % % % % %

SCHOOL STORES

Sugar content of foods

None 68.63% 66.67% 62.75% 58.82% 58.82% 58.82%

Weak 11.11% 11.11% 9.15% 13.07% 11.11% 11.11%

Strong <IOM 10.46% 10.46% 16.34% 16.34% 18.30% 18.30%

Strong Meets IOM 7.19% 9.15% 9.15% 9.15% 9.15% 9.15%

Ban 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61%

Limits on candy None 75.82% 75.16% 75.16% 75.16% 75.16% 75.16%

Weak 16.99% 16.99% 16.99% 16.99% 16.99% 16.99%

Strong 4.58% 5.23% 5.23% 5.23% 5.23% 5.23%

Ban 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61%

Fat content of foods None 65.36% 63.40% 57.52% 55.56% 55.56% 55.56%

Weak 12.42% 12.42% 12.42% 14.38% 12.42% 11.11%

Strong <IOM 13.07% 15.03% 18.95% 20.26% 22.22% 23.53%

Strong Meets IOM 6.54% 6.54% 8.50% 7.19% 7.19% 7.19%

Ban 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61%

92

Page 97: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ALL

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

% % % % % %

Trans fats in foods None 84.31% 78.43% 74.51% 69.28% 69.28% 67.32%

Weak 7.19% 9.15% 9.15% 14.38% 12.42% 12.42%

Strong <IOM 3.92% 3.92% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61%

Strong Meets IOM 1.96% 5.88% 11.11% 11.11% 13.07% 15.03%

Ban 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61%

Sodium content of foods None 86.93% 86.93% 83.01% 79.08% 79.08% 79.08%

Weak 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 5.88% 3.92% 3.92%

Strong <IOM 6.54% 6.54% 10.46% 10.46% 10.46% 10.46%

Strong Meets IOM 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92%

Ban 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61%

Calorie content per individual serving of snack item

None 86.27% 82.35% 77.12% 73.20% 73.20% 73.20%

Weak 2.61% 4.58% 4.58% 8.50% 6.54% 6.54%

Strong <IOM 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31%

Strong Meets IOM 7.19% 9.15% 14.38% 14.38% 16.34% 16.34%

Ban 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% Sugar content of beverages None 70.59% 68.63% 66.67% 62.75% 62.75% 62.75%

Weak 17.65% 18.95% 20.26% 22.88% 20.92% 20.26%

Strong 9.15% 9.80% 10.46% 11.76% 13.73% 14.38%

Ban 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61%

Calorie content of beverages None 86.93% 84.31% 84.31% 82.35% 82.35% 82.35%

Weak 4.58% 7.19% 7.19% 7.19% 7.19% 7.19%

Strong 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84%

Ban 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61%

Regular soda None 58.82% 56.86% 54.90% 50.33% 50.33% 50.33%

Weak 12.42% 10.46% 10.46% 13.07% 11.11% 11.11%

Strong <IOM 16.99% 20.26% 21.57% 22.22% 22.22% 21.57%

Strong Meets IOM 9.15% 9.80% 10.46% 11.76% 13.73% 14.38%

Ban 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61%

SSBs other than soda None 78.43% 76.47% 75.82% 71.90% 71.90% 71.24%

Weak 9.80% 11.11% 11.11% 13.73% 11.76% 11.76%

Strong 9.15% 9.80% 10.46% 11.76% 13.73% 14.38%

Ban 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61%

Sugar/calorie content of milk None 82.35% 80.39% 80.39% 78.43% 78.43% 77.12%

Weak 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.96% 0.00% 0.00%

Strong <IOM 15.03% 16.99% 16.99% 16.99% 16.99% 18.30%

Strong Meets IOM 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.96% 1.96%

Ban 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61%

Fat content of milk None 75.16% 73.20% 71.24% 69.28% 69.28% 69.28%

Weak 9.15% 8.50% 8.50% 10.46% 8.50% 8.50%

Strong 13.07% 15.69% 17.65% 17.65% 19.61% 19.61%

Ban 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61%

Serving size limits for beverages None 69.93% 66.01% 66.01% 62.09% 62.09% 62.09%

Weak 18.30% 20.26% 20.26% 24.18% 22.22% 22.22%

Strong <IOM 9.15% 11.11% 10.46% 10.46% 10.46% 10.46%

Strong Meets IOM 0.00% 0.00% 0.65% 0.65% 2.61% 2.61%

Ban 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61%

93

Page 98: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ALL

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

% % % % % %

Caffeine content of beverages None 75.82% 75.82% 75.16% 71.90% 71.90% 71.24%

Weak 6.54% 5.88% 5.88% 7.84% 5.88% 5.88%

Strong 15.03% 15.69% 16.34% 17.65% 19.61% 20.26%

Ban 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61%

Require water for sale None -- -- -- 60.78% 58.82% 58.82%

Weak -- -- -- 26.14% 24.84% 24.18%

Strong -- -- -- 10.46% 13.73% 14.38%

Ban -- -- -- 2.61% 2.61% 2.61%

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ALL

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

% % % % % %

Á LA CARTE LINES

Sugar content of foods

None 70.59% 68.63% 64.71% 60.78% 58.82% 58.82%

Weak 11.11% 11.11% 9.15% 13.07% 11.76% 11.76%

Strong <IOM 11.11% 10.46% 16.34% 16.34% 19.61% 19.61%

Strong Meets IOM 5.88% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84%

Ban 1.31% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Limits on candy None 61.44% 60.78% 59.48% 59.48% 59.48% 59.48%

Weak 33.99% 33.33% 34.64% 34.64% 34.64% 34.64%

Strong 3.27% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92%

Ban 1.31% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Fat content of foods None 66.67% 64.71% 58.82% 56.86% 54.90% 54.90%

Weak 11.76% 11.76% 11.76% 13.73% 12.42% 11.11%

Strong <IOM 13.73% 15.03% 19.61% 20.92% 22.88% 24.18%

Strong Meets IOM 6.54% 6.54% 7.84% 6.54% 7.84% 7.84%

Ban 1.31% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Trans fats in foods None 82.35% 76.47% 72.55% 65.36% 65.36% 63.40%

Weak 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 13.07% 11.11% 11.11%

Strong <IOM 8.50% 8.50% 6.54% 6.54% 6.54% 6.54%

Strong Meets IOM 0.00% 5.23% 11.11% 13.07% 15.03% 16.99%

Ban 1.31% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Sodium content of foods None 88.24% 87.58% 83.66% 79.74% 79.74% 79.74%

Weak 3.92% 3.92% 1.96% 5.88% 3.92% 3.92%

Strong <IOM 6.54% 6.54% 12.42% 12.42% 12.42% 12.42%

Strong Meets IOM 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.96% 1.96%

Ban 1.31% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% Calorie content per individual serving of snack item

None 88.89% 84.97% 79.08% 75.16% 73.20% 73.20%

Weak 2.61% 3.92% 3.92% 7.84% 6.54% 6.54%

Strong <IOM 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58%

Strong Meets IOM 2.61% 4.58% 10.46% 10.46% 13.73% 13.73%

Ban 1.31% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% Sugar content of beverages None 68.63% 66.67% 64.71% 60.78% 58.82% 58.82%

Weak 19.61% 18.95% 20.26% 22.88% 21.57% 20.92%

Strong 10.46% 12.42% 13.07% 14.38% 17.65% 18.30%

Ban 1.31% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

94

Page 99: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ALL

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

% % % % % %

Calorie content of beverages None 86.27% 83.66% 83.66% 81.70% 81.05% 81.05%

Weak 5.88% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 8.50% 8.50%

Strong 6.54% 6.54% 6.54% 8.50% 8.50% 8.50%

Ban 1.31% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Regular soda None 41.83% 41.83% 39.22% 35.29% 35.29% 35.29%

Weak 6.54% 6.54% 5.88% 7.84% 5.88% 5.88%

Strong <IOM 39.87% 37.25% 39.87% 40.52% 39.22% 38.56%

Strong Meets IOM 10.46% 12.42% 13.07% 14.38% 17.65% 18.30%

Ban 1.31% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

SSBs other than soda None 76.47% 74.51% 73.86% 69.93% 67.97% 67.32%

Weak 11.76% 11.11% 11.11% 13.73% 12.42% 12.42%

Strong 10.46% 12.42% 13.07% 14.38% 17.65% 18.30%

Ban 1.31% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Sugar/calorie content of milk None 81.70% 81.05% 79.74% 77.78% 77.78% 76.47%

Weak 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.96% 0.00% 0.00%

Strong <IOM 16.99% 16.99% 18.30% 18.30% 18.30% 19.61%

Strong Meets IOM 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.96% 1.96%

Ban 1.31% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Fat content of milk None 73.86% 71.90% 69.93% 67.97% 66.01% 66.01%

Weak 11.11% 9.15% 9.15% 11.11% 9.15% 9.15%

Strong 13.73% 16.99% 18.95% 18.95% 22.88% 22.88%

Ban 1.31% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Serving size limits for beverages None 70.59% 66.67% 66.67% 62.75% 60.78% 60.78%

Weak 16.99% 16.99% 16.99% 20.92% 20.92% 20.92%

Strong <IOM 11.11% 14.38% 13.73% 13.73% 13.73% 13.73%

Strong Meets IOM 0.00% 0.00% 0.65% 0.65% 2.61% 2.61%

Ban 1.31% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Caffeine content of beverages None 73.86% 74.51% 72.55% 69.28% 67.97% 67.32%

Weak 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 7.84% 5.88% 5.88%

Strong 18.95% 17.65% 19.61% 20.92% 24.18% 24.84%

Ban 1.31% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Require water for sale None -- -- -- 56.86% 54.90% 54.90%

Weak -- -- -- 28.10% 25.49% 24.84%

Strong -- -- -- 13.07% 17.65% 18.30%

Ban -- -- -- 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ALL

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

% % % % % %

CLASSROOM PARTIES

Sugar content of foods

None 88.24% 88.24% 88.24% 88.24% 88.24% 88.24%

Weak 7.84% 7.84% 5.88% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92%

Strong <IOM 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92%

Strong Meets IOM 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92%

Ban 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

95

Page 100: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ALL

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

% % % % % % Limits on candy None 94.12% 94.12% 94.12% 94.12% 94.12% 94.12%

Weak 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92%

Strong 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Ban 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Fat content of foods None 88.24% 88.24% 88.24% 88.24% 88.24% 88.24%

Weak 7.84% 7.84% 5.88% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92%

Strong <IOM 3.92% 3.92% 5.88% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84%

Strong Meets IOM 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Ban 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Trans fats in foods None 94.12% 92.16% 92.16% 92.16% 92.16% 92.16%

Weak 3.92% 5.88% 5.88% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92%

Strong <IOM 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Strong Meets IOM 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92%

Ban 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Sodium content of foods None 94.12% 94.12% 94.12% 94.12% 94.12% 94.12%

Weak 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Strong <IOM 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Strong Meets IOM 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Ban 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Calorie content per individual serving of snack item

None 98.04% 96.08% 96.08% 94.12% 94.12% 94.12%

Weak 0.00% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Strong <IOM 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Strong Meets IOM 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92%

Ban 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Sugar content of beverages None 91.50% 91.50% 91.50% 91.50% 91.50% 91.50%

Weak 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88%

Strong 0.65% 0.65% 0.65% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61%

Ban 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Calorie content of beverages None 100% 100% 100% 100% 100% 100%

Weak 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Strong 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Ban 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Regular soda None 88.24% 88.24% 88.24% 88.24% 88.24% 88.24%

Weak 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92%

Strong <IOM 5.23% 5.23% 5.23% 5.23% 5.23% 5.23%

Strong Meets IOM 0.65% 0.65% 0.65% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61%

Ban 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

SSBs other than soda None 94.12% 94.12% 94.12% 94.12% 94.12% 94.12%

Weak 5.23% 5.23% 5.23% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27%

Strong 0.65% 0.65% 0.65% 2.61% 2.61% 2.61%

Ban 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Sugar/calorie content of milk None 96.08% 96.08% 96.08% 96.08% 96.08% 96.08%

Weak 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Strong <IOM 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Strong Meets IOM 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Ban 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

96

Page 101: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ALL

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

% % % % % % Fat content of milk None 89.54% 89.54% 89.54% 89.54% 89.54% 89.54%

Weak 9.15% 9.15% 9.15% 7.19% 7.19% 7.19% Strong 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27%

Ban 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Serving size limits for beverages

None 91.50% 89.54% 89.54% 89.54% 89.54% 89.54%

Weak 8.50% 10.46% 10.46% 8.50% 8.50% 8.50%

Strong <IOM 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31%

Strong Meets IOM 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.65% 0.65% 0.65%

Ban 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

Caffeine content of beverages None 90.20% 90.20% 90.20% 90.20% 90.20% 90.20%

Weak 5.23% 5.23% 5.23% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27%

Strong 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 6.54% 6.54% 6.54%

Ban 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00%

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ALL

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

% % % % % %

IN-SCHOOL FUNDRAISING

Sugar content of foods

None 77.12% 77.12% 75.16% 71.24% 71.24% 71.24%

Weak 5.23% 5.23% 5.23% 9.15% 7.19% 7.19%

Strong <IOM 8.50% 8.50% 10.46% 10.46% 12.42% 12.42%

Strong Meets IOM 7.19% 7.19% 7.19% 7.19% 7.19% 7.19%

Ban 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Limits on candy None 90.20% 89.54% 89.54% 89.54% 89.54% 89.54% Weak 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% 3.27% Strong 4.58% 5.23% 5.23% 5.23% 5.23% 5.23%

Ban 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% Fat content of foods None 75.82% 75.82% 73.86% 69.93% 69.93% 69.93%

Weak 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 8.50% 6.54% 5.23% Strong <IOM 13.73% 13.73% 15.69% 17.65% 19.61% 20.92%

Strong Meets IOM 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% Ban 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Limits amount of trans fats in foods

None 84.31% 82.35% 80.39% 75.16% 75.16% 75.16% Weak 5.23% 7.19% 7.19% 12.42% 10.46% 10.46%

Strong <IOM 6.54% 6.54% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% Strong Meets IOM 1.96% 1.96% 5.88% 5.88% 7.84% 7.84%

Ban 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% Sodium content of foods None 89.54% 89.54% 87.58% 83.66% 83.66% 83.66%

Weak 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 3.92% 1.96% 1.96% Strong <IOM 6.54% 6.54% 8.50% 8.50% 8.50% 8.50%

Strong Meets IOM 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92% Ban 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Calorie content per individual serving of snack item

None 89.54% 87.58% 83.66% 79.74% 79.74% 79.74% Weak 0.00% 1.96% 1.96% 5.88% 3.92% 3.92%

Strong <IOM 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% Strong Meets IOM 4.58% 4.58% 8.50% 8.50% 10.46% 10.46%

Ban 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

97

Page 102: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ALL

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

% % % % % %

Sugar content of beverages None 77.78% 75.82% 73.86% 69.93% 69.93% 67.97% Weak 14.38% 15.69% 16.99% 19.61% 17.65% 18.30% Strong 6.54% 7.19% 7.84% 9.15% 11.11% 12.42%

Ban 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% Calorie content of beverages None 95.42% 93.46% 93.46% 91.50% 91.50% 89.54%

Weak 2.61% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% 4.58% Strong 0.65% 0.65% 0.65% 2.61% 2.61% 4.58%

Ban 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% Regular soda None 76.47% 74.51% 72.55% 68.63% 68.63% 66.67%

Weak 4.58% 3.27% 3.27% 5.23% 3.27% 3.27% Strong <IOM 11.11% 13.73% 15.03% 15.69% 15.69% 16.34%

Strong Meets IOM 6.54% 7.19% 7.84% 9.15% 11.11% 12.42% Ban 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31%

SSBs other than soda None 82.35% 80.39% 79.74% 75.82% 75.82% 74.51% Weak 9.80% 11.11% 11.11% 13.73% 11.76% 11.76% Strong 6.54% 7.19% 7.84% 9.15% 11.11% 12.42%

Ban 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% Sugar/calorie content of milk None 90.20% 88.24% 88.24% 86.27% 86.27% 83.01%

Weak 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.96% 0.00% 0.00% Strong <IOM 8.50% 10.46% 10.46% 10.46% 10.46% 13.73%

Strong Meets IOM 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 0.00% 1.96% 1.96% Ban 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31%

Fat content of milk None 81.05% 79.08% 77.12% 75.16% 75.16% 73.20% Weak 11.11% 11.11% 11.11% 13.07% 11.11% 11.11% Strong 6.54% 8.50% 10.46% 10.46% 12.42% 14.38%

Ban 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% Serving size limits for beverages None 80.39% 76.47% 76.47% 72.55% 72.55% 70.59%

Weak 11.76% 13.73% 13.73% 17.65% 15.69% 15.69% Strong <IOM 6.54% 8.50% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 9.80%

Strong Meets IOM 0.00% 0.00% 0.65% 0.65% 2.61% 2.61% Ban 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31%

Caffeine content of beverages None 79.08% 78.43% 77.78% 74.51% 74.51% 73.20% Weak 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 7.84% 5.88% 5.88% Strong 13.73% 14.38% 15.03% 16.34% 18.30% 19.61%

Ban 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31% 1.31%

98

Page 103: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

Table C-2. States Nationwide with Wellness Policies Addressing Competitive Food and Beverage Content Restrictions by

Location of Sale and Provision, Elementary School Level, School Years 2008-09 through 2013-2014

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ELEMENTARY

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

VENDING MACHINES

Sugar content of foods

None 29 56.86% 28 54.90% 26 50.98% 24 47.06% 24 47.06% 24 47.06%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong <IOM 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 11 21.57%

Strong Meets IOM 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Ban 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Limits on candy None 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 32 62.75%

Weak 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61%

Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Fat content of foods None 28 54.90% 27 52.94% 24 47.06% 23 45.10% 23 45.10% 23 45.10%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong <IOM 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 12 23.53%

Strong Meets IOM 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Ban 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Trans fats in foods None 38 74.51% 35 68.63% 33 64.71% 30 58.82% 30 58.82% 29 56.86%

Weak 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong <IOM 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69%

Ban 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Sodium content of foods None 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 36 70.59% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 34 66.67%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Calorie content per individual serving of snack item

None 37 72.55% 35 68.63% 33 64.71% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 31 60.78%

Weak 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong <IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong Meets IOM 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Ban 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Sugar content of beverages None 32 62.75% 31 60.78% 30 58.82% 28 54.90% 28 54.90% 28 54.90%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 13 25.49%

Ban 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Calorie content of beverages

None 39 76.47% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 37 72.55%

Weak 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Regular soda None 24 47.06% 23 45.10% 22 43.14% 20 39.22% 20 39.22% 20 39.22%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong <IOM 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Strong Meets IOM 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 13 25.49%

Ban 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

99

Page 104: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ELEMENTARY

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

SSBs other than soda None 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 31 60.78% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 29 56.86%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 13 25.49%

Ban 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Sugar/calorie content of milk

None 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 36 70.59%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong <IOM 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Fat content of milk None 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 31 60.78%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Ban 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Serving size limits for beverages

None 33 64.71% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 29 56.86%

Weak 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 10 19.61% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Strong <IOM 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Caffeine content of beverages

None 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 31 60.78% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 29 56.86%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 15 29.41% 16 31.37% 17 33.33% 17 33.33%

Ban 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Require water for sale None -- -- -- -- -- -- 27 52.94% 26 50.98% 26 50.98%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- 11 21.57% 13 25.49% 13 25.49%

Ban -- -- -- -- -- -- 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ELEMENTARY

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

SCHOOL STORES

Sugar content of foods

None 32 62.75% 31 60.78% 29 56.86% 27 52.94% 27 52.94% 27 52.94%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong <IOM 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61%

Strong Meets IOM 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Ban 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Limits on candy None 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 36 70.59%

Weak 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Fat content of foods None 31 60.78% 30 58.82% 27 52.94% 26 50.98% 26 50.98% 26 50.98%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong <IOM 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 11 21.57%

Strong Meets IOM 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Ban 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

100

Page 105: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ELEMENTARY

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Trans fats in foods None 41 80.39% 38 74.51% 36 70.59% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 33 64.71%

Weak 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong <IOM 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 7 13.73%

Ban 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Sodium content of foods None 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 40 78.43% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 38 74.51%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Calorie content per individual serving of snack item

None 41 80.39% 39 76.47% 37 72.55% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 35 68.63%

Weak 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong <IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong Meets IOM 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Ban 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Sugar content of beverages None 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 30 58.82% 30 58.82% 30 58.82%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 11 21.57%

Ban 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Calorie content of beverages

None 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 39 76.47%

Weak 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Regular soda None 27 52.94% 26 50.98% 25 49.02% 23 45.10% 23 45.10% 23 45.10%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong <IOM 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69%

Strong Meets IOM 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 11 21.57%

Ban 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

SSBs other than soda None 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 34 66.67% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 32 62.75%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 11 21.57%

Ban 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Sugar/calorie content of milk

None 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 38 74.51%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong <IOM 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Fat content of milk None 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 33 64.71%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Ban 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Serving size limits for beverages

None 34 66.67% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 30 58.82% 30 58.82% 30 58.82%

Weak 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 11 21.57% 10 19.61% 10 19.61%

Strong <IOM 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

101

Page 106: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ELEMENTARY

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Caffeine content of beverages

None 35 68.63% 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 31 60.78%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 15 29.41% 15 29.41%

Ban 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Require water for sale None -- -- -- -- -- -- 29 56.86% 28 54.90% 28 54.90%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- 9 17.65% 8 15.69% 8 15.69%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- 9 17.65% 11 21.57% 11 21.57%

Ban -- -- -- -- -- -- 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ELEMENTARY

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Á LA CARTE LINES

Sugar content of foods

None 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 30 58.82% 28 54.90% 27 52.94% 27 52.94%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong <IOM 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 10 19.61% 10 19.61%

