Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

The School Food Environment and Obesity Prevention: Progress Over the Last Decade

  • Obesity Prevention (A Must, Section Editor)
  • Published:
Current Obesity Reports Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The school food environment—including when and where children obtain food and the types of options available during the school day—plays an important role in children’s consumption patterns. Thus, childhood obesity prevention efforts often focus on altering the school food environment as a mechanism for improving student dietary intake. This review examines the role school food programs and policies play in improving children’s diet, weight, and health. Overall, research suggests that significant improvements have been made in school nutrition policies and programs. Due to the recent program changes made as a result of the 2010 Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, an emphasis was placed on research conducted over the past decade and especially on the evaluation of foods and beverages served and sold since implementation of this national law. This review also examines remaining gaps in the literature and opportunities for further improvements in school food programs and policies.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

Papers of particular interest, published recently, have been highlighted as: • Of importance

  1. Kids’ Safe and Healthful Foods Project. The State of School Nutrition [Internet]. 2014 Jan 28 [cited 2015 November 10] Available from: http://www.pewtrusts.org/en/about/news-room/opinion/2014/01/28/the-state-of-school-nutrition.

  2. Scientific Report of the 2015 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee. United States Department of Agriculture and Department of Health and Human Services; 2014.

  3. Public Law 111–296, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, Dec. 13, 2010.

  4. School Breakfast Program [Internet]. United States Department of Agriculture; 2013 [updated 2013 July 26; cited 2015 November 18]. Available from: http://www.fns.usda.gov/sbp/program-history.

  5. National School Lunch Act [Internet]. United States Department of Agriculture; 2015 [updated 2015 August 26; cited 2015 November 11]. Available from: http://www.fns.usda.gov/nslp/history_5.

  6. National School Lunch Program: Participation and Lunches Served [Internet]. United States Department of Agriculture; 2015 [updated 2015 November 06; cited 2015 November 15]. Available from: http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/pd/slsummar.pdf.

  7. School Breakfast Program Participation and Meals Served [Internet]. United States Department of Agriculture; 2015 [updated 2015 November 6; cited 2015 November 15]. Available from: http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/pd/sbsummar.pdf.

  8. Egner R, Oza-Frank R, Cunningham SA. The school breakfast program: a view of the present and preparing for the future-a commentary. J Sch Health. 2014;84(7):417–20.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Anzman-Frasca S, Djang HC, Halmo MM, Dolan PR, Economos CD. Estimating impacts of a breakfast in the classroom program on school outcomes. JAMA Pediat. 2015;169(1):71–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Merlo C, Brener N, Kann L, McManus T, Harris D, Mugavero K. School-level practices to increase availability of fruits, vegetables, and whole grains, and reduce sodium in school meals-United States 2000, 2006, and 2014. Morb Mortal Wkly Rep. 2015;64(33):905–8. This report provides nationally representative data from the School Health Policies and Practices Study both pre- and post-HHFKA implementation in elementary, middle, and high schools.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. Crepinsek MK, Gordon AR, McKinney PM, Condon EM, Wilson A. Meals offered and served in US public schools: do they meet nutrient standards? J Am Diet Assoc. 2009;109(2 Suppl):S31–43.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  12. Public Law 111–296, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, Section 203, Dec. 13, 2010.

  13. Long C. Child nutrition reauthorization 2010: water availability during national school lunch program meal service. Alexandria: United States Department of Agriculture; 2011.

    Google Scholar 

  14. de Ruyter JC, Olthof Mr Fau - Seidell JC, Seidell Jc Fau - Katan MB, Katan MB. A trial of sugar-free or sugar-sweetened beverages and body weight in children. (1533–4406 (Electronic)).

  15. Pan A, Malik Vs, Hao T, Willett WC, Mozaffarian D, Hu FB. Changes in water and beverage intake and long-term weight changes: results from three prospective cohort studies. (1476–5497 (Electronic)).

  16. Kenney EL, Long MW, Cradock AL, Gortmaker SL. Prevalence of inadequate hydration among US children and disparities by gender and race/ethnicity: National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey, 2009–2012. (1541–0048 (Electronic)).

