Any opinions, findings, conclusions, or recommendations expressed in this publication are those of the author s and do not necessarily reflect the view of the organizations or agencies that provided support for this project. IOM Institute of Medicine. The members of the committee responsible for the report were chosen for their special competences and with regard for appropriate balance.
Turn recording back on. National Center for Biotechnology Information , U. Copyright and Permissions. Copyright by the National Academy of Sciences. All rights reserved. For more information, see the Bookshelf Copyright Notice. Hardcopy Version at National Academies Press. Search term. Contents Expand All Collapse All. Expand All Collapse All. Related information. The task includes the specification of standards for the two types of menu planning approaches currently encompassed within the Meal Requirements these current standards are listed in detail in Appendixes G and H.
In addition, to make appropriate recommendations, the committee was asked to articulate an approach a planning model for the development of the Nutrition Standards that is consistent with the current Dietary Guidelines for Americans and with current applications of existing nutrient reference values.
Current standards for school lunch and breakfast under review by the committee. This USDA regulation requires that the meal programs comply with the then current Dietary Guidelines for Americans and that school lunches and breakfasts provide at least one-third and one-fourth of the Recommended Dietary Allowances RDAs NRC, for selected nutrients, respectively, on a daily basis, as averaged over 5 consecutive school days.
In addition, the program regulations specify the maximum amounts of total fat and saturated fat and the minimum number of calories. In addition to calories, the existing Nutrition Standards focus on protein, calcium, iron, and vitamins A and C because of the roles that these nutrients play in promoting growth and development USDA, These five nutrients were intended to serve as a practical proxy to ensure that school meals include other essential nutrients.
All 11 of these nutrients and other dietary components are identified on the nutrition labels of food products, providing an important source of information for school menu planners. As part of its task to recommend revisions to the Nutrition Standards , the committee was asked to specify a planning model, that is, to describe and provide a rationale for the approach used to establish the Nutrition Standards.
The existing planning model for Nutrition Standards is based on application of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans and the RDAs for selected nutrients, as averaged over 5 school days.
Many terms are associated with the Nutrition Standards. The term Nutrition Standards itself reflects the comprehensive list of the overall dietary goals of interest, regardless of whether they are currently required or only recommended by USDA. The required components of the Nutrition Standards are called key nutrients. The calculations on which these amounts are based are described later in this chapter.
For FBMP, however, the nutrient standards were used in developing the specifications for the meal standards 4 that reflect the food components and amounts in the Meal Requirements Appendix G , and SFAs may use the nutrient standards as a measure when monitoring the quality of the menus they have planned.
Furthermore, some have used the term indicator nutrients to refer to those key nutrients that serve as a useful proxy for major food groups and for identifying dietary patterns that are likely to include a range of essential nutrients. Vitamin C, for example, if it is present in an adequate amount in food sources, is likely to indicate the presence of important amounts of certain other vitamins and trace elements.
Recently, the term nutrients of concern or, sometimes, indicators of concern has been used to refer to nutrients for which current levels of consumption may be problematic e. Nutrients of concern are not specified within current USDA provisions for school meals, but one or more of the key nutrients may be nutrients of concern. The Nutrition Standards specify that the lunch meal contain one-third of the RDA for key nutrients and that the breakfast meal contain one-fourth of the RDA for key nutrients.
However, the Nutrition Standards must be quantified in a manner that tailors the amounts for the age-grade groups receiving the school meal—for example, children in a school for grades 7—12, all of whom receive meals from a single cafeteria line. For several nutrients, this quantification involves the use of weighted RDAs. The use of weighting allows the determination of a single representative value when children in the age-grade group have different RDAs on the basis of their age and gender.
These calculated values have been called nutrient standards; but, to avoid unnecessary confusion, this report incorporates these values into the broader term Nutrition Standards. From this point forward in the report, the term Nutrition Standards is used to encompass the general list of nutrients and other dietary components, including the quantities calculated for each age-grade group. Table shows the amounts of nutrients that are to be provided to schoolchildren on the basis of the current Nutrition Standards and as specified for relevant age-grade groups.
These amounts are based on a 5-day average. Therefore, over the course of a school week, the average nutrient content per meal must be consistent with these amounts. Different menu planning approaches incorporate different age-grade groups. School menu planners have some flexibility to plan nutritious and appealing meals that vary from day to day, but these meals must provide the required components of the Nutrition Standards on a daily basis, as averaged over the school week Table These standards, as specified by USDA, guide the menu planning process.
The term Meal Requirements refers to the set of meal standards used to develop menus and meals so as to implement the Nutrition Standards. The two menu planning approaches and related meal standards serve several important purposes.
In particular, they. Aspects of the Meal Requirements that are specific to each approach are indicated by gray shading. Food-based menu planning approaches There are two food-based approaches, the traditional and the enhanced approaches. The first two columns of Table show that the traditional food-based approach is similar to the enhanced food-based approach but that the enhanced food-based approach uses a larger number of servings of vegetables and fruits and of grains and breads at lunch.
It also uses different age-grade groups see the rows Reimbursable lunch [as offered standard] and Age-grade groups: Lunch. The as served standard for a reimbursable breakfast is the same for both the traditional and the enhanced FBMP approaches. Nutrient-based menu planning approaches The two NBMP approaches nutrient standard menu planning and assisted nutrient standard menu planning are the same and appear together in the rightmost column of Table Both approaches develop menus utilizing a computerized process to ensure that the nutrient content conforms to the standards.
