1. Innovation
1.1. The case for innovation
1.1.1. Childhood obesity: a wicked problem - needs systematic, underlying approach
1.1.1.1. This intervention takes place in the "Food Culture" portion by addressing the disconnected relationship our nations' kids have with food via our culture's lifestyle, food marketing etc
1.1.1.1.1. Research has shown that food advertisements have negative impacts on how our kids see healthy food, their relationship with what food is/where it's from and the ability of parents to influence what their kids eat (Roberts, 2005)
1.1.1.2. Interactive curriculum aims to create foundation for healthy relationship between children and food
1.1.1.2.1. This relationship is an underlying and systematic approach to achieving long-term and inherent healthy eating habits
1.1.2. Bypasses typical difficulties when implementing school programs
1.1.2.1. $$
1.1.2.1.1. No need for school to carry burden of overhead
1.1.2.2. Space
1.1.2.2.1. No need for school to designate valuable space
1.1.3. Potential independent business venture
1.1.3.1. Summer programs
1.1.3.2. Schools bring on for extended classes
1.1.3.3. Private classes/camps
1.1.3.4. As Weiss & Legrand (2011) say " innovation is applied creativity that achieves business value"
1.2. Ideation & brainstorming process
1.2.1. Program and curriculum
1.2.1.1. Educational/Interactive projects:
1.2.1.1.1. How different kinds of food grow
1.2.1.1.2. Healthy and fun cooking classes
1.2.1.1.3. Local farmers markets; have farmers come speak
1.2.1.1.4. Lessons on how to navigate the grocery stores for good food and what to look for/pay attention to on packaging and during advertisements
1.2.1.1.5. Gardening Component
1.2.1.1.6. Cooking/food handling demonstrations
1.2.1.2. Recurring, weekly visits to school/classroom enrolled
1.2.1.2.1. Schools are natural setting to influence children's eating patterns
1.2.2. How to reach a large number of students
1.2.2.1. Mobile Unit
1.2.2.1.1. A mobile truck/trailer "classroom" that can travel between schools throughout the week, stopping at each school once a week for lessons and activities. The trailer would park and "open up" to create indoor/outdoor activity/cooking and lecture space