  17. Terry-McElrath YM, O’Malley PM, Johnston LD. Foods and beverages offered in US public secondary schools through the national school lunch program from 2011–2013: early evidence of improved nutrition and reduced disparities. Prev Med. 2015;78:52–8. This study provides nationally representative data on the trends in foods and beverages offered in middle and high schools pre- and post-HHFKA.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  18. School Meals: School Meal Certification Data [Internet]. United States Department of Agriculture; 2015 [updated 2015 October 26; cited 2015 November 5]. Available from: http://www.fns.usda.gov/school-meals/school-meal-certification-data.

  19. Patel AI, Hecht K, Hampton KE, Grumbach JM, Braff-Guajardo E, Brindis CD. Tapping into water: key considerations for achieving excellence in school drinking water access. (1541–0048 (Electronic)).

  20. Hood NE, Turner L, Colabianchi N, Chaloupka FJ, Johnston LD. Availability of drinking water in US public school cafeterias. (2212–2672 (Print)).

  21. Turner L, Chaloupka FJ. Perceived reactions of elementary school students to changes in school lunches after implementation of the United States Department of Agriculture’s new meals standards: minimal backlash, but rural and socioeconomic disparities exist. Child Obes. 2014;10(4):349–56.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  22. Terry-McElrath YM, Colabianchi, N, O’Malley PM, Johnston LD. First year of USDA school lunch meal standards: findings from US secondary schools. (Youth, Education, & Society Occasional Paper No. 7); 2014. Ann Arbor, MI: Institute for Social Research, 10 pp. Cohen Impact.

  23. Cohen JF, Richardson S, Parker E, Catalano PJ, Rimm EB. Impact of the new U.S. Department of Agriculture school meal standards on food selection, consumption, and waste. Am J Prev Med. 2014;46(4):388–94.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  24. Schwartz MB, Henderson KE, Read M, Danna N, Ickovics JR. New school meal regulations increase fruit consumption and do not increase total plate waste. Child Obes. 2015;11(3):242–7. This study uses strong methods to measure food consumption and plate waste both before and after policy changes resulting from the HHFKA.

    PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  25. Byker CJ, Farris AR, Marcenelle M, Davis GC, Serrano EL. Food waste in a school nutrition program after implementation of new lunch program guidelines. J Nutr Educ Behav. 2014;46(5):406–11.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  26. Gase LN, McCarthy WJ, Robles B, Kuo T. Student receptivity to new school meal offerings: assessing fruit and vegetable waste among middle school students in the Los Angeles Unified School District. Prev Med. 2014;67 Suppl 1:S28–33.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  27. Cullen KW, Chen TA, Dave JM. Changes in foods selected and consumed after implementation of the new National School Lunch Program meal patterns in southeast Texas. Prevent Med Rep. 2015;2:440–3.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  28. Terry-McElrath YM, O’Malley PM, Johnston LD. Potential impact of national school nutritional environment policies: cross-sectional associations with US secondary student overweight/obesity, 2008–2012. JAMA Pediat. 2015;169(1):78–85.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Schwartz AE, Leardo M, Aneja S, Elbel B. Effect of a school-based water intervention on child body mass index and obesity. 2168–6211 (Electronic)).

  30. Cummings PL, Welch SB, Mason M, Burbage L, Kwon S, Kuo T. Nutrient content of school meals before and after implementation of nutrition recommendations in five school districts across two U.S. counties. Prev Med. 2014;67 Suppl 1:S21–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  31. Taber DR, Chriqui JF, Powell L, Chaloupka FJ. Association between state laws governing school meal nutrition content and student weight status: implications for new USDA school meal standards. JAMA Pediat. 2013;167(6):513–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. Newman, C. The food costs of healthier school lunches. Agr Resource Econ Rev. 2012; 41(1):12–28.

  33. Kids’ Safe and Healthful Foods Project. Serving healthy school meals: staff development and training needs. Washington: The Pew Charitable Trusts; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Kids’ Safe and Healthful Foods Project. Serving healthy school meals: U.S. schools need updated kitchen equipment. Washington: The Pew Charitable Trusts; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  35. USDA Awards Grants to Support Schools Serving Healthier Meals and Snacks [Internet]. United States Department of Agriculture; 2015 [updated 2015 March 06; cited 2015 October 30]. Available from: http://www.usda.gov/wps/portal/usda/usdahome?contentidonly=true&contentid=2015/03/0058.xml.

