FFY 2015 Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ's)
FAQs last updated: 05/08/2014 (bold = new questions)
Resources for the FFY 2015 SNAP-Ed Statewide Work Plan: http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/cpns/Pages/FFY15SNAP-EdResources.aspx
SNAP-Ed Local Implementing Agency Forum Website: http://www.cce.csus.edu/conferences/nhc/14/index.cfm?pid=653
|1||3/3/2014||Location of Forum documents and presentations||Once everything is posted, eblast notifying participants of the presentations that are posted.||http://www.cce.csus.edu/conferences/nhc/14/index.cfm?pid=653
|2||3/3/2014||I am still a bit uncertain about the collaboration aspect of the new way we're supposed to do things now. I understand we're to write a new annual plan collaboratively and work together to maximize impacts and outcomes, but can you please provide me with some examples on how we're to do this? For example, smarter lunchrooms in the cafeterias seems to be a big thing, so then how do we collaborate in these efforts without duplication? Please advise.||We are working collectively with the State Implementing Agencies on providing examples to assist counties with their work plans. As soon as they are available we plan to forward them out. As for the example with the Smarter Lunchrooms, I think I need a little bit more information on how and what is intended to be accomplished. Smarter Lunchrooms can be a distinct and different "strategy" than what you have traditionally delivered with the direct education lessons UCCE has provided. Therefore it can either be delivered by UCCE or the other IA partners as best determined from your meetings.|
|3||3/4/2014||Where can we find a copy of the SNAP-Ed Strategies and Interventions: An Obesity Prevention Toolkit for States? Is it online?||The SNAP-Ed Toolkit is available for download from the SNAP-Ed Connection website. We anticipate there will be an updated version released when the 2015 USDA SNAP-Ed Guidance documents are released at the end of March.|
|4||3/6/2014||Can we get a copy of the questions and answers from the forum to post on our website for our local projects?||Currently being worked on by CDSS and draft will be shared with the 2.0 group Thursday the 13th for feedback and final preparation for early that next week to post on the Forum website and to disseminate to the locals.|
|5||3/6/2014||Is there a webpage where we can direct folks who need the Work Plan Template and Instructions?||It's not on the Forum website as of now, but it can be. The work plan template and instructions draft (what they received at the Forum) should be included in an email blast that went out a week prior to the Forum. If you don't have that, I can share again to get out to your locals.|
|6||3/6/2014||Is there a webpage where the FAQ's, templates and materials from the forum will be housed?||The Forum will house the following (estimated postdate in between March 14-20); Training power point presentation, Q&A from work plan session, opening and closing presenter slides, county profiles, and state agency bullet table top file.|
|3/13/2014||In the Intervention Plan section of the One-Year Work Plan, what EFNEP info would we include? Would we add specific EFNEP objectives and/or activities, or in the Narrative Summary, or in the Evaluation Plan, or in the Targeting Summary?
||As previously shared, EFNEP can complement and should be recognized when the SNAP Ed planning takes place for the county's work plan/scope of work. So for example, you may be doing Hunger Attacks in high school or ESBA for adults in specific community agencies. The county may be doing more environmental work or social marketing targeting a specific message. The most important component -what needs to be addressed in your community with the resources you both have. For non-funded partner work, please refer to No. 5, County Nutrition Action Plan, in Section A: Overview in the One-Year Work Plan. It is suggested EFNEP be included in this section where the plan addresses collaborative efforts to achieve the SNAP-Ed goals and objectives. This will allow for identification of either unmet needs or needs being addressed by partners. There should not be specific objectives included in the work plan that describes the EFNEP contributions since these are not funded by SNAP Ed.
|8||As part of the CNAP planning process, UC counties have been asked to provide information on the numbers served and site listings for EFNEP. Why is this information needed and will it be used for numbers served in the integrated county work plan?
