National School Lunch Nutrition Standards: Making Kids Hungry or Healthy?

Abstract

Introduction

As of July 1, 2012, school cafeterias are required by the USDA to serve students lunches with more fruits, vegetables, and whole grains than previous requirements. The new lunch standards are also derived from menus that have a cap on calories by grade range. While the need to bring healthier options to school-based meals as a way of addressing childhood obesity is widely agreed upon, there have been conflicting reactions from school districts across the country to the mandated changes. To explore how the same nutrition standards are being met with such differing reactions, Childhood Obesity approached two representative school districts—one in favor and one against the mandates from the federal school lunch program.

In Favor of the USDA New School Lunch Standards

Janet Miller, food service manager, Springfield School District, Illinois: The changes that are reflected in the new school lunch standards came as no surprise to me. The goal of these new regulations was to assure that those who eat a hot lunch at school are eating better, and the new guidelines have done that.

In fact, we didn't have much resistance from our 11,000 students or staff when we began the new school year. The lack of pushback is likely because we started to introduce many changes beginning 3 years ago. I expect that if we had tried to make all of the changes in September, we might have seen greater resistance from the students and staff. However, I have always worked to stay on top of the nutrition trends and, as such, we started to replace our high-fat items with lower-fat options, such as low-fat tacos, and offer more fresh vegetables and fruits on the lunch lines to get the managers thinking this way and preparing the students to expect these kind of offerings. In effect, we were already a long way toward meeting the regulations before they were even enacted.

The bigger challenge is that these new regulations expect us to be able to attain certain nutrient benchmarks, but the options for products are not there yet. For example, we would be closer to 100% whole grain if more manufacturers could meet our needs. At present, we have exceeded the 50% requirement without any problem, providing about 70% of our grain items as 100% whole grain, including pastas and bread items. It is just taking the manufacturing community time to catch up. I expect that the availability will improve so that our menu will be fully whole grain by fall 2013.

Trial and Error

I began introducing a burger on a whole wheat bun, which was rejected when we first introduced it. The students pulled off the bun and tossed it—just eating the burger. I expect this introduction was a first for most of our students who only eat white bread at home. To improve acceptance, we have been trying different manufacturers and finally we found a wheat bun that the children readily accepted. Their acceptance is likely due to a combination of time and trials coupled with the realization that white bread isn't coming back.

This trial and error is a typical approach for us. We don't expect full endorsement of something new across the board. Rather, we introduce new items gradually to give our students a chance to adjust, and with multiple trials and tweaking the options in response to their feedback, we eventually seem to get it right.

Scratch Cooking Versus Prepared Foods

I started back in the days when everything was made from scratch, and now it seems that the trend is to go back to that. However, that won't happen in my district anytime soon as it is too high a hurdle. We have neither the equipment nor the staff with the skills necessary to be able to achieve a scratch-cooked menu. In truth, significant training would be needed to get back to a cook-from-scratch approach. To meet the regulations, given our current capabilities, we tend to order prepared items so that we can offer eight different entrées to our middle schoolers (including many sandwich wraps) and 12 entrées offered daily at the high school.

Calorie Caps

The USDA's rules are very precise—down to how often red, orange, or green vegetables are served each month. Perhaps the hardest change for the students, especially among the older children, had to do with the smaller portions of protein and breads, which are calculated by the ounce. The calorie limits have required the biggest adjustment for our students. There is no doubt that I have found it tough, but doable, to stay within calorie ranges. While the calories are now capped in addition to having a minimum, we have slowly introduced the changes by encouraging an unlimited consumption of fruits and vegetables, hoping that that will make up for some of the calories lost in the smaller portions of protein and grains. Although having a dietitian would make this whole process of menu development much easier, I have managed, but I imagine that many of the smaller districts around the country are struggling.

Fries and Salad Bars

A common complaint among older students is their wish for us to bring back their longtime favorite, French fries. We attempted to make baked fries, even trying horseshoes, but the product just didn't turn out the same, so we felt it best to just eliminate this item. Another popular item, nachos with cheese sauce, met the same fate. There is no room for items of such low nutritional value and high saturated fat.