  36. Patel AI, Bogart LM, Elliott MN, Lamb S, Uyeda KE, Hawes-Dawson J, Klein DJ, et al. Increasing the availability and consumption of drinking water in middle schools: a pilot study. (1545–1151 (Electronic)).

  37. Kenney EL, Gortmaker SL, Carter JE, Howe MC, Reiner JF, Cradock AL. Grab a cup, fill it up! An intervention to promote the convenience of drinking water and increase student water consumption during school lunch. (1541–0048 (Electronic)).

  38. Patel AI, Chandran K, Hampton KE, Hecht K, Grumbach JM, Kimura AT, Braff-Guajardo E, et al. Observations of drinking water access in school food service areas before implementation of federal and state school water policy, California, 2011. (1545–1151 (Electronic)).

  39. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program: Nutrition Standards for All Foods Sold in School as Required by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids act of 2010; Interim Final Rule,” 7 C.F.R. 210, 220.

  40. O’Toole TP, Anderson S, Miller C, Guthrie J. Nutrition services and foods and beverages available at school: results from the School Health Policies and Programs Study 2006. J Sch Health. 2007;77(8):500–21.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  41. Johnston LD, O’Malley PM, Terry-McElrath YM, Colabianchi N. School policies and practices to improve health and prevent obesity: national secondary school results:school years 2006–07 through 2010–11. Volume 3. Bridging the Gap Program, Survey Research Center, Institute for Social Research, Ann Arbor MI; 2013.

  42. Datar A, Nicosia N. Junk Food in Schools and Childhood Obesity. J Pol Anal Manag: J Assoc Pub Pol Anal Manag. 2012;31(2):312–37.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Fox MK, Condon E. School nutrition dietary assessment study IV. Alexandria, VA: United States Department of Agriculture; 2012. Available at: http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/SNDA-IV_Findings_0.pdf. This study summarizes the findings from the most recent School Nutrition Dietary Assessment Study (SNDA), which used a nationally represenatitve sample to measure the nutrient content of meals served and the availability of competitive foods and beverages. This study is the most recent version of the SNDA series and therefore is a useful source for determining progress over time.

  44. Bridging the Gap. Will the USDA’s school food standards make a difference in childhood obesity? Ann Arbor, MI; 2014.

  45. Chriqui JF, Pickel M, Story M. Influence of school competitive food and beverage policies on obesity, consumption, and availability: a systematic review. JAMA Pediat. 2014;168(3):279–86. This study is a recent systematic review of the effects of competitive food and beverage policies on various outcomes. This review was conducted prior to Smart Snacks implementation.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Long MW, Henderson KE, Schwartz MB. Evaluating the impact of a Connecticut program to reduce availability of unhealthy competitive food in schools. J Sch Health. 2010;80(10):478–86.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  47. Woodward-Lopez G, Gosliner W, Samuels SE, Craypo L, Kao J, Crawford PB. Lessons learned from evaluations of California’s statewide school nutrition standards. Am J Public Health. 2010;100(11):2137–45.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  48. Taber DR, Chriqui JF, Chaloupka FJ. Differences in nutrient intake associated with state laws regarding fat, sugar, and caloric content of competitive foods. Arch Pediatr Adolesc Med. 2012;166(5):452–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  49. Alaimo K, Oleksyk SC, Drzal NB, Golzynski DL, Lucarelli JF, Wen Y, et al. Effects of changes in lunch-time competitive foods, nutrition practices, and nutrition policies on low-income middle-school children’s diets. Child Obes. 2013;9(6):509–23.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  50. Coffield JE, Metos JM, Utz RL, Waitzman NJ. A multivariate analysis of federally mandated school wellness policies on adolescent obesity. J Adoles Health Offic Pub Soc Adoles Med. 2011;49(4):363–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Riis J, Grason H, Strobino D, Ahmed S, Minkovitz C. State school policies and youth obesity. Matern Child Health J. 2012;16 Suppl 1:S111–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Sanchez-Vaznaugh EV, Sanchez BN, Baek J, Crawford PB. ‘Competitive’ food and beverage policies: are they influencing childhood overweight trends? Health Affairs (Project Hope). 2010;29(3):436–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Taber DR, Chriqui JF, Perna FM, Powell LM, Chaloupka FJ. Weight status among adolescents in States that govern competitive food nutrition content. Pediatrics. 2012;130(3):437–44.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  54. Fox MK, Gordon A, Nogales R, Wilson A. Availability and consumption of competitive foods in US public schools. J Am Diet Assoc. 2009;109(2 Suppl):S57–66.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Harris JL, Schwartz MB, Shehan C, Hyary M, Appel J, Haraghey K, et al. Snack FACTS 2015: evaluating snack food nutrition and marketing to youth. UConn Rudd Center for Food Policy & Obesity; November 2015. Available at: http://www.uconnruddcenter.org/files/Pdfs/SnackFACTS_2015_Fulldraft02.pdf.

