Page 8 - Infocus 4 January 2018 _Neat

1.5 School Lunch Programme in Other Countries

1. Hunger-free Kids Act 2010 (Not an NGO): The bill was passed in USA in 2012. It focuses
on upping nutrition standards and providing wholesome meals (vegetables and fruits) to
school kids and encourages children to participate in extracurricular activities. However,
this bill is on debate due to an increase in food waste and declining school revenue.

The food is either free of cost or at reduced rate – for those who can afford, are charged a
nominal fee. MEASURING

2. Malaysia School Milk Programme – started and funded by the Ministry of Education
in 1954. Schools apply for the program based on the number of children and low-income MID-DAY MEAL
students.

3. Canada – the only G8 country that does not have a national school lunch program and OUTCOMES
therefore, schools approach differs based on provinces. Schools approach private lunch
providers for making and delivering meals – not at free of cost.
Lunch Lady – a school lunch provider in Canada operating since 1993 through 50
kitchens and 5 provinces.
Pita Pit – This firm approaches the school and after consulting the staff and getting
approval by parents, they begin their work.
Adopt-a-School – Vancouver Sun’s breakfast program at low cost (at 85 cents per meal).

4. Brazil’s National School Feeding Programme , started in 1955, is one of the wider The impact of a welfare initiative is best demonstrated by research backed by statistical
1
range of social assistance programmes run by the Ministry of Development, as part of its data. This section is a compilation of various studies undertaken to assess the impact of
“Zero Hunger Strategy”. It feeds over 42 million children – making this programme the Mid-Day Meal Scheme on children in general. In addition, it also puts forth the Akshaya
second largest in the world. USP: The vegetables are sourced from local farmers. Patra story in numbers.

5. Healthy Kids Association – is a non-profit in Australia countering junk food by setting
up school canteens. USP: Healthy food. They provide to schools based on membership. 2.1 Mid-Day Meal Impact

Source: On Attendance 1
1. http://pulitzercenter.org/project/south-america-brazil-school-lunch A 2015 paper by IJSR indicates that attendance in MDM schools was higher compared to
non-MDM schools. That is, 86.50% in MDM schools compared to 82.90% in non-MDM
schools (the statistics combines both rural and urban schools).
A child eating lunch at a kindergarten in Sao Paulo city.
A school kid in US enjoying lunch Image by Rhitu Chatterjee. Brazil, 2015
On Primary School Enrolment 2
An Economics Professor, Rajshri Jayaraman published an impact evaluation paper in 2015
titled ‘The Effect of School Lunches on Primary School Enrollment’, which indicates that
mid-day meal programme increased school enrolment for Grades 1 and 2 however, the same
policy did not respond to Grades 4 and 5. According to the paper, it was found that mid-day
meals could be less effective in retaining children in upper primary schools.

(Sic) Our main triple difference estimates indicate that primary school enrollment increased
by 6.6%, with the largest and most robust increase coming from grades 1 and 2, where en-
rollment, rose by 18% and 9%, respectively.

Source:
1. https://www.ijsr.net/archive/v4i2/SUB151284.pdf
2. www.isid.ac.in/~pu/conference/dec_10_conf/Papers/RajiJayaraman.pdf

infocus | JANUARY 2018 infocus | JANUARY 2018 Page 06