When we first introduced salad bars, the response from the students was a huge surprise—they essentially ate us out of house and home—and it made our ability to meet the vegetable requirements, which are quite specific, rather easy. We always offer three types of fruit—two fresh and one chilled (canned). We offer two types of greens, tomatoes or carrots, two to three times per week. We have added garbanzo beans or other legumes, and we offer a hot vegetable on the line. Now, the novelty has worn off so we are better able to stock the salad bars without worrying about running out, and our staff is able to monitor the students and offer guidance, as to how much and what is selected, both to encourage a reasonable portion and minimize waste.

Budget and Staff

Our bottom line has shifted toward greater costs for fresh fruit and vegetables, which was to be expected. We are offering more, both in variety and quantity, so we hope that the 6 cents extra we will receive will be enough to offset the expense. However, I do not think that additional income will be sufficient especially given seasonal limitations as well as impacts on price from unforeseen price factors such as drought or transportation costs affected by gas prices.

We make good use of the USDA commodity foods, which have evolved to offer many more healthy items, reflecting the new regulations. When they introduced whole grain pancakes, tortilla shells, and whole grain noodles, we picked up on that and started offering these new items on the menu. It took a while for the children to adjust to the whole wheat products, which is to be expected considering that they were really only familiar with white bread and white rice.

We were diligent in planning summer meetings and workshops for our food service managers so they were prepared to train the kitchen staff in the new regulations. That is another reason that the process has gone smoothly. All our servers know to encourage students to take at least one fruit and/or vegetable so they meet the requirements for a reimbursable meal but also so they learn what a healthy plate should include.

Opposed to the USDA New School Lunch Standards

Salley Young, a Montana School Nutrition Association executive board member and food service manager at Greenfield Elementary School, Fairfield, Montana: The new school lunch guidelines that come from the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act have gone too far. There were already reasonable requirements that assured healthy meals, including the need to incorporate more whole grains and fresh produce, but the new regulations demand excessive limits that must be applied across the board, and this just isn't practical or sensible.

Living in a rural community, many of our students get on buses as early as 7:15 am and do not get an evening meal until 8:00 pm or later because of school activities, athletics, and bus trips home. The restrictions on meat and whole grains do not meet the basic nutritional needs for growing, active children raised on ranches where there is no shortage of activity. We are not city folks so our children's needs are likely much different than students growing up in the city, or even in most suburbs. These differences are not recognized or acknowledged in the oversimplified nutrition limits set in the new regulations.

Calorie Caps

I appreciate that an upper limit on the calorie intake for every child may have been intended as a means to reduce obesity, but it fails to consider the varied needs of many children across the country. I challenge the validity of a single, required calorie cap for many reasons, not the least of which is that at 700 calories, we have too many students going away from the lunch meal hungry. The fact is that one calorie level is not appropriate for all, and that is the most misguided limitation. Specifically, girls do not need and should not get the same calorie level as boys; a sedentary 9th grader should not consume the same calories as a 12^th-grade football player; and many children depend on the school lunch as their main, and sometimes only, meal of the day. The requisite 700 calories (for middle school students) does not fill this very critical need in our community, but our hands are tied if we want to benefit from federal funds.

As if the challenge of the calorie cap isn't enough, the problem is exacerbated by the reduction in portions of both protein and grains. Two ounces of grains for each elementary child is small, but 2.4 ounces for our high school boys is ridiculous. Even worse is the portion for protein. The new rules set the limit at 1 ounce of protein per meal for our youngsters and 2 ounces for our high school students. To help enforce these maximums, school lunch programs are no longer allowed to offer a second helping of any protein- or grain-based nutritious entrée to our children. Students will be required to purchase a full-priced second lunch if they are hungry for more meat/protein or whole grains. This USDA program discriminates against all of the children in our nation's schools who are on free and reduced meal programs. They did not have $2 in their pocket to buy lunch in the first place; they certainly don't have money to buy a second lunch. Instead, our hungry kids will go to the vending machines between classes to fill up or head for the cookie jar and chip supply after school if not provided with enough nutrition and protein in their school lunch. This can only add to the growing obesity problem.