  56. Gortmaker SL, Wang YC, Long MW, Giles CM, Ward ZJ, Barrett JL, et al. Three interventions that reduce childhood obesity are projected to save more than they cost to implement. Health Affairs (Project Hope). 2015;34(11):1932–9. This is a recent study evaluating the cost-effectiveness of various childhood obesity intervnetions and highlights the effectivess of competitive food and beverage policies. This study is unique because there are not many existing cost-effectiveness analyses of childhood obesity interventions.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  57. Dr. Robert C., Atkins V. Center for weight and health. Dollars and sense: the financial impact of selling healthier school foods. Berkeley, CA; 2007. http://cwh.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/primary_pdfs/Dollars_and_Sense_FINAL_3.07.pdf.

  58. Peart T, Kao J, Crawford PB, Samuels SE, Craypo L, Woodward-Lopez G. Does competitive food and beverage legislation hurt meal participation or revenues in high schools? Child Obes. 2012;8(4):339–46.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Nollen NL, Kimminau KS, Nazir N. Demographic and financial characteristics of school districts with low and high a la Carte sales in rural Kansas Public Schools. J Am Diet Assoc. 2011;111(6):879–83.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  60. Joshi A, Ratcliffe MM. Causal pathways linking Farm to School to childhood obesity prevention. Child Obes. 2012;8(4):305–14.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  61. Nicholson L, Turner L, Schneider L, Chriqui J, Chaloupka F. State farm-to-school laws influence the availability of fruits and vegetables in school lunches at US public elementary schools. J Sch Health. 2014;84(5):310–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. Feenstra G, Ohmart J. The evolution of the school food and farm to school movement in the United States: connecting childhood health, farms, and communities. Child Obes. 2012;8(4):280–9.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Geographic Preference Option for the Procurement of Unprocessed Agricultural Products in Child Nutrition Programs; Final Rule,” 7 C.F.R., 210, 215, 220, 225, 226.

  64. Benson M, Russel M, Kane E. USDA Farm to School Grant Program FY 2013-FY 2015 summary of awards. Alexandria: United States Department of Agriculture; 2015.

    Google Scholar 

  65. The Farm to School Census [Internet]. United States Department of Agriculture; 2015 [cited 2015 October 28]. Available from: https://farmtoschoolcensus.fns.usda.gov.

  66. Peterson C. A rotten deal for schools? An assessment of states’ success with the National School Lunch Program’s in-kind benefit. Food Pol. 2011;36:588–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  67. Woodward-Lopez G, Kao J, Kiesel K, Lewis Miller M, Boyle M, Drago-Ferguson S, et al. Is scratch-cooking a cost-effective way to prepare healthy school meals with US Department of Agriculture foods? J Acad Nutr Diet. 2014;114(9):1349–58.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  68. Hecht K, Samuels S, Sharp M, et al. The federal child nutrition commodity program: a report on nutritional quality. Oakland: California Food Policy Advocates; 2008.

    Google Scholar 

  69. United States Department of Agriculture. USDA foods: healthy choices for our schools [Internet]. 2011 [updated 2011 May; cited 2011 Oct 20]. Available from: http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/8_USDAFHCFUS.pdf.

