6. Monitoring school meals
believed that the SLA available from the LEA would take a more traditional approach
to meal provision.
We went to this system because we felt that SLA offered by [LEA] was still very much in the
big canteen kitchen mode, so we wouldn’t be on the same wavelength.
The service was substantially more expensive than the LEA SLA but offered additional
services and support to the school while it was setting up its in house provision. It
provided what the head teacher described as ‘the safety net’. It offered discounts with
local suppliers and considerable marketing advice to help the school improve the take
up of meals to enable the service to remain viable. It provided menus to conform to
the nutritional standards and made regular monitoring visits to check menus, meals and
kitchen arrangements.
6.17 Four case study schools subscribed to no SLA or private consultancy for monitoring,
relying on their own internal monitoring of meals. A small primary school used the
DfES guidance on nutritional standards and discussed these with their supplier. The
menus were devised on a three week cycle and the head teacher and governor believed
that the meals they offered exceeded the statutory standards. As the head teacher
explained:
We could take the county SLA but we decided to do it ourselves. The governors monitor the
meals and come in specifically at lunchtime to look at what is happening.
Previously it was a service given by the county and we accepted the service. Before we finished
we did have problems with the quality of the meals and we complained on several occasions.
But now the governors keep an eye on the quality.
6.18 The meal was a set two-course lunch with a vegetarian option on the main protein item
only, so devising menus to the correct nutritional standard was straightforward. The free
school meal was the set lunch. As most food was sourced locally, there was sometimes a
deviation from the menu depending on the availability of fresh supplies, but
substitution was always on a ‘like for like’ basis. The supplier, the landlord of the local
pub used the guidelines and the health aspects of the serving of the meal were also
covered. When setting up the service, she had visited the school to conduct a risk
assessment of the serving area and the governors had addressed the risk issues she had
identified. The kitchen in which the meal was prepared and cooked, was regularly
inspected by environmental health officers.
I checked on the local health inspector. All the food is probed when it goes out and it is served
within about 15 minutes anyway. For the first week or two I kept going over to make sure
they were doing things properly but they are very reliable. [Dinner Supervisor] did the course
and we send over so many portions and she uses her discretion in serving it out, the smaller ones
get two potatoes, the bigger ones three, things like that.
6.19 In another case study school, a large secondary with a busy cafeteria, the situation was
more problematic. Whilst it was possible to select a meal that conformed to the
nutritional standard, the choice was very limited, with no fresh fruit or vegetables on the
menu. There was no monitoring of the free school meal take up, with pupils being free
to select any food and therefore able to spend their daily allowance wholly on cake or
canned drinks.
Summary
6.20 There is a lack of uniformity in the monitoring services provided by LEAs, and
specifically in monitoring nutritional standards of meals provided. This in part results
34