Integrated Study of School Meal Costs and Outcomes: A Design, Cost, and Feasibility Plan, Volume 1: Final Report (original) (raw)
Related papers
A HEALTHY SCHOOL MEAL ENVIRONMENT: FOOD ASSISTANCE RESEARCH BRIEF
2003
A "healthy school meal environment" not only gives students opportunities to make healthy meal choices but also encourages them to do so. The extent to which a healthy school meal environment affects the success of USDA's school meals programs is currently a subject of debate. The policy strategies that can be used to encourage such an environment for the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and the School Breakfast Program (SBP)also are subjects of debate. Environmental factors considered to be important include: (1) the nutritional quality, variety, and acceptability of program meals; (2) meal scheduling; (3) nutrition education; and (4) sales of non-USDA ("competitive") foods. Other factors contributing to an overall healthy nutrition environment in the school include a commitment to physical activity, and promotion of healthy eating and physical activity. This issue brief reviews information on the first three of these school meal environment factors. Co...
Purpose/Objective The purpose of this study was to compare the nutrient content of National School Lunch Program (NSLP) lunches and lunches brought from home (LBFH) lunches in elementary schools participating in the HealthierUS School Challenge (HUSSC). Methods Participants included students in grades 2-5 in four Washington state HUSSC elementary schools. Data were collected during the 2011-12 school year. A multiple analysis of variance (MANOVA) followed by post-hoc analyses of multiple t-tests was used to analyze nutrients provided and consumed by students to show differences between NSLP lunches and LBFH. Data were further separated by the child's eligibility status for free and reduced price meals. A MANOVA test followed by post-hoc analyses using multiple t-tests compared differences in mean nutrient amounts between LBFH and NSLP lunches within these groups. The average percentages of NSLP lunches and LBFH meeting School Meal Initiative (SMI) guidelines were compared. Results A total of 1,085 lunches were evaluated including 547 NSLP meals from 344 students and 538 LBFH from 276 students. NSLP lunches provided significantly more protein, calcium, iron, cholesterol, sodium, and vitamin C compared to LBFH. Students with NSLP lunches consumed significantly more protein, calcium, iron, cholesterol, sodium, vitamin A, and vitamin C compared to students who had LBFH. Students eligible for free and reduced price (FRP) meals who ate LBFH brought and consumed more calories, fat, and saturated fat. Lunches brought from home were less likely to meet SMI guidelines in nearly all categories. Applications to the Child Nutrition Professionals Based on the results from the current study, child nutrition professionals planned and prepared NSLP meals that met the current standards. As a result NSLP lunches were more nutritious than LBFH. While continuing efforts to improve the NSLP, the nutritional quality and content of LBFH should be more extensively studied. Nutrition education regarding LBFH is important for both parents and students. Further research is needed to determine factors affecting choice of LBFH food items.
USDA school meal programs face new challenges
Choices. The Magazine of Food, Farm, and Resources Issues, 2009
In 2008, the USDA's National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and School Breakfast Program (SBP) fed almost 31 million children each school day. On a typical school day, lunch participants obtain more than onethird (35%) of their daily caloric intake at school; for children participating in both breakfast and lunch, the contribution of school food to caloric intake rises to almost one-half (47%) (Story, 2009). The programs promote the food security of low-income households with children by providing meals to those children at free or reduced price. In addition, the programs strive to improve the diets and health of all participating children. When school meal programs began (see timeline, Table 1), their focus was on ensuring that all children had something to eat for lunch. Today, overweight and obesity have become the most common nutrition problems among American children. Children are described as "overweight but undernourished" as they consume diets high in saturated fat, added sugars, and sodium, but low in fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and lowfat milk. Public concern has risen concerning the quality of foods available to schoolchildren and whether USDA school meal programs contribute to the growing problem of childhood obesity. In response, there is a desire to update and strengthen nutritional requirements for USDA-funded school meals and regulate the nutritional content of other foods and beverages sold at school-often referred to as "competitive foods." At the same time, the economic downturn has brought renewed emphasis on the role of the programs as a nutrition safety net for children, with advocates proposing changes to make more children eligible for free meals. However, there is an important issue related to this. School meal providers find it challenging to cover program costs and encourage student participation while improving the quality of meals served to children. Here, drawing primarily on a review by Ralston et al. (2008), we briefly discuss the history of the national school meal programs, current evidence of their association with children's diet and health, and proposed changes in the programs to meet the changing nutrition problems facing American children. The School Meal Programs: Yesterday and Today The NSLP was founded in 1946, building on smaller, localized efforts to provide school meals to needy children. Over time, federal involvement in providing meals to children and youth expanded, with the creation of the School Breakfast Program, the Child and Adult Care Food Program, and the Summer Food Service Program (see Table 1). In 2008, combined Federal spending for these programs reached $14.4 billion, second in terms of expenditures only to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP, (formerly known as the Food Stamp Program) (see Figure 1). USDA's Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) administers the child nutrition programs and reimburses participating schools' foodservice departments for the meals served to students. Schools must provide meals for free or at a reduced price to children eligible on the basis of household income and USDA reimburses those meals at a higher level. Children from families with incomes at or below 130% of the poverty level are eligible for free meals. Those with incomes between 130% and 185% of the poverty level are eligible for reduced-priced meals.
