The lack of nationally representative, individual-level dietary intake data has led researchers to increasingly turn to household-level data on food acquisitions and/or consumption to inform the design of food-fortification programs in low- and middle-income countries (LMICs). These nationally representative, household-level data come from household consumption and expenditure surveys (HCESs), which are collected regularly in many LMICs and are often made publicly available. Our objectives were to examine the utility of HCES data to inform the design of food-fortification programs and to identify best-practice methods for analyzing HCES data for this purpose. To this end, we summarized information needed to design fortification programs and assessed the extent to which HCES data can provide corresponding indicators. We concluded that HCES data are well suited to guide the selection of appropriate food vehicles, but because individual-level estimates of apparent nutrient intakes rely on assumptions about the intrahousehold distribution of food, more caution is advised when using HCES data to select the target micronutrient content of fortified foods. We also developed a checklist to guide analysts through the use of HCES data and, where possible, identified research-based, best-practice analytical methods for analyzing HCES data, including selecting the number of days of recall data to include in the analysis and converting reported units to standard units. More research is needed on how best to deal with composite foods, foods consumed away from home, and extreme values, as well as the best methods for assessing the adequacy of apparent intakes. Ultimately, we recommend sensitivity analyses around key model parameters, and the continual triangulation of HCES-based results with other national and subnational data on food availability, dietary intake, and nutritional status when designing food-fortification programs.

Information on fortifiable food consumption is essential to design, monitor and evaluate fortification programmes, yet detailed methods like 24-h recalls (24HRs) that provide such data are rarely conducted. Simplified questionnaire-based methods exist but their validity compared with 24HRs has not been shown. We compared two simplified methods (i.e., a household food acquisition and purchase questionnaire [FAPQ] and a 7-day semiquantitative food frequency questionnaire [SQ-FFQ]) against 24HRs for estimating fortifiable food consumption. We assessed the consumption of fortifiable wheat flour and oil using a FAPQ and, for wheat flour only, a 7-day SQ-FFQ and compared the results against 24HRs. The participants included children 12-18 months (n = 123) and their mothers 18-49 years selected for a study assessing child vitamin A intake and status in Mandaluyong City, Philippines. For fortifiable wheat flour, the FAPQ estimated considerably lower mean intakes compared to 24HRs for children and mothers (2.2 vs. 14.1 g/day and 5.1 vs. 42.3 g/day, respectively), while the SQ-FFQ estimated slightly higher mean intakes (15.7 vs. 14.1 g/day and 51.5 vs. 42.3 g/day, respectively). For fortifiable oil, the FAPQ estimated considerably higher mean intakes compared to 24HRs for children and mothers (4.6 vs. 1.8 g/day and 12.5 vs. 6.1 g/day, respectively). The SQ-FFQ, but not the FAPQ, generated useful information on fortifiable food consumption that can inform fortification programme design and monitoring decisions in the absence of more detailed individual-level data. Potential adaptations to improve the FAPQ, such as additional questions on foods prepared away from home and usage patterns, merit further research.