FEED MINDS, CHANGE LIVES SCHOOL FEEDING

FEED MINDS, CHANGE LIVES

SCHOOL FEEDING:HIGHLIGHTS AND NEW DIRECTIONS

Photo credits

Cover: WFP / Rein SkullerudTable of contents: WFP / Tashi Doma; WFP / Clive ShirleyPage 4: WFP / Richard Lee; WFP / Clive ShirleyPage 5: WFP / Shehzad NooraniPage 12: WFP / Rein SkullerudPage 16: WFP / Shehzad NooraniPage 17: WFP / Wieteke DupainPage 18: WFP / Thomas Yeboah Page 19: WFP / Pablo Medina

WFP Ambassadors

C. Evora: WFP / Joe Wurfel LusafricaP. Tergat: WFP / Francesco BroliM. Yassin: WFP / Luc LamprierePrincess M. C. Sirindhorn: WFP / Rein SkullerudKakà: WFP / Rein SkullerudRonaldinho: WFP / Stephan HerbrugerM. G. Cucinotta: WFP / Vichi De MarchiD. Barrymore: WFP / Guillaume Bonn H. Buffet: WFP / Rein SkullerudJ. K. A. Kufuor: WFP / Rein Skullerud

T he ongoing global economic crisis haspresented a myriad of challenges tocountries throughout the world. Now,

perhaps more than ever before, the world isunder greater pressure to provide safety nets toassist those most in need.

School feeding is helping eliminate hunger formillions of children around the globe and iscontributing to their education, nutrition, healthand future productivity as adults. WFP supportsschool feeding in 68 countries and, in 2008 alone,20 national governments chose to scale-up schoolfeeding programmes as a response to the highfood price crisis, to benefit those most in need.

School feeding is a safety net that has provedeffective in protecting vulnerable school childrenwhile providing nutrition, education, and genderequity benefits, along with a wide range ofsocio-economic gains.

When putting food on the family table today takespriority over a child’s potential for tomorrow, schoolfeeding programmes allow parents the choice ofsending children to school. School feeding alsoallows valuable income to be freed up to investproductively in ways that benefit the entire family.

School feeding is a sensible investment forgovernments and donors with unique reinforcingand multiplication effects between thevarious outcomes.

School feeding is sustainable. To date, WFP hashanded over school feeding programmes to 31national governments, which continue to provideschool feeding today.

With over 45 years of experience in the field, WFPhas taken stock of what is needed to implementsuccessful, high-quality, cost-effective school feedingprogrammes. WFP's Strategic Plan (2008–2011),

along with its expanded toolkit to support safetynets, offer the organization a unique opportunity tostrengthen school feeding as a hunger tool to reachthe most vulnerable school children.

The way forward is now apparent forestablishing nationally owned, nationally led,locally sourced school feeding programmes.Successful programmes plan transition strategiesin advance; are aligned with national policyframeworks; receive stable funding andbudgeting; are designed based on soundevidence; include strong partnerships andintersectoral coordination; procure food locallywhere feasible; and are supported by committedcommunity participation.

Effective international, regional, national and localpartnerships are now being forged, building arounda wider collection of safety-net interventions thataddress hunger, nutrition, health, and education,which together have a multiplier effect that providesgreater lasting impact.

Feed Minds, Change Lives is a compilation of thefollowing most recent analytical work undertaken in2009 on the subject of school feeding:

• Learning from Experience – Good practices from 45years of school feeding, by WFP

• An Investment Case for School Feeding, by WFPand the Boston Consulting Group

• Rethinking School Feeding: Social Safety Nets, ChildDevelopment and the Education Sector, a jointpublication by the World Bank Group and WFP

• Home-Grown School Feeding: A framework to link schoolfeeding with local agricultural production, by WFP

This document extracts from these works, thekey concepts and actions necessary to achievegreater and more rapid gains in eliminating childhunger, while contributing to humandevelopment.

Concerted efforts by governments, donors, UNagencies, the World Bank, regional bodies, NGOs,and research institutions are now called tomobilize the political will, technical support andresources needed to reach the vision of reducinghunger among school children so that hunger isnot an obstacle to their human development.

Concerned readers actively engaged in efforts toeliminate hunger are invited to review thiscollection of latest evidence and experiences onschool feeding, and help set in motion futuredialogue and decisive action to scale-up schoolfeeding programmes globally, as a tool toovercome hunger and build a better future.

FOREWORD

S C H O O L F E E D I N G : H I G H L I G H T S A N D N E W D I R E C T I O N S

F E E D M I N D S , C H A N G E L I V E S

Why School Feeding? 4

School Feeding: What is the Current Status? 5

School Feeding: A Sound Investment 7

WFP Global School Feeding Map 2008 8

Learning from Experience 10

Sustainability 11

Supporting Transition 12

Affordability 13

Links to Local Production 13

Getting the Work Done through Strategic Partnerships 14

Successes and Innovations 16

Facts and Figures 18

WFP School Feeding-Related Publications 20

WFP Ambassadors 21

TABLE OFCONTENTS


4

W FP has successfully implementedschool feeding programmes forover 45 years, and in 2008 alone

this activity reached 22.6 million children in 68countries. Still, an estimated 66 millionchildren continue to attend school hungryeach day and an additional 75 million childrenin this age group do not attend school at all.