  70. Jamelske E, Bica LA, McCarty DJ, Meinen A. Preliminary findings from an evaluation of the USDA Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program in Wisconsin schools. WMJ Offic Pub State Med Soc Wiscon. 2008;107(5):225–30.

    Google Scholar 

  71. Ohri-Vachaspati P, Turner L, Chaloupka FJ. Fresh fruit and vegetable program participation in elementary schools in the United States and availability of fruits and vegetables in school lunch meals. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2012;112(6):921–6.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  72. Davis EM, Cullen KW, Watson KB, Konarik M, Radcliffe J. A fresh fruit and vegetable program improves high school students’ consumption of fresh produce. J Am Diet Assoc. 2009;109(7):1227–31.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  73. Bartlett S, Olsho L, Klerman J, et al. Evaluation of the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program (FFVP): final evaluation report. Alexandria: United States Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition Service; 2013.

    Google Scholar 

  74. Team Nutrition: Local School Wellness Policy [Internet]. United States Department of Agriculture; 2015 [updated 2015 September 01; cited 2015 October 20]. Available from: http://www.fns.usda.gov/tn/local-school-wellness-policy.

  75. Schwartz MB, Henderson KE, Falbe J, Novak SA, Wharton CM, Long MW, et al. Strength and comprehensiveness of district school wellness policies predict policy implementation at the school level. J Sch Health. 2012;82(6):262–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  76. Belansky ES, Cutforth N, Delong E, Litt J, Gilbert L, Scarbro S, et al. Early effects of the federally mandated local wellness policy on school nutrition environments appear modest in Colorado’s rural, low-income elementary schools. J Am Diet Assoc. 2010;110(11):1712–7.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  77. Nanney MS, MacLehose R, Kubik MY, Davey CS, Coombes B, Nelson TF. Recommended school policies are associated with student sugary drink and fruit and vegetable intake. Prev Med. 2014;62:179–81.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  78. Lucarelli JF, Alaimo K, Belansky ES, Mang E, Miles R, Kelleher DK, et al. Little association between wellness policies and school-reported nutrition practices. Health Promot Pract. 2015;16(2):193–201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  79. Nanney MS, Davey CS, Kubik MY. Rural disparities in the distribution of policies that support healthy eating in US secondary schools. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2013;113(8):1062–8.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  80. Caspi CE, Davey C, Nelson TF, Larson N, Kubik MY, Coombes B, et al. Disparities persist in nutrition policies and practices in Minnesota secondary schools. J Acad Nutr Diet. 2015;115(3):419–25.e3.

  81. U.S. Department of Agriculture, “Local School Wellness Policy Implementation Under the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010; Proposed Rule,” 7 C.F.R. 210, 220; Federal register, vol. 79, No.38 pg.10693.

  82. United States Department of Agriculture. School meals: healthy hunger-free kids act [Internet]. 2014 [updated 2014 Mar 03; cite 2015 Nov 25]. Available from: http://www.fns.usda.gov/school-meals/healthy-hunger-free-kids-act.

  83. Patel AI, Hampton KE. Encouraging consumption of water in school and child care settings: access, challenges, and strategies for improvement. Am J Public Health. 2011;101(8):1370–9.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  84. Smith S, Wleklinski D, Roth SL, Tragoudas U. Does school size affect interest for purchasing local foods in the midwest? Child Obes. 2013;9(2):150–6.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Duke Global Health Institute, Duke University, 310 Trent Drive, Duke Box 90519, Durham, NC, 27708, USA

    Emily Welker, Megan Lott & Mary Story

Authors
  1. Emily Welker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Megan Lott
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Mary Story
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Emily Welker.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

Emily Welker, Megan Lott, and Mary Story declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Human and Animal Rights and Informed Consent

This article does not contain any studies with human or animal subjects performed by any of the authors.

Additional information

This article is part of the Topical Collection on Obesity Prevention

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Welker, E., Lott, M. & Story, M. The School Food Environment and Obesity Prevention: Progress Over the Last Decade. Curr Obes Rep 5, 145–155 (2016). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13679-016-0204-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13679-016-0204-0

Keywords

Search

Navigation