Strong Meets IOM 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Ban 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Limits on candy None 30 58.82% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 29 56.86%

Weak 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 17 33.33%

Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Fat content of foods None 31 60.78% 30 58.82% 27 52.94% 26 50.98% 25 49.02% 25 49.02%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong <IOM 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 12 23.53%

Strong Meets IOM 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Ban 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Trans fats in foods None 39 76.47% 36 70.59% 34 66.67% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 30 58.82%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong <IOM 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 2 3.92% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69%

Ban 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Sodium content of foods None 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 40 78.43% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 38 74.51%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Calorie content per individual serving of snack item

None 43 84.31% 41 80.39% 38 74.51% 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 35 68.63%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong <IOM 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong Meets IOM 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 8 15.69% 8 15.69%

Ban 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Sugar content of beverages None 32 62.75% 31 60.78% 30 58.82% 28 54.90% 27 52.94% 27 52.94%

Weak 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 14 27.45% 14 27.45%

Ban 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

102

Page 107: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ELEMENTARY

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Calorie content of beverages

None 42 82.35% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 39 76.47%

Weak 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Regular soda None 19 37.25% 19 37.25% 18 35.29% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 16 31.37%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong <IOM 18 35.29% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 15 29.41% 15 29.41%

Strong Meets IOM 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 14 27.45% 14 27.45%

Ban 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

SSBs other than soda None 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 30 58.82% 29 56.86% 29 56.86%

Weak 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 14 27.45% 14 27.45%

Ban 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Sugar/calorie content of milk

None 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 38 74.51%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong <IOM 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Fat content of milk None 35 68.63% 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 31 60.78% 31 60.78%

Weak 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 11 21.57% 11 21.57%

Ban 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Serving size limits for beverages

None 34 66.67% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 30 58.82% 29 56.86% 29 56.86%

Weak 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61%

Strong <IOM 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Caffeine content of beverages

None 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 31 60.78% 29 56.86% 28 54.90% 28 54.90%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 16 31.37% 17 33.33% 19 37.25% 19 37.25%

Ban 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Require water for sale None -- -- -- -- -- -- 26 50.98% 25 49.02% 25 49.02%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- 11 21.57% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- 11 21.57% 14 27.45% 14 27.45%

Ban -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ELEMENTARY

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

CLASSROOM PARTIES

Sugar content of foods

None 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

103

Page 108: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ELEMENTARY

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Limits on candy None 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Fat content of foods None 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Trans fats in foods None 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sodium content of foods None 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong <IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Calorie content per individual serving of snack item

None 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong <IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sugar content of beverages None 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Calorie content of beverages

None 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Regular soda None 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

SSBs other than soda None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sugar/calorie content of milk

None 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong <IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

104

Page 109: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ELEMENTARY

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Fat content of milk None 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Serving size limits for beverages

None 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24%

Weak 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong <IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Caffeine content of beverages

None 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ELEMENTARY

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

IN- SCHOOL FUNDRAISING

Sugar content of foods

None 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 35 68.63%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong <IOM 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong Meets IOM 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Limits on candy None 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Fat content of foods None 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 35 68.63%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Strong Meets IOM 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Limits amount of trans fats in foods

None 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 38 74.51%

Weak 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong <IOM 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Sodium content of foods None 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong <IOM 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Calorie content per individual serving of snack item

None 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 41 80.39% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 39 76.47%

Weak 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong Meets IOM 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Ban 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

105

Page 110: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- ELEMENTARY

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Sugar content of beverages None 39 76.47% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 34 66.67%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 10 19.61%

Ban 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Calorie content of beverages

None 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27%

Weak 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92%

Ban 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Regular soda None 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 33 64.71%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong <IOM 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong Meets IOM 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 10 19.61%

Ban 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

SSBs other than soda None 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 38 74.51% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 35 68.63%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 10 19.61%

Ban 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Sugar/calorie content of milk

None 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 42 82.35%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong <IOM 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Fat content of milk None 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 36 70.59%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 7 13.73%

Ban 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Serving size limits for beverages

None 41 80.39% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 36 70.59%

Weak 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong <IOM 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Caffeine content of beverages

None 39 76.47% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 34 66.67%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 14 27.45%

Ban 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

106

Page 111: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

Table C-3. States Nationwide with Wellness Policies Addressing Competitive Food and Beverage Content Restrictions by

Location of Sale and Provision, Middle School Level, School Years 2008-09 through 2013-2014

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year - MIDDLE

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

VENDING MACHINES

Sugar content of foods

None 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 30 58.82% 28 54.90% 28 54.90% 28 54.90%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong <IOM 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 12 23.53%

Strong Meets IOM 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits on candy None 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 38 74.51%

Weak 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Fat content of foods None 31 60.78% 30 58.82% 27 52.94% 26 50.98% 26 50.98% 26 50.98%

Weak 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 6 11.76%

Strong <IOM 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 15 29.41%

Strong Meets IOM 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Trans fats in foods None 42 82.35% 39 76.47% 37 72.55% 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 32 62.75%

Weak 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong <IOM 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sodium content of foods None 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 42 82.35% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Calorie content per individual serving of snack item

None 42 82.35% 40 78.43% 37 72.55% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 35 68.63%

Weak 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong <IOM 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong Meets IOM 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Sugar content of beverages None 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 30 58.82% 30 58.82% 30 58.82%

Weak 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 13 25.49% 12 23.53%

Strong 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Calorie content of beverages

None 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39%

Weak 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% Regular soda None 26 50.98% 25 49.02% 24 47.06% 22 43.14% 22 43.14% 22 43.14%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong <IOM 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 15 29.41% 14 27.45%

Strong Meets IOM 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

107

Page 112: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year - MIDDLE

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

SSBs other than soda None 39 76.47% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 35 68.63%

Weak 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sugar/calorie content of milk

None 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 39 76.47%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong <IOM 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 11 21.57%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Fat content of milk None 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 34 66.67%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 11 21.57%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Serving size limits for beverages

None 34 66.67% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 30 58.82% 30 58.82% 30 58.82%

Weak 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 13 25.49% 12 23.53% 12 23.53%

Strong <IOM 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Caffeine content of beverages

None 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 34 66.67%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 13 25.49%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Require water for sale None -- -- -- -- -- -- 29 56.86% 28 54.90% 28 54.90%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- 16 31.37% 15 29.41% 14 27.45%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- 6 11.76% 8 15.69% 9 17.65%

Ban -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year - MIDDLE

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

SCHOOL STORES

Sugar content of foods

None 35 68.63% 34 66.67% 32 62.75% 30 58.82% 30 58.82% 30 58.82%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong <IOM 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61%

Strong Meets IOM 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits on candy None 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 39 76.47%

Weak 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Fat content of foods None 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 29 56.86% 28 54.90% 28 54.90% 28 54.90%

Weak 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 6 11.76%

Strong <IOM 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 13 25.49%

Strong Meets IOM 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

108

Page 113: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year - MIDDLE

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Trans fats in foods None 44 86.27% 41 80.39% 39 76.47% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 35 68.63%

Weak 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong <IOM 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sodium content of foods None 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 43 84.31% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Calorie content per individual serving of snack item

None 45 88.24% 43 84.31% 40 78.43% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 38 74.51%

Weak 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong <IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong Meets IOM 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sugar content of beverages None 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 34 66.67% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 32 62.75%

Weak 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 12 23.53% 11 21.57%

Strong 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Calorie content of beverages

None 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31%

Weak 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Regular soda None 29 56.86% 28 54.90% 27 52.94% 25 49.02% 25 49.02% 25 49.02%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong <IOM 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 12 23.53%

Strong Meets IOM 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

SSBs other than soda None 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 37 72.55%

Weak 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sugar/calorie content of milk

None 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 40 78.43%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong <IOM 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 10 19.61%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Fat content of milk None 39 76.47% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 36 70.59%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 11 21.57%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Serving size limits for beverages

None 36 70.59% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 32 62.75%

Weak 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 12 23.53% 11 21.57% 11 21.57%

Strong <IOM 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

109

Page 114: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year - MIDDLE

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Caffeine content of beverages

None 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 36 70.59%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 11 21.57%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Require water for sale None -- -- -- -- -- -- 31 60.78% 30 58.82% 30 58.82%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- 15 29.41% 14 27.45% 13 25.49%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- 5 9.80% 7 13.73% 8 15.69%

Ban -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year - MIDDLE

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Á LA CARTE LINES

Sugar content of foods

None 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 33 64.71% 31 60.78% 30 58.82% 30 58.82%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong <IOM 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 11 21.57% 11 21.57%

Strong Meets IOM 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits on candy None 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 30 58.82% 30 58.82% 30 58.82% 30 58.82%

Weak 18 35.29% 18 35.29% 19 37.25% 19 37.25% 19 37.25% 19 37.25%

Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Fat content of foods None 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 30 58.82% 29 56.86% 28 54.90% 28 54.90%

Weak 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 6 11.76%

Strong <IOM 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 13 25.49%

Strong Meets IOM 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Trans fats in foods None 43 84.31% 40 78.43% 38 74.51% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 33 64.71%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong <IOM 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 3 5.88% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sodium content of foods None 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 43 84.31% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Calorie content per individual serving of snack item

None 46 90.20% 44 86.27% 41 80.39% 39 76.47% 38 74.51% 38 74.51%

Weak 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong <IOM 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sugar content of beverages None 35 68.63% 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 31 60.78% 30 58.82% 30 58.82%

Weak 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 12 23.53% 11 21.57%

Strong 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 9 17.65% 10 19.61%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

110

Page 115: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year - MIDDLE

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Calorie content of beverages

None 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39%

Weak 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Regular soda None 20 39.22% 20 39.22% 19 37.25% 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 17 33.33%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong <IOM 22 43.14% 21 41.18% 23 45.10% 23 45.10% 22 43.14% 21 41.18%

Strong Meets IOM 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 9 17.65% 10 19.61%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

SSBs other than soda None 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 35 68.63%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 9 17.65% 10 19.61%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sugar/calorie content of milk

None 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 39 76.47%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong <IOM 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 11 21.57%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Fat content of milk None 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 34 66.67% 34 66.67%

Weak 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong 7 13.73% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 12 23.53% 12 23.53%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Serving size limits for beverages

None 36 70.59% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 32 62.75% 31 60.78% 31 60.78%

Weak 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61%

Strong <IOM 7 13.73% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Caffeine content of beverages

None 38 74.51% 39 76.47% 38 74.51% 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 34 66.67%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 9 17.65% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 12 23.53% 13 25.49%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Require water for sale None -- -- -- -- -- -- 29 56.86% 28 54.90% 28 54.90%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- 16 31.37% 14 27.45% 13 25.49%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- 6 11.76% 9 17.65% 10 19.61%

Ban -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year - MIDDLE

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

CLASSROOM PARTIES

Sugar content of foods

None 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

111

Page 116: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year - MIDDLE

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Limits on candy None 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Fat content of foods None 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Trans fats in foods None 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sodium content of foods None 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong <IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Calorie content per individual serving of snack item

None 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong <IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sugar content of beverages None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Calorie content of beverages

None 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Regular soda None 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

SSBs other than soda None 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sugar/calorie content of milk

None 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong <IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

112

Page 117: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year - MIDDLE

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Fat content of milk None 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Serving size limits for beverages

None 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20%

Weak 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong <IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Caffeine content of beverages

None 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year - MIDDLE

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

IN-SCHOOL FUNDRAISING

Sugar content of foods

None 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 38 74.51% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 36 70.59%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong <IOM 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong Meets IOM 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits on candy None 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Fat content of foods None 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 35 68.63%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 3 5.88%

Strong <IOM 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 12 23.53%

Strong Meets IOM 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits amount of trans fats in foods

None 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 38 74.51%

Weak 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong <IOM 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sodium content of foods None 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong <IOM 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Calorie content per individual serving of snack item

None 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 43 84.31% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39%

Weak 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong Meets IOM 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

113

Page 118: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE & PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year - MIDDLE

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Sugar content of beverages None 39 76.47% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 34 66.67%

Weak 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 11 21.57% 11 21.57%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 6 11.76%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Calorie content of beverages

None 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 45 88.24%

Weak 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Regular soda None 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 33 64.71%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61%

Strong Meets IOM 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 6 11.76%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

SSBs other than soda None 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 38 74.51%

Weak 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 6 11.76%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sugar/calorie content of milk

None 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 42 82.35%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong <IOM 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 8 15.69%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Fat content of milk None 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 37 72.55%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Serving size limits for beverages

None 40 78.43% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 35 68.63%

Weak 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 10 19.61% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Strong <IOM 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Caffeine content of beverages

None 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 37 72.55%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 10 19.61%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

114

Page 119: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

Table C-4. States Nationwide with Wellness Policies Addressing Competitive Food and Beverage Content Restrictions by

Location of Sale and Provision, High School Level, School Years 2008-09 through 2013-2014

LOCATION OF SALE &

PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- HIGH

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

VENDING MACHINES

Sugar content

of foods

None 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 34 66.67% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 32 62.75%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong <IOM 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Strong Meets IOM 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits on candy None 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43%

Weak 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69%

Strong 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Fat content of foods None 35 68.63% 34 66.67% 31 60.78% 30 58.82% 30 58.82% 30 58.82%

Weak 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 6 11.76%

Strong <IOM 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 13 25.49%

Strong Meets IOM 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Trans fats in foods None 43 84.31% 40 78.43% 38 74.51% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 33 64.71%

Weak 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong <IOM 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sodium content of foods None 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 44 86.27% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Calorie content per

individual serving of snack

item

None 44 86.27% 42 82.35% 39 76.47% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 37 72.55%

Weak 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong <IOM 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong Meets IOM 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sugar content of beverages None 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 33 64.71%

Weak 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 16 31.37% 15 29.41% 15 29.41%

Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Calorie content of

beverages

None 47 92.16% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27%

Weak 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Regular soda None 31 60.78% 30 58.82% 29 56.86% 27 52.94% 27 52.94% 27 52.94%

Weak 10 19.61% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong <IOM 8 15.69% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45%

Strong Meets IOM 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

115

Page 120: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE &

PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- HIGH

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

SSBs other than soda None 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 39 76.47%

Weak 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 10 19.61% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sugar/calorie content of

milk

None 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 40 78.43%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong <IOM 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 10 19.61%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Fat content of milk None 39 76.47% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 36 70.59%

Weak 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong 6 11.76% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Serving size limits for

beverages

None 36 70.59% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 32 62.75%

Weak 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 15 29.41% 14 27.45% 14 27.45%

Strong <IOM 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Caffeine content of

beverages

None 41 80.39% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39%

Weak 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Require water for sale None -- -- -- -- -- -- 32 62.75% 31 60.78% 31 60.78%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 17 33.33%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Ban -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

LOCATION OF SALE &

PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- HIGH

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

SCHOOL STORES

Sugar content

of foods

None 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 35 68.63% 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 33 64.71%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong <IOM 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 8 15.69%

Strong Meets IOM 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits on candy None 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43%

Weak 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69%

Strong 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Fat content of foods None 36 70.59% 35 68.63% 32 62.75% 31 60.78% 31 60.78% 31 60.78%

Weak 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 6 11.76%

Strong <IOM 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 12 23.53%

Strong Meets IOM 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

116

Page 121: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE &

PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- HIGH

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Trans fats in foods None 44 86.27% 41 80.39% 39 76.47% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 35 68.63%

Weak 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong <IOM 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sodium content of foods None 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 44 86.27% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Calorie content per

individual serving of snack

item

None 46 90.20% 44 86.27% 41 80.39% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 39 76.47%

Weak 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong <IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong Meets IOM 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sugar content of beverages None 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 34 66.67% 34 66.67% 34 66.67%

Weak 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 15 29.41% 14 27.45% 14 27.45%

Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Calorie content of

beverages

None 47 92.16% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27% 44 86.27%

Weak 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Regular soda None 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 29 56.86% 29 56.86% 29 56.86%

Weak 8 15.69% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong <IOM 7 13.73% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 13 25.49% 13 25.49% 13 25.49%

Strong Meets IOM 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

SSBs other than soda None 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 40 78.43%

Weak 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 9 17.65% 8 15.69% 8 15.69%

Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sugar/calorie content of

milk

None 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 40 78.43%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong <IOM 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 10 19.61%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Fat content of milk None 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 37 72.55%

Weak 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 6 11.76% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Serving size limits for

beverages

None 37 72.55% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 33 64.71%

Weak 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 12 23.53% 14 27.45% 13 25.49% 13 25.49%

Strong <IOM 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

117

Page 122: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE &

PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- HIGH

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Caffeine content of

beverages

None 42 82.35% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35%

Weak 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Require water for sale None -- -- -- -- -- -- 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 32 62.75%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 16 31.37%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Ban -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

LOCATION OF SALE &

PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- HIGH

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Á LA CARTE LINES

Sugar content

of foods

None 39 76.47% 38 74.51% 36 70.59% 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 33 64.71%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong <IOM 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Strong Meets IOM 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits on candy None 33 64.71% 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 32 62.75% 32 62.75%

Weak 17 33.33% 16 31.37% 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 17 33.33% 17 33.33%

Strong 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Fat content of foods None 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 33 64.71% 32 62.75% 31 60.78% 31 60.78%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 6 11.76%

Strong <IOM 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 11 21.57% 12 23.53%

Strong Meets IOM 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Trans fats in foods None 44 86.27% 41 80.39% 39 76.47% 35 68.63% 35 68.63% 34 66.67%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong <IOM 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 3 5.88% 6 11.76% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sodium content of foods None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 45 88.24% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 43 84.31%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Calorie content per

individual serving of snack

item

None 47 92.16% 45 88.24% 42 82.35% 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 39 76.47%

Weak 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong <IOM 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sugar content of beverages None 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 33 64.71%

Weak 11 21.57% 11 21.57% 12 23.53% 14 27.45% 14 27.45% 14 27.45%

Strong 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

118

Page 123: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE &

PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- HIGH

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Calorie content of

beverages

None 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 44 86.27% 44 86.27%

Weak 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Regular soda None 25 49.02% 25 49.02% 23 45.10% 21 41.18% 21 41.18% 21 41.18%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong <IOM 21 41.18% 20 39.22% 22 43.14% 23 45.10% 23 45.10% 23 45.10%

Strong Meets IOM 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

SSBs other than soda None 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 39 76.47%

Weak 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 8 15.69%

Strong 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sugar/calorie content of

milk

None 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 40 78.43%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong <IOM 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 10 19.61%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Fat content of milk None 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 38 74.51% 37 72.55% 36 70.59% 36 70.59%

Weak 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong 7 13.73% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 12 23.53% 12 23.53%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Serving size limits for

beverages

None 38 74.51% 36 70.59% 36 70.59% 34 66.67% 33 64.71% 33 64.71%

Weak 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 10 19.61% 12 23.53% 12 23.53% 12 23.53%

Strong <IOM 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Caffeine content of

beverages

None 42 82.35% 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Require water for sale None -- -- -- -- -- -- 32 62.75% 31 60.78% 31 60.78%

Weak -- -- -- -- -- -- 16 31.37% 16 31.37% 16 31.37%

Strong -- -- -- -- -- -- 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban -- -- -- -- -- -- 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

LOCATION OF SALE &

PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- HIGH

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

CLASSROOM PARTIES

Sugar content

of foods

None 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

119

Page 124: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE &

PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- HIGH

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Limits on candy None 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Fat content of foods None 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Trans fats in foods None 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sodium content of foods None 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong <IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Calorie content per

individual serving of snack

item

None 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 48 94.12%

Weak 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong <IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sugar content of beverages None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Calorie content of

beverages

None 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100% 51 100%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Regular soda None 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

SSBs other than soda None 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sugar/calorie content of

milk

None 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 49 96.08%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong <IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

120

Page 125: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE &

PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- HIGH

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Fat content of milk None 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Serving size limits for

beverages

None 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 46 90.20%

Weak 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong <IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Caffeine content of

beverages

None 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

LOCATION OF SALE &

PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- HIGH

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

IN-SCHOOL FUNDRAISING

Sugar content

of foods

None 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 38 74.51%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong <IOM 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong Meets IOM 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Limits on candy None 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16% 47 92.16%

Weak 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Fat content of foods None 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 37 72.55%

Weak 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 3 5.88%

Strong <IOM 7 13.73% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 11 21.57%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Trans fats in foods None 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 39 76.47% 39 76.47% 39 76.47%

Weak 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 7 13.73% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Strong <IOM 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sodium content of foods None 48 94.12% 48 94.12% 47 92.16% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 45 88.24%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 2 3.92% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong <IOM 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Strong Meets IOM 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Calorie content per

individual serving of snack

item

None 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 44 86.27% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35%

Weak 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong Meets IOM 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

121

Page 126: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

LOCATION OF SALE &

PROVISION PROVISION STRENGTH

States Nationwide by School Year- HIGH

’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14

N % N % N % N % N % N %

Sugar content of beverages None 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 36 70.59%

Weak 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 10 19.61% 12 23.53% 11 21.57% 12 23.53%

Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Calorie content of

beverages

None 51 100% 50 98.04% 50 98.04% 49 96.08% 49 96.08% 48 94.12%

Weak 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Strong 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Regular soda None 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 39 76.47% 37 72.55% 37 72.55% 36 70.59%

Weak 4 7.84% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Strong <IOM 4 7.84% 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 9 17.65% 9 17.65% 10 19.61%

Strong Meets IOM 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

SSBs other than soda None 44 86.27% 43 84.31% 43 84.31% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39%

Weak 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76% 8 15.69% 7 13.73% 7 13.73%

Strong 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 3 5.88%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Sugar/calorie content of

milk

None 47 92.16% 46 90.20% 46 90.20% 45 88.24% 45 88.24% 43 84.31%

Weak 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Strong <IOM 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 7 13.73%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Fat content of milk None 43 84.31% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 39 76.47%

