Modified Produce Prescription: Perspectives From Students and Feasibility of Implementation in an HBCU

Top Things to Know

Campus-based produce prescription programs appear feasible and highly acceptable, particularly when produce access is paired with nutrition education and culinary skill-building.

Providing fruits and vegetables alongside education may enhance participant engagement and perceived value compared with education alone.

FIM programs for college populations should address structural barriers beyond food access, including transportation, stigma, limited cooking infrastructure, communication challenges, and culturally relevant food preferences.

Summary of Conclusion/Findings

In this 12-week mixed-methods pilot study, 55 food-insecure and/or at-risk students at a historically Black college or university (HBCU) participated in either a modified produce prescription (PRx) program that combined biweekly fruit and vegetable bags with nutrition education and cooking demonstrations (n=28) or a comparison program that provided education and cooking demonstrations only (n=27). Participants in the intervention group used approximately 80% of the produce bags distributed, indicating strong program uptake and feasibility. Overall satisfaction was high across both groups, but students receiving produce reported significantly higher satisfaction with program content (80.0% vs. 42.3% very satisfied; P=.05) and were more likely to recommend the program (88.0% vs. 55.6% very likely; P=.05). Qualitative findings showed that students perceived improvements in healthy eating behaviors, food-related knowledge, health awareness, and financial savings, while valuing the combination of produce access and cooking demonstrations. Participants also identified ongoing barriers, including limited access to fresh produce, financial constraints, transportation challenges, and inadequate cooking or food-storage facilities. Because the study was small, nonrandomized, conducted at a single HBCU, and limited to 12 weeks, the findings primarily support feasibility and acceptability rather than demonstrating long-term dietary or health effects.