University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Food insecurity and the impact on community college students

(USC Thesis Other)

Food insecurity and the impact on community college students

PDF

Download a page range

Download transcript

Copy asset link

Request this asset

Transcript (if available)

Content Food Insecurity and the Impact on Community College Students by Elizabeth A. Moore Rossier School of Education University of Southern California A dissertation submitted to the faculty in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education May 2022 © Copyright by Elizabeth A. Moore 2022 All Rights Reserved The Committee for Elizabeth A. Moore certifies the approval of this Dissertation Proposal Briana Hinga Hannah Lawler Patricia Tobey, Chair Rossier School of Education University of Southern California May 2022 iv Abstract This qualitative research examined the harmful impact of food insecurity on community college students. Community colleges disproportionately enroll more racially minoritized students who are prone to experience food insecurity, affecting their academic experience. In addition to the physical, mental, and health difficulties, the study investigated how food insecurity impacts the student’s achievement, persistence transfer, and ability to graduate from a 4-year university. Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory serves as the theoretical framework, centering the conceptual model by exploring the students’ influences as they navigate between two settings: home and college. Following the research, the potential and ongoing suggested reforms may reduce the number of students experiencing food insecurity and may help to alleviate barriers to their educational goals. Keywords: Community colleges, ecological system’s theory, food insecurity, setting v Dedication To all community college students who pursue higher education despite the unreasonable, and often, unfathomable challenges of experiencing food insecurity. Your courage, tenacity, grit, and dedication to advancing yourselves through learning demonstrates a level of excellence that will advance you with greatness in your desired professional path. vi Acknowledgements First, I would like to acknowledge the untenable support I received throughout this entire process from my loving partner, best friend, and dedicated husband, Patrick. Without his steadfast encouragement, commitment to healthy meal preparation, patience when words would not flow, and uncanny ability to know when to provide unsolicited admiration for this enormous personal feat, I would not have made it to the finish line – thank you. To my daughter Samantha and “sun” Kori, your enthusiasm and excitement as I tackled this journey has uplifted me in measurable ways, while emphasizing the importance of, “it’s never too late to reach for the stars.” To my family of friends, thank you for indulging me in the discourse and for accepting my wild ride as all mine. To Dr. Eric Fecht who inoculated me with excitement, seeing the potential and importance in the subject matter addressed, challenged me to jump in feet first, while reaching out to the top experts in the field of basic needs – thank you! Without the endless support of Dr. Ali Wilcox, I am confident that I would have continued down imposter syndrome lane. Ali, your counsel, guidance, and thoughtful engagement made me want to elevate my process to new heights, and I am forever grateful for the candid approach you shared so generously with us all. To my deeply dedication and truly engaged dissertation committee members Chair Dr. Pat Tobey, Dr. Briana Hinga, and Dr. Hannah Lawler: my gratitude to each of you for your sage guidance, mentorship, commitment to this process being mine and mine alone – thank you. To Dr. Kathryn E. Jeffery, Dr. Kiersten Elliott, and Dr. Susan Fila, thank you for your genuine support and sincere encouragement each step of the way. To editor- extraordinaire, Dr. Guadalupe “GG” Garcia Montano, your gift for providing a space for calm through this storm of a process is beyond appreciated – thank you! Finally, to the inspirational vii students who allowed me to explore their lived experiences through my research, I am forever indebted to you for your honesty, insight, wisdom, and trust. viii Table of Contents Abstract ..................................................................................................................................... iv Dedication .................................................................................................................................. v Acknowledgements ................................................................................................................... vi List of Tables ............................................................................................................................. xi List of Figures .......................................................................................................................... xii Chapter One: Overview of Study ................................................................................................ 1 Context and Background of the Problem ........................................................................ 2 Purpose of the Project and Research Questions .............................................................. 5 Significance of the Study ............................................................................................... 5 Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology ................................................. 6 Definition of Terms ....................................................................................................... 8 Organization of the Dissertation..................................................................................... 9 Chapter Two: Review of Literature ........................................................................................... 11 History and Mission of Community Colleges ............................................................... 11 Defining and Assessing Food Insecurity ...................................................................... 14 The Impact of Food Insecurity on College Students ..................................................... 18 Existing Barriers for Students Struggling with Food Insecurity .................................... 22 Ecological Systems Theory .......................................................................................... 25 Conceptual Framework ................................................................................................ 28 Summary ..................................................................................................................... 45 Chapter Three: Methodology .................................................................................................... 47 Research Questions...................................................................................................... 47 ix Overview of Methodology ........................................................................................... 47 Population and Interview Sample ................................................................................. 48 Instrumentation ............................................................................................................ 48 Credibility and Trustworthiness ................................................................................... 50 Research Setting .......................................................................................................... 51 The Researcher ............................................................................................................ 53 Data Collection ............................................................................................................ 53 Data Analysis .............................................................................................................. 59 Ethics .......................................................................................................................... 60 Conclusion .................................................................................................................. 61 Chapter Four: Findings ............................................................................................................. 62 Interviewee Demographics .......................................................................................... 63 Findings....................................................................................................................... 66 Results for Research Question 1 .................................................................................. 66 Results for Research Question 2 .................................................................................. 89 Chapter Four Summary ................................................................................................ 99 Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations .................................................................... 101 Discussion for Findings for Research Question 1 ....................................................... 101 Discussion for Findings to Research Question 2......................................................... 108 Implications for Practice ............................................................................................ 112 Institutional Recommendations .................................................................................. 113 Recommendations for Food Program Enhancements.................................................. 117 Recommendations for Professional Development ...................................................... 120 x Implementation and Change Management ................................................................. 130 Limitations and Delimitations .................................................................................... 134 Recommendations for Future Research ...................................................................... 136 Conclusion ................................................................................................................ 137 References .............................................................................................................................. 138 Appendix B: Recruitment Handout/Email Text ....................................................................... 161 Appendix C: Sample Preview of Qualtrics Form ..................................................................... 163 Appendix D: Sample Interview Confirmation Email ............................................................... 165 Appendix E: Participant Profile Form ..................................................................................... 166 Appendix F: Informed Consent for Research .......................................................................... 168 Appendix I: Sample Basic Needs Syllabi Statements .............................................................. 176 xi List of Tables Table 1: Student Demographics 63 Table 2: Interviewees’ Use of Campus Food Programs 70 Table 3: Student Quotes Exemplifying Favorable Experiences with Food Pantry Programs 74 Table 4: Student Quotes Exemplifying Barriers With Food Pantry Programs 76 Table 5: Student’s Opinions and Values About the Delivery Meal Program 78 Table 6: Student Quotes About Their Experience with the To-Go Meal Program 80 Table 7: Student Quotes About the Sense of Being Cared For 84 Table 8: Student Quotes About Experiencing Stigma Associated with Seeking FI Support 87 Table 9: Student’s Lack of Food Program Knowledge Prior to Entering College 90 Table 10: How Students Received Communication About Food Programs 92 Table 11: Student Quotes About the People Who Helped Them Navigate College 95 Table 12: Student Statements About the Impact of COVID-19 (Exosystem) 99 Table 13: Summary of Findings Organized by Research Question 100 Table 14: Hiatt (2006) ADKAR Steps for Implementation at CCC 134 Appendix A: Interview Questions 155 Appendix G: To-Go Food Program Five-Step Process 173 xii List of Figures Figure 1: Varying Categories of Food Security from the USDA Economic Research Service 16 Figure 2: Conceptual Framework Indicating Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological System Theory and the Impact Food Insecurity has on Community College Students 45 Figure 3: Interviewees’ Participation in CCC Food Support Programs 71 Figure 4: Kotter’s (1996) Eight-Step Model of Organizational Change 124 Appendix H: Cares Community College Communication Channels 175 1 Chapter One: Overview of Study Food insecurity among college students is a nationwide problem (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2019). Defined by the “limited or uncertain availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods or the ability to acquire such foods in a socially acceptable manner” (Anderson, 1990, p. 1576), food insecurity is silent, without identity, and is often faceless among college students (Henry, 2017). Although there are no nationally representative data of college students impacted by such severe and chronic hunger, the existing literature through self-reported survey data revealed that one in three college students experienced food insecurity before the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) crisis (Bruening et al., 2017; Laska et al., 2020; Nikolaus et al., 2020). In contrast, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) estimates that, nationwide, 10.5% of households are food insecure (USDA, 2021b). Some colleges and universities have taken steps to ensure that students have access to free food, demonstrated by the increased number of college campus food pantries (College and University Food Bank Alliance [CUFBA], 2019). Although the year-over-year increase in the number of colleges hosting food pantries is significant, the data represents a fraction of the 4,360 degree-granting colleges and universities nationwide (National Center for Education Statistics [NCES], 2021b). This study addresses the harmful impact of food insecurity on community college students’ journey through college. This problem is critical to address because students impacted by food insecurity are less likely to persist, transfer, or graduate from a 4-year university, failing to reach their academic goals (Bruening et al., 2017; Ilieva et al., 2019). The current qualitative study examines the ecological system and how an institution impacts persistence among students who experience FI at a large, urban community college on the west coast. 2 Context and Background of the Problem In 2019, approximately 10.5% of U.S. households experienced food insecurity at some point during the year, according to the data gathered by the U.S. Census Bureau (USDA, 2021b). Comparatively, research indicates that among the nearly 20 million students enrolled in higher education in 2019 (NCES, 2021a), a range of 14% to 59% of students on each college campus report experiencing food insecurity during their time in college (Goldrick-Rab, 2018; Henry, 2017; Patton-López et al., 2014). With community college students making up 32% of the college population in the U.S. and disproportionately serving more Black and Latinx students, who are far more likely to experience food insecurity, than their 4-year counterparts, it is critical to examine the prevalence of food insecurity in community colleges and the detrimental impacts on their students. Community Colleges William Rainey Harper, who held the office of president of the University of Chicago, is responsible for opening the first community college in 1901, with the intended goal of making higher education accessible (Drury, 2003). Today, 41% of all undergraduate students attend community colleges, including 39% of all first-year students (American Association of Community Colleges [AACC], 2021). According to the U.S. Department of Education (2021), there are 936 community colleges across the nation (AACC, 2021). Moreover, community colleges are open-access institutions, admitting any individual who wishes to enroll in higher education, including populations who historically have been denied access to higher education, including racially minoritized students, reducing the barrier of the high cost of university by increasing postsecondary access to all (Schudde & Goldrick-Rab, 2015). Nationally, community colleges enroll a significant percentage of racially minoritized students, evident by the fact 44% 3 of all Black students, 53% of all Latinx students, and 39% of all Asian/Pacific Islander students attend a 2-year institution as their first point of college entry (AACC, 2021). Largest National College System California is home to the largest college system in the United States, with 116 community college districts (California Community College Chancellor’s Office [CCCCO], 2021). Districts with multiple, separate institutions are known as multi-college districts in comparison to a single- college district with just one community college (CCCCO, 2021). Moreover, the community college system is particularly important for students who identify as ethnic minorities. Community colleges disproportionately serve more racially minoritized students than 4-year institutions (Ma & Baum, 2016). For the purposes of this study, Cares Community College (CCC) is a single-college district 1 . Nationally recognized as a Hispanic-serving institution (Hispanic Association of Colleges & Universities [HACU], 2021), CCC serves a diverse population that reflects ethnic and socioeconomic diversity. The majority of CCC students enroll in 11.5 units or fewer, classifying them as part-time students. Three-quarters of the student population seek to transfer to a 4-year university or college, with the majority of the student body’s total enrollment eligible for financial aid based on their low socioeconomic status (SES), defined by their estimated family income (Federal Student Aid, 2021). To effectively serve the diverse population of students, CCC offers a robust array of services to aid students who experience food insecurity. Prior to the pandemic and strategically placed across the campus in high-trafficked areas, one dozen food pantry closets offered shelf- stable goods (e.g., canned goods, grains, dried beans), grab-and-go snacks, and access to other 1 Information derived from organizational websites and documents not cited to protect anonymity. 4 resources. Meal vouchers with a monetary value to purchase campus food were available to students who self-identify and meet the qualifications for the program (e.g., registered as a student carrying at least six units). A mobile-based application (app) notified students on campus in real time when leftover food from a meeting, event, or gathering is available. Further, in direct response to the campus moving from traditional on-ground classes to remote-only courses due to COVID-19, the food programs also pivoted during the unprecedented period during which the study took place. A weekly drive-through food pantry was available to all students regardless of unit load. Additionally, students who experience food insecurity can participate in one of two no- cost food programs: one delivering nutritious meals each week to their residence and the other providing access to meals that can be ordered online at a local restaurant and picked up. Moreover, a dedicated social worker manages referrals from faculty, staff, and self- identifying students, assessing their basic needs, and assisting qualified students in registering for CalFresh, California’s Supplemental Nutritious Assistance Program (SNAP), historically known as food stamps (California Department of Social Services [CDSS], 2021; Feeding America, 2021). SNAP is the nation’s largest federal food assistance program that provides qualified individuals with access to a monthly allowance for groceries using an electronic benefits transfer card (CDSS, 2021). Despite these student services programs, recent CCC survey data 2 finds that 54% of students were food insecure in the prior 30 days. A 2017 national survey sampling 70 community colleges with a total population of 33,000 students found that two out of three students attending community colleges are food insecure (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2017; Ilieva et al., 2019), with at least one in five students identified at the very lowest level of food security, indicated by multiple disruptions in eating patterns and reduced food intake (Bruening et al., 2 Information derived from organizational websites and documents not cited to protect anonymity. 5 2017; USDA, 2020). The data from CCC are consistent with national trends related to food insecurity among community college students. Purpose of the Project and Research Questions Community college students experiencing food insecurity represent a complex and critical problem. Examined through Bronfenbrenner’s (1979, 1995, 2005) lens and the ecological systems theory (EST), the purpose of the research is to understand the ecological system, or setting, at an institution that influences students’ ability to persist, or the ability to persevere in college classes to obtain their academic goal (Contreras & Contreras, 2015). The research questions that guided the study state the following: 1. What are the experiences and perceptions of community college students using food support programs? 2. What institutional factors facilitate or create barriers for students accessing and utilizing food programs? Significance of the Study Nationwide, college completion rates, defined by degree or certificate attainment (NCES, 2021a), continue to drop, particularly among two student groups: those who are economically disadvantaged (Bound et al., 2010; Broton & Goldrick-Rab, 2018) and those who are racially minoritized students (Contreras & Contreras, 2015). The research on this topic illustrates that food insecurity is a complex and multi-faceted problem that impacts community college students in various ways. An analysis conducted by Phillips et al. (2018) indicated that students impacted by food insecurity had 3.49 times greater odds of academic disruption, resulting in withdrawing or dropping out of college altogether, compared to food secure students. Students who face no challenges with food security are more likely to achieve academically than food insecure 6 students, as indicated by the latter group’s lower grade point averages (Maroto et al., 2015). The ecological systems that inform and shape college students may originate from a public school system where subsidized food programs were available and part of their home setting or how their families managed day-to-day food-related basic needs (i.e., food stamps, food pantries). Understanding these ecological systems provides direction and guidance on how best to develop the recommendations to address this problem of practice. Community colleges disproportionately enroll more racially minoritized students who are more likely to experience food insecurity in addition to other hardships affecting their academic experience compared to those attending 4-year universities (Vasquez et al., 2019). Nationally, this includes 21% Latinx students and 71% Black students (Vasquez et al., 2019; Wood et al., 2015). This research explores the differing degrees to which food insecurity impacts students’ academic experience. Providing insight through context and background by exploring the various EST systems further illuminates the challenges for students experiencing this phenomenon. Overview of Theoretical Framework and Methodology Utilizing EST (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, 1995, 2005), this qualitative methodological study examined the nested systems that influence and impact a student’s lived experience in the setting in which they learn (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). Specifically, this research focused first on the student as the individual at the center of the nested system (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). Next, the research examined the settings within the student’s microsystem, mesosystem, and exosystem as well as broadly explored the connection with the chronosystem (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). Students entering community college may have matriculated through a public K-12 educational system that provided subsidized meal programs and support to their family (i.e., microsystem), contributing to their basic needs (Broton & Goldrick-Rab, 2018) and providing sufficient 7 nutritious food (Farahbakhsh et al., 2017). However, the community college food landscape is significantly different, and in many cases, absent of comparable programs (Broton & Goldrick- Rab, 2018), placing students who pursue higher education in a precarious financial position given the cost of post-secondary education (Goldrick-Rab, 2018). Here, the mesosystem represents the community college, its personnel, and programs that directly and indirectly shape the experience of the student centered in the theory. The EST serves as the lens to understand the relationship between the systems and structures impacting students as they transition from a K-12 setting to community college. The population, convenience sample, and sample size determination (Creswell & Creswell, 2018) included a stratification of 11 CCC students who participated in the college’s food programs. Synchronous, semi-structured, open-ended, online interviews provided the researcher an opportunity to build rapport with the student (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), gathering important data on their history and lived experiences within their various ecological systems at home and in college. Although the macrosystem plays a role in students’ lived experience, this research focused on the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem and briefly touched on the chronosystem, framing the research accordingly. The setting within each ecological environment also played a significant role, as the EST provided for a deeper understanding of how a student’s environment influences pursuit of higher education while experiencing food insecurity. Maroto et al. (2015) posited that community colleges serve as the next step or gateway for diverse populations who have recently completed high school and pursue higher education. Together with EST and the qualitative methodology, the research revealed an important set of recommendations to support community college students who experience food insecurity. 8 Definition of Terms Derived in large part from the literature, the definitions provided address some of the frequently used terms. The meanings of the terms are pertinent to the research, as they articulate valuable references to a deeper understanding of the problem of practice. • Basic Needs: Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy of basic needs addresses the foundational human motivation and the physiological impact that occurs when an individual lacks the basic needs such as air, water, shelter, and food. • Ecological Transition: Within the framing of a multi-setting engagement, the transition that occurs when a person enters a new setting is known as an ecological transition (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). • Dyad: A two-person system (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). • First-Generation: Defined by neither parent or guardian completing a bachelor’s degree or higher (Toutkoushian et al., 2021). • Food Insecurity: The limited or uncertain availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods, or the ability to acquire such foods in a socially acceptable manner (Alaimo, 2005; Anderson, 1990; Cady, 2014). • Hispanic-Serving Institution (HSI): A college or university where total Hispanic enrollment constitutes a minimum of 25% of the total student enrollment (HACU, 2021). • Latinx: A term used in lieu of the gender-neutral term “Latino/a” and features the fluidity of gender identities within the Latinx community (Garcia, 2017). • National School Lunch Program (NSLP): Federally funded food assistance programs in K-12 public education to serve low-income students, ensure adequate nutrition, and mitigate food insufficiency (Huang & Barnidge, 2016). 9 • Persistence: Refers to the probability that a student will persevere in college classes to obtain their academic goal. Students with high academic achievement and college credits are more likely to build academic momentum that ultimately results in college completion (Contreras & Contreras, 2015). • Racially Minoritized Students: In contrast to students of color, the term refers to the action or process that reflects an understanding of minority status that which is socially constructed in specific societal contexts (Stewart, 2013). • Setting: The physical location where students engage and gather, whether at home, on campus, or other destinations where face-to-face interaction occurs (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). • Setting Transition: The most critical direct link between two settings is the one that establishes the existence of a mesosystem in the first instance, known as the setting transition (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). • Stigma: Negative feelings or emotions expressed by students associated with seeking help or receiving food program support (Ahmed et al., 2021). • Stratification: Specific characteristics of the population represented in the study will reflect the true proportion of the institution (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Organization of the Dissertation The organization of the dissertation provides a road map of the information and research conducted. Within the context of this body of work, Chapter One provides a broad overview of food insecurity and its impact on community college students, the theoretical framework, and the conceptual framework. Chapter Two offers a comprehensive account of the previously published, peer-reviewed literature authored by content experts who researched community 10 college students and food insecurity. Here, the literature emphasized an understanding of the theoretical and conceptual framework. Chapter Three outlines the methodological approach used to ascertain the qualitative research conducted, emphasizing the population studied, the data analysis process, and ethical considerations. Chapter Four postulates the results from the qualitative data collected, and Chapter Five provides recommendations that address the problem of practice. 11 Chapter Two: Review of Literature This literature review examines the data and research proximate to FI among community college students, its impact on their college experience, and the relationship between the students’ home and college settings. Chapter Two commences with the history and mission of community colleges, followed by a comprehensive FI definition. Understanding the complexities of FI is further represented by examining how FI is assessed, including the USDA categories or levels that evaluate the varying degrees of hunger. Next, the data illuminates the history and limited research surrounding FI, emphasizing the effects of FI on the student experience. Equally important, the literature review posits Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) theoretical framework in a condensed manner, examining the relationship between the student as the individual and their microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and chronosystem, which influence their journey from high school, the transition into community college, and their experience as they pursue their academic goals. Moreover, the data examine the barriers and potential solutions to alleviate the burden this hardship presents. Chapter Two also presents the conceptual framework, key theoretical principles, and the application to the research centered on FI among community college students. History and Mission of Community Colleges Community colleges in the United States, originally called junior colleges, were founded in 1901 in Joliet, Illinois, by the president of the University of Chicago, William Rainey Harper. Prior to establishing the junior college, Harper instituted “organizational separation” at the University of Chicago by dividing the university’s traditional 4-year program into two distinct degree-attaining tracks. As such, general education courses taken within the first two years of college earned a separate degree, “introducing the associate’s degree” (Drury, 2003, p. 2), 12 whereas the upper division track, once completed, earned the traditional bachelor’s degree (Drury, 2003). The formation, development, and expansion of the community college system were based on several national goals. Drury (2003) posits that to operate the nation’s growing industries, including the ability to “capture growing educational and training markets within the increasing complex ecology of the American education system,” more community college campuses were developed to accommodate the ongoing demand for higher education (Brint & Karabel, 1989, as cited in Meier, 2018, p. 7). Moreover, the need to improve social and educational reform to advance democracy and support open access to higher education for all persons led the “drive towards social equality,” given that the educational economic system was evolving rapidly following WWII (Drury, 2003, p. 4). Further, the construction and operation of a community college added regional value to the cities and neighborhoods, offering open-access education to all citizens (Drury, 2003). Events Shaping Community College Several significant historical events contributed to the expansion and sustainability of community colleges, including the Great Depression (1929–1939), where unemployed persons enrolled in college, to the Truman Commission Report of 1947 that validated the need for community colleges to serve as cultural centers, rich in curriculum and free of charge (Drury, 2003; Kater, 2018). Post-World War II, another surge in college registrants occurred, enhanced by the implementation of the GI Bill of Rights, granting veterans specific benefits related to attending to or returning to college (Drury, 2003). Along with veterans, who today comprise 5% of the community college population (AACC, 2021), 2-year institutions serve dynamically 13 diverse population of students, including first-generation students (29%), students with disabilities (20%), single parents (15%), and international students (9%) (AACC, 2021). Today’s Community College In 2021, more than 12 million of all undergraduate students attended community colleges, including 39% of all first-year students (American Association of Community Colleges [AACC], 2021). According to the U.S. Department of Education (2021), there are 936 community colleges across the nation (AACC, 2021). Community colleges are open-access institutions, admitting any individual who seeks enrollment in higher education, including populations who historically have been denied access to higher education and reduce the barrier to the high cost of university by increasing postsecondary access to all (Schudde & Goldrick-Rab, 2015). Nationally, community colleges enroll a significant percentage of racially minoritized students, evident by the fact 44% of all Black students, 53% of all Latinx students, and 39% of all Asian/Pacific Islander students attend a 2-year institution as their first point of college entry (AACC, 2021). Mission Central Representing the statewide system, the CCCCO’s mission is to “provide students with the knowledge, background and training necessary to compete in today’s economic workforce” (CCCCO, 2021). Examining CCC, their mission scaffolds on CCCCO’s mission, setting its intention to create a learning environment that is inclusive, safe, and offers each student the opportunity for personal and intellectual growth, exploration, and inclusivity. CCC recognizes the immense contribution of its dynamically diverse student body that is local, national, and global in its composition. The affordability and accessibility aspects of community college are core values at CCC, with pathways for students to transfer to a 4-year university, seek career 14 training, and promote lifelong learning. Since 2014, One of the major recent actions’ community colleges have had to examine is the impact food insecurity has on its students. Defining and Assessing Food Insecurity The difference between hunger and FI is an important distinction. The USDA defines FI as “a household-level economic and social condition of limited or uncertain access to adequate food” (USDA, 2021a). In comparison, hunger is “an individual-level physiological condition that may result from food security” (USDA, 2021a). For the purposes of this research, the emphasis was on food insecure community college students and examines the varying food security categories outlined by the USDA. Defining Food Insecurity Maslow’s (1943) hierarchy of basic needs addresses the foundational human motivation and the physiological impact that occurs when an individual lacks basic necessities such as air, water, shelter, and food. Used internationally to describe the instability of food supplies in poor nations, the USDA and Department of Health and Human Services adopted the term food insecurity in 1994 as a salient concept assessing food acquisition struggles (Alaimo, 2005; Habicht et al., 2004). The USDA and the Economic Research Service play a leading role in federal research on food security and food security measurement in U.S. households and communities (USDA, 2020). The definition of food security and its varying levels of severity derive from the USDA site. As such, the USDA developed a range of labels to describe and provide a spectrum of thresholds for food security (USDA, 2020). Until 2005, three categories comprised the food insecurity definition: food security, FI without hunger, and FI with hunger (USDA, 2020). In 2006, a language revision addressed the description with two general categories subdivided into four areas (USDA, 2021a). The new 15 language addressed various spectrums within each of the four areas and included high food security, marginal food security, low food security, and very low food security (Maroto et al., 2015). An individual experiencing reduced quality, variety, or desirability of diet, with little or no indication of reduced food intake falls in the category of low FI (USDA, 2020). In contrast, a student classified as very low FI experiences multiple indications of disruption in eating patterns and reduced food intake (Bruening et al., 2016; USDA, 2020). Figure 1 illustrates the varying FI levels. Maslow’s theory of basic needs is a fundamental tenet when examining the correlation between community college students impacted by FI and their probability of thriving academically (Broton & Goldrick-Rab, 2018; Taormina & Gao, 2013). Without addressing one’s basic needs, academic attainment may be significantly compromised (Goldrick-Rab, 2018). For the purposes of this research, the focus centered on students who experience low and very low food security. 16 Figure 1 Varying Categories of Food Security from the USDA Economic Research Service Assessment of Food Insecurity Within the USDA’s framework for food security, students are considered food insecure if they have low or very low food security (USDA, 2021b). For decades, hunger has been a major public health issue nationally and globally (Coleman-Jensen et al., 2020; Gundersen et al., 2011; Rideout & Kostasky, 2014; USDA, 2020). Gundersen and Ziliak (2016) posited food insecure households are at a record high, impacting 21.4% of children living in the U.S., in addition to 14% of American adults. In contrast, FI is more prevalent among California college students, as 17 evident by the fact that 40% of students in the University of California system have experienced FI (Martinez et al., 2019), compared to USDA (2019) data where 10.5% of U.S. households reported FI. The data on FI experienced by college students may be underreported, as Peterson and Freidus (2020) found issues relating to assessing food insecurity. The researchers examined the tools and assessments used to evaluate food insecurity (e.g., USDA 18-questions) and found several significant deficits that failed to illustrate the full scope of the struggle students experienced, including “cultural acceptability, safety, certainty, and stability” (p. 126) as well as barriers like “time, transportation, housing, [or the] stigma” in the assessment itself (Peterson & Freidus, 2020, p.134). Additionally, the researchers indicated that traditional assessments fail to evaluate FI challenges not correlated to financial stability versus access (Peterson & Freidus, 2020). Moreover, Regan (2020) posited that FI is a measure of material hardship and that surveys like the USDA’s questionnaire do not necessarily capture the entirety of the poverty a student may experience. Thus, it is important to further examine new data to assess the community college population. The Hope Center for College, Community, and Justice (THCCCJ) released a 2021 report on basic needs during the pandemic. The center distributed a survey to more than 1.84 million students at 202 colleges and universities, and over 195,000 students completed it, with an estimated 11% response rate (THCCCJ, 2021). Nineteen of the 170 participating 2-year colleges were located in California, with the western region of the U.S. presenting the highest rates of basic needs insecurity comparatively (THCCCJ, 2021). The research measured three primary types of basic needs insecurity: housing insecurity, homelessness, and FI. Using the USDA’s 18 questions to evaluate food security, 39% of students at 2-year institutions reported being food 18 insecure, compared to 4-year university students, where 30% of students were food insecure (THCCCJ, 2021). Additionally, 44% of community college students surveyed indicated that they “worried whether [their] food would run out before [they received] money to buy more” (THCCCJ, 2021, p. 28). Finally, understanding the historical context of FI impacting college students guides the research to understand the influences in the students’ settings that may account for challenges in navigating the various environments. Historical Context of Food Insecurity Among College Students The seminal research conducted by Chaparro et al. (2009) was the first known study to examine the correlation between poor academic performance and FI. In Chaparro et al.’s quantitative study, 441 students from the University of Hawai’i at Manoa, including sophomores, juniors, and seniors, were randomly selected to participate (Chaparro et al., 2009). The non-freshmen query included FI questions about students’ previous year, focusing on their lived experiences while in college; thus, the freshman population was excluded (Chaparro et al., 2009). The results indicated that of those surveyed, 45% were food insecure or “at risk of becoming food insecure” (Chaparro et al., 2009, p. 2099). Particularly noteworthy, students who lived on campus or off campus with roommates were at higher risk of experiencing FI (Chaparro et al., 2009). One of the conclusions of Chaparro et al.’s research was a desire to seek a greater understanding of the impact of FI on students’ academic performance. As such, a closer examination of how FI impacts college students who receive food support is needed. The Impact of Food Insecurity on College Students Researchers are beginning to understand and measure FI as it relates to learning and academic achievement. The data shows FI impacts a student’s grade point average (GPA; Farahbakhsh et al., 2017), and affects their mental health and wellbeing (Payne-Sturges et al., 19 2018) and other behavioral characteristics, inserting barriers as they pursue their academic goals (Dhillon et al., 2019). However, given the limited data, there is still a need for further research to study the impact FI has on college students (Maroto et al., 2015). Getting the Grade A review of the research suggests a direct negative correlation between FI and a lower college GPA (Farahbakhsh et al., 2017; Patton-López et al., 2014). A study completed by Maroto et al. (2015) indicated that college students who are impacted by FI are 22% less likely to earn a 3.5–4.0 GPA versus a 2.0–2.49 GPA. A 10-campus study at the University of California conducted by Martinez et al. (2019) invited 67,645 college students to participate in a survey addressing FI. Utilizing the USDA’s six-item short-form instrument, 8,705 students opted in and responded to the questionnaire on FI, with 7,999 self-reporting their GPA (Martinez et al., 2020). The data denote a measurable correlation between students who earned an A average and registered on the USDA scale as food secure compared to students who earned a C average and were impacted by FI (Martinez et al., 2019, 2020). A Canadian study examined the experience of 58 college students, 89% of whom were food insecure; all had compromised health, poor academic performance, and dietary issues (Farahbakhsh et al., 2017). Thus, community college students who fall below the food security threshold and subsequently experience adversity are at higher risk of performing poorly academically and may not persist through degree completion or transfer requirements (Martinez et al., 2019). In contrast, students who face no challenges with food security are more likely to achieve academically than food insecure students (Maroto et al., 2015). Compounding these data are the social, emotional, and psychological costs associated with FI and the correlating achievement gap for food insecure students. 