||It is important to determine why the question is being asked and how the information will be used. The information on what is provided by EFNEP can be an important step in determining the unmet need in the county and have it included within the description of needs; eg "EFNEP provides series based direct education programs to 1,200 residents at 15 community and school sites in Boone County." As mentioned in Q.7, the CNAP is planning proceeds, having this information can help enhance and assure the current EFNEP programs are understood and supported. The integrated work plan is intended to only project and count numbers that are directly served with SNAP Ed funds, therefore the EFNEP numbers should not be included in the work plan for numbers to be served.
|9||Is the visual version of the Food Behavior Checklist available for SNAP Ed partners to use? At the county level we are being asked to share the UC CalFresh evaluation tools.||The UC CalFresh State Office is getting increasingly more inquiries asking for the picture version of the food behavior checklist (FBC). It is important to point out; there are different versions of the FBC and not all are appropriate for all programs and activities. In fact there are no tools that can be used for all interventions. UC CalFresh has contacted Marilyn Townsend (nutrition specialist at UC Davis) to clarify which FBC tools she developed for the Network (California Dept of Public Health), and where to find them. These tools are available on the CDPH NEOB web under the research Link. The link is working and the Compendium of Surveys Resource Kit will also include the following items: Food Behavior Checklist (English), Food Behavior Checklist (Spanish), Food Behavior Checklist Instruction Guide, Fruit and Vegetable Checklist (English), Fruit and Vegetable Checklist (Spanish), Fruit and Vegetable Instruction Guide, On the Go! (combined in English and Spanish), On the Go! Instruction Guide.||If you have any additional questions about the link or the tools, you can contact Carolyn Rider directly at 916-449-5547 or Carolyn.email@example.com|
|10||I am trying to find the Spanish version of this checklist but have had no luck. Are you able to provide it?||Research Website Link: CDPH has checked in with the Research team on the Food Behavior Checklist link. The link is working now and the CDPH is in the process of adding the Compendium of Survey Resource Kit on our website. See Q. 9 to view the specific items that will be included in the Compendium of Surveys Resource Kit.||If you have any additional questions about the link or the tools, you can contact Carolyn Rider directly at 916-449-5547 or Carolyn.firstname.lastname@example.org|
|11||Can we share our evaluation tools with our partners?||Yes. However, the bigger question and concern is how the tools are used and if they are appropriate for their nutrition education efforts. For UC CalFresh, the evaluation tools are linked to specific curriculum with each evaluation tool having assigned SMART objectives that link back to the nutrition education effort. It is important when sharing tools, there is an understanding on how they will be used, what will be measured and if the tool is appropriately linked to the lessons/curriculum. Based on the questions, there appears to be a tendency to use whatever is available. The State Implementing Agencies (SIA) have not (yet) provided this guidance. UC CalFresh suggests when being asked for tools, it is appropriate to review the questions on any evaluation tool to see if all the questions are relevant to the nutrition education being provided.|
|12||4/14/2014||Is UCCE considered an "LIA"?||
All of the SNAP-Ed funded programs at the county level are Local Implementing Agencies (LIAs). The LIAs are: CDSS, CDPH, CDA, CDFA and UCCE.The state partners are State Implementing Agencies (SIAs).
