Food Policy Reform in Schools - Essay Example

? RUNNING HEADING: Food Policy Reform in Schools School Food Policy Reform in Schools The paper is concerning the two national school food programs that are implemented in schools for the last 50 to 60 years. The programs consume more than $12 billion dollars each year and cover more than 31 million children up to the age of 16 to 18 years. Children from different income groups are included and they would be provided subsidized or free food. The program main goals are to ensure that children can receive a nutritious diet free of junk items and in this way not be at a risk for obesity, overweight and cardiovascular disorders. The program also aims to provide opportunities for various stakeholders including parents, agriculturists, retailers, etc. However, in recent times it is found that the program are unable to achieve their objectives as the nutritional status of populations have changed over the last 50 years and populations are affected with a different set of disorders compared to what was present more than 50 years ago. Hence, recommendations need to be laid down which would more effectively ensure the success of the school food programs and ensured hat the taxpayers money is put to better use. Food Policy Reform in Schools Introduction The aim of this study would to review the food reform policies that are implemented for schools across various states of the US. The aim of the food policy is to implement a population-based approach so that the diet of children is improved, their nutritional status is benefitted and various nutritional disorders such as obesity and deficiency are prevented. An important aspect of the topic is the fact that children’s diet in schools would play an important role in developing future food behavior, establish an appropriate BMI. Children spend a significant portion of their time at schools and these fruitful hours in education also need to take into consideration other activities such as exercises, food eating habits and psychosocial development. Most Americans spend life at schools for the first 16 years of their lives and hence is exposed to the food available at schools at least at some point (Adamick 2010). Over the past few years, the food problem in schools have escalated very seriously as unhealthy eating habits were being developed and promoted. Vending machines, fast food cultures, cafeterias and junk food stalls been sources of unhealthy food (Public Health Law Center 2010). Kate Adamick (co-founder, Cook for America), considers that having a school food reform program may not only be effective as the economy is sick and the costs of such programs would be prohibitively high. Also considering the fact that the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and the School Breakfast Program (SBP) have certain set standards available for nutritional content and that junk food which is also easily available at schools does not need to meet any nutrient content. Schools may sell these junk food items through cafeteria, fundraising events, school stores, vending machines or snack bars (Adamick 2010). In analysis, the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and the School Breakfast Program (SBP) have been provided by the federal government to students of school and children care facilities across the US, regardless of the income status or the social status of the families. These programs have been authorized under the statues Child Nutrition Act 1966 and the National School Lunch Act 1946. The Statutes involves creating a policy for providing food to children from schools at a subsidized rate (or free for qualified students) whilst ensuing that the various stakeholders in this scheme are benefited. The various stakeholders including the children, parents, teachers, school management, Federal government, state government, US Department of Agriculture, Department of Education, etc. The program was further modified for including snacks provided to children up to the age of 18 years. More than 31 million children across the US are benefited from the Lunch and Breakfast schemes (FNS 2011). In this paper would be reviewing the National Food health policies including the school lunch and the breakfast policy. In the year 2010, the national lunch scheme cost $10 billion whereas the national breakfast scheme cost $1.68 billion in 2003. The policy areas include providing a nutritionally healthy meal to the students at an affordable price and free in case of students who belong to the lower socioeconomic groups (FNS – USDA 2011). Overview of current knowledge The National School Lunch Policy came into being since 1946 and the National Breakfast program came into being since 1966. It has been implemented through the Federal government and the state governments, though the departments playing the major role include the US Department of Agriculture and the Department of Education. It aims to provide meals free or at a subsidized rate to students of schools until the age of 16 or 18, where applicable. The main crux of the policy is to provide healthy and a nutritious meal for the students and building good eating habits, thus helping the students to grow in a healthy manner and reduce the chances of obesity or several other nutritional disorders. The Food and Nutritional Service actually administers the entire program and the USDA ensures the procurement of various raw materials for preparation of the meals. The Policy has certain objectives in general. Firstly it aims to improve the nutrition, freshness, quality and appeal of food that is served in schools. There are several unhealthy competitors and the aim of this program is to restrict the effect of these items and offer more healthy options for the children. The policy also creates a restriction on the advertisement and the vending options that are available for schools for unhealthy food options. The second objective of the policy is to develop a healthy eating environment and habits, and ensure that the food preparation and the food service are done in a healthy manner. The third objective of this policy is to increase participation of the student population in the school nutrition programs, and at the same time ensure that no student goes hungry. The fourth objective of this program is to integrate food service with other healthy objectives that are to be inculcated at schools including meeting the educational, health and wellness and environmental needs of the children. Fifthly, the opportunity for meeting the nutritional and the developmental needs of the child is not only fulfilled but also to promote economic and social development of the communities who would be able to develop raw materials for food preparation and serve food for these children. Sixthly, it would serve as an opportunity for various groups to come together so that school food and nutrition can be improved further. Lastly, it would serve the legislative bodies and the