20 Mental Health and Psychological Costs Research indicates that FI among college students may cause mental anguish and stress, decreasing the student’s ability to concentrate and affecting their cognitive, academic, and psychosocial development (Ilieva et al., 2019; Patton-López et al., 2014). Further data illustrate the social, emotional, and psychological costs associated with one’s inability to focus and persist as well as the fact that experiencing severe FI can challenge one’s self-efficacy (Martin et al., 2016). Moreover, research has found that significant depression (Payne-Sturges et al., 2018), high levels of stress and anxiety, and other related mental health conditions directly correlate to FI (Morris et al., 2016; Payne-Sturges et al., 2018; Vasquez et al., 2019). The relationship between health and wellness and FI is prevalent. Food insecure students were negatively impacted and more likely to report poor health, depression, and anxiety than food secure students, compromising their ability to thrive academically (Patton-López et al., 2014; Payne-Sturges et al., 2018; Stebleton et al., 2020). In the systemwide study examining the relationship between FI and outcomes for students enrolled in the University of California, Martinez et al. (2019) found that high levels of FI were associated with several health deficiencies, including insufficient sleep, a lack of fruit and vegetable consumption, and increased obesity among FI students due, in part, to available food options (Martinez et al., 2019; Sano et al., 2010). In addition to its detrimental impact on physical wellbeing, there is evidence to suggest that FI negatively impacts psychosocial health. The psychosocial health of students experiencing FI is compromised, expressed by experiencing high levels of anxiety, fear of disappointing family, resentment towards their peers, and the inability to nurture social relationships (Meza et al., 2019). A study by Martin et al. (2016), however, found evidence that interventions 21 implemented by colleges and universities (i.e., modeling, tools, financial coaching) can mitigate the negative impact of FI on students’ psychosocial wellbeing. In addition to the impact of FI on mental wellness, research notes specific behavioral characteristics and influences associated with academic achievement. Food Insecurity and Student Behavior Characteristics A review of the literature reveals that researchers are starting to better understand the behavioral characteristics that negatively impact academic achievement when a student is experiencing FI. A study examining 3,765 students from 34 higher education institutions located across 12 states, including eight community colleges, examined the impact hunger has on students’ ability to achieve academically (Dubick et al., 2016). The data showed that 86% of students expressed missing class, missing a study session, and/or dropping a class due to the impact of FI (Bruening et al., 2017; Dubick et al., 2016). Behaviorally, students experiencing FI are burdened with many stressors that impact their education (Dubick et al., 2016). Students who are FI are more likely to exhibit signs of lethargy and fatigue, with faculty perceiving the student’s behavior as uninterested or unmotivated in the coursework, even when students are motivated given their physical presence (Vasquez et al., 2019; Wood et al., 2016). A research analysis conducted by Phillips et al. (2018) indicated that students impacted by FI had 3.49 times greater odds of academic interference resulting in withdrawing or dropping out of college altogether compared to those who were food secure. These behaviors point to the academic disruption that occurs due to FI, affecting a student’s ability to achieve academically (Phillips et al., 2018). 22 Limited Research on College Students Impacted by Food Insecurity Despite the earliest known research examining FI among community college students conducted in 2008 (Chaparro et al., 2009), research on its impact on college students is limited (Nikolaus et al., 2020; Twill et al., 2016). Since 1995, the USDA has annually published food insecurity data examining hunger in U.S. households (Wunderlich & Norwood, 2006). Although data on hunger in America dates to the Depression era (Wunderlich & Norwood, 2006), there is significantly less known about the specific segmentation of community college students and FI (Bruening et al., 2016; Bruening et al., 2017; Cady, 2014; Maroto et al., 2015). Additional research is needed to further understand the influences and complexities impacting the community college students who experience FI (Nikolaus et al., 2020; Peterson & Freidus, 2020). Despite the need for additional research, the data available illustrates several existing barriers and hurdles for these students. Existing Barriers for Students Struggling with Food Insecurity Several barriers exist for college students impacted by FI. Three prominent barriers include the disproportionate percentage of students from low-SES families, racially minoritized students (Contreras & Contreras, 2015), and stigma (Bruckner et al., 2021; Freudenberg et al., 2019). Racially Minoritized, Low-Income Students Black, Latinx, and low-income students disproportionately comprise the largest percentage of students enrolled in community colleges (Ma & Baum, 2016; Maroto et al., 2015). Specifically, 44% of all Black students and 56% of all Latinx students attend a 2-year institution as their first point of college entry, compared to White and Asian students who are more likely to matriculate from high school directly to a 4-year university (Ma & Baum, 2016). In 2013–14, 23 46% of all students who graduated from a 4-year university also attended a 2-year college within the previous 10 years (Ma & Baum, 2016). Concurrently, FI is more prevalent among racially minoritized students. This is symptomatic of the structural racism in the United States that negatively impacts racially minoritized groups (Odoms-Young & Bruce, 2018). The relationship between race/ethnicity and food insecurity is evident in a 16-year analysis produced by the USDA, which indicated that African American and Hispanic households were twice as likely to be food insecure compared to White households (Odoms-Young & Bruce, 2018). Further, Odoms-Young and Bruce (2018) suggest that “despite the intersectionality of race/ethnicity and other social/economic determinants, evidence suggests that the higher risk of food insecurity among people of color continues even when these other social and economic factors are removed” (p. S3). Basic needs rates are highest among marginalized students, specifically Black and Latinx students (Maroto et al., 2015). Freudenberg et al. (2019) posited that the prevalence of FI points to the fact that “39% of college students [are] from households with incomes at or below 130% of the federal poverty line” (p. 1652). Dubick et al. (2016) conducted a study with a sample of 3,765 students from 2-year and 4-year campuses in 12 states. Fifty-seven percent of Black students confirmed personal experience with FI (Dubick et al., 2016). According to a study conducted by Maroto et al. (2015), single-parent students were among the highest population experiencing FI (77%), compared to non-parent students (54%). Three-quarters of college students are nontraditional students, represented by at least one of six specific criteria: (a) registered as part-time students, (b) employed full-time, (c) financially independent, (d) provider for dependents, (e) single parent, or (f) no high school diploma or grade equivalent degree (Dubick et al., 2016). 24 Stigma Food insecurity is a complex and delicate topic (Martinez et al., 2019). Research has found that students impacted by FI cope with several social and emotional challenges while simultaneously dealing with the responsibility of their academics and employment. Students requiring assistance avoid seeking help enrolling for food programs like SNAP or visiting the food pantry, as there is a social stigma attached to the experience (Bruckner et al., 2021; Dubick et al., 2016) and the evaluation process for such benefits (Peterson & Freidus, 2020). Colleges that centralize support services like food pantries help students normalize the experience, reducing the stigma associated with needing assistance (Broton & Goldrick-Rab, 2016). However, a study examining the effectiveness of college pantries indicated that a minimal percentage of those in need of support visit the pantry due in large part to the social stigma attached to seeking assistance (Bruckner et al., 2021; Goldrick-Rab et al., 2018). Moreover, college students may not reveal the full extent of their economic challenges when completing the FAFSA due to concerns about stigma (Broton & Goldrick-Rab, 2016). Shame and stigma are accompanying emotions tied to a student’s inability to provide financially for themselves and are further exacerbated by not seeking food assistance from family, peers, or school allies (Henry, 2017). Research suggests that college support systems that offer skills building, including “food literacy, nutrition education, and living on a budget…help reduce the stigma attached to food insecurity” (Martinez et al., 2019, p. 8). Another example of how colleges mitigate stigma is loading a student’s identification card with support for meal programs (Camelo & Elliott, 2019). An examination of what influences the experience of a college student forces the examination and understanding of the various systems that may impact their journey as they matriculate from one academic setting to another. 25 Ecological Systems Theory Ecological systems theory (EST) centers the individual nested within five concentric layers: the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, macrosystem, and chronosystem (Bronfenbrenner, 2005). The focus of the study is on the student as the developing individual, the microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and chronosystem. Microsystem The microsystem is the innermost layer that contains a developing person and the immediate settings with which they directly interface (i.e., family, home, peers). A reciprocal rapport exists between the person, who influences their environment, and how their environment shapes the person (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). Mesosystem Surrounding the microsystem is the social ecology known as the mesosystem. In this system, the developing person or individual becomes an active participant in the interconnections and interrelations between two or more settings (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). The mesosystem describes the relationship between each microsystem, such as the communication between the student and their workplace, family, and peers (Crawford et al., 2019). The complexities of the mesosystem are further deepened by a diversity of four general types of interconnections: (a) multi-setting participation, (b) indirect linkage, (c) inter-setting communications, and (d) inter- setting knowledge (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). In addition to serving as a setting of support, Crawford et al. (2019) posited the mesosystem may be a source of stress, depending on the rapport and dynamic of the setting interaction. Bronfenbrenner (1979) defines multi-setting participation as “the existence of a direct or first order social network across settings in which the developing person is a participant” (p. 26 209). Considered the primary link between the settings, the individual participates in more than one mesosystem (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). In contrast, an indirect linkage exists among multiple settings when an individual lacks participation, and a third party intervenes as the proximal link between the individual and the given settings (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). Inter-setting communications is the third type of interconnection, where oral, written, and digital information conveys what is necessary from person to person in each setting. Further, the information conveyed may be one-sided or two-directional (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). Lastly, “the information or experiences that exist in one setting about the other” (Bronfenbrenner, 1979, p. 210) defines inter-setting knowledge. The various types of interconnections are an important part of the EST model, its application, and its history to better understand settings’ impact on the individual. Exosystem Enveloping the mesosystem, the next most outer layer or setting within the EST model is the exosystem. Bronfenbrenner (1979) defines the exosystem as “one or more settings that do not involve the developing person as an active participant, but in which events occur that affect, or are affected by, what happens in the setting containing the developing person” (p. 25). Examples of exosystems include activities and regulations of a college school board, the student’s parent’s network of friends, or more indirectly, the influence of local, state, or federal policy (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). Chronosystem The chronosystem focuses on changes over time, specifically considering the characteristics within an individual’s settings that contribute to their development and cultural competencies over their lifetime (Bronfenbrenner, 2005). An emphasis on milestones, life transitions, and historical events factor into the individual’s development within the 27 chronosystem (Crawford et al., 2019). For example, a student may or may not develop certain competencies during their formative years due to a lack of parental, peer, or sibling influences over time. These competencies may include learning how to advocate for certain skills, courses, or educational benefits prior to entering college (Crawford et al., 2019). History of Bronfenbrenner Examining the historical perspective, in addition to the EST model’s evolution, provides insight and understanding of the influences that lead to the now-named bioecological theory. Bronfenbrenner (1979) attributes one of the first influences of his foundational work describing human behavior to theorist Kurt Lewin’s (1935) early phenomenological research that identified the merit and impact of the interaction between an individual and their environment (Lewin, 1935, as cited in Johnson, 2008). Crawford et al. (2019) described Bronfenbrenner’s earliest model of human development where context holds significant prominence compared to person– context interactions (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Slomp et al., 2018). Here, the individual, while not a system, holds attributes that evoke emotional and psychological factors that “often influence participation” (Crawford et al., 2019, p. 47). In 1977, Bronfenbrenner continued developing this theory to include the complex layered or nested physical model illustrated in Figure 2. Bronfenbrenner (1979) addressed and defined the interaction between a developing person and their multi-setting environment by stating, The ecology of human development involves the scientific study of the progressive, mutual accommodations between an active, growing human being and the changing properties of the immediate settings in which the developing person lives, as this process is affected by relations between these settings, and by the larger contexts in which the settings are [nested]. (p. 22) 28 An important revision to the model occurred when Bronfenbrenner (1995) added the element of time: the chronosystem. Several iterations of the now-named bioecological systems theory evolved over 2 decades, with Bronfenbrenner revising the theory periodically until his death in 2005 (Mulisa, 2019). Conceptual Framework Applying EST (Bronfenbrenner, 1979) to community college students impacted by FI provides a multi-faceted, concentric, or nested, theoretical lens to better understand the impact and influence one’s immediate (micro), mezzo, exo, and chronological settings have on one’s college experience. For a college student, these may include the microsystem (e.g., family, relatives, friends, peers, neighbors, and work), the mesosystem (e.g., faculty and classmates), the exosystem (e.g., indirect policies and global influences), and changes over time, or chronosystem (Bronfenbrenner, 2005). Although the community college student impacted by FI sits at the center of the bioecological model, each system offers an intersectionality that influences the development of the student as the individual. Through the EST model, examining the interconnectedness of each system and how the framework of systems affect the individual may provide insight and understanding to the existing challenges that students experience when FI is present. The EST structure informs the research by understanding the various interconnected external influences that impact a student’s college experience and ability to thrive academically. Evaluating the connections, interactions, support, and tensions between the individual student’s microsystem and mesosystem may provide an understanding of the various influences affecting their ability to thrive academically. Understanding the external influences such as state or federal policies represented by the exosystem provides insight as to how indirect actions in policies and 29 decisions external to the student experience impact their lives. Exploring the chronosystem, gleaning a comprehensive timeline of a student’s pre-college academic experience may reveal important data as they enter and experience community college. Further, investigating through the EST lens may explain the various ways in which a student receives support through knowledge, skills, resources, and mentoring to achieve a successful transition into higher education. Lastly, EST may identify how the various structures impact a student’s academic success and overall wellbeing. The setting itself is a critical component of the EST framework, as it is where students engage in direct and indirect interactions (Bronfenbrenner, 1979; Gardiner & Kosmitzki, 2002). Here, the settings examined are twofold: the home setting and the college setting. Absent from this narrative is the macrosystem, centering the conceptual framework with the student as the individual and their microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and chronosystem. Microsystem The microsystem is the first level represented by the interpersonal relations, activity, and roles as the innermost layer for a developing student (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). Uniquely represented, the college student is the developing individual in the center of their biological ecosystem (Mulisa, 2019), interacting directly with the various influences in their environment: family, peers, neighbors, and community members (Johnson, 2008). Students hold a myriad of roles, dependent on the setting, whether at home or school. Home Setting (Micro) Among students from low-SES groups attending community college, there is a lack of “college knowledge” in the home setting among their parents or guardians (Goldrick-Rab, 2010). Important information about financial aid and other social services available in college may not 30 make its way to the household, in turn making it challenging for the student to know about services and benefits for which they may be eligible (Goldrick-Rab, 2010). “Students from socioeconomically disadvantaged family backgrounds are less likely to possess a clear sense of how to negotiate” (Goldrick-Rab, 2010, p. 453) or navigate the college’s student services programs supporting their basic needs. Parents or Guardians. Goldrick-Rab (2010) studied the challenges and opportunities community college students face entering college. Knowledge of how to navigate, pay for, and enroll in college was more prevalent when at least one parent or guardian attended college (Goldrick-Rab, 2010). Because community colleges enroll a disproportionate population of racially minoritized students, particularly first-generation students, they are “less likely to receive high-quality information” at home from a family member helping them navigate the various financial programs and opportunities that exist on campus (Goldrick-Rab, 2010, p. 452). According to research by Gandara (1998, 2002), the “single most important barrier to college access for Latino students in California is lack of instrumental knowledge of the steps needed to go to college” (Gandara, 1998, 2002, as cited by Auerbach, 2004, p. 126). Further, parents are cited as one of the top three resources students rely upon for college information (Auerbach, 2004). A study by Tornatzky et al. (2002) examined parents of Latinx students indicated that more than 67% lacked “basic information about college eligibility and planning” (Auerbach, 2004, p. 126). Moreover, first-generation college students are more frequently food insecure, as are Black, Latinx, and students who qualify for Pell Grants (Camelo & Elliott, 2019). A 2018 national survey examining 86,000 college students revealed that 53% of students originated from homes where neither parent/guardian earned a high school diploma (Goldrick- Rab et al., 2019), which correlates to the lack of guidance from within the home needed to 31 navigate the higher education setting. Moreover, students deemed independent from their family, as indicated by FAFSA data, are more likely to experience FI than students who “are claimed by their parents as dependents” (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2019, p. 15). A student quote captured in a 2020 study articulates the relationship influences that exist for some FI students: “Some students have their parent’s support. Some of us need to support our parents” (THCCCJ, 2021, p 38). Siblings. The direct interactions and influences between a student and their parents, guardians, grandparents, and siblings contribute to familial capital, or the support family provides as a resource that helps to inform the student’s understanding and educational awareness (Crawford et al., 2019). In a 2019 study examining parents of racially minoritized students identified as academically gifted, Crawford et al. (2019) posited that parents were unable to assist their children in navigating the information needed to support them in their academic pursuit, despite their desire to be a resource or source of encouragement. Moreover, Roksa et al. (2020) examined the influence of college-enrolled siblings and their interaction with their younger college sibling regarding university resources, programs, and systems. The researchers found a lack of shared experiences between college siblings (Roksa et al., 2020). The results indicated that first-year students seldom rely on information or resources from their older college-experienced siblings (Roksa et al., 2020). Work. Sixty-eight percent of students who attend college and work are food insecure (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2019; Wood et al., 2016). Moreover, these students work more hours than food secure students (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2019). A study conducted by Broton and Goldrick-Rab (2018) found that “62% of community colleges were employed” (p. 126), averaging approximately 30 hours per week. Low-income students are more likely to be employed to cover the cost of college attendance, working at least 20 or more hours per week (Cady, 2014). Dubick 32 et al. (2016) posited that while 72% of all students are employed while enrolled in college, “only 18% of students report being able to cover their college expenses by working a job” (p. 10). More research conducted by Broton and Goldrick-Rab (2018) found that most students who received some form of financial aid also worked at least 30 hours per week. Moreover, students who receive Pell Grant funding are also associated with being at high risk for FI (Dubick et al., 2016; Goldrick-Rab, 2018). However, the recent COVID-19 pandemic has exacerbated the economic challenges faced by working students. A study released by THCCCJ (2021) indicated that 42% of college students experienced job loss due to the onset of the pandemic. Working a job while in college was a barrier for students, who found it challenging to balance attending college classes, studying, and not having enough time to go to the grocery store (Henry, 2017). College Setting (Micro) It is important to understand how students navigate the campus food environment to ascertain where barriers may exist for them to secure access to food. The level of student engagement often depends on the quality of “effort related to their interaction with faculty” and staff (Greene et al., 2008, p. 517). Additionally, student peers play a role in how information about resources are exchanged in navigating college. Faculty and Staff. Although individual college staff and programmatic offices may be responsive by helping students navigate the various food security programs on campus (Dominguez-Whitehead, 2015), faculty and staff often underestimate the existence of FI among students (Crutchfield et al., 2016; Phillips et al., 2018). Where support programs exist, community college practitioners often feel isolated, uninformed, and untrained on how best to 33 evaluate or assist a student who may be experiencing FI, with a lack of critical funding and criticism from peers that they are spending their time “doing social services” rather than their assigned college responsibilities (Goldrick-Rab, 2018). Whether it is a group of college professionals at Boston’s Bunker Hill Community College where a “hunger team distributes meal vouchers to students” (Goldrick-Rab, 2018, p. 13) or financial coaches working with students who received food scholarships from the cooperative financial aid office at Houston Community College, there are models of colleges working to address FI impacting students nationwide. Separately, at Amarillo College, a 2-year community college in Texas, faculty are a critical part of the campus-wide effort to address, support, and connect students with a comprehensive basic needs program, inclusive of food resources, financial coaching, and incentives to address the significant need facing its students, 70% of whom are first-generation (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2018). It is noted that while students impacted by FI utilized staff support, it seldom offers “sufficient or adequate support” to meet the student’s basic needs (Dominguez- Whitehead, 2015, p. 294). Wood et al. (2017) conducted a study examining 3,647 California college students who reported experiencing both housing insecurity and FI. Their research indicates, Students with FI are significantly less likely to perceive a sense of belonging from faculty, feel welcome to engage inside and outside the classroom, to report having access to student services, and to see campus services as being effective in helping them address their [basic] needs. (Wood et al., 2016, p. 25) Moreover, Wood et al.’s (2017) research specifies that male students were less likely to ask for assistance from a college staff member. These data are consistent with the research by Roksa et 34 al. (2020), who illuminated the fact that students, particularly those from low-SES backgrounds and first-generation students, are challenged with finding ways to connect, communicate, or engage with faculty. Examining how Latinx students traverse the path to college, Carolan-Silva and Reyes (2013) posited that while students may have a positive rapport with faculty or college counselors, “it is not necessarily the case that [the] relationship is ‘academically relevant’ in that it provides students with the resources they need to navigate the college process” (p. 338). Further, a significant shortage of allied health faculty at community colleges (Goldrick-Rab, 2010), in addition to the funding contraction public universities have experienced, led to a reduction in student services programs, which negatively impacts students with the greatest need (Freudenberg et al., 2019). Twill et al. (2016) discussed the importance of faculty engagement with students by integrating information about FI, campus resources, and how to access the campus benefits by incorporating information into the course syllabus. Adding a statement recognizing FI exists to the course syllabus connects students and faculty (Goldrick-Rab, 2018). Further research suggests that leveraging new faculty orientations offers a mechanism to inform and educate faculty about FI to help mitigate the communication gap on college campuses (Goldrick-Rab, 2018; Twill et al., 2016). Examining the connection between the student as the individual and various programs and services on the physical campus may illuminate a deeper understanding of why college students struggle with FI. Peers. In contrast to parents, guardians, and siblings, the peer group within the ecological system of a college students’ environment serves as a solid source in assisting them as they navigate college (Ilieva et al., 2019). Carolan-Silva and Reyes (2013) examined first-generation Latinx college students matriculating from high school to college. The data illustrate that peers 35 played a significant role in providing information and assistance in helping to navigate the transition in addition to serving as a source of motivation (Carolan-Silva & Reyes, 2013). In some instances, students recognize their instability with FI as a shared experience, acknowledging that their peers may be experiencing similar challenges, while others maintain anonymity due to the stigma of need (Stebleton et al., 2020). Mesosystem Gardiner and Kosmitzki (2002) describe Bronfenbrenner’s mesosystem as the linkage between the developing individual (i.e., the student) and two or more settings (Bronfenbrenner, 1995). The mesosystem is a collective of microsystems that influence each other (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). Within the context of the research, the mesosystem is where programs and persons work together to inform students from the home setting to college and from college setting to home. Home Setting (Meso) A student’s human development is facilitated through interactions with persons who occupy various roles (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). The student moves from their home setting where they interact with parents, guardians, siblings, and relatives to the college setting where their interaction and role expands to include college faculty, staff, and other university personnel, programs, and service. Understanding the experiences of food insecure students at the meso level includes assessing how their social networks at the college, home, and peers who straddle both settings influence their experience (Barnett et al., 2019). Students who lack familial support may look to other systems (i.e., programs, faculty, counselors) to guide them through the college process (Crawford et al., 2019). Further, barriers prevent students from seeking help from their support systems because they lack the tools to access support. In a 2015 study examining self- 36 reported barriers to community college matriculation, low-SES students indicated that their home setting lacked internet connection and access to a computer to adequately meet the demands of college (Scott et al., 2016). A social worker may examine how the college or university supports FI students while further exploring how a student’s family can assist with food support (Barnett et al., 2019). In a review of the literature, Barnett et al. (2019) found that “family financial obligations such as medical bills or younger siblings may impede a college student from asking their parents or guardians for food financial assistance” (p. 77). College Setting (Meso) The solitary transition is paramount to the student’s onboarding experience (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). Thus, a student completing high school and entering college without proper support, guidance, and interaction with key campus stakeholders and absent of critical information may find navigating the college campus and resources challenging and a barrier to their higher education experience (Scott et al., 2016). Furthermore, most 2-year colleges lack the formal meal programs that exist at 4-year institutions, offering a more limited landscape of vending machines, grab-and-go store fronts, and campus cafeterias (Ilieva et al., 2019). Students develop a sense of distrust about a college setting reflective of its existing foodscape, thus creating a barrier versus accessibility to support (Ilieva et al., 2019). Ilieva et al. (2019) posited that students might develop “distrust in the institution due to its creation of a difficult campus foodscape [to navigate]” (p. 9). The data indicate that when seeking support and direction, students relied heavily on their relationships with peers, compared to asking college staff for assistance (Ilieva et al., 2019). 37 Several interventions have been implemented to assist students with navigating the complex college landscape, pointing food insecure students directly to programs and services on campus. Some of the intervention programs are on-campus food pantries, support with registration for federal food programs (Martinez et al., 2019), and identifying methods to integrate information about FI into the curriculum by encouraging faculty to add a FI statement to their syllabi (Goldrick-Rab, 2018). Food Pantry Engagement. One of the trending approaches to addressing FI on college campuses is food pantries (Dubick et al., 2016). A 2018 report by the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO, 2021) reports that 650 colleges and universities have established food pantries compared to the 70 college pantries that existed in 2013 (CUFBA, 2020). The results from the first-ever national survey examining college campus food pantries included participation from 40 states evenly distributed across the regions, with 4-year universities and 2- year colleges representing 84% of the 262 total respondents (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2018). The data yielded information regarding the establishment, funding source, physical location, stocking, staffing, hours of operations, and usage of the campus pantries (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2018). For example, the majority of Fresno State’s campus pantry model is funded and staffed by the university with supplemental funds provided by donations. In contrast, the University of Nevada- Reno’s pantry is largely operated by students and financed through student fees (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2018). Moreover, on-campus food pantries serve as a point of engagement for students who struggle with FI, demonstrating a college campus that cares about its students (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2018). Further, the food pantry is a connecting point where college staff can assist with additional resources (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2018). The physical location of a food pantry is of 38 equal importance and can be a barrier if it is not highly visible to the student population (Twill et al., 2016). This free resource for students to secure food is one example that has proven to be of value, as students are more likely to access the food pantry while on campus because they see the pantry as a college resource, compared to the stigma of accessing an offsite public assistance program (Dubick et al., 2016). Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. The USDA food support program, SNAP, formally known as food stamps and rebranded in California as CalFresh, provides qualified individuals with a monthly allocation to purchase food items (Bianco et al., 2016). Approximately 20% of FI students receive and access SNAP (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2019). The findings from a quantitative study examining FI among 707 students conducted at California State University, Chico, indicate that “despite 46% of the respondents reporting low to very low FI based on USDA criteria, and 47% of respondents assessed as eligible for CalFresh [SNAP], only 12% of all [students] were enrolled in CalFresh benefits at the time of the survey” (Bianco et al., 2016, p. 4). Community college students are more likely than their counterparts at 4-year universities to access public assistance programs such as SNAP (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2019). Moreover, some college campus stores now accept SNAP as payment for eligible grocery items (Dubick et al., 2016). Further, some colleges offer assistance with registering for SNAP benefits, as is evident in California, where 61% of students surveyed indicated such support was available on their campus (Community College League of California [CCLC], 2021). In contrast, the GAO surmises that “57% of students at risk for FI and eligible for SNAP did not collect [the] benefits” (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2019, p. 3). Because students often underutilize nutrition assistance 39 programs (Ilieva et al., 2019, p. 13), universities and 2-year colleges developed programs to help them apply for SNAP (Martinez et al., 2020). Counseling and Coaching The student may or may not interface with a counselor when entering community college, as class registration is often conducted solely online, absent of a counselor or peer to help navigate the various systems or programs. A study by McKinney and Novak (2013) examined first-generation and low-income students and found that students who enrolled in community colleges often had the most difficulty acquiring information and guidance. New student orientations, counseling offices, student health, and other student service centers serve as important access points for information engagement by college personnel to connect with students struggling with FI (Camelo & Elliott, 2019). To assist students impacted by FI, the data suggest that financial coaching is one of the common approaches’ colleges take (Bruening et al., 2017). Students who are food insecure are more likely than their counterparts to receive financial aid support (Peterson & Freidus, 2020). Some colleges are working with students to provide financial coaching in tandem with the financial aid they receive, educating students on budgeting, cost-effective pricing (Peterson & Freidus, 2020), and how to shop for and prepare low-cost, healthy food items (Payne-Sturges et al., 2018) Exosystem Johnson (2008) describes the exosystem as a system that “encompasses the larger social system, and encompasses events, contingencies, decisions, and policies over which the developing person has no influence (p. 3).” Thus, within the exosystem, the student is not directly included (Crawford et al., 2019; Slomp et al., 2018). However, there is an indirect 40 connection to the influences that impact the larger ecosystem of a student’s lived experiences within their exosystem. According to Bronfenbrenner (1977), changes in social structures can lead to changes within the settings in which the student directly interacts. Examples of exosystem influences on students may include state and federal policies related to financial aid eligibility or changes to eligibility for SNAP, to new national meal program initiatives such as the H.R. 4065 Food for Thought Act of 2019 (Congress.gov, n.d.). Other state and federal policies related to global health disasters, such as the COVID-19 pandemic, impact the student’s exosystem and can include district policies, state education policies, and federal social services policies, to name a few. A closer examination of how the exosystem influences the student’s home and college setting is provided. Home Setting (Exo) The COVID-19 pandemic’s impact on students and their home setting is multifaceted and dynamic, with constant changes to information about college courses and resources. Due to federal, state, county, and district policies for public safety, students were thrust into an immediate transition from being in-person on campus to a remote-only learning environment at home (El Masri & Sabzalieva, 2020). The impact of the shift in public services affected students’ basic needs in a variety of ways (THCCCJ, 2021). Many students reported challenges with concentration due to not having a quiet or private space within their home to focus on learning, given their shared living conditions with family or roommates (THCCCJ, 2021). A 2020 study examining 242 community college student-athletes and their ability to adapt to at-home learning indicated significant challenges due to a lack of resources (Bullard, 2021). 