1.2.2.1.2. Why it is innovative...
1.2.3. Extend beyond the bounds of school
1.2.3.1. Continuous Education Portion:
1.2.3.1.1. Take home assignments
1.2.3.1.2. Students who have gone through the program and are now too old can come back as instructors/aids
1.2.3.1.3. Opportunity to sign up for summer classes/camps
1.2.3.1.4. Tools/recipe books to take home
1.3. Rapid prototyping
1.3.1. Mindmap
1.3.1.1. Conveys detailed program information
1.3.1.1.1. Programs expectations
1.3.1.1.2. Program's needs
1.3.1.1.3. Program justification
1.3.1.1.4. Presented to potential funders and schools showing interest
1.3.2. Prezi
1.3.2.1. Accessible, informative presentation format
1.3.2.1.1. General overview
1.3.2.1.2. Presented to potential schools and parents
1.3.2.1.3. Can be used as general project introduction
1.3.3. Experience prototype
1.3.3.1. School pilot program
1.3.3.1.1. School administration
1.3.3.1.2. Students
1.3.3.1.3. Teachers
1.3.3.1.4. Parents
1.3.4. Look at existing models
1.3.4.1. Rentable game trucks
1.3.4.2. NOAH Clinic mobile care unit
1.3.4.3. Food trucks
1.4. Considerations for Course Corrections
1.4.1. Satisfaction survey results
1.4.1.1. Students
1.4.1.1.1. Did they enjoy it?
1.4.1.1.2. What did they like most?
1.4.1.1.3. What did they like least?
1.4.1.1.4. What did they take away from it?
1.4.1.2. Parents
1.4.1.2.1. Did they see a change at home?
1.4.1.2.2. Were they involved in assignments and program components?
1.4.1.2.3. Did they learn anything?
1.4.1.3. School/teachers
1.4.1.3.1. Was the program easy to establish and maintain?
1.4.1.3.2. Did they have enough training to effectively teach?
1.4.1.3.3. What could be done better?
1.4.2. Expanding audience`
1.4.2.1. Private "classes"
1.4.2.2. Increase/decrease targeted age groups
1.4.2.3. Summer camps
1.4.2.4. Additional programming?
2. Leadership Structure
2.1. Project Vision
2.1.1. Define goals and objectives
2.1.1.1. Encourage innate healthy eating patterns in children
2.1.1.1.1. Via interactive and hands on activities, help establish a healthy relationship with food
2.1.1.2. Become model for school food programs
2.1.1.3. Encourage healthier food lunch options
2.1.1.3.1. Integrate with garden component
2.1.1.3.2. Reduce on-site, nutritionally poor food presence
2.1.2. Integrate strategic plan with the mission of schools
2.1.2.1. Develop platform for schools to encourage wellbeing
2.1.2.1.1. Address physical wellbeing in addition to educational/mental wellbeing
2.1.2.1.2. Encourage minimization of traditional food industry involvement on school grounds
2.1.2.1.3. Schools play a particularly critical role by establishing a safe and supportive environment with policies and practices that support healthy behaviors…[and] provide opportunities for students to learn about and practice healthy eating...
2.2. Facilitation Mindset - Variety of Stakeholders
2.2.1. State Government
2.2.1.1. Department of Education
2.2.1.1.1. Health and Nutrition Services
2.2.1.2. AZ Department of Health Services
2.2.1.2.1. School Garden Program
2.2.2. School related
2.2.2.1. Parents and students
2.2.2.1.1. "system exists to serve students and parents"
2.2.2.2. School board
2.2.2.2.1. ensures compliance with responsibilities and policies
2.2.2.3. District and Superintendent
2.2.2.3.1. oversees programs, rules, policies and procedures
2.2.2.4. Individual schools
2.2.2.4.1. Principals
2.2.2.4.2. Teachers and support staff
2.2.2.4.3. PTO and PTA
2.2.2.4.4. School improvement team
2.3. Emergent Leadership
2.3.1. Director of the mobile unit
2.3.1.1. Contact point for signing up and scheduling
2.3.1.2. Driver
2.3.1.2.1. and potentially the instructor if teachers and specialists are not available
2.3.2. Fundraising team
2.3.3. Outreach
2.3.3.1. School introductions
2.3.3.2. Marketing/PR
2.3.3.3. Policy and child health advocacy
2.4. Leadership Core Values
2.4.1. all leaders work for improvement of institute...not shielding from "outside interference"
2.4.2. continuous learning and colleague reviews
2.4.3. teachers as models for behavior, learning and instructional knowledge
2.4.4. leadership flows via individual expertise and not necessarily from institutional dictates
2.4.5. policymakers involved to note best circumstances and necessary resources
2.5. Sustainability Plan
2.5.1. Change
2.5.1.1. resistance to change can be a hinderance to innovation
2.5.1.1.1. Share potential program benefits
2.5.1.1.2. Keep in mind long term, beneficial goal
2.5.1.1.3. Chang avoiders or resisters must be identified, challenged, worked with, empowered and placed in the midst of the change process
2.5.2. Time
2.5.2.1. Innovation and effective change has a long timeline
2.5.2.1.1. Takes repetition and practice at innovative thinking
2.5.3. Investing in health
2.5.3.1. Create continuous grassroots support
2.5.3.1.1. Parents understand the role of the program in children's eating behaviors
2.5.3.1.2. School recognizes program goals as complementary strategy
3. Finance
3.1. Organizational Financial Impact
3.1.1. Program Startup
3.1.1.1. Mobile unit
3.1.1.1.1. The highest cost to the innovation overall...potentially $30,000- $50,000
3.1.1.1.2. Retrofitting to the programs needs
3.1.1.1.3. Consider beginning on a smaller scale
3.1.1.2. Technology portion
3.1.1.2.1. Subscription to a mobile group platform
3.1.1.2.2. Down the road: Kiosk at school for those who don't have access to computer at home and/or smart device
3.1.1.3. Insurance and Certificates
3.1.1.4. Although this start up might be pricey...what does it look like vs. starting this program and making garden at schools all across the state?
