Special project tests new way to plan meals - Celebrating 40 Years of School Lunch

Food and Nutrition, Oct, 1986 by Joanne Widner

Special Project Tests New Way To Plan Meals

Everything's up to date in Kansas City (Missouri)--not only in the lyrics of the Broadway musical but at Hickman Mills Consolidated School District 1, where food service staff are pleased with their alternative lunch program.

Hickman Mills is one of seven districts nationwide still involved in the third year of a pilot project that began in school year 1983-84 with 18 participating school districts across the country. That project--Nutrient Standard Menu Planning--offered selected districts an opportunity to test an alternative to the time-honored school lunch meal pattern.

Meals are planned in different way

Meal pattern planning is currently used by all schools participating in the National School Lunch Program with the exception of those testing the nutrient standard.

With the meal pattern approach, USDA requires school lunch managers to include in each lunch a specified amount of food from each of four food components--meat/meat alternate, vegetable/fruit, bread/bread alternate, and milk. Each lunch includes two servings from the vegetable/fruit component so a complete meal contains five food items.

The nutrient standard system does not use meal patterns. Instead, meals are evaluated for nutrient content. The goal is to meet one-third of the child's Recommended Dietary Allowance (RDA) for eight key nutrients, averaged over the 5-day school week.

If a computer analysis reveals a shortage of one of the nutrients during a particular week, district school lunch directors adjust the menus, recipes, and/or portion sizes to meet the nutrient standard. Standardized menus and recipes are essential to the plan.

As Alberta Frost, director of FNS' Nutrition and Technical Services Division, explains, all of the eight analyzed nutrients are essential for growth and development. They include protein, calcium, iron, vitamin C, vitamin A, thiamin, and riboflavin. Foods containing these nutrients typically contain other nutrients as well. Food energy is analyzed but not monitored.

Introduced in nine Hickman Mills schools

Hickman Mills school food service director Betty Culley sees both advantages and disadvantages to using the nutrient standard system. On balance, however, she's enthusiastic about the system and feels it offers a viable alternative for schools suited to using it.

Nine of the 11 Hickman Mills schools--seven elementary and two junior high schools--are participating in the pilot project. When the nutrient standard system was introduced, the district used brochures and school newsletters to inform teachers, students, parents, and the community that the new alternative was being tested.

According to representatives from FNS' Mountain Plains regional office who have monitored the project, cafeteria staff were resistant at first but are now supportive, and student acceptance has been good.

FNS staff have noticed a number of changes in the district's program as a result of the new approach. The district uses increased quantities of commodities such as peanut butter and raisins (to help meet the iron requirement) and increased quantities of fruits and vegetables. On the other hand, use of meat and meat alternates has decreased, as has the number of bread servings.

Initially, FNS staff helped train local staff. At that time, the Missouri Department of Elementary and Secondary Education closely monitored the new program on a weekly basis. They now make a monitoring visit and audit the program one a year, forwarding their reports to the FNS regional office.

Actual testing ended last year, but Hickman Mills is still refining the program to suit its needs.

Computer analysis is key to system

One of the benefits of the project for Hickman Mills and other participating districts was an opportunity to work with computers in a new way.

While a few districts did not use computers in the project, most used either mainframe or miscrocomputers together with software developed by USDA. Schools using computers had the most success with nutrient standard planning; districts testing the manual method found it was not practical because it was tedious and error prone.

Along with software, USDA provided a data base that included information on the nutrient content of more than 1,100 frequently used foods. District supervisors added to the data base information on other foods their schools use, including commercially processed foods.

If necessary, districts modified the USDA software for use with their equipment. Modifications were needed primarily in districts with mainframe computers. Betty Culley adapted the software for use with a Radio Shack Model 16 computer. She says the computer has not only helped her with meal planning but also with the documentation needed for the nutrient standard project.

While the nutrient standard system has worked well in districts like Hickman Mills, it's not likely to be offered indiscriminately as an option to all schools because of its unique requirements.

As Stella Nash of Mountain Plains explains, the nutrient standard requires standardized recipes, good computer support, and specialized software. It also requires time and money for training and implementation. It doesn't, for example, lend itself readily to one-cook schools. It also doesn't work very well in schools that offer students a wide variety of menu choices, such as schools offering salad bars or bag lunches.