TL;DR
Get everyday helpers delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
A University at Buffalo study found that food-insecure older adults used substantially more of their prescribed produce when it was delivered to their homes than when they had to collect it at a market. In the 12-week trial, redemption was 89.2% in both delivery groups and 28.3% in the voucher group; the small study does not establish whether the result applies to other populations or larger programs.
A 12-week randomized study of 67 food-insecure older adults found that participants used more prescribed produce when it was delivered to their homes than when they had to collect it at a market. Redemption—defined by the researchers as preparing and consuming the produce—was 89.2% in each delivery group, compared with 28.3% among participants given vouchers for market collection, according to University at Buffalo researchers.
The study, published in Frontiers in Public Health, compared three approaches to food prescriptions. Participants were recruited through primary care clinics at Erie County Medical Center in Buffalo. They were mostly African American adults over 65 who had reported experiencing food insecurity at times. The research team assigned them to one of two delivery programs or a standard voucher program.
One delivery group received weekly boxes of fresh produce from FreshFix, with the option to customize the contents. The other received meal kits containing produce and ingredients for three meals, with five or six kit options available each week. Participants in the comparison group received vouchers redeemable at the hospital’s mobile market or at participating FeedMore Western New York markets. The reported redemption rate was 28.3% in this group.
The study authors said adding meal kits did not raise produce use beyond the rate seen with produce boxes alone. They suggested that participants may already have known how to prepare the foods. The researchers also reported that more than 9 in 10 participants rated the delivery program highly and said they would recommend it to others. These results reflect participants’ reported experience in this study, not a comparison of long-term health outcomes.
Home Delivery Removes Collection Barriers
The results suggest that how food reaches participants can affect whether a food prescription is used. University at Buffalo associate professor Lucia A. Leone said conventional voucher programs can ask recipients to travel to a particular location. Transportation difficulties may prevent collection, and some people may feel uncomfortable seeking help at a food pantry or market, she said.
For older adults experiencing food insecurity, bringing produce to the home may reduce those practical and social hurdles. That matters for programs intended to connect people with nutritious food: a benefit that is difficult to collect may go unused. Still, the trial measured produce preparation and consumption over 12 weeks; it did not establish that home delivery improves health or produces savings for health systems.
The study also points to implementation choices beyond delivery itself. Participants could customize produce orders, and researchers described positive feedback about the delivery driver. Those features may have helped participants engage, but the study was not designed to isolate the effect of customization or personal contact from the effect of delivery.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
How the Three Programs Compared
Food prescription programs provide free or subsidized food to people experiencing food insecurity, often through vouchers that can be used at markets. The report says earlier programs have found that 9% to 18% of voucher recipients redeem them. That range is background cited in the report, not a result from this particular trial; the study’s own comparison group had a redemption rate of 28.3%.
Leone, the study’s corresponding author, said the research tested whether delivery could improve redemption compared with the local standard approach of collecting produce at a market, and whether meal kits would encourage greater produce use. The randomized trial was conducted with 67 participants in Buffalo, limiting what it can show about other regions or groups. The findings were published in 2026 in Frontiers in Public Health under the title “A randomized controlled study comparing three food prescription programs for older adults: program design, implementation, and utilization.”
“The problem historically with food prescription programs is that people get the vouchers but don’t redeem them.”
— Lucia A. Leone, study corresponding author and University at Buffalo associate professor
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Limits of the Buffalo Trial
The findings come from a small, 12-week study in one city, with 67 participants who were mostly older African American adults recruited through one medical center’s clinics. It is not clear whether similar redemption rates would be seen in larger programs, in rural areas, or among people with different needs. The study also does not show whether the intervention led to lasting changes in diet, food security or health.
Because both delivery groups had the same reported redemption rate, the results do not show an added produce-use benefit from meal kits over produce boxes. Nor do they establish which specific part of the delivery approach—removing travel, allowing customization, the quantity of food, or interaction with the driver—accounted for the difference from market collection. The report does not provide enough information to determine the program’s costs or how those costs compare with potential benefits.
fresh fruit and vegetable subscription
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Researchers Plan a Family Study
Leone and colleagues plan to test a similar approach with a different population: families on Medicaid experiencing food insecurity and raising children aged 2 to 6. The researchers will work with local pediatric practices. That study is intended to test food prescription delivery in a population the team describes as more challenging to serve; its design and results have not yet been reported in the source material.
Further research would be needed to determine whether delivery can be expanded effectively, how programs can tailor food to participants, and whether greater redemption leads to sustained improvements in food security or health. For now, the Buffalo study supports a narrower conclusion: in this trial, home delivery was associated with much higher produce use than requiring participants to collect food at a market.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Key Questions
What did the study find?
In a 12-week trial, 89.2% of produce in each home-delivery group was reported as prepared and consumed, compared with 28.3% in the group receiving vouchers for market collection.
Who took part in the study?
The study enrolled 67 adults recruited through primary care clinics at Erie County Medical Center in Buffalo. Participants were mostly African American, over 65, and had indicated that they sometimes experienced food insecurity.
Did meal kits lead to greater produce use?
No difference in redemption was reported between the meal-kit and produce-box delivery groups: both had a rate of 89.2%. Researchers said the meal kits did not appear to increase produce use in this trial.
Does the study prove home delivery improves health?
No. It measured produce preparation and consumption during a 12-week program, not long-term health outcomes. The findings also come from a small study in one city and may not apply to every population or program.
What are the researchers studying next?
The team plans a similar study with Medicaid families experiencing food insecurity who have children aged 2 to 6, working with local pediatric practices. Results and further details were not available in the report.
Source: rss
Halloween Picks
halloween
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
