Author ORCID Identifier

https://orcid.org/0009-0009-7725-1960

Semester

Summer

Date of Graduation

2026

Document Type

Thesis

Degree Type

MS

College

Davis College of Agriculture, Natural Resources and Design

Department

Animal and Nutritional Sciences

Committee Chair

Melissa Olfert

Committee Member

Allison Dagen

Committee Member

Samuel Workman

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: Artificial food dyes (AFD+) are an increasing policy concern in the U.S., particularly in children’s foods. West Virginia’s House Bill 2354, the first statewide AFD+ ban implemented in K-12 schools, restricts seven AFD+ in state-funded meals. Little is known about how AFD+ bans are perceived or implemented. This study examined how the ban functioned within school food systems and the barriers and facilitators experienced by school stakeholders within the initial year of implementation during the 2025-2026 school year.

METHODS: A cross-sectional, observational mixed-methods study was conducted among implementers, enforcers, and receivers of the policy. A survey tool guided by behavioral and implementation science frameworks was developed and utilized to assess knowledge, attitudes, experiences, and perceptions in 2 cohorts over a two-week period and a 4-week period (N = 109). Quantitative data were analyzed using descriptive statistics, Kruskal-Wallis tests with post-hoc testing using Dunn’s Test with Bonferroni correction and Wilcoxon Signed-Rank tests. Open-ended survey responses and follow-up semi-structured interviews (N = 4) were analyzed using Braun and Clarke’s six-phase reflexive thematic analysis.

RESULTS: Respondents showed high policy awareness (98.2%); receivers reported lower familiarity with the banned AFD+ than enforcers (p = .0003) and implementers (p = .0014). Overall support was moderate to high (M = 63.4/100). Respondents reported checking ingredient labels for AFD+ more often after policy enactment than before (p = .0008). Reported challenges included limited time (M = 50.5/100), low communication/guidance (M = 53.8/100), and low access to AFD+-free products (M = 55.2/100). Avoiding AFD+ ranked relatively low among household health priorities (M = 44.2/100). Qualitative findings indicated that stakeholders viewed the policy as a positive step toward improving children’s nutrition while also expressing concerns about its scientific rationale, policy design, implementation feasibility, or prioritization compared to broader nutrition challenges. Barriers included limited product availability, financial and staffing constraints, unclear guidance and communication, and differences in operational capacity and resources by county. Stakeholders also described broader concerns related to food insecurity, affordability, and food access in West Virginia schools and communities.

CONCLUSIONS: Stakeholder perceptions of HB 2354 were complex, with support for reducing AFD+ often accompanied by concerns regarding scientific evidence, policy design, and implementation feasibility. Findings suggest that a successful school nutrition policy may require policymakers to consider and understand the resources and operational capacities of the diverse schools and counties responsible for implementation across the policy’s reach. Future AFD+ policies in other states may benefit from longer implementation timelines, more stakeholder input during the design process, clear guidance, adequate resources, and considering broader nutrition and food access challenges. As states consider policies addressing AFD+ and other food additives within K-12 schools, findings from West Virginia may inform future policy development and implementation.

Download

Share

COinS