Lack of nutrition education for students was the third most commonly cited barrier to successfully providing additional servings of fresh fruit. Although it was intended that the program include a nutrition education component, schools were provided with only 1 cent per meal served for all nonfood expenses related to the program, including nutrition education and promotion. Yet, in spite of the limited funding, over half of the schools did report using some nutrition education or promotional materials.Although slightly more than half of nutrition directors had implemented some form of staff training, 40% reported that staff needed more training in the areas of fruit and vegetable handling and management and nutrition education in order to more effectively market fruits and vegetables to students. Nutrition, Family and Consumer Science advisors are poised to provide this kind of education and training.The 10 cents per meal the program provided was substantially less than the amount required to cover a supplementary serving of fruit. Without considering the labor and other costs associated with serving additional fruit,plastic planters wholesale the cost of the fruit alone was 3 cents higher than the 10 cent reimbursement, 4 cents above the 9 cents designated for food cost.
The cost per serving for apples, oranges and bananas is 12 to 15 cents, whereas the other fruits offered in the program range from 14 to 25 cents per serving . The 1 cent intended for all other costs, including labor, education and administrative expenses, was totally inadequate; labor costs for school food service departments usually account for 30% to 50% of expenses, and costs associated with storage and produce loss from perishability add to the expense of handling fresh produce. If the California Fresh Start Program were to offer a greater variety of fruits and higher-quality fruit, as students would prefer, fruit consumption would likely increase, leading to substantial increases in labor costs and costs of facility modification, as well as produce costs. Most nutrition directors reported that the program reimbursement was inadequate to cover the cost of implementing the program. Those that did report nonfood expenses spent an average of $2,784, primarily on small equipment and educational materials. Nutrition directors identified cost as the main barrier to providing a greater variety of fruits. They tended to serve fruit whole to reduce waste, increase shelf life and reduce labor costs associated with chopping fruit. They served apples, bananas and oranges most frequently because they are the most affordable. Student favorites such as strawberries cost much more . To keep costs down, nutrition directors obtain their fruit whenever possible through the commodity food and Department of Defense programs.
According to the nutrition directors, they could serve a greater variety of produce if these programs offered a more consistent supply and greater variety of fruits and vegetables. Despite the perceived inadequacy of the reimbursement, many nutrition directors thought the program was helpful financially and made it easier for them to provide more fruits because enrollment in the breakfast program increased. Higher participation rates in school breakfast might help to improve the bottom line by bringing in more federal reimbursement dollars. Participation increased slightly during the program, but the increase was too low to be statistically significant; it is not clear what would have happened over a longer period of time. During the program, more California grown fruit was sold and distributed because the quantities of fruit and varieties of fruit purchased by schools increased. Using production records from schools participating in the program evaluation and interviews with selected produce distributors, we were able to estimate the proportion of produce the schools purchased that was California grown .If all schools in California were to increase fresh produce offerings at breakfast, annual school purchases of California-grown fruit would increase by an estimated 26 million servings, valued currently at approximately $4 million per year. These estimates are based on an average increase of at least one-third of a serving of fresh fruit per school breakfast meal served, an assumption that 47% of the fresh fruit served would be California grown, and an average cost per serving of 15 cents. Given this scenario, an additional $8.3 million would be spent on fresh produce, of which approximately $3.9 million would be spent on California grown produce and $4.4 million would be spent on fresh produce from other sources.
If students’ favorite fruits, which are primarily California grown, were served more often, our findings suggest students would take even more fruit at breakfast and therefore the increase in the value of school purchases of California grown produce would be even higher. According to school nutrition directors, produce vendors were a program asset, making it possible to increase fresh fruit servings by providing dependable service, high quality and reasonable prices, and providing access to locally grown produce. While nutrition directors were enthusiastic about using more locally grown produce, some felt that they needed a go-between to procure the produce from local growers. Some reported that there were few, if any, local growers, and even if there were multiple local growers, it would be difficult to work directly with them. Directors expressed concern about supply, distribution, dependability, food safety and cost issues when dealing directly with local growers. Produce vendors were seen as necessary intermediaries between the schools and the growers as some directors felt that food service departments are not equipped to deal with many small growers. They preferred to continue dealing with the major suppliers with whom they have ongoing relationships. Increased purchase of California grown produce can be a win-win for schools, students, distributors and farmers. Food distributors indicate that they prefer to purchase fresh fruit from California farmers, when available, as it is more affordable than fruit imported from out of state. Schools benefit from these savings, and farmers benefit from an increased market demand. The ultimate beneficiary is the student, whose increased consumption of fruit will contribute to long-term health. While the California Fresh Start Program was designed to provide more fruits and vegetables to students, its application to the breakfast program led to an overwhelming emphasis on fruit, and it is therefore impossible to draw conclusions about its potential impact on vegetable consumption from our data. However, other studies have indicated that increasing student vegetable consumption at other times in the school day presents greater challenges than are found with fruit . A systematic review of 27 school-based programs designed to increase fruit and vegetable intake found that although the programs moderately improved fruit intake, they had minimal impact on vegetable consumption. The authors called for additional studies to address barriers to changing dietary behavior, particularly in relation to vegetables . As implemented,plastic plant pot the California program was effective in increasing the amount of fruit, particularly the amount of fresh fruit, offered to and taken by California school children each day. Further, the variety of fruits offered, especially those that were fresh, increased substantially. The success of the program demonstrated that schools can have a positive impact on students’ consumption of fruit, which is particularly important since produce consumption at school is lower than at home. Piloting the program also provided lessons for the future implementation and expansion of such a program. Given the well-documented health risks that poor nutrition poses for California’s school children and, at the same time, the likelihood that a school fruit program may decrease children’s intake of unhealthy snacks at school , it is critical to closely examine those lessons. The significant increase in the number of fruit servings students took at breakfast during the program was observed even in the absence of adequate funding to promote the effort or to upgrade facilities and equipment so that the fruit could be served in a way that would make it more attractive to students. Infusing additional resources for training, technical support and facilities upgrades, including, for example, improvements in storage capacity, adequacy and attractiveness of cafeteria seating, and creative presentation such as the use of salad-type fruit bars and point of-service displays, could lead to even more substantial increases in the servings students take.