3.1.1.4.1. garden at each school
3.1.1.4.2. cost of materials
3.1.1.4.3. cost of landscaping
3.1.1.4.4. watering
3.1.1.4.5. nutrition curriculum
3.1.2. Program Continuation
3.1.2.1. Gas
3.1.2.2. Generator?
3.1.2.3. Maintaining garden portion
3.1.2.4. Compensation for individual who runs the curriculum/mobile unit
3.1.2.4.1. Can the "teacher of the program" either be a trained teacher from the school or
3.1.2.4.2. A child health/nutrition specialists who donates this small amount of team each week to come to a number of the schools (or just one) to teach the program
3.1.3. Financial barriers
3.1.3.1. schools (especially public schools) have minimal expendable resources
3.1.3.1.1. Must be considered during conception, implementation and sustenance
3.1.3.1.2. continuous meetings and discussion between stakeholders is critical to keep up on this barrier and create sustainable organization
3.2. Funding & Support Sources
3.2.1. Non-profit approach
3.2.1.1. Donations
3.2.1.2. Grants
3.2.1.2.1. Especially from foundations and sources focusing on child wellbeing
3.2.1.3. Fundraising
3.2.2. For-profit approach
3.2.2.1. Program revenue
3.2.2.1.1. Summer programs
3.2.2.1.2. Can be one-time rented for parties and events (even corporate)
3.2.3. Revenue through beneficial partnerships
3.2.3.1. Partner with local companies for in-kind donations, supplies, kick-bask system
3.2.3.1.1. Companies with vested interest i.e. health food stores and organizations with a focus on/support for child wellness
3.2.3.2. Partner with local government
3.2.3.2.1. Potential to impact public policy
3.2.3.2.2. IE portion of taxes collected for sales of nutritionally poor foods or associated locations/establishments come back to program
3.3. ROI
3.3.1. Mobile deliver
3.3.1.1. Quicker ROI than brick and mortar
3.3.1.1.1. Cost of permanent structure is generally prohibitive
3.3.2. Mobile health delivery average ROI of $21 for every initial $1
3.3.2.1. Via preventive approach
3.3.2.1.1. $$ saved from enlisted a similar program through the school
3.3.2.1.2. Student wellbeing
3.4. Regulations, Policies & Procedures
3.4.1. Appropriate accounting system
3.4.1.1. CFO
3.4.1.1.1. Heads Finance Committee
3.4.1.1.2. Reviews all purchase and budget
3.4.2. Financial controls
3.4.2.1. Finance Committee
3.4.2.1.1. School representatives
3.4.2.1.2. Parent representatives
3.4.2.1.3. Government representatives
3.4.2.1.4. Local stakeholders with subject experience
3.4.2.2. Continuous review
3.4.2.2.1. Budget
3.4.2.2.2. Year to date on expected outcomes and ROI
3.4.3. Policies & procedures
3.4.3.1. Quarterly Financial Committee meetings
3.4.3.2. Mileage logs
3.4.3.3. Class/school logs
3.4.3.3.1. how many times a school has been visited/week
4. Evidence Based Practice
4.1. Current evidence supporting innovation project
4.1.1. Childhood obesity is a costly "epidemic"
4.1.1.1. Obesity rates among kids and the direct and indirect healthcare costs have risen dramatically in recent history
4.1.1.1.1. Since 1980, percent of obese 12-17 year olds has increased 64% and 98% among 6-11 year olds (Straus, 2012)
4.1.1.1.2. Direct and indirect costs associated with childhood obesity quadrupled between 1980 and 1999 (Transande, 2009)
4.1.1.1.3. Worldwide there are 170 million obese children (Hendriks, 2012)
4.1.1.2. Comorbidities
4.1.1.2.1. Emotional & Psychological
4.1.1.2.2. Physical wellbeing
4.1.2. Intervene early
4.1.2.1. Time spent at school
4.1.2.2. Bypasses the home obstacle of "parents are too busy" or "cannot afford it"
4.1.2.3. Instill life-long, healthy eating patterns
4.1.2.3.1. Children who are obese after age 6 have a greater than 50% chance of being obese as adults; the statistics for children ages 10-15 is 80%
4.1.2.4. "priority population" for weight intervention
4.1.2.4.1. long-term adult weightless difficult to achieve
4.1.3. Impact underlying food relationship with interaction
4.1.3.1. Interactive component to nutrition curriculum has beneficial outcomes on eating patterns, school achievement and behavior