WFP’s vision is to reduce hunger amongschool children so that hunger is not anobstacle to their development. This has led tofurther studies of how school feeding shouldbe implemented in developing countries to

reach all hungry school children in need, in away that is targeted, cost-effective andsustainable. The aim is to provide themaximum effect as a safety net to improvelivelihoods and invest in human capitalthrough nutrition, health and education.Interventions are mutually reinforcing, makingthe goal of breaking the intergenerationalcycle of hunger a real possibility.

As a safety net, school feeding offers anincentive for households to send their childrento school and provides them with aneducation, while also reducing short-termhunger and improving their nutrition andhealth through quality fortified food. The valueof the food transfer allows households to usescarce resources to purchase essential items.

School feeding also serves as a platform forother developmental outcomes such as:reinforcing and developing local economiesthrough the purchase of local goods andservices; reducing gender and social inequitiesby encouraging families to send girls andother vulnerable children to school;establishing basic infrastructure to allowgovernments to implement their own schoolfeeding, nutrition and health programmes,while employing environmentally-friendlytechnologies and practices; ensuring safelearning environments to improve socialinteraction and cohesion during mealtimes;and improving nutrition and learning by usingquality foods with added micronutrients andsupplementary programmes that enhancehealth and cognition.

WHY SCHOOLFEEDING?


W FP defines school feeding needas the global number ofundernourished, primary

school-age children enrolled in school.According to this definition, the needsassessment undertaken by WFP in 2009concluded that:

• An estimated 66 million school childrenin 94 developing countries areundernourished

• US$3.2 billion is needed annually to reachthese children with a basic school meal

• Currently, WFP school feeding activitiesreach 22.6 million beneficiaries in 68countries

SCHOOLFEEDING:WHAT IS THECURRENT STATUS?

70

60

50

40

30

20

10

0

66

22.6

Global SchoolFeeding CoreNeed 2009N

o.

of

Sch

oo

l-A

ge

Ch

ildre

n (

mill

ion

s)

WFPCoverage

2008

No. of School-Age Children in Need of School Feeding Globally and WFP's School Feeding Coverage

5


18

16

14

12

10

8

6

4

2

0

No

. o

f Sc

ho

ol-

Ag

e C

hil

dre

n (

mil

lio

ns)

IndiaChinaD

RC

BangladeshPakistanIndonesiaEthiopiaAfghanistanTanzaniaPhilippinesEgyptN

igeriaKenyaIraq

Zimbabw

eSudanYem

enM

ozambique

Uganda

Zambia

6

20 Countries Most In Need of School Feeding


Source: Bundy, D., Burbano, C., Grosh, M., Gelli, A., Jukes, M., and Drake, L. (2009). “Rethinking School Feeding: Social Safety Nets, Child Development and the Education Sector”. Directions in Development, World Bank, Washington DC.

Current School Feeding Programmes Globally

While most governments support at some levelthe provision of food to children in school, notall have the resources and capacities to do so,especially in the current global economicdownturn. As can be seen clearly from the

map below, most of the countries around theworld are implementing school feeding at onelevel or another. In the majority of countries inAfrica, where the need for school feeding isthe greatest, the coverage is least.

In 2009, WFP and The Boston ConsultingGroup conducted a study which assessedthe monetary costs and economic

benefits of providing school feeding. Thestudy, based on data from Laos and Kenya,and global academic and empirical evidence,incorporated all main recognized outcomesof school feeding: nutrition/health,educational benefits, and value transfer(added household income).

Findings from this study revealed that schoolfeeding leads to monetary outcomes in twomain areas: higher lifetime earnings andadded income with resulting higher returns oninvestments at the household level. (Figure 1)

The analysis also highlighted the reinforcingand multiplication effects between thevarious outcomes which make school feedinga unique and robust intervention. (Figure 2)

Results from Kenya and Laos consistentlyshowed both short- and long-term benefits.(Figure 3)

The general conclusions drawn are that:

• Investing in school feeding createssignificant economic value.

• School feeding is a unique and robustsafety-net intervention driven by theinterdependency between variousoutcomes, and combines short-,mid- and long-term benefits fromnutrition, education and value transfer.

SCHOOLFEEDING: A SOUNDINVESTMENT

Figure 2: Multiplication Effects Make School Feedinga Unique and Robust Intervention


Figure 3: School Feeding with Both Short- andLong-Term Benefits

7

Input

$ investedin schoolfeeding

# ofchildrenreceivingschoolfeeding

Δ Household income

Δ Enrolment

Δ Attendance

Δ Dropout

Δ Cognition

Δ Intestinalparasites

Δ Micronutrientdeficiency

Δ Household valuetransferplus returns from higherinvestments

Δ Productivity

x

Δ Productive life

years

=

Δ Lifetime earnings

Output Outcome

Wider Socio-Economic Benefits

Returns from investment in primary school feeding programme in Kenya

Δ = Change In

Value Creation

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

Figure 1: School Feeding Investment Case Framework

Impacts mutually reinforcing to drive value creation over the long term

WFP GLOBAL SCHOOL FEEDING MAP 2008

The boundaries and names shown andthe designations used on this map donot imply official endorsement oracceptance by the United Nations.