The Economics of a Healthy School Meal
Choices, 2009
At first, the question seems simple: "Is it economically feasible to serve healthy food in school?" And, at first, the road to an answer seems equally simple: one must estimate the cost of serving a meal and then confirm that revenue suffices to cover this cost. The federal government uses this type of straightforward comparison of costs and revenues to judge whether the federal reimbursement rate for meals served by the National School Lunch Program (NLSP) and School Breakfast Program (SBP) is adequate. The influential periodic federal School Lunch and Breakfast Cost Study, completed most recently in April 2008, estimated that the national mean cost to provide a school lunch was 2.28inthe2005−06schoolyear,whichwaslessthanthefederalreimbursementperfreelunchof2.28 in the 2005-06 school year, which was less than the federal reimbursement per free lunch of 2.28inthe2005−06schoolyear,whichwaslessthanthefederalreimbursementperfreelunchof2.51 that year (USDA/FNS, 2008). Perhaps there was even a little change left over. The School Nutrition Association, the trade association for school food service operations, uses a similar straightforward comparison, though, not surprisingly, it reaches a different conclusion. Its September 2008 report, Heat's On: School Meals Under Financial Pressure, based on a less systematic survey of 45 large school districts, estimated that median costs had risen to 2.92forthe2008−2009schoolyear,whilethefederalreimbursementperfreelunchhadrisenonlyto2.92 for the 2008-2009 school year, while the federal reimbursement per free lunch had risen only to 2.92forthe2008−2009schoolyear,whilethefederalreimbursementperfreelunchhadrisenonlyto2.78. Especially when one considers the growing public pressure to provide better and more nutritious food, these estimates imply a painful financial shortfall. Yet, neither of these comparisons of costs and reimbursements can answer the original question. First, there are diverse ideas about what is a "healthy" meal. To qualify for the federal lunch and breakfast programs, meals are expected to provide foods from multiple food groups and to meet general nutrient guidelines. In many local districts, school food programs face rising expectations for quality and nutrition characteristics that exceed federal minimum standards. Second, the economics of school food service are both more complex and more fascinating than these simple comparisons allow. The School Food Service as a Business Think of a school food service operation as a business. It is a not-for-profit business, in the sense that there are no dividends for private shareholders or owners. Yet, most school food services are required to break even, so the economic pressures are very similar to those facing any business.
The National School Lunch Program: Background, Trends, and Issues. ERS Report Summary
The National School Lunch Program (NSLP) is one of the largest food and nutrition assistance programs in the United States, feeding millions of children every day. School meal providers face the task of serving nutritious and appealing school lunches, including free and reduced-price lunches for low-income students, and doing so under budget constraints. This report is intended as a briefing for policymakers and other stakeholders on the history and basic features of the program. It also addresses steps being taken by school food authorities and USDA's Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) in response to challenges faced by program administrators. One of the main goals of NSLP as identified by Congress is to promote the health and well-being of the nation's children. In recent years, questions have been raised about the program's ability to meet this goal, especially as the main nutrition problem has shifted from under-nutrition to overweight and obesity. Public concern for t...