|13||4/15/2014||We need guidance on how to enter some of our sites into the countywide work plans. The form allows us to choose among three different sections to enter data according to the method of qualification. The three categories are: 1) Means-Tested, 2) FRPM Data, or 3) Census Tract Data. It is unclear to me how we enter sites that we use the UC CalFresh Agency Eligibility Verification Form as the means of qualifying. Would these be listed under the Means-Tested category? Some of them do not fall into the typical list of Means-Tested sites. For example, they are not a shelter or Head Start program.||If you are receiving qualifying data from the facility via UC CalFresh Agency Eligibility Verification Form, this would be considered Means-Tested; an assessment was made based on the eligibility and financial status of the participants.|
|14||4/16/2014||Where do we enter sites that do not census tract or receive free/reduced priced lunch? For example, sites that we have previously qualifies using our UC CalFresh Agency Eligibility Verification Form?||If you are receiving qualifying data from the facility via UC CalFresh Agency Eligibility Verification Form, this would be considered Means-Tested; an assessment was made based on the eligibility and financial status of the participants|
|15||4/16/2014||When is the anticipated release of the revised Go, Glow, Grow curriculum?||The edits should be completed by the end of April. We will notify all of the UC CalFresh programs once the curriculum is completed.|
|16||4/17/2014||For Means-Tested sites, such as a Migrant Ed program, do we have to have an eligibility form on file?||Eligibility forms for Means-Tested sites should be kept on file in your county office|
- | | | | | | Reporting | |
# Question Response Resource(s) B.1 What is expected from each Local Implementing Agency (LIA) in regards to the budget for FFY 2015? For FFY 2015, the budgets are being developed separately by each LIA. Each LIA will submit their budgets to their respective State Implementing Agency (SIA). The SIA will review the budgets and provide you with feedback. The budgets will be consolidated at the state-level and submitted to USDA. Please refer to the timeline that all LIAs must follow. http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/cpns/Pages/FFY15SNAP-EdResources.aspx B.2 In our county, there are two agencies that are receiving SNAP-Ed funding. We will be working together to create one integrated work plan, but two separate budgets? Please clarify. You are correct. Your designated work plan coordinator will coordinate the work plan and activities for both agencies. Each agency will create their own budget based on instructions provided by their respective State Implementing Agency. B.3 Which figure should we be using when developing our budget for CDPH? Please contact your project officer at CDPH to discuss this in more detail.
# Question Response Resource(s) C.1 We have an active Youth Expanded Food and Nutrition Education Program (EFNEP) in our county. In our county work plan, one of our local objectives is to cover 40% of low-income schools with direct education. My understanding is that if someone is already doing direct education in the schools, other activities should be done by a different agency. Can you clarify? Please refer to the CDSS memo on duplication of services. EFNEP is not SNAP-Ed funded or considered one of the State Implementing Agencies (SIAs). If EFNEP is at a site, you can partner with them and provide complementary services by using different strategies. Your work with EFNEP should also be reflected in the narrative of your work plan to indicate populations being reached. During the plan review, USDA will be looking at the larger county need, so you will need to consider if there are other areas within your jurisdiction that are not currently being addressed or served. C.2 There are a limited number of qualifying sites in our county. We are providing direct education to early childhood youth at one site and a subcontractor wants to provide direct education to parents at the same site. Can you clarify if this is allowable? You will need to justify that there is not a significant number of qualifying sites in your jurisdiction. Be sure you are providing direct education with an environmental support. USDA would like to see how the services are being coordinated amongst different agencies. We do not want to see that two agencies are in the same site and not communicating with each other. C.3 We have a Community Transformation Grant (CTG) in our county, but it is not USDA funded. Can they be included in our work plan activities? Community Transformation Grants (CTGs) are funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The groups working under the CTG are not required to participate with you in creating this plan, but can benefit your County Nutrition Action Plan (CNAP) efforts. It would be great to partner with them to see how you can collaborate in your jurisdiction. As long as the activities are allowable within SNAP-Ed funding, it would be okay to include how you will partner with the CTG in your jurisdiction. Please consult the USDA SNAP-Ed Guidance to determine allowable vs. unallowable activities. http://snap.nal.usda.gov/national-snap-ed/snap-ed-plan-guidance-and-templates C.4 We have a CTG in our county. They have done Policy, Systems and Environmental (PSE) change work around healthy eating, active living; however, a lot of the work will not continue past September 2014. Would it be appropriate to talk to our CTG counterparts to assess what has been accomplished and continue with some of their work into FFY 2015? We encourage you to take advantage of progress that has already been made in your community through the CTG. However, keep in mind there are some activities that are allowable under CTG that are not allowable under our SNAP-Ed funding. Please consult the USDA SNAP-Ed Guidance to determine allowable vs. unallowable activities. http://snap.nal.usda.gov/national-snap-ed/snap-ed-plan-guidance-and-templates C.5 What is the role of the California Department of Food and Agriculture (CDFA) in FFY 2015? The role of CDFA in FFY 2015 is currently being looked into. C.6 What is the role of the California Department of Aging's (CDA) Area Agency 3 in providing services to CDA's Area Agency 2 jurisdictions? For the purpose of the FFY 2015 Work Plan, local jurisdictions may contact Joe Cobery, Executive Director.