Data source: WFP OperationalReporting and Analysis Branch (OMXR)

Map produced by WFP Food SecurityAnalysis Service (OMXF), June 2009.

Afghanistan

Algeria

Angola

Armenia

Bangladesh

Benin

Bhutan

Bolivia

Burkina Faso

Burundi

Cambodia

Cameroon

Cape Verde

Central AfricanRepublic

Chad

Colombia

Congo

Côte d’Ivoire

Cuba

DemocraticPeople’s Republicof Korea

DemocraticRepublic of theCongo

Djibouti

Egypt

El Salvador

Ethiopia

Gambia

68 COUNTRIES WHERE WFP SUPPORTS SCHOOL FEEDING

Georgia

Ghana

Guatemala

Guinea

Guinea-Bissau

Haiti

Honduras

India

Indonesia

Iran

Kenya

Lao People’sDemocraticRepublic

Lesotho

Liberia

Madagascar

Malawi

Mali

Mauritania

Mozambique

Myanmar

Nepal

Nicaragua

Niger

OccupiedPalestinianTerritories

Pakistan

Philippines

Russia

Rwanda

Sao Tome andPrincipe

Senegal

Sierra Leone

Somalia

Sri-Lanka

Sudan

Swaziland

Tajikistan

Timor-Leste

Uganda

UnitedRepublic ofTanzania

Yemen

Zambia

Zimbabwe

In El Salvador and Honduras, WFP provided capacity building, technical assistance and implementation support under trust fund mechanisms.In total, 1,980,000 school children were supported by Government Trust Funds in 2008.

10


A study undertaken by WFP in early2009, Learning from Experience, hasharvested existing knowledge on

school feeding based on a wealth ofexperience and information collected on thesubject. The study drew from over 45 years ofWFP’s work in the field, 134 evaluations, casestudies, an ongoing consultation process, aswell as lessons learned from government andNGO school feeding programmes.

The main conclusion from this exercise isthat high quality sustainable school feedingprogrammes have specific characteristics incommon:

Inclusion in national policy andprogramming frameworks and processes.Advocacy, sound policy advice togovernments, and evidence-based discussionswith all national and internationalstakeholders play a critical role in the qualityand sustainability of school feedingprogrammes. For instance, in India theprogramme is mandated by a Supreme CourtRuling. In Brazil it is mentioned in the NationalConstitution, and in Honduras a nationalcongressional bill on school feeding wasrecently passed. The 2008 National Nutritionand Food Security Policy from Kenya calls forenhancing and expanding school feeding.

Multi-year, predictable funding flowsenable proper planning of structured,sustainable programmes. Many donors,including Brazil, Canada, Italy and the USprovide multi-year funding which allows for

longer-term planning. Such funding can becomplemented with explicit handover strategiesearly on, to ensure gradual national ownershipof the programme. When handover to thegovernment is prepared for well in advance,local funding solutions can be established. In ElSalvador, the government and WFP plannedthe transition process over a period of tenyears, during which the government financedschool feeding on an incremental basis.Proceeds from the privatization of the nationaltelecommunication company are allocated tosocial programmes, such as school feeding.Ghana recently negotiated an agreement witha mobile phone company, which charges a setamount for every SMS or call made in thecountry for school feeding.

Robust analyses and informed advice ontargeting, costing, implementationmodalities, choice of rations and localprocurement solutions enablegovernments to choose the best optionsfor preparing, budgeting andimplementing national school feedingprogrammes. Sound advice and support todecision-makers in national governmentshelp them to identify concrete needs andunderstand the financial implications of sucha programme. For example, WFP Malawiand the World Bank recently conducted acost-estimation exercise, assessing fivepotential food baskets to help guide thegovernment in its budgeting process.Distribution modalities and food basketsshould be tailored according to nutritionalobjectives, fortification requirements andbased on whether the food can be locallyproduced. Local procurement and local foodprocessing are essential to the programme’ssustainability, while also benefiting localbusinesses, processing companies, smallfarmer cooperatives and women’s groups.

Adequate and relevant nationalinstitutional structures with a clearmandate are a driver for effectiveinstitutional coordination andimplementation. In Côte d’Ivoire, theDirection Nationale des Cantines Scolairesimplements a large national school feedingprogramme for 700,000 children, while in

LEARNINGFROMEXPERIENCE

11


Brazil, the National Agency for EducationDevelopment transfers federal school feeding-related funds directly to states, federal districtsand municipalities. Synergies between themany sectors and actors that have a stake inschool feeding should be strengthenedthrough stakeholder workshops, routineconsultations and effective co-ordination.School feeding efforts should be harmonizedunder a common framework of governmentownership and commitment.

