The changing menu for school lunches - Inside the News

Prepared Foods, Sept, 1994 by Pat Lenius

What's for lunch? Less fat and more veggies. But processed foods also have a place in...

While the nutritional guidelines are arguably tougher, other proposed changes in the National School Lunch Program may actually make it easier for food processors to participate in this $5-billion program.

French fries, pizza and other fast-food favorites may appear less frequently or in combination with a variety of fruits, vegetables and grain products in school lunches if a proposed initiative from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) becomes law. The proposal, which was published in the Federal Register June 10 and was open to public comment until Sept. 8, is called the School Meals Initiative for Healthy Children.

The USDA proposal generally forces the school lunch program to follow the recommendations of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans by the 1998 school year. The Food Guide Pyramid is a graphic representation of these guidelines, which were jointly established by the Department of Health and Human Services and USDA.

The guidelines suggest eating a variety of foods including plenty of vegetables, fruits and grain products, and limiting intake of foods high in fat, saturated fat, cholesterol, sugar, salt and sodium.

"I think there's agreement that the old program was meeting the nutritional needs of the children, but it was not in compliance with our own, newer limits on fat, saturated fat and cholesterol," says a spokeswoman for USDA.

There are two key changes that should be beneficial to food processors. One is that the program would no longer require "the four food groups" in each meal. That should give school cafeterias the ability to introduce new entrees that alone may be nutritious enough but are too filling or too expensive to use in concert with all the traditional food groups.

The other change is that schools must meet these nutritional guidelines over a full week of menus, not on a day-by-day basis. That affords them the latitude to serve a meal that does not meet the nutritional guidelines one day if they can make up for it later in the week.

"There was talk early of the program going overwhelmingly to fresh foods and ingredients. That would have hurt processed foods," says Regina Hildwine, director of technical regulatory affairs at the National Food Processors Assoc. (NFPA), Washington. "I think everybody realized that would have been unworkable for many cafeteria staffs. What is being discussed proves processed foods can participate in a good school lunch program."

The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) staff at USDA will review all of the comments at the end of the comment period and make any necessary changes to the proposed regulation. The proposal will then go through a final clearance process after which it will be published as a final rule in the Federal Register.

FIRST CHANGES EVER

The federal nutritional requirements for school menus have not changed significantly since the school lunch program was introduced in 1946. Schools in the program get cash subsidies and donated commodities from the USDA for each meal they serve. In return, the schools must serve lunches that meet federal requirements and must offer free or reduced-price lunches to eligible children.

Currently, to qualify for federal reimbursements, schools must meet a "meal pattern" established by USDA that requires in each meal specific minimum amounts of meat or meat alternatives, vegetables and/or fruit, bread or bread alternatives, and milk.

The proposal would replace the meal pattern with NuMenus (Nutrient Standard Meal Planning) and Assisted NuMenus, which USDA describes as a "flexible, easy to use system of planning menus to meet updated nutrition standards. The menu will be developed through nutrient analysis of all foods offered over the school week to ensure that meals meet specific nutrition standards for key nutrients (calories, protein, calcium, iron, fat, vitamins A & C)."

It is expected that most schools will use computer software to carry out NuMenus, but with Assisted NuMenus, schools that need assistance could share hardware and software, consult with outside experts or use menus developed in cooperation with USDA.

"Our position is generally supportive of the proposal," continues Hildwine. "It reinforces dietary guidelines and does so in a common sense way by measuring through a one-week menu cycle, not meal by meal or food by food."

However, Hildwine expressed concern about the nutrient value data base, "which is the heart of the school lunch program implementation. There has to be reporting into the national nutrient data base to substantiate that a product can go into the mix. We have to come up with criteria for (the reporting) that is scientifically rigorous but not overly burdensome. Otherwise, the criteria could shut out small companies from participation because they would not have the resources to do the analyses."

There could be a downside for school children, too. Increased paperwork and the high cost of computer programs to implement NuMenus and Assisted NuMenus could result in schools leaving the National School Lunch program and fewer children being served. Also, strict application of NuMenus could lead to greater uniformity, less variety and fewer ethnic dishes in school lunches, says Vivian Pilant, president of the American School Food Service Assoc., Alexandria, Va.