Joe Cobery, Executive Director, Area 3 Agency on Aging
# Question Response Resource(s) D.1 If we plan on doing a combined evaluation, do we list the evaluation in the "Additional Evaluation Activities" section or the "Required Evaluation Activities" section? It would be appropriate to describe your collective evaluation. The State Implementing Agencies (SIAs) will need to discuss how to report the findings. The SIAs will also discuss the potential of developing a joint evaluation tool for Policy, Systems and Environmental (PSE) approaches. D.2 Will the local projects need to develop an evaluation tool to measure change in consumption at the local level? No, it is not necessary for you to develop your own evaluation tools. Consumption is measured through the state level bi-annual surveys. D.3 How is evaluation going to work? If we are looking at statewide objectives, we do not seem to have statewide evaluation tools. This is something the SIAs have been discussing. Each of the SIAs has provided direction to their LIAs to follow appropriate evaluation within their programs. There has been discussion at the state level to use the evaluation framework from USDA-WRO to look at other indices. Our hope is to have a common framework and indices when looking at county-level activities that address the state objectives. A copy of the USDA-WRO evaluation framework is available on the CDPH FFY 15 SNAP-Ed Resources website. http://snap.nal.usda.gov/snap/WesternRegionEvaluationFramework.pdf D.4 Will PSE's pre/post assessment suffice for evaluation? Please work directly with your SIA on what is required or expected in regards to evaluation. D.5 Which activities are expected to be evaluated and at what level...Impact, Process, or Formative? Please work directly with your SIA to determine what they are asking for in regards to their activities and how they should be evaluated. D.6 One of the FAQs was about sharing the evaluation tools with our partners. Can you pleaseclarify?
There is a visual food behavior checklist that has been developed for measuring food behaviors. It has been posted on the CDPH web and was originally developed by Marilyn Townsend at UC Davis.
Please be sure you are using tools that are appropriate for the objectives that you have developed for the program delivery, design and intervention. Not all tools are appropriate for what you are measuring or delivering. Please work directly with your SIA to determine which evaluation tools will be appropriate for your program.
# Question Response Resource(s) E.1 At the state-level, what discussion have occurred regarding EARS? The Local Health Department (LHD) has no ability to run reports; therefore, it is challenging to see what our subcontractors are doing. In California, each State Implementing Agency (SIA) submits their own respective EARS form. You should contact your Program Officer or State Office to determine what reporting you can receive. The SIAs will be discussing coordination of EARS.
# Question Response Resource(s) I.1 How shall the designation of Policy, System and Environmental (PSE) change? PSE designated locations should focus on large target audiences of low-income families and individuals. All sites that implement PSE changes should meet the 185% federal poverty level or be considered a proxy site. In addition to PSE changes, there should be supporting SNAP-Ed educational or marketing strategies. For additional information, please refer to pages 13-14 of the FFY 2015 SNAP-Ed Guidance. http://snap.nal.usda.gov/snap/Guidance/FinalFY2015SNAP-EdGuidance.pdf I.2 I am still confused regarding the Media, Social Media and Public Relations intervention category. Are you saying our activities under this category must be part of a social marketing campaign? Will you clarify the expectation for this intervention category? UC CalFrseh programs have not historically been designed as social marketing campaigns. CDPH programs have traditionally been designed as social marketing campaigns. A social marketing campaign is focused on promoting messages that are linked to interventions. Please refer to the USDA SNAP-Ed Guidance for additional information on the definition of social marketing. Media efforts such as press events or promotions of programs can be listed under media, but in general may not always be considered social marketing. http://snap.nal.usda.gov/snap/Guidance/FinalFY2015SNAP-EdGuidance.pdf I.3 The instructions refer to the Obesity Prevention Toolkit to identify the intervention strategies. The toolkit only includes strategies related to Policy, System and Environmental Change in Child Care, Schools, Community and Family Settings, but not related with Direct Education. Could we include additional direct education strategies in our plan?