The program also was successful at shifting student consumption away from fruit juice toward fresh fruit. When schools serve less juice at breakfast, students take more fresh produce. Fruits are a healthier option than juice because of their higher levels of fiber and associated micronutrients. While the program resulted in a doubling of fruits offered to students at breakfast and a doubling of fresh fruit taken, a limitation of the study is the lack of assessment of the amount of fruit consumed. While not assessed in this study, improved variety and appeal in produce offerings, improved facilities, and more nutrition education could all potentially result in higher total consumption as well. Our evaluation of the program suggested that school food service personnel faced a dilemma: If they took steps to improve the variety, presentation and promotion of fruit, their labor and food costs would increase beyond the 10 cents per meal provided by the program. At the same time, more students would likely take more fruit servings, particularly servings of fresh fruit, thereby further straining food service budgets. Our study suggests that additional financial resources will be required to ensure that most or all students take the recommended two servings of fruits and vegetables at breakfast. If the program reimbursement were increased to 15 cents to better cover estimated actual costs and if all eligible schools participated, the total reimbursement figure would be about $26 million per year. School programs would further benefit from additional funding to make food service facilities adequate to store, prepare and serve fruits and vegetables in a safe and appealing manner. Interestingly, the USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service recently estimated that the final meal pattern ruling mandating increases in whole grain and fruits in the School Breakfast Program would necessarily increase the cost of food and labor by 14 cents, an amount similar to our estimate for fruit . As part of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, an extra 6 cents per meal in reimbursement was provided for school nutrition programs that complied with the mandate to increase the kinds and amounts of fruits and vegetables. As the final provisions of this act are implemented in schools across the nation, it will be important to evaluate school programs. California has recognized the need to reverse the trend toward poor youth diets and has acknowledged the responsibility of schools to promote health. Unfortunately, lack of financial resources led the state to discontinue funding for the California Fresh Start Program after the pilot. However, new programs can benefit from lessons learned from the California program. There are currently changes taking place in school nutrition policy at the federal level. Partnerships among influential organizations and sectors, including growers, schools, public health agencies and others have been suggested as a lynchpin of the National Action Plan of the National Fruit and Vegetable Alliance . The health of future generations depends upon our commitment to ensuring that everything possible is done to help today’s youth adopt healthy food habits.Aging can be modulated by genes and lifestyle. For instance, specific gene variants of insulin-like growth factor-1 receptor and fork head box O3A are associated with longer lifespan in centenarians. In terms of lifestyle, one of the most studied interventions that delay aging is caloric restriction , which can increase lifespan in organisms ranging from yeasts to primates. Diet composition also influences the aging process, with low protein diets and high phytochemical intake being associated with a longer lifespan. Notably, a recent analysis suggests that the heritability of human longevity is below 10% , indicating that lifestyle choices play a major role in influencing aging and longevity. Since interventions such as CR and dieting are difficult to implement and maintain over a long period, interest has focused on identifying molecules that produce effects similar to CR . This endeavor is based on the observation that signaling pathways that are modulated by CR, including 5’ adenosine-monophosphate-activated protein kinase , mammalian target of rapamycin and sirtuin-1, can be targeted by small organic compound. Activation of these pathways induces autophagy, mitochondrial bio-genesis and expression of antioxidant and detoxifying enzymes, which together can improve cellular function. In a manner similar to CR, several organic compounds labeled as CR mimetics promote physiological functions and reduce the development of chronic diseases, thus improving both health and longevity.