Delivering a comprehensive, integratedpackage under the leadership of thegovernment, in partnership with UNagencies and NGOs, is also essential andensures that the multiple benefits ofschool feeding are maximized and canlead to wider socio-economic benefits.In Afghanistan, Ethiopia, Laos and Malawi,for example, school feeding is one of manyinterventions that use schools as the deliveryplatform; others range from deworming,water and sanitation, and infrastructure, tohealth, nutrition, hygiene and HIV awareness.

Participation and ownership by parents,teachers and the local community allowschool feeding programmes to interactwith other social programmes, turningschools into local development centres.In Ethiopia, the Ministry of Education andWFP initiated Children In Local Development(CHILD) in 2003, a community-led planning toolthat is operational in 184 schools and involves

the entire community in improving schoolpremises and the quality of basic education.

This comprehensive analysis led to the new“gold standards”, comprising eight qualitybenchmarks for school feeding:

These standards are relevant for governmentsand NGO partners, as well as for WFP, indesigning and implementing high-quality,sustainable and relevant school feedingprogrammes. WFP country offices shouldelaborate on strategies to meet the standardsand provide regular progress reports during thelife of the project. Good practices should beincorporated in all stages of project appraisal,design and implementation.

S chool feeding is sustainable when keydrivers are in place. Over the past 45years, WFP has handed over school

feeding programmes to 31 countries whereit has worked; these countries still haveschool feeding programmes offered atsome level. The most recent countrieswhere WFP phased out school feedingwere Peru and Azerbaijan during2007–2008.

SUSTAINABILITY

8 Standards for Quality and Sustainable School Feeding Programmes

• Standard 1: Sustainability

• Standard 2: Sound alignment with the national policy framework

• Standard 3: Stable funding and budgeting

• Standard 4: Needs-based, cost-effective quality programme design

• Standard 5: Strong institutional arrangements for implementation, monitoring and accountability

• Standard 6: Strategy for local production and sourcing

• Standard 7: Strong partnerships and inter-sector coordination

• Standard 8: Strong community participation and ownership

The transition to sustainable, nationallyowned programmes requires thatschool feeding be mainstreamed in

national policies, strategies, programmes,financing mechanisms and administrativestructures.

The following illustrates how school feedingprogrammes change and transition overtime. As government capacity andownership develops and progresses fromstage 1 through stage 5, governmentsassume greater responsibility for schoolfeeding programmes. The right support atthe right time in terms of funding,

implementation, technical support andcapacity development is critical throughoutthe transition process. The degree and natureof external support will need to be tailoredto each context, decreasing or intensifying asnecessary as countries move through thedifferent stages toward governmentsustained programmes.

SUPPORTINGTRANSITION

Strong

Strong

StrongStrongIncreasedLimited

Policyframeworkfor schoolfeeding

Governmentfinancialcapacity

Governmentinstitutionalcapacity

StrongIncreasedModerateLimited

Limited Weak Moderate Increased Strong

Programmesrely onnationalfunding andimplementation

Programmes rely mostly on external funding and implementation

STAGE 1 STAGE 2 STAGE 3 STAGE 4 STAGE 5

Government/Communityresourcescapacity andresponsibility

External Support Implementation

CapacityDevelopment

Stages of Transition


The costs of school feeding and whethercountries can afford the programmehave always been prominent concerns.

Studies show that school feeding becomesmore affordable as countries develop. In

countries with a low GDP per capita, a schoolfeeding programme typically costs half or moreof their education budget. The programmesbecome relatively less expensive as countriesdevelop and may be as low as 10 percent ofthe education budget in richer countries.

Given a finite budget, targeting is essential toensure that programmes provide the mostbenefit to the intended beneficiaries.

During programme design, it is critical tocarefully assess costs, benefits and tradeoffs andplan realistically to ensure costs are containedand the programmes expand gradually.

Donors and development partners have asignificant role to play in supporting thepoorest countries with both funding andtechnical support to ensure costs arecontained, are affordable and sustainable.

AFFORDABILITY

A framework for linking school feedingand local production conducted byWFP in 2008, funded by the Bill and

Melinda Gates Foundation, explored thefeasibility of linking school feedingprogrammes with local agricultural productionin developing countries. The idea behindlinking local production to school feeding isthat by ensuring a regular demand on the localmarket, and by meeting this demand throughlocal purchase of food, school feeding also hasthe potential to support local agricultural

production and the local economy. Theframework reveals the immense opportunitiesand difficult challenges of increasing access forsmall-scale farmers. Support is critical and isrequired in the areas of strategic procurement,agricultural development and institutionaldevelopment. There is also a need to moveforward incrementally through careful planningand piloting, with an initial small proportion offood purchased from small-scale farmers, toensure the quality and timeliness of food forschool children are not jeopardized.

Source: WFP (2009). Home-Grown School Feeding:A Framework to Link School Feeding with LocalAgricultural Production. World Food Programme, Rome.

