» Articles » PMID: 40071117

A Study Comparing Positive Benefits for Parents, and Their Children, of Children Attending the UK's Holiday Activities and Food Program to Parents of Non-attendees

Overview
Specialty Public Health
Date 2025 Mar 12
PMID 40071117
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

The Holiday Activities and Food (HAF) is a UK Department for Education (DfE) funded program that provides free food and activities for 5-16-year-olds in receipt of means-tested free school meals. This evaluation focuses on parent/caregiver perceptions of HAF benefits during the 2021 and 2022 school holidays for a sample of parents/caregivers whose children attended HAF ( = 736) and a sample who did not attend HAF ( = 885). The results show that parents of children who attend HAF for 4 weeks (i.e., the '4-Week' HAF treatment group) report that their children engage in more weeks of physical activity compared to children in the Non-Attendee group ( = 0.59, 95% CI [0.25, 0.94]). Parents/caregivers of children who attended HAF for 6 weeks or more report no significant difference in household food insecurity compared to parents/caregivers in the Non-Attendee group ( = -0.27, 95% CI [-0.70, 0.16]). The results also show that parents/caregivers are concerned about affordable childcare if their children attend 6 weeks or more of HAF ( = -1.33, 95% CI [-2.07, -0.59]). For parents and caregivers of children who attend HAF for 1 to 5 weeks there is no difference in self-reported compared to parents/caregivers of non-attending children ( = 0.57, 95% CI [-0.09, 1.23]), but parents/caregivers whose children attend 6 weeks or more of HAF report significantly better wellbeing than parents in the control group ( = 1.12, 95% CI [0.56, 1.69]). Parents and caregivers of attendees in the HAF treatment groups are no more or less likely to believe that children are safe in their neighborhood than in the Non- Attendee group ( = 0.12, 95% CI [-0.11, 0.34] for 6 or more weeks of attendance vs. non-attendees). These findings are discussed in relation to prior research, and we make several HAF policy recommendations.

References
1.
Round E, Shinwell J, Stretesky P, Defeyter M . An Exploration of Nutritional Education within the Holiday Activities and Food Programme in England. Int J Environ Res Public Health. 2022; 19(4). PMC: 8872040. DOI: 10.3390/ijerph19042398. View

2.
Kwong A, Pearson R, Adams M, Northstone K, Tilling K, Smith D . Mental health before and during the COVID-19 pandemic in two longitudinal UK population cohorts. Br J Psychiatry. 2020; 218(6):334-343. PMC: 7844173. DOI: 10.1192/bjp.2020.242. View

3.
Bates L, Zieff G, Stanford K, Moore J, Kerr Z, Hanson E . COVID-19 Impact on Behaviors across the 24-Hour Day in Children and Adolescents: Physical Activity, Sedentary Behavior, and Sleep. Children (Basel). 2020; 7(9). PMC: 7552759. DOI: 10.3390/children7090138. View

4.
Warner P . Ordinal logistic regression. J Fam Plann Reprod Health Care. 2008; 34(3):169-70. DOI: 10.1783/147118908784734945. View

5.
Daly-Smith A, Zwolinsky S, McKenna J, Tomporowski P, Defeyter M, Manley A . Systematic review of acute physically active learning and classroom movement breaks on children's physical activity, cognition, academic performance and classroom behaviour: understanding critical design features. BMJ Open Sport Exerc Med. 2018; 4(1):e000341. PMC: 5884342. DOI: 10.1136/bmjsem-2018-000341. View