Mandated policies to improve food environments in public settings are an important strategy for governments. Most Australian governments have mandated policies or voluntary standards for healthy food procurement in healthcare facilities, however, implementation and compliance are poor. A better understanding of the support required to successfully implement such policies is needed. This research explored food retailers’ experiences in implementing a mandated food and nutrition policy (the Policy) in healthcare settings to identify barriers, enablers, and impacts of compliance. Three 90-min workshops facilitated by two public health practitioners were undertaken with 12 food retailers responsible for operating 44 outlets across four hospitals in Perth, Western Australia. Workshop discussions were transcribed non-verbatim and inductive thematic content was analyzed. Three main themes were identified: (1) food retailers had come to accept their role in implementing the Policy; (2) the Policy made it difficult for food retailers to operate successfully, and; (3) food retailers needed help and support to implement the Policy. Findings indicate the cost of implementation is borne by food retailers. Communications campaigns, centralized databases of classified products, reporting frameworks, recognition of achievements, and dedicated technical expertise would support achieving policy compliance. Feasibility assessments prior to policy implementation are recommended for policy success.

University food environments have a strong influence on the dietary choices of students and staff. The aim of this study was to assess the food environment at a large university in Sydney, Australia. Data were collected between March and July 2022 from 27 fixed food outlets and 24 vending machines. The healthiness of the food environment was evaluated using the Healthy Food and Drink in NSW Health Facilities for Staff and Visitors Framework (‘Framework’), which assesses food environment parameters including the availability, placement, and promotion of ‘Everyday’ (healthy) and ‘Occasional’ (less healthy) products. Each parameter was evaluated overall and across each food outlet type. Across all outlets, Everyday foods and drinks made up 43.9% of all products. Only two outlets met the Framework’s product availability benchmark of ≥75% Everyday foods and drinks. A total of 43 outlets (84.3%) sold sugary drinks as part of their product range. Occasional products made up 68.4%, 53.3%, and 59.9% of all items for sale at checkout areas, countertops, and eye-level shelves, respectively. Finally, 79.7% of meal deals included Occasional products. Our findings highlight the need to improve the availability, placement, and promotion of foods and drinks sold at a major university campus in Sydney, Australia.

Australian families increasingly rely on eating foods from outside the home, which increases intake of energy-dense nutrient-poor foods. ‘Kids’ Menus’ are designed to appeal to families and typically lack healthy options. However, the nutritional quality of Kids’ Menus from cafes and full-service restaurants (as opposed to fast-food outlets) has not been investigated in Australia. The aim of this study was to evaluate the nutritional quality of Kids’ Menus in restaurants and cafés in metropolitan Perth, Western Australia. All 787 cafes and restaurants located within the East Metropolitan Health Service area were contacted and 33% had a separate Kids’ Menu. The validated Kids’ Menu Healthy Score (KIMEHS) was used to assess the nutritional quality of the Kids’ Menus. Almost all Kids’ Menus (99%) were rated ‘unhealthy’ using KIMEHS. The mean KIMEHS score for all restaurants and cafés was −8.5 (range −14.5 to +3.5) which was lower (i.e., more unhealthy) than the mean KIMEHS score for the top 10 most frequented chain fast-food outlets (mean −3.5, range −6.5 to +3). The findings highlight the need for additional supports to make improvements in the nutritional quality of Kids’ Menus. Local Government Public Health Plans provide an opportunity for policy interventions, using locally relevant tools to guide decision making.

Produce prescription programs can benefit both individuals and health systems; however, best practices for integrating such programs into the Australian health system are yet unknown. This study explored stakeholders’ perspectives on the acceptability, potential design and integration of produce prescription programs for adults with type 2 diabetes in Australia. Purposive sampling was used to recruit 22 participants for an online workshop, representing six stakeholder groups (government, healthcare service, clinician, food retailer, consumer, non-government organisation). Participant responses were gathered through workshop discussions and a virtual collaboration tool (Mural). The workshop was video-recorded and transcribed verbatim, and thematic analysis was conducted using a deductive–inductive approach. Stakeholders recognised produce prescription as an acceptable intervention; however, they identified challenges to implementation related to contextuality, accessibility, and sustainability. Stakeholders were vocal about the approach (e.g., community-led) and infrastructure (e.g., screening tools) needed to support program design and implementation but expressed diverse views about potential funding models, indicating a need for further investigation. Aligning evaluation outcomes with existing measures in local, State and Federal initiatives was recommended, and entry points for integration were identified within and outside of the Australian health sector. Our findings provide clear considerations for future produce prescription interventions for people with type 2 diabetes.