LINKS TOLOCALPRODUCTION


In line with WFP’s strategic direction to better use its purchasingpower to support the sustainable development of food security,WFP has launched a set of pilot activities, primarily in Africa, tofurther explore programming and procurement modalities. Thiseffort is known as “Purchase for Progress”, or P4P.

With this programme, WFP combines its food assistanceprogrammes with innovations in local and regional procurementand market development. The experience and learning from P4Pwill be instrumental to understanding and maximizing impacts offuture procurement for all programmes, including school feedingprogrammes.

SCHOOL FEEDING BECOMES MORE AFFORDABLE AS COUNTRIES DEVELOP

WFP’s “P4P” Initiative: Maximizing the Benefits of Local Procurement

14


B uilding strong partnerships withgovernments, United Nationsagencies, non-governmental

organizations (NGOs), the private sector andcommunities are crucial to the work of WFPand essential to the success of schoolfeeding programmes.

GOVERNMENTS

• WFP continues to collaborate withgovernments in school feeding in 68countries.

• Brazil has one of the largest schoolfeeding programmes in the world andhas been sharing its knowledge andexpertise through South-Southcooperation and works with WFP tosupport school feeding programmes in anumber of countries.

• In El Salvador and Honduras, WFPprovided capacity building, technicalassistance and implementation supportcovered through Government Trust Fundmechanisms.

• The main five main direct contributors toWFP school feeding activities are theUnited States, Canada, Italy, Iceland andBrazil.

REGIONAL PARTNERS

The New Partnership for Africa'sDevelopment (NEPAD) is an economicdevelopment programme of the AfricanUnion. In 2003, African governments, intheir aim to restore agricultural growth, food

security, adequate nutritional levels and ruraldevelopment in Africa, endorsed the Home-Grown School Feeding (HGSF) programmeof the Comprehensive Africa DevelopmentProgramme (CAADP). WFP and NEPADsigned a Memorandum of Understanding toenhance cooperation on HGSF. Twelve pilotcountries (Angola, Democratic Republic ofCongo, Ethiopia, Ghana, Kenya, Malawi,Mali, Mozambique, Nigeria, Senegal,Uganda and Zambia) were identified toimplement the programme.

UN AGENCIES

• UNICEF — WFP and UNICEF work together toprovide an integrated package of cost-effectiveinterventions to improve the nutritional status andhealth of school children. This is known as the“Essential Package”1, based on the “FocusingResources on Effective School Health (FRESH)”framework, and is provided in 40 countries whereUNICEF and WFP work.

• World Bank — In 2009, WFP and the World Bankproduced a joint publication entitled “RethinkingSchool Feeding: Social Safety Nets, ChildDevelopment and the Education Sector”. The book isa comprehensive review of the evidence and optionsin the design and implementation of school feeding,in particular on nutrition and cost containment. Interms of the global response to the 2008 high foodprice crisis, school feeding programmes were scaledup in 20 countries. The World Bank has fundedschool feeding directly in Central African Republic,Guinea-Bissau and Liberia: a promising first steptowards future collaboration with WFP in schoolfeeding.

• FAO — FAO leads the Education for Rural PeoplePartnership, is a vital actor in the school gardenactivities of the Essential Package and hosts a websiteon school gardens.

• World Health Organization — WHO is akey partner in tackling the problem of high wormprevalence in school-age children, providing surveyson the prevalence of worms.

• UNESCO — UNESCO is the lead agency for theEducation For All (EFA) global movement which aimsto meet the learning needs of all children, youth andadults by 2015. UNDP, UNFPA, UNICEF and theWorld Bank are the major international stakeholdersin the EFA movement. WFP has also been activelyengaged with the Fast Track Initiative (FTI), acompact between donors to ensure countries withsound education policies and agreed education plansreceive adequate, stable donor funding. Between2002 and 2008, FTI provided funding through thegovernments of Benin, Cambodia, Madagascar, Maliand Mauritania, all of which supported schoolfeeding and included this programme as part of theireducation strategy.

GETTING THEWORK DONETHROUGHSTRATEGICPARTNERSHIPS

1. The 12 Interventions of the Essential Package: 1. Basic education; 2. School feeding; 3. Promotion of girls’ education; 4. Potable water and sanitary latrines;5. Health, nutrition and hygiene education; 6. Systematic deworming; 7. Micronutrient supplementation; 8. HIV and AIDS education; 9. Psychosocial support;10. Malaria prevention; 11. School gardens; and 12. Improved stoves. (WFP/UNICEF).


• Standing Committee on Nutrition(SCN) and Working Group on Nutritionof School-Age Children — WFP chairs theWorking Group of SCN Nutrition of School-AgeChildren to share information on latest evidence,programmes and innovations.

NGOs

WFP’s major international NGO partners inschool feeding include World VisionInternational, Catholic Relief Services,Norwegian Refugee Council, CARE, PlanInternational and Joint Aid Management, allof which provide a mix of implementationsupport and complementary activities.A number of local NGOs also provideimportant support in the implementation ofWFP school feeding activities.