The Toolkit developed by the National Collaborative on Childhood Obesity Research (NCCOR) targets the PSE types of interventions because there are a number of already approved direct education strategies. Please note, the Toolkit is being revised and will be shared once it is released.
You can continue your direct education efforts with curriculum from the approved list. Direct education should be a part of programming in your jurisdiction.
http://snap.nal.usda.gov/snap/SNAP-EdInterventionsToolkit.pdf I.4 If we're doing Rethink Your Drink, Power Play, etc. should we count social marketing even if we do only one component as the CDPH website considers this a social marketing campaign? It should be included as part of a media activity listed. It does not have to be described as part of a social marketing campaign nor is it precluded from being conducted if it is not part of a social marketing campaign.
# Question Response Resource(s) O.1 We have not discussed how the current drought will impact the availability of fruits and vegetables. The work plan lists grandiose objectives and I am not sure that other agencies understand the impact the drought will have in FFY 2015. At the state-level, we are working with the Governor's Drought Task Force and the Emergency Food Assistance Program (EFAP). We are also working with the County Welfare Department Association in regards to looking at our efforts moving forward. Questions are beginning to be raised by schools and with foodservice directors. As challenges are raised, we will be working with USDA. It is good to be cognizant of these issues and if for some reason we are unable to meet our goals and objectives because of the drought, it will be noted in our reports to USDA. O.2 Thank you, I love seeing the agencies at the state and local levels collaborating. We collaborate in small, rural programs. I can't wait to see the positive results. Thank you for your comment. O.3 When updating the FFY 15 SNAP-Ed Resource webpage, I would recommend adding dates to indicate when the documents were updated. I think this would be more helpful than color-coding the newly updated documents on the web. Thank you for your comment. As new items are added to the web, we will add dates to indicate when the documents were updated.
# Question Response Resource(s) T.1 In Section E: SNAP-Ed Targeting Summary, for each site, there are boxes to check for Implementing Agencies and strategies. If we have different agencies using different strategies at the same site, how would you like us to indicate this? If more than one agency is providing services, please describe in the activity who is delivering what to who so we have a better idea on how the strategies are complementing each other and who is responsible for delivering that activity and strategy. We would like as much detail as possible. T.2 Should we include a total number of all potentially served sites, or only the number of sites we expect to serve within the county? For example, let's say that Tehama County has a total of 31 elementary schools, but we as a collaborative expect to serve a total of 12. Would we indicate 12 or 31 on the form for number 6? (Found on Intervention Sites Page) Since it was a collaborative expectation to serve 12 elementary schools, you would indicate 12. Please keep in mind that listing all 31 sites may be misleading to the audience as to where services were actually delivered. Furthermore, listing all 31 sites will make it challenging for those unserved sites to be served by other local agencies. T.3 What does "Individual Homes" mean? If we expect to provide services in the homes of clients (such as our program that does nutrition education outreach for elderly home bound clients), should we indicate the total number of homes we expect to go to? Or is this the number of programs that will be going into the homes? (example: Community Action = 1 program, Northern Valley Services = 1 program, for a total of 2). If we are indicating the total number of homes we expect to go into with our programs (for example: 35 homes of elderly home bound clients), do we need to know which homes and indicate their location on the census list? This would be a problem, as we do not know which people will respond to our program outreach offer.