41 Additional barriers to students learning from their home setting included inadequate Wi- Fi or lack of proper technology such as laptops (Levin, 2020). Students who relied on utilizing the library or computer labs found themselves without technology at home, creating added stress and anxiety due to a lack of technology needs (THCCCJ, 2021). Moreover, FI increased dramatically among racially minoritized students during the pandemic compared to their White counterparts. Racially minoritized students experienced higher FI rates (THCCCJ, 2021). Students Who Are Parents. Parenting students who relied on their children attending daycare or public school faced enormous challenges with school closures and the absence of childcare. A 2020 national study sampling 32,000 parenting students indicated that 78% had to assist their children at home while attending college classes simultaneously (THCCCJ, 2021). Working Students. The pandemic led to job reductions and massive layoffs in the workforce, causing businesses to close and entire industries to come to a complete stop (THCCCJ, 2021). According to the THCCCJ (2021), one in three students lost their employment due to the pandemic. “While the causes of job losses among college students are complex, contributing factors include campus closures, lost work-study opportunities, and shuttered or scaled-back leisure and hospitality businesses—where younger, economically disadvantaged students are more likely to work” (THCCCJ, 2021, p. 18). College Setting (Exo) Many colleges and universities suspended classes and closed their campuses due to the pandemic. THCCCJ (2021) reported that 58% of 2-year community colleges closed for in-person classes compared to 4-year universities, with 26% closing. As such, colleges pivoted to remote learning only, moving classroom curriculum to an online platform delivered via Zoom. Additionally, the campus closures impacted the services students relied on, such as the cafeteria, 42 food support programs, counseling, the library, and more (THCCCJ, 2021). The line between home and college blurred significantly. Challenges varied for students, including internet connections and technology challenges, to difficulties concentrating and learning in a remote environment. The policy-driven decisions to close campuses to create significant social distancing and “sheltering in place” was a public safety concern given the severity of the pandemic and spread of COVID-19. In the wake of these timely decisions, students who formally found their college campus “homelike” and a physically welcoming location to retreat and learn experienced feelings of distress, uncertainty, anxiety, frustration, and betrayal with campus closures (Zhai & Du, 2020). Researchers Zhai and Du (2020) indicated, “Students may struggle with loneliness and isolation while sheltering in place because of disconnections from friends and partners. For those who receive counseling services on campus, they can no longer access counseling services, which exacerbates their psychological symptoms.” During the pandemic, colleges became a vehicle for distributing federal emergency funds to students through the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act) (Finkel, 2020). Fifty percent of each college’s allocation was earmarked for students as direct cash aid, while the other 50% was earmarked for college financial shortfalls in the wake of the financial crisis impacting higher institutions (Finkel, 2020). This support was critical for students. According to THCCCJ’s (2021) data, more than 50% of students who received CARES Act funding used it for food support, and less than half put the funding towards housing. The data indicated “the funds also helped students support their families. At 2-year colleges, 38% of students used the funds to support family with bills, and 11% used the funds to pay for childcare” (THCCCJ, 2021, p. 44). A survey conducted by Jones et al. (2021) examining 2,282 college 43 students from a public New York university indicated that 81% of those surveyed either personally lost income or had someone in their immediate family who lost income due to the pandemic. Chronosystem The study of the chronosystem centers on change over time, during which the setting may impact the individual (Crawford et al., 2019). Throughout the K-12 public education experience and during their years in school, eligible low-SES students in need of food support regularly have access to free nutritious meals, including breakfast and lunch through the nation’s largest food support programs, the NSLP and the School Breakfast Program (SBP). However, when students matriculate from high school to college, these food programs do not follow them. Such programs may have an impact on the timeframe associated with a student moving from high school to college and their overall academic experience, including their college career (Henry, 2017). Home Setting (Chrono) Beginning in the earliest years of a student’s academic experience, eligible public school students qualify to participate in various federally funded food programs. The NSLP and the SBP serve over 30 million K–12 public school students, annually providing free and reduced-price meals for children during the school day (Capogrossi & You, 2017). Eligibility for the NSLP program is based on federal income guidelines (Benefits.gov, 2021). Families with school-aged children enrolled in other federally assisted services, such as SNAP or Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), are automatically eligible for the NSLP (Benefits.gov, 2021). However, Wood and Harris (2017) posited that students who transition from high school into the higher education system are left without clear connections or influences to understand how best to 44 navigate the various programs and services available to them. Specifically, in the K–12 setting, various programs like SNAP, TANF, and NSLP were once made available, with information distributed to household members. Students entering college are not necessarily aware of the programs or know where to ask for guidance. College Setting (Chrono) During a student’s K–12 experience, their parents or guardians serve as liaisons between the school and the child (Crawford et al., 2019). Parents or guardians have rights and privileges to important information, records, and their child’s academic records. When a student enters college, regardless of age, the Federal Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA) shifts all privacy rights from the parent or guardian to the student, eliminating access to information about the student’s college experience, with few exceptions for illegal activities (U.S. Department of Education [USDOE], 2021). Higher education institutions strictly enforce student privacy, both internally and externally, as required by federal law. Thus, the parent or guardian is unable to inquire on the student’s behalf in this new setting. Additionally, students who begin college encounter a new landscape absent of the federal food programs of the K–12 education system. The NSLP and SBP do not exist in higher education, leaving low-SES students who once qualified for these programs without access to nutrition. A study conducted at a Southwestern University examined the high rates of FI among Black and Latinx first-year students (Bruening et al., 2016). The results indicated that these students were significantly less likely to consume breakfast or receive food support from their immediate families (Bruening et al., 2016). 45 Figure 2 Conceptual Framework Indicating Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological System Theory and the Impact Food Insecurity has on Community College Students Summary Despite experiencing FI, many college students possess a strong “motivation to attend college” (Henry, 2017, p. 14). Access to affordable, nutritional food is a barrier for a significant proportion of these students, particularly at the community college. Black and Latinx students experience FI at rates significantly higher than their White peers (Bruening et al., 2016; Camelo & Elliott, 2019). Students who experience FI are more likely to work at least 30 hours per week while attending classes and are less likely to seek assistance from college personnel or family members due to the stigma of being needy. As such, FI students earn lower GPAs than food secure students (Farahbakhsh et al., 2017; Patton-López et al., 2014). TRANSITION FROM HIGH SCHOOL TO POST-SECONDARY HOME COLLEGE 46 The challenges students experience are evident within the various levels highlighted in Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) ecological system theory centered on two areas: home and college. Food insecure students face significant social and emotional stress, anxiety, and depression, creating additional barriers to their academic success (Bruening et al., 2016). This study sought to help understand how community colleges can help students overcome this barrier. 47 Chapter Three: Methodology Chapter Three discusses the methods and tools used to collect and analyze the data for the study. The chapter begins with an overview of the methodology framing the study. Next, the study sample and population, as well as the instrumentation used for the research, are presented. The qualitative paradigm expressly stated in the credibility and trustworthiness of the research frames the next section of the chapter, guiding the research into the setting and pivoting towards understanding the researcher. Data collection, including the research design, interview protocols, and procedures, lead to the data analysis portion of the chapter. Finally, the ethics and researcher’s positionality conclude the chapter. Research Questions Bronfenbrenner’s (1979, 1995, 2005) EST provides a deeper understanding of how FI influences a student’s college experience. Two research questions guide this study: 1. What are the experiences and perceptions of community college students using food support programs? 2. What institutional factors facilitate or create barriers for students accessing and utilizing food programs? Overview of Methodology The qualitative research study included several methodological techniques to ascertain a comprehensive understanding of the challenges that FI presents for students in college. The primary source of data was interviews. Rich, thick, descriptive language was used in reflective, analytic memos when evaluating the data (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Further, member checking helped triangulate the research, which addressed the credibility, assuring the strategies represented a trustworthy and sound approach to the research study (Lincoln & Guba, 1985). 48 Thus, the goal of the research and methodology was to ascertain insight and understanding as to how students receive and access various programs and services, providing a more deliberate and intentional mode of engagement. Moreover, the information aided in providing the college and the researcher critical information to better serve students’ basic needs related to FI. Population and Interview Sample A purposeful snowball sampling process was used to conduct the interviews (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Moreover, the setting for the interviews was what Merriam and Tisdell (2016) refer to as a typical site, the college setting, a “normal” virtual destination where college students partake in many activities, in addition to classes and other student-centric services. One example of such programs was the health and wellness center (a pseudonym), which offers a variety of services to address the whole student, including mental health support and access to several free food programs that help mitigate FI. The goal of this study was to interview 10 to 12 students who participated in at least one of the college’s food programs. In total, 11 CCC students were interviewed. Snowball sampling occurred as students shared their knowledge of the interview invitation (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016), creating a larger pool of viable participants engaged in the qualitative research. This was helpful to the study because FI students may have felt stigmatized to discuss their stories and the snowball sampling encouraged individuals to step forward and participate. Instrumentation The qualitative methodology using interviews as the data source allows for an in-depth and detailed exploration of the interviewees’ perspectives and practices (Morgan, 2014). The practical application of the interview protocol provided a forum to explore and examine specific food programs available to students on and off campus and examined the impact on the students’ 49 college experiences. The synchronous, semi-structured, open-ended interviews were conducted online utilizing the Zoom platform and allowed for virtual face-to-face conversations through a digital forum that was private, personalized, and easily accessible for the participants (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Further, the students had a strong familiarization with the Zoom platform due in large part to the fact that all college courses were delivered in a remote environment since the start of the 2020 pandemic and continue to be delivered in such a manner in most cases (Serembus & Kemery, 2020). Moreover, the online platform allowed me, the researcher, to record and digitally transcribe the interviews, permitting me an uninterrupted forum to listen acutely while noting verbal and nonverbal cues throughout the online meeting (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The interview questions were designed to elicit demographic data, personal points of view, and an understanding of each student’s bioecological systems that they work within, specifically at home and in the college setting (Bronfenbrenner, 1995). A list of 18 interview questions (Appendix A) with follow-up probes helped to further investigate the study’s subject matter, seeking greater clarity regarding the participants’ answers (Johnson & Christensen, 2015). Some of the questions listed in Appendix A were piloted during an earlier study where participants interviewed met the same criteria set forth in this study. As such, the language, order, and intention of the questions were modified for greater effectiveness for the purposes of this research. 50 Credibility and Trustworthiness Credibility and trustworthiness were critical components to maximize the integrity of the qualitative research (Creswell & Creswell, 2018; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Several strategies were employed. First, as the researcher, I checked the digital transcriptions to ensure they were free from mistakes, which reinforced the consistent nature of the data (Creswell & Creswell, 2018) without compromising the factual representation of each interview. Once completed, I used member checking with several of the participants and confirmed the data analysis captured represented their perspectives and affirmed clarification where necessary (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). This helped ensure that researcher bias or interpretation was as absent as possible from the data analysis. Member checking was conducted with some of the participants through scheduled follow-up telephonic meetings, where we reviewed specific responses for accuracy and referenced the cleaned-up copy of the auto-transcription they received via email for their records prior to the scheduled call. During this phone meeting, the students informed me that their experience and perspective relayed in the data accurately represented their position and recollection of the information from the interview session, reinforcing the member checking validation and credibility. Creswell and Creswell (2018) emphasized the importance of triangulating qualitative research, ensuring the data’s accuracy was reinforced by examining multiple sources. Building on the credibility, the fourth qualitative research strategy included using “rich, thick description” language to effectively illustrate the interview setting, leaving the reader with little to ponder (Creswell & Creswell, 2018, p. 200). Direct student quotes, experiences, and observed nonverbal cues illustrate the data and observations with clarity and integrity. Finally, addressing my 51 positionality or bias through a reflexivity narrative added to the validity of the qualitative research. This research study was considered “backyard” research, given the process and protocols and that the participants attend the same college where I, the researcher, work (Glesne & Peshkin, 1992, as cited in Creswell & Creswell, 2018, p. 184). To that end, the research required additional credibility and trustworthiness processes to certify that the protocols were thoughtfully managed (Creswell & Creswell, 2016). The insider status I possess as an employee and administrator at the college where the study’s participants attend (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) was balanced and measured with intentionality towards remaining impartial to the information shared. Informed by my positionality, I recognized and am deeply cognizant that my role as a college administrator and life experiences impacted how I received information from the respondents. By engaging in the various methods characterized above, I am confident that I ensured the qualitative paradigm of credibility and transferability was received with minimal bias. Research Setting California’s community college system is the largest body of 2-year institutions in the nation, representing 116 colleges serving 2.1 million students (CCCCO, 2021). The research setting for this study was CCC, a single-college district that serves a diverse population of students. The college’s institutional research office reports nearly 28,000 students attend CCC, with 95% of students registered as for-credit students compared to non-credit students. The student population was comprised of a slightly higher percentage of females than males, with 2% of the population not reporting their gender. 52 According to the Public Policy Institute of California (2021), the Golden State’s population is diverse, with 39% Latinx, 36% White, 15% Asian or Pacific Islander, and 6% Black. Fewer than 1% of the California residents are Native American or Alaskan Native, and 3% are multiracial or other (Public Policy Institute of California, 2021). Mirroring much of California’s population, the students at CCC are 39% Latinx/Hispanic, 25% White, 10% Asian, and 8% Black. Less than 1% of the student population is Native American, Alaskan Native, or Pacific Islander, with 5% of students indicating two or more races and 12% unreported. Most CCC students qualify for financial aid based on their estimated family contribution, with 66% receiving state and federal support. At the time of this study, two-thirds of students were between the ages of 19 and 24. Unique to this institution, the simple majority were first- generation students, defined by neither parent/guardian completing a bachelor’s degree or higher (Toutkoushian et al., 2021). The stated educational goal for the greater student population at CCC was to transfer to a 4-year university or college, while a proportion sought to acquire skills-based and workforce training, including certifications offered in areas such as accounting and cosmetology (Porchea et al., 2010). Although 36% of students attended CCC full-time or the equivalent of taking at least 12 units, most students currently enrolled attended part-time. A 2018 national survey conducted by THCCCJ and inclusive of the California community college population reported that 54% of students were food insecure within the prior 30 days (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2019). Correspondingly, of the students reporting such findings, 30% experienced very low FI (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2019). Given this data, the student population, and the food support programs offered, CCC as a research site served as the setting for this study. 53 The Researcher Lincoln (2010) referred to “the researcher-participant relationship and how one affects the other in the research process” as working the hyphen (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 63). I recognized my reflexivity, or role, cultural background, gender, and personal experiences may have a distinct impact on this study (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). I hold a position of leadership within the host college’s administration. I am a White female, the daughter of an immigrant mother, and a first-generation American father. After high school, I attended the same college where I am employed and where I conducted the study. My interpretation of the data was informed, in part, by my bias and background as an individual with a history of FI during my formative years, throughout high school, and well into college. During my senior year in college, I was a very low-income wage earner, a single parent, and accessed federal social services programs to acquire affordable nutritional food for my toddler and me. As such, I likely possess a relatability with the participants that will support the data collection process. Data Collection Qualitative research provides an in-depth perspective about the problem of practice, compared to quantitative research that offers a generalized evaluation (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The research design for this study I used included qualitative interviews. Participants A phenomenological study centers the research on the lived experiences as the essence of the study (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Here, the phenomenological research and protocols described the lived experiences of the students (Creswell & Creswell, 2018) and the extreme hunger phenomenon known as FI affecting them (USDA, 2021a). 54 Prior to the qualitative interviews with the students who experienced FI, it was important for me, as the researcher, to thoroughly examine and separate my experiences, assumptions, and viewpoints, refraining from any judgment or pre-determination of outcome. This bracketing technique, called epoche, represents that the researcher made every attempt to set aside all prejudices to contain one’s own biases (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Further, throughout the study, I integrated phenomenological reduction, or “the process of continually returning to the essence of the experience to derive the inner structure or meaning in and of itself” (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 27). Here, the invariant structure, or essence, was represented by how food insecurity impacts the student experience attending college (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). I used a purposeful sampling process for this qualitative study. The goal was to interview 10 to 12 CCC students who experience FI and leverage assistance from various college programs and resources that help them navigate their bioecological systems. The goal was to secure an equal number of male and female students who participated in at least one of the college’s food programs. To ensure ethnic and representational balance, I attempted to secure a pool of students whose ethnic background is congruent to the CCC student demography. Participant Recruitment Purposeful sampling provided me, the researcher, the ability to “understand, gain insight, and [learn]” from the participant’s experiences informing the research (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016, p. 96). A professional rapport existed between me as the researcher and the research institution because I am an employee of the college. A digital recruitment flyer was emailed by a third party to all students currently enrolled in at least one of the college’s food programs. The flyer verbiage included critical information and necessary protocols indicating the purpose, the 55 voluntary nature, the minimum age requirement (18 years of age), the fact that the interviews were recorded, and that participation could be terminated at any time by the participant. A second outreach strategy for recruiting eligible students included a physical paper flyer with the same content listed in Appendix B for college employees to distribute to students during the institution’s weekly food pantry distribution. Interested students who wished to participate in the study emailed me to my address which appeared on both versions of the flyer. A specific deadline for participation limited the number of submissions and helped manage the associated timeline to conduct the interviews. Once the deadline passed, I collected the responses and evaluated the options of participants to ensure a balanced composition and representation of students in the pool of final interviewees. Regardless of the submission, I communicated with all 33 students who initially expressed interest within the required timeframe, confirmed receipt of their interest via email to avoid ambiguity, and thanked them for their interest. Following that, I asked them to complete and submit the required information on the participant profile form embedded in a Qualtrics link by a specific deadline (Appendix C). Within the Qualtrics form and prior to capturing any data, the study’s purpose was clearly stated as well as an explanation about the participants involvement, voluntary participation, confidentiality, and formal consent. Once the pool of participants was selected, each received an email confirmation, affirming their interest and offering them a variety of appointment times conducive to their schedule (Appendix D). The two students who did not participate were unavailable for scheduling. In the email, students were offered a $25 digital grocery gift card as an incentive to participate in the interview. Subsequently, 11 students completed the interviews. 56 Participant Criteria I obtained the criteria for the participant sampling from the demographic portion of the participant profile form (Appendix E). The requisites for the participants were students who (a) were at least 18 years of age, (b) had participated in at least one of the campus food programs, and (c) had an educational goal of either transferring to a 4-year institution or seeking an associate of arts degree. Participant Consent and Anonymity Various ethical issues arose when engaged in interviews, particularly when the data collection used the internet as the medium (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The increased use of the internet to conduct research requires detailed attention and care to the participants’ privacy (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Obtaining informed consent prior to commencing the research was imperative to the privacy and confidentiality of each participant (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). As such, each participant was required to complete an informed consent for research form (Appendix F) prior to the data collection. Participants submitted these forms using the Qualtrics program that allowed for digital responses. Once students confirmed their participation in the study, their anonymity was protected by asking them to identify a pseudonym prior to starting the recording on the Zoom platform. This same pseudonym was transferred to all transcriptions and data collection. Interviews The primary goal of this study was to understand how each student’s bioecological systems and FI impact their ability to persist in college. The perspective of students who contributed by sharing their personal experiences and perceptions informed the data with authentic understanding (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Introductory statements and applicable 57 transition questions established a friendly tone for the interviews. A brief introduction to the study explained that the questions sought to understand participants’ lived experiences and framed the discussion. The list of interview questions with follow-up probes helped to further investigate the dissertation’s subject matter, seeking greater clarity regarding the participants’ responses (Johnson & Christensen, 2015). The interview questions were designed to elicit information, personal points of view, and understanding of each student’s bioecological systems at home and in college. Moreover, understanding the role and impact of FI in their lived experience in college guided the in-depth interviews. Interview Protocols The qualitative methodology used interviews as the primary data source, which allowed for an in-depth and detailed exploration of the interviewee’s perspective and experience (Morgan, 2014). The application of protocols allowed for the examination of the impact FI has on their college experience. The synchronous, semi-structured interviews were conducted online using the Zoom platform that allowed for virtual face-to-face conversation and created a familiar forum that was conducive to privacy, personalization, and easy access for the participants (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). I selected this modality for the interviews because the participants’ college had not returned to in-person classes for nearly 85% of its offerings in Fall 2021, making it very challenging to ask students to attend the interviews in person. To protect their privacy, I asked the students to create a pseudonym when they logged in to the Zoom screen. Interview Collection Procedures In qualitative research, interviews are the primary way data are gathered (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). Given the County of Los Angeles Public Health Department’s (2021) mandate and limitations for social distancing due to the COVID-19 pandemic, remote interviewing was 58 required to conduct the research and carry out the protocol safely. Although interviewing a participant in person has many benefits, including collecting the data in the natural setting of the college campus (Creswell & Creswell, 2018), online interviews presented an additive element of ease, including the ability to record the interview with the participant’s permission and access to the meeting from the participant’s geographical location (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The data collection occurred in September 2021 following the approval from both the University of Southern California and the community college’s institutional review boards. Once the approval was received, I coordinated directly with CCC’s office of institutional research to ensure the study was conducted with all required protocols. I interviewed 11 students. Prior to the interview, I sought the participant’s permission to record the online meeting. Each interview was scheduled for one 60-minute period and began with a prefatory statement that provided the respondent with an introduction to the study (Patton, 2002, as cited in Creswell & Creswell, 2018). The interviews took place using the Zoom platform, with each participant entering an online forum. Procedurally, I leveraged various strategies to collect the data, including notetaking, Zoom video recording, and Zoom auto transcriptions for each participant. Further, a back-up desk recorder captured the audio portion of the interview with each participant. I informed the participants that following the interview, the auto transcriptions gathered from the Zoom platform would be cleaned up and sent to them via email to ensure an accurate representation of their statements. Additionally, to certify trustworthiness, member checking, triangulation of the data, and rich descriptive language ensured credibility and accuracy of the data (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Within 48 hours of each interview, the participant received a copy of their transcription via email. Random respondent validation or member checking 59 occurred with several of the participants to ensure accurate representation of their interviews (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). In addition to receiving their interview transcription, each student received a digital $25 gift card. Confirmation of both items was conveyed via email. Secure Storage The data collection occurred using a secured, external drive located off campus in a locked, private office. In so doing, all data collected (e.g., recorded interviews, emails, files, documents) were stored in an off-campus locked office, in a password-protected folder, within a password-protected computer, and backed up on a password-protected external drive. Once the collected data was coded, the documents were permanently purged and erased from the external drive. Data Analysis The data analysis was inductive and comparative (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016) to evaluate the data to answer the research questions regarding the impact of FI on college students. There were several stages to the data analysis process. Following the data collection, I segmented, coded, and developed a categorization system from the interview transcripts (Johnson & Christensen, 2015). This interpretation of the data guided the identifying relationships or themes that were present in the analysis. Such heuristic patterns or hierarchical themes that evolve from the data have informed the research, guiding the answers to the research questions and developed a thematic analysis (Johnson & Christensen, 2017; Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). The interview transcriptions were coded using a master list with all codes used for the study (Johnson & Christensen, 2017). Exploring the relationships between various segments, themes, categories, or data points further informed the inquiry. Subsequently, the data results 60 informed the recommendations for how the college can better support students who struggle with FI. Ethics The relationship and rapport between the researcher and the study participants are that of familiarity and insider status, as I am a CCC administrator (Merriam & Tisdell, 2016). My positionality factored into the study with a personal history as an alumna of CCC, the same institution as the participants. A key bias I possessed was a history of struggling with food security when transitioning from high school to college and throughout much of my time at the university. Additionally, early in my educational journey, I was a low-income, single-parent student, receiving public assistance through federal programs such as the Special Supplemental Program for Women, Infants & Children, given the profound struggle to acquire affordable nutritional food while in college. As such, a relatability with the participants existed and was managed by maintaining a high level of awareness and an acute sense of professionalism throughout the entire process. Merriam and Tisdell (2016) noted it is important to consider the reflexivity or “awareness of the influence the researcher has on what is being studied” (p. 64) and, at the same time, be mindful of how the actual research process impacts the researcher. The practical application of my reflexive behavior, maintaining a solid, balanced position throughout the data collecting and research protocols, was imperative to lessen bias. I centered my research protocols with an emphasis on consistency with all participants, ensuring qualitative reliability (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). For the purposes of the research, I worked together with a proxy from the department of health and wellbeing, who delivered the physical and digital recruitment flyers. The proxy was a college employee and member of the basic needs team, who provided a 61 relatability factor for the participants should any questions arose. Final approval from the institutional review board at the University of Southern California and from CCC allowed me to proceed with the research. Conclusion The methodology yielded research data centered on understanding college students’ challenges with FI. Interviews served as the primary source of thick, rich, descriptive narratives. In addition, member checking and field notes served to triangulate the data. Thus, the data provided important insight into the college and may better serve students who struggle with FI. As such, framing the problem for the college community created transparency and understanding with the end goal of serving students where their needs are. 62 Chapter Four: Findings The purpose of this qualitative phenomenological study was to conduct a series of interviews with community college students who experienced FI as part of their higher education journey. In total, the sample consisted of 11 community college students, each of whom was at least 18 years old, participated in at least one of the food programs at CCC, and had an academic goal of transferring to a 4-year university or earning an associate of arts degree or certificate. The findings from this study will contribute to the literature and discourse about the effectiveness of on-campus food programs to alleviate FI among college students while examining existing practices and institutional factors to effectively serve students challenged by FI (Camelo & Elliott, 2019; El Zein et al., 2019; Freudenberg et al., 2019; Henry, 2017). This study’s problem of practice examined the impact of FI on student participants’ journey through community college. The following two research questions were developed to guide the study: 1. What are the experiences and perceptions of community college students using food support programs? 2. What institutional factors facilitate or create barriers for students accessing and utilizing food programs? The main purpose of this chapter is to present the findings from this research study. The first subsection provides an overview of the student participants’ demographics. Subsequently, the findings are organized separately by each of the two research questions, followed by major themes addressing each question with supporting data that summarizes the evidence collected. These themes are evident within the interconnected layers of the students’ environment expressed by how they navigated and interacted within the various micro-, meso-, exo-, and 63 chronosystems between their home and college environment defined by Bronfenbrenner’s EST. The chapter concludes with a summary that captures the main points expressed in Chapter Four. Interviewee Demographics All participants were students at CCC. As discussed in Chapter Three, the synchronous, semi-structured interviews were conducted online using the Zoom platform. The demographics listed in Table 1 represent the 11 students interviewed for the study. Prior to entering CCC, all 11 participants attended public school and were enrolled in the NSLP, receiving free or reduced- price breakfast and lunch at school. The names listed in Table 1 are self-identified pseudonyms to protect the participants’ privacy and will be used in the discussion of the findings throughout this chapter. Table 1 Student Demographics Pseudonym Age Gender Racial identification Enrolled full-time or part-time Academic goal Bam-Bam 20 Male Chicano/Latino/Hispanic P/T Transfer Bee 35 Non-Binary Two or more races P/T Transfer Candice 21 Female African descent/Black F/T Transfer Jane 29 Female Chicana/Latina/Hispanic F/T Transfer John 19 Non-Binary Chicano/a, Latino/a/x, Hispanic F/T Transfer Marco 25 Male Chicano/Latino/Hispanic F/T Transfer Maria 18 Female Chicana/Latina/Hispanic F/T Transfer Michael 53 Male Chicano/Latino/Hispanic P/T Certificate Stella 20 Female Asian F/T Transfer Vanilla 18 Female Chicana/Latina/Hispanic F/T Transfer Zack 42 Male White P/T Certificate 64 Additionally, a brief description of each participant informs data on the complex nature of each participant. § A first-generation college student, Bam-Bam is a 20-year-old Latino male. Bam-Bam works full-time while taking three classes at CCC with the desire to earn a certificate in criminology. He participated in the weekly drive-through food pantry and currently participates in the college’s free meal program. • Bee identifies as a 35-year-old, non-binary person of two or more races. Bee is a twin, attends CCC, and participated in several of the food programs available on campus. They experienced both food and housing insecurity during their time in college. • Candice is a Black, 21-year-old female transfer student who works two part-time jobs totaling at least 40 hours per week while attending college and carrying a full-time load. Candice seeks to transfer and earn a bachelor’s degree in sociology. She utilized the campus’s food pantry as her single source for food support. • Jane is a 29-year-old, undocumented, first-generation Latina female with an academic goal to transfer to a 4-year university. During her time at CCC, Jane maximized the food programs, accessing CalFresh, the drive-through food pantry, the on-campus food pantry, meal vouchers, the home delivery meal programs, and the text-based meal program. • John identifies as a non-binary and is a 19-year-old Latinx student who is a sophomore at CCC. They are enrolled in courses full-time while working part-time and have participated in four food programs on campus. • Marco is a 25-year-old, first-generation Latino male who attends college full-time. Marco is a former foster youth and experienced housing insecurity and homelessness while 65 attending college. Marco works part-time in addition to balancing more than 15 units each semester. • Maria is a female, Latina, first-generation, 18-year-old student attending CCC with an academic goal of transferring to a 4-year university. Maria is a first-year student who graduated from a public high school where she received food support through the federal free and reduced lunch program. While attending CCC, she has accessed the on-ground food pantry as her single source of food support on campus. • Michael is a 53-year-old, self-identified disabled Latino male who seeks to attain an associate’s degree while attending CCC. • Stella is a 20-year-old, undocumented, first-generation Asian female. Stella is enrolled at CCC full-time and seeks to transfer with an associate’s degree to a 4-year university college. Stella accessed all the available food program resources at CCC, except for CalFresh, since she is not eligible as an undocumented student. • A first-generation high school graduate and college student, Vanilla is an 18-year-old Latina female. Vanilla carries a full load of units, works part-time, and provides significant support at home for her younger sister, who has learning disabilities. Her goal is to transfer to one of the public universities in California, preferably somewhere near her family. • Zack is a 42-year-old, single White male enrolled in four classes at CCC seeking a certificate or degree to pivot professionally to a new career in the technology field. Currently homeless, Zack participates in the college’s food pantry program as a source of sustenance. 66 Findings The interviews consisted of 18 questions (Appendix A). In the first cycle of coding, I developed a set of themes identified through a priori and priori codes. Once the data was thoroughly analyzed, and data saturation achieved (Ravitch, 2018), I focused on the phenomenological shared experiences of the participants to examine specific findings. The results discuss specific themes that emerged from the data analyses. Results for Research Question 1 The first research question for the study asked, “What are the experiences and perceptions of community college students using food support programs?” The results pertaining to this question focused on the students’ lived experiences with food support programs. Four themes emerged. First, students reported overall positive experiences with the various food programs, but they faced barriers in accessing them. Second, students experienced a sense of being cared for. The third theme was the stigma attached to asking for support, and the fourth was that membership in a CCC student services program improved the student experience. The interviewees each participated in two or more food programs on campus, although their pattern of usage and programs varied. The participants perceived the food programs to be of high value and somewhat flexible. However, for all programs, students faced a common barrier: challenges related to the accessibility of food, including complicated application or sign-up processes (when applicable), limited hours of operation, and logistical issues like restaurants canceling to-go orders. The accessibility barrier adversely affected the food programs’ effectiveness in addressing students’ food insecurity. The following sections describe the programs in further detail. 67 CalFresh A modern, statewide program formally known as food stamps, CalFresh provides eligible students and families with financial resources to purchase groceries (California Department of Social Services, 2021). Each eligible student receives an electronic benefits transfer (EBT) card to use at participating grocery stores, farmers markets, corner stores, and on-campus cafés (California Department of Social Services, 2021). Students who are non-resident or Dreamers are not eligible for CalFresh (California Department of Social Services, 2021). Six participants noted using CalFresh as a form of food security while attending CCC, with one student denied services due to eligibility. CCC Food Pantry The CCC food pantry offers a variety of shelf-stable items such as canned and boxed goods, fresh produce, and a variety of refrigerated protein options, including eggs, milk, and chicken. Additionally, the pantry offers personal hygiene items such as soap, toothpaste, toothbrushes, and a variety of feminine hygiene products. To serve students who are parents, diapers and baby food are available. Several CCC partners donate food pantry items, including the local food bank, privately owned grocery stores, organizations, and local food vendors. All interviewees accessed the drive-through food pantry, the on-ground food pantry, or both. With the onset of the pandemic, CCC continued offering services to students persevering through school while challenged by food insecurity by establishing a weekly, drive-through food pantry. This important campus food service continued uninterrupted despite the campus’s physical closure and pivot to remote courses, offering access to critical support for students who continued to attend classes remotely and needed food support. Nine interviewees utilized the drive-through food pantry program. In fall 2021, CCC resumed a limited number of on-ground 68 courses, reopening the campus to students accessing services in person. As such, the campus opened a storefront food pantry, offering students the agency to shop for their personal needs. Seven interviewees visited the on-ground food pantry during the fall 2021 semester. Delivery Meal Program (DMP) In direct response to the pandemic and in conjunction with its foundation, CCC established a DMP to support students by having fresh, healthy meals delivered to their home free of charge. Qualified students receive an email invitation to curate seven meals, desserts, and snacks each week. Eligibility to participate in the DMP includes having met with the district’s social worker. Referrals to the DMP and all food programs are accessible to all faculty, staff, and administrators by submitting a student’s name to a centralized email address. A combination of donations and public and private grants secured by CCC’s nonprofit foundation pay the program’s costs. The program has been operational since the start of the pandemic in March 2020. Six interviewees engaged in the DMP program. To-Go Meal Program A text-based to-go meal program (TGMP) launched in September 2020, giving students access to fresh, free meals that they order via text and pick up. Students evaluated for FI by a CCC program designated social worker are invited to participate in the TGMP. To access the program, students follow a short, five-step process (Appendix G). The time it takes to enroll and launch the program is approximately 3 minutes and does not require Wi-Fi, given its text-based platform. Currently, CCC has approximately 300 students enrolled in the TGMP, each receiving 28 meals per month at no charge. Seven students interviewed participated in the TGMP program. 