Weak 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 5 9.80% 5 9.80%

Strong 3 5.88% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 7 13.73%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Serving size limits for

beverages

None 42 82.35% 40 78.43% 40 78.43% 38 74.51% 38 74.51% 37 72.55%

Weak 7 13.73% 8 15.69% 8 15.69% 10 19.61% 9 17.65% 9 17.65%

Strong <IOM 2 3.92% 3 5.88% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 2 3.92% 3 5.88%

Strong Meets IOM 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 1 1.96% 1 1.96% 2 3.92% 2 3.92%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

Caffeine content of

beverages

None 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 42 82.35% 41 80.39% 41 80.39% 41 80.39%

Weak 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 4 7.84% 5 9.80% 4 7.84% 4 7.84%

Strong 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 5 9.80% 6 11.76% 6 11.76%

Ban 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00% 0 0.00%

122

Page 127: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

Table D-1. Mean Levels of Comprehensiveness and Strength Scores by Year and State Characteristic, State Level, All Grades,

School Years 2006-07 through 2014-15 OVERALL SCORES BY WELLNESS POLICY CATEGORY

POLICY CATEGORY

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15

Overall Score 22.43 24.18 26.72 27.54 29.57 30.05 30.17 30.68 30.11 13.73 14.49 16.29 17.23 18.05 18.33 18.68 18.80 19.36

Nutrition Education 46.30 47.60 48.58 48.58 48.91 49.13 49.78 50.11 50.65 33.66 34.64 35.19 35.51 35.51 35.51 35.51 35.51 35.40

Physical Activity 13.49 13.55 15.06 16.11 16.90 17.52 18.46 19.73 20.04 7.77 7.64 8.56 9.17 9.85 9.32 10.04 10.58 10.88

Physical Education 37.01 39.90 42.35 42.94 45.65 45.97 46.23 46.55 46.92 25.83 27.31 28.58 29.85 30.97 31.18 31.70 31.66 31.83

School Meals 21.13 22.88 25.64 26.51 29.48 30.65 29.70 30.79 30.43 10.89 11.33 13.44 13.87 14.16 14.38 14.38 14.16 14.89

Competitive Foods & Beverages 21.83 25.23 27.78 28.24 30.98 31.57 31.76 31.96 29.35 7.91 9.35 11.96 13.01 14.12 14.51 15.42 15.42 19.28

Marketing & Promotion 3.92 4.90 6.54 6.54 6.54 5.56 5.56 5.56 6.54 1.96 2.94 3.27 3.27 3.27 3.27 3.27 3.27 5.23

Communications 11.98 11.98 15.69 15.69 16.99 17.65 16.99 16.99 16.99 7.84 7.84 9.15 9.15 9.80 9.15 9.15 9.15 9.15

Evaluation & Implementation 13.22 14.58 18.40 20.01 22.37 22.93 23.18 23.33 21.97 8.55 8.95 12.17 13.78 15.23 16.39 16.54 16.79 15.74

Reporting Requirements -- -- -- -- 8.88 11.03 11.46 11.84 11.80 -- -- -- -- 6.57 8.73 8.57 9.53 9.03 Staff Wellness 1.96 1.96 3.27 5.23 5.88 5.23 5.23 7.19 6.54 0.65 0.65 0.65 1.96 1.96 1.96 1.96 3.27 2.61

SCORES BY STATE CHARACTERISTIC

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 OVERALL SCORE

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 17.75 20.15 22.38 23.37 25.02 25.50 25.62 25.90 25.54 10.45 11.32 12.80 14.08 14.73 14.87 15.23 15.40 15.84

At- or Above-Mean 28.58 29.50 32.45 33.03 35.57 35.16 35.29 36.06 35.24 18.06 18.67 20.90 21.39 22.42 22.23 22.55 22.62 23.32

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 18.32 20.46 22.92 22.43 23.04 23.24 23.42 22.33 22.75 11.95 12.50 14.55 14.85 14.56 14.68 15.35 14.33 15.44

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

38.66 44.59 53.61 53.61 69.07 74.74 74.74 74.74 76.80 25.00 29.90 38.92 38.92 52.58 52.58 54.13 54.13 56.19

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 28.35 28.35 28.35 37.36 38.14 38.39 42.09 43.98 38.82 24.74 24.74 25.26 25.26 26.03 26.03 25.77 26.63 24.74

Mixed 26.26 26.82 28.70 30.08 33.74 33.85 33.29 34.20 32.85 14.56 15.09 15.88 17.24 19.43 19.71 19.50 20.14 20.31

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 17.91 17.97 19.81 21.16 24.44 23.48 24.47 27.17 24.44 11.85 12.05 12.69 12.95 13.82 13.88 14.85 16.71 15.40

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 14.86 18.07 21.32 20.50 24.59 24.13 23.20 23.38 25.29 8.07 9.83 11.40 12.46 14.46 13.85 13.77 13.10 15.13

High FRL (Low SES) 34.96 34.79 38.17 40.23 39.69 40.63 42.84 41.50 40.60 21.49 20.29 24.34 26.10 25.86 26.28 27.41 26.59 27.56

Census Divisions

New England (1) 20.87 25.52 27.66 30.07 33.07 34.11 34.36 34.88 35.39 12.80 15.21 17.44 19.67 20.62 21.39 22.51 22.77 22.77

Middle Atlantic (2) 30.41 30.93 30.41 30.07 30.07 30.58 30.58 30.58 28.86 16.15 18.73 17.69 17.69 17.69 17.69 17.69 17.69 17.52

East North Central (3) 14.95 15.98 16.60 16.70 19.59 19.90 20.10 20.00 20.41 9.07 9.69 10.62 11.24 12.06 12.37 12.68 12.17 12.27

West North Central (4) 10.09 10.45 12.44 13.11 15.09 15.54 15.31 15.61 14.95 6.85 6.85 7.73 8.25 9.13 9.35 10.01 10.23 10.90

South Atlantic (5) 32.06 32.46 35.56 36.07 39.68 40.66 41.17 41.52 41.75 20.15 20.33 22.33 22.56 24.51 25.02 25.54 25.77 27.66

East South Central (6) 32.61 35.96 42.40 42.40 42.40 42.66 43.43 45.75 45.49 21.00 23.97 30.16 30.16 30.16 30.42 30.80 31.32 31.32

West South Central (7) 38.40 40.97 43.29 46.00 47.68 47.68 46.13 47.29 42.39 23.83 23.44 25.12 26.93 26.80 26.93 26.54 26.93 26.93

Mountain (8) 16.95 17.27 19.91 20.88 21.84 22.10 22.17 22.49 22.17 10.96 10.96 12.05 12.82 13.02 13.08 13.08 13.08 14.18

Pacific (9) 14.74 19.27 22.67 22.67 24.74 24.74 25.36 25.77 25.05 6.70 7.01 9.48 11.96 13.40 13.40 13.40 13.40 13.09

123

Page 128: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 NUTRITION EDUCATION

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 42.15 44.44 45.21 45.21 44.83 46.71 47.33 47.33 47.94 30.08 31.80 31.80 32.38 32.38 31.69 31.69 31.69 31.69

At- or Above-Mean 51.77 51.77 53.03 53.03 54.29 51.85 52.55 53.24 53.70 38.38 38.38 39.65 39.65 39.65 39.81 39.81 39.81 39.58

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 41.07 44.44 45.09 44.22 42.13 41.55 41.55 40.74 42.78 29.56 31.89 32.91 32.22 31.48 31.40 31.40 29.89 31.39

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

77.78 77.78 77.78 77.78 88.89 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%)

50.00 50.00 50.00 58.33 58.33 58.33 55.56 55.56 61.11 50.00 50.00 50.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 38.89 38.89 38.89

Mixed 50.28 48.68 50.00 50.00 53.24 53.33 54.86 55.13 53.50 35.28 34.39 34.34 36.62 37.73 37.56 37.04 37.82 36.21

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 42.71 43.75 43.75 44.10 44.12 44.10 44.77 47.39 42.81 35.07 35.07 35.07 32.99 33.01 32.99 33.99 38.56 33.01

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 37.25 40.28 43.79 40.20 41.83 38.54 41.18 39.22 44.12 21.90 25.69 27.12 27.78 29.08 27.08 26.14 23.20 28.43

High FRL (Low SES) 59.15 58.33 58.50 60.78 60.78 60.46 63.40 63.73 65.03 44.12 42.01 43.79 45.42 44.44 46.41 46.41 44.77 44.77

Census Divisions

New England (1) 54.63 62.96 62.96 62.96 62.96 62.96 62.96 62.96 62.96 40.74 46.30 46.30 46.30 46.30 46.30 46.30 46.30 46.30

Middle Atlantic (2) 55.56 61.11 61.11 61.11 61.11 61.11 61.11 61.11 59.26 35.19 40.74 40.74 40.74 40.74 40.74 40.74 40.74 38.89

East North Central (3) 25.56 25.56 25.56 25.56 26.67 26.67 26.67 26.67 26.67 15.56 15.56 15.56 15.56 15.56 15.56 15.56 15.56 15.56

West North Central (4) 21.43 21.43 21.43 21.43 21.43 21.43 21.43 22.22 22.22 15.87 15.87 15.87 15.87 15.87 15.87 15.87 15.87 15.87

South Atlantic (5) 61.73 61.73 62.35 62.35 64.20 65.43 65.43 64.81 64.81 50.62 50.62 51.85 51.85 51.85 51.85 51.85 51.85 51.85

East South Central (6) 56.94 56.94 62.50 62.50 62.50 62.50 62.50 66.67 66.67 47.22 47.22 51.39 51.39 51.39 51.39 51.39 51.39 51.39

West South Central (7) 65.28 65.28 65.28 65.28 63.89 63.89 68.06 68.06 68.06 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83

Mountain (8) 44.44 44.44 46.53 46.53 46.53 46.53 46.53 46.53 48.61 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42

Pacific (9) 37.78 37.78 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89 42.22 42.22 45.56 13.33 13.33 13.33 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 PHYSICAL ACTIVITY

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 11.90 12.45 13.55 15.19 16.04 14.76 14.76 15.34 15.34 5.94 6.49 6.87 7.74 8.40 8.26 8.44 8.44 8.44

At- or Above-Mean 15.58 15.01 17.06 17.32 18.04 20.63 22.62 24.67 25.33 10.17 9.16 10.79 11.04 11.76 10.52 11.84 13.00 13.62

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 8.93 8.02 9.13 10.44 10.58 11.04 12.42 10.58 12.14 6.15 5.38 6.20 7.08 7.31 7.63 9.01 7.60 8.49

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

34.13 34.13 51.98 51.98 68.25 84.13 84.13 84.13 84.13 26.19 26.19 38.89 38.89 52.38 15.87 15.87 15.87 15.87

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%)

31.75 31.75 31.75 34.13 42.06 42.06 36.51 45.50 45.50 15.87 15.87 15.87 15.87 23.81 23.81 17.46 21.16 21.16

Mixed 16.90 17.84 17.97 17.64 18.98 18.86 19.25 21.67 20.69 7.78 8.39 8.26 8.23 9.46 9.46 9.85 11.57 11.32

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 11.81 11.81 13.79 17.76 16.06 18.06 17.93 20.73 18.86 5.85 5.85 6.55 8.83 8.59 9.42 9.15 11.02 9.15

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 4.90 6.20 5.84 4.90 8.50 7.44 6.07 6.07 9.15 2.75 3.92 3.69 3.03 3.87 4.12 3.87 3.87 6.35

High FRL (Low SES) 24.46 18.35 23.67 26.70 26.14 26.42 31.37 32.40 32.12 15.03 9.03 14.01 16.15 17.09 14.29 17.09 16.85 17.13

124

Page 129: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 Census Divisions

New England (1) 19.31 21.96 22.75 25.40 25.40 25.40 25.40 28.04 28.04 11.38 14.02 14.02 14.81 14.81 14.81 15.61 15.61 15.61

Middle Atlantic (2) 10.58 10.58 10.58 10.58 10.58 10.58 10.58 10.58 10.58 5.29 5.29 5.29 5.29 5.29 5.29 5.29 5.29 5.29

East North Central (3) 3.97 3.97 3.97 3.97 2.86 2.86 2.86 2.86 2.86 3.02 3.02 3.02 3.02 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.90 1.90

West North Central (4) 2.27 2.27 2.27 6.80 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.95 6.46 6.46 6.46 6.46 6.46

South Atlantic (5) 20.11 20.11 25.40 25.40 25.40 27.16 28.92 30.69 32.98 11.46 11.46 14.37 14.37 14.37 10.32 12.08 13.84 14.99

East South Central (6) 15.48 15.48 24.40 24.40 24.40 24.40 32.34 33.93 33.93 14.29 14.29 20.63 20.63 20.63 20.63 24.60 24.80 24.80

West South Central (7) 36.51 33.33 30.56 31.94 31.94 31.94 31.94 38.69 37.50 18.25 12.70 11.51 12.90 12.90 14.09 14.09 16.87 18.06

Mountain (8) 7.94 7.94 7.94 7.94 9.92 11.90 11.90 11.90 11.90 3.97 3.97 3.97 3.97 5.95 6.55 6.55 6.55 6.55

Pacific (9) 10.48 10.48 10.48 10.48 10.48 10.48 10.48 10.48 10.48 6.35 6.35 6.35 6.35 6.35 6.35 6.35 6.35 6.35

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 PHYSICAL EDUCATION

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 31.83 34.16 37.80 38.73 40.97 42.21 42.51 42.72 42.72 22.70 23.91 25.96 27.64 28.29 28.97 29.87 30.18 30.18

At- or Above-Mean 43.84 47.47 48.35 48.48 51.81 50.19 50.41 50.85 51.65 29.96 31.79 32.03 32.77 34.50 33.65 33.76 33.32 33.68

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 33.47 37.10 39.78 39.97 41.18 41.20 41.20 41.79 42.53 24.28 25.27 27.49 28.91 28.87 28.96 30.02 30.31 31.16

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

34.08 60.79 62.29 62.29 48.72 56.84 56.84 56.84 56.84 19.02 40.49 40.49 40.49 32.48 26.92 26.92 26.92 32.48

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%)

35.04 35.04 35.04 48.40 48.40 48.40 53.92 53.92 53.92 35.04 35.04 35.04 30.98 30.98 30.98 32.34 32.34 32.34

Mixed 42.36 41.75 43.90 44.06 49.76 49.72 49.64 49.15 49.03 28.24 28.31 28.49 29.85 33.00 33.40 33.44 32.85 32.23

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 35.78 37.95 38.97 36.78 43.70 41.19 42.26 44.18 41.79 27.83 29.33 30.34 29.01 31.42 30.53 32.70 33.97 31.60

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 25.87 28.50 36.83 37.63 40.65 41.51 39.06 40.35 43.06 17.74 18.87 22.83 26.01 27.60 27.96 26.17 26.50 27.29

High FRL (Low SES) 49.43 51.91 50.16 52.59 52.59 53.73 57.37 55.12 55.91 31.99 34.79 33.07 33.87 33.87 34.98 36.24 34.50 36.59

Census Divisions

New England (1) 27.92 34.22 38.28 42.34 42.34 42.34 42.34 42.34 42.34 22.51 26.99 28.35 32.41 32.41 32.41 32.41 32.41 32.41

Middle Atlantic (2) 59.40 59.40 56.70 54.91 54.91 54.91 54.91 54.91 54.91 40.46 40.46 40.46 40.46 40.46 40.46 40.46 40.46 40.46

East North Central (3) 31.88 35.60 37.22 36.15 35.60 35.60 35.60 36.71 38.33 23.68 23.68 25.30 28.55 28.55 28.55 28.55 27.52 27.52

West North Central (4) 28.51 29.24 30.40 31.56 35.04 35.04 35.04 36.20 36.20 18.86 18.86 20.02 21.18 21.55 21.55 25.03 26.19 26.19

South Atlantic (5) 49.07 49.67 49.36 49.07 54.20 56.01 56.01 56.01 57.22 32.74 33.05 33.05 33.05 35.75 36.94 36.94 36.94 37.89

East South Central (6) 39.42 52.78 54.22 54.22 54.22 54.22 54.22 58.28 58.28 29.86 40.60 39.90 39.90 39.90 39.90 39.90 39.26 39.26

West South Central (7) 52.24 52.88 54.91 57.59 61.65 61.65 62.98 60.20 60.20 36.54 35.15 35.15 35.15 35.15 35.15 35.79 35.10 35.10

Mountain (8) 32.72 34.11 39.50 39.50 41.53 41.53 41.53 41.21 41.21 24.63 24.63 29.01 29.01 29.01 29.01 29.01 29.01 29.01

Pacific (9) 22.56 25.26 32.86 32.86 40.47 40.47 42.09 42.09 42.09 10.68 12.31 13.93 17.18 23.16 23.16 23.16 23.16 23.16

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 SCHOOL MEALS Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 15.45 18.14 20.69 21.07 22.99 25.79 25.38 25.79 26.20 8.43 9.20 10.47 10.86 10.86 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.52

At- or Above-Mean 28.62 29.12 32.15 33.67 38.05 36.11 34.57 36.42 35.19 14.14 14.14 17.34 17.85 18.52 18.06 18.06 17.59 18.67

125

Page 130: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 18.78 19.89 21.23 20.74 21.60 22.06 21.58 22.05 21.48 9.92 9.88 11.40 11.85 11.88 11.92 11.92 12.52 12.59 Maj. African-American

(≥50%) 27.78 27.78 55.56 55.56 77.78 88.89 88.89 88.89 100.00 24.07 24.07 46.30 46.30 62.96 74.07 74.07 74.07 88.89

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.67 16.67 18.52 32.10 32.10 28.40 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.11 11.11 11.11 7.41 7.41 11.11

Mixed 24.81 27.34 29.29 31.31 36.42 37.19 34.72 35.47 34.71 11.48 12.52 13.47 13.47 14.66 14.52 15.12 13.96 14.27

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 15.97 17.36 18.75 21.53 24.84 25.00 25.49 29.41 26.58 9.72 11.11 11.81 12.50 11.11 11.11 11.76 14.38 13.51

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 19.17 20.37 22.00 19.61 24.84 24.54 23.53 22.88 24.62 10.46 10.42 10.89 10.68 11.98 12.27 11.33 10.68 11.55

High FRL (Low SES) 29.19 30.09 36.38 38.34 38.78 42.27 40.09 40.09 40.09 13.07 10.88 17.43 18.52 19.39 19.39 20.04 17.43 19.61

Census Divisions

New England (1) 24.69 30.25 30.86 32.72 36.42 38.27 38.27 38.27 38.27 11.11 14.81 16.05 17.90 17.90 17.90 17.90 17.90 17.90

Middle Atlantic (2) 18.52 18.52 18.52 18.52 18.52 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11

East North Central (3) 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89

West North Central (4) 17.46 19.05 20.63 20.63 22.22 23.81 22.22 22.22 22.22 12.70 12.70 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29

South Atlantic (5) 29.63 30.86 33.33 34.57 39.09 41.56 41.56 42.80 44.03 18.52 18.52 20.16 20.16 21.81 23.05 23.05 23.05 24.69

East South Central (6) 36.11 38.89 52.78 52.78 52.78 52.78 52.78 55.56 55.56 16.67 16.67 27.78 27.78 27.78 27.78 27.78 25.00 25.00

West South Central (7) 32.41 37.96 37.96 40.74 46.30 46.30 36.11 38.89 30.56 5.56 5.56 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 11.11

Mountain (8) 8.33 8.33 10.19 11.57 12.96 13.43 13.89 15.28 15.74 4.17 4.17 5.09 6.48 6.48 6.48 6.48 6.48 7.87

Pacific (9) 15.56 15.56 22.22 22.22 24.44 24.44 24.44 26.67 26.67 6.67 6.67 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 COMPETITIVE FOODS & BEVERAGES

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 13.91 19.89 21.49 22.30 26.32 25.56 25.93 25.93 24.81 2.41 3.79 5.63 7.47 9.43 9.38 10.86 10.86 14.81

At- or Above-Mean 32.27 32.27 36.06 36.06 37.12 38.33 38.33 38.75 34.44 15.15 16.67 20.30 20.30 20.30 20.28 20.56 20.56 24.31

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 13.21 17.16 21.79 19.20 22.36 22.46 22.90 20.95 21.00 5.00 5.68 9.23 9.33 9.58 8.70 10.43 7.30 12.17

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 70.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 63.33 25.00 25.00 45.00 45.00 50.00 50.00 60.00 60.00 63.33

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 30.00 30.00 30.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 46.67 46.67 30.00 26.67 26.67 30.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 32.22 32.22 23.33

Mixed 30.17 32.54 32.27 35.00 37.22 38.13 37.22 38.08 34.20 9.33 11.75 11.36 12.27 15.42 16.80 16.25 18.33 22.47

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 9.38 9.38 13.13 14.38 23.53 18.75 20.59 28.24 26.08 0.00 2.50 1.25 1.88 4.71 5.00 7.06 9.41 13.92

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 14.12 19.58 22.75 22.55 25.88 28.75 28.24 25.88 24.71 3.33 4.79 6.47 7.25 9.22 8.13 11.76 8.82 12.55

High FRL (Low SES) 42.55 43.96 45.88 46.27 43.53 43.53 46.47 41.76 37.25 20.39 18.54 27.25 30.00 28.43 27.65 27.45 28.04 31.37

Census Divisions

New England (1) 15.00 20.56 25.00 23.89 35.00 35.00 36.67 36.67 41.67 1.67 1.67 11.67 10.56 15.00 15.00 21.67 21.67 23.33

Middle Atlantic (2) 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 20.00 0.00 13.33 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67

East North Central (3) 17.33 17.33 17.33 17.33 19.33 25.33 25.33 25.33 28.00 4.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 8.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 14.67