policymakers and a vital ground to discuss the implementation of such programs and develop improvements with other stakeholders such as farmers, nutritionists, healthcare professionals, families, parents, and the industry (Vallianatos 2005). Pleog et al (2008) conducted a study to determine the impact of food assistance programs in schools to prevent obesity and overweight. Data from 1976 to 2002 was being analyzed in the study and it was found that there were no significant differences between the weight status of those in the programs and those who did not take part in the program even though they were eligible. However, there was some difference in the data between the participants and children belonging to the higher income groups. Clark 2009 assessed the programs between 2004-05 in 2300 children in about 287 public schools and found that school healthy programs help to meet the dietary adequacies of children, but the program did not properly handle the excessive salt intake and excessive dietary fat intake in children, which could play an important role in the development of hypertension and obesity in children. Finkelstein et al (2008) noted that as the children entered a higher grade, their eating habits became more and more unhealthy. More and more students are using cafeterias and vending machines, and these increasing provide now nutrients, greater fat/carbohydrate foods, and junk food. Thus in general it can be seen that though the program is implemented since about 50 to 60 years, it has not been fully effective in the modern age to control some of the unhealthy eating patterns in school children. Existing policy related to the topic The School Breakfast Program was authorized under the Child Nutrition Act 1966 and provided for a breakfast meal for the students. The program is available to all children regardless of their income groups, and for children belonging to lower income groups, food is given free. The National School Lunch Program is authorized under the National School Lunch Act 1946 that was signed by the Truman Administration just after the World War 2. It also provides meals for children in the form of lunch at a subsidized rate. Both these programs are aimed at several objectives mentioned above with the intention of program a nutritious and a wholesome meal for the children. However, several studies and events during the 50 to 60 year history of the School programs have shown that these programs may be ineffective in achieving its objectives. For example, the programs have been ineffective in counteracting obesity and other nutritional disorders in children, and children who do not participate in the program have no significant differences between those within the program. The program is also unable to achieve its objectives with relation to food hygiene and studies have shown that junk food is more hygienic than the food served in the school health programs. Also, both the programs are consuming huge money of the taxpayer’s contributions and questions are being raised whether they are should be continued considering that the objectives may be outdated (FNS 2011). Key issues The First major problem noted is that the program were implemented more than 50 to 60 years ago and at that time the major problem after the world war 2 was under nutrition. However, today with a different set of problems, the policy of the school food program does not seem to be effective. The second problem is whether a National School food program would be an effective tool to bring about good eating habits in children. Though the child spends a major portion of their day at school questions are being raised whether the home environment plays an even more important role in developing food habits. Hence, the home environment is different, then the effect of the home eating habits would be different for each child and this could be disastrous on the overall eating habit, as the school food program aims to achieve a uniform eating pattern in children. Thirdly, most of the commodities that are used in the school food programs are donated, and hence questions are being raised of the quality of such foods. Fourthly, though the intention of the program was to create a profound effect on agriculture, it has been noted that the impact on agriculture has been minimal. Lastly, the effect of these programs on obesity and overweight is not really certain as there was no difference in energy take levels between participants and non-participants (Ralston 2008). Conclusions and recommendations Both the National Breakfast and the Lunch programs at the schools need to be reviewed and modifications made especially since both these schemes are outdated and may not fit into the current school system. Greater efforts should be made to include scientific data in determining the nutritional value of food being supplied to the students. In this way, the program can stick better to its objectives. There are also questions being raised about the hygiene and the manner of preparation of food meant for these programs. Greater precautions are required especially since the program would be catering to primarily children. Also, School food programs may not be the only way of restricting the consumption of junk food and in order to do so other measures are required such as creation of different legislations. Bibliography Clark, M. A., & Fox, M. K. (2009). ‘Nutritional quality of the diets of US public school children and the role of the school meal programs.’ J AM Diet Assoc. 109(2 Suppl):S44-56. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/19166672 Finkelstein, D. M., Hill, E. L., & Whitaker, R. C. (2008). ‘School food environments and policies in US public schools.’ Pediatrics. 122(1):e251-9. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/18595970 FNS (2011). National School Lunch Program. Retrieved on April 20, 2012, from Web: http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/lunch/AboutLunch/NSLPFactSheet.pdf FNS (2011). School Breakfast Program. Retrieved on April 20, 2012, from Web: http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/breakfast/AboutBFast/bfastfacts.htm Pleog, M. ET al (2008). ‘US Food assistance programs and trends in children's weight.’ Int J Pediar Obest. 3(1):22-30. doi: 10.1080/17477160701520231. http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/17852543 Public Health Law Center (2010). School Food Policies. Retrieved on April 20, 2012, from Web: http://publichealthlawcenter.org/topics/healthy-eating/school-food-policies Ralston, K. (2008). The National School Lunch Program: Background, Trends, and Issues. Retrieved on April 20, 2012, from Web: http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/err61/err61.pdf Vallianatos, M. (2005). A Working Paper of the Center for Food and Justice, Urban and Environmental Policy Institute. Retrieved on April 20, 2012, from Web: http://departments.oxy.edu/uepi/cfj/publications/healthy_school_food_policies_05.pdf Read More