Yes, you would indicate the number of homes you expect to visit. However, you should also consider how the clients are being identified? Are they receiving some type of means-tested benefit or part of a means-tested program? Are you locating them by income level? Or identifying them by their census tract?
When "individual homes" are selected, name and address of the individual cannot be indicated (IRB issues) therefore; we would only indicate the census tract #.
T.4 Each agency in our collaborative has a good idea of where they will be providing Nutrition Education services in 2015. However, there are often sites in the county that request services that we have not planned to go into in our work plan. We want to serve these sites quickly. The question is whether we are supposed to list all "potential" locations/sites for services in 2015 to be as inclusive of every possible site, or if we are supposed to only list those sites we are "sure" we will be serving. Since it was a collaborative expectation on where you would provide services, you would indicate where you are "sure" to be serving. Please keep in mind that listing all potential sites may be misleading to the audience as to where services are actually being delivered. Furthermore, listing all potential sites will make it challenging for those unserved sites to be served by other local agencies. T.5 If we are only listing those sites we are "sure" we will serve, some of our collaborative partners have indicated that adding census-approved sites can be a lengthy process and we may miss opportunities to serve unduplicated clients with our services. If you are requesting to add census-approved site/s, the process should be simple and prompt. With this new model of a Statewide Integrated Work Plan, the expectation is that once you identify site/s that was not on the original approved plan, the CNAP collaborative will meet to ensure that the identified site/s are not currently being served. In your request to serve the site, you would indicate that the site is unserved (confirmed during CNAP Collaborative Meetings) and that it is census-approved. T.6 For "Means-Tested" sites - that ALSO meet the census-approved site requirements, do you want these sites listed in both parts of the sites list pages, or listed only once? List the site once. T.7 Alternative Targeting Methodologies Approved by WRO Alternative Targeting Methodologies Approved by WRO document T.8 Can we enter an "other" category for Means-Tested Sites? Instructions on how to enter an "Other" category for Means-Tested sites has been provided. Please refer to the instructions posted on the CDPH FFY 15 SNAP-Ed Resources website. http://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/cpns/Pages/FFY15SNAP-EdResources.aspx T.9 Section E: SNAP-Ed Targeting Summary lists social media (SM) as a strategy. Public Health interpreted the SM as only a social marketing campaign. Can this also include the newsletter and print or online articles that we produce?
Per the USDA SNAP-Ed Guidance, the definition of social marketing is "a disciplined, consumer-focused, research-based process to plan, develop, implement and evaluate interventions, programs and multiple channels of communications designed to influence the voluntary behavior of a large number of people in the target audience."
An example of a social marketing campaign would be the Champion Mothers campaign through CDPH. Sending a newsletter by itself or other types of media such as newspaper articles would not be considered as part of a social marketing campaign.
http://snap.nal.usda.gov/national-snap-ed/snap-ed-plan-guidance-and-templates T.10 Do all agencies qualify sites the same, using census tracts, FRPM, and means-tested? I'm not familiar with qualifying by using a letter like you said in your example. There are various ways to use means-testing for qualifying sites where you plan to deliver programs. The USDA SNAP-Ed Guidance also lists approved alternative methods for qualifying sites. Please work directly with your SIA if you are using an alternative methodology to qualify means-tested sites you plan to serve. http://snap.nal.usda.gov/national-snap-ed/snap-ed-plan-guidance-and-templates T.11 In Section E: SNAP-Ed Targeting Summary, some of the LIAs are including sites where they are providing indirect education. We deliver education at farmers markets that offer EBT services. Nevertheless, these places do not qualify by census tract. Is there any other way that we could qualify these sites? PENDING RESPONSE T.12 I understand the methods for qualifying means-tested sites. The table in the work plan does not have a way to help identify "Other" in the drop-down menu. Also, USDA mentioned proximity. Can you clarify what that is?
Instructions on how to enter an "Other" category for Means-Tested sites has been provided. Please refer to the instructions posted on the CDPH FFY 15 SNAP-Ed Resources website.