West North Central (4) 0.00 0.00 7.14 7.14 11.43 11.43 11.43 11.43 5.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.86 2.86 2.86 2.86 5.71

South Atlantic (5) 33.70 33.70 38.89 38.89 42.59 42.59 42.59 42.59 40.00 12.59 12.59 14.81 14.81 15.93 15.93 17.04 17.04 27.04

East South Central (6) 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 18.33 21.67 36.67 36.67 36.67 36.67 36.67 36.67 36.67

West South Central (7) 48.33 58.33 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 36.67 28.33 28.33 27.50 27.50 27.50 27.50 26.67 26.67 25.83

Mountain (8) 16.67 16.67 19.17 22.92 22.92 22.92 22.92 24.17 22.92 6.67 6.67 6.25 7.50 7.50 7.50 7.50 7.50 15.83

Pacific (9) 10.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 4.00 4.00 8.00 18.00 18.00 18.00 18.00 18.00 18.00

126

Page 131: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 MARKETING & PROMOTION

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 0.57 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 1.85 1.85 1.85 3.70 0.57 2.30 2.30 2.30 2.30 1.85 1.85 1.85 3.70

At- or Above-Mean 8.33 8.33 12.12 12.12 12.12 9.72 9.72 9.72 9.72 3.79 3.79 4.55 4.55 4.55 4.86 4.86 4.86 6.94

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 0.00 1.85 2.56 2.67 2.78 2.90 2.90 3.17 3.33 0.00 1.85 1.92 2.00 2.08 2.17 2.17 2.38 2.50

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

75.00 75.00 75.00 75.00 100.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Mixed 2.50 2.38 5.30 5.30 6.94 6.67 6.94 6.41 8.02 2.50 2.38 3.03 3.03 2.78 2.67 2.78 2.56 6.17

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.98 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Mid FRL (Middle SES) 0.00 3.13 2.94 2.94 2.94 0.00 2.94 2.94 6.86 0.00 3.13 2.94 2.94 2.94 0.00 2.94 2.94 5.88

High FRL (Low SES) 11.76 6.25 16.67 16.67 16.67 13.73 13.73 12.75 12.75 5.88 3.13 6.86 6.86 6.86 6.86 6.86 6.86 9.80 Census Divisions

New England (1) 0.00 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 0.00 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 Middle Atlantic (2) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

East North Central (3) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 West North Central (4) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.14

South Atlantic (5) 11.11 11.11 12.96 12.96 12.96 7.41 7.41 7.41 7.41 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 East South Central (6) 20.83 20.83 37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50 8.33 8.33 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 25.00 West South Central (7) 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17

Mountain (8) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pacific (9) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

127

Page 132: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 COMMUNICATION & STAKEHOLDER INPUT

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 8.05 8.05 9.20 9.20 10.34 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 3.45 3.45 4.60 4.60 4.60 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70

At- or Above-Mean 17.17 17.17 24.24 24.24 25.76 25.00 23.61 23.61 23.61 13.64 13.64 15.15 15.15 16.67 15.28 15.28 15.28 15.28

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 8.33 8.64 11.11 10.22 12.04 14.01 14.01 11.11 11.67 5.95 6.17 7.69 6.67 6.94 7.25 7.25 7.94 8.33

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

33.33 33.33 66.67 66.67 100.0

0 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33

100.00

66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.11 11.11 11.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.11 11.11 11.11

Mixed 15.56 14.81 17.17 18.69 19.91 19.11 17.13 19.23 18.52 8.33 7.94 9.09 10.61 9.72 9.33 8.33 7.69 7.41

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 4.17 4.17 4.17 8.33 9.80 12.50 11.76 11.76 9.80 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 3.92 4.17 3.92 3.92 1.96

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 9.80 10.42 11.76 5.88 9.80 6.25 7.84 9.80 11.76 1.96 2.08 3.92 1.96 5.88 4.17 3.92 5.88 7.84

High FRL (Low SES) 22.22 19.44 31.37 31.37 31.37 33.33 31.37 29.41 29.41 17.65 14.58 19.61 19.61 19.61 19.61 19.61 17.65 17.65

Census Divisions

New England (1) 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 11.11 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Middle Atlantic (2) 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22

East North Central (3) 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67

West North Central (4) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

South Atlantic (5) 19.75 19.75 27.16 27.16 30.86 30.86 30.86 30.86 30.86 18.52 18.52 22.22 22.22 25.93 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22

East South Central (6) 25.00 25.00 47.22 47.22 47.22 47.22 47.22 47.22 47.22 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67

West South Central (7) 25.00 25.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 25.00 25.00 25.00 16.67 16.67 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00

Mountain (8) 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Pacific (9) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 EVALUATION & IMPLEMENTATION

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 8.66 10.34 13.53 15.65 16.80 16.24 16.24 16.90 15.10 4.77 5.04 7.69 9.55 10.34 10.83 10.54 11.11 9.69

At- or Above-Mean 19.23 20.16 24.83 25.76 29.72 30.45 30.98 30.56 29.70 13.52 14.10 18.07 19.35 21.68 22.65 23.29 23.18 22.54

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 10.35 12.25 15.58 14.67 14.85 15.27 15.50 12.58 12.44 7.60 7.88 10.95 10.15 9.29 10.26 10.59 8.42 8.08

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

26.92 30.77 38.46 38.46 69.23 84.62 84.62 84.62 84.62 15.38 19.23 26.92 26.92 53.85 76.92 76.92 76.92 69.23

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 46.15 46.15 46.15 46.15 46.15 46.15 48.72 51.28 38.46 38.46 38.46 38.46 34.62 34.62 34.62 35.90 38.46 33.33

Mixed 14.23 14.53 18.65 22.03 25.96 25.64 24.79 26.43 24.88 7.69 7.94 11.07 14.80 17.95 18.15 17.31 18.74 17.47

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 9.46 7.21 10.10 12.98 13.88 13.46 15.54 15.84 11.76 5.77 2.40 4.81 6.25 7.24 7.69 8.14 9.50 6.33 Mid FRL (Middle SES) 3.32 8.17 11.16 10.71 18.55 17.15 14.63 17.04 18.85 1.51 5.29 6.79 8.14 12.22 11.06 10.41 10.41 11.76

High FRL (Low SES) 27.45 27.24 32.43 35.75 34.69 36.35 39.37 37.10 35.29 18.70 17.95 23.53 26.85 26.24 28.81 31.07 30.47 29.11

128

Page 133: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 Census Divisions

New England (1) 10.26 12.82 14.10 19.23 21.79 24.36 24.36 25.64 24.36 8.97 8.97 10.26 14.10 15.38 19.23 19.23 20.51 19.23 Middle Atlantic (2) 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26

East North Central (3) 4.62 6.15 7.69 7.69 16.41 14.87 15.90 14.36 12.82 3.08 3.08 6.15 6.15 10.77 9.23 10.77 9.23 7.69 West North Central (4) 0.00 0.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 3.30 3.30 3.30 3.30 0.00 0.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 3.30 3.30 3.30 3.30

South Atlantic (5) 21.94 22.51 27.64 29.63 34.19 35.04 36.75 37.04 37.04 12.54 13.11 17.38 18.52 22.79 26.21 27.07 27.35 26.50 East South Central (6) 25.00 26.92 31.41 31.41 31.41 32.69 32.69 32.05 32.69 16.67 18.59 25.00 25.00 25.00 26.28 26.28 27.56 27.56 West South Central (7) 27.56 29.49 41.03 49.36 50.64 50.64 48.72 50.00 46.15 23.72 25.64 31.41 39.74 39.10 39.10 37.18 38.46 36.54

Mountain (8) 8.33 8.65 12.50 12.50 13.46 13.46 13.46 13.46 11.54 4.81 4.81 5.77 7.69 7.69 7.69 7.69 7.69 5.77 Pacific (9) 9.23 13.85 18.46 18.46 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.51 15.38 4.62 4.62 10.77 10.77 12.31 12.31 12.31 12.31 10.77

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 6.63 7.55 7.55 7.12 7.12 4.06 5.66 5.66 5.23 4.58

At- or Above-Mean 11.85 14.95 15.85 17.16 17.08 9.89 12.17 11.85 14.38 14.05

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 8.09 9.12 9.63 7.75 7.84 6.45 7.67 7.50 5.98 5.98

Maj. African-American (≥50%) 23.53 70.59 70.59 70.59 70.59 23.53 70.59 70.59 70.59 70.59

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 10.78 13.73 13.07 20.92 20.92 5.88 5.88 7.84 15.69 15.69

Mixed 8.91 10.20 10.54 11.84 11.55 6.05 7.45 7.11 9.35 8.28

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL) Low FRL (High SES) 5.19 6.62 7.96 7.96 5.19 2.77 4.41 4.50 6.57 3.81

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 7.27 7.97 8.88 10.27 10.96 4.50 5.02 5.19 5.88 6.92 High FRL (Low SES) 14.19 17.42 17.53 17.30 19.26 12.46 16.26 16.03 16.15 16.38

Census Divisions New England (1) 7.84 12.75 12.75 12.75 11.76 4.90 10.78 10.78 10.78 9.80

Middle Atlantic (2) 19.61 19.61 19.61 19.61 19.61 9.80 9.80 9.80 9.80 9.80 East North Central (3) 3.53 4.31 11.37 11.37 13.73 2.35 3.14 2.35 7.06 7.06

West North Central (4) 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 South Atlantic (5) 14.38 21.57 21.57 20.26 20.92 11.76 18.95 18.95 17.65 16.99

East South Central (6) 14.71 14.71 14.71 16.18 17.65 12.25 12.25 12.25 15.20 16.67 West South Central (7) 15.20 16.67 13.24 19.61 17.65 12.75 14.22 13.24 19.61 17.65

Mountain (8) 5.15 5.15 5.15 5.15 3.68 3.68 3.68 3.68 3.68 2.21 Pacific (9) 6.67 7.84 7.84 7.84 7.84 4.71 4.71 4.71 4.71 4.71

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 STAFF WELLNESS & MODELING

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 3.45 3.45 4.60 5.75 5.75 6.17 6.17 6.17 6.17 1.15 1.15 1.15 3.45 3.45 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70

At- or Above-Mean 0.00 0.00 1.52 4.55 6.06 4.17 4.17 8.33 6.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.78 1.39

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 2.38 2.47 3.85 6.67 2.78 1.45 1.45 1.59 1.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Maj. African-American (≥50%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 22.22 33.33 33.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.67 16.67 16.67 11.11 11.11 11.11

Mixed 1.67 1.59 3.03 1.52 5.56 5.33 5.56 7.69 6.17 1.67 1.59 1.52 0.00 2.78 2.67 2.78 5.13 3.70

129

Page 134: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 4.17 0.00 2.08 2.08 1.96 2.08 1.96 1.96 1.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 0.00 4.17 3.92 7.84 7.84 6.25 5.88 5.88 5.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.92 3.92 4.17 3.92 3.92 3.92

High FRL (Low SES) 1.96 2.08 3.92 5.88 7.84 5.88 7.84 13.73 11.76 1.96 2.08 1.96 1.96 1.96 0.00 1.96 5.88 3.92

Census Divisions

New England (1) 11.11 11.11 16.67 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11

Middle Atlantic (2) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

East North Central (3) 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.67 6.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

West North Central (4) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

South Atlantic (5) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

East South Central (6) 0.00 0.00 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 25.00 16.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.67 8.33

West South Central (7) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.33 8.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Mountain (8) 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Pacific (9) 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67

130

Page 135: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

Table D-2. Mean Levels of Comprehensiveness and Strength Scores by Year and State Characteristic, Elementary School,

School Years 2006-07 through 2014-15 OVERALL SCORES BY WELLNESS POLICY CATEGORY

POLICY CATEGORY

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15

Overall Score 23.14 24.95 27.57 28.36 30.41 30.89 31.04 31.52 30.92 14.66 15.38 17.16 18.07 19.00 19.28 19.61 19.70 20.09

Nutrition Education 43.46 44.77 45.42 45.42 45.75 46.08 46.73 47.06 47.71 34.31 35.29 35.62 35.95 35.95 35.95 35.95 35.95 35.95

Physical Activity 15.97 16.81 19.05 19.89 21.29 21.85 22.69 23.25 23.53 9.24 9.52 10.64 11.48 12.89 12.61 13.45 13.45 14.01

Physical Education 38.24 40.85 43.79 44.44 47.39 47.71 47.88 48.20 48.69 25.65 26.96 28.27 29.58 30.72 30.88 31.21 31.21 31.54

School Meals 22.22 23.97 26.80 27.67 30.50 31.81 31.15 32.24 31.81 11.76 12.20 14.60 15.03 15.25 15.47 15.47 15.25 15.90

Competitive Foods & Beverages 24.12 27.84 30.00 30.59 32.94 33.53 33.73 33.92 31.18 11.96 13.33 15.49 16.47 17.84 18.24 19.22 19.22 21.57

Marketing & Promotion 3.92 4.90 5.88 5.88 5.88 4.90 4.90 4.90 5.88 1.96 2.94 2.94 2.94 2.94 2.94 2.94 2.94 4.90

Communications 12.42 12.42 16.34 16.34 17.65 18.30 17.65 17.65 17.65 7.84 7.84 9.15 9.15 9.80 9.15 9.15 9.15 9.15

Evaluation & Implementation 13.88 15.23 19.16 20.51 22.93 23.38 23.68 23.98 22.47 9.20 9.50 12.82 14.18 15.69 16.74 16.89 17.19 16.14

Reporting Requirements -- -- -- -- 9.11 11.19 11.76 12.00 11.88 -- -- -- -- 6.81 9.00 8.88 9.69 9.11

Staff Wellness 1.96 1.96 3.27 5.23 5.88 5.23 5.23 7.19 6.54 0.65 0.65 0.65 1.96 1.96 1.96 1.96 3.27 2.61

SCORES BY STATE CHARACTERISTIC

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 OVERALL SCORE

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 17.51 20.11 22.33 23.40 25.09 25.30 25.41 25.75 25.36 10.56 11.41 12.89 14.22 15.07 15.21 15.61 15.78 15.95

At- or Above-Mean 30.56 31.33 34.48 34.90 37.41 37.18 37.37 38.01 37.18 20.07 20.63 22.80 23.15 24.20 23.85 24.10 24.10 24.74

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 18.08 20.57 23.02 22.28 23.01 23.08 23.28 22.05 22.54 12.14 12.65 14.62 14.77 14.68 14.78 15.45 14.36 15.38

Maj. African-American (≥50%) 40.00 43.85 55.38 55.38 69.23 75.38 75.38 75.38 78.46 26.15 30.00 40.77 40.77 53.85 52.31 53.85 53.85 56.92

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 27.69 27.69 27.69 36.92 37.69 38.46 43.08 44.62 40.51 24.62 24.62 24.62 24.62 25.38 25.38 26.15 26.67 24.10

Mixed 28.31 28.64 30.42 32.03 35.58 35.69 35.13 35.98 34.30 16.54 17.07 17.69 19.16 21.35 21.60 21.35 21.89 21.77

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 17.21 17.50 19.33 20.77 24.07 23.17 24.07 26.79 24.34 11.63 11.73 12.50 12.98 13.94 14.23 15.20 16.83 15.66

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 14.75 18.17 20.72 20.18 24.52 23.85 23.17 23.26 24.98 8.05 10.00 11.22 12.49 14.75 13.85 13.94 13.30 15.02

High FRL (Low SES) 37.92 37.31 41.36 43.44 42.62 43.71 45.88 44.52 43.44 24.52 22.88 26.88 28.69 28.33 28.78 29.68 28.96 29.59

Census Divisions

New England (1) 20.77 25.90 27.69 30.26 33.08 34.10 34.36 34.87 35.38 12.82 15.13 17.44 20.00 20.77 21.54 22.82 23.08 23.08

Middle Atlantic (2) 29.23 29.74 29.23 29.23 29.23 29.74 29.74 29.74 28.21 15.38 17.95 17.95 17.95 17.95 17.95 17.95 17.95 17.95

East North Central (3) 15.08 16.00 16.62 16.62 19.69 20.00 20.31 20.31 20.31 9.23 10.15 11.08 11.69 12.62 12.92 13.23 12.92 12.62

West North Central (4) 9.23 9.45 11.43 12.09 14.51 14.95 14.73 14.95 14.29 6.37 6.37 7.25 7.91 9.67 9.89 10.55 10.77 10.99

South Atlantic (5) 36.07 36.24 39.15 39.49 42.74 43.76 44.27 44.79 45.13 23.25 23.42 25.47 25.47 27.35 27.69 28.21 28.55 30.26

East South Central (6) 35.00 37.31 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.77 47.69 47.31 24.23 26.15 32.31 32.31 32.31 32.31 32.69 33.08 33.08

West South Central (7) 40.38 43.85 46.54 48.85 50.77 50.77 49.23 49.62 45.00 26.92 26.92 28.08 29.62 29.62 30.00 29.23 28.85 28.08

Mountain (8) 16.15 17.12 19.81 20.77 21.73 22.12 22.31 22.69 22.31 10.77 10.77 11.73 12.50 12.69 12.88 12.88 12.88 14.04

Pacific (9) 14.46 18.77 22.46 22.46 24.62 24.62 25.23 25.85 24.92 6.77 7.08 9.23 11.38 12.92 12.92 12.92 12.92 12.62

131

Page 136: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 NUTRITION EDUCATION

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 39.66 41.95 42.53 42.53 41.95 43.83 44.44 44.44 45.06 31.03 32.76 32.76 33.33 33.33 32.10 32.10 32.10 32.10

At- or Above-Mean 48.48 48.48 49.24 49.24 50.76 48.61 49.31 50.00 50.69 38.64 38.64 39.39 39.39 39.39 40.28 40.28 40.28 40.28

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 38.10 41.36 41.67 40.67 38.19 37.68 37.68 36.51 38.33 30.36 32.72 33.33 32.67 31.94 31.88 31.88 30.16 31.67

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

75.00 75.00 75.00 75.00 83.33 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 50.00 50.00 50.00 58.33 58.33 58.33 55.56 55.56 61.11 50.00 50.00 50.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 38.89 38.89 38.89

Mixed 47.50 46.03 46.97 46.97 50.69 50.67 52.08 52.56 51.23 35.83 34.92 34.85 37.12 38.19 38.00 37.50 38.46 37.04

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 39.58 40.63 40.63 41.67 41.18 41.67 42.16 44.12 40.20 35.42 35.42 35.42 33.33 33.33 33.33 34.31 38.24 33.33

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 34.31 38.54 40.20 36.27 38.24 34.37 37.25 35.29 40.20 22.55 27.08 27.45 28.43 29.41 27.08 26.47 23.53 28.43

High FRL (Low SES) 56.86 56.25 55.88 57.84 57.84 57.84 60.78 61.76 62.75 45.10 42.71 44.12 46.08 45.10 47.06 47.06 46.08 46.08

Census Divisions

New England (1) 52.78 61.11 61.11 61.11 61.11 61.11 61.11 61.11 61.11 41.67 47.22 47.22 47.22 47.22 47.22 47.22 47.22 47.22

Middle Atlantic (2) 50.00 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 33.33 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89

East North Central (3) 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67

West North Central (4) 19.05 19.05 19.05 19.05 19.05 19.05 19.05 19.05 19.05 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67

South Atlantic (5) 59.26 59.26 59.26 59.26 61.11 62.96 62.96 62.96 62.96 51.85 51.85 51.85 51.85 51.85 51.85 51.85 51.85 51.85

East South Central (6) 54.17 54.17 58.33 58.33 58.33 58.33 58.33 62.50 62.50 50.00 50.00 54.17 54.17 54.17 54.17 54.17 54.17 54.17

West South Central (7) 62.50 62.50 62.50 62.50 62.50 62.50 66.67 66.67 66.67 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83

Mountain (8) 41.67 41.67 43.75 43.75 43.75 43.75 43.75 43.75 45.83 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42

Pacific (9) 36.67 36.67 36.67 36.67 36.67 36.67 40.00 40.00 43.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 PHYSICAL ACTIVITY

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 13.30 13.79 14.78 16.26 18.23 15.87 15.87 16.40 16.40 6.90 7.39 7.39 8.87 10.84 10.58 11.11 11.11 11.11

At- or Above-Mean 19.48 20.78 24.68 24.68 25.32 28.57 30.36 30.95 31.55 12.34 12.34 14.94 14.94 15.58 14.88 16.07 16.07 17.26

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 10.71 11.11 12.64 12.00 13.69 14.29 15.53 14.29 16.43 7.14 6.88 7.69 8.57 10.12 10.56 11.80 10.88 12.14

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

35.71 35.71 64.29 64.29 71.43 85.71 85.71 85.71 85.71 28.57 28.57 50.00 50.00 57.14 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 28.57 28.57 28.57 35.71 42.86 42.86 42.86 47.62 47.62 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29 21.43 21.43 19.05 19.05 19.05

Mixed 20.71 21.77 22.08 23.38 25.00 24.57 24.40 25.27 23.81 10.00 10.88 10.39 11.04 13.10 13.71 14.29 14.84 14.81

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 12.50 12.50 14.29 17.86 16.81 18.75 18.49 21.01 19.33 7.14 7.14 7.14 9.82 10.08 11.61 11.76 13.45 11.76

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 5.88 7.14 6.72 5.88 11.76 9.82 8.40 8.40 11.76 3.36 4.46 4.20 4.20 6.72 7.14 6.72 6.72 9.24

High FRL (Low SES) 30.25 25.89 32.77 36.97 35.29 36.13 41.18 40.34 39.50 17.65 12.50 18.49 21.01 21.85 19.33 21.85 20.17 21.01

132

Page 137: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 Census Divisions

New England (1) 19.05 21.43 23.81 26.19 26.19 26.19 26.19 28.57 28.57 11.90 14.29 14.29 16.67 16.67 16.67 19.05 19.05 19.05