It would have been far better to have some latitude in the regulations so that adjustments could be made by trained professionals in each district. I have been so infuriated by this one-size-fits-all approach and these drastic limits that I have written to everyone possible to have the upper level calorie level rescinded or removed.

School Lunch Menu Planning

Menu planning is nothing short of a nightmare. There is a lot more paperwork than ever before. We have to create all new production records for every menu, which for me means more than 30 different reports. Before these regulations went into effect, we relied on cycle menus, which could be developed on the computer. We could pull up an existing production record for vegetable beef soup, for example, and make minor menu changes such as peaches to oranges, or green beans to corn. However, with the new regulations, we have to plan a full week of menus simultaneously to assure that the vegetable requirements are met, and that the minimum and maximum calories for each grade grouping are achieved. It is very hard to get a whole week of menus to repeat or cycle. Each month I am faced with building new production records that balance the calorie ranges, while keeping good protein and grain choices limited but producing a meal that can satisfy all of the students.

School Size and Scratch Cooking

Maybe for big schools that cook out of a box, and just need to reheat prepared meals to meet the regulations, the limits do not present a problem. I expect that some districts are satisfied to order premeasured, prepared entrées because they rely on food service companies to serve the minimum and stay on budget. For these large schools, the pressure is “how fast will industry answer to the meal pattern changes,” as opposed to “how am I going to serve our students their favorite homemade spaghetti sauce, pasta, and bread sticks, and still stay under my weekly maximum for grains and protein.”

I know that across Montana, our class B- and C-size schools are getting crushed in trying to keep our wholesome, scratch kitchens. But more and more are giving in and just ordering prepared meals to simply meet the requirements.

There isn't even a process to evaluate scratch cooking menus, so we are left to use ounce scales to measure out all our portions. That means weighing everything. Spaghetti sauce, for example, means that I have to weigh and measure each and every component. I start with 10 pounds of raw meat, and divide that cooked weight by 70 servings, which is approximately 2 oz. Then, I add tomato sauce and tomato soup with seasonings and then calculate exactly what serving utensil will deliver only 2 oz. of meat combined with the tomato sauce. I must accurately calculate calories per serving. Really, I can only estimate the nutrient profile without having adequate software tools and the time to calculate the nutritional value in scratch recipes. Now, I no longer serve fluffy loose pasta with my meat sauce. I have to squish it into a #16 scoop (equal to 2 ounces) then serve it in an unappealing, compressed lump, which is simply not enough pasta to feed 10- and 12-year-old boys. I have to tell the children that there is no Parmesan cheese because that would push us over the protein limit.

Salad Bars

A fundamental problem with self-serve salad bars is the waste. We used to be able to stock the salad bars with a good selection of items, but now with the minimum requirements, we have to overstock to demonstrate that we have enough servings for each child. At the end of the day, anything remaining must be thrown away. Unfortunately, to get a sufficient variety of colored vegetables, and to meet the regulations, we must put more items on the salad bars than the children can eat.

Beyond the salad bars, some schools are offering a baked potato bar everyday as a legitimate way to enable students and food service managers to supplement school lunch. I am sure that in schools where students can leave the premises, they will. There is little incentive for students to eat the skimpy school lunch when they can go out and get a few slices of pizza or a bagel and cream cheese and feel more satisfied.

Conclusion

While there is general consensus that a greater emphasis on fresh fruits and vegetables is a positive move, and guidelines are appropriate to ensure that the right kinds of fats and grains are served, it is equally clear that a one-size-fits-all set of regulations is too restrictive. Adjusting the regulations to permit greater flexibility, and to take into account the diverse needs of different school populations, is necessary and would serve the students across the United States far better. Just as we know that no single diet is right for everyone, neither should school lunches have arbitrary restrictions that do not reflect the needs and nutritional requirements of children from ages 5 to 18.