PRIVATE SECTOR

• The Boston Consulting Group — TheBoston Consulting Group (BCG) has been providingpro bono work to WFP and in 2009 cooperated withWFP to develop the investment case for schoolfeeding, which confirmed that school feeding createsimmediate benefits as well as significant economicvalue in the long term.

• TNT — In 2008 TNT donated US$3.4 million toWFP's school feeding programmes in five countries.These funds were used for micro-projects thatbenefited recipients of WFP school feedingprogrammes in Cambodia, Gambia, Malawi,Nicaragua and Tanzania.

• Unilever — Unilever is a long-term WFP partnerand has provided funding and supported advocacycampaigns to improve nutrition, hygiene and healthbehaviours of school children. WFP has become achannel for Unilever staff to engage in corporatesocial responsibility by working on secondment toWFP, and fundraising.

• Yum! Brands — Collaboration included anexpanded global awareness and fundraisingcampaign by Yum! Brands called World HungerRelief, which helped to fill gaps in 12 school feedingprogrammes and has doubled online fundraisingsince 2007.

• DSM — DSM has been working with WFP to fightmicronutrient deficiencies by piloting a micronutrientpowder for on-site fortification in Cambodia andTanzania and directly supplies the product for WFPschool feeding in Afghanistan, based on an earliersuccessful pilot.

• Clinton Global Initiative (CGI), Dewormthe World, Feed the Children — In 2008,CGI established the Deworm the World and Feed theChildren programme to treat millions of school

children with deworming tablets. This effort will helptremendously to improve nutrient uptake and thenutritional status of school children in those areasaffected by a high prevalence of worms.

OTHER PARTNERS

• Global Child Nutrition Foundation —Established in 2006 as the international arm of theUS School Nutrition Association (SNA), the GlobalChild Nutrition Foundation is an important WFPpartner in providing technical assistance for thedevelopment of national school feeding programmesthat respond to nutritional needs of children, localcultures and community values.

• Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation —In 2008, the Gates Foundation provided WFP a grantto develop a framework for linking school feeding withlocal agricultural production. The Foundation alsosponsored USDA/WFP missions to four countries(Ghana, Kenya, Mali and Rwanda) to assess thepotential links between school feeding and smallholderfarmers.

• Partnership for Child Development(PCD) — A global consortium of civil societyorganizations, academic institutions and technicalexperts based within the Department of InfectiousDisease Epidemiology at Imperial College, London,PCD supports high-level networks to linkgovernments and international organizations insupporting school health and nutrition interventions,including school feeding.

• International Food Policy ResearchInstitute — This organization seeks sustainablesolutions for ending hunger and poverty and is animportant think tank and research body on questionsof school feeding.

From 1965 until 1981, WFP worked with the government of Brazilin food assistance activities in vulnerable and highly food-insecureareas of northern Brazil. School feeding was one of theinterventions. In 1985 WFP handed over its activities andoperation to the government, which now feeds nearly 47 millionchildren every year.

In 2006, WFP established an innovative partnership with theNational Education Development Fund (FNDE), in charge offinancing the school feeding programme in Brazil. Thearrangement began with high-level meetings and missions toCape Verde, Angola and Mozambique to establish the needs andchallenges of these countries.

In January 2008, the partnership expanded with FNDE channellingUS$1 million through a WFP trust fund to help develop localcapacities in the design and implementation of quality schoolfeeding programmes. In 2009, FNDE donated US$1.2 million tocontinue its support to school feeding. Currently nine countriesbenefit from the partnership: Bolivia, Colombia, El Salvador,Guatemala, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Nicaragua, Sao Tome andPrincipe, and Timor-Leste.

The Story of Brazil and WFP

15

16


Safety Nets in the Face of High Food PricesAs a response to the high food price crisis,in 2008 WFP scaled up its school feedingprojects by approximately five millionchildren in 17 countries: Bangladesh, Benin,Burundi, Central African Republic, Ghana,Guinea, Guinea-Bissau, Haiti, Kenya, Liberia,Mozambique, Nicaragua, OccupiedPalestinian Territories, Pakistan, Senegal,Sierra Leone and Tajikistan, with the largestincreases in, Bangladesh, Haiti, Pakistan,Senegal and Tajikistan.

Fuel-Efficient Stoves and Carbon CreditsIn an attempt to reduce the quantity ofwood burned as fuel each year in schools,WFP is helping to ensure that fuel-efficientstoves are in place for the cooking ofschool meals. Currently 16 countries whereWFP works are using fuel-efficient stoves.For instance, in the Amhara region inEthiopia, WFP and the German TechnicalCooperation (GTZ) partnership havesuccessfully provided ten fuel-efficientstoves and training, and will expand toprovide fuel-efficient stoves to anotherthirty schools in the Oromya region. Inaddition, an innovative carbon credit pilotproject involving four countries in Africa(Ethiopia, Kenya, Rwanda and Tanzania) isunderway that will assess ways by whichrural communities can reduce carbonemissions and earn credits, for example byconserving and planting new trees andusing fuel-efficient stoves.