Either the SFA itself or with assisted planning an outside source uses the software to plan and analyze menus. The state agency must approve the initial cycle menus, recipes, and other pertinent information, such as food specifications. Alternative approaches A fifth option not shown is known as the alternative menu planning approach or as any reasonable approach, as cited in regulation Healthy Meals for Children Act, P. It allows states and school districts to develop their own approaches, but these are subject to the requirements established in the USDA regulations.
For the NBMP approaches, the meal standards regarding the nature of the menu items are relatively broad e. The actual number of menu items required each day depends on the number needed to meet the Nutrition Standards averaged over a week. In contrast, schools using the FBMP approaches must meet portion size specifications for all the food components in the lunch menu namely, fluid milk, meat or meat alternate, vegetable or fruit, and grains or bread.
On the basis of data from the third School Nutrition Dietary Assessment USDA, a , approximately 48 percent of the schools that offer lunch use the traditional food-based method of menu planning, 22 percent use the enhanced food-based method, and 30 percent use a version of the nutrient-based method.
Under existing requirements, schools must offer— that is, make available on the cafeteria line—the menu items that on a daily basis comprise a reimbursable meal. As shown in Table under both menu planning approaches, the as offered standards are distinct from as served standards for meals.
For schools that take part in OVS, a student may select—that is, be served —fewer menu items than the number that must be offered, but the selected menu items must match those required under the OVS provisions i. Although students may decline specified foods, the cost if any of the meal to the student stays the same. It should be noted that a meal as served does not necessarily equate to what a student may actually consume.
For schools that do not take part in OVS, the as offered standard applies. The goal is to promote adherence to the standards and to provide the technical assistance that may be needed. Although Table provides a general overview of the components of the current Meal Requirements , the committee must address the specific meal standards within the Meal Requirements.
Federal reimbursement of meal costs is the major source of cost reimbursement for meals and is conducted on the basis of prescribed record-keeping requirements, which are the responsibility of the SFA. Trained cashiers check the meals selected by the child against meal standards described in the previous section.
Then, consistent with the level of reimbursement for that child, they tally the number of qualifying full-price, reduced-price, and free meals.
This activity is shown at the end of the schematic in Figure in Chapter 1. Meal reimbursement is intended for meals that have been prepared, offered, and selected consistent with the Nutrition Standards and Meal Requirements. The three main budgetary inputs for providing high-quality, nutritious school meals that apply to both the NSLP and the SBP school meal programs are 1 federal per meal cash reimbursements, 2 the costs paid by participating children, and 3 the costs for USDA commodities.
Two smaller federal programs also provide input. Each of these inputs is described briefly below. USDA provides per meal cash reimbursements to participating public and nonprofit private schools and residential child care institutions for meals that meet the federal Nutrition Standards. USDA provides the reimbursement to state agencies, which, in turn, disburse the monies to the SFAs within their states.
The reimbursement rates for the — school year appear in Table The reimbursement rate is adjusted annually on the basis of an index linked to the Consumer Price Index which reflects changes in prices compared with those in the previous school year and is published in the Federal Register by July 1 of each year to aid schools in planning for the new school year Amendments to the National School Lunch Act and the Child Nutrition Act, P.
Special provisions available through USDA referred to as Provisions 1, 2, and 3 are aimed at reducing the application burden. The three provisions allow for providing meals at no cost to students, given that the schools follow certain application and claiming procedures as outlined in regulation USDA, c.
Provision 1 is available to schools in which 80 percent of enrolled children are eligible for free or reduced-price meals. Students who qualify for free meals can be certified as eligible to receive them for a 2-year period. Provision 2 requires schools to provide free meals to all participating children and may certify children as eligible to receive free and reduced-price meals for up to a 4-year period. Provision 3 also requires schools to provide free meals to all participating children but changes the process by which federal cash and commodity assistance received by the school is determined USDA, c.
The reimbursement rate for the free meals is the same as that indicated in Table By regulation, the cost of a meal to a child receiving a free or reduced-price meal may not be increased above the amount published in the Federal Register currently the amount in the rightmost column of Table , but the cost for children paying full price may be set by the school district or SFA.
Experience has shown that increasing the cost for full-price meals decreases the rate of participation by children living in households whose income exceeds the maximum allowed for reduced-price meals. In some cases, a decreased rate of participation may lead to higher per meal costs to the SFA because non-food costs do not decrease to the same degree.
These limitations mean that the school food service planners must be very resourceful in controlling food, labor, and other costs, despite rising prices. USDA agricultural commodities called commodities here for convenience are unprocessed or partially processed foods. It assisted farmers by purchasing their surplus products, and it provided food for school lunches for millions of schoolchildren who were unable to pay for lunch USDA, c. The value of the commodities supplements the per meal cash reimbursements that schools receive.
Local school districts are entitled to a specific dollar value of entitlement commodities each school year on the basis of the product of the total number of school lunches that they serve and a reimbursement rate.
In addition, if USDA has a surplus of particular commodities, states may order whatever amount of these bonus commodities they can use. Accessibility Statement. Non-Discrimination Statement. Information Quality. Privacy Policy. New Farmers. Disaster Resource Center. An official website of the United States government.
0コメント