An example of proximity would be if a site is located between or adjacent to schools that are >50% FRPM, it is considered potentially allowable by proximity.
Please refer to the USDA SNAP-Ed Guidance for a list of approved alternative targeting methodologies and work with your Project Officer or State Office for approval of alternative methods.
# Question Response Resource(s) W.1 We have a Get Fresh grant and have determined what we are going to accomplish for the next two years. Does that mean the Scope of Work (SOW) could change based on the work plan and how we decide to collaborate locally? What should we do if we have changes to put int our work plan? Please work closely with your Project Manager at CDSS. They will be able to provide you with technical assistance with respect to your project as we move forward. W.2 What is the relationship between the Local Health Department (LHD) deliverables and the objectives listed in the work plan? When CDPH grants to Local Health Departments (LHDs), we are asking you for deliverables or outcomes. For example, Deliverable #1 is to have a plan on how to implement programs within your county. Deliverable #1 will be accomplished through this FFY 2015 planning process. W.3 Each year, our CNAP formulates a strategic action plan and we determine how we will work together in our jurisdiction. In our SNAP-Ed work plan, should we identify activities that we would normally plan with non-funded partners? Please include SNAP-Ed-specific activities in your work plan. You can review your needs assessment to determine areas of your county where your SNAP-Ed activities can support what is already occurring in your county as a result of the work done by non-funded partners. In your narrative, please provide a summary of how your SNAP-Ed funded activities will fit into your county as a whole and how the CNAP partners are addressing some of the needs. W.4 We are a small rural program with only two implementing agencies in our county. There are multiple intervention categories, but we are concerned that all of the intervention categories will not be sustainable with our current funding. We understand the challenges of small rural counties with limited funding. Please do the best you can with the funding allocation for FFY 2015 to write a plan that is as comprehensive as possible. Consider looking at how you can build upon existing SNAP-Ed services in your jurisdiction and how you can layer on what is already occurring to support a more coordinated and comprehensive approach. W.5 In Section B: Target Audience Description, are the figures for gender, age, race/ethnicity, etc. supposed to be reported by the different agencies or would you like them to be presented for the county as a whole? Please provide the figures for the county as a whole. They do not need to be broken down by different agencies. W.6 The sample work plan template encourages the use of SMART objectives. One example will measure behavior change while another will measure numbers reached. Is there a specific way you would like the SMART objectives written? Your objectives should be written in the SMART format: Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time Based. If you look at the template, we are asking you to submit objectives by intervention category. You can make a judgment at the local level as to what you want to measure for each intervention category. For some intervention categories, it may make sense to have a behavioral or knowledge percentage change, while in other cases it should be written as a process/numbers change. For specific activities where you conduct an outcome evaluation, your objectives should be connected to what you will measure in your outcome evaluation. For other activities where you may track Policy, Systems and Environmental (PSE) change, your objective may be more process-oriented. W.7 Can you provide clarity on the level of specificity you would like included for each activity? For example, is it okay to separate activities by agency or should the activities be more broad? It is important to understand which agency is delivering the activity, therefore you are encouraged to provide specifics. They should be written so the activities are clear, will meet your local objectives, are SNAP-Ed focused, address community need and are allowable under the SNAP-Ed Guidance. How you write the activities in your work plan will depend on who is doing what and what works best for your jurisdiction. W.8 When we receive feedback from the State Implementing Agencies (SIAs) on our work plans, is the work plan coordinator responsible for communicating with the other Local Implementing Agencies (LIAs) to make the changes that need to happen? Or will the SIA work plan work group assist the agencies? What about changes that need to be made to the budgets? The work plan coordinator will focus on the work plan with support from the SIAs. With respect to the budget, each LIA will be working with their respective SIA on changes that need to be addressed. W.9 I do not see a place in the work plan template for Catholic Charities. Our county also has a Get Fresh grant, so it could be confusing. Do we add them in separately or will there be an