69 Meal Vouchers Student leaders started the meal voucher program in 2016 to provide FI students with $7.50 to use at any of the on-campus cafés. The program was funded in part by a grant from the CCCCO and by additional funds provided by the CCC student government. Each semester, approximately 200 students were served by the meal voucher program. Students were eligible for up to 18 vouchers per semester and were required to meet with a counselor to secure additional ones. Due to the college campus moving to exclusively remote learning for the 2020–21 academic year and all food vendors closing their businesses on campus, the meal voucher program ceased operations. Prior to the pandemic, four interviewees participated in the meal voucher program, thus presenting the program as part of the study and data collection. The first research question centers the data on the student experience with CCC’s food support programs. This section presents each food program’s findings with subsections illuminating both their favorable aspects and, in some cases, barriers or challenges with the program. All interviewees were asked, “What specific food programs do you participate in?” Additionally, two follow-up probe questions were asked of the students: “Which program best meets your needs?” and “What are the reasons why?” All participants provided rich, descriptive language expressing their lived experiences with the various food programs and services. Theme 1: Experience With CCC Food Programs (Mesosystem, College) Within the mesosystem layer of the college, food support services consist of five different programs 3 : CalFresh, an on-ground food pantry, a TGMP, the DMP, and meal vouchers. Furthermore, all these programs are free to CCC students. The subsequent sections present a description of each food program. Additionally, Table 2 and Figure 3 illustrate which CCC food 3 Information derived from organizational websites and documents not cited to protect anonymity. 70 support programs the interviewees were enrolled in or participated in when the study was conducted. Table 2 illustrates that 10 students participated in two or more food programs. Four participated in five food programs, three participated in three or four programs, and one participated in one food program offered at CCC. The following sections provide an overview of how students responded to their lived experiences with the food support programs. Table 2 Interviewees’ Use of Campus Food Programs Pseudonym CalFresh On-ground food pantry Drive- through food pantry To-go meal program Delivery meal program Meal vouchers Bam-Bam • • Bee • • • • Candice • Jane • • • • John Doe • • • • Marco • • • • • Maria • • Michael • • • • • Stella • • • • • Vanilla • • • • • Zack • • 71 Figure 3 Interviewees’ Participation in CCC Food Support Programs CalFresh Six students interviewed received the CalFresh benefits program. Five participants were unfamiliar or uncertain whether they qualified for CalFresh benefits. Five of the participants who qualified for the CalFresh program found the service favorable, given the value of the monthly financial support provided. Maria expressed that she relies on her sibling’s CalFresh EBT card to offset some of her family’s grocery expenses, even though Maria herself has not applied for the benefits. Bee stated that “CalFresh [is a favored program] because of the freedom and flexibility it offers.” Zack shared, “Students can choose where to go, what to buy, and it includes the ability to choose higher-end [grocery] stores and [some] restaurants.” However, some students 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 1 Program 2 Programs 4 Programs 5 Programs Number of Food Programs Number of Students 72 expressed a lack of knowledge of whether they qualified for the program. Other students expressed frustration and discouragement with the CalFresh application process. Bam-Bam, who previously applied for CalFresh and was denied, stated, “The [application] process took a long time and was confusing.” Stella wanted to apply but was fearful of being denied: “To be honest, I wanted to [apply]. It’s just that I was scared if I’m not eligible.” These responses demonstrated different student experiences between those who enrolled in the program and those who did not. Chapter Five presents a discussion and elucidation of these findings. Food Pantry Programs All interviewees participated in the CCC food pantry programs. When 15% of on-ground classes resumed in the fall of 2021, CCC opened a storefront food pantry, that offered students the agency to shop independently for their personal needs compared to the drive-through pantry that provided a pre-packed bag to each student. Seven interviewees visited the on-ground food pantry during the fall 2021 semester. Some of the participants who visited the food pantry expressed that they felt like the college authentically cared about their health and wellbeing. When asked how she felt about her regular visits to CCC’s on-ground food pantry, Maria stated, It felt nice. Like it felt really nice that I have access to the [pantry] whenever I’m in need of something. Maybe, like now, if I am financially unstable and can’t afford food at the moment. I think it’s very nice to have. It’s like, sort of, how do you say this? Like “I’ve got your back,” basically. Participants who visited the on-ground food pantry expressed valuing the items available to them, including a variety of shelf-stable items such as canned and boxed goods, fresh produce, refrigerated protein options, and non-alcoholic beverages. In addition to the food-related items, 73 several participants stated how important and valuable it was to have access to personal hygiene items. Personal protection, such as face masks and hand sanitizer, were additional valued items mentioned by participants. “Vanilla” noted that the pantry provided “New baked bread, vegetables, hand sanitizer, baby wipes, and anything you can think of.” Other participants expressed favorable experiences with the food pantry program, including a sense of feeling valued and appreciated. Additional student responses about their experiences are provided in Table 3. 74 Table 3 Student Quotes Exemplifying Favorable Experiences with Food Pantry Programs Theme: Favorable experience with food pantry programs Interview question Student Responses Describe your experience when you first received support from the campus food pantries. Vanilla They gave us like bags. Like four bags and like one big box of just like produce like vegetables. Bee I really liked that when they were on campus and anyone can go no matter your financial need or whatever. The [staff] were cheerful like it didn’t feel like anyone was judging. It didn’t feel like, “oh, poor baby, I’m helping.” Like no savior shit. It was just like “hey, what’s up? Food. We got so much food.” And I didn’t feel like a burden. I didn’t feel like I was taking resources I shouldn’t, or anything like that. Bam-Bam They were giving out $50 gift cards as well. I was like, oh, wow. Yeah it was good. Marco They also have like parenting supplies in there or hygiene supplies and I felt I did take advantage of the hygiene supplies a lot. And like I took the toothbrushes and different soaps and stuff. Candice I didn’t really know about food pantries until like, until recently, and it was pretty cool. I didn’t know they have free food like that like it was like a grocery store, or like a farmer’s market, it was pretty nice. Jane I didn’t know about the food pantry like I’ve heard of it, but even when I was at SMC I never ended never really used it until COVID. Food Pantry Barriers (Chronosystem) Most of the interviewees expressed challenges with the pantry hours of operations that were not conducive to their school or work schedules. One student stated that he must choose between attending class or queuing up to secure groceries from the food pantry. Another student stated that external barriers, such as distance between their home and campus, made it challenging to utilize the food pantry programs. Some students stated that because they do not 75 have private transportation, securing food pantry groceries is challenging, and they must rely on relatives or friends to assist, making it difficult to use the program services. John stated, One time I went on the bus, and it was definitely like a hassle. There was really no way to keep that stuff fresh, especially on the bus, and then two times my dad drove me, but he didn’t want to go because [the campus] is far. Additional food pantry barriers included the length of time it took to secure groceries. Vanilla stated, “The line was around, maybe 30 to 45 minutes.” Further, students expressed concern with the freshness of the food, stating that some of the shelf-stable and refrigerated items were past their expiration dates. Some students noted that the selection of items lacked variety, with few to no ethnic food options. Other students wanted greater quantity of specific items, like feminine hygiene products, than were available due to limits. Table 4 exemplifies student quotes discussing challenges and barriers with the food pantry programs. These are examples of students’ responses demonstrating the theme associated with favorable experiences and barriers related to the food pantry program. Chapter Five presents a discussion of the interpretation of these findings. 76 Table 4 Student Quotes Exemplifying Barriers With Food Pantry Programs Theme: Barriers with food pantry programs Interview question Student Responses What, if any, challenges, or barriers did you face with accessing the college’s food pantries? Vanilla The line was around, maybe [a] 30 to 45 minutes [wait]. It was pretty heavy, so my sister and me and my aunt had to walk to the car. It would be good to get more than one package of tampons. Also, something that I’ve been seeing in the drive-through as well as [on-ground] pantry is that they’re giving us expired food. Bam-Bam The only bad part was the vegetables are all rotten already. But besides that, everything else was back to those frozen chicken and bread. It was stuff I can manage, but the vegetables I would have to throw away [because they] could be bad already. Marco When it was happening, I’m not available on Wednesdays. My schedule doesn’t allow for me to drive an hour to get groceries and then an hour back. Candice It was a long line. Jane [The pantry is] very carb-heavy. I’d say [we need] probably more fiber and proteins. Stella New baked bread, vegetables, hand sanitizer, baby wipes, and anything you can think of. Zack The problem is it’s taking at least an hour, so I know if I get there at 1 pm, I’m going to at least be there till 2:15 pm, and it closes at 3 pm. If you don’t get there early enough, the chicken goes quick. Maria There was one minor obstacle, which was time. The line did take a while, and I waited there. I got there at maybe 1:30 pm, and I had a class that started at 2:30 pm. So, by the time I got out, it was already around 2:30 pm. Michael Me, I’m a Latino. I eat everything, you know, but, I think, more variety like vegan stuff and vegetarian [items], so that way it can benefit everybody. 77 Delivery Meal Program The DMP was established to support students by delivering seven free, fresh, healthy meals directly to the student’s homes weekly. The delivery service included additional snacks and desserts. The student selected from three different curated menus or could make meal selections independently. The meals were ordered a week prior to the actual delivery date. The DMP program began operations at the start of the pandemic in March 2020 to address the needs of FI students while in a remote learning environment. Six participants utilized the DMP. Students’ responses varied, as indicated in Table 5. Some students accessed the program for 12 months or more, or until they grew tired of the repetition of menu choices. Others expressed appreciation for having fresh meals delivered directly to their home. 78 Table 5 Student’s Opinions and Values About the Delivery Meal Program Theme: Opinions and values of the DMP Interview question Student Responses The meal delivery program offers a different kind of support. In what ways has the to-go meal program provided support during your college experience, it at all? Stella I used [the DMP] for a year. Eventually, I got tired of the food, so [CCC] also offered another program, which is called [to-go meal program]. I rely on the [the DMP]. I have to order and wait for a week in order for my food to come, delivered and stuff and that for me it was a long time. Vanilla The 30 meals do help us. I participated for six months and shared meals with my Dad. Marco I felt like a lot of the food had sustenance behind it. The only downside with [the MDP] I found that it only helped me for like 3 days, and then the rest of the week, I didn’t have food. I found also with [MDP], it didn’t last that long, especially because I got salads, and you can’t freeze them. John They have a selection. They have three meal plans you could choose. It’s standard. And there’s a vegetarian option, so you could chose choose from those, or you could select the meals individually. Sometimes I get vegetarian but usually just [the] standard [choice]. Bam-Bam I wouldn’t ever be home when they delivered it. So, it means the food would go bad, or I would have to call somebody to come get in their house, and I had to pick it up. Michael Now, I receive meals at my house. One of the themes in the data was that the meals were helpful, but the quantity per week did not meet interviewees’ hunger needs. Another barrier some students expressed was the meal delivery system: to receive the DMP, someone would have to be home to receive the cold- 79 packed order. Logistics of coordinating the DMP service affected some students. For Bam-Bam, this was challenging because he worked long hours and could not arrange a time that would permit the delivery without worrying that the order would spoil. He stated, “I wouldn’t ever be home when they delivered it. So, it means the food would go bad, or I would have to call somebody to come get in their house, and I had to pick it up.” The examples are students’ responses demonstrating the themes associated with values, opinions, and barriers related to the DMP. Chapter Five presents a discussion of the interpretation of these findings. To-Go Meal Program The text-based TGMP provided FI students with access to 28 fresh and free restaurant- prepared meals per month that students order using their mobile devices. The data collected from students who participated in this program demonstrated that the program was convenient, easy to use, and provided the agency to select the foods they wanted to eat. Table 6 captures the favorable responses from students who were enrolled in the TGMP. 80 Table 6 Student Quotes About Their Experience with the To-Go Meal Program Theme: Opinions and values of the TGMP Interview question Student Responses The to-go meal program offers a different kind of support. In what ways has the to-go meal program provided support during your college experience, it at all? Michael I think the [TGMP] is the more convenient right now. Bam-Bam I can just order something real quick through the [TGMP]. That way, I can take that to work instead of going to McDonald’s or Chipotle, then waste $10 to $15, but I could save that money for rent or gas. Jane The [TGMP] is my favorite. Just because I do have the option for it be a little more, I guess, anonymous. If I don’t want my parents to know why I’m getting deliveries versus the MDP. Stella Another food program where I text an order at a restaurant, and the program partners with the restaurant, and I pick the food I wanted to eat. So, it’s very convenient for me to just text an order, and I’ll just get the food from wherever I’m at. Bee The [TGMP] is one of my favorites. Besides, because you could be in any neighborhood you are, wherever you are, because I don’t have a home base. Like, this is a bed my friend let’s me sleep in. You can get multiple meals, so then, I can have meals for days. The TGMP presented challenges, including restaurants unexpectedly canceling the student’s order, lack of restaurant choices, and a lack of ethnic food options. Stella shared, “The only restaurants that they offered are mostly Mexican food. There [wasn’t] really much other ethnic food. I wanted more things to try, like Asian food.” While Jane and Bee expressed satisfaction with the TGMP, they also shared that they both experienced frustration when their orders were canceled. Jane stated, 81 With [this program] sometimes [the restaurant] might cancel. I don’t know if sometimes they’re just doing system maintenance or if the restaurants aren’t available. They’ll be listed like they are [available], but then I get a cancelation maybe two to three times in a row, so then, I just kind of stop and try to figure out another option. A student’s physical address or home geography was also a factor in having choices for the TGMP. Marco expressed frustration given that the only restaurant choices that were available near his location were fast food options: “Just to be honest, it’s not the greatest.” Marco stated, “I live in an area that’s not exactly probably the most accessible. It’s geographically challenging. Most of my meals out here are Burger King, fried chicken, and fries.” These examples of students’ responses demonstrate the theme associated with favorable experiences and challenges related to the TGMP. Chapter Five presents a discussion of the interpretation of these findings. Meal Voucher Program Each semester, the meal voucher program provided eligible students with up to 18 coupons valued at $7.50 each. Each semester is 16 weeks in duration. The vouchers were redeemable at any of the on-campus cafés and are treated the same as cash. To sign up for the program, students were required to meet each semester with a counselor to secure vouchers. During the student-counselor meeting, the counselor would ascertain whether the student had additional needs such as housing support or other academic services they could receive on campus. Four study participants were enrolled in the meal voucher program prior to the pandemic. In interviews, students shared that securing the meal vouchers regularly was challenging. For example, one student described their experience signing up for the meal voucher program as a 82 “scavenger hunt,” explaining that the process to secure the meal vouchers was challenging, confusing, and time consuming. Bee said, I had to be interviewed. There’s all these hoops and parts of the puzzle where I feel like I’m figuring things out. It’s like a scavenger hunt. So, I was waiting to get interviewed or something, and I flaked one time, and then I think the counselor didn’t show up another time where they interview you about your needs. One of the themes in the data was that while the meal voucher program was helpful, the number of vouchers did not sufficiently meet the FI need. Stella said, “I usually tried to limit myself to see if I am really that hungry or should I [not] use [the voucher].” Students expressed that they rationed their meal vouchers so that they would know that they had food support throughout the semester. John stated, “I would go [to campus] maybe every day or every other day. That would be enough. That left me maybe a few. And then I would try and stretch it out, so I can use [the vouchers].” Regardless of challenges in securing the meal vouchers, students said that the program was valuable as a financial resource for food. Marco said, “The [meal vouchers] definitely helped me when I had them to not spend that money.” The students’ experience with the meal voucher program included favorable outcomes such as supporting them with financial resources and access to food support in an environment where the students had the agency to select their food. The process to secure the benefits presented challenges, including confusion in the sign-up process and scheduling of the renewal process for more vouchers. Further, the program participants stated that the number of meal vouchers was not sufficient in addressing the FI needs. 83 These examples of students’ responses demonstrate the theme associated with favorable experiences and challenges related to the meal voucher program. Chapter Five presents a discussion of the interpretation of these findings. Preferred Food Support Program Throughout each of the interviews, I asked students, “Which program best meets your needs?” and “What are the reasons why?” The responses indicated no consensus for any one program that stood out as preferred. Furthermore, not all students experienced all five of the programs. Michael, Jane, Bam-Bam, and Stella were enrolled in the TGMP and found this program to be the most versatile and easy to use, as it provided them with the agency to eat what they wanted when they wanted. Jane indicated that the food programs allowed her to focus more on her studies and less on her hunger. She stated, I definitely do feel like I can focus a bit more usually half hour to an hour after I eat versus if I’m a bit hungrier. I’m very aware that my tummy is making growling sounds. A different subset of students said CalFresh was their favored resource because their needs were met more effectively due to the flexibility and financial support the EBT card offered them. Students enrolled in the DMP valued the convenience and consistency of having free healthy meals delivered to their homes. Students’ responses reflect that four of the five food programs were valued resources. Theme 2: Students Feel a Sense of Being Cared For (Mesosystem, College) Within the mesosystem of the student’s college environment, one common sentiment students shared was that the food programs led to the authentic sense that the community college and its employees cared about them. The interview protocol did not include an item relating to this sentiment of caring. Rather, the question that evoked responses relating to caring was a 84 closing inquiry: “Is there anything that you would like to add?” Some of the students independently expressed that their lived experiences with the various food programs and the college staff who supported them made them feel cared for. Maria said, “It feels like [CCC] is saying, ‘I’ve got your back.’” Bee shared, “[The pantry] was just easy and fun, and everyone was nice.” These statements exemplify the mesosystem connection between the student and college food support programs available at CCC. The responses in Table 7 are sample quotes relaying this sentiment. Table 7 Student Quotes About the Sense of Being Cared For Theme: Sense of being cared for Interview question Student Responses Is there anything that you would like to add? Maria All I can really say is we are very fortunate to be able to access stuff such as EBT or the [pantry] at the college. The campus does really care. They even offered reusable bags. If you didn’t have one, such as me [because] I came unprepared without a bag, they gave me one for free. And there were people there to assist you, just in case you have a question or anything like that. Vanilla I don’t feel alone in the process, especially since I’m a first-generation college student. I was the first to graduate from high school as well. I have three wonderful counselors I can go to whenever I want. And then with Miss [Smith], we sometimes have the longest talks. One of them was like an hour talk because we’re so close. And like she just makes me feel very safe and secure. Marco It felt like I was cared for. Candice [The food pantry] was friendly, and someone helped me to my car to load all my groceries, which was really nice. Stella I’m grateful that [CCC is] doing these [programs] for us. I’m really grateful for CCC to even like support us, or support like pay for us, for our food. 85 Theme 3: Stigma Associated With Experiencing Support (Microsystem, College and Home) The campus centralized some of its food support services to help students normalize the experience, reducing the stigma associated with needing assistance (Broton & Goldrick-Rab, 2016; Bruckner et al., 2021). However, interviewees expressed a variety of stigma-related emotions associated with asking for assistance with food security support within the college or their home setting. Emotions related to seeking support with food security ranged from embarrassment and shame to fear. John stated, “When I was younger, there would be a shame to that. To needing to be helped out, I guess, especially for food.” Bee stated, “I’m scared to apply for [CalFresh] only because of fear of rejection again.” Other participants who visited CCC’s food pantry expressed various emotions associated with embarrassment. Candice stated, “It was a long line. I was a little embarrassed, but there were other people doing it, so it was pretty cool.” When asked a follow-up question about why the student felt embarrassed to ask for help, Candice stated, “It’s just looked down upon when people [need] assistance with things like with food.” Specifically, interviewees expressed varying degrees of shame, stigma, or embarrassment attached to asking for assistance despite the fact that the food programs were intentionally designed to support their needs. The feelings associated with stigma were not part of the protocol, and the interviewees independently shared them. Some of the responses associated with stigma indicate that students recognize the negative characteristic they experience in being stigmatized as a given for individuals who seek assistance with food security. Marco explained, “There is still somewhat a stigma that people do feel around asking for help.” Jane acknowledged that she hides the fact that she receives food 86 support from the immediate family members with whom she resides. She expressed that she did not want her family to feel shame because they could not adequately provide for her basic needs. Table 8 depicts the experiences related to students’ accessing support with CCC’s various food programs and the associated stigma, shame, or fear that accompanied their experience. 87 Table 8 Student Quotes About Experiencing Stigma Associated with Seeking FI Support Theme: Stigma Interview question Student Responses What, if any, challenges, or barriers did you face with accessing the college’s food programs? John When I was younger, there would be a shame to that. To needing to be helped out, I guess, especially for food. But now, I’m more aware. Now that I am older, I am more aware a lot of people hide that, their food insecurity because some people like shaming you if you need help. Bam-Bam I feel uncomfortable. I feel bad [asking for help] because of it. My house was always, you know, “you find a way you figure it out, not go the easy route.” Marco If somebody is ashamed to ask for help, they might not want to be seen by the rest of the students in the center of campus going to the [pantry]. I don’t think that as many students care about that anymore, especially over the last 2 years. Candice I was a little embarrassed, but there was other people doing it, so it was pretty cool. It’s not cool or it’s not really, when people have help. It’s looked down upon. It’s just looked down upon when people have assistance with things like food or living outside. Jane At first, I felt a bit bad because, since it was the beginning of the pandemic, I felt like other people were in worse positions, but it kind of also hit at a bit of a, I don’t want to say a financial problem, a financial bump in my family. Stella Am I worthy to get this kind of accessibility to even have this kind of opportunity to have free food? Michael I want you to know that if the same treatment happened to me, then maybe it happened to somebody else that really needed help. Bee I had shame about food stamps, and I moved out when I was 18. Note: The words “stigma” and “shame” were not mentioned or intimated by the researcher during the interviews. 88 Students repeatedly used the words “shame” and “stigma” to describe the barriers and challenges of accessing food programs. This finding suggests these negative emotions are prevalent and influence students’ decisions to ask for help and utilize these programs. This finding has implications for how to market and conduct outreach for food programs. These are examples of students’ responses demonstrating the theme associated with stigma while asking for help with food security support. Chapter Five presents a discussion of the interpretation of these findings. Theme 4: Program Membership Improves the Student Experience (Micro- and Mesosystem, College) Between the micro- and mesosystem, different people and programs supported the student experience with accessing support. In addition to students learning about the various food support programs from emails, social media, and word-of-mouth from other students, one of the most significant ways students became informed was through their enrollment in student services programs. Membership and participation in one these programs provided greater insight and knowledge about accessing and utilizing the food programs and improved the students’ experience. Nine interviewees stated that they were currently enrolled in at least one student services program and that these programs were a source of information and resource for them. Specifically, the programs were academic counseling programs designated for racially minoritized students, foster youth, and undocumented students. Michael, Stella, and Marco said they learned about the food program benefits from their program counselors. Jane shared a similar connection to support she received from program staff, stating, 89 Towards the beginning of the pandemic last year, a lot of [student services] staff would also email about the food program. And just because it seemed like everybody was like, “Hey, check it out.” It really did catch my attention. These are examples of student’s experiences navigating the college offerings when simultaneously enrolled in a student services program while receiving food security support. Chapter Five presents a discussion of the interpretation of these findings. Results for Research Question 2 The second research question asked, “What institutional factors facilitate or create barriers for students accessing and utilizing food programs?” The four themes identified to answer the second question were (a) communication channels and how students learned about the food programs, (b) how they navigated college with guidance, (c) barriers created by limited food program operations, and (d) the impact of COVID-19 on their experiences. These four themes are discussed in detail with evidence in the following subsections related to the second research question. Theme 1: Communication Channels About Food Programs (Mesosystem, College) Data from the interviews suggest that students are generally not aware of campus food programs prior to enrolling. However, once enrolled, they become aware quickly through a variety of communication channels. The student participants represent a small group who already knew how to access the programs. Thus, their experiences and perceptions about communication may not be generalizable to all students. The research sought to identify institutional barriers for students who need support with food security. One of the questions asked in the interviews was, “Prior to starting college, what knowledge did you have about the food programs offered at CCC?” Seven students responded 90 that they had no information or knowledge about the programs prior to attending CCC. Three students mentioned learning about the programs through an older sibling or friend who attended CCC. Additionally, five students interviewed were between the ages of 18 and 20 and matriculated recently from their local public high school. The responses in Table 9 depict the student’s lack of program knowledge prior to entering college. Table 9 Student’s Lack of Food Program Knowledge Prior to Entering College Theme: Communication (mesosystem, college) Interview question Student Responses Prior to starting college, what knowledge did you have about the food programs offered at CCC? Maria None. Michael None. Vanilla I didn’t know anything about the food drive any like food help like anything of that like I wasn’t aware of anything Marco I had no knowledge of any of the programs here. And then just in general, I wasn’t really aware of any of the food programs at any colleges either. Jane I didn’t know about the food pantry like I’ve heard of it, but even when I was [in person] at CCC I never really knew about it. Bee I had none prior to starting at CCC. I didn’t know that there was food programs. Candice No, I didn’t know about their food programs. I came from [a neighboring] high school and they didn’t really say much about food programs. Stella I didn’t really know about it until my friend told me about it. 91 However, once students were enrolled in classes and programs at CCC, the communication about the food program resources became more apparent. Students stated that they learned about various programs through different communication channels: flyers and posters around campus, emails, social media, school clubs, and their peers. Other students heard about the resources through student services programs. Moreover, some of the students mentioned that they learned about the resources through counselors and faculty who presented the resources, advocating for students who need support to leverage the programs. Jane shared that some of the “younger” faculty in her classes would intimate that certain student services programs provided food as an incentive to attract students. One student, Bee, mentioned that they preferred receiving information from college staff versus relying on social media or emails. They expressed that the information communicated by a person was more helpful and less taxing on them. Bee said, “I learned about stuff from flyers, but to me, that’s not [helpful].” They elaborated, “I would rather get the information from a human than ‘go sit at that computer,’ or ‘here is just paper for you to figure out the next puzzle.’” Table 10 depicts how students responded to the adapted interview question, “Once in college, how did you learn about the food programs?” These are examples of how students receive communication about resources available them for support. Chapter Five presents a discussion of the interpretation of these findings. 92 Table 10 How Students Received Communication About Food Programs Theme: Communication (mesosystem, college) Interview questions Student Responses How did you learn about the food programs? How did you know how to access the food programs? Maria If I didn’t have social media, I think I would have been kind of clueless about the food programs. Michael Because I go to my [special] program and I go to a program orientations. Vanilla I began getting emails from CCC [and] the programs I’m in and the clubs I’m in. [They] informed us about all the opportunities that we had at school. Basic needs program communication is effective through social media channels like FB and CCC’s app. Marco I first learned about the food programs through participating in some of the [special] programs on campus. Jane There were consistent emails: “Hey, you can check this out.” [Also], I know some of the younger professors maybe under 40ish or so, also drop hints like which student groups offer snacks or foods during student activities. They’re like, “If you go to this club or group meeting, they have stuff…hint, hint.” Bee The emails [are effective], so whoever’s doing the emails and the social medias [thumbs up]. I don’t know anyone personally, but that’s how I’m staying informed. Candice Definitely the flyers, and before COVID a lot of people on campus will talk about it and it would be kind of everywhere. The CCC app. Stella They post it usually on social media or on the MLS. I’m also in the [special] student programs, and I respond more often. Theme 2: Navigating College With Guidance (Microsystem, College) Related specifically to their microsystem, I asked students, “Who are the people, if anyone, at the college that help you navigate the hurdles you face with school? In what ways 93 were they helpful?” Ten students identified someone on campus who has helped them navigate the college environment. Maria (age 18), said that she was brand new to the school in fall 2021 and did not know anyone, but met a fellow student who was waiting in line for the food pantry. Classroom faculty were mentioned as a valued resource for students who helped them navigate college. Vanilla said, Professors are really helpful and kind. [They] say, “These are all the resources [that] are happening this week” all throughout the semester. Every single week, they’re sending emails, and I think that’s a really smart and very thoughtful idea for them to do because there are people who are struggling way more than me that need it. Marco, a former foster youth, expressed the importance of establishing a community at the college to provide support through his academic journey. Marco explained, “I really needed to have a community around me. I knew that predictively, if I didn’t immerse myself, I would drop out again. And I felt that’s why I was actively searching and participating in some of these [food] programs.” Program and academic counselors were some of the professionals who were important resources in helping students understand the college landscape. Also important were fellow students, friends, and peers on campus. Michael talked about the support he received from the CCC’s health department, which reached out to him to ensure the services he was receiving were adequate. The student expressed appreciation when the staff member followed up several months after the student started receiving food program support. Michael said, “Almost 6 months later, she reached out to me, and she said, ‘how’s everything for you?’” This made the student feel cared for. The students’ quotes suggest that people play a critical role in connecting students to college programs and services. The initial connection and the follow-up from others students’ 94 sense of belonging to the college community. Table 11 provides student quotes about the people on campus who help them find their way and provide support. 95 Table 11 Student Quotes About the People Who Helped Them Navigate College Theme: College Community support (microsystem) Interview question Student Responses Who are the people, if anyone, at the college that help you navigate the hurdles you face with school? Maria I made a new friend while I was standing in line at [the food pantry]. We had the same major. Michael [There] is the lady in the health department. Nice lady. She’s usually the top of the department because the emails and bulletins and everything’s coming from her. Vanilla I basically have three separate counselors to talk to all the time. Miss [Smith] is so sweet. I like her the most. She’s super helpful. She’s super nice. She told me what classes to take, what I need. Marco I really needed to have a community around me. I knew that predictively if I didn’t immerse myself, I would drop out again. That’s why I was actively searching and participating in some of these programs. Jane The counselors. Towards the beginning of the pandemic last year, a lot of them would also email about the [delivery meal] program. It seemed like everybody was not consistent but just like, “Hey, check it out.” It really did catch my attention. Bee Two people that stand out are [staff] where I could feel them actually want to help, trying to remember and think of all the resources and telling me like we have food closets or whatever, telling me like where each of the closets are and then if this one doesn’t have any good stuff. John I’ve been having one specific counselor through the [special programs]. She’s been a great counselor and has really understood my situation. Candice One of my classmates actually went to the [food pantry] before class and she got a bag of food and she was just telling me, “Yeah they have food here. You should go get some before the line gets too long.” I was like, wow, good to know that other people were doing it. Zack My professor sent me information. So, everybody talks to each other and students talk to each other, [too]. Stella I’m in nutrition class, [and] my professor does talk about food programs that are available for students like me. She’s very helpful. 96 Theme 3: The Barrier of Limited Food Program Operations (Meso- and Chronosystem, College) Represented within the college’s meso- and chronosystem, all 11 interviewees expressed significant challenges with the program services and the times during which the services were available, as these conflicted with their work and school schedules. Specifically, the food pantry program’s hours of operation were the most-often reported barrier. Students talked about having to make choices between attending class or taking the time to stand in line to enter the food pantry. While the food pantry provides the agency of choice, the significantly limited hours forced many of them to choose between addressing their hunger and fulfilling their academic needs. In so doing, the program caused stress and anxiety for students who needed FI support, creating a barrier for them to access the program. Moreover, students who experience anxiety and stress due to FI are at greater risk for other health-related problems (Innis et al., 2019). The food pantry’s limited hours of operations, coupled with the time and distance to travel back and forth to campus, presented additional challenges. Candice mentioned she has limited to wait in line for the food pantry: “I think what I’ve noticed so far is that time seems to be the biggest barrier to access the programs that are on campus like the [food pantry].” Marco stated, I think some of the initial challenges are the limited timeframe and accessing the [food pantry] or the food drive. When it was happening [on-ground], I’m not available on Wednesdays. Another challenge in [the] present day [is] I moved, so distance definitely became a barrier to accessing a lot of the in-person food. I have found now that my schedule doesn’t allow for me to drive an hour to get groceries and then an hour back. 97 The institutional barrier illustrates the fact that while the food programs are a benefit to address food insecurity, the limited hours of operation restrict students’ ability to utilize the support. When students cannot access food support, they cannot alleviate their hunger. Lack of access to the resource causes additional stress. These are examples of institutional barriers and how they impact the student experience. Chapter Five presents a discussion of the interpretation of these findings. Theme 4: The Impact of COVID-19 on the Student Experience (Exosystem) COVID-19 impacted the learning environment, including the college student experience. At the exosystem level, college district, county, and state policies impacted the students’ ability to resume a normal college experience. Although specific questions were not asked about the impact of the pandemic on their lived experiences and the protocol did not focus on the student’s exosystem, interviewees openly expressed specific barriers and challenges related to COVID-19. Students expressed missing a sense of community in the classroom and campus. Some of the sentiments expressed included feelings of loneliness, isolation, fear, and disconnect. Bam-Bam said, “[Since COVID], I don’t feel as confident talking to teachers [online] right now as [compared] to the ones I had before [in person].” Prior to the pandemic, Michael took classes on campus where he received help from the professors or campus tutors. With most courses offered remotely, Michael expressed that he does not have that same level of confidence to take courses with similar rigor: “I used to have a chemistry class [and] mathematics. I get scared to take it online because I don’t have nobody in my house to help me at home.” The emotional impact on the student experience creates a sense of instability and uncertainty that affects their ability to concentrate on their school work. The additional struggle with FI makes the task of learning even more difficult. Prior to the pandemic, students relied on 98 in-person interactions with faculty and college staff in addition to the various on-campus services, especially the food programs that supported their FI. The students expressed a diminished level of confidence with seeking needed support due largely to the ongoing policies preventing them from returning entirely to on-ground classes. Being away from the physical campus adds to the lack of in-person interactions. Students were accustomed to the flexibility of walking in without an appointment, visiting a special program, and accessing snacks or meals in a less formal, more familial grab-n-go way. Now, students are without easy access to college staff to help them navigate campus programs. While students are receiving food support in different ways, they are missing the physical human connection with their peers, college employees, and program support staff. Table 12 reflects the responses from students who expressed the impact COVID-19 has had on their lived experiences while in college. 