Current Developments in Nutrition, 2020
National School Lunch Program (NSLP) standards recently changed significantly. The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act (HHFKA) presumably improved the dietary quality (DQ) of meals, whereas Child Nutrition Program (CNP) Flexibilities appear to decrease DQ. This variability has not been quantified. Our objective was to determine differences in DQ between elementary school lunch menus meeting NSLP standards: School Meal Initiative (SMI), HHFKA, CNP Flexibilities, and evidence-based best practices (BP). A base menu was portioned per NSLP standards and analyzed for nutrient content and DQ. Statistical analyses included 1-factor ANOVA, Kruskal–Wallis, and Dunnett's test. The BP menu had higher whole fruit and whole grain Healthy Eating Index scores than SMI (Ps < 0.0083). The BP and HHFKA menus had higher refined grain and added sugars scores than SMI (Ps < 0.0083). The SMI menu had lower total vegetable and saturated fat scores than all menus (Ps < 0.0083). This study informs pol...
School Lunch Quality Following Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act Implementation
The Journal of Child Nutrition & Management, 2016
Purpose/Objectives This study investigates the effect of meal component changes by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 (HHFKA) on school lunch quality and consumption in elementary school students, grade 2-5 before and after the HHFKA guidelines were implemented in July 2012 using the Healthy Eating Index. Methods In Spring 2012, before implementation of meal standards mandated by the HHFKA, digital photographs were taken of second to fifth graders' lunches in four HealthierUS School Challenge (HUSSC) participating elementary schools before and after the meals were consumed. In Spring 2013, after implementation of meal standards mandated by the HHFKA, digital photographs of lunches were again taken in the same schools before and after lunches were consumed. The photos were used to visually estimate the amounts of food items selected and consumed. Meals selected and consumed were scored using the Healthy Eating Index (HEI-2010). The HEI-2010 scores of the lunches in 2012 were compared to those in 2013. Results Results based upon 1,033 lunches (509 pre-HHFKA in Spring 2012 and 524 post-HHFKA in Spring 2013) revealed improved HEI-2010 scores (p< 0.05) for both served (52.2 pre-HHFKA to 57.0 post-HHFKA) and consumed meals (49.8 pre-HHFKA to 53.2 post-HHFKA). Noteworthy component scores that improved included Empty Calories (served) from 14.1 to 15.3 (maximum score 20); Total Fruit (served) from 2.3 to 3.7 (maximum score 5); Total Fruit (consumed) from 2.3 to 3.4 (maximum score 5); and Sodium (served) from 4.6 to 5.3 (maximum score 10). Application to Child Nutrition Professionals The current study indicates that menus offered by child nutrition professionals in four schools in Washington improved the nutritional quality of lunches served and consumed post-HHFKA implementation.
School Lunch before and after Implementation of the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act
The Journal of Child Nutrition & Management, 2014
Purpose/Objectives This study compares the mean nutrients selected and consumed in National School Lunch Program (NSLP) meals before and after implementation of the new nutrition standards mandated by the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 (HHFKA) in July 2012. Four elementary schools achieving HealthierUS Schools Challenge awards serving second through fifth grade students were selected to participate. Methods In Spring 2012, before implementation of meal standards mandated by the HHFKA, digital photographs of NSLP lunches were taken of second to fifth graders’ lunches in four elementary schools before and after the meals were consumed. In Spring 2013, after implementation of meal standards mandated by the HHFKA, digital photographs of lunch were again taken in the same schools before and after lunches were consumed. The photos were used to visually estimate the amounts of food items on trays and determine nutritional content of meals selected and consumed. The nutrition content ...
Healthier Standards for School Meals and Snacks
American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 2016
Introduction: In 2012, the updated U.S. Department of Agriculture school meals standards and a competitive food law similar to the fully implemented version of the national Smart Snack standards went into effect in Massachusetts. This study evaluated the impact of these updated school meal standards and Massachusetts' comprehensive competitive food standards on school food revenues and school lunch participation.