Two pilot studies conducted by the UC Berkeley Center for Weight and Health in conjunction with several other partner agencies suggest that when nutrition standards are applied to “competitive” foods and beverages, school food service departments can benefit financially. The two studies examined the impact of the nutrition standards as specified in California’s Senate Bill 19. These nutrition standards were developed in response to rising rates of child obesity, and primarily limited the sugar and fat content of snack foods and sweetened beverages that are sold outside the school meal program, in food service a la carte, school stores, snack bars, vending machines, etc.
Schools were concerned about potential loss in revenue if sales decreased after switching to healthier options. Sales of snack foods and beverages did decrease in most cases, but participation in the meal program increased. The gains in meal sales and reimbursements more than compensated for the losses in a la carte sales by the food service department. At 65% of the 20 middle and high schools, food service experienced an increase in total revenues (a la carte combined with meal sales) after implementing the nutrition standards; another 25% experienced very little change in total revenues; and 10% experienced a decrease. Best of all, students were buying fewer snacks and sweetened beverages and eating meals instead.
Other campus-based groups that depended on food and beverage sales did not fare as well. Most experienced declines in revenue after implementing the standards. However, in most cases losses were only a few hundred or a few thousand dollars per year. Two of the biggest volume operations actually experienced increases in sales, primarily because they renovated their facilities, carefully selected their healthy products and engaged students in selecting and marketing the healthy options. These results suggest that healthy alternatives can be profitable.
In order to reduce dependency on a la carte sales, school food service departments made several improvements to their meal program such as updating their menus, enhancing the eating and serving areas, and marketing the program with student input. Some also had to upgrade their kitchen facilities to allow for preparation and storage of fresh foods on site. On average school foods service departments spent about $50,000 per school from grant funds to upgrade their programs. This additional funding may be critical if food service is to effectively draw students to the meal program when a la carte sales decline.
These findings suggest that nutrition standards can be a win-win for students and school food service departments: students improve their eating patterns and school food service may improve or at least may not worsen their bottom line. However, to get these results, investments need to be made in order to enable food service to provide healthy meals that appeal to students. Furthermore, a decline in a la carte and other competitive foods and beverage sales may be a necessary part of this equation. Therefore other campus groups would be well advised to shift to non-food and beverage forms of fundraising. Additionally, care should be taken when considering the promotion of snack foods and beverages that are “compliant” with nutrition standards but would still compete with the school meal program, thereby potentially diluting the positive impacts described here.
For more information, visit www.cnr.berkeley.edu/cwh/activites/LEAF.shtml for a complete copy of the LEAF (Linking Education, Activity and Food) study report and www.cnr.berkeley.edu/cwh/PDFs/Dollars_and_Sense_FINAL_3.07.pdf
for a policy brief on the financial impact analysis.