updated template provided? Catholic Charities falls under CDSS/CWD since Catholic Charities is not considered an implementing agency. You can identify Catholic Charities in your work plan by checking the box for "CWD" and listing "Catholic Charities" as a subcontractor. Please contact your liaison at CDSS to discuss this in further detail if you still have questions. W.10 In the work plan template, Physical Activity is listed two times. Is there a distinction between the two? If so, please clarify. Thank you for your comment. For the state level objectives, Objective 3 is intended for individual behavioral changes, while Objective 4 is for Policy, System or Environmental (PSE) changes. On page 2 under "Key Messages," we have noted physical activity is included twice. This will be corrected. W.11 Will extensions be granted for submission of the Work Plan and/or budget? No, extensions will not be granted for submission of the Work Plan and individual budgets. Counties and jurisdictions have been provided with reasonable time to complete these documents. W.12 How is each individually funded entity supposed to record/forecast unduplicated participants for the purpose of determining budget when the total unduplicated number is to be reached together through combined efforts to serve the needs of the county? CNAP meetings offer the best opportunity for collaboration among all local SNAP-Ed funded agencies. Project directors and leads from LIAs responsible for writing the Work Plan and budgets need to collaborate and communicate to avoid duplication of services within their counties/jurisdictions. SNAP-Ed agencies are required to track and report unduplicated participants and contacts in the Education and Administrative Reporting System (EARS) form. Also, Annual Reports help states track the numbers reached through combined efforts. We encourage you to think beyond reach and instead work collaboratively to provide complementary strategies that will achieve greater outcomes and impact. W.13 I'm having difficulty finding the breakdown of SNAP-Ed eligible population by the age groups listed. The profile provided by CDPH has them grouped differently than the work plan. In your needs assessment, if the data source has SNAP-Ed eligible broken down into other age categories, you should still be able to describe the needs in your jurisdiction for specific age populations. For EARS reporting to USDA, there are specific age breakouts. The data you collect for your needs assessment may not always coincide with the age breakdown required for EARS reporting. W.14 In Section E: SNAP-Ed Targeting Summary, we are using ACS data for 2006-2010; however, in the drop-down menu, the only options are for 11 or 12. You should use the most recent data available when looking at your targeting plan and qualifying sites. Please consult with your SIA for additional guidance on more recent data that is available. W.15 For UC CalFresh, we used to provide the gender, age range and ethnicity data for only the direct education, which we are able to collect during the delivery of the education. For this plan, Public Health has received instructions to estimate the gender, age, and ethnicity distribution for the total of the projected numbers (direct + indirect + PSE) using the county profile provided at the February Forum. This is a different methodology. Could you expand a little more about it and how valid is it to continue collecting the data from our direct education?
For direct education, you can collect demographic information by using a data card or the demographics of a school or agency. We encourage you to use the appropriate data sources for your direct education.
In group classes or community events, it can be difficult to collect this information if you are not using data cards. It would be appropriate to use the county data profile to estimate who is being served. However, if it is a targeted event, then you would most likely not use the county data because you are targeting a specific population.
For media activities you should work with the media outlets to provide the appropriate demographic data. When reporting "impressions" or reach through media, please work with your SIA to verify what is being reported.
W.16 In Section B: Target Audience Description, our county used ACS data and there was a category identified a "some other" since there are some individuals who do not want to choose Hispanic as being a race. Is it okay that the total does not equal to 100%? This should add up to 100%.
|R.1||What is the expectation for number of indirect reach?||There should be a balance between direct education, indirect education, and policy, systems and environmental approaches in your jurisdiction. Direct education is strongly encouraged as this is the basis for doing PSE work.|
|R.2||Will there be quarterly feedback to provide the local implementing agencies with information on the data that has been collected and who has been served by each agency?||There has been dialogue about this at the state level; however, we do not have a system in place. CDPH is working with AAA and CDSS to enter EARS information into a common system, while UC CalFresh has their own reporting tools workbook.|