The name is absent

6. Monitoring school meals

6. Monitoring school meals

6.1 This section examines the monitoring of the school meals service, and in particular,
what part the LEA can or does play there. Monitoring of meal provision in schools was
seen by interest groups interviewed in Strand 1 to be of key importance, particularly
with the proliferation of individual contracts and in-house provision. There was a strong
view that schools should be monitored at a more local level. Although governing bodies
had legal responsibility for the meals service in their schools, there was no statutory
monitoring by either the LEA or the DfES. Several interest groups stressed the need
for formal support from DfES for this, and that school meals should be valued in the
same way as academic education objectives.

6.2 The extent to which LEAs were involved in monitoring was believed to differ between
authorities that had retained a client role post-delegation and those that had not. Indeed,
with full delegation of the meals service, one LEA’s client group had been disbanded.
An officer commented, ‘client monitoring is now done by the real client, which is the school’.
Some LEAs were thought to be continuing to monitor providers in their area, but with
schools now having to buy into that monitoring process, this was less likely to be taken
up. Concerns were raised regarding the consistency of monitoring within an LEA, with
private and ex-DSO operations being monitored equally.

The LEA role in monitoring

6.3 There appeared to be a lack of clarity in the role of the LEA in monitoring school meal
provision. Consequently, the extent to which monitoring was undertaken varied. Whilst
monitoring of any central contract (including those with private contractors) was
standard practice, LEAs held differing views on their role in respect of non-participant
schools. Some saw monitoring of schools outside the contract as part of the LEA
responsibility, whilst others perceived the role of the LEA to be purely advisory. One
LEA pointed out that whilst they could monitor the meals service for a school with an
outside contractor - monitoring on behalf of the client, the school - it was unclear how
this would work when monitoring schools that managed their own in-house provision.
He commented, ‘government guidance is so vague on this — it doesn ^,t give the LEA authority to do
this’.

6.4 At least one LEA officer believed monitoring to be a core function, and held a separate
small budget centrally, specifically for monitoring nutritional standards and health and
safety for all schools in the authority. Take-up of free school meals were monitored
through weekly returns from all schools. The officer pointed out that the LEA has
statutory responsibility for free school meals, health and safety, and food hygiene,
responsibilities that they ‘would never want to abdicate’. Several LEAs reported visiting all
schools to ensure that free school meal provision was adequate. One principal catering
adviser described his monitoring of meals and his aim to ensure that children get a
‘decent’ free school meal with their token.

I go in and check the meal for content and take up, and tally that with the number of pupils
who are entitled. And I do eat the meal with the Head.

6.5 In at least three of the LEAs, the issue of monitoring was expected to figure in
forthcoming Ofsted inspections, and officers interviewed had already begun to

31

<<   32   33   34   35   36   37   38   >>

More intriguing information