Micronutrient Fortified PowderWFP with private sector partner DSMconducted a pilot study in 2005 to test theacceptability of using a powdered

SUCCESSES ANDINNOVATIONS

micronutrient supplement to addressmicronutrient deficiencies in children. Thestudy was conducted in Cambodia andTanzania and 5,000 school childrenparticipated from ten schools in eachcountry. The communities were sensitizedwell, an important measure as part of thepilot. The product was well received by thestudents and communities in both countries,and has been recommended for scale up.

Combating Child Labour In Egypt, four government ministries, UNagencies and civil society have teamed up ina groundbreaking partnership to helpeliminate exploitive child labour in thecountry through rehabilitation andeducation. The four-year project is thelargest in Egypt, targeting 10,000 childrenwithdrawn from the labour market or at riskof entering it.

The partnership is a model demonstration ofeffective inter-ministerial collaboration toprotect and ensure the rights of the child:The Ministry of Education offers educationprogrammes tailored to each child's age andneeds to attract the children to school andhelp ensure they complete their education.Daily snacks are provided at school andchildren are given take-home rations fortheir families, and other incentives such aspayment of school fees, uniforms and booksare provided. The Ministry of Social Solidarityoffers training together with the Ministry ofManpower and Migration and facilitatesincome-generating activities for families. TheMinistry of Manpower and Migrationenforces policies and legislation, andmonitors child labour activities. The Ministryof State for Family and Populationcooperates with all stakeholders to advocatefor quality education, advocate against childlabour exploitation and support childprotection mechanisms. WFP, ILO andUNICEF provide the technical and logisticalsupport necessary and work with NGOs toensure timely project implementation.

The US$5 million project is funded by USDepartment of Labour and administered byWFP as lead agency.

17


Ms Zinatbi, a 42-year old widow, has struggled as the solebreadwinner for her three girls and son. Because of high food,fertilizer, fuel and seed prices, her limited income could not coverthe wheat cultivation costs, making access to food a daily trial forthis family.

Even though resources were stretched, Zinatbi’s two daughterscontinued to attend primary school in the Rasht Valley where WFPprovides take-home rations through its food-for-educationprogramme. Following the high food price crisis and a harshwinter season the year before in mountainous areas of Tajikistan,WFP increased the food ration for girls. The quantity of foodcovered the needs of this family for the two challenging monthsprior to winter.

Zinatbi claimed that, “Before the food was distributed I had todecide between purchasing food and heating fuel. In prior years,heating fuel, food and clothing were cheaper. But WFP solved myproblem. With the extra food, our family could face the coldwinter and afford fuel and seeds to plant. I am very happy I didn’ttake my girls out of school. The food provided by WFP is veryimportant, especially when food prices are very high and ourfamily income is low.”

Take-Home Rations Ease the Struggle Caused by High Prices

FACTS ANDFIGURES

18

WFP KEY SCHOOL FEEDING DATA

• In 2008, WFP invested almost half abillion US dollars in food-for-educationprogrammes.

• WFP provided school meals and/ortake-home rations to over 22.6 millionchildren in 68 countries in 2008.

• Over the past 45 years, WFP has handedover school feeding programmes to 31countries where it has worked; thesecountries still have school feedingprogrammes offered at some level.

• Gender ratio was 1.13 in 2008(113 girls enrolled for each 100 boys inWFP-assisted schools).

• WFP-supported deworming activitiesreached 12 million children in 2008.

• Of the 66 million children in primaryschool, approximately 80 percent of theneed for school feeding is in 20 keypriority countries where WFP works.


No. of Children and Countries Supported by WFP School Feeding Programmes (1999–2008)

Year

1999

2000

2001

2002

2003

2004

2005

2006

2007

2008

No. of Children Receiving School Feeding

11.9 million

12.3 million

15.0 million

15.6 million

15.2 million

16.6 million

21.7 million

19.4 million

19.3 million

22.6 million

No. of Countries Assisted

52

54

57

64

69

72

74

71

70

68

GLOBAL AND CHILD HUNGER,AND MALNUTRITION

Global Hunger

• Hunger kills more people every year thanAIDS, malaria and tuberculosiscombined.

• Approximately 1 billion people do nothave enough to eat – more than thepopulations of the USA, Canada and theEuropean Union.

• One in seven people (adults and children)go to bed hungry each night.

• 25,000 people (adults and children) dieevery day from hunger and related causes.

• The number of undernourished peoplein the world increased by 75 million in2007 and 40 million in 2008, andcurrent projections indicate an increaseto 100 million, largely due to higherfood prices.

• Asia and the Pacific are home to thelargest number of hungry people.

Child Hunger

• Every six seconds a child dies because ofhunger and related causes (or 14,000children a day).

• For 25 cents a day or just US$50 a year, ahungry child can be fed a healthy mealeach day at school.

• Undernutrition affects an estimated 300million children under the age of 15.

• Almost 11 million children under 5 die indeveloping countries each year.Malnutrition and hunger-related diseasescause 60 percent of the deaths.