Middle Atlantic (2) 9.52 9.52 9.52 9.52 9.52 9.52 9.52 9.52 9.52 4.76 4.76 4.76 4.76 4.76 4.76 4.76 4.76 4.76

East North Central (3) 8.57 8.57 8.57 8.57 8.57 8.57 8.57 8.57 8.57 5.71 5.71 5.71 5.71 5.71 5.71 5.71 5.71 5.71

West North Central (4) 2.04 2.04 2.04 6.12 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.08 12.24 12.24 12.24 12.24 12.24

South Atlantic (5) 26.98 26.98 31.75 31.75 31.75 33.33 34.92 36.51 39.68 15.87 15.87 19.05 19.05 19.05 14.29 15.87 17.46 19.05

East South Central (6) 21.43 21.43 35.71 35.71 35.71 35.71 42.86 39.29 39.29 17.86 17.86 28.57 28.57 28.57 28.57 32.14 28.57 28.57

West South Central (7) 42.86 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 53.57 50.00 21.43 21.43 17.86 17.86 17.86 21.43 21.43 21.43 25.00

Mountain (8) 7.14 7.14 7.14 7.14 8.93 10.71 10.71 10.71 10.71 3.57 3.57 3.57 3.57 5.36 7.14 7.14 7.14 7.14

Pacific (9) 11.43 11.43 11.43 11.43 11.43 11.43 11.43 11.43 11.43 5.71 5.71 5.71 5.71 5.71 5.71 5.71 5.71 5.71

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 PHYSICAL EDUCATION

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 31.32 34.20 38.22 39.37 41.67 42.90 43.21 43.52 43.52 21.84 22.99 25.00 26.72 27.30 27.78 28.70 29.01 29.01

At- or Above-Mean 47.35 49.62 51.14 51.14 54.92 53.13 53.13 53.47 54.51 30.68 32.20 32.58 33.33 35.23 34.38 34.03 33.68 34.38

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 32.74 37.04 40.06 39.67 40.97 40.58 40.58 41.27 42.08 23.21 24.07 25.96 27.00 26.74 26.81 27.90 28.17 29.17

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

41.67 58.33 66.67 66.67 50.00 58.33 58.33 58.33 58.33 20.83 37.50 41.67 41.67 33.33 25.00 25.00 25.00 33.33

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 33.33 33.33 33.33 45.83 45.83 45.83 52.78 52.78 52.78 33.33 33.33 33.33 29.17 29.17 29.17 30.56 30.56 30.56

Mixed 45.83 44.44 46.59 47.73 53.82 54.00 53.82 52.88 52.78 29.17 29.37 29.55 31.44 34.72 35.00 34.72 33.97 33.33

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 34.38 37.50 38.54 36.46 44.12 41.15 42.16 44.61 42.16 26.56 27.60 28.65 28.13 29.90 29.69 31.86 32.35 30.39

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 25.00 27.60 35.78 36.76 39.71 40.63 38.73 39.71 43.14 16.18 17.71 21.08 24.02 25.98 25.52 24.51 25.00 25.49

High FRL (Low SES) 55.39 55.73 55.39 58.33 58.33 59.80 62.75 60.29 60.78 34.31 36.46 35.29 36.27 36.27 37.25 37.25 36.27 38.73

Census Divisions

New England (1) 27.78 34.72 38.89 43.06 43.06 43.06 43.06 43.06 43.06 22.22 26.39 27.78 31.94 31.94 31.94 31.94 31.94 31.94

Middle Atlantic (2) 58.33 58.33 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 55.56 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89

East North Central (3) 31.67 35.00 36.67 35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 36.67 38.33 21.67 21.67 23.33 26.67 26.67 26.67 26.67 26.67 26.67

West North Central (4) 26.19 26.19 27.38 28.57 32.14 32.14 32.14 33.33 33.33 16.67 16.67 17.86 19.05 19.05 19.05 22.62 23.81 23.81

South Atlantic (5) 54.63 54.63 54.63 54.63 60.19 62.04 62.04 62.04 63.89 34.26 35.19 35.19 35.19 37.96 38.89 38.89 38.89 40.74

East South Central (6) 45.83 54.17 58.33 58.33 58.33 58.33 58.33 62.50 62.50 33.33 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67

West South Central (7) 60.42 60.42 62.50 64.58 68.75 68.75 68.75 64.58 64.58 41.67 39.58 39.58 39.58 39.58 39.58 37.50 35.42 35.42

Mountain (8) 30.21 34.38 39.58 39.58 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 22.92 22.92 27.08 27.08 27.08 27.08 27.08 27.08 27.08

Pacific (9) 21.67 23.33 33.33 33.33 41.67 41.67 43.33 43.33 43.33 8.33 10.00 11.67 15.00 21.67 21.67 21.67 21.67 21.67

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 SCHOOL MEALS

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 15.71 18.39 21.07 21.46 23.37 25.93 25.51 25.93 26.34 8.43 9.20 10.73 11.11 11.11 11.52 11.52 11.52 11.93

At- or Above-Mean 30.81 31.31 34.34 35.86 39.90 38.43 37.50 39.35 37.96 16.16 16.16 19.70 20.20 20.71 19.91 19.91 19.44 20.37

133

Page 138: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 19.05 20.16 21.37 20.89 21.76 22.22 21.74 22.22 21.67 9.92 9.88 11.54 12.00 12.04 12.08 12.08 12.70 12.78

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

27.78 27.78 55.56 55.56 77.78 88.89 88.89 88.89 100.00 27.78 27.78 50.00 50.00 66.67 77.78 77.78 77.78 88.89

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.67 16.67 22.22 37.04 37.04 33.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.11 11.11 11.11 7.41 7.41 11.11

Mixed 27.22 29.63 31.82 33.84 38.43 39.11 37.04 37.61 36.63 13.33 14.29 15.66 15.66 16.67 16.44 17.13 15.81 16.05

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 15.97 17.36 18.75 21.53 24.84 25.00 25.49 29.41 26.80 9.72 11.11 11.81 12.50 11.11 11.11 11.76 14.38 13.73

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 19.61 20.83 22.22 20.26 25.49 25.00 24.18 23.53 24.84 10.46 10.42 11.11 11.11 12.42 12.50 11.76 11.11 11.76

High FRL (Low SES) 32.03 32.64 39.22 41.18 41.18 45.10 43.79 43.79 43.79 15.69 13.19 20.26 21.57 22.22 22.22 22.88 20.26 22.22

Census Divisions

New England (1) 25.93 31.48 31.48 33.33 37.04 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89 11.11 14.81 16.67 18.52 18.52 18.52 18.52 18.52 18.52

Middle Atlantic (2) 18.52 18.52 18.52 18.52 18.52 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11

East North Central (3) 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89

West North Central (4) 17.46 19.05 20.63 20.63 22.22 23.81 22.22 22.22 22.22 12.70 12.70 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29

South Atlantic (5) 35.80 37.04 39.51 40.74 44.44 46.91 46.91 48.15 49.38 23.46 23.46 25.93 25.93 27.16 28.40 28.40 28.40 29.63

East South Central (6) 36.11 38.89 52.78 52.78 52.78 52.78 52.78 55.56 55.56 16.67 16.67 27.78 27.78 27.78 27.78 27.78 25.00 25.00

West South Central (7) 30.56 36.11 36.11 38.89 44.44 44.44 36.11 38.89 30.56 5.56 5.56 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 11.11

Mountain (8) 8.33 8.33 11.11 12.50 13.89 15.28 16.67 18.06 18.06 4.17 4.17 5.56 6.94 6.94 6.94 6.94 6.94 8.33

Pacific (9) 15.56 15.56 22.22 22.22 24.44 24.44 24.44 26.67 26.67 6.67 6.67 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 COMPETITIVE FOODS & BEVERAGES

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 14.48 21.03 22.41 23.45 27.24 25.56 25.93 25.93 24.81 3.79 5.17 7.24 8.97 11.38 11.85 13.33 13.33 15.56

At- or Above-Mean 36.82 36.82 40.00 40.00 40.45 42.50 42.50 42.92 38.33 22.73 24.09 26.36 26.36 26.36 25.42 25.83 25.83 28.33

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 13.93 18.52 22.31 20.00 22.92 23.04 23.48 20.95 21.00 7.14 7.41 10.77 10.40 11.25 10.43 12.17 8.57 12.50

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 70.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 70.00 25.00 25.00 45.00 45.00 50.00 50.00 60.00 60.00 70.00

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 30.00 30.00 30.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 46.67 46.67 36.67 30.00 30.00 30.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 36.67 36.67 23.33

Mixed 35.00 37.14 36.82 39.55 40.83 41.60 40.83 41.92 36.67 16.50 19.05 17.73 19.09 21.67 22.80 22.08 24.23 26.30

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 9.38 9.38 13.13 14.38 23.53 18.75 20.59 28.24 27.06 0.00 2.50 2.50 3.13 7.06 7.50 9.41 11.76 15.88

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 15.88 22.50 23.53 24.71 27.65 30.63 30.00 27.65 24.71 4.71 6.88 7.65 9.41 11.76 10.00 13.53 10.59 12.94

High FRL (Low SES) 47.65 49.38 51.76 51.18 47.65 47.65 50.59 45.88 41.76 31.18 28.75 34.71 37.06 34.71 34.71 34.71 35.29 35.88

Census Divisions New England (1) 15.00 23.33 25.00 25.00 35.00 35.00 36.67 36.67 41.67 1.67 1.67 11.67 11.67 15.00 15.00 21.67 21.67 23.33

Middle Atlantic (2) 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 20.00 0.00 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33

East North Central (3) 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 22.00 28.00 28.00 28.00 28.00 6.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 16.00 16.00 16.00 16.00

West North Central (4) 0.00 0.00 7.14 7.14 11.43 11.43 11.43 11.43 5.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 5.71 5.71 5.71 5.71 5.71

South Atlantic (5) 41.11 41.11 45.56 45.56 47.78 47.78 47.78 47.78 44.44 20.00 20.00 22.22 22.22 23.33 23.33 24.44 24.44 32.22

East South Central (6) 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 30.00 30.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00

West South Central (7) 50.00 60.00 57.50 57.50 57.50 57.50 57.50 57.50 42.50 40.00 40.00 37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50 30.00

Mountain (8) 18.75 18.75 21.25 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 26.25 25.00 8.75 8.75 7.50 8.75 8.75 8.75 8.75 8.75 17.50

Pacific (9) 10.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 8.00 8.00 10.00 18.00 18.00 18.00 18.00 18.00 18.00

134

Page 139: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 MARKETING & PROMOTION

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 0.00 1.72 1.72 1.72 1.72 1.85 1.85 1.85 3.70 0.00 1.72 1.72 1.72 1.72 1.85 1.85 1.85 3.70

At- or Above-Mean 9.09 9.09 11.36 11.36 11.36 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 4.55 4.55 4.55 4.55 4.55 4.17 4.17 4.17 6.25

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 0.00 1.85 1.92 2.00 2.08 2.17 2.17 2.38 2.50 0.00 1.85 1.92 2.00 2.08 2.17 2.17 2.38 2.50

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

75.00 75.00 75.00 75.00 100.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Mixed 2.50 2.38 4.55 4.55 6.25 6.00 6.25 5.77 7.41 2.50 2.38 2.27 2.27 2.08 2.00 2.08 1.92 5.56

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Mid FRL (Middle SES) 0.00 3.13 2.94 2.94 2.94 0.00 2.94 2.94 5.88 0.00 3.13 2.94 2.94 2.94 0.00 2.94 2.94 5.88

High FRL (Low SES) 11.76 6.25 14.71 14.71 14.71 11.76 11.76 11.76 11.76 5.88 3.13 5.88 5.88 5.88 5.88 5.88 5.88 8.82 Census Divisions

New England (1) 0.00 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 0.00 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 Middle Atlantic (2) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

East North Central (3) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 West North Central (4) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.14

South Atlantic (5) 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 East South Central (6) 25.00 25.00 37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 25.00 West South Central (7) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Mountain (8) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pacific (9) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

135

Page 140: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 COMMUNICATION & STAKEHOLDER INPUT

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 8.05 8.05 9.20 9.20 10.34 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 3.45 3.45 4.60 4.60 4.60 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70

At- or Above-Mean 18.18 18.18 25.76 25.76 27.27 26.39 25.00 25.00 25.00 13.64 13.64 15.15 15.15 16.67 15.28 15.28 15.28 15.28

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 8.33 8.64 11.54 10.67 12.50 14.49 14.49 11.11 11.67 5.95 6.17 7.69 6.67 6.94 7.25 7.25 7.94 8.33

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

33.33 33.33 66.67 66.67 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 100.00 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%)

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.11 11.11 11.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.11 11.11 11.11

Mixed 16.67 15.87 18.18 19.70 20.83 20.00 18.06 20.51 19.75 8.33 7.94 9.09 10.61 9.72 9.33 8.33 7.69 7.41

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 4.17 4.17 4.17 8.33 9.80 12.50 11.76 11.76 9.80 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 3.92 4.17 3.92 3.92 1.96

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 9.80 10.42 11.76 5.88 9.80 6.25 7.84 9.80 11.76 1.96 2.08 3.92 1.96 5.88 4.17 3.92 5.88 7.84

High FRL (Low SES) 23.53 20.83 33.33 33.33 33.33 35.29 33.33 31.37 31.37 17.65 14.58 19.61 19.61 19.61 19.61 19.61 17.65 17.65

Census Divisions

New England (1) 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 11.11 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Middle Atlantic (2) 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22

East North Central (3) 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67

West North Central (4) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

South Atlantic (5) 22.22 22.22 29.63 29.63 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 18.52 18.52 22.22 22.22 25.93 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22

East South Central (6) 25.00 25.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67

West South Central (7) 25.00 25.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 25.00 25.00 25.00 16.67 16.67 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00

Mountain (8) 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Pacific (9) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 EVALUATION & IMPLEMENTATION

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 8.49 10.34 13.53 15.65 16.71 16.24 16.24 17.09 15.10 4.77 5.04 7.69 9.55 10.34 10.83 10.54 11.11 9.69

At- or Above-Mean 20.98 21.68 26.57 26.92 31.12 31.41 32.05 31.73 30.77 15.03 15.38 19.58 20.28 22.73 23.40 24.04 24.04 23.40

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 10.44 12.54 16.27 15.38 15.71 15.72 16.05 12.82 12.69 7.69 7.98 11.24 10.46 9.62 10.37 10.70 8.42 8.08

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

26.92 30.77 38.46 38.46 69.23 84.62 84.62 84.62 84.62 15.38 19.23 26.92 26.92 53.85 76.92 76.92 76.92 69.23

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%)

46.15 46.15 46.15 46.15 46.15 46.15 48.72 51.28 38.46 38.46 38.46 38.46 34.62 34.62 34.62 35.90 38.46 33.33

Mixed 15.77 15.75 19.58 22.38 26.28 26.15 25.32 27.51 25.64 9.23 9.16 12.24 15.38 18.59 18.77 17.95 19.53 18.23

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 9.13 7.21 10.10 12.98 13.57 13.46 15.38 15.84 11.76 5.77 2.40 4.81 6.25 7.24 7.69 8.14 9.50 6.33 Mid FRL (Middle SES) 3.62 8.17 10.86 10.41 18.55 16.83 14.93 17.19 19.00 1.81 5.29 6.79 8.14 12.22 11.06 10.41 10.41 11.76

High FRL (Low SES) 29.41 28.37 34.39 37.56 36.65 38.01 40.72 38.91 36.65 20.36 18.75 24.89 28.05 27.60 29.86 32.13 31.67 30.32

136

Page 141: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 Census Divisions

New England (1) 10.26 12.82 14.10 19.23 21.79 24.36 24.36 25.64 24.36 8.97 8.97 10.26 14.10 15.38 19.23 19.23 20.51 19.23 Middle Atlantic (2) 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26

East North Central (3) 4.62 6.15 7.69 7.69 16.92 15.38 16.92 15.38 13.85 3.08 3.08 6.15 6.15 10.77 9.23 10.77 9.23 7.69 West North Central (4) 0.00 0.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 3.30 3.30 3.30 3.30 0.00 0.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 3.30 3.30 3.30 3.30

South Atlantic (5) 24.79 24.79 29.91 30.77 35.04 35.90 37.61 38.46 38.46 15.38 15.38 19.66 19.66 23.93 27.35 28.21 29.06 28.21 East South Central (6) 26.92 28.85 34.62 34.62 34.62 34.62 34.62 34.62 34.62 17.31 19.23 26.92 26.92 26.92 26.92 26.92 28.85 28.85 West South Central (7) 28.85 30.77 42.31 50.00 51.92 51.92 50.00 50.00 46.15 25.00 26.92 32.69 40.38 40.38 40.38 38.46 38.46 36.54

Mountain (8) 7.69 8.65 12.50 12.50 13.46 13.46 13.46 13.46 11.54 4.81 4.81 5.77 7.69 7.69 7.69 7.69 7.69 5.77 Pacific (9) 9.23 13.85 18.46 18.46 20.00 20.00 20.00 21.54 15.38 4.62 4.62 10.77 10.77 12.31 12.31 12.31 12.31 10.77

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 6.90 7.63 7.63 7.19 7.19 4.06 5.66 5.66 5.23 4.58

At- or Above-Mean 12.03 15.20 16.42 17.40 17.16 10.43 12.75 12.50 14.71 14.22

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 8.09 9.21 9.72 7.84 7.94 6.62 7.93 7.67 6.16 6.18

Maj. African-American (≥50%) 23.53 70.59 70.59 70.59 70.59 23.53 70.59 70.59 70.59 70.59

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 14.71 14.71 13.73 21.57 21.57 5.88 5.88 7.84 15.69 15.69

Mixed 9.07 10.35 11.03 11.99 11.55 6.37 7.76 7.60 9.50 8.28

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL) Low FRL (High SES) 5.19 6.62 7.96 7.96 5.19 2.77 4.41 4.50 6.57 3.81

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 7.27 8.09 9.00 10.38 11.07 4.50 5.15 5.19 5.88 6.92 High FRL (Low SES) 14.88 17.65 18.34 17.65 19.38 13.15 16.96 16.96 16.61 16.61

Census Divisions New England (1) 7.84 12.75 12.75 12.75 11.76 4.90 10.78 10.78 10.78 9.80

Middle Atlantic (2) 19.61 19.61 19.61 19.61 19.61 9.80 9.80 9.80 9.80 9.80 East North Central (3) 3.53 4.71 11.76 11.76 14.12 2.35 3.53 2.35 7.06 7.06

West North Central (4) 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 South Atlantic (5) 14.38 21.57 21.57 20.26 20.92 11.76 18.95 18.95 17.65 16.99

East South Central (6) 14.71 14.71 14.71 16.18 17.65 13.24 13.24 13.24 16.18 17.65 West South Central (7) 16.18 17.65 16.18 20.59 17.65 14.71 16.18 16.18 20.59 17.65

Mountain (8) 5.15 5.15 5.15 5.15 3.68 3.68 3.68 3.68 3.68 2.21 Pacific (9) 8.24 8.24 8.24 8.24 8.24 4.71 4.71 4.71 4.71 4.71

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 STAFF WELLNESS & MODELING

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 3.45 3.45 4.60 5.75 5.75 6.17 6.17 6.17 6.17 1.15 1.15 1.15 3.45 3.45 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70

At- or Above-Mean 0.00 0.00 1.52 4.55 6.06 4.17 4.17 8.33 6.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.78 1.39

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 2.38 2.47 3.85 6.67 2.78 1.45 1.45 1.59 1.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 22.22 33.33 33.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.67 16.67 16.67 11.11 11.11 11.11

Mixed 1.67 1.59 3.03 1.52 5.56 5.33 5.56 7.69 6.17 1.67 1.59 1.52 0.00 2.78 2.67 2.78 5.13 3.70

137

Page 142: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 4.17 0.00 2.08 2.08 1.96 2.08 1.96 1.96 1.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 0.00 4.17 3.92 7.84 7.84 6.25 5.88 5.88 5.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.92 3.92 4.17 3.92 3.92 3.92

High FRL (Low SES) 1.96 2.08 3.92 5.88 7.84 5.88 7.84 13.73 11.76 1.96 2.08 1.96 1.96 1.96 0.00 1.96 5.88 3.92 Census Divisions

New England (1) 11.11 11.11 16.67 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11

Middle Atlantic (2) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

East North Central (3) 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.67 6.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

West North Central (4) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

South Atlantic (5) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

East South Central (6) 0.00 0.00 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 25.00 16.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.67 8.33

West South Central (7) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.33 8.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Mountain (8) 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Pacific (9) 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67

138

Page 143: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

Table D-3. Mean Levels of Comprehensiveness and Strength Scores by Year and State Characteristic, Middle School, School

Years 2006-07 through 2014-15

OVERALL SCORES BY WELLNESS POLICY CATEGORY

POLICY CATEGORY COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15

Overall Score 22.03 23.68 26.23 27.11 29.14 29.63 29.72 30.24 29.56 13.36 14.19 16.05 17.00 17.74 18.01 18.38 18.54 19.18 Nutrition Education 44.77 46.08 46.73 46.73 47.06 47.39 48.04 48.69 49.02 34.97 35.95 36.60 36.93 36.93 36.93 36.93 36.93 36.60

Physical Activity 12.75 12.42 14.38 15.69 16.34 16.99 17.97 19.28 19.61 7.52 7.19 8.50 9.15 9.48 8.82 9.48 10.13 10.46

Physical Education 36.60 38.89 41.18 41.83 44.61 44.93 45.26 45.59 45.92 25.00 26.31 27.45 28.76 29.90 30.07 30.72 30.88 31.21

School Meals 20.70 22.44 25.49 26.36 29.41 30.50 29.41 30.50 30.07 10.68 11.11 13.29 13.73 13.94 14.16 14.16 13.94 14.60