99 Table 12 Student Statements About the Impact of COVID-19 (Exosystem) Theme: COVID impact Student Responses Bam-Bam [Since COVID], I don’t feel as confident talking to teachers [online] right now as [compared] to the ones I had before [in person]. Michael I used to get [food] help at school. Now, I receive meals at my house. Vanilla Due to COVID, just everything went downhill. John Then COVID hit. Candice Before COVID, a lot of people on campus will talk about [food support programs], and it would be kind of everywhere. Stella I’m in EOPS program, and before COVID started, they also provided food vouchers for us. So, they talk about you should use this, and there’s also food program. Stella During COVID, I didn’t want to go anywhere else. I didn’t go. I didn’t want to go to the store or anywhere out in public. Chapter Four Summary Two research questions guided this study examining food insecurity’s impact on community college students. The first question asked, “What are the experiences and perceptions of community college students using food support programs?” The four themes that emerged from the data analysis to answer this question were the participants’ experience with the food programs, their sense of being cared for, the stigma attached to seeking support for food insecurity, and that student services programs provided greater insight and knowledge about accessing and utilizing the food programs and improved the student experience. The second research question asked, “What institutional factors facilitate or create barriers for students accessing and utilizing food programs?” Four themes emerged from the data analysis for this question: communication channels, how students navigated college with 100 guidance, the barrier of limited food program operations, and the impact of COVID-19 on the student experience. In total, this chapter discussed eight findings based on the interview data addressing the two research questions, as summarized in Table 13. Chapter Five addresses these findings and implications and provides suggested recommendations and solutions based on the resulting data acquired. Table 13 Summary of Findings Organized by Research Question What are the experiences and perceptions of undergraduate community college students using food support programs? Theme 1: Experience with CCC food programs Theme 2: Students feel a sense of being cared for Theme 3: Stigma associated with experiencing support Theme 4: Program membership improves student experience What institutional factors facilitate or create barriers for students accessing and utilizing food programs? Theme 1: Communication channels about food programs Theme 2: Navigating college with guidance Theme 3: The barrier of limited food program operations Theme 4: The impact of COVID-19 on the student experience 101 Chapter Five: Discussion and Recommendations Chapter Four presented detailed findings and themes from the data analysis to answer the study’s research questions about food insecurity’s impact on community college students. The research questions in this qualitative study addressed two related areas. First, the study assessed how food insecure students experience the suite of food programs and the supports’ impact on their collegiate experience. Second, the study examined what institutional factors facilitated or created barriers for students to access these programs. The goal of this study was to provide a meaningful forum to discuss and understand the challenges, institutional barriers, and lived experiences of FI students who receive support through the college’s various food programs and services. Chapter Five commences with a discussion of the eight findings confirming knowledge about FI students in the literature and adding new insight about how they experience institutional and other supports. The chapter segues to the implications for practice, and the institutional recommendations and implementation plan are presented using two different change models: Kotter’s (2007) eight-step model of organizational change and Hiatt’s (2006) five-step ADKAR model for successful change and implementation. Chapter Five concludes by addressing the study’s limitations, future research needs, and a final summary. Discussion for Findings for Research Question 1 The students interviewed provided unique perspectives and lived experiences. The findings demonstrate common themes supported by the evidence these students presented. First, a college campus that provides significant sustenance in its food program offerings led to students reporting added value and a sense that the institution cared about them. The following sections present the four major themes relating to the first research question. 102 Student Experience With CCC Food Programs The research in Chapter Two acknowledges the varying levels of FI indicated by the USDA’s framework definition of food insecurity (Maroto et al., 2015). The evidence collected in the research indicated that the student participants met USDA qualifications to be considered in the most severe level of FI: very low food security (USDA, 2020). These students illustrated evidence of FI that included reduced food intake and disruption in eating patterns due to lack of money or other resources for food, which is congruent with the research about post-secondary education and FI (Bruening et al., 2017; USDA, 2020). The first research question focused on the students’ lived experiences in college (Chaparro et al., 2009). One of the first areas of inquiry was the food support programs available to students. The literature supports the findings about how students experience these programs and help address the first research question. Food Support Programs Most community colleges lack formal meal programs that are more commonly available at 4-year university campuses. Thus, the food landscape is limited at 2-year colleges, especially for students experiencing FI (Ilieva et al., 2019). However, contrary to the literature, the research in the current study indicated that several food program interventions had been implemented at CCC to support FI students’ basic needs (Martinez et al., 2019). Some of the programs are federally funded, and others were launched with funding from private donations or by leveraging a combination of resources, including private and state funding. The subsequent sections provide a closer examination of CCC’s food programs’ direct impact on students. CalFresh. Eligible students positively received the federally funded CalFresh nutrition assistance program. In total, six students accessed CalFresh, with favorable results, including the 103 freedom to purchase items they desired. However, five of the students did not apply for CalFresh, expressing uncertainty or lack of clarity about whether they qualified for the program, which is consistent with the literature (Bianco et al., 2016). Further, students found the application process cumbersome and challenging to complete. Lastly, some students expressed fear of being denied as their reason for not applying at all. Stella stated, “To be honest, I wanted to [apply for] CalFresh. It’s just that I was scared if I’m not eligible.” The evidence supports that while community college students are more likely than their counterparts at 4-year universities to access public assistance programs, the majority of 2-year college students underutilize this program (Ilieva et al., 2019). Food Pantry. The literature supports that college food pantries are among the most beneficial resources for students who experience FI (Dubick et al., 2016; Goldrick-Rab et al., 2018; Twill et al., 2016). The evidence is consistent with the literature as the CCC food pantry is one food program used by all 11 interviewees. Students valued the free groceries, most of the food choices, and the consistency of knowing that groceries were available to them weekly. The campus food pantry served as a point of positive engagement and connection with college staff, with students expressing sentiments of feeling cared for, valued, and a sense of belonging (Brooms, 2019; Goldrick-Rab et al., 2018; Strayhorn, 2018; Wood et al., 2016). Further, the highly visible drive-through food pantry and the on-ground food pantry helped normalize students’ experiences, reducing the stigma associated with asking for help (Brooms, 2019; Twill et al., 2016). While most of the data indicate favorable experiences, three barriers were presented as significant challenges associated with the pantry: the restricted hours of operations and time it 104 took to complete the transaction, the lack of ethnic food choices, and the restrictions on the number of items one could take at each visit. Other Meal Programs. The CCC provided three additional food support programs to students: TGMP, DMP, and the meal voucher program. Prior to the pandemic, the meal voucher program provided a limited number of vouchers valued at $7.50 each for use at on-campus retail stores when the college was fully operational. The program was considered favorable among students, providing them with the agency to purchase meals from their desired vendor. However, despite the program’s value, students expressed two barriers. First, the low number of vouchers students received per semester did not sufficiently support their needs. Instead, their need to ration the vouchers perpetuated the FI behavior they sought to diminish. Stella said, “I usually tried to limit myself to see if I am really that hungry or should I [not] use [the voucher].” Second, students expressed challenges with accessing and renewing their enrollment in the meal voucher program. The process required an in-person interview with a program counselor who ascertained the student’s other needs, such as support applying for CalFresh, housing support, or tutoring. During these interviews, the students did not wholly understand the evaluation or how the inquiry was intended to help meet their needs. Bee stated, “I had to be interviewed. There [were] all these hoops and parts of the puzzle where I feel like I'm figuring things out. It's like a scavenger hunt.” Next, the students received text-based TGMP favorably because it provided 28 meals of their choice. Overall, students appreciated and valued the ease of accessing food of their choice through the platform. When asked how the program could be improved or better serve their needs, students’ top response was a desire to have more ethnic food choices. They were also 105 frustrated with restaurants canceling their order, though this sentiment did not dissuade students from utilizing the program benefit. The third meal program, the DMP, is CCC’s longest-running food support program that started providing meals delivered to students at home with the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in March 2020 and continues to serve hundreds of students each week. The research indicates that students value this resource. While students appreciated the DMP, a consistent finding with all the meal-specific programs was the insufficient quantity of meals provided to address their overall needs. Finally, occasional program-delivery logistics presented challenges for some students using DMP. Students Feel A Sense of Being Cared For One finding consistent with the literature is the impact of food programs on campus culture and their subsequent effect on students’ perceptions of the college. As a result of participating in the food programs, students expressed a genuine sense of being cared for by the various programs, points of engagement, staff interaction, and overall campus expression (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2018). Again, this finding was unsolicited in the protocol. However, participants shared their sentiments of feeling cared for when asked if they had any additional information they would like to include in the interviews. The food programs served as an essential engagement point for students to connect with staff to ascertain additional resources (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2018). Maria spoke about how she experienced the caring environment at the college when she visited the food pantry. She said, “The campus does really care. There were people there to assist you, just in case you have a question or anything like that.” Students valued the free resources available on campus as a college benefit compared to securing offsite public assistance programs (Dubick et al., 2016). In 106 addition to feeling cared for, several students expressed gratitude for the services provided. Stella shared that having the various food support programs available at no cost to students was valuable: “I'm grateful that [CCC is] doing these [programs] for us. I'm really grateful for [CCC] to even like support us, or support like pay for us, for our food.” Stigma Associated With Students Experiencing Support Martinez et al. (2019) indicated that FI is a delicate and complex subject to navigate. Students who experience FI must cope with its various social and emotional challenges. Specifically, students who require assistance may avoid seeking help because of the social stigma attached to the experience (Bruckner et al., 2021; Freudenberg et al., 2019). Martinez et al.’s work aligns with the research findings related to the stigma associated with seeking support (Camelo, 2019; Freudenberg et al., 2019). Some students expressed shame and felt bad when asking for help. Some students expressed associated stigma to feeling guilty when needing assistance with food support. Others expressed a sense of not being worthy of receiving food support. Some students expressed the shame and stigma associated with their inability to provide for themselves (Henry, 2017; Peterson & Freidus, 2020). One student, Jane, expressed hiding her FI from her family due to the associated shame: “I don't want my parents to know exactly what [is] going on.” Additionally, specific programs such as CalFresh and the food pantry were associated with emotions tied to shame and stigma (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2018). This finding is congruent with the research of Dubick et al. (2016), which indicated that students avoided seeking help because of the social stigma attached to doing so. Program Membership Improves Student Experience Regarding the first research question, engaging and maintaining membership in a student- centered program improved the overall experience, eliminating barriers to access to the food 107 programs. This finding is consistent with Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) outline of the mesosystem where multi-setting participation is the primary link to the “existence of a direct or first-order social network across settings in which the [the student] is a participant” (p. 209). Further, nine interviewees noted the importance of their participation in at least one of CCC’s student services programs. The programs varied from counseling-designated groups to student leadership to support programs for specific groups, such as undocumented students and formerly foster youth. There was a distinct relationship between students enrolled in student-centered programs and those who access food support programs. Peer support was another way participants learned about different support systems from their peers who were also members of various programs. For example, Candice shared that one of her classmates encouraged her to visit the food pantry, which prompted her to do so for the first time. The trusted community established in the student services program allowed for students to share and receive information. Students expressed a more robust understanding of navigating the college and its programs due to the membership and support they found in the various programs and settings (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). For example, Marco shared, “I really needed to have a community around me. I knew that predictively if I didn't immerse myself, I would drop out again. And that's why I was actively participating in some of these programs.” The various types of interconnections found within programmatic membership punctuate the importance of understanding the influence membership has on the student as the individual and aligns with the literature presented in Chapter Two (Bronfenbrenner, 1979). 108 Discussion for Findings to Research Question 2 The second research question centered on identifying the institutional factors that create barriers for students when accessing and utilizing the food programs. Specifically, the research examined how various systems, settings, and influences at the college and home environment contribute to their lived experience, aligning with Bronfenbrenner’s (1979) EST model. The research question revealed four findings related to challenges students faced as they navigated the college’s food programs. Communication Channels About Food Programs As mentioned earlier, there is a lack of college knowledge in the home, particularly among poor and racially minoritized students (Goldrick-Rab, 2010). Important information about food support programs and other college resources are less widely known to students who derive from low-SES backgrounds, particularly first-generation students, as they are “less likely to receive high-quality information” at home from their parents or family members (Goldrick-Rab, 2010, p. 452). First-generation students lack familial capital to provide understanding, knowledge, and awareness about the various college food resources available to them (Crawford et al., 2019). The literature aligns with the finding that most of the students interviewed indicated they had no knowledge about the food resources available on campus prior to starting college. Additionally, researchers examined the influence of college-enrolled siblings and their interaction with their younger siblings; they found a lack of shared experiences, especially evident among first-year students who seldom relied on information from their older siblings (Roksa et al. 2020). The research conducted for this study exemplified similar findings with a lack of shared experiences between students and their family members. Stella indicated that although her older siblings were enrolled at the same college, they did not know of the food 109 support programs. Moreover, Stella shared that she provided knowledge of the food pantry and other programs to her older siblings. She stated, “I was the only one that [knew] about the food programs. I was the one that had to tell them, even though they were [at CCC] before me.” In contrast, some students expressed that they learned about some of the resources from their siblings. For example, John responded, “I have an older sibling who went to [CCC]. Because we are in the same living situation, they kind of figured out everything for me, so I learned about the [food pantry] and meal programs.” However, once students began their academic programs, they learned about the food support offerings from different sources, including faculty, social media, and peers. Stella mentioned that the college’s social media posts made her aware of the food programs. Marco stated that he learned about the food programs through his enrollment in other student services programs, and Jane felt encouraged by her classroom faculty to explore the various food support programs. Navigating College With Guidance Bronfenbrenner (1979) indicated that the solitary transition is paramount to the student’s onboarding experience. In this study, some students had recently transitioned from high school into college. Their ability to navigate the college landscape was critical to their academic success (Scott et al., 2016). The absence of crucial college stakeholders and critical information about campus resources may have presented unnecessary barriers for the interviewees. Goldrick-Rab (2010) indicated that students of low SES were less likely to possess the knowledge to navigate the various systems to support their own basic needs. This literature aligns with the findings indicated by the study participants who expressed that prior to enrolling at CCC, they lacked knowledge about how to navigate the campus, including programs and services to support their 110 needs. The evidence revealed that most of the students’ parents or family members did not possess prior knowledge or understanding of accessing support with FI. The evidence presented is consistent with Wood and Harris’s (2017) research, which indicated that the transition from high school to college is absent of clear connections or influences to understand how best to navigate the various programs and services available. Greene et al. (2008) emphasized student engagement and the quality of the effort when students interact with faculty and staff after they enter higher education. The evidence collected indicates alignment with that work. For example, students interviewed relied more on receiving their information from faculty than from other college staff (Crutchfield et al., 2016; Phillips et al., 2018). In addition to student services programs, the data are consistent with the literature in that several students relied on counseling faculty and classroom faculty to provide information about food support programs available to them (Crutchfield et al. 2016; Phillips et al., 2018). Further, students relied on their interaction with faculty to gain insight, knowledge, and understanding on how best to access and navigate the various support services at the college (Dominguez-Whitehead, 2015). Some students shared that their comfort with faculty engagement depended on their rapport with the faculty member (Greene et al., 2008). This finding indicates academic and counseling faculty must be accessible, engaging, and knowledgeable about supporting students who may experience FI. The Barrier of Limited Food Program Operations The literature supports food program operations as a barrier, which addresses the second research question. The literature noted the need for intervention food programs to be an integral part of the college ecosystem (Dubick et al., 2016; Martinez et al., 2019). However, the interviewees expressed significant challenges because the pantry’s hours of operation conflicted 111 with their school and work schedule, which negatively impacted their learning and ability to succeed in their courses. The students had to choose between attending class or waiting in line to access the food pantry. Moreover, the student interviews indicated that the restricted hours caused additional stress and anxiety, particularly for students who needed food support and relied on the pantry as a source for that aid. This finding supports the literature that indicates students develop a sense of distrust about a college setting reflective of its existing foodscape, thus creating a barrier versus accessibility to support their needs (Ilieva et al., 2019). The institutional barrier presented by this finding illustrates that while the food pantry program is beneficial to help address FI, the limited access due to the hours of operations restricts students’ ability to utilize the support. When students cannot access food support, this prevents them from seeking the sustenance they require to alleviate their hunger. Facing FI causes additional stress on the student. Although CCC has created food programs to support this population, the institution needs to consider the complexities and barriers that create limitations to existing food programs, thus negatively impacting students. This finding aligns with the literature that indicates students who experience anxiety and stress due to FI are at greater risk for other health-related problems (Innis et al., 2019). The Impact of COVID-19 on the Student Experience The global COVID-19 pandemic has had lasting effects on the student experience with constant changes to their learning environment. In addition to the shift from taking classes in person on campus in a setting inclusive of others, students now consume most of their classes in a remote environment (El Masri & Sabzalieva, 2020). The students interviewed for the study expressed feelings of loneliness, isolation, fear, and a sense of disconnect, having shifted from 112 on-ground courses to a remote learning modality (Bullard, 2021). Vanilla expressed, “Due to just you know everything was you know, COVID, and just everything went downhill.” In some cases, scheduling the qualitative interviews presented privacy challenges for students who did not have access to quiet or personal space within their home to conduct the conversation or were unexpectedly interrupted by family members entering the space, which is additional evidence to support the impact of the pandemic on the student experience (THCCCJ, 2021). Other students noted challenges with Wi-Fi signals or the need to share their technology, like their computers, with other family members while attending classes remotely, which is congruent with the literature (Levin, 2020). With the pandemic’s onset, access to free grab-and- go snacks at various departments and the MVP ceased and shifted to remote-only learning. While the food support programs pivoted to offerings that included meal delivery, to-go meals, and weekly drive-through food pantry options, students missed the interaction with college staff and their peers. Moreover, students expressed reluctance and confidence in asking for help while in the remote environment. Throughout the interviews, student responses started with “before COVID” or “during COVID” as benchmarks to what students knew as standard in their college timeline. Implications for Practice This study focused on the lived experiences of 11 community college students who were food insecure. This section will address how the study informs the work of community college practitioners, including faculty, administrators, and staff. Together, the literature and the findings from the study provide recommendations and strategies for the institution to consider significant changes to address FI for a campus-wide transformation integration. The three areas are 113 institutional recommendations, program enhancement recommendations, and professional development suggestions to address FI on campus. Institutional Recommendations The following sections outline recommendations for the institution to address FI among its student population. Moreover, additional recommendations include providing continued support with the existing food programs. Subsequently, there will be a discussion on how to move from recommendation to action-oriented implementation. Institutional Change: Early Engagement With Students and Families Given the high percentage of first-generation students and racially minoritized students on campus (Roksa et al., 2020), information about the various programs and support services should be provided to students and their families before they leave high school and prior to entering college (John Burton Advocates for Youth, 2020). Currently, CCC offers strategies to engage high school students and early enrollment workshops on Saturdays. Thus, CCC can leverage or build on these structures to increase awareness of food programs and facilitate enrollment in them. In addition to increasing awareness about food support services, CCC should conduct evening and weekend bilingual workshops, both in-person and online, to reduce familial-college barriers and bridge critical resources for students. Engaging families in their native language creates partners and allies (Auerbach, 2004). Parents are a top source for students seeking help, yet once a student enters college, they are not privy to their progress due to FERPA regulations (USDOE, 2021). However, presenting the facts is only one component families need to support their college students. Hispanic families need opportunities to make sense of college information by hearing about other parents’ lived experiences (Auerbach, 2004). Providing such workshops 114 will create a meaningful bridge among the institution, students, and families. Campus personnel should lead, engage, and institutionalize the community-centric workshops centered on navigating through college as part of their outreach to high schools, creating familiarity and connection to programs, services, and support professionals to eliminate information barriers (Roksa et al., 2020). Institutional Change: Through Marketing and Communications Throughout this study, communication was an important theme. Recommendations from the literature suggest that an essential part of establishing and maintaining awareness is developing clear, intentional communication channels (CCCCO, 2018; Twill et al., 2016). Nudging students about basic needs resources coupled with deliberate communication has proven effective (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2021). The recommendation is for the institution to develop regularly calendared, coordinated messaging about the various food programs and services to all constituents. Appendix H provides an overview of CCC’s constituent groups, strategic locations, and campuses, hereafter called channels, where communication should be delivered consistently. The omission of any channels produces information gaps, ultimately posing barriers for students who may need the information. Mobile App. One successful example CCC launched in 2019 is a mobile app program that sends a push notification via text message notifying students about free leftover prepared food from a campus meeting or event. The current protocol requires students to opt-in to this campus mobile app. However, when the pandemic forced the campus closure, the focus of the mobile app shifted to notifying students about remote food program offerings. Although the college has returned to a hybrid model of offering classes in various modalities, a recommendation is for all new students to be automatically registered for the 115 mobile food app with the choice to opt out. Moreover, all students should receive scheduled reminders via text three times each semester about the suite of food resources available to them as their environment is dynamic and changes occur. Institutional Change: Dedicated Staffing for Basic Needs Recommendations from the literature indicate colleges must have a dedicated team including directors, case managers, and staff to support and serve the student population (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2019). In 2021, newly earmarked state funding was available to California community colleges to start a basic needs center with allocation for staffing (Legislative Analyst’s Office [LAO], 2022). In fall 2021, the institution hired a basic needs manager who joined an existing part-time academic advisor dedicated to supporting social work case management for students needing assistance with basic needs. However, the current population of approximately 29,000 students and THCCCJ’s (2019) data indicating 54% of students surveyed were food insecure in the prior 30 days demonstrate the substantial need for more staffing and funding. Institutional Change: Basic Needs Committee Composition Since 2018, a committee supporting basic needs was formed on campus and includes stakeholders from various constituent groups. Although the basic needs committee composition is representative of many programmatic and academic touchpoints, a recommendation is to expand it to include teaching faculty and staff from high-visibility areas, such as the library, athletics, and campus security (Goldrick-Rab, 2018). Further, adding representatives from the marketing and communications team would provide campus-wide integration for new or changing programmatic information. A more dynamic committee will identify additional strategies to serve students and create greater connectivity and cohesiveness across campus. 116 Institutional Change: Establish Emergency Basic Needs Fund Emergency aid is one of the most effective ways to provide immediate cash resources with no red tape or lengthy processes (Dubick et al., 2016; Goldrick-Rab et al., 2019; THCCCJ, 2021). A recommendation is to establish an endowed basic needs emergency fund by fall semester 2023. Once established, the endowed fund would be restricted to emergency aid for students in the form of grocery gift cards and exist in perpetuity. Policy Changes Needed Community colleges can address FI among students from a local policy perspective in addition to state and federal policy changes (Blagg et al., 2017). Federal legislation providing increased resources needs to expand to community colleges specifically, given the significant percentage of racially minoritized and low-socioeconomic-status students who enroll at these campuses (Innis et al., 2019; Wood et al., 2016). Institutionally, one recommendation is for the CCC board of trustees to commit to continuous support for the food programs as a fundamental need for students’ health, wellbeing, and academic persistence. A trustee-adopted statement would demonstrate leadership across the district, highlight the district’s commitment to the external community, and reinforce the college’s support of students’ basic needs (Wood et al., 2016). The federal government is not keeping pace with the growing FI crisis among college students (Broton & Goldrick-Rab, 2016). The NSLP does not exist in post-secondary education (Broton & Goldrick-Rab, 2016; Bruening et al., 2016; Phillips et al., 2018). Students who graduated high school and enter community college are without the service they previously relied on in K–12, thus contributing to their FI while in college (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2021; 117 Regan, 2020). Congress should expand the NSLP to include community colleges (Camelo, 2019; Goldrick-Rab et al., 2021). Moreover, Congress should pass the Food for Thought Act (HR-4065) to support financial grants for community colleges to provide meals and snacks to eligible students (Congress.gov, n.d.). Additionally, Congress should pass the Basic Assistance for Students in College (BASIC) Act (SB-2004), which was introduced in 2021 to guarantee students can meet their basic needs while pursuing their college education (Padilla, 2021). The BASIC Act would provide basic needs planning and implementation grants to qualifying public higher education institutions and earmarks 25% of the funds for community colleges with grant priority given to institutions with a 25% or higher Pell enrollment, like CCC (Padilla, 2021). Recommendations for Food Program Enhancements Alleviating FI among students requires removing structural and operational barriers to campus food programs (Peterson & Freidus, 2020). First, the section below offers three operational recommendations to consider for the food pantry program: extending service hours, centralizing the physical location, and removing quantity restrictions. Following the food pantry suggestions, meal program enhancements are suggested. Finally, recommendations are offered to improve the student experience for eligible students applying for CalFresh and earmarking funding for food programs. Expand Food Pantry Hours of Operation A recommendation is to offer more flexible hours of operation conducive to students’ busy schedules, including those who attend classes in the evening or entirely asynchronously. Aligned with the findings and the literature, weekday evening hours and Saturday hours of operation would increase the opportunity for students to access the food pantry (Henry, 2017). 118 Extended hours of operation would increase the program’s visibility to engage more students who may not be on campus during the current hours of operation. Centralize and Expand the Food Pantry Program The literature supports the recommendation and the need to centralize the support services, removing navigation barriers within the food landscape which causes students to distrust the institution (Ilieva et al., 2018). The food pantry’s physical location is not highly visible. Although the pantry is adjacent to the cafeteria and health center, it should be more prominently located (Bruckner et al., 2021; John Burton Advocates for Youth, 2020). Because the food pantry is part of a suite of programs and not the definitive solution (Henry, 2017), additional support requires ongoing funding and staffing support. Satellite Campuses The college’s several satellite campuses do not have food support resources, thus creating a barrier for FI students who have their classes on an alternate campus. The institution should expand the food pantry to the satellite campuses, stocking food closets in prominent locations. Edible Campus The campus is undergoing a transformation with the construction of different buildings and locations for students to gather. In addition to the organic learning garden on campus that provides fresh produce for the pantry, CCC should add fruit trees for students to easily access fresh produce, build community, and learn about the agricultural offerings on campus (Dubick et al., 2016; Henry, 2017). Eliminate Quantity Restrictions at Food Pantry In addition to expanding the food pantry’s hours, the college should eliminate restrictions on the number of items a student can access. If students visit the campus food pantry, the 119 assumption should be that they have a need (Twill et al., 2016). In addition to securing goods for themselves, students may require items for their families. Giving students the agency to share their items creates goodwill and reduces anxiety and stress (Bruckner et al., 2021). Eliminating the quantity limits will help students be more comfortable utilizing the program, experience less stigma, and develop trust (Twill et al., 2016). Meal Program Modifications The institution supports students with three different free meal programs: TGMP, DMP, and meal vouchers (Dubick et al., 2016). The data demonstrate a significant need to provide more sustenance in each instance. Increasing the number of meals issued to students may better meet their needs. Additionally, the college should work with its providers to offer more ethnic food choices. Surveying about different food choices would offer an inclusive approach to creating meaningful change. CalFresh: Early Notification A recommendation supported by the literature is to improve practices for engaging and informing students about their potential eligibility in the CalFresh program (Bianco et al., 2016). Students entering college should be made aware of the EBT benefits, the process to qualify, and where they can access the benefits. Moreover, students should know that being denied these benefits does not preclude them from submitting another application later. Additionally, to help alleviate shame and stigma, the college should implement a streamlined process where all students submit a CalFresh application regardless of income. The universal process will normalize the experience and provide access to funding of which students were previously unaware. 120 Earmarked Funding for Food Programs Recent changes in state legislation earmarked funds requiring community colleges to implement basic needs programs that include addressing FI (LAO, 2022). A recommendation broadly supported by the literature suggests the institution should further identify dedicated funding to support the ongoing and expanded needs to sustain its FI programs (John Burton Advocates for Youth, 2020). Recommendations for Professional Development College leaders, including teaching and counseling faculty, administrators, and staff, are uniquely positioned to initiate and engage students (Stebleton & Diamond, 2020; Twill et al., 2016; Vasquez et al., 2019). The recommendations offered below center on how CCC faculty and college staff can support students in addressing FI. Institutional Change: Adding a Basic Needs Statement to Course Syllabi Recommendations from the literature suggest that one of the most effective ways faculty can support students and express an understanding of FI among students is to include a basic needs statement in their syllabi (Berman, 2017, as cited in Goldrick-Rab, 2018; Crutchfield et al., 2019; Goldrick-Rab et al., 2018; Stebleton & Diamond, 2020). The basic needs statement is a point of engagement for faculty to influence students to explore various food support programs while helping them navigate the college resources available to them. Adding a statement about FI into each course syllabus brings credible awareness and initiates potential dialogue in a group setting, with additional potential for peer-to- peer and peer-to-faculty engagement. Further, adding a basic needs statement to course syllabi amplifies the significance of this significant health issue impacting a significant proportion of the student body, positioning FI as something many students experience (Stebleton & Diamond, 121 2020). Appendix I provides samples of higher education basic needs syllabi statements used at various 2-year and 4-year campuses. Institutional Change: Professional Development and Data-Informed Tactics Faculty are frequently the first human connection to the student experience, regardless of the learning modality. Moreover, students often disclose their personal circumstances to a faculty or staff member they trust, positioning the college employee as a referral source of support to the student (Crutchfield et al., 2019). It is essential to provide professional development (PD) for faculty and staff that includes intrusive strategies to engage students experiencing environmental challenges such as FI and create campus-wide integration (John Burton Advocates for Youth, 2020). Professional development should include ally training for faculty and staff to identify signs of distress connected to FI (e.g., withdrawn, sleepy, anxious, stressed) and understand the different ways to approach a student who may be experiencing FI. It should also ensure a comprehensive understanding of the resources on campus and off campus, including how to access the services. Lastly, it should create a forum for the college employees to reinforce that they have each other as resources because practitioners supporting students’ basic needs can feel isolated (Crutchfield et al., 2019; Goldrick-Rab, 2018, Vasquez et al., 2019). Moreover, recommendations from the literature suggest the institution should continue to assess students and collect student data to inform its best practices and ongoing service to students (Cady, 2014; John Burton Advocates for Youth, 2020). The college must continue to use multiple quantitative and qualitative measures to evaluate the efficacy of its current suite of food support programs. It must also measure the levels of FI among students with year-over-year data collected prior to each semester and utilize the analytics to improve services. These data will help to enrich the student experience (Goldrick-Rab & Cady, 2018; Wood et al., 2017; Wood & 122 Harris, III, 2018). Moreover, the food programs can serve as a tool for collecting the data (John Burton Advocates for Youth, 2020). In addition to academic measures, student outcomes must include evaluating how effective the institution meets students’ basic needs through its support (Goldrick-Rab et al., 2021). Further, the data should be disaggregated to understand the variations across gender and racial groups and shared with all professional stakeholder groups as part of informed PD (Wood & Harris, III, 2018). Institutional Change: Leverage Peer-to-Peer Relationships Relationship and rapport between students significantly influence information, behavior, and motivation (Carolan-Silva & Reyes, 2013). Students who work on campus are underutilized in their ability to influence and connect with their peers (John Burton Advocates for Youth, 2020). A recommendation supported by the literature is that the institution should intentionally engage and leverage peer-to-peer rapport between students to communicate, market, and amplify the programs and services available to students. A student sharing their lived experience accessing the college’s food support system brings a level of credibility and trust unique to the relationship (Carolan-Silva & Reyes, 2013; John Burton Advocates for Youth, 2020). Student leaders are present within the college’s clubs, special programs, and student government. Developing a strategy to engage a culture of peer-to-peer influencers to help students navigate the programs and services will benefit students and the institution. Institutional Change: Targeted Workshops for Students A recommendation supported by the literature is for the institution to provide training workshops for students on relevant life skills such as creating a meal plan, preparing healthy recipes, and creating a monthly budget (Bruening et al., 2016; Innis et al., 2019; Payne-Sturges et 123 al., 2017). This workshop could be integrated into the district’s counseling course designed to orient students to higher education, currently offered as a one-unit class designed for incoming freshmen. Additionally, access to information and programs that include a curriculum on shopping for nutritious, affordable, low-cost items, inclusive of the food pantry offerings, would benefit students (Payne-Sturges et al., 2017). Creating Organizational Change: Navigating from Recommendations to Action Kotter’s (2007) eight-step model of organizational change will serve as the framework to engage, evoke, and institute sustainable growth within the CCC institution. In so doing, CCC will further solidify its role of providing substantive programming and services to address the needs of FI students effectively and consistently. Figure 4 provides the ordered steps that describe Kotter’s change model (Calegari et al., 2015). Kotter’s change model is outlined with examples of suggested implementations. 