4.1.3.2. Inclusion of a garden component
4.1.3.2.1. An interactive activity
4.1.3.2.2. Has positive impact on perceptions towards fruits and vegetable consumption
4.1.3.2.3. Teachers believe it is an effective nutrition tool
4.2. Evidence from user input
4.2.1. Students
4.2.1.1. Gardening and interactive components can impact school lunch choice
4.2.2. Parents
4.2.2.1. Want healthier options and curriculum
4.2.2.2. Feel that school environment can override home values when it comes to food and eating
4.2.3. Teachers
4.2.3.1. Teachers believe gardening components can be successfully implemented and executed
5. IT Strategy
5.1. Cloud based, interactive online platform/app
5.1.1. For students, teachers, families and child health specialists
5.1.1.1. Allows curriculum to carry into home
5.1.1.1.1. Results in more effective outcomes
5.1.1.2. Can make sure to focus on best nutritional outcomes of students
5.1.1.3. needs:
5.1.1.3.1. easily navigated
5.1.1.3.2. versatile enough for all groups to use
5.1.1.3.3. has capability to retrieve and add information to the platform
5.1.2. Prototype
5.1.3. Complement current school push to move online
5.1.3.1. Including menu options
5.1.4. What it will include
5.1.4.1. Recipe sharing
5.1.4.1.1. photos
5.1.4.1.2. feedback from families regarding favorites
5.1.4.1.3. feedback from nutrition specialists
5.1.4.2. Homework/assignment access
5.2. Governance Model and Relevant Stakeholders
5.2.1. Governance Strategy: Central and Local
5.2.1.1. Involve variety of stakeholders in development and implementation
5.2.1.1.1. To ensure all parties have input per program strategy
5.2.1.1.2. Involve potential spokespeople to represent stakeholder group
5.2.2. Determining business applications
5.2.2.1. Allow teachers and professionals to provide input on what applications could be most easily implemented and could be most effective.
5.2.3. Slow implementation strategy
5.2.3.1. Start with one class and look at results before full implementation
5.2.3.1.1. Feedback from kids and families?
5.2.3.1.2. Did parents feel that children were developing healthier eating habits and were more educated?
5.2.4. Budget development
5.2.4.1. After looking at intervention "pilot study" determine successes, failures and where budget should be maximized
5.3. Needed IT Assets
5.3.1. Current assessment
5.3.1.1. Limited resources
5.3.1.1.1. Schools have extreme asset limitations: they are short on time, manpower, resources and money (Katz et al., 2011). Because the main goal of traditional schools is to educate in areas including math, science, history and writing, that is generally where resources are focused. As a result, IT assets including technology, staff, data and applications (Mintzberg et al., 1998), especially in regard to a non-priority area such as food education, are after thoughts
5.3.1.2. Limited access
5.3.1.2.1. Teachers and educators feel that the necessary resources to support a nutrition education program are there but don't think they have access to those sources or training on how to use them
5.3.2. Applications
5.3.2.1. An appropriate application means creating a software that is easy for kids, versatile to apply to multiple individuals, quick for families to utilize to use and collects the necessary information.
5.3.2.2. By providing an easy to use application we can fix the problem of teachers feeling they have no access to food education resources.
5.3.2.3. Existing examples
5.3.2.3.1. Basecamp
5.3.3. Architecture
5.3.3.1. Research shows that teachers believe active learning strategies are more effective during nutrition educations. The architecture of the IT intervention needs to incorporate these strategies.
5.3.3.2. Smart device
5.3.3.3. Computer
5.3.3.4. Kiosk system
5.3.4. Data
5.3.4.1. Student food knowledge
5.3.4.2. Eating habits
5.3.4.3. Food interactions
5.3.4.4. Curriculum use at home
5.3.4.5. A recent survey showed that teachers felt they did not have (access to) enough resources and materials. This platform gives them access to that data.