Competitive Foods & Beverages 21.96 25.69 28.24 28.63 31.57 32.16 32.35 32.55 29.41 6.67 8.82 11.76 12.55 13.53 13.92 14.90 14.90 19.22

Marketing & Promotion 3.92 4.90 5.88 5.88 5.88 4.90 4.90 4.90 5.88 1.96 2.94 2.94 2.94 2.94 2.94 2.94 2.94 4.90

Communications 11.76 11.76 15.69 15.69 16.99 17.65 16.99 16.99 16.99 7.84 7.84 9.15 9.15 9.80 9.15 9.15 9.15 9.15

Evaluation & Implementation 13.12 14.48 18.25 20.06 22.17 22.78 22.93 22.93 21.72 8.30 8.75 11.92 13.73 15.08 16.29 16.44 16.59 15.54

Reporting Requirements -- -- -- -- 8.77 10.96 11.30 11.88 11.76 -- -- -- -- 6.46 8.54 8.42 9.57 9.00

Staff Wellness 1.96 1.96 3.27 5.23 5.88 5.23 5.23 7.19 6.54 0.65 0.65 0.65 1.96 1.96 1.96 1.96 3.27 2.61

SCORES BY STATE CHARACTERISTIC

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 OVERALL SCORE

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 17.35 19.72 21.93 22.90 24.52 24.94 25.06 25.41 25.06 10.34 11.21 12.77 13.95 14.49 14.41 14.76 14.93 15.51

At- or Above-Mean 28.20 28.91 31.89 32.67 35.23 34.90 34.96 35.68 34.64 17.33 18.11 20.38 21.02 22.02 22.07 22.46 22.59 23.31

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 18.19 20.14 22.48 22.13 22.59 22.89 23.03 21.80 22.19 11.72 12.38 14.54 14.94 14.52 14.67 15.35 14.21 15.47

Maj. African-American (≥50%) 39.06 44.53 53.91 53.91 68.75 75.00 75.00 75.00 76.56 25.78 30.47 39.06 39.06 53.13 53.13 54.69 54.69 56.25

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 28.13 28.13 28.13 35.94 36.72 36.72 40.63 42.71 36.98 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.78 25.78 25.00 26.04 24.48

Mixed 25.39 26.04 28.05 29.55 33.40 33.44 32.88 33.89 32.47 13.83 14.43 15.34 16.62 18.82 19.06 18.95 19.77 19.97

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 17.68 17.38 19.24 20.61 23.99 22.95 23.90 26.75 24.26 11.72 11.82 12.40 12.60 13.42 13.38 14.34 16.36 15.26

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 14.89 18.26 21.32 20.68 24.63 24.32 23.16 23.44 24.72 8.09 10.06 11.58 12.68 14.61 14.06 13.97 13.33 15.17 High FRL (Low SES) 34.01 33.50 37.04 39.25 38.79 39.89 42.10 40.53 39.71 20.50 19.24 23.71 25.46 25.18 25.55 26.84 25.92 27.11

Census Divisions New England (1) 20.57 25.52 27.34 29.69 32.81 33.85 34.11 34.64 35.16 12.76 15.10 17.45 19.53 20.57 21.35 22.40 22.66 22.66

Middle Atlantic (2) 30.21 30.73 30.21 29.69 29.69 30.21 30.21 30.21 28.13 16.15 18.75 17.19 17.19 17.19 17.19 17.19 17.19 16.67

East North Central (3) 15.63 16.25 16.88 17.19 19.38 19.69 19.69 19.69 19.69 9.06 10.00 10.94 11.56 12.19 12.50 12.81 12.50 12.19

West North Central (4) 9.82 10.04 12.05 12.72 14.73 15.18 14.96 15.40 14.73 6.92 6.92 7.81 8.26 8.71 8.93 9.60 9.82 10.71

South Atlantic (5) 30.03 30.56 33.68 34.38 38.19 39.24 39.76 40.10 40.28 18.92 19.10 21.18 21.53 23.44 23.96 24.48 24.65 26.91

East South Central (6) 33.59 36.72 43.36 43.36 43.36 43.75 44.53 46.48 46.48 20.70 24.61 30.86 30.86 30.86 31.25 31.64 32.03 32.03

West South Central (7) 37.50 39.45 42.19 45.31 46.88 46.88 45.31 46.48 41.02 22.27 21.48 23.44 25.78 25.39 25.39 25.39 26.17 26.56

Mountain (8) 17.38 17.38 20.12 21.09 22.07 22.27 22.27 22.66 22.27 11.33 11.33 12.30 13.09 13.28 13.28 13.28 13.28 14.45

Pacific (9) 13.75 18.44 21.56 21.56 23.75 23.75 24.38 24.69 24.06 5.94 6.25 9.38 11.56 13.13 13.13 13.13 13.13 12.81

139

Page 144: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 NUTRITION EDUCATION

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 40.23 42.53 43.10 43.10 42.53 44.44 45.06 45.68 46.30 31.03 32.76 32.76 33.33 33.33 32.10 32.10 32.10 32.10

At- or Above-Mean 50.76 50.76 51.52 51.52 53.03 50.69 51.39 52.08 52.08 40.15 40.15 41.67 41.67 41.67 42.36 42.36 42.36 41.67

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 39.88 43.21 43.59 42.67 40.28 39.86 39.86 39.68 41.67 30.95 33.33 34.62 34.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 31.75 33.33

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

75.00 75.00 75.00 75.00 83.33 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 50.00 50.00 50.00 58.33 58.33 58.33 55.56 55.56 61.11 50.00 50.00 50.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 38.89 38.89 38.89

Mixed 48.33 46.83 47.73 47.73 51.39 51.33 52.78 53.21 51.23 36.67 35.71 35.61 37.88 38.89 38.67 38.19 39.10 37.04

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 40.63 41.67 41.67 41.67 42.16 41.67 42.16 46.08 42.16 35.42 35.42 35.42 33.33 33.33 33.33 34.31 39.22 33.33

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 37.25 39.58 44.12 40.20 42.16 39.58 41.18 39.22 42.16 23.53 27.08 29.41 29.41 31.37 29.17 28.43 25.49 30.39

High FRL (Low SES) 56.86 56.25 54.90 56.86 56.86 56.86 60.78 60.78 62.75 46.08 43.75 45.10 47.06 46.08 48.04 48.04 46.08 46.08

Census Divisions

New England (1) 52.78 61.11 61.11 61.11 61.11 61.11 61.11 61.11 61.11 41.67 47.22 47.22 47.22 47.22 47.22 47.22 47.22 47.22

Middle Atlantic (2) 55.56 61.11 61.11 61.11 61.11 61.11 61.11 61.11 55.56 38.89 44.44 44.44 44.44 44.44 44.44 44.44 44.44 38.89

East North Central (3) 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00

West North Central (4) 19.05 19.05 19.05 19.05 19.05 19.05 19.05 21.43 21.43 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67

South Atlantic (5) 57.41 57.41 57.41 57.41 59.26 61.11 61.11 61.11 61.11 51.85 51.85 53.70 53.70 53.70 53.70 53.70 53.70 53.70

East South Central (6) 54.17 54.17 58.33 58.33 58.33 58.33 58.33 62.50 62.50 50.00 50.00 54.17 54.17 54.17 54.17 54.17 54.17 54.17

West South Central (7) 62.50 62.50 62.50 62.50 62.50 62.50 66.67 66.67 66.67 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83

Mountain (8) 43.75 43.75 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 47.92 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42

Pacific (9) 36.67 36.67 36.67 36.67 36.67 36.67 40.00 40.00 43.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 PHYSICAL ACTIVITY

Overweight/Obesity Rates Below-Mean 11.49 12.07 13.22 14.94 15.52 14.81 14.81 15.43 15.43 5.75 6.32 6.90 7.47 7.47 7.41 7.41 7.41 7.41

At- or Above-Mean 14.39 12.88 15.91 16.67 17.42 19.44 21.53 23.61 24.31 9.85 8.33 10.61 11.36 12.12 10.42 11.81 13.19 13.89

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 8.33 6.79 7.69 10.00 9.72 10.14 11.59 9.52 10.83 5.95 4.94 5.77 6.67 6.25 6.52 7.97 6.35 7.50

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

33.33 33.33 58.33 58.33 66.67 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 25.00 25.00 41.67 41.67 50.00 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 41.67 41.67 33.33 44.44 44.44 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 25.00 25.00 16.67 22.22 22.22

Mixed 15.83 16.67 17.42 16.67 18.75 18.67 19.44 21.79 20.99 7.50 7.94 8.33 8.33 9.72 9.33 9.72 11.54 11.11

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 11.46 11.46 13.54 17.71 15.69 17.71 17.65 20.59 18.63 5.21 5.21 6.25 8.33 7.84 8.33 7.84 9.80 7.84

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 4.90 6.25 5.88 4.90 7.84 7.29 5.88 5.88 8.82 2.94 4.17 3.92 2.94 2.94 3.13 2.94 2.94 5.88

High FRL (Low SES) 22.55 14.58 20.59 25.49 25.49 25.49 30.39 31.37 31.37 14.71 7.29 12.75 16.67 17.65 14.71 17.65 17.65 17.65

140

Page 145: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 Census Divisions

New England (1) 19.44 22.22 22.22 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 27.78 27.78 11.11 13.89 13.89 13.89 13.89 13.89 13.89 13.89 13.89

Middle Atlantic (2) 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56

East North Central (3) 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

West North Central (4) 2.38 2.38 2.38 7.14 11.90 11.90 11.90 11.90 11.90 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.38 4.76 4.76 4.76 4.76 4.76

South Atlantic (5) 18.52 18.52 25.93 25.93 25.93 27.78 29.63 31.48 33.33 11.11 11.11 14.81 14.81 14.81 11.11 12.96 14.81 16.67

East South Central (6) 12.50 12.50 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 12.50 12.50 20.83 20.83 20.83 20.83 25.00 25.00 25.00

West South Central (7) 33.33 25.00 20.83 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 33.33 33.33 16.67 8.33 8.33 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 16.67 16.67

Mountain (8) 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 10.42 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 6.25 6.25 6.25 6.25 6.25

Pacific (9) 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 PHYSICAL EDUCATION

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 30.75 32.47 35.92 36.78 39.08 40.43 40.74 41.05 41.05 22.13 23.28 25.29 27.01 27.59 28.09 29.01 29.32 29.32 At- or Above-Mean 44.32 47.35 48.11 48.48 51.89 50.00 50.35 50.69 51.39 28.79 30.30 30.30 31.06 32.95 32.29 32.64 32.64 33.33

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 33.33 35.80 38.46 39.00 39.93 40.22 40.22 40.87 41.67 23.51 24.38 26.92 28.67 28.47 28.62 29.71 30.16 31.25 Maj. African-American

(≥50%) 37.50 62.50 62.50 62.50 50.00 58.33 58.33 58.33 58.33 20.83 41.67 37.50 37.50 33.33 25.00 25.00 25.00 33.33 Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 33.33 33.33 33.33 41.67 41.67 41.67 50.00 50.00 50.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 29.17 29.17 29.17 30.56 30.56 30.56

Mixed 41.25 40.87 42.80 43.18 49.31 49.00 48.96 48.40 48.15 27.08 26.98 26.89 28.03 31.25 31.67 31.94 31.73 31.17 Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 35.94 36.46 37.50 35.42 42.65 40.10 41.18 43.14 40.69 27.60 28.65 29.69 28.13 30.88 29.69 31.86 33.82 31.37 Mid FRL (Middle SES) 25.00 27.60 35.78 36.76 39.71 40.63 37.75 39.71 42.16 16.67 18.23 22.06 25.49 26.96 27.60 25.49 25.98 26.96

High FRL (Low SES) 49.02 50.00 48.04 51.47 51.47 53.43 56.86 53.92 54.90 30.88 32.81 30.88 31.86 31.86 32.84 34.80 32.84 35.29 Census Divisions

New England (1) 27.78 33.33 37.50 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 22.22 26.39 27.78 31.94 31.94 31.94 31.94 31.94 31.94 Middle Atlantic (2) 58.33 58.33 55.56 52.78 52.78 52.78 52.78 52.78 52.78 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89

East North Central (3) 31.67 33.33 35.00 35.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 35.00 36.67 21.67 21.67 23.33 26.67 26.67 26.67 26.67 26.67 26.67 West North Central (4) 28.57 28.57 29.76 30.95 34.52 34.52 34.52 35.71 35.71 19.05 19.05 20.24 21.43 21.43 21.43 25.00 26.19 26.19

South Atlantic (5) 48.15 49.07 48.15 48.15 53.70 55.56 55.56 55.56 56.48 31.48 31.48 31.48 31.48 34.26 35.19 35.19 35.19 37.04 East South Central (6) 41.67 54.17 56.25 56.25 56.25 56.25 56.25 60.42 60.42 31.25 41.67 39.58 39.58 39.58 39.58 39.58 39.58 39.58 West South Central (7) 52.08 52.08 54.17 56.25 60.42 60.42 62.50 58.33 58.33 33.33 31.25 31.25 31.25 31.25 31.25 33.33 33.33 33.33

Mountain (8) 33.33 33.33 38.54 38.54 40.63 40.63 40.63 40.63 40.63 25.00 25.00 29.17 29.17 29.17 29.17 29.17 29.17 29.17 Pacific (9) 18.33 21.67 28.33 28.33 36.67 36.67 38.33 38.33 38.33 8.33 10.00 11.67 15.00 21.67 21.67 21.67 21.67 21.67

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 SCHOOL MEALS

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 15.33 18.01 21.07 21.46 23.37 25.93 25.51 25.93 26.34 8.43 9.20 10.73 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.52 At- or Above-Mean 27.78 28.28 31.31 32.83 37.37 35.65 33.80 35.65 34.26 13.64 13.64 16.67 17.17 17.68 17.59 17.59 17.13 18.06

141

Page 146: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 18.65 19.75 21.37 20.89 21.76 22.22 21.74 22.22 21.67 9.92 9.88 11.54 12.00 12.04 12.08 12.08 12.70 12.78 Maj. African-American

(≥50%) 27.78 27.78 55.56 55.56 77.78 88.89 88.89 88.89 100.00 27.78 27.78 50.00 50.00 66.67 77.78 77.78 77.78 88.89 Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.67 16.67 16.67 29.63 29.63 25.93 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.11 11.11 11.11 7.41 7.41 11.11

Mixed 23.89 26.46 28.79 30.81 36.11 36.89 34.26 35.04 34.16 10.56 11.64 12.63 12.63 13.89 13.78 14.35 13.25 13.58 Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 15.97 17.36 18.75 21.53 24.84 25.00 25.49 29.41 26.80 9.72 11.11 11.81 12.50 11.11 11.11 11.76 14.38 13.73 Mid FRL (Middle SES) 18.95 20.14 22.22 20.26 25.49 25.00 24.18 23.53 24.84 10.46 10.42 11.11 11.11 12.42 12.50 11.76 11.11 11.76

High FRL (Low SES) 28.10 29.17 35.95 37.25 37.91 41.18 38.56 38.56 38.56 12.42 9.72 16.99 17.65 18.30 18.30 18.95 16.34 18.30 Census Divisions

New England (1) 24.07 29.63 31.48 33.33 37.04 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89 11.11 14.81 16.67 18.52 18.52 18.52 18.52 18.52 18.52 Middle Atlantic (2) 18.52 18.52 18.52 18.52 18.52 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11

East North Central (3) 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 West North Central (4) 17.46 19.05 20.63 20.63 22.22 23.81 22.22 22.22 22.22 12.70 12.70 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29

South Atlantic (5) 27.16 28.40 30.86 32.10 37.04 39.51 39.51 40.74 41.98 17.28 17.28 18.52 18.52 19.75 20.99 20.99 20.99 22.22 East South Central (6) 36.11 38.89 52.78 52.78 52.78 52.78 52.78 55.56 55.56 16.67 16.67 27.78 27.78 27.78 27.78 27.78 25.00 25.00 West South Central (7) 33.33 38.89 38.89 41.67 47.22 47.22 36.11 38.89 30.56 5.56 5.56 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 11.11

Mountain (8) 8.33 8.33 11.11 12.50 13.89 13.89 13.89 15.28 15.28 4.17 4.17 5.56 6.94 6.94 6.94 6.94 6.94 8.33 Pacific (9) 15.56 15.56 22.22 22.22 24.44 24.44 24.44 26.67 26.67 6.67 6.67 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 COMPETITIVE FOODS & BEVERAGES Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 14.48 21.03 22.41 23.10 27.24 25.56 25.93 25.93 24.81 2.41 3.79 5.86 7.24 8.97 8.15 9.63 9.63 14.44 At- or Above-Mean 31.82 31.82 35.91 35.91 37.27 39.58 39.58 40.00 34.58 12.27 15.45 19.55 19.55 19.55 20.42 20.83 20.83 24.58

Race/Ethnicity Maj. White (≥66%) 13.57 18.15 22.31 19.60 22.92 23.04 23.48 20.95 21.00 3.93 5.56 9.23 9.60 9.58 8.70 10.43 6.67 12.00

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 70.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 25.00 25.00 45.00 45.00 50.00 50.00 60.00 60.00 60.00

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 30.00 30.00 30.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 46.67 46.67 26.67 30.00 30.00 30.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 30.00 30.00 23.33

Mixed 30.00 32.38 32.73 35.45 37.92 38.80 37.92 39.23 34.81 7.50 10.48 10.91 10.91 14.17 15.60 15.42 18.08 22.59 Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 9.38 9.38 13.13 14.38 23.53 18.75 20.59 28.24 27.06 0.00 2.50 0.63 1.25 3.53 3.75 5.88 8.24 14.12

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 15.88 22.50 23.53 24.12 27.65 30.63 30.00 27.65 24.71 4.12 6.25 7.06 8.24 10.00 9.38 12.94 10.00 12.35

High FRL (Low SES) 41.18 42.50 46.47 45.88 43.53 43.53 46.47 41.76 36.47 15.88 15.63 27.06 28.24 27.06 25.88 25.88 26.47 31.18

Census Divisions New England (1) 15.00 23.33 25.00 23.33 35.00 35.00 36.67 36.67 41.67 1.67 1.67 11.67 10.00 15.00 15.00 21.67 21.67 23.33

Middle Atlantic (2) 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 20.00 0.00 13.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33

East North Central (3) 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 22.00 28.00 28.00 28.00 28.00 4.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 14.00 14.00 14.00 14.00

West North Central (4) 0.00 0.00 7.14 7.14 11.43 11.43 11.43 11.43 5.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.43 1.43 1.43 1.43 5.71

South Atlantic (5) 30.00 30.00 35.56 35.56 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 37.78 8.89 8.89 11.11 11.11 12.22 12.22 13.33 13.33 24.44

East South Central (6) 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 45.00 12.50 22.50 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00

West South Central (7) 47.50 57.50 57.50 57.50 57.50 57.50 57.50 57.50 35.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 27.50

Mountain (8) 18.75 18.75 21.25 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 26.25 25.00 8.75 8.75 7.50 8.75 8.75 8.75 8.75 8.75 17.50

Pacific (9) 10.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 2.00 2.00 10.00 18.00 18.00 18.00 18.00 18.00 18.00

142

Page 147: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 MARKETING & PROMOTION

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 0.00 1.72 1.72 1.72 1.72 1.85 1.85 1.85 3.70 0.00 1.72 1.72 1.72 1.72 1.85 1.85 1.85 3.70

At- or Above-Mean 9.09 9.09 11.36 11.36 11.36 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 4.55 4.55 4.55 4.55 4.55 4.17 4.17 4.17 6.25

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 0.00 1.85 1.92 2.00 2.08 2.17 2.17 2.38 2.50 0.00 1.85 1.92 2.00 2.08 2.17 2.17 2.38 2.50

Maj. African-American (≥50%) 75.00 75.00 75.00 75.00 100.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Mixed 2.50 2.38 4.55 4.55 6.25 6.00 6.25 5.77 7.41 2.50 2.38 2.27 2.27 2.08 2.00 2.08 1.92 5.56

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Mid FRL (Middle SES) 0.00 3.13 2.94 2.94 2.94 0.00 2.94 2.94 5.88 0.00 3.13 2.94 2.94 2.94 0.00 2.94 2.94 5.88

High FRL (Low SES) 11.76 6.25 14.71 14.71 14.71 11.76 11.76 11.76 11.76 5.88 3.13 5.88 5.88 5.88 5.88 5.88 5.88 8.82 Census Divisions

New England (1) 0.00 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 0.00 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 Middle Atlantic (2) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

East North Central (3) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 West North Central (4) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.14

South Atlantic (5) 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 East South Central (6) 25.00 25.00 37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 25.00 West South Central (7) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Mountain (8) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pacific (9) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

143

Page 148: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 COMMUNICATION & STAKEHOLDER INPUT

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 8.05 8.05 9.20 9.20 10.34 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 3.45 3.45 4.60 4.60 4.60 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70

At- or Above-Mean 16.67 16.67 24.24 24.24 25.76 25.00 23.61 23.61 23.61 13.64 13.64 15.15 15.15 16.67 15.28 15.28 15.28 15.28

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 8.33 8.64 11.54 10.67 12.50 14.49 14.49 11.11 11.67 5.95 6.17 7.69 6.67 6.94 7.25 7.25 7.94 8.33

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

33.33 33.33 66.67 66.67 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 100.00 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%)

0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.11 11.11 11.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.11 11.11 11.11

Mixed 15.00 14.29 16.67 18.18 19.44 18.67 16.67 19.23 18.52 8.33 7.94 9.09 10.61 9.72 9.33 8.33 7.69 7.41

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 4.17 4.17 4.17 8.33 9.80 12.50 11.76 11.76 9.80 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 3.92 4.17 3.92 3.92 1.96

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 9.80 10.42 11.76 5.88 9.80 6.25 7.84 9.80 11.76 1.96 2.08 3.92 1.96 5.88 4.17 3.92 5.88 7.84