124 Figure 4 Kotter’s (1996) Eight-Step Model of Organizational Change Step 1: Create a Sense of Urgency The first step to launching the change model is for leaders to establish a sense of urgency at the institution, creating a compelling rationale to connect with the professional college community (Kotter, 2007). Step 1 is critical for transformational change as it requires the motivation, cooperation, and buy-in of key stakeholders. Kotter (2007) states, “Change, by definition, requires creating a new system which in turn always demands leadership” (p. 3). Further, the sense of urgency must be maintained throughout the eight-step process to ensure the change is rooted in the organization. The goal is to engage at least 75% of the core leaders, 125 conveying that the status quo is more dangerous than the unknown (Kotter, 2007). For CCC, this requires the institution’s superintendent/president, vice presidents, and key stakeholder group leaders to champion the change needed. Without establishing this premiere step, staff will be resistant, and the change model will not succeed (Kotter, 2007). The senior administration is paramount as change agents and must focus on reducing complacency by providing evidence- based, vivid rationales for change. Senior management should incorporate active inquiries quarterly with their direct reports. Developing benchmarks for their associated teams tied to performance evaluations will further root the effort in action-oriented outcomes. In conjunction with substantial, credible leadership presenting the change necessary to address FI among students (Calegari et al., 2015), one facet to successfully delivering the message of urgency is providing relevant data that supports the transformation needed. For example, students impacted by FI are less likely to persist, transfer, or graduate from a 4-year university, failing to reach their academic goals (Bruening et al., 2017; Ilieva et al., 2019). Further, the literature substantiates that when students experience FI, their grades drop, their stress and depression levels increase, and their ability to focus diminishes, significantly impacting their academic performance (Farahbakhsh et al., 2017; Henry, 2017; Patton-López et al., 2014; Payne-Sturges et al., 2018; Wood et al., 2016). Credible leaders presenting vivid data to all faculty and staff will set a successful launch substantiated by a sense of urgency among those unfamiliar with the FI crisis and provide evidence-based substance to professionals who may understand the challenges food insecure students face. Due to the large student population and substantial employee base, the number of students and staff who lack the information to support students should not be underestimated. 126 For example, CCC has had food support programs for several years, yet information on these programs and how students may access them is still lacking. A collaborative approach that includes senior administrative leadership, elected officials, constituent leadership, and student leadership will drive a more compelling agenda that has more significant potential to move towards the change theory’s second step: assembling a guiding team (Wood et al., 2016). Step 2: Build a Guiding Team Kotter’s (2007) Step 2 involves forming a coalition or guiding team representing foundational campus constituencies to validate, facilitate, and drive the ongoing mission to effect change. Establishing a powerful guiding coalition of influential, representative decision-makers and stakeholders is critical to establishing transformational change. In higher education, it is particularly judicious that the various professional groups regard the guiding coalition as credible and valid for the change targets (Calegari et al., 2015; Kotter, 2007). The Kotter model has proven results in higher education, especially when working directly with faculty in various departments and fields of study (Guzman et al., 2011, as cited in Calegari et al., 2015). With the senior administration’s support, the institution’s basic needs committee should serve as the guiding team to inform and keep the FI goals central to campus-wide integration (John Burton Advocates for Youth, 2020). Step 3: Get the Vision Right In Step 3, Kotter’s (2007) goal is to create a vision to direct the change effort. This stage of the change model entails engaging the stakeholders cognitively and affectively (Calegari et al., 2015; Kotter, 2007). The vision must be delivered with brevity, clarity, and straightforward language, ensuring that the recipients receive the vision with ease and understanding (Kotter, 127 2007). Moreover, the guiding team should develop the vision for the change and ensure all stakeholders align with it. Orienting the vision through the guiding team’s collaborative effort is a critical step in Kotter’s change theory. A testament to a strong vision can be communicated effectively in 5 minutes or less (Kotter, 2007). Here, the recommended vision is precise and clear: eradicate FI for all CCC students. This vision is critical as it will be leveraged throughout the following stages to guide CCC’s decisions and activities that support the change efforts. Step 4: Communicate the Vision for Buy-in In Step 4, Kotter’s (2007) model necessitates effectively communicating the vision and strategies to achieve the intended change. Calegari et al. (2015) suggest the communication must include the stakeholder’s input aligned with the college’s institutional values in framing the vision. Within Step 4, leveraging every communication channel to convey the vision and strategies is essential to implementing the change model (Kotter, 2007). Subsequently, this will enable the stakeholders to take ownership, given their investment. Further, intentional, ongoing institutional communication and status updates are necessary, emphasizing the importance and urgency of the change initiative (Calegari et al., 2015). Appendix I provides a suggested communication framework to ensure all stakeholder groups and constituents are well-informed. Step 5: Empower Action In Step 5 of Kotter’s (2007) theory of change, the focus is to facilitate change by removing barriers and recognizing good behaviors that support and reinforce the change. Calegari et al. (2015) suggest that removing barriers includes two key tactics: reinforcing favorable actions and outcomes aligned with the change initiative and spotlighting individuals who help advance the vision and change. Rewards may include acknowledging those willing to 128 take risks and reinforcing new behaviors among stakeholders that support the change, demonstrating social proof that the college community is supportive and reassuring of the change action implemented (Cialdini, 2006, as cited in Calegari et al., 2015). Obstacles that may arise include supervisors who diminish the goals and objectives of the change plan. Empowering staff to help remove barriers and support the transformational vision will further establish a culture of collaboration. Examples of removing barriers are providing faculty with sample basic needs statements for their syllabi and digital interactive flyers promoting the various programs, all pre-formatted for a one-click upload to the course portal. This action will empower faculty to promote the information quickly and seamlessly. Also, spotlight recognition of faculty and staff who amplify the food support programs and services should occur during the superintendent’s monthly digital newsletters and board of trustee monthly meeting updates. Step 6: Create Short-Term Wins Once barriers and obstacles are removed, celebrating short-term wins along the journey of the change initiative will further cement the stakeholder’s commitment to the cause. Kotter’s (2007) Step 6 elicits that desired change is more likely to occur when quick wins are visible and experiential. Short-term wins demonstrate the change effort's feasibility, growth, and motivation. Combined with reinforcements, the wins become tangible representations of success (Calegari et al., 2015). The absence of such acknowledgment can dilute the energy and effort the staff puts towards the change initiative and validate nay-sayers (Kotter, 2007). While the literature suggests monetary compensation, employees also value alternative cost-free recognition (Calegari et al., 2015; Kotter, 2007). The PD sessions should include formal recognition of academic departments and program achievements with the highest percentage of staff participation related to the change initiative. Moreover, data on increased student participation in 129 the meal support programs will be celebrated and communicated to all employees monthly, reinforcing the change. Acknowledgment can include gift cards with accompanying notes of appreciation from students, demonstrating value and care. Step 7: Don’t Let Up Step 7 centers on consolidating the change and moving forward by not allowing complacency among stakeholders (Kotter, 2007). Kotter (2007) warns of declaring victory and success prematurely before the change initiative has rooted in an organization’s culture. The guiding needs to support the long-term vision, resist temptations to declare the initiative solved, and maintain an approach of persistence (Calegari et al., 2015). Change efforts often collapse because participants revert to their prior habits, failing to continue implementing the change, often due to weak implementation of a sense of urgency. As stated previously, the institution’s senior leadership is critical to the change initiative, and its momentum is needed throughout the transformation. At CCC, we must sustain the momentum toward the vision by ensuring all change actions and communications point to the outcome of no FI on campus. Ongoing reinforcement through presentations, celebrations of successful growth towards the vision, and data demonstrating improved student retention and persistence rates will provide the needed encouragement across the college community. Step 8: Make Change Stick In Step 8, the goal is to institutionalize the change and anchor it to the organizational culture (Kotter, 2007). Accomplishing this stage requires that change become the status quo. The use of ongoing orientation sessions, training, reward systems to support change, and ensuring that resources are available to support the new behavior will cement the transformational shift. Step 8 requires ongoing communication to illustrate the connections among the initiative, vision, 130 and outcome (Calegari et al., 2015; Kotter, 2007). Helping colleagues connect the change in behavior and action to positive results will maintain relevance and poignancy towards the dynamic effort. Again, communication is paramount to the change’s sustainability and success. Maintaining staff engagement and onboarding new employees with the shared vision to eradicate FI on campus will help root the transformational change. Implementation and Change Management Institutional change is difficult. However, galvanizing the CCC professional community to engage in measurable change addressing is imperative for the health and wellbeing of all students. Kotter’s (2007) eight-step change model provides a framework for the institution to consider its need and desire to change. According to Expert Program Management (EPM, 2021), change only occurs at the organizational level when individuals within the institution are willing to reflect and shift the directional course. Within each organization, the individuals comprise the change reaction for the initiative to flourish and root in the institutional culture. Moreover, utilizing the ADKAR model will add value and focus on the employee to ensure greater implementation success of the change initiative. A closer examination of the ADKAR model is provided in the subsequent sections. ADKAR Hiatt’s (2006) five-step ADKAR model for successful change and implementation focuses on the individual journey through change inside the organization (Prosci, 2019). The model is sequential and requires performing the steps in order. Further, ADKAR is dynamic and not linear, with the ability to oscillate between the steps to ensure change is rooted (Prosci, 2019). 131 ADKAR is an acronym for the five outcomes an individual needs to complete for change to be successful (Prosci, 2022). The five steps to driving individual change are awareness (a) for the need for change and understanding why the change is happening; desire (d) for the need to change as personal, individualized decision to get on board the change initiative; knowledge (k) about what to do during and after the change; ability (a) or the capability to perform your job differently, demonstrating the difference in performance that is inclusive of the change; and reinforcement (R) to intentionally ensure that the behavior sticks, refraining from reverting to old practices. According to EPM (2021), change only occurs at the organizational level when individuals are willing to reflect and shift the directional course. A fluid, dynamic process, the ADKAR model will assist college employees by guiding them through the change process depending on where they sit in the model’s framework. The ADKAR model is beneficial as it helps to identify gaps, spotlighting barriers that prevent the forward momentum of the change initiative. A closer examination and institutional application of the five-step change management system is discussed in the following sections. Awareness The guiding team of senior administrators and the basic needs committee leaders, will bring awareness and establish a rationale for why change is needed now. At CCC, recognizing why FI is happening and its impact on college students drives the awareness step. Layered communication strategies for college employees will help elevate the urgency, provide awareness of the current situation, and encourage the individual to engage. In so doing, the organization will avoid negative sentiments such as “This is a waste of time,” or “We are always the last to know.” While FI has been a significant problem for students for many years, the 132 COVID-19 pandemic spotlighted the unprecedented number of students struggling to secure food. In addition to the volume of students receiving meal support, the institution’s weekly drive- through food pantry helped illuminate the vast need. As such, CCC should invest in its employees by providing the forum, time, and resources to dive deep into understanding the impact and associated results of FI students. Desire The desire for college employees to actively engage in the change process should be rooted in the potential outcomes that will influence and impact the student experience, ultimately improving the trajectory for all students to persist through their educational journey without the worry, anxiety, or threat of FI. Often, individuals want to understand, “What’s in it for me?” Evidence through data is a valid technique. When students are properly nourished, their grades improve, their mental health and wellbeing improve, and barriers to persistence are reduced (Goldrick-Rab, 2018; Hagedorn & Olfert, 2018, as cited in Innis et al., 2019; Martinez et al., 2018). In addition to the student, the entire community benefits. Students are the clients or customers in the business of higher education. Their individual experiences must dictate how and why we support their academic journey. For this change process to be effective, college employees must want to participate in the change. Moreover, when employees are intentionally part of the change action, they are active stakeholders, invested in the outcome for all students. Knowledge Step 3 in Hiatt’s (2006) ADKAR model is centered on the individual shifting prior practices to new approaches. For the individual employee, developing comprehensive knowledge of the issue, the solutions, and the proper strategies to address FI is a prerequisite of implementing this step (Gilani et al., 2017). Additionally, employees must understand the skills 133 and behaviors they may need to support the change effort (EPM, 2021). Together with Kotter’s (2007) change model, workshops, PD, and ongoing training for all college employees will further root the change needed. Ability The application of ability is evident when the college employee can demonstrate the intellectual capability to implement the change at the desired performance level (Hiatt, 2006). “Knowledge is knowing what to do. Ability is being able to put the knowledge into practice” (Prosci, Inc., n.d., p. 12). The knowledge and ability gaps will vary from individual to individual. The leadership team must provide time and resources for ongoing training and PD to enable employees to support the change effort. Reinforcement It is critical in Step 5 to reinforce the change effort once the various support systems and mechanisms are in place reinforcing change (Hiatt, 2006). Recognition of employees who have demonstrated the application of change will be valued by the recipients and nudge others to follow suit (Bonsi, 2009, as cited in Gilani et al., 2017). Celebrating the professional community for implementing and changing behavior towards best practices to support students who are FI will root the initiative in the campus culture. Sustaining the change initiative will require ongoing support by the senior administrative management team in empowering employees to find additional ways to support students actively. Table 14 outlines the implementation steps for the CCC campus. 134 Table 14 Hiatt (2006) ADKAR Steps for Implementation at CCC ADKAR steps Application of implementation steps Awareness (Step 1) The guiding team (senior administrators and basic needs committee) will bring awareness for the need to understand FI and the impact it has on college students. Desire (Step 2) The individual college employee understands the negative consequences of FI and desires to shift away from the status quo with an equally strong aspiration to improve the FI student experience. Knowledge (Step 3) The college employee will know how to identify and support a student experiencing FI. Ability (Step 4) Building on awareness, desire, and knowledge, the college employee will demonstrate the skills and behaviors to address FI on campus because the institution provides the needed substantive resources, training, and support. Reinforcement (Step 5) Intentional reinforcements through the individual, department and campus-wide recognition will preserve the change initiative, ensuring ongoing practice and alleviating the possibility of reverting to old behaviors. Note: This model demonstrates the application of the ADKAR Change Model to the institution presented in the study. The table was adapted from The Prosci ADKAR Model: Why it works by Prosci, Inc. (https://www.prosci.com/resources/articles/why-the-adkar-model-works) Limitations and Delimitations This study focused on FI among community college students. There were inherent limitations and delimitations in this research. Limitations, including implicit characteristics, are “matters and occurrences that arose in a study which were out of the researcher’s control” (Simon & Goes, 2013, p. 1). In contrast, delimitations are the researcher’s specific choices, including characteristics that stem from limitations within the scope of the research boundaries 135 (Simon & Goes, 2013). This study was delimited to 11 FI students at CCC, who were interviewed to understand FI’s impact on their college experience. As such, the findings are not generalizable to all CCC students. However, the data are rich and demonstrate the students’ perceptions and lived experiences that could not be captured via a quantitative survey. One significant limitation affecting this study was the COVID-19 global pandemic. Following the global shutdown in March 2020, colleges and universities across the country either reduced on-campus attendance or closed altogether, pivoting to remote learning. Eighty-four percent of community colleges shifted entirely to online curriculum delivery, compared to 66% of 4-year institutions (THCCCJ, 2021). Prior to the pandemic, outreach for this study would have occurred by interacting in person with faculty, counselors, and student services programs. Subsequently, student outreach was limited to connecting via email, phone, or online-platform meetings. The limited on-ground connection to students included outreach during the distribution of one of the CCC food programs. Moreover, CCC’s fall 2021 semester offered 15% of its courses on-ground, maintaining a remote learning environment for most of its classes. This study had limitations regarding student sampling and data. The sample was limited to students at one institution who participated in one of the food programs and sought to earn an associate’s degree or transfer to a 4-year institution. Age, gender, race, ethnicity, and SES were not primary factors in their selection. The students who volunteered for this study may differ from nonparticipating students, making it impossible to generalize the data findings. The study relied on the student’s point of view. Although the researcher set the objective, boundaries, and setting for the interview questions, students may not have responded in a manner that informed the data. Further, participants may not readily have articulated their points of view or perceptions (Creswell & Creswell, 2018). Further, the study relied on the student’s point of view and did not 136 include input or interviews from other members within the student’s family or college setting (i.e., college faculty, counselors, administrators). Lastly, although significant research indicates a correlation between FI and housing insecurity (Broton & Goldrick-Rab, 2018), this study does not discuss or address housing insecurity among college students. Recommendations for Future Research Research on FI among community college students is still in the early stages and limited (Henry, 2018; Maroto et al., 2014). Furthermore, few qualitative studies capture the lived experience of food insecure students on college campuses (Meza et al., 2019). More research is needed to understand • the effectiveness of food support programs such as food pantries, SNAP, and other resources on college campuses, • the underlying reasons students feel fear and shame associated with applying for and utilizing CalFresh, • how FI impacts students who attend college full-time compared to those who attend part- time, • how working students experience food insecurity, • how community college students who once received the NSLP benefits in high school enter higher education absent of food programs, • the impact FI has on a student’s health after graduating, and • first-generation students experience FI, and how Hispanic-serving institutions may provide insight into the cultural differences for students and their families navigating the transition between high school and higher education. 137 Finally, more institutional research is needed to ascertain the degree to which higher education faculty and staff understand and recognize FI and the various barriers on campus. Conclusion Food insecurity is detrimental to health and wellbeing. The focus of this study was on the lived experiences of community colleges students impacted by FI, as they face a myriad of health, wellbeing, and academic challenges and disadvantages compared to their counterparts who are food secure. Using Bronfenbrenner (1979) for the conceptual framework, interviews captured the lived experiences of 11 participants who shared important details about the college’s food support programs, how they navigated them, and how these interventions provided them some food stability. The findings helped to ascertain an understanding of institutional factors that facilitate or create barriers for FI students regarding their access and use of food support services. The student perspective provided critical insightful and relevant information to guide the institution to improve its practices. The findings, supported by empirical literature, direct tangible recommendations for the college to implement institutional change. This study addresses the harmful impact of FI on students’ lived experience in college. Understanding that students impacted by FI are less likely to reach their academic goals, with increased drop-out rates and diminished persistence rates, must motivate all higher education leaders, faculty, and staff to address this critical issue with clear intention, goals, outcomes, and accountability to eradicate FI for all students (Bruening et al., 2017; Ilieva et al., 2019). 138 References Ahmed, Ilieva, R. T., Clarke, A., & Wong, H. Y. (2021). Impact of a student-led food insecurity intervention on diverse community college students. Journal of Hunger & Environmental Nutrition, (ahead-of-print), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1080/19320248.2021.1985030 Alaimo, K. (2005). Food insecurity in the United States: An overview. Topics in Clinical Nutrition, 20(4), 281–298. https://doi.org/10.1097/00008486-200510000-00002 American Association of Community Colleges. (2021). Fast facts 2021. https://www.aacc.nche.edu/research-trends/fast-facts/ Anderson, S. A. (Ed.). (1990). Core indicators of nutritional state for difficult to sample populations. Journal of Nutrition, 120(11) 1557-1559. doi:10.1093/jn/120.suppl_11.1555 Auerbach, S. (2004). Engaging Latino parents in supporting college pathways: Lessons from a college access program. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 3(2), 125-145. Barnett, T. M., Olivio, R., & Valandra, K. C. (2019). Theoretical application to understand food insecurity among college students: A multi-systems life course perspective. Sociology 9(2), 75-83. doi: 10.17265/2159-5526/2019.02.004 Benefits.gov. (2021). National school lunch and breakfast program: Eligibility. https://www.benefits.gov/benefit/366 Bianco, S., Bedore, A., Jiang, M., Stamper, N., Breed, J., Paiva, M., Abbiati, L., & Wolff, C. (2016). Identifying food insecure students and constraints for SNAP/CalFresh participation at California State University, Chico. The California State University. Bound, J., Lovenheim, M., & Turner, S. (2010). Why have college completion rates declined? An analysis of changing student preparation and collegiate resources. American Economic Journal: Applied Economics, 2(3), 129–157. doi:10.2307/25760222 139 Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Harvard University Press. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1995). Developmental ecology through space and time: A future perspective. In G. H. Elder (Ed.). Examining lives in context: Perspectives on the ecology of human development (pp. 619-647). American Psychological Association. https://doi.org/10.1037/10176-018 Bronfenbrenner, U. (2005). Making human beings human: Bioecological perspectives on human development. Sage Publications. Broton, K., & Goldrick-Rab, S. (2016). The dark side of college (un)affordability: Food and housing insecurity in higher education. Change, 48(1), 16–25. Broton, K., & Goldrick-Rab, S. (2018). Going without: An exploration of food and housing insecurity among undergraduates. Educational Researcher, 47(2), 121–133. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189X17741303 Bruckner, H. K., Westbrook, M., Loberg, L., Teig, E., & Schaefbauer, C. (2021). “Free” food with a side of shame? Combating stigma in emergency food assistance programs in the quest for food justice. Geoforum, 123, 99-106. Bruening, M., Argo, K., Payne-Sturges, D., & Laska, M. N. (2017). The struggle is real: A systematic review of food insecurity on postsecondary education campuses. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics; Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 117(11), 1767–1791. doi:10.1016/j.jand.2017.05.022 Bruening, M., Brennhofer, S., Van Woerden, I., Todd, M., & Laska, M. (2016). Factors related to the high rates of food insecurity among diverse, urban college freshmen. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 116(9), 1450-1457. 140 Bullard. (n.d.). Preparing for return to play: Understanding the impact of COVID-19 on the well- being of community college student-athletes. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, ahead-of-print(ahead-of-print), 1–8. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2021.1982796 Cady, C. L. (2014). Food insecurity as a student issue. Journal of College and Character, 15(4), 265-–272. doi:10.1515/jcc-2014-0031 Calegari, M. F., Sibley, R. E., & Turner, M. E. (2015). A roadmap for using Kotter’s organizational change model to build faculty engagement in accreditation. Academy of Educational Leadership Journal, 19(3), 31. California Community College Chancellor’s Office. (2018). Basic needs survey report. California Community College Chancellor’s Office. (2020). Key facts. https://www.cccco.edu/Search-Results?search=key%20facts California Community College Chancellor’s Office. (2021). Key facts. https://www.cccco.edu/About-Us/Key-Facts California Department of Social Services. (2021). CalFresh. https://www.cdss.ca.gov/inforesources/CalFresh Camelo, K., & Elliott, M. (2019). Food insecurity and academic achievement among college students at a public university in the United States. Journal of College Student Development, 60(3), 307–318. Capogrossi, K., & You, W. (2017). The influence of school nutrition programs on the weight of low-income children: A treatment effect analysis. Health economics, 26(8), 980–1000. Carolan-Silva, A., & Reyes, J. R. (2013). Navigating the path to college: Latino students’ social networks and access to college. Educational Studies, 49(4), 334-359. 141 Chaparro, M. P., Zaghloul, S. S., Holck, P., & Dobbs, J. (2009). Food insecurity prevalence among college students at the University of Hawai’i at Mānoa. Public Health Nutrition, 12(11), 2097-2103. doi:10.1017/S1368980009990735 Coleman-Jensen, A., Rabbitt, M. P., & Gregory, C. A. (2020). Household food security in the United States in 2019. https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/99282/err- 275.pdf?v=628.9 College and University Food Bank Alliance. (2019). Hunger on campus: The challenge of food insecurity for college students. https://cufba.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/03/ Hunger_On_Campus.pdf Community College League of California. (2021). 2018 Basic needs survey report. https://ccleague.org/sites/default/files/training-materials/2018-basic-needs-survey-report- print.pdf Congress.gov. (2022, January 15). H.R. 4065 – Food for Thought Act of 2019. https://www.congress.gov/bill/116th-congress/house-bill/4065/text Contreras, F., & Contreras, G. (2015). Raising the bar for Hispanic Serving Institutions: An analysis of college completion and success rates. Journal of Hispanic Higher Education, 14(2), 151–170. doi.org/10.1177/1538192715572892 County of Los Angeles Public Health Department. (2021). COVID-19: All the information you need to stay safe, healthy, and get vaccinated. http://publichealth.lacounty.gov/media/Coronavirus/ Crawford, B. F., Snyder, K. E., & Adelson, J. L. (2019). Exploring obstacles faced by gifted minority students through Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological systems theory. High Ability Studies, 31(1), 43–74. 142 Creswell, J. W., & Creswell, J. D. (2018). Research design: Qualitative, quantitative, and mixed methods approaches. (5th ed.). Sage Publications, Inc. Crutchfield, R., Clark, K., Gamez, S., Green, A., Munson, D., & Stribling, H. (2016). Serving displaced and food insecure students in the CSU. California State University, Long Beach. Dhillon, J., Diaz Rios, L., Aldaz, K., De La Cruz, N., Vu, E., Asad Asghar, S., Kuse, Q., & Ortiz, R. (2019). We don’t have a lot of healthy options: Food environment perceptions of first- year, minority college students attending a food desert campus. Nutrients, 11(4), 816–. https://doi.org/10.3390/nu11040816. Dominguez-Whitehead, Y. (2015). Students’ food acquisition struggles in the context of South Africa: The fundamentals of student development. Journal of College Student Development 56(3), 292–308. doi:10.1353/csd.2015.0022. Drury, R. L. (2003). Community colleges in America: A historical perspective. Inquiry, 8(1), n1. Dubick, J., Mathews, B., & Cady, C. (2016). Hunger on campus: The challenge of food insecurity for college students. http://studentsagainsthunger.org/wp- content/uploads/2016/10/Hunger_ On_Campus.pdf El Masri, & Sabzalieva, E. (2020). Dealing with disruption, rethinking recovery: Policy responses to the COVID-19 pandemic in higher education. Policy Design and Practice, 3(3), 312–333. https://doi.org/10.1080/25741292.2020.1813359 El Zein, Shelnutt, K. P., Colby, S., Vilaro, M. J., Zhou, W., Greene, G., Olfert, M. D., Riggsbee, K., Morrell, J. S., & Mathews, A. E. (2019). Prevalence and correlates of food insecurity among U.S. college students: A multi-institutional study. BMC Public Health, 19(1), 660–660. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-019-6943-6 143 Farahbakhsh, J., Hanbazaza, M., Ball, G., Farmer, A., Maximova, K., & Willows, N. (2017). Food insecure student clients of a university-based food bank have compromised health, dietary intake, and academic quality. Nutrition & Dietetics, 74(1), 67–73. https://doi.org/10.1111/1747-0080.12307 Federal Student Aid. (2021). Federal Pell grants are usually awarded to undergraduate students. https://studentaid.gov/understand-aid/types/grants/pell Feeding America. (2021). What is food insecurity? https://www.feedingamerica.org/hunger-in- america Finkel, E. (2020). A piece of the pie: Leveraging CARES Act fund. Community College Journal, 91(2), 10-17. http://libproxy.usc.edu/login?url=https://www.proquest.com/trade- journals/piece-pie-leveraging-cares-act-fund/docview/2476177974/se- 2?accountid=14749 Food and Drug Administration. (n.d.). Institutional review boards frequently asked questions. Retrieved November 15, 2020. https://www.fda.gov/regulatory-information/search-fda- guidance-documents/institutionalreviewboardsfrequentlyaskedquestions#:~:text=Under %20FDA%20regulations%2C%20an%20IRB,approval)%2C%20or%20disapprove%20re search Food Insecurity. (2016). Public Health Reports, 131(5), 655–657. doi:10.1177/0033354916664154 Freudenberg, N., Goldrick-Rab, S., & Poppendieck, J. (2019). College students and SNAP: The new face of food insecurity in the United States. American Journal of Public Health, 109(12), 1652-1658. 144 Garcia, G. A. (2017). Defined by outcomes or culture? Constructing an organizational identity for Hispanic-serving institutions. American Educational Research Journal, 54(1_suppl), 111S-134S. doi.org/10.3102/0002831216669779 Gardiner, H., & Kosmitzki, C. (2002). Lives across cultures: Cross-cultural human development (2nd ed.). Allyn and Bacon. Gilani, Kozak, R. A., & Innes, J. L. (2018). A change management model for the adoption of chain of custody certification in the British Columbia value-added wood products sector. Journal of Change Management, 18(3), 240–256. https://doi.org/10.1080/14697017.2017.1349163 Goldrick-Rab, S. (2010). Challenges and opportunities for improving community college student success. Review of Educational Research, 80(3), 437–469. Goldrick-Rab, S. (2018). Addressing community college completion rates by securing students’ basic needs. New Directions for Community Colleges, 2018(184), 7–15. doi:10.1002/cc.20323 Goldrick-Rab, S., Clark, K., Baker-Smith, C., & Witherspoon, C. (2021). Supporting the whole community college student: The impact of nudging for basic needs security. The Hope Center for College, Community, and Justice. https://hope4college.com/wpcontent/uploads/2021/10/ARC_ImpactPaper. pdf. Goldrick-Rab, S., Baker-Smith, C., Coca, V., Looker, E., & Williams, T. (2019). College and university basic needs insecurity: A national #realcollege survey report. https://hope4college.com/wpcontent/uploads/2019/04/HOPE_realcollege_National_repor t_digital.pdf 145 Goldrick-Rab, S., & Cady, C. (2018). Supporting community college completion with a culture of caring: A case study of Amarillo College. Goldrick-Rab, S., Cady, C., & Coca, V. (2018). Campus food pantries: Insights from a national survey. The Hope Center for College, Community, and Justice. Goldrick-Rab, S., Richardson, J., & Hernandez, A. (2017). Hungry and homeless in college: Results from a national study of basic needs insecurity in higher education. Wisconsin HOPE Lab. https://hope4college.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Hungry-and- Homeless-In-College-Report.pdf Greene, T. G., Marti, C. N., & McClenney, K. (2008). The effort--outcome gap: Differences for African American and Hispanic community college students in student engagement and academic achievement. (report). Journal of Higher Education, 79(5), 513. doi:10.1353/jhe.0.0018 Gundersen, C., Kreider, B., & Pepper, J. (2011). The economics of food insecurity in the United States. Applied Economic Perspectives and Policy, 33(3), 281–303. https://doi.org/10.1093/aepp/ppr022 Gundersen, C., & Ziliak, J. P. (2016). Food insecurity among children in the United States. Southern Economic Journal, 82(4), 1059–1061. https://doi.org/10.1002/soej.12077 Habicht, J. P., Pelto, G., Frongillo, E., & Rose, D. (2004). Conceptualization and instrumentation of food insecurity. In National Research Council (Ed.). Workshop on the Measurement of Food Insecurity and Hunger (Vol. 15). The National Academies Press. Henry, L. (2017). Understanding food insecurity among college students: Experience, motivation, and local solutions: Food insecurity in college. Annals of Anthropological Practice, 41(1), 6–19. https://doi.org/10.1111/napa.12108 146 Hiatt, J. (2006). ADKAR: A model for Change in Business. Government, and Our Community. Hispanic Association of Colleges & Universities. (2021). Hispanic-serving institution definition. https://www.hacu.net/hacu/HSI_Definition.asp The Hope Center for College, Community, and Justice. (2021). #RealCollege 2021: Basic needs insecurity during the ongoing pandemic. https://hope4college.com/rc2021-bni-during- the-ongoing-pandemic/ Huang, J., & Barnidge, E. (2016). Low-income children’s participation in the National School Lunch Program and household food insufficiency. Social Science & Medicine, 150, 8–14. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.socscimed.2015.12.020 Ilieva, R., Ahmed, T., & Yan, A. (2019). Hungry minds: Investigating the food insecurity of minority community college students. Journal of Public Affairs, 19(3), n/a. doi:10.1002/pa.1891 Innis, J., Bishop, M., & Boloudakis, S. (2019). Food insecurity and community college students. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, doi:10.1080/10668926.2019.1635541 John Burton Advocates for Youth (2020). Equity made real: Promising strategies for addressing college student basic needs. https://www.jbaforyouth.org/publication-guides/ Johnson, E. (2008). Ecological systems and complexity theory: Toward an alternative model of accountability in education. Complicity: An International Journal of Complexity and Education. 5(1), 1–10. https://doi.org/10.29173/cmplct8777 Johnson, R. B., & Christensen, L. B. (2015). Chapter 9: Methods of data collection. In Educational Research: Quantitative, qualitative, and mixed approaches (5th ed.). (pp. 223–246). Sage Publications. 147 Kater, S.T. (2018). Understanding Community Colleges (J.S. Levin, Ed.) (2nd ed.). Routledge. https://doi-org.libproxy1.usc.edu/10.4324/9781315268071 Kotter, J. P. (2007). Leading change why transformation efforts fail. Harvard Business Review, 85, 1, 96-103. Laska, M. N., Fleischhacker, S., Petsoulis, C., Bruening, M., & Stebleton, M. J. (2020). Addressing college food insecurity: An assessment of federal legislation before and during coronavirus disease-2019. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 52(10), 982–987. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2020.07.001 Legislative Analyst’s Office. (2022). The 2021-22 budget: California community college. https://lao.ca.gov/Publications/Report/4372 Levin, D. (2020, October 12). No home, no Wi-Fi: Pandemic adds to strain on poor college students. The New York Times. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/12/us/covid-poor-college- students.html Lewin, K. (1935). A dynamic theory of personality. McGraw-Hill. Lincoln, Y.S., (2010). “What a long, strange trip it’s been…”: Twenty-five years of qualitative and new paradigm research. Qualitative Inquiry, 16(1), 3-9. Lincoln, Y.S., & Guba, E. G. (1985). Naturalistic inquiry. SAGE. Ma, J., & Baum, S. (2016). Trends in community colleges: Enrollment, prices, student debt, and completion. College Board. https://go.valenciacollege.edu/academics/programs/ undergraduate-research/documents/trends-in-community-colleges-research-brief.pdf Maroto, M., Snelling, A., & Linck, H. (2015). Food insecurity among community college students: Prevalence and association with grade point average. Community College 148 Journal of Research and Practice, 39(6), 515–526. https://doi.org/ 10.1080/10668926.2013.850758 Martin, K. S., Colantonio, A. G., Picho, K., & Boyle, K. E. (2016). Self-efficacy is associated with increased food security in novel food pantry program. SSM - Population Health; SSM Popul Health, 2, 62–67. doi:10.1016/j.ssmph.2016.01.005 Martinez, S., Frongillo, E., Leung, C., & Ritchie, L. (2020). No food for thought: Food insecurity is related to poor mental health and lower academic performance among students in California’s public university system. Journal of Health Psychology, 1–10. 1359105318783028. doi:10.1177/1359105318783028 Martinez, S. M., Grandner, M. A., Nazmi, A., Canedo, E. R., & Ritchie, L. D. (2019). Pathways from food insecurity to health outcomes among California University students. Nutrients, 11(6), 1419. Maslow, A. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4), 370–396. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0054346 McKinney, L., & Novak, H. (2013). The relationship between FAFSA filing and persistence among first-year community college students. Community College Review, 41(1), 63–85. Meier, K. (2018). Understanding community colleges: The historical origins of the comprehensive community college mission, 1901–1965 (J. Levin, & S. Kater, Eds.). Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2016). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. (4th ed.). Jossey-Bass. Meza, A., Altman, E., Martinez, S., & Leung, C. W. (2019). “It’s a feeling that one is not worth food”: A qualitative study exploring the psychosocial experience and academic 149 consequences of food insecurity among college students. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, 119(10), 1713–1721. 10.1016/j.jand.2018.09.006 Morgan, D. L. (2014). Chapter 3: Research design and research methods. In Integrating qualitative and quantitative methods (pp. 45-62). Sage Publications, Inc. Morris, L., Smith, S., Davis, J., & Null, D. (2016). The prevalence of food security and insecurity among Illinois university students. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 48(6), 376–382.e1. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2016.03.013 Mulisa, F. (2019). Application of bioecological systems theory to higher education: Best evidence review. Journal of Pedagogical Sociology and Psychology, 1(2), 104–115. National Center for Education Statistics. (2019). Student Enrollment: How many students enroll in postsecondary institutions annually? https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/TrendGenerator/app/ answer/2/2 National Center for Education Statistics. (2020). Student Enrollment: How many students enroll in postsecondary institutions annually? https://nces.ed.gov/ipeds/TrendGenerator/app/ answer/2/2 National Center for Education Statistics. (2021a). Table 244. Degree-granting institutions, by control and type of institution: 1949-50 to 2000-01. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/ digest/d01/dt244.asp National Center for Education Statistics. (2021b). Educational institutions. https://nces.ed.gov/ fastfacts/display.asp?id=84 National Center for Education Statistics. (2021c). Undergraduate retention and graduation rates. https://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/indicator/ctr (page 6) 150 Nikolaus, C. J., An, R., Ellison, B., Nickols-Richardson, S. M. (2020). Food insecurity among college students in the United States: A scoping review. Advances in Nutrition, 11(2), 327–348. https://doi.org/10.1093/advances/nmz111 Odoms-Young, & Bruce, M. A. (2018). Examining the impact of structural racism on food insecurity: Implications for addressing racial/ethnic disparities. Family & Community Health, 41(2), S3–S6. https://doi.org/10.1097/FCH.0000000000000183 Padilla, A. (2021, June 10). Padilla, Warren, Torres introduce legislation to improve equity in higher education by helping students access basic needs [Press release]. Padilla.Senate.Gov. https://www.padilla.senate.gov/newsroom/press-releases/padilla- warren-torres-introduce-legislation-to-improve-equity-in-higher-education-by-helping- students-access-basic-needs/ Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods. SAGE. Patton-López, M., López-Cevallos, D., Cancel-Tirado, D., & Vazquez, L. (2014). Prevalence and correlates of food insecurity among students attending a midsize rural university in Oregon. Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior, 46(3), 209– 214.https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jneb.2013.10.007 Payne-Sturges, D.C., Tjaden, A., Caldeira, K. M., Vincent, K. B., & Arria, A. M. (2018). Student hunger on campus: Food insecurity among college students and implications for academic institutions. American Journal of Health Promotion, 32(2), 349–354. doi:10.1177/0890117117719620 Peterson, N., & Freidus, A. (2020). More than money: Barriers to food security on a college campus. Culture, Agriculture, Food and the Environment, 42(2), 125–137. https://doi.org/10.1111/cuag.12252 151 Phillips, E., McDaniel, A., & Croft, A. (2018). Food insecurity and academic disruption among college students. Journal of Student Affairs Research and Practice, 55(4), 353–372. doi:10.1080/19496591.2018.1470003 Porchea, S. F., Allen, J., Robbins, S., & Phelps, R. P. (2010). Predictors of long-term enrollment and degree outcomes for community college students: Integrating academic, psychosocial, socio-demographic, and situational factors. The Journal of Higher Education, 81(6), 680–708. Prosci, Inc. (n.d.). The Prosci ADKAR model. Prosci (n.d). The Prosci ADKAR model: Organizational change requires individual change. https://www.prosci.com/methodology/adkar Prosci (2019, August 15). The Prosci ADKAR model: Prosci Tim talks. YouTube. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=L_7I03LOyyk Public Policy Institute of California. (2021). California’s population. https://www.ppic.org/ publication/californiaspopulation/#:~:text=With%20almost%2040%20million%20people ,45%20million%20people%20by%202050. Regan, E. P. (2020). Food insecurity among college students. Sociology Compass, 14(6). https://doi.org/10.1111/soc4.12790 Rideout, K., & Kostasky, T., (2014). Food insecurity: A public health issue for BC. BC Medical Journal, (55)1, 29–46. https://bcmj.org/bccdc/food-insecurity-public-health-issue-bc Roksa, J., Silver, B. R., Deutschlander, D., & Whitley, S. E. (2020). Navigating the first year of college: Siblings, parents, and first-generation students’ experiences. Sociological Forum, 35(3), 565-586. https://doi:10.1111/socf.12617 152 Sano, Y., Garasky, S., Greder, K. A., Cook, C. C., & Browder, D. E. (2010). Understanding food insecurity among Latino immigrant families in rural America. Journal of Family and Economic Issues, 32(1), 111–123. Schudde, L., & Goldrick-Rab, S. (2015). On second chances and stratification: How sociologists think about community colleges. Community College Review, 43(1), 27-45. doi:10.1177/0091552114553296 Scott, S., Miller, M. T., & Morris, A. A. (2016). Rural community college student perceptions of barriers to college enrollment. Academic Leadership Journal in Student Research, 4. Serembus, J., & Kemery, D. (2020). Creating dynamic learning with Zoom. Nurse Educator, 45(6), 291–293. https://doi.org/10.1097/NNE.0000000000000915 Simon, M. K., & Goes, J. (2013). Scope, limitations, and delimitations. Slomp, D., Mombourquette, C., & Marynowski, R. (2018). A case study of school leadership and the change process through the lens of Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory of human development. SAGE Publications. Stebleton, M. J., Lee, C. K., & Diamond, K. K. (2020). Understanding the food insecurity experiences of college students: A qualitative inquiry. Review of Higher Education, 43(3), 727–752. https://doi.org/10.1353/rhe.2020.0005U.S. Stewart, D. L. (2013). Racially minoritized students at US four-year institutions. The Journal of Negro Education, 82(2), 184-197. https://doi.org/10.7709/jnegroeducation.82.2.0184 Taormina, R. J., & Gao, J. H. (2013). Maslow and the motivation hierarchy: Measuring satisfaction of the needs. The American Journal of Psychology, 126(2), 155– 177.https://doi.org/10.5406/amerjpsyc126.2.0155 Tornatzky, L. G., Cutler, R., & Lee, J. (2002). College knowledge: What Latino parents 153 need to know and why they don’t know it. Claremont, CA: Tomas Rivera Policy Institute. Toutkoushian, R. K., May-Trifiletti, J. A., & Clayton, A. B. (2021). From “first in family” to “first to finish”: Does college graduation vary by how first-generation college status is defined? Educational Policy, 35(3), 481–521. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904818823753 Twill, S.E., Bergdahl, J., & Fensler, R. (2016). Partnering to build a pantry: A university campus responds to student food insecurity. Journal of Poverty, 20(3), 340–-358. https://10.1080/10875549.2015.1094775 United States Department of Agriculture. (2020). Definitions of Food Security. https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in- the-us United States Department of Agriculture. (2021a). Measurement: What is food security? https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the- us/measurement.aspx United States Department of Agriculture. (2021b). Key statistics: Food security status of U.S. households in 2019. https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food- security-in-the-us/key-statistics-graphics/ United States Department of Education. (2021). Community colleges facts at a glance. https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ovae/pi/cclo/ccfacts.html United States Department of Education. (2021). Family Educational Rights and Privacy Act (FERPA). https://www2.ed.gov/policy/gen/guid/fpco/ferpa/index.html Vasquez, M., Vang, M., Garcia, F., & Harris, F. (2019). What do I eat? Where do I sleep?: A concern for men of color in community college. Community College Journal of Research and Practice, 43(4), 295–306. https://doi.org/10.1080/10668926.2018.1478340 154 Wood, J. L., & Harris, F., III. (2017). Five critical facts about men of color and food insecurity in community colleges. Community College Equity Assessment Lab. http://consortium.cceal.org/wp-content/uploads/2017/04/ISSUE-BRIEF-1.pdf Wood, J. L., & Harris, F. III, (2018). Experiences with “acute” food insecurity among college students. Educational Researcher, 47(2), 142–145. https://doi.org/10.3102/0013189x17752928 Wood, J. L., Harris, F. III, & Delgado, N. R. (2016). Struggling to survive–striving to succeed: Food and housing insecurities in the community college. Community College Equity Assessment Lab. https://www.luminafoundation.org/files/resources/food-and-housing- report.pdf Wood, J. L., Palmer, R., & Harris, F., III. (2015). Men of color in community colleges: A synthesis of empirical findings. In M.B. Paulsen (Ed.), Higher education: Handbook of theory and research (pp.431-468). Springer International. Wunderlich, G. S., & Norwood, J. L. (2006). Food insecurity and hunger in the United States an assessment of the measure. National Academies Press. Zhai, & Du, X. (2020). Addressing collegiate mental health amid COVID-19 pandemic. Psychiatry Research, 288, 113003–113003. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.psychres.2020.113003 155 Appendix A: Interview Questions Interview questions Potential probes RQ addressed Key concept addressed Q type (Patton) Again, thank you for being here with me today. Your perspective as a student is very important to the college. Thank you for sharing your insight. Would you please state your age and occupation? N/A N/A N/A Demographic Transition: Thank you. Let’s get started! Tell me what an ideal day going to college looks like for you? N/A N/A N/A Experiences and behaviors Transition: That sounds like a special way to spend your day. Prior to starting college, what knowledge did you have about the food programs offered at Cares Community College? How did you learn about the food programs? How did you know how to access these programs? Who, if anyone, helped you navigate your way to the programs? 1, 2 Knowledge Knowledge Experiences and behaviors Transition: Thank you for sharing this information. I am interested to learn… What specific food programs do you participate in? Which program best meets your needs? 1, 2 Food insecurity Experiences and behaviors 156 Interview questions Potential probes RQ addressed Key concept addressed Q type (Patton) What are the reasons why? Transition: Your response is helpful After you signed up to be in the program(s), how did you feel about participating in a food program provided by the college? With whom have you shared that you are in a college food program, if anyone? 1, 2 Food insecurity Experience and behaviors Transition: Thank you for sharing your perspective. If you could improve the food programs or access to affordable, healthy food on campus, what would that look like to you? How, if at all, would this change your current experience? 1, 2 Food insecurity Experience and behaviors Transition: We are going to shift to an earlier time when you first accessed the food programs. Describe your experience when you first received support from the campus food programs. Who do you remember telling you about this resource? What made your experience memorable? What specific things do you remember seeing or hearing? What did you share about 1, 2 Food insecurity Setting Ecological Transition Experience and behaviors Sensory 157 Interview questions Potential probes RQ addressed Key concept addressed Q type (Patton) your experience with others, if at all? Transition: That is very interesting. What, if any, challenges, or barriers did you face with accessing the college’s food programs? 1, 2 Food insecurity Knowledge Transition: Let’s talk about attending college in general. In what way have the food programs assisted you while in school? How did you learn about the food programs? How did you know how to access these programs? 2 Food insecurity Experience and behaviors Transition: I hear what you are saying. Let’s shift gears and talk about campus staff including professors, counselors, and anyone else you may interact with. In what ways, if at all, have campus staff such as professors, counselors or other personnel offered support or guidance with addressing your challenges with hunger? In what ways, if at all, have they offered support? 1, 2 EST Food insecurity Experience and behaviors Transition: Building on your response, would you please… 158 Interview questions Potential probes RQ addressed Key concept addressed Q type (Patton) Think back prior to college. What was the food landscape like for you when you were in high school compared to now being college? How did you access food? Who, if anyone, assisted you with navigating food programs in high school? 1, 2 EST Food insecurity Ecological Transition Knowledge Transition: Thank you. Tell me about a memory that stands out to you when you utilized food programs on campus. Who did that experience include, if anyone? How did you come to know about X? How helpful was this resource? Explain why. 1, 2 EST Food insecurity Setting Ecological Transition Opinions and values Transition: The memory you described is powerful. Thank you for sharing. Moving on to our next question… Let’s look at a specific food program: the food pantry. This program is offered during specific hours of operations. How does the schedule of the program work for you? If you could change the schedule of the program to better meet your needs, what would the schedule look like for you? 1, 2 Food insecurity Opinions and values Transition: You input is very helpful. Continuing this thread… 159 Interview questions Potential probes RQ addressed Key concept addressed Q type (Patton) The food pantry offers a variety of items including fresh produce, canned foods, and other items. What are items you would like to see offered as part of the food pantry inventory? Explain how you feel when you visit the food pantry. 1, 2 Food insecurity Setting Opinions and values Transition: We are going to shift to a different food program and service provided by the college. The meal programs offer a different kind of support. In what ways have the meal programs provided support during your college experience, if at all? How would you improve upon the meal programs? With what frequency do you access the meal programs? 2 EST Food insecurity Opinions and values Transition: Support comes in lots of different forms, from different areas, people, and places. Who are the people in your personal life that help you navigate the hurdles you face with school? In what ways were they helpful? Please provide a specific example. 1 EST Food insecurity Transition Experience and behaviors Explain the ways in which you receive support with food from your own family, friends, neighbors, or anyone else. How frequently do you receive support, if at all? Tell me what support looks like to you? 1, 2 EST Food insecurity Knowledge 160 Interview questions Potential probes RQ addressed Key concept addressed Q type (Patton) Who are the people at the college, if anyone, that help you navigate the hurdles you face with school? How did you meet them? In what ways were they helpful? Please provide a specific example. Why do you trust them? 1 EST Food insecurity Transition Experience and behaviors Concluding Transition: Thank you. This concludes our questions. Is there anything that you would care to add? I am going to stop the recording now. 161 Appendix B: Recruitment Handout/Email Text Subject line: Food Insecurity and the Impact on Community College Students Email text: Greetings. My name is Lizzy Moore and I am a doctoral student at the University of Southern California. The purpose of this email is to inform you about a research project entitled, “Food Insecurity and the Impact on Community College Students.” I am working in concert with Dr. Patricia Tobey at USC’s Rossier School of Education. Please read the information below. Once you have read, please let me know if you would be interested in participating in this study. This research study will seek approximately 10 to 12 students to interview. Your participation in this study is voluntary. To participate, you must 1) be at least 18 years of age, 2) seek to obtain a degree or transfer to a four-university, and 3) use one of the college’s food programs. You may choose to terminate your participation at any time for any reason without consequence. If you are interested in participating or would like to know more about this research study, please contact me at eamoore@usc.edu by September 15, 2021. Purpose of the Study: The purpose of this study is to understand the impact food insecurity has on a college student. Procedures: You will be asked to share your experiences in an online interview. The interview duration is approximately one hour (60 minutes) and will be recorded using the Zoom platform. Risks and Benefits: Although not anticipated, possible risks and discomforts you could experience during this study may include emotions related to sadness, frustration, anger, depression, anxiety, or other unanticipated feelings. Participants will be emailed a digital $25 grocery gift card. 162 Confidentiality: This information that you share will remain strictly confidential. Only the researcher will have access to the files. Your name will remain anonymous. Your responses will be coded. Your grades will not be affected whether or not you participate or complete the interview. Participation and Withdrawal: Your participation in this research is voluntary and you are free to withdraw or refuse to answer any question at any time without negative consequence to you. If you volunteer to participate, you may still withdraw at any time, again, without negative consequence to you. Identification of Investigators: If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please contact Dr. Patricia Tobey at tobey@usc.edu, University of Southern California Rossier School of Education, or Lizzy Moore at eamoore@usc.edu or by phone 310-780-9279. Research Questions 1. What are the experiences and perceptions of undergraduate community college students using food support programs? 2. What institutional factors facilitate or create barriers for students accessing and utilizing food programs? Respondent Type: Students who are enrolled one of the food security programs at Cares Community College (a pseudonym). 163 Appendix C: Sample Preview of Qualtrics Form Food Insecurity and the Impact on Community College Students Participation Profile Form & Consent September 2021 Hello! Please take a few minutes to read the information below and complete the brief questionnaire. The deadline to submit names for consideration is September 24th. All students will be notified by September 26, 2021, via email to let them know if they were selected to participate in the study interviews. Thank you for taking the time to complete this information. - Lizzy Moore Study Purpose The purpose of this study is to understand how food insecurity, or the absence of adequate food, impacts community college students. We are interested in understanding more about your personal experience with the food programs on campus. If you are selected, you will be asked to participate in an online Zoom interview for approximately one hour. Your responses will be kept completely confidential. Your Involvement Please complete the following questions about you. The questions should take about five (5) minutes to complete. The Researcher of this study is Lizzy Moore and can be contacted at eamoore@usc.edu. Voluntary Participation Your participation in this research is voluntary and you are free to withdraw or refuse to answer any questions at any time without negative consequences. Confidentiality The information that you share will remain strictly confidential. Only the researcher will have access to the files. Data collected will not be shared with your community college. It is collected solely for academic purposes to inform the Researcher’s dissertation and possible publication. We will keep your records for this study confidential as far as permitted by law. However, if we are required to do so by law, we will disclose confidential information about you. Efforts will be made to limit the use and disclosure of your personal information, including research study records, to people who are required to review this information. We may publish the information from this study in journals or present it at meetings. If we do, we will not use your name. 164 By clicking the button below, you acknowledge: • Your participation in the study is voluntary. • You are at least 18 years of age. • You are aware that you may choose to terminate your participation at any time for any reason without consequence. 165 Appendix D: Sample Interview Confirmation Email Dear <<Student’s First Name>>, Thank you for agreeing to participate in my research assignment. I very much appreciate your willingness to share part of your day with me. As I mentioned, my name is Lizzy Moore and I am a doctoral student at the University of Southern California. I am working directly with Patricia Tobey, PhD, and the USC Rossier School of Education. My dissertation work requires that I conduct one-on-one interviews with individuals related to my dissertation work. My research focuses on understanding how food insecurity, or the absence of adequate food, impacts community college students. The interview will be approximately 45-60 minutes in duration and will be hosted online using the Zoom platform. Thank you for confirming in advance that you have access to a laptop and a strong Wi-Fi connection that can accommodate a virtual interview. Confidentiality: Only the researcher will have access to the data. Your responses will be coded/ Your grades will not be affected whether you participate or complete the interview. Voluntary Participation and Withdrawal: Your participation in this research is voluntary and you are free to withdraw or refuse to answer any questions at any time without negative consequences. For your ease, I have provided three possible time options that may work for your schedule: • Option 1: Sunday, September XX at 4 pm • Option 2: Sunday, September XX at 5 pm • Option 3: Monday, September XX at 6 pm Please let me know which time works best for your schedule. If these are not viable options, I am happy to find a time that is more convenient for you. Once you confirm the time, I will send you an outlook calendar request that will include the Zoom link and all pertinent information. Again, I truly appreciate the fact that you are willing to share your personal perspective with me. I look forward to hearing from you. Sincerely, Lizzy Moore | 310-780-9279 USC Doctoral Student 166 Appendix E: Participant Profile Form Purpose of Study: The purpose of this study is to understand how food insecurity, or the absence of adequate food, impacts community college students. Procedures: Through a series of questions, you will be asked to share your experiences with the researcher during an online Zoom interview. The interview will last approximately one hour. Prior to the interview commencing, the researcher will seek your permission to record the interview. Additionally, the researcher will ask you to create a pseudonym name on the Zoom screen to protect your anonymity. Once the interview concludes, the data will be transcribed. The researcher will provide you with the chance to review the transcripts, giving you the opportunity to make any corrections. All elements of the data collection including the audio recording will be permanently erased, and the transcription will be identifiable by a code. Only the researcher will know your identity. Although not anticipated, possible risks and discomforts you could experience during this study may include emotions related to sadness, frustration, anger, depression, anxiety, or other unanticipated feelings. If you are interested or would like to know more about this study, please complete the following information and I will contact you directly. Thank you. Date (MM/DD/YYYY): __________________ 1. First/Last Name __________________ __________________ 2. Student ID#__________________ 3. Age__________________ 4. Email__________________ 5. Mobile Number (XXX-XXX-XXXX) __________________ 6. Gender (please check) Female Male Transgender Female Transgender Male Non-binary Other Decline Responding 7. Ethnicity/Race Asian Black Chicano/a • Latino/a/x • Hispanic Native American/Alaskan Native Pacific Islander Two or More Races White Decline Responding 8. Educational Goal (check all that apply) Transfer AA/AS Degree 167 Certificate or Technical Program Don’t know 9. Academic Major__________________ 10. Current Year in College Incoming Freshman (from high school or GED) Freshman (second semester) Sophomore Other __________________ 11. Employment (check all that apply): Employed full-time Employed part-time Unemployed looking for work Unemployed not looking for work Retired Student Disabled Decline Responding 12. Please indicate any food programs or services you have accessed while in college (check all that apply): Drive-through Food Pantry Everytable Meals delivered to home Bento To-Go Meals On-Campus Food Pantry CalFresh Grocery Card FLVR Program Other __________________ Decline Responding 13. Please provide a list of any other programs, clubs, or teams you may be involved with on campus: ________________________________________________________________________ ________________________________________________________________________ Identification of Investigators: If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please contact Patricia Tobey, PhD, at tobey@usc.edu, University of Southern California Rossier School of Education, or Lizzy Moore at eamoore@usc.edu or by phone 310-780-9279. 168 Appendix F: Informed Consent for Research Study Title: Food Insecurity and the Impact on Community College Students Principal Investigator: Elizabeth A. Moore Department: USC Rossier School of Education Faculty Advisor: Patricia Tobey, PhD INTRODUCTION Food insecurity among community college students is a nationwide problem. Defined as, “the limited or uncertain availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods or the ability to acquire such foods in a socially acceptable manner,” food insecurity is silent, without identity, and is often faceless among college students. The existing research reveals that one in three college students experienced food insecurity before the coronavirus disease-2019 (COVID-19) crisis. In contrast, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) estimates that, nationwide, 10.5% of households are food insecure. My name is Elizabeth Moore and I am a doctoral student at the University of Southern California. I am working directly with Patricia Tobey, PhD, and the USC Rossier School of Education. My dissertation requires that I conduct one-on-one interviews with individuals related to my dissertation work. My qualitative research focuses on understanding how food insecurity, or the absence of adequate food, impacts community college students. KEY INFORMATION The following is a short summary of this study to help you decide whether you should participate. More detailed information is listed later in this form. 1. Being in this research study is voluntary–it is your choice. 2. You are being asked to take part in this study because you are a student at the community college where the research is taking place. The purpose of this study is to understand how food insecurity, or the absence of adequate food, impacts community college students. Your participation in this study will last approximately 60 minutes. Procedures will include completing a demographic one-sheet online (e.g. name, age, ethnicity, major, educational goal, etc.) and a Zoom interview to be scheduled at a time convenient for you. 3. There are risks from participating in this study. The most common risks are experiencing emotions of frustration or sadness. More detailed information about the risks of this study can be found under the “Risk and Discomfort” section. 4. If you decide not to participate in this research, there are no consequences to canceling or withdrawing at any time. 169 DETAILED INFORMATION PURPOSE The purpose of this study is to understand how food insecurity, or the absence of adequate food, impacts community college students. We hope to learn how the settings influence and impact a college student’s experience and how to mitigate food insecurity. You are invited as a possible participant because (1) you are enrolled as a student in the participating college site, (2) you are at least 18 years of age, (3) you have participated in at least one of the college campus food programs; and (4) have an educational goal of either transferring to a 4-year institution or seeking an associate of arts degree. Ten to 12 participants will be asked to take part in the study. PROCEDURES If you decide to take part, this is what will happen: 1. To protect participants’ anonymity, students will be asked to create a pseudonym when they log in to the Zoom screen. (Frequency: One time per participant) 2. Prior to the interview, the researcher will seek the participant’s permission to record the online meeting. (Duration: 30 seconds; Frequency: One time per participant) 3. Each interview will be scheduled for one 60-minute period and will begin with a prefatory statement, providing the respondent with an introduction to the study. (Frequency: One time) 4. For the duration of the 60-minute interview, data collection will occur including notetaking, Zoom video recording, and Zoom auto transcriptions for each participant. Additionally, a back-up desk recorder will capture the audio portion of the interview with each participant. (Frequency: One time per participant) 5. The synchronous, semi-structured, open-ended interviews shall be conducted online using the Zoom platform, allowing for face-to-face conversation, and creating a forum that is familiar and conducive to privacy, personalization, and easy access for the participants. (Frequency: One time per participant) 6. Eighteen (18) questions will be asked of each participant. (Duration: 60-minutes; Frequency: One set of questions per participant) 7. Once the interview questions conclude, the participant will be asked if they have any further questions. Each participant will be informed of the next steps which include: (a) receiving a copy of the transcript via email from the researcher to check for accuracy; (b) receiving a digital $25 Vons grocery store gift card; (c) receiving the researcher’s contact information for any further questions the participant may have. 8. The recording will stop and the participant depart. RISKS AND DISCOMFORTS Possible risks and discomforts you could experience during this study may include emotions related to sadness, frustration, anger, depression, anxiety, or other unanticipated feelings. The intention of the study is to ascertain the lived experiences from students to better understand how the community college can assist in alleviating the food insecurity barrier. 170 Several safeguards are established throughout the study protocol to ensure confidentiality and anonymity are exercised. After the transcripts and recordings have been coded, all of it will be destroyed to further protect the privacy of the participant. Despite these efforts to maintain confidentiality, the researcher cannot control sentiments shared by other participants outside of the study parameters who may choose to share their experience with others. Surveys/Questionnaires/Interviews: Some of the questions may make you feel uneasy or embarrassed. You can choose to skip or stop answering any questions you do not want to answer at any time. BENEFITS There is no direct benefit to you for participating in this research study. Participants who complete the interview process will receive a digital $25 grocery gift card. PRIVACY/CONFIDENTIALITY We will keep your records for this study confidential as far as permitted by law. However, if we are required to do so by law, we will disclose confidential information about you. Efforts will be made to limit the use and disclosure of your personal information, including research study and medical records, to people who are required to review this information. We may publish the information from this study in journals or present it at meetings. If we do, we will not use your name. The University of Southern California’s Institutional Review Board (IRB) and Human Subject’s Protections Program (HSPP) may review your records. OUTSIDE RESOURCES Below is a list of external health and wellbeing local resources: CalFresh California’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) provides individuals and families with money to buy food and groceries. You may be eligible for up to $192 per month in CalFresh benefits! Students and non-students can apply online at http://www.getCalFresh.org/. Safe Place for Youth Outreach and Engagement Team: 310-895-4655 Vanessa Rodriquez: vanessar@safeplaceforyouth.org info@safeplaceforyouth.org St. Joseph Center 24-hour call center for non-urgent community concerns: 310-358-2835 Didi Hirsch Community Mental Health Center 171 4760 S. Sepulveda Blvd Culver City, CA 90230 310-390-6612 Edelman Mental Health Adult Services 11080 W. Olympic Blvd. Los Angeles, CA 90064 310-966-6500 Westside Mental Health Urgent Care Center 11444 W. Washington Blvd, Ste D Los Angeles, CA 90066 310-253-9494 Intake Line: (800) 829-3923 Suicide Prevention Hotline (24 hours) 800-273-8255 or 877-727-4747 Crisis Text Line (24 hours) Text: “COURAGE” to: 741741 PAYMENTS / COMPENSATION You will not be compensated for your participation in this research. However, participants will be offered a $25 grocery gift card as an incentive to participate in the interview process. VOLUNTARY PARTICIPATION It is your choice whether to participate. If you choose to participate, you may change your mind and leave the study at any time. If you decide not to participate, or choose to end your participation in this study, you will not be penalized or lose any benefits that you are otherwise entitled to. WITHDRAWAL FROM STUDY INSTRUCTIONS Your participation in this research is voluntary and you are free to withdraw or refuse to answer any question at any time without negative consequence to you. If you volunteer to participate, you may still withdraw at any time, again, without negative consequence to you. If you wish to withdraw from the research study at any point, please email your first and last name to the researcher, Elizabeth Moore, eamoore@usc.edu. You need not provide a reason or rationale from withdrawing from the study. CONTACT INFORMATION 172 If you have any questions or concerns about the research, please contact Patricia Tobey, PhD, at tobey@usc.edu, University of Southern California Rossier School of Education, or Elizabeth Moore at eamoore@usc.edu. This research has been reviewed by the USC Institutional Review Board (IRB). The IRB is a research review board that reviews and monitors research studies to protect the rights and welfare of research participants. Contact the IRB if you have questions about your rights as a research participant or you have complaints about the research. You may contact the IRB at (323) 442-0114 or by email at irb@usc.edu. STATEMENT OF CONSENT I have read (or someone has read to me) the information provided above. I have been given a chance to ask questions. All my questions have been answered. By signing this form, I am agreeing to take part in this study. Name of Research Participant Signature Date and Time Signed 173 Appendix G: To-Go Food Program Five-Step Process Steps Text-based prompt Student’s text-based response Program response to student Step 1: Enroll Hi Mary, the to-go meal program is brought to you by CCC and is open for enrollment. The program will provide you with 28 orders for the next 30 days available between 10 am and 10 pm. Type ENROLL to start. Enroll Thank you, Mary for enrolling in the to-go meal program brought to you by CCC. The program will provide you with 28 orders for the next 30 days available between 10 am and 10 pm. Step 2: Hungry? Remember to type “HUNGRY” to start ordering your meal. Hungry Sure I can help you place a to-go food order. Let’s find a participating restaurant close to you. Step 3: Confirm your location Please enter your FULL address. For example, 100 Main Ave, Chicago, IL. 54321 Student enters address: 1234 Main St., Los Angeles, CA 90066 Did you mean 1234 Main St., Los Angeles, CA 90066? Press 1: Yes Press 2: No Student enters: 1/Yes Here are restaurants we found near the location you selected. Which restaurant do you want to order from? Step 4: Choose restaurant Press 1: Hungry Pocket Press 2: Subway Press 3: Veggie Grill Press 4: Fresh Brothers Press 5: Kafe K Press 6: Dagwood’s Press 7: Taco Libre Student selects “1” Hungry Pocket Would you like to safe this restaurant as a preferred location to save time on your next order? Press 1: Yes Press 2: No Step 5: Pick your meal What would you like to order? Press 1: PB Banana Toast Student selects “1” Banana Toast Great! You order of “banana toast” is confirmed and will be ready for pick up under 174 Steps Text-based prompt Student’s text-based response Program response to student Press 2: Turkey Bacon, Roasted Tomato, Spinach + Feta Sandwich Press 3: Roasted Tomato, Spinach + Feta Sandwich Press 4: Turkey Sausage, Roasted Red Pepper + Gouda Sandwich Press 5: Spinach N’ Cheese Breakfast Wrap Press 6: Four Cheese Pizza your first name in 30 minutes at the following address: 4545 First Street. Again, this order is paid for by the CCC and there will be no cost to you. 175 Appendix H: Cares Community College Communication Channels (15) Classified Staff Monthly Meetings Student Center Library Cafeteria Restrooms Classrooms Bulletin Boards Book Store Main Campus Satellite Campuses Campus 2 Campus 3 Campus 4 Campus 5 Campus 6 Campus 7 Campus 8 (1) Academic Senate (2) Acad. Affairs Chairs Mtg (3) Faculty Association Mtg (4) Department Mtgs (5) Counseling (6) Special Programs (7) Senior Administration Weekly Meetings (8) Management Association monthly meetings (9) Athletics (10) Assoc. Student Board Weekly Mtgs (11) Student Communications Coordinator (12) Inter-Club Council Monthly Mtgs (13) Student Peer Program (14) Student Outreach Programs CAMPUSES & STRATEGIC LOCATIONS STUDENTS FACULTY ADMINISTRATION CLASSIFIED Social Media Print (posters, flyers, pop- up boards, programs) All Screens Text Message Peer-to-Peer College Apps Email Vinyls 176 Appendix I: Sample Basic Needs Syllabi Statements • Any student who faces challenges securing their food or housing and believes this may affect their performance in the course is urged to contact the Dean of Students for support. Furthermore, please notify the professor if you are comfortable doing so. This will enable them to provide any resources that they may possess. Source: The Hope Center for College, Community, and Justice https://hope4college.com/wp- content/uploads/2019/06/BTFP_SyllabusStatement_WelcomeSurvey.pdf • Any student who has difficulty affording groceries or accessing sufficient food to eat every day, or who lacks a safe and stable place to live, and believes this may affect their performance in the course, is urged to contact the Human Services Resource Center (HSRC) for support (hsrc@oregonstate.edu, 541-737-3747). The HSRC has a food pantry, assistance signing up for SNAP (up to $194 in grocery money each month for eligible students), textbook lending program and other resources to help. Furthermore, please notify the professor if you are comfortable in doing so. This will enable them to provide any resources that they may possess. Source: Oregon State University https://studentlife.oregonstate.edu/hsrc/osu-basic-needs-statement • “We learn as whole people. To learn effectively you must have basic security: a roof over your head, a safe place to sleep, enough food to eat. If you’re having trouble with any of those things, please talk with me or with the Dean of Students. Together we can work to make sure those needs are met.” Source: State University of New York College-Geneseo • “It can be challenging to do your best in class if you have trouble meeting basic needs like safe shelter, sleep, and nutrition. If you have difficulty affording groceries or accessing sufficient food to eat every day, or lack a safe and stable place to live, I urge you to contact XXX and/or me. We are here to help.” Source: University of Connecticut • “I believe that in order to learn, students need to have their basic needs met: food to eat and a safe place to live. If you’re having trouble with either, the campus has some resources for you. If you’re facing food insecurity, reach out to food@colorado.edu, and they will work with you to find food resources. If you’re having trouble paying rent or facing housing insecurity, you can get in touch with these advocates: Boulder County Housing & Human Services at 303-441-1000 or Off-campus Housing at och@colorado.edu & 303-492-7053. For assistance with landlord-tenant matters, contact Mediation Services at 303-441-4364 & mediation@bouldercolorado.edu. A Student Emergency Fund has been created to support students experiencing a temporary financial hardship because of COVID-19. Other campus resources are available here (including mental health resources and free therapy). Case manager resources are also available to help you find appropriate campus and local resources. A 24/7 Suicide Prevention hotline is available for you: just call 303-492-2277. Please don’t hesitate to also approach me if you have trouble negotiating these resources.” Source: University of Colorado Boulder https://www.colorado.edu/wgst/basic-needs-syllabus-statement 177 • Any student who has difficulty affording groceries or accessing sufficient food to eat every day, or who lacks a safe and stable place to live and believes this may affect their performance in the course is urged to contact the Dean of Students for support. Furthermore, please notify the professor if you are comfortable in doing so. This will enable him or her to provide any resources that he or she may possess. Source: University of Virginia https://cte.virginia.edu/course-design-institute/sample-syllabi/basic-needs-security • Any student who is experiencing difficulty with transportation, affording materials and supplies for classes, accessing food on a regular basis, and/or lacking a safe place to live, and believes this may affect their class performance are encouraged to contact Marcus Legrand, COCC College and Career Success Coach at step@cocc.edu or (541) 318-3798 to discuss potential resources available at COCC and in the community. Furthermore, please notify me if you are comfortable in doing so. This will enable me to provide any resources that I may possess. Source: Central Oregon Community College https://www.cocc.edu/departments/step/basic-needs-statement.aspx • If you face challenges securing food, housing, or other basic needs, you are not alone, and Cal Poly can help during this time of crisis. We invite you to learn about the many resources available to support you through Cal Poly’s Basic Needs initiative at basicneeds.calpoly.edu or by contacting deanofstudents@calpoly.edu. Source: California Polytechnic State University https://ctlt.calpoly.edu/syllabus-statements-basic-needs-support

