February 2021
We have also recruited five fellows to serve as mentors for the 2021 program year. They were selected for their contributions in the following areas: healthy food and beverage standards, food security, structured physical activity and school wellness policy. The mentors will be participating in the onboarding, serving as moderators for webinars and trainings, and providing technical assistance to fellows from the new cohort, as requested. 
2021 Champion Provider Fellow Mentors
Please join me in congratulating the new cohort and 2021 mentors.

In Health and Solidarity,

Wagahta Semere, MD, MHS
Fellowship Director & Assistant Professor
UCSF School of Medicine
Upcoming Activities

MARCH 2021

APRIL 2021

Fellow Activities
Dr. Moazzum Bajwa (Riverside County) has been working with the local health department to pilot a program to screen patients for food insecurity and refer those that screen positive to community resources. They are also looking to coordinate with local produce growers to provide food boxes for patient pick-up or delivery.
Dr. Laurie Bostick-Cammon (Santa Clara County) spoke at a public meeting of the Board of Directors of the Open Space Authority in support of placing Measure Q on the November 2020 ballot to extend the parcel tax initially established in 2014. The Board voted to place the tax extension on the ballot and it was passed, allowing for increased investment in nature. Read more. She has also secured $100,000 to expand the ParkRx program.
Congrats to Drs. Emma Steinberg & Kimberly Newell Green (San Francisco County) and other coalition members on the recent revision to the CalAIM proposal (Executive Summary) that now includes language for “medically-supportive food and nutrition” in the In-Lieu Services and Incentive Payments section. Drs. Steinberg and Newell Green presented about their work related to this initiative at the 2020 Mini College.
*Champion Provider Listserv*
Collaborate & communicate with Champion Provider
Fellows across the state about your community change efforts.
Post a message by emailing: champion-providers@googlegroups.com
NOTE: Please do not use the listserv to share treatment protocol for patients. 
Policy Brief
Make Every Bite Count
With the Dietary Guidelines

The 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) was issued shortly before the end of 2020 by the U.S. Department of Agriculture and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. They can be found here: https://www.dietaryguidelines.gov/.

All nutrition information provided by the Federal nutrition programs such as SNAP-Ed and WIC must be consistent with the DGA. There was little change in the new version compared with the previous version with one exception. The current DGA now covers pregnant and breastfeeding women as well as infants and toddlers. Previously, the DGA covered only age two and above. As in the past, the emphasis is on what foods to include in your diet rather than what to avoid. Food systems and the effects of food production and consumption on climate change and sustainability are not covered.  

The DGA development process includes an independent scientific advisory committee report which made a number of recommendations that were not included in the final document https://www.dietaryguidelines.gov/2020-advisory-committee-report. Of particular note, was the recommendation that Americans limit their intake of added sugar to six percent of total calories. (The 2015-2020 recommendation was 10 percent of calories). However, the new DGA now recommends that infants and toddlers less than two not receive any added sugar in their diet at all. This would, of course, include candy, desserts, ice cream, and sugary cereals as well as sugar sweetened drinks like soda.

Also of note, the scientific advisory committee recommended lowering the amount of alcohol consumed from a maximum of one drink a day for women and two drinks a day for men to one drink a day for both sexes on any day that alcohol is consumed. The 2020-2025 DGA document, however, did not include this change.  
From the Field
Note: Materials included in this section are for reference and information purposes only and do not imply endorsement by the federal government, California Department of Public Health, or the University of California, San Francisco.
Food Research and Action Center, February 2021
In the 2020 academic year, September 2019 through February 2020, 12.6 million children received a free or reduced-price school breakfast on an average school day, an increase of 1.5% for the same time period during the prior year. Participation in the School Breakfast Program (SBP) still lags behind the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) with 58.4 low-income children being served by SBP for every 100 participating in the NSLP.
Jacob et al. (2021). American Journal of Preventative Medicine, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2020.08.002
This article undertook a systematic review of studies that examined the economic benefits of infrastructure and non-infrastructure interventions aimed at increasing active transport to school. The authors concluded that interventions comprised of an infrastructure component in addition to addressing safety and ease of active transport provided an economic benefit that exceeded the intervention cost. This study could provide additional support for ongoing investments in programs like Safe Routes to School.
Kinsey et al. (2020). American Journal of Public Health
The article examines the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on school meals missed (defined as breakfasts and lunches that would have been served at school under normal circumstances) and innovative ways that states and school districts are responding to ensure that children get access to these meals. Opportunities exist for future studies to examine best practices and policies for meal delivery during the COVID-19 pandemic to better inform programs aimed at providing meals to children while out of school.
 Popkin BM, Ng SW (2021). PLoS Med 18(1): e1003412. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pmed.1003412
Forty-five (45) countries, cities and regions across the world have implemented sugary-sweetened beverage taxes. The authors reflect on lessons-learned from these diverse taxation policies and suggest considerations for optimizing their public health impact. The authors suggest potentially increasing tax rates or expanding them to be inclusive of unhealthy, ultra processed foods and other beverage categories.
More Opportunities