High FRL (Low SES) 21.57 18.75 31.37 31.37 31.37 33.33 31.37 29.41 29.41 17.65 14.58 19.61 19.61 19.61 19.61 19.61 17.65 17.65

Census Divisions

New England (1) 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 11.11 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Middle Atlantic (2) 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22

East North Central (3) 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67

West North Central (4) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

South Atlantic (5) 18.52 18.52 25.93 25.93 29.63 29.63 29.63 29.63 29.63 18.52 18.52 22.22 22.22 25.93 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22

East South Central (6) 25.00 25.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67

West South Central (7) 25.00 25.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 25.00 25.00 25.00 16.67 16.67 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00

Mountain (8) 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Pacific (9) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 EVALUATION & IMPLEMENTATION

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 8.75 10.34 13.53 15.65 16.71 16.24 16.24 16.81 15.10 4.77 5.04 7.69 9.55 10.34 10.83 10.54 11.11 9.69

At- or Above-Mean 18.88 19.93 24.48 25.87 29.37 30.13 30.45 29.81 29.17 12.94 13.64 17.48 19.23 21.33 22.44 23.08 22.76 22.12

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 10.71 12.54 15.68 14.77 14.74 15.38 15.38 12.09 11.92 7.69 7.98 10.95 10.15 9.29 10.37 10.70 8.42 8.08

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

26.92 30.77 38.46 38.46 69.23 84.62 84.62 84.62 84.62 15.38 19.23 26.92 26.92 53.85 76.92 76.92 76.92 69.23

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%)

46.15 46.15 46.15 46.15 46.15 46.15 48.72 51.28 38.46 38.46 38.46 38.46 34.62 34.62 34.62 35.90 38.46 33.33

Mixed 13.46 13.92 18.18 22.03 25.64 25.23 24.36 26.04 24.79 6.92 7.33 10.49 14.69 17.63 17.85 16.99 18.34 17.09

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 9.62 7.21 10.10 12.98 14.03 13.46 15.38 15.84 11.76 5.77 2.40 4.81 6.25 7.24 7.69 8.14 9.50 6.33 Mid FRL (Middle SES) 3.17 8.17 11.31 10.86 18.10 16.83 14.03 16.29 18.10 1.36 5.29 6.79 8.14 12.22 11.06 10.41 10.41 11.76

High FRL (Low SES) 27.15 27.40 32.13 35.75 34.39 36.20 39.37 36.65 35.29 18.10 17.79 23.08 26.70 25.79 28.51 30.77 29.86 28.51

144

Page 149: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 Census Divisions

New England (1) 10.26 12.82 14.10 19.23 21.79 24.36 24.36 25.64 24.36 8.97 8.97 10.26 14.10 15.38 19.23 19.23 20.51 19.23 Middle Atlantic (2) 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26

East North Central (3) 4.62 6.15 7.69 7.69 15.38 13.85 13.85 12.31 10.77 3.08 3.08 6.15 6.15 10.77 9.23 10.77 9.23 7.69 West North Central (4) 0.00 0.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 3.30 3.30 3.30 3.30 0.00 0.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 3.30 3.30 3.30 3.30

South Atlantic (5) 20.51 21.37 26.50 29.06 33.33 34.19 35.90 35.90 35.90 11.11 11.97 16.24 17.95 22.22 25.64 26.50 26.50 25.64 East South Central (6) 26.92 28.85 32.69 32.69 32.69 34.62 34.62 32.69 34.62 17.31 19.23 25.00 25.00 25.00 26.92 26.92 26.92 26.92 West South Central (7) 26.92 28.85 40.38 50.00 50.00 50.00 48.08 50.00 46.15 23.08 25.00 30.77 40.38 38.46 38.46 36.54 38.46 36.54

Mountain (8) 8.65 8.65 12.50 12.50 13.46 13.46 13.46 13.46 11.54 4.81 4.81 5.77 7.69 7.69 7.69 7.69 7.69 5.77 Pacific (9) 9.23 13.85 18.46 18.46 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 15.38 4.62 4.62 10.77 10.77 12.31 12.31 12.31 12.31 10.77

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 6.49 7.63 7.63 7.19 7.19 4.06 5.66 5.66 5.23 4.58

At- or Above-Mean 11.76 14.71 15.44 17.16 16.91 9.63 11.76 11.52 14.46 13.97

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 8.09 8.95 9.46 7.56 7.65 6.37 7.42 7.42 5.88 5.88

Maj. African-American (≥50%) 23.53 70.59 70.59 70.59 70.59 23.53 70.59 70.59 70.59 70.59

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 8.82 14.71 13.73 21.57 21.57 5.88 5.88 7.84 15.69 15.69

Mixed 8.82 10.12 10.29 11.99 11.55 5.88 7.29 6.86 9.50 8.28

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL) Low FRL (High SES) 5.19 6.62 7.96 7.96 5.19 2.77 4.41 4.50 6.57 3.81

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 7.27 7.72 8.65 10.03 10.73 4.50 4.78 5.19 5.88 6.92 High FRL (Low SES) 13.84 17.30 17.30 17.65 19.38 12.11 15.92 15.57 16.26 16.26

Census Divisions New England (1) 7.84 12.75 12.75 12.75 11.76 4.90 10.78 10.78 10.78 9.80

Middle Atlantic (2) 19.61 19.61 19.61 19.61 19.61 9.80 9.80 9.80 9.80 9.80 East North Central (3) 3.53 3.53 10.59 10.59 12.94 2.35 2.35 2.35 7.06 7.06

West North Central (4) 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 South Atlantic (5) 14.38 21.57 21.57 20.26 20.92 11.76 18.95 18.95 17.65 16.99

East South Central (6) 14.71 14.71 14.71 16.18 17.65 11.76 11.76 11.76 14.71 16.18 West South Central (7) 14.71 16.18 11.76 20.59 17.65 11.76 13.24 11.76 20.59 17.65

Mountain (8) 5.15 5.15 5.15 5.15 3.68 3.68 3.68 3.68 3.68 2.21 Pacific (9) 5.88 8.24 8.24 8.24 8.24 4.71 4.71 4.71 4.71 4.71

145

Page 150: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 STAFF WELLNESS & MODELING

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 3.45 3.45 4.60 5.75 5.75 6.17 6.17 6.17 6.17 1.15 1.15 1.15 3.45 3.45 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70

At- or Above-Mean 0.00 0.00 1.52 4.55 6.06 4.17 4.17 8.33 6.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.78 1.39

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 2.38 2.47 3.85 6.67 2.78 1.45 1.45 1.59 1.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Maj. African-American (≥50%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 22.22 33.33 33.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.67 16.67 16.67 11.11 11.11 11.11

Mixed 1.67 1.59 3.03 1.52 5.56 5.33 5.56 7.69 6.17 1.67 1.59 1.52 0.00 2.78 2.67 2.78 5.13 3.70

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 4.17 0.00 2.08 2.08 1.96 2.08 1.96 1.96 1.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 0.00 4.17 3.92 7.84 7.84 6.25 5.88 5.88 5.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.92 3.92 4.17 3.92 3.92 3.92

High FRL (Low SES) 1.96 2.08 3.92 5.88 7.84 5.88 7.84 13.73 11.76 1.96 2.08 1.96 1.96 1.96 0.00 1.96 5.88 3.92

Census Divisions

New England (1) 11.11 11.11 16.67 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11

Middle Atlantic (2) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

East North Central (3) 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.67 6.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

West North Central (4) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

South Atlantic (5) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

East South Central (6) 0.00 0.00 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 25.00 16.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.67 8.33

West South Central (7) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.33 8.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Mountain (8) 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Pacific (9) 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67

146

Page 151: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

Table D-4. Mean Levels of Comprehensiveness and Strength Scores by Year and State Characteristic, High School, School

Years 2006-07 through 2014-15

OVERALL SCORES BY WELLNESS POLICY CATEGORY

POLICY CATEGORY

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15

Overall Score 22.11 23.92 26.37 27.15 29.17 29.62 29.74 30.29 29.83 13.18 13.91 15.66 16.62 17.41 17.71 18.04 18.16 18.82

Nutrition Education 50.65 51.96 53.59 53.59 53.92 53.92 54.58 54.58 55.23 31.70 32.68 33.33 33.66 33.66 33.66 33.66 33.66 33.66

Physical Activity 11.76 11.44 11.76 12.75 13.07 13.73 14.71 16.67 16.99 6.54 6.21 6.54 6.86 7.19 6.54 7.19 8.17 8.17

Physical Education 36.20 39.97 42.08 42.53 44.95 45.25 45.55 45.85 46.15 26.85 28.66 30.02 31.22 32.28 32.58 33.18 32.88 32.73

School Meals 20.48 22.22 24.62 25.49 28.54 29.63 28.54 29.63 29.41 10.24 10.68 12.42 12.85 13.29 13.51 13.51 13.29 14.16

Competitive Foods & Beverages 19.41 22.16 25.10 25.49 28.43 29.02 29.22 29.41 27.45 5.10 5.88 8.63 10.00 10.98 11.37 12.16 12.16 17.06

Marketing & Promotion 3.92 4.90 7.84 7.84 7.84 6.86 6.86 6.86 7.84 1.96 2.94 3.92 3.92 3.92 3.92 3.92 3.92 5.88

Communications 11.76 11.76 15.03 15.03 16.34 16.99 16.34 16.34 16.34 7.84 7.84 9.15 9.15 9.80 9.15 9.15 9.15 9.15

Evaluation & Implementation 12.67 14.03 17.80 19.46 22.02 22.62 22.93 23.08 21.72 8.14 8.60 11.76 13.42 14.93 16.14 16.29 16.59 15.54

Reporting Requirements -- -- -- -- 8.77 10.96 11.30 11.65 11.76 -- -- -- -- 6.46 8.65 8.42 9.34 9.00

Staff Wellness 1.96 1.96 3.27 5.23 5.88 5.23 5.23 7.19 6.54 0.65 0.65 0.65 1.96 1.96 1.96 1.96 3.27 2.61

SCORES BY STATE CHARACTERISTIC

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 OVERALL SCORE

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 18.41 20.64 22.86 23.82 25.46 26.27 26.38 26.55 26.21 10.45 11.35 12.73 14.06 14.64 14.99 15.33 15.50 16.07

At- or Above-Mean 26.99 28.25 30.98 31.54 34.06 33.40 33.53 34.49 33.91 16.78 17.27 19.51 20.00 21.05 20.77 21.09 21.15 21.92 Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 18.68 20.68 23.25 22.89 23.53 23.75 23.95 23.15 23.54 11.98 12.48 14.50 14.83 14.49 14.58 15.25 14.43 15.46 Maj. African-American

(≥50%) 36.92 45.38 51.54 51.54 69.23 73.85 73.85 73.85 75.38 23.08 29.23 36.92 36.92 50.77 52.31 53.85 53.85 55.38 Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 29.23 29.23 29.23 39.23 40.00 40.00 42.56 44.62 38.97 24.62 24.62 26.15 26.15 26.92 26.92 26.15 27.18 25.64

Mixed 25.08 25.79 27.62 28.67 32.24 32.43 31.86 32.72 31.79 13.31 13.77 14.62 15.94 18.14 18.46 18.21 18.76 19.20 Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 18.85 19.04 20.87 22.12 25.25 24.33 25.43 27.96 24.71 12.21 12.60 13.17 13.27 14.12 14.04 15.02 16.92 15.29 Mid FRL (Middle SES) 14.93 17.79 21.90 20.63 24.62 24.23 23.26 23.44 26.15 8.05 9.42 11.40 12.22 14.03 13.65 13.39 12.67 15.20

High FRL (Low SES) 32.94 33.56 36.11 38.01 37.65 38.28 40.54 39.46 38.64 19.46 18.75 22.44 24.16 24.07 24.52 25.70 24.89 25.97 Census Divisions

New England (1) 21.28 25.13 27.95 30.26 33.33 34.36 34.62 35.13 35.64 12.82 15.38 17.44 19.49 20.51 21.28 22.31 22.56 22.56 Middle Atlantic (2) 31.79 32.31 31.79 31.28 31.28 31.79 31.79 31.79 30.26 16.92 19.49 17.95 17.95 17.95 17.95 17.95 17.95 17.95

East North Central (3) 14.15 15.69 16.31 16.31 19.69 20.00 20.31 20.00 21.23 8.92 8.92 9.85 10.46 11.38 11.69 12.00 11.08 12.00 West North Central (4) 11.21 11.87 13.85 14.51 16.04 16.48 16.26 16.48 15.82 7.25 7.25 8.13 8.57 9.01 9.23 9.89 10.11 10.99

South Atlantic (5) 30.09 30.60 33.85 34.36 38.12 38.97 39.49 39.66 39.83 18.29 18.46 20.34 20.68 22.74 23.42 23.93 24.10 25.81 East South Central (6) 29.23 33.85 38.85 38.85 38.85 39.23 40.00 43.08 42.69 18.08 21.15 27.31 27.31 27.31 27.69 28.08 28.85 28.85 West South Central (7) 37.31 39.62 41.15 43.85 45.38 45.38 43.85 45.77 41.15 22.31 21.92 23.85 25.38 25.38 25.38 25.00 25.77 26.15

Mountain (8) 17.31 17.31 19.81 20.77 21.73 21.92 21.92 22.12 21.92 10.77 10.77 12.12 12.88 13.08 13.08 13.08 13.08 14.04 Pacific (9) 16.00 20.62 24.00 24.00 25.85 25.85 26.46 26.77 26.15 7.38 7.69 9.85 12.92 14.15 14.15 14.15 14.15 13.85

147

Page 152: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 NUTRITION EDUCATION

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 46.55 48.85 50.00 50.00 50.00 51.85 52.47 51.85 52.47 28.16 29.89 29.89 30.46 30.46 30.86 30.86 30.86 30.86 At- or Above-Mean 56.06 56.06 58.33 58.33 59.09 56.25 56.94 57.64 58.33 36.36 36.36 37.88 37.88 37.88 36.81 36.81 36.81 36.81

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 45.24 48.77 50.00 49.33 47.92 47.10 47.10 46.03 48.33 27.38 29.63 30.77 30.00 29.17 28.99 28.99 27.78 29.17 Maj. African-American

(≥50%) 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 100.00 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 50.00 50.00 50.00 58.33 58.33 58.33 55.56 55.56 61.11 50.00 50.00 50.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 38.89 38.89 38.89

Mixed 55.00 53.17 55.30 55.30 57.64 58.00 59.72 59.62 58.02 33.33 32.54 32.58 34.85 36.11 36.00 35.42 35.90 34.57 Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 47.92 48.96 48.96 48.96 49.02 48.96 50.00 51.96 46.08 34.38 34.38 34.38 32.29 32.35 32.29 33.33 38.24 32.35 Mid FRL (Middle SES) 40.20 42.71 47.06 44.12 45.10 41.67 45.10 43.14 50.00 19.61 22.92 24.51 25.49 26.47 25.00 23.53 20.59 26.47

High FRL (Low SES) 63.73 62.50 64.71 67.65 67.65 66.67 68.63 68.63 69.61 41.18 39.58 42.16 43.14 42.16 44.12 44.12 42.16 42.16 Census Divisions

New England (1) 58.33 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 38.89 44.44 44.44 44.44 44.44 44.44 44.44 44.44 44.44 Middle Atlantic (2) 61.11 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 33.33 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89 38.89

East North Central (3) 26.67 26.67 26.67 26.67 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 West North Central (4) 26.19 26.19 26.19 26.19 26.19 26.19 26.19 26.19 26.19 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29

South Atlantic (5) 68.52 68.52 70.37 70.37 72.22 72.22 72.22 70.37 70.37 48.15 48.15 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 East South Central (6) 62.50 62.50 70.83 70.83 70.83 70.83 70.83 75.00 75.00 41.67 41.67 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 West South Central (7) 70.83 70.83 70.83 70.83 66.67 66.67 70.83 70.83 70.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83 45.83

Mountain (8) 47.92 47.92 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 52.08 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42 35.42 Pacific (9) 40.00 40.00 43.33 43.33 43.33 43.33 46.67 46.67 50.00 13.33 13.33 13.33 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 PHYSICAL ACTIVITY

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 10.92 11.49 12.64 14.37 14.37 13.58 13.58 14.20 14.20 5.17 5.75 6.32 6.90 6.90 6.79 6.79 6.79 6.79

At- or Above-Mean 12.88 11.36 10.61 10.61 11.36 13.89 15.97 19.44 20.14 8.33 6.82 6.82 6.82 7.58 6.25 7.64 9.72 9.72

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 7.74 6.17 7.05 9.33 8.33 8.70 10.14 7.94 9.17 5.36 4.32 5.13 6.00 5.56 5.80 7.25 5.56 5.83

Maj. African-American (≥50%)

33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 66.67 83.33 83.33 83.33 83.33 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 50.00 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 41.67 41.67 33.33 44.44 44.44 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 25.00 25.00 16.67 22.22 22.22

Mixed 14.17 15.08 14.39 12.88 13.19 13.33 13.89 17.95 17.28 5.83 6.35 6.06 5.30 5.56 5.33 5.56 8.33 8.02

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 11.46 11.46 13.54 17.71 15.69 17.71 17.65 20.59 18.63 5.21 5.21 6.25 8.33 7.84 8.33 7.84 9.80 7.84

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 3.92 5.21 4.90 3.92 5.88 5.21 3.92 3.92 6.86 1.96 3.13 2.94 1.96 1.96 2.08 1.96 1.96 3.92

High FRL (Low SES) 20.59 14.58 17.65 17.65 17.65 17.65 22.55 25.49 25.49 12.75 7.29 10.78 10.78 11.76 8.82 11.76 12.75 12.75

148

Page 153: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 Census Divisions

New England (1) 19.44 22.22 22.22 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 27.78 27.78 11.11 13.89 13.89 13.89 13.89 13.89 13.89 13.89 13.89

Middle Atlantic (2) 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56

East North Central (3) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

West North Central (4) 2.38 2.38 2.38 7.14 7.14 7.14 7.14 7.14 7.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.38 2.38 2.38 2.38 2.38 2.38

South Atlantic (5) 14.81 14.81 18.52 18.52 18.52 20.37 22.22 24.07 25.93 7.41 7.41 9.26 9.26 9.26 5.56 7.41 9.26 9.26

East South Central (6) 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 20.83 29.17 29.17 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 16.67 20.83 20.83

West South Central (7) 33.33 25.00 20.83 20.83 20.83 20.83 20.83 29.17 29.17 16.67 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 12.50 12.50

Mountain (8) 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 10.42 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 6.25 6.25 6.25 6.25 6.25

Pacific (9) 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 10.00 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 PHYSICAL EDUCATION

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 33.42 35.81 39.26 40.05 42.18 43.30 43.59 43.59 43.59 24.14 25.46 27.59 29.18 29.97 31.05 31.91 32.19 32.19 At- or Above-Mean 39.86 45.45 45.80 45.80 48.60 47.44 47.76 48.40 49.04 30.42 32.87 33.22 33.92 35.31 34.29 34.62 33.65 33.33

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 34.34 38.46 40.83 41.23 42.63 42.81 42.81 43.22 43.85 26.10 27.35 29.59 31.08 31.41 31.44 32.44 32.60 33.08 Maj. African-American

(≥50%) 23.08 61.54 57.69 57.69 46.15 53.85 53.85 53.85 53.85 15.38 42.31 42.31 42.31 30.77 30.77 30.77 30.77 30.77 Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 38.46 38.46 38.46 57.69 57.69 57.69 58.97 58.97 58.97 38.46 38.46 38.46 34.62 34.62 34.62 35.90 35.90 35.90

Mixed 40.00 39.93 42.31 41.26 46.15 46.15 46.15 46.15 46.15 28.46 28.57 29.02 30.07 33.01 33.54 33.65 32.84 32.19 Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 37.02 39.90 40.87 38.46 44.34 42.31 43.44 44.80 42.53 29.33 31.73 32.69 30.77 33.48 32.21 34.39 35.75 33.03 Mid FRL (Middle SES) 27.60 30.29 38.91 39.37 42.53 43.27 40.72 41.63 43.89 20.36 20.67 25.34 28.51 29.86 30.77 28.51 28.51 29.41

High FRL (Low SES) 43.89 50.00 47.06 47.96 47.96 47.96 52.49 51.13 52.04 30.77 35.10 33.03 33.48 33.48 34.84 36.65 34.39 35.75 Census Divisions

New England (1) 28.21 34.62 38.46 42.31 42.31 42.31 42.31 42.31 42.31 23.08 28.21 29.49 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 Middle Atlantic (2) 61.54 61.54 58.97 56.41 56.41 56.41 56.41 56.41 56.41 43.59 43.59 43.59 43.59 43.59 43.59 43.59 43.59 43.59

East North Central (3) 32.31 38.46 40.00 38.46 38.46 38.46 38.46 38.46 40.00 27.69 27.69 29.23 32.31 32.31 32.31 32.31 29.23 29.23 West North Central (4) 30.77 32.97 34.07 35.16 38.46 38.46 38.46 39.56 39.56 20.88 20.88 21.98 23.08 24.18 24.18 27.47 28.57 28.57

South Atlantic (5) 44.44 45.30 45.30 44.44 48.72 50.43 50.43 50.43 51.28 32.48 32.48 32.48 32.48 35.04 36.75 36.75 36.75 35.90 East South Central (6) 30.77 50.00 48.08 48.08 48.08 48.08 48.08 51.92 51.92 25.00 38.46 38.46 38.46 38.46 38.46 38.46 36.54 36.54 West South Central (7) 44.23 46.15 48.08 51.92 55.77 55.77 57.69 57.69 57.69 34.62 34.62 34.62 34.62 34.62 34.62 36.54 36.54 36.54