Abstract (if available)

Abstract This qualitative research examined the harmful impact of food insecurity on community college students. Community colleges disproportionately enroll more racially minoritized students who are prone to experience food insecurity, affecting their academic experience. In addition to the physical, mental, and health difficulties, the study investigated how food insecurity impacts the student’s achievement, persistence transfer, and ability to graduate from a 4-year university. Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory serves as the theoretical framework, centering the conceptual model by exploring the students’ influences as they navigate between two settings: home and college. Following the research, the potential and ongoing suggested reforms may reduce the number of students experiencing food insecurity and may help to alleviate barriers to their educational goals.

Linked assets

University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses

Conceptually similar

PDF

Exploring the practices and experiences of food resource manager in managing food resource rooms to address food insecurity at two-year community colleges

PDF

College-educated older adults and information and communications technology

PDF

Black male experience on a community college campus: a study on sense of belonging

PDF

Examining the experiences of high school counselors when advising student athletes on the NCAA college going process

PDF

Equity and access for veteran's students in the California community colleges

PDF

A narrative analysis of students in addiction recovery in college

PDF

Food is medicine: the intersection of food insecurity and chronic disease management

PDF

And still we rise: examining the strengths of first-generation college students

PDF

An ecological systems perspective of long-term English learners (LTELs) and perceptions of their college readiness: a case study

PDF

Oppression of remedial reading community college students and their academic success rates: student perspectives of the unquantified challenges faced

PDF

What will I be when I grow up? Understanding how the lived experiences of African American community college students impact their academic major choices

PDF

Improving graduation equity in community colleges: a study on California Assembly Bill 705 policy implementation

PDF

Addressing the education debt: how community college educators utilize culturally relevant pedagogy to support Black and Latinx student success

PDF

Assessing the impact of the Puente Project on Latino males in California community colleges

PDF

Federal loan borrowing in community colleges: examining the decision making processes of non‐traditional community college students

PDF

African-American/Black students’ experience and achievement in asynchronous online learning environments at a community college

PDF

Organizational change agents: an equity framework to addressing housing and food insecurity in higher education

PDF

The impact of campus climate on community college student motivation

PDF

Retaining racially minoritized students in community college STEM programs

PDF

Internal affairs: understanding challenges low-income college students face in unpaid entertainment industry internships

Asset Metadata

Creator Moore, Elizabeth Anne (author)

Core Title Food insecurity and the impact on community college students

School Rossier School of Education

Degree Doctor of Education

Degree Program Educational Leadership

Publication Date 03/17/2022

Defense Date 03/08/2022

Publisher University of Southern California (original), University of Southern California. Libraries (digital)

Tag Bronfenbrenner,community college,ecological system’s theory,food insecurity,OAI-PMH Harvest,setting

Format application/pdf (imt)

Language English

Contributor Electronically uploaded by the author (provenance)

Advisor Tobey, Patricia (committee chair), Hinga, Briana (committee member), Lawler, Hannah (committee member)

Creator Email eamoore@usc.edu,lizzym@me.com

Permanent Link (DOI) https://doi.org/10.25549/usctheses-oUC110816144

Unique identifier UC110816144

Document Type Dissertation

Format application/pdf (imt)

Rights Moore, Elizabeth Anne

Type texts

Source 20220321-usctheses-batch-916 (batch), University of Southern California (contributing entity), University of Southern California Dissertations and Theses (collection)

Access Conditions The author retains rights to his/her dissertation, thesis or other graduate work according to U.S. copyright law. Electronic access is being provided by the USC Libraries in agreement with the author, as the original true and official version of the work, but does not grant the reader permission to use the work if the desired use is covered by copyright. It is the author, as rights holder, who must provide use permission if such use is covered by copyright. The original signature page accompanying the original submission of the work to the USC Libraries is retained by the USC Libraries and a copy of it may be obtained by authorized requesters contacting the repository e-mail address given.

Repository Name University of Southern California Digital Library

Repository Location USC Digital Library, University of Southern California, University Park Campus MC 2810, 3434 South Grand Avenue, 2nd Floor, Los Angeles, California 90089-2810, USA

Repository Email cisadmin@lib.usc.edu