Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2020 Nov 2.
Published in final edited form as: J Frailty Aging. 2018;7(3):182–186. doi: 10.14283/jfa.2018.21

Table 2.

Participants’ Functional Status and Perceptions of the Nationwide Congregate Meals Program

Frequency %*
Limitations in ADLs
  0 499 58.2
  1 230 25.7
  2 or more 165 16.2
Overall rating of congregate meals
  Good to excellent 815 91.7
  Fair or poor 85 8.3
Taste Satisfaction Rating
  Always 257 26.7
  Usually 453 55.4
  Sometimes 164 15.9
  Seldom 18 1.4
  Never 4 0.2
  Don’t know/refused 5 0.5
Variety Satisfaction Rating
  Always 333 38.2
  Usually 363 39.9
  Sometimes 183 18.6
  Seldom 13 1.2
  Never 6 0.5
  Don’t know/refused 3 1.8
Would recommend to a friend
  Yes 859 96.0
  No 35 3.6
  Don’t know/refused 7 0.4
Meals improve health
  Yes 678 74.4
  No 165 18.9
  Don’t know/refused 58 6.7
Meals improve diet
  Yes 706 77.5
  No 180 21.3
  Don’t know/refused 15 1.1
Meals help to remain living in home
  Yes 580 58.1
  No 295 37.4
  Don’t know/refused 26 4.5
Meals help to feel better
  Yes 741 81.5
  No 122 15.0
  Don’t know/refused 38 3.5
Last time received meal
  Within the last day 301 31.6
  Within the last week 300 31.6
  Within the last month 122 13.3
  More than a month ago 178 23.5
Duration of Participation
  <=6 months 113 15.2
  > 6 months to< 1 year 91 8.4
  1 to <2 years 126 12.5
  2 to 5 years 292 35.2
  >5 years 274 28.3
  Don’t know/refused 5 0.3
Days per week
  <=1 270 35.7
  2-4 438 46.3
  5+ 150 12.5
  Don’t know/refused 43 5.5
Proportion of foods meal represents
  <1/2 417 46.9
  1/2 261 33.5
  >1/2 201 17.3
  Don’t know/refused 22 2.2
*

Weighted to account for the sampling design within the nationwide sample.

ADL, Activity of Daily Living; Limitations defined as needing help from another person in bathing, dressing, eating, transferring from bed to chair, or toileting