Mountain (8) 34.62 34.62 40.38 40.38 42.31 42.31 42.31 41.35 41.35 25.96 25.96 30.77 30.77 30.77 30.77 30.77 30.77 30.77 Pacific (9) 27.69 30.77 36.92 36.92 43.08 43.08 44.62 44.62 44.62 15.38 16.92 18.46 21.54 26.15 26.15 26.15 26.15 26.15

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 SCHOOL MEALS

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 15.33 18.01 19.92 20.31 22.22 25.51 25.10 25.51 25.93 8.43 9.20 9.96 10.34 10.34 10.70 10.70 10.70 11.11 At- or Above-Mean 27.27 27.78 30.81 32.32 36.87 34.26 32.41 34.26 33.33 12.63 12.63 15.66 16.16 17.17 16.67 16.67 16.20 17.59

149

Page 154: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 18.65 19.75 20.94 20.44 21.30 21.74 21.26 21.69 21.11 9.92 9.88 11.11 11.56 11.57 11.59 11.59 12.17 12.22 Maj. African-American

(≥50%) 27.78 27.78 55.56 55.56 77.78 88.89 88.89 88.89 100.00 16.67 16.67 38.89 38.89 55.56 66.67 66.67 66.67 88.89

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%)

0.00 0.00 0.00 16.67 16.67 16.67 29.63 29.63 25.93 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.11 11.11 11.11 7.41 7.41 11.11

Mixed 23.33 25.93 27.27 29.29 34.72 35.56 32.87 33.76 33.33 10.56 11.64 12.12 12.12 13.43 13.33 13.89 12.82 13.17

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 15.97 17.36 18.75 21.53 24.84 25.00 25.49 29.41 26.14 9.72 11.11 11.81 12.50 11.11 11.11 11.76 14.38 13.07

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 18.95 20.14 21.57 18.30 23.53 23.61 22.22 21.57 24.18 10.46 10.42 10.46 9.80 11.11 11.81 10.46 9.80 11.11

High FRL (Low SES) 27.45 28.47 33.99 36.60 37.25 40.52 37.91 37.91 37.91 11.11 9.72 15.03 16.34 17.65 17.65 18.30 15.69 18.30

Census Divisions

New England (1) 24.07 29.63 29.63 31.48 35.19 37.04 37.04 37.04 37.04 11.11 14.81 14.81 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67

Middle Atlantic (2) 18.52 18.52 18.52 18.52 18.52 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11

East North Central (3) 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89

West North Central (4) 17.46 19.05 20.63 20.63 22.22 23.81 22.22 22.22 22.22 12.70 12.70 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29 14.29

South Atlantic (5) 25.93 27.16 29.63 30.86 35.80 38.27 38.27 39.51 40.74 14.81 14.81 16.05 16.05 18.52 19.75 19.75 19.75 22.22

East South Central (6) 36.11 38.89 52.78 52.78 52.78 52.78 52.78 55.56 55.56 16.67 16.67 27.78 27.78 27.78 27.78 27.78 25.00 25.00

West South Central (7) 33.33 38.89 38.89 41.67 47.22 47.22 36.11 38.89 30.56 5.56 5.56 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 11.11

Mountain (8) 8.33 8.33 8.33 9.72 11.11 11.11 11.11 12.50 13.89 4.17 4.17 4.17 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 6.94

Pacific (9) 15.56 15.56 22.22 22.22 24.44 24.44 24.44 26.67 26.67 6.67 6.67 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89 8.89

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 COMPETITIVE FOODS & BEVERAGES Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 12.76 17.59 19.66 20.34 24.48 25.56 25.93 25.93 24.81 1.03 2.41 3.79 6.21 7.93 8.15 9.63 9.63 14.44 At- or Above-Mean 28.18 28.18 32.27 32.27 33.64 32.92 32.92 33.33 30.42 10.45 10.45 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 15.00 20.00

Race/Ethnicity Maj. White (≥66%) 12.14 14.81 20.77 18.00 21.25 21.30 21.74 20.95 21.00 3.93 4.07 7.69 8.00 7.92 6.96 8.70 6.67 12.00

Maj. African-American (≥50%) 55.00 55.00 55.00 55.00 70.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 60.00 25.00 25.00 45.00 45.00 50.00 50.00 60.00 60.00 60.00

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 30.00 30.00 30.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 46.67 46.67 26.67 20.00 20.00 30.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 30.00 30.00 23.33 Mixed 25.50 28.10 27.27 30.00 32.92 34.00 32.92 33.08 31.11 4.00 5.71 5.45 6.82 10.42 12.00 11.25 12.69 18.52

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 9.38 9.38 13.13 14.38 23.53 18.75 20.59 28.24 24.12 0.00 2.50 0.63 1.25 3.53 3.75 5.88 8.24 11.76 Mid FRL (Middle SES) 10.59 13.75 21.18 18.82 22.35 25.00 24.71 22.35 24.71 1.18 1.25 4.71 4.12 5.88 5.00 8.82 5.88 12.35

High FRL (Low SES) 38.82 40.00 39.41 41.76 39.41 39.41 42.35 37.65 33.53 14.12 11.25 20.00 24.71 23.53 22.35 21.76 22.35 27.06 Census Divisions

New England (1) 15.00 15.00 25.00 23.33 35.00 35.00 36.67 36.67 41.67 1.67 1.67 11.67 10.00 15.00 15.00 21.67 21.67 23.33 Middle Atlantic (2) 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 20.00 0.00 13.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33 3.33

East North Central (3) 12.00 12.00 12.00 12.00 14.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 28.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 2.00 6.00 6.00 6.00 14.00 West North Central (4) 0.00 0.00 7.14 7.14 11.43 11.43 11.43 11.43 5.71 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 1.43 1.43 1.43 1.43 5.71

South Atlantic (5) 30.00 30.00 35.56 35.56 40.00 40.00 40.00 40.00 37.78 8.89 8.89 11.11 11.11 12.22 12.22 13.33 13.33 24.44 East South Central (6) 35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 35.00 12.50 12.50 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 West South Central (7) 47.50 57.50 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 32.50 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 17.50 17.50 20.00

Mountain (8) 12.50 12.50 15.00 18.75 18.75 18.75 18.75 20.00 18.75 2.50 2.50 3.75 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 5.00 12.50 Pacific (9) 10.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 30.00 2.00 2.00 4.00 18.00 18.00 18.00 18.00 18.00 18.00

150

Page 155: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 MARKETING & PROMOTION

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 1.72 3.45 3.45 3.45 3.45 1.85 1.85 1.85 3.70 1.72 3.45 3.45 3.45 3.45 1.85 1.85 1.85 3.70 At- or Above-Mean 6.82 6.82 13.64 13.64 13.64 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 2.27 2.27 4.55 4.55 4.55 6.25 6.25 6.25 8.33

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 0.00 1.85 3.85 4.00 4.17 4.35 4.35 4.76 5.00 0.00 1.85 1.92 2.00 2.08 2.17 2.17 2.38 2.50 Maj. African-American

(≥50%) 75.00 75.00 75.00 75.00 100.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 50.00 Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Mixed 2.50 2.38 6.82 6.82 8.33 8.00 8.33 7.69 9.26 2.50 2.38 4.55 4.55 4.17 4.00 4.17 3.85 7.41 Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Mid FRL (Middle SES) 0.00 3.13 2.94 2.94 2.94 0.00 2.94 2.94 8.82 0.00 3.13 2.94 2.94 2.94 0.00 2.94 2.94 5.88

High FRL (Low SES) 11.76 6.25 20.59 20.59 20.59 17.65 17.65 14.71 14.71 5.88 3.13 8.82 8.82 8.82 8.82 8.82 8.82 11.76 Census Divisions

New England (1) 0.00 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 0.00 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 Middle Atlantic (2) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

East North Central (3) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 West North Central (4) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.14 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 7.14

South Atlantic (5) 11.11 11.11 16.67 16.67 16.67 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 East South Central (6) 12.50 12.50 37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50 37.50 0.00 0.00 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 25.00 West South Central (7) 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50 12.50

Mountain (8) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pacific (9) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

151

Page 156: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 COMMUNICATION & STAKEHOLDER INPUT

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 8.05 8.05 9.20 9.20 10.34 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 3.45 3.45 4.60 4.60 4.60 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 At- or Above-Mean 16.67 16.67 22.73 22.73 24.24 23.61 22.22 22.22 22.22 13.64 13.64 15.15 15.15 16.67 15.28 15.28 15.28 15.28

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 8.33 8.64 10.26 9.33 11.11 13.04 13.04 11.11 11.67 5.95 6.17 7.69 6.67 6.94 7.25 7.25 7.94 8.33 Maj. African-American

(≥50%) 33.33 33.33 66.67 66.67 100 100.00 100 100.00 100.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 100.00 66.67 66.67 66.67 66.67 Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.11 11.11 11.11 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.11 11.11 11.11

Mixed 15.00 14.29 16.67 18.18 19.44 18.67 16.67 17.95 17.28 8.33 7.94 9.09 10.61 9.72 9.33 8.33 7.69 7.41 Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 4.17 4.17 4.17 8.33 9.80 12.50 11.76 11.76 9.80 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 3.92 4.17 3.92 3.92 1.96 Mid FRL (Middle SES) 9.80 10.42 11.76 5.88 9.80 6.25 7.84 9.80 11.76 1.96 2.08 3.92 1.96 5.88 4.17 3.92 5.88 7.84

High FRL (Low SES) 21.57 18.75 29.41 29.41 29.41 31.37 29.41 27.45 27.45 17.65 14.58 19.61 19.61 19.61 19.61 19.61 17.65 17.65 Census Divisions

New England (1) 5.56 5.56 5.56 5.56 11.11 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Middle Atlantic (2) 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22

East North Central (3) 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 13.33 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 West North Central (4) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

South Atlantic (5) 18.52 18.52 25.93 25.93 29.63 29.63 29.63 29.63 29.63 18.52 18.52 22.22 22.22 25.93 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 East South Central (6) 25.00 25.00 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 41.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 16.67 West South Central (7) 25.00 25.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 25.00 25.00 25.00 16.67 16.67 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00 25.00

Mountain (8) 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pacific (9) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 EVALUATION & IMPLEMENTATION

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 8.75 10.34 13.53 15.65 16.98 16.24 16.24 16.81 15.10 4.77 5.04 7.69 9.55 10.34 10.83 10.54 11.11 9.69 At- or Above-Mean 17.83 18.88 23.43 24.48 28.67 29.81 30.45 30.13 29.17 12.59 13.29 17.13 18.53 20.98 22.12 22.76 22.76 22.12

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 9.89 11.68 14.79 13.85 14.10 14.72 15.05 12.82 12.69 7.42 7.69 10.65 9.85 8.97 10.03 10.37 8.42 8.08 Maj. African-American

(≥50%) 26.92 30.77 38.46 38.46 69.23 84.62 84.62 84.62 84.62 15.38 19.23 26.92 26.92 53.85 76.92 76.92 76.92 69.23 Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 46.15 46.15 46.15 46.15 46.15 46.15 48.72 51.28 38.46 38.46 38.46 38.46 34.62 34.62 34.62 35.90 38.46 33.33

Mixed 13.46 13.92 18.18 21.68 25.96 25.54 24.68 25.74 24.22 6.92 7.33 10.49 14.34 17.63 17.85 16.99 18.34 17.09 Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 9.62 7.21 10.10 12.98 14.03 13.46 15.84 15.84 11.76 5.77 2.40 4.81 6.25 7.24 7.69 8.14 9.50 6.33 Mid FRL (Middle SES) 3.17 8.17 11.31 10.86 19.00 17.79 14.93 17.65 19.46 1.36 5.29 6.79 8.14 12.22 11.06 10.41 10.41 11.76

High FRL (Low SES) 25.79 25.96 30.77 33.94 33.03 34.84 38.01 35.75 33.94 17.65 17.31 22.62 25.79 25.34 28.05 30.32 29.86 28.51

152

Page 157: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 Census Divisions

New England (1) 10.26 12.82 14.10 19.23 21.79 24.36 24.36 25.64 24.36 8.97 8.97 10.26 14.10 15.38 19.23 19.23 20.51 19.23 Middle Atlantic (2) 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 23.08 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26 10.26

East North Central (3) 4.62 6.15 7.69 7.69 16.92 15.38 16.92 15.38 13.85 3.08 3.08 6.15 6.15 10.77 9.23 10.77 9.23 7.69 West North Central (4) 0.00 0.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 3.30 3.30 3.30 3.30 0.00 0.00 2.20 2.20 2.20 3.30 3.30 3.30 3.30

South Atlantic (5) 20.51 21.37 26.50 29.06 34.19 35.04 36.75 36.75 36.75 11.11 11.97 16.24 17.95 22.22 25.64 26.50 26.50 25.64 East South Central (6) 21.15 23.08 26.92 26.92 26.92 28.85 28.85 28.85 28.85 15.38 17.31 23.08 23.08 23.08 25.00 25.00 26.92 26.92 West South Central (7) 26.92 28.85 40.38 48.08 50.00 50.00 48.08 50.00 46.15 23.08 25.00 30.77 38.46 38.46 38.46 36.54 38.46 36.54

Mountain (8) 8.65 8.65 12.50 12.50 13.46 13.46 13.46 13.46 11.54 4.81 4.81 5.77 7.69 7.69 7.69 7.69 7.69 5.77 Pacific (9) 9.23 13.85 18.46 18.46 20.00 20.00 20.00 20.00 15.38 4.62 4.62 10.77 10.77 12.31 12.31 12.31 12.31 10.77

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15

REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 6.49 7.41 7.41 6.97 6.97 4.06 5.66 5.66 5.23 4.58

At- or Above-Mean 11.76 14.95 15.69 16.91 17.16 9.63 12.01 11.52 13.97 13.97

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 8.09 9.21 9.72 7.84 7.94 6.37 7.67 7.42 5.88 5.88

Maj. African-American (≥50%) 23.53 70.59 70.59 70.59 70.59 23.53 70.59 70.59 70.59 70.59

Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 8.82 11.76 11.76 19.61 19.61 5.88 5.88 7.84 15.69 15.69

Mixed 8.82 10.12 10.29 11.54 11.55 5.88 7.29 6.86 9.05 8.28

Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL) Low FRL (High SES) 5.19 6.62 7.96 7.96 5.19 2.77 4.41 4.50 6.57 3.81

Mid FRL (Middle SES) 7.27 8.09 9.00 10.38 11.07 4.50 5.15 5.19 5.88 6.92 High FRL (Low SES) 13.84 17.30 16.96 16.61 19.03 12.11 15.92 15.57 15.57 16.26

Census Divisions New England (1) 7.84 12.75 12.75 12.75 11.76 4.90 10.78 10.78 10.78 9.80

Middle Atlantic (2) 19.61 19.61 19.61 19.61 19.61 9.80 9.80 9.80 9.80 9.80 East North Central (3) 3.53 4.71 11.76 11.76 14.12 2.35 3.53 2.35 7.06 7.06

West North Central (4) 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 0.84 South Atlantic (5) 14.38 21.57 21.57 20.26 20.92 11.76 18.95 18.95 17.65 16.99

East South Central (6) 14.71 14.71 14.71 16.18 17.65 11.76 11.76 11.76 14.71 16.18 West South Central (7) 14.71 16.18 11.76 17.65 17.65 11.76 13.24 11.76 17.65 17.65

Mountain (8) 5.15 5.15 5.15 5.15 3.68 3.68 3.68 3.68 3.68 2.21 Pacific (9) 5.88 7.06 7.06 7.06 7.06 4.71 4.71 4.71 4.71 4.71

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 STAFF WELLNESS & MODELING

Overweight/Obesity Rates

Below-Mean 3.45 3.45 4.60 5.75 5.75 6.17 6.17 6.17 6.17 1.15 1.15 1.15 3.45 3.45 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 At- or Above-Mean 0.00 0.00 1.52 4.55 6.06 4.17 4.17 8.33 6.94 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.78 1.39

Race/Ethnicity

Maj. White (≥66%) 2.38 2.47 3.85 6.67 2.78 1.45 1.45 1.59 1.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 2.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maj. African-American

(≥50%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 33.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Maj. Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 0.00 0.00 0.00 33.33 33.33 33.33 22.22 33.33 33.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.67 16.67 16.67 11.11 11.11 11.11

Mixed 1.67 1.59 3.03 1.52 5.56 5.33 5.56 7.69 6.17 1.67 1.59 1.52 0.00 2.78 2.67 2.78 5.13 3.70

153

Page 158: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

STATE CHARACTERISTIC

COMPREHENSIVENESS SCORES (OUT OF 100) STRENGTH SCORES (OUT OF 100)

’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 ’06-’07 ’07-’08 ’08-’09 ’09-’10 ’10-’11 ’11-’12 ’12-’13 ’13-’14 ’14-’15 Free-/Reduced-Price Lunch (FRL)

Low FRL (High SES) 4.17 0.00 2.08 2.08 1.96 2.08 1.96 1.96 1.96 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Mid FRL (Middle SES) 0.00 4.17 3.92 7.84 7.84 6.25 5.88 5.88 5.88 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.92 3.92 4.17 3.92 3.92 3.92

High FRL (Low SES) 1.96 2.08 3.92 5.88 7.84 5.88 7.84 13.73 11.76 1.96 2.08 1.96 1.96 1.96 0.00 1.96 5.88 3.92

Census Divisions

New England (1) 11.11 11.11 16.67 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 22.22 0.00 0.00 0.00 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 11.11 Middle Atlantic (2) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

East North Central (3) 0.00 0.00 0.00 6.67 6.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 West North Central (4) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

South Atlantic (5) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 3.70 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 East South Central (6) 0.00 0.00 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 8.33 25.00 16.67 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 16.67 8.33 West South Central (7) 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 8.33 8.33 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00

Mountain (8) 0.00 0.00 0.00 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 4.17 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.00 Pacific (9) 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67 6.67

154

Page 159: The Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform ... › files › NWPS_Active_Role_States_SY06_07_through_SY14_15.pdfThe Active Role States Have Played in Helping To Transform

Table E. States with Given Characteristics by School Year, School Years 2006-07

through 2014-15

CHARACTERISTIC

STATE CHARACTERISTICS BY SCHOOL YEAR

’06–’07 ’07–’08 ’08–’09 ’09–’10 ’10–’11 ’11–’12 ’12–’13 ’13–’14 ’14–’15 Overweight/Obesity Rates*

Below Mean 56.86% 56.86% 56.86% 56.86% 56.86% 52.94% 52.94% 52.94% 52.94%

At or above Mean 43.14% 43.14% 43.14% 43.14% 43.14% 47.06% 47.06% 47.06% 47.06%

Race/Ethnicity

Majority White (≥66%) 54.90% 52.94% 50.98% 49.02% 47.06% 45.10% 45.10% 41.18% 39.22% Majority African-American (≥50%) 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 1.96%

Majority Hispanic/Latino (≥50%) 1.96% 1.96% 1.96% 3.92% 3.92% 3.92% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% Diverse racial/ethnic 39.22% 41.18% 43.14% 43.14% 47.06% 49.02% 47.06% 50.98% 52.94%

Socioeconomic Status**

Low SES (High FRL) 34.00% 33.33% 34.00% 34.00% 33.33% 34.69% 33.33% 33.33% 33.33% Medium SES (Medium FRL) 34.00% 33.33% 34.00% 34.00% 33.33% 32.65% 33.33% 33.33% 33.33%

High SES (Low FRL) 32.00% 33.33% 32.00% 32.00% 33.33% 32.65% 33.33% 33.33% 33.33%

Census Divisions

New England (1) 11.76% 11.76% 11.76% 11.76% 11.76% 11.76% 11.76% 11.76% 11.76% Middle Atlantic (2) 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88% 5.88%

East North Central (3) 9.80% 9.80% 9.80% 9.80% 9.80% 9.80% 9.80% 9.80% 9.80% West North Central (4) 13.73% 13.73% 13.73% 13.73% 13.73% 13.73% 13.73% 13.73% 13.73%

South Atlantic (5) 17.65% 17.65% 17.65% 17.65% 17.65% 17.65% 17.65% 17.65% 17.65% East South Central (6) 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% West South Central (7) 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84% 7.84%

Mountain (8) 15.69% 15.69% 15.69% 15.69% 15.69% 15.69% 15.69% 15.69% 15.69% Pacific (9) 9.80% 9.80% 9.80% 9.80% 9.80% 9.80% 9.80% 9.80% 9.80%

Data on the percentage of children age 10-17 in each state who were overweight or obese, defined as being at the 85th percentile

of body mass index or above, were obtained from the 2007 and 2011 National Survey of Children’s Health (NSCH). Data from the

2007 NSCH were used for school years 2006-07 through 2010-11, while data from the 2011 NSCH were used for school years

2011-12 through 2014-15. Data for each school year on the proportion of public school students eligible for free or reduced-price

lunch (FRL) and the racial/ethnic distribution of students in grades 1-12 were obtained from the National Center for Education

Statistics. Tertiles of FRL eligibility were computed separately by year.

* The mean overweight/obesity rate was 31.01% for school years 2006-07 through 2010-11, and 30.79% for school years 2011-12

through 2014-15.

** Free/reduced-price lunch eligibility cutpoints: Year 1 (Low: < 33.67%, medium: 33.67-42.77%, high: ≥42.77%); Year 2 (Low: <

33.74%, medium: 33.74-40.69%, high: ≥40.69%); Year 3 (Low: < 35.27%, medium: 35.27-45.56%, high: ≥45.56%); Year 4 (Low: <

39.42%, medium: 39.42-48.22%, high: ≥48.22%); Year 5 (Low: < 40.07%, medium: 40.07-50.14%, high: ≥50.14%); Year 6 (Low: <

41.31%, medium: 41.31-51.05%, high: ≥51.05%); Year 7 (Low: < 43.01%, medium: 43.01-52.14%, high: ≥52.14%); Year 8 (Low: <

42.12%, medium: 42.12-51.78%, high: ≥51.78%); Year 9 (Low: < 43.20%, medium: 43.20-51.43%, high: ≥51.43%).

155