1. Deakin University Institute for Physical Activity and Nutrition (IPAN) proposal
to undertake collaborative project with SecondBite
Introduction
This proposal has been prepared by IPAN in response to the project outline “Hand Up not Hand Out”
prepared by SecondBite in February 2016. “Hand Up not Hand Out” is an extension of SecondBite’s
FoodMate nutrition education program and focuses on the evaluation of FoodMate participants’
outcomes or skills to identify the potential long term behaviour changes.
Following detailed discussions with SecondBite research manager, Dr Geoff Smith, regarding the
potential program evaluation, IPAN is pleased to submit this proposal for consideration of funding
this collaborative project between Deakin University’s IPAN and SecondBite.
Project Aim:
To evaluate the impact of the FoodMate program on attitudes and behaviour among participants
over varying time intervals of follow-up.
Project Overview:
In liaison with previously engaged FoodMate delivery agencies, IPAN will locate and
interview/survey individuals who have taken part in FoodMate previously, to examine the potential
long term (up to 2 years) impact of participation in the FoodMate program.
Specifically the study will examine:
• The cooking confidence, cooking/food preparation behaviours, and food independence among
former FoodMate participants at varying intervals since participation
• Participants’ self-reported new opportunities to eat healthily; perceptions of food
accessibility/affordability
• Physical activity of participants (although small sample size makes most valid measures
impractical)
• Participants’ perception of program impact on significant others (families and friends and
communities), as reported by participants (ie proxy report)
• Mental and social well-being of former participants (and subject to baseline data available,
changes since baseline)
• Dependent on comparability/availability of baseline data, comparisons of intake of core food
groups and diet quality scores at pre-program, post-program and follow-up.

2. Project methodology will be finalised in close consultation with SecondBite. A Project Working
Group consisting of the IPAN Project Team and Dr Geoff Smith from SecondBite will meet regularly
throughout the Project.
Caveats: Because this is a retrospective evaluation (with availability of appropriate baseline data to
be determined), and an uncontrolled study design with a relatively small sample, it will not be
possible to make firm conclusions as to the effectiveness/impact of the program. What the
evaluation can conclude is whether participants in ‘FoodMate’ report perceived beneficial impacts
over varying follow-up periods. If baseline dietary, behavioural and attitudinal data are amenable to
comparison, it may also be possible to examine the feasibility of collecting similar data at follow-up
and comparing these with baseline to examine change; however this pre-post test design with a
small sample will again only be suggestive of potential impact, rather than providing definitive
evidence. The small likely sample size suggests that qualitative, rather than quantitative evaluation
methods may be most appropriate. We are also unlikely to be able to examine how the impact
changes over varying time intervals, given the small overall sample size, meaning subgroups
classified according to time since participation will be too small to make meaningful comparisons.
We could investigate the feasibility of looking at this descriptively in broad time frames (e.g. <1 year,
> 1 year).
IPAN Project Team
• Alfred Deakin Professor Kylie Ball, NHMRC Principal Research Fellow. Her role is to lead the
project and be the key contact for SecondBite. She will also chair Project Working Group meetings
and be responsible for the completion of the project deliverables.
• A second academic staff member (TBC) from IPAN will co-supervise the Research Assistant, assist
with data analysis and preparation of project deliverables.
• The IPAN project team will recruit a casual research assistant to undertake data collection and
analysis and preparation of the project deliverables.
Timeline
The proposed project will require 12 months for data collection and report/presentation
preparation, commencing from sign-off of an agreement.
An additional 3 months is required for preparation of a manuscript suitable for submission to a peer-
reviewed journal. Conference presentations are not included in the timeline as these are dependent
on the timing of suitable conferences, acceptance of the conference abstract, and resources
available to support attendance (if IPAN-led).
A proposed timeline with tasks is outlined
below.
Task Estimated timeline
Research planning and design Month 1-2
Literature review & development of evaluation
instruments; ethics application
Month 2-3
Data collection Month 4-7
Data cleaning, coding and analysis complete Month 9

3. Submission of draft report for feedback Month 10
Final report submitted; findings presented to
SecondBite staff/stakeholders
Month 12
Note: The timeline is dependent on receiving ethical approval by Month 3. Should this be delayed,
other tasks will be shifted accordingly.
Project Deliverables
The key deliverables will be a written report summarising the findings in electronic format, and a
face to face presentation, including PowerPoint presentation, of the project findings to SecondBite
staff and relevant others.
Based on discussions with SecondBite, it has also been agreed that the IPAN project team will lead
the preparation of a scientific manuscript suitable for submission to a peer-reviewed journal.
Relevant staff from SecondBite will be involved as authors on the paper provided they meet
authorship eligibility criteria. Work on preparation of the scientific manuscript will commence upon
completion of this project and falls outside of this funding proposal.
Budget
The budget for this project is $24,783 (EX GST) to cover salary for the Research Assistant and travel
costs. Deakin University is contributing substantial in-kind funds in the order of $54,840 to the
project for Professor Ball’s and the other senior academic staff member’s time, and University
infrastructure costs for the twelve month duration of the project.
Next steps
To engage Deakin University’s services to undertake this project, a contract addressing the budget,
invoicing, services provided, milestones, deliverables, intellectual property, and other relevant
factors will be required.