Social determinants of the fast food environment near California's public schools

Background: There is strong interest in the fast food environment near schools since children spend large amounts of time in or around schools. Prior research has observed greater concentrations of fast food restaurants (FFR)... [ view full abstract ]

Background: There is strong interest in the fast food environment near schools since children spend large amounts of time in or around schools. Prior research has observed greater concentrations of fast food restaurants (FFR) near schools attended by students of color and schools in socioeconomically disadvantaged neighborhoods. Far less is known about whether there is a neighborhood socioeconomic pattern near schools attended by students of color. Further, FFR availability may have changed over time by urbanicity and neighborhood socioeconomic advantage, but little is known about this issue.

Objectives: To investigate patterns of FFR according to school neighborhood socioeconomic advantage, urbanicity, race/ethnic composition of students, and time.

Methods: Using the National Establishments Time Series, enrollment data from the California Department of Education, 2000 and 2020 US Census Data, and urbanicity from Nielsen PRIZM segmentation database, we generated FFR counts within 0.75 mile service areas for 7,722 California public schools. We calculated mean FFR counts for service areas of schools by school’s neighborhood income, urbanicity, and racial/ethnic composition of the student body. The study does not use human data, exempting it from IRB review.

Results: In urban areas, schools in low income neighborhoods had greater concentrations of FFR than schools in affluent neighborhoods, regardless of racial/ethnic student enrollment, except for schools with majority black students. Between 2000 and 2010, there were little to no changes in FFR availability; however, small changes resulted in greater FFR availability in low income neighborhoods. In non-urban areas, schools had fewer FFR than those in urban areas, there was no income pattern in FFR availability, and changes in FFR between 2000 and 2010 were smaller than in urban areas.

Conclusions and implications: Schools in low income urban areas had greater concentrations of FFR. Reducing environmental disparities in FFR availability requires simultaneous consideration of urbanicity and socioeconomic advantage.