5.3.5. IT Staff
5.3.5.1. An IT individual, either staff of the school for external consultant, who can guide the school and involved teachers how to use the platform. They can they pass that information along to students and families.
5.4. Based on organizational strategies
5.4.1. Development centers on answering "how do we apply IT to the overarching goal of the organization?"
5.4.1.1. Provide a safe and nurturing environment
5.4.1.1.1. Place for children to learn, grow, become productive and capable
5.4.1.2. Encouraging a healthy relationship with food and therefore promoting healthy eating patterns is a large component of being an able bodied and nurtured individual. Although this specific goal might not be solidified in all schools, it is definitely a great opportunity to begin addressing the issue of obesity in America and the negative impact it has had on our healthcare system and economy
5.4.1.3. A cloud based platform allows parents and specialists to be involved even if not at school
5.4.1.4. A cloud based platform allows children to share what they have learned in a format that can involve their families and can be shared with others in their classrooms
5.4.2. Complementary Strategies
5.4.2.1. IT strategy to integrate into current online school movement
5.4.2.1.1. School districts are beginning to move more components of education and communication online
5.4.2.1.2. Schools even now offer menu information and nutritional information for meals
5.4.2.1.3. As form of broad leverage strategy
6. Policy
6.1. Current Policies that Impede
6.1.1. No Child Left Behind Act
6.1.1.1. Can make it difficult to implement wellness programs outside of NCLBA requirements
6.1.2. "Schools are being asked by elected officials-policy leaders, if you will-to do things they are largely unequipped to do"
6.1.2.1. This innovation will help schools become equips to fulfill these requirements and regulations
6.2. New Policies that will be impacted
6.2.1. Nutrition Education Act of 2013
6.2.1.1. requirement of nutritional education in school
6.2.1.2. H.R. 1500, 2013
6.2.2. School Challenge Program to Reduce Childhood Obesity 2009
6.2.2.1. Amendment to the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 to Establish Healthy Habits
6.2.2.2. Emphasize nutrition education and physical activity as part of curriculum
6.2.2.3. Establish nutritional requirements for all foods in schools
6.2.2.4. Integrates parents, students board, administrators and food suppliers in development of wellness program
6.2.2.5. Monitored by Secretary of Agriculture; developed with input of Institute of Medicine
6.2.3. Agricultural Act of 2014
6.2.3.1. Section 4202 sets up local procurement pilot program for schools
6.2.4. Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010
6.2.4.1. Farm to School Grant Program
6.2.4.1.1. provides funding for farm/school start up programs
6.3. Policy changes to impact system
6.3.1. Arizona trails in farm to school related legislation
6.3.1.1. Call for 10-person investigative committee
6.3.1.2. Need to think about legislation pertaining to:
6.3.1.2.1. allocating funds for farm to school program
6.3.1.2.2. reimbursement for serving local school meals
6.3.1.2.3. supporting and encouraging school gardens
6.3.1.2.4. local preferences laws to create purchasing preferences for school
6.3.1.2.5. food hubs to distribute local foods more easily
6.3.1.2.6. specific designations to include farm to school efforts within wellness policies
7. Outcomes
7.1. Qualitative Outcomes
7.1.1. Student eating patterns and food preferences
7.1.1.1. Conduct study of what foods kids are eating during lunch
7.1.2. Parent and student satisfaction
7.1.2.1. Take home survey for parents and kids (also serves as a pre/post study):
7.1.2.1.1. Approval from parents is crucial to the success and sustainability of the program. Also provide opportunities for feedback to make program better
7.1.2.1.2. Aim for at least 75% of parents to find satisfaction in some portion of the program
7.1.2.2. If parents are not satisfied with the program alterations need to be made.
7.1.2.2.1. Specific changes depend on what the feedback is
7.2. Quantitative Outcomes
7.2.1. Number of schools reached
7.2.1.1. Reach 5 schools within first the first 2 years and at least 100 students with a goal of increasing that by 50%% after first 2 years of program initiation
7.2.1.2. I could not find any AZ schools that have an established/consistent nutrition program (websites for the schools that say "nutrition program" are referring to the foods they offer at lunch and things they restrict i.e. sodas.