• One out of four children – roughly 146million – in developing countries areunderweight.

• Currently an estimated 66 million childrenenrolled in primary school areundernourished; this number will increaseto 82 million by 2015.

Malnutrition

• Lack of vitamin A weakens the immunesystem of 40 percent of children under 5in poor countries, and can causeblindness.

• Iodine deficiency is the main cause of braindamage in the early years of a child's life.

• An estimated 684,000 child deathsworldwide could be prevented byincreasing access to vitamin A and zinc.

• Iron deficiency is the most common formof malnutrition, affecting 180 millionchildren under 4.

• Iron deficiency is impairing the mentaldevelopment of 40–60 percent ofchildren in developing countries.

Source:http://www.wfp.org/ hunger/statsWFP Annual Performance Report 2008; FAO; UNICEF.


19

Learning From Experience. This report is a harvest of theexperiences and good practices thathave led to the establishment of sixquality benchmarks for schoolfeeding.

Rethinking School Feeding:Social Safety Nets, ChildDevelopment, and theEducator Sector.This publication, written jointly bythe World Bank Group and theWorld Food Programme, examinesthe evidence base for schoolfeeding programmes to betterunderstand how to develop andimplement effective schoolfeeding programmes as aproductive safety net and as afiscally sustainable investment inhuman capital.

Home-Grown School Feeding:A Framework for Action.Home-grown school feeding (HGSF)is a school feeding programme thatprovides food produced andpurchased within a country to theextent possible. WFP hascollaborated with the Bill andMelinda Gates Foundation, theNew Partnership for Africa’sDevelopment and other partners todevelop an approach to HGSF. Thisdocument is a culmination of theseefforts, focusing on linking schoolfeeding with local small-scalefarmer production by creating anongoing market for smalllandholders.

Food for Education Works.This report is a consolidation ofdifferent analyses of the monitoringand evaluation data collected byWFP between 2002 and 2006 tostrengthen the knowledge-base ofits food-for-education (FFE)programmes. The work gatherssome of the thoughts behind theprogramme theory of WFP FFE.

School Feeding Worksfor Girls’ Education. This work explains the reasons whygirls’ education is so important forindividual families and beyond.There are several case studiesproving the benefits of take-homeration programmes.

School Feeding Works, WFPSchool Feeding Surveys2001–2003 and 2003–2004. These publications analyse the datacollected through the StandardizedSchool Feeding surveys.

World Hunger Series 2006:Hunger and Learning.Every child deserves to eat and go toschool. By examining the relationshipbetween hunger and learning at eachstage of life and highlighting relevantinterventions, this edition of theWorld Hunger Series demonstratesthat this aim can be achieved. And itshows that the benefits will be felt byindividuals, communities, nations andeconomies for generations to come.

The Essential Package. In collaboration with UNICEF, WFP hasput together a booklet outlining the12 elements of an essential learningpackage: basic education, food foreducation, promotions of girls’education, potable water and sanitarylatrines, health, nutrition and hygieneeducation, systematic deworming,micronutrient supplementation, HIVand AIDS education, psychosocialsupport, malaria prevention, schoolgardens, and improved stoves.

Supporting Girls’ Education.This study highlights the impact ofWFP Food-for-Education programmeson school enrolment, particularly ofgirls.

WFP SCHOOLFEEDING-RELATEDPUBLICATIONS

20


WFPAMBASSADORS

CESARIA EVORASinger, Cape Verde.Appointed in December2003.

PAUL TERGATMarathon runner, Kenya. Appointed in January 2004.

MAHMOUND YASSINActor, Egypt. Appointed in September2004.

HRH PRINCESS MAHACHAKRI SIRINDHORNThailand. Appointed in October 2004.

KAKÀSoccer player, Brazil.Appointed in November2004.

RONALDINHOSoccer player, Brazil.Appointed in August 2005.

MARIA GRAZIACUCINOTTAActress and producer, Italy. Appointed in May 2006.

DREW BARRYMOREActress and producer, USA. Appointed in May 2007.

HOWARD BUFFETTPhilanthropist andenvironmentalist, USA.Appointed in October 2007.

JOHN KOFI AGYEKUMKUFUORFormer President of Ghana,Ghana. Designated in February 2009.

The following individuals

are currently serving as

WFP ambassadors to

heighten awareness on

issues of hunger and to

help fundraising efforts.

Porridge, rice or beans — it takes just 25 cents to fill one of the red cups that WFP uses togive hungry kids regular school meals. US$50 feeds a child for an entire school year.

YEAR2009

For more detailed information visit our website:

wfp.org/school-meals

or contact:

WFP School Feeding Policy, Planning and Strategy Division

Via Cesare Giulio Viola, 68/7000148 Rome, Italy

Tel.: +39 0665131

Fax: +39 066513-2854

E-mail: [email protected]

FEED MINDS, CHANGE LIVES SCHOOL FEEDING

Documents

Transcript of FEED MINDS, CHANGE LIVES SCHOOL FEEDING