7.2.2. Sign ups for offered summer programs
7.2.2.1. Validates that kids and their families enjoy the program
7.2.3. Long term: an obesity rate below the average statistic
7.2.3.1. School wide goal: lower obesity rates than the national average: 1 out of 3
7.2.3.1.1. analyze BMI of students who have taken part in the program for at least 4 years…those 4 years can cross over between elementary school and middle school
7.2.4. Nutrition label literacy
7.2.4.1. Conduct a pre/post test on how kids interpret food labels
7.2.4.2. Nutrition literacy is a great example of how our current culture of innovation is focused more on knowledge creation than a concrete outcome measured by tools of measurement and calculation
7.3. Better health outcomes
7.3.1. Increase children's nutrition literacy
7.3.2. Kids are able to determine "healthfulness" by looking at ingredients and amounts. In key study nutrition knowledge improved from 18.1%-26.9% via a school education program
7.3.3. Encourage healthy interactions with and understanding of food
7.3.3.1. Food's role in wellness/nutrition
7.3.3.2. Appreciation for mealtime traditions and food's cultural/social roles
7.3.3.3. Knowledge of where food comes from, what is in it, how it's prepared
7.3.4. Basis for healthy eating behaviors
7.3.4.1. Foundation for welllness
7.3.4.1.1. Minimize obesity related chronic illness
7.4. Evolution
7.4.1. Addressing an adaptive challenge
7.4.1.1. Current ways we are addressing childhood obesity are not adequate for desired results
7.4.1.1.1. piece meal and siloed
7.4.1.1.2. pharmacological
7.4.1.2. Road map to success is made by traveling it
7.4.1.3. Will inevitably run into issues and come across program alterations to be made
7.4.2. Utilize communications committee
7.4.2.1. Flexible and definitive
7.4.2.2. Present to stakeholders and school for input
7.4.2.3. Share with staff
7.4.2.4. Sense of accountability
7.4.2.5. Instill sense of values
8. Objective II
8.1. Change Theory
8.1.1. How will change come about in this innovation program?
8.1.1.1. Pilot program results
8.1.1.2. Survey results
8.1.1.3. Short and longer term outcomes results
8.1.1.4. Measurement of outcomes
8.1.2. Change Management
8.1.2.1. Create expectation of change
8.1.2.2. Minimize fear of change
8.2. Systems theory
8.2.1. School intervention complexity
8.2.1.1. School policies and regulations
8.2.1.2. Government regulations
8.2.1.3. Parents, families and students
8.2.2. Childhood obesity as complex issue - needs systems thinking approach
8.2.2.1. lifestyle
8.2.2.2. culture
8.2.2.3. education
8.2.2.4. family
8.2.2.4.1. It is also crucial to educate parents on these issues because kids’ actions are highly influenced by “what they see modeled by people in their environment”
8.2.2.5. politics
8.2.2.6. school environment
8.2.3. Understand how different components act together when exposed to a variety of different influences simultaneously
8.3. Teamwork
8.3.1. Stakeholders from variety of organizations collaborating
8.3.2. Mastmind Collaboration
8.3.2.1. Innovation occurs at the convergence of disciplines
8.3.2.1.1. Child health
8.3.2.1.2. Schools/education system
8.3.2.1.3. Family and community
8.3.2.1.4. FDA
8.3.2.1.5. Legislators
8.3.2.1.6. Food and beverage industry
8.4. Leadership skills
8.4.1. Organizing and integrating
8.4.1.1. multiple visits and locations
8.4.1.1.1. calendar
8.4.1.1.2. maps
8.4.1.2. Intersection of a wide-range of stakeholders
8.4.2. Role modeling and mentorship
8.4.2.1. Solution centered mindset
8.4.2.1.1. Find purpose based on what we want to see happen and with charismatic optimism
8.4.2.2. “The leader’s role is to engage with the unfolding reality…and then guide others into actions to meet the demands of a reality not quite present”
8.4.3. Coordination and facilitating
8.4.3.1. Kaleidoscopic thinking
8.4.3.1.1. Consider many problems at once and from multiple angles
8.4.3.2. Perpetuating open communication between variety of stakeholders