In April 2024, the U.S. Department of Agriculture released new nutrition rules aimed at improving school lunches. The rules build on the work of Michelle Obama, First Lady of the United States, in the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 (HHFKA). The act came under criticism, with attempts to lower nutrition standards under the Trump administration and President Biden relaxing some of its provisions during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The new rule, “Child Nutrition Programs: Dietary Patterns Aligned with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020-2025,” will bring the nutritional value of public school meals served in schools across the nation closer to the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020-2025. However, it is important to note that some proposed provisions, first announced in February 2023, were weakened after USDA received feedback from food companies, school food experts, and more than 136,000 members of the public.
Now working for Wellness in the Schools, a national nonprofit that works with school food providers to ensure public school children have access to nutritious meals and active play, I’ve seen firsthand that nutrition guidelines are more than just bureaucracy and checklists; they can make a huge difference in the quality of school meals and learning outcomes. For these reasons, the new rules should be applauded.
But the rule goes further in some ways to make school meals more nutritious. For example, it doesn’t remove chocolate milk from school cafeterias, nor does it reduce salt in line with the latest dietary guidelines. Moreover, it does little to ensure that school food professionals have the budget, infrastructure, and time to implement these changes, which, as we’ve seen in the past, could jeopardize supplier buy-in and long-term success.
The role of school meals in children’s nutrition
USDA’s National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and School Breakfast Program (SBP) are basic federal nutrition assistance programs that provide low-cost or free meals and snacks to children in public and nonprofit private schools and foster care. School meals are one of the healthiest sources of food for many of the 29 million children who participate in the NSLP, some of whom rely on school meals for more than half of their diet. In 2023, the federal government will spend approximately $21 billion on school lunch and breakfast programs.
“29 million: Number of children enrolled in the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National School Lunch Program”
Since the Obama administration, there have been ongoing efforts to improve the nutritional profile of school lunches to combat rising childhood obesity rates and nutritional deficiencies. This new rule marks the next step in this ongoing effort. In 2010, the HHFKA significantly improved school lunches and other child nutrition programs by increasing whole grains, fruits, and vegetables and reducing saturated fat and sodium to align with the 2010 edition of the USDA and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services Dietary Guidelines. The act also required each local education agency participating in the NSLB and SBP to develop a local school health policy that promotes the health, well-being, and learning ability of its students. In addition, the HHFKA provided more funding for free and low-cost meals, provided additional funding to schools that met updated essential nutrition standards, helped communities establish local farm-to-school networks to create school gardens, and encouraged school districts to use more local ingredients in their cafeterias, resulting in a win for health and local farmers.
When the HHFKA became law in 2010, it received overwhelming support from Congress. A generation raised on Pizza Hut, Lunch Bulls, and microwave meals has seen a huge increase in the average child’s weight since 1980. Today, one in three American children is overweight or obese, and rates of type 2 diabetes and other diet-related illnesses are on the rise. But when it came to defining specific rules and how they would affect specific athletes, the fight against obesity and obesity-related illnesses turned into a battle with former First Lady Michelle Obama and others who have supported and defended the HHFKA.
Some Republicans began to criticize the HHFKA as an intrusion by Mrs. Obama into the overprotective state, arguing that parents know their children’s preferences well and schools should serve what suits them. Food companies argued that the new standards were too strict and would lead to excessive food waste, and they spent millions of dollars lobbying to block or change them. The School Nutrition Association (SNA), a national nonprofit professional organization representing 50,000 members who provide school lunches nationwide, argued that some of the law’s requirements led to higher costs, food waste, and lower participation in school lunches.
The USDA rescinded some of the HHFKA standards in 2018, largely due to the same concerns, but ample research has shown that none of these concerns are substantiated.
Overall, nutrition advocates say the HHFKA is a public health success, with students eating more fruits, vegetables, and whole grains and fewer starchy vegetables. And research backs up these claims: A 2019 USDA study analyzed school lunches for compliance with nutrition regulations and found that they are significantly healthier. After the implementation of the HHFKA, school lunches scored 41 percent on the department’s Healthy Eating Index.
Why change school lunch nutrition guidelines again when the HHFKA was seen as a major improvement? USDA’s new rules go even further.
Key highlights of the rule
One of the most important aspects of the rule is that it places limits on added sugars in school lunches, the first of its kind based on recent research that shows added sugars contribute to poor health conditions like type 2 diabetes, poor behavior at school and lower test scores. Starting in the 2025-26 school year, strict added sugar limits will be imposed on breakfast cereals, yogurt and flavored milks, forcing many manufacturers to make changes to the products they currently sell to schools. By the 2027-28 school year, cafeterias will be required to limit added sugars to less than 10% of weekly calories.
An interesting counterargument to the inclusion of added sugars in the new rule came from the industry group the Sugar Association during deliberations on the rule. The group supported limiting added sugars but called applying the limit to individual products like flavored dairy products “arbitrary” and warned that the new standards could inadvertently lead to increased use of artificial sweeteners. These additives are not addressed in the new rule, but they do have negative health effects in their own right, highlighting a potentially significant oversight by the USDA.
The new rules give schools more flexibility in a number of ways. School meals can offer a wider range of meats and meat alternatives than before, including beans, yoghurt, peas, lentils, eggs and tofu. In addition, schools’ previous grain requirements are now more flexible and can be achieved with a combination of grains and proteins, giving pupils more diverse and nutritious options.
Schools will be given more flexibility to substitute fruits for vegetables at breakfast, allowing them to serve more vegetables, which are generally lower in sugar and calories than fruit and higher in vitamins, minerals, fiber, antioxidants and other nutrients.
Where the rules fall short
Under the new rules, schools have the flexibility to include more vegetables and meat alternatives. But a better solution would have been to require schools to include more vegetables and meat alternatives in a certain number of meals per week. This change could increase vegetable consumption and provide more vegetables and meat alternatives to children in the school environment, potentially improving their health and nutritional status over the course of their lives. Research shows that children need to try a new food at least 10 times before they like it. This is both a question of equity and an opportunity: for many children, school lunches are an opportunity to try new things they can’t afford to try at home.
Despite many public health and nutrition advocates wanting to eliminate flavored milk from school lunches, the USDA will continue to offer flavored nonfat and low-fat milk to students, although, as mentioned above, the new rules will introduce limits on added sugars in flavored milk.
The new rules will require a 15% reduction in sodium intake at lunches and a 10% reduction in sodium intake at breakfast by the 2027-28 school year. While these changes will reduce students’ sodium intake, which has been linked to high blood pressure and heart disease, they are not enough to bring them in line with the latest dietary guidelines. What’s more, because the rules will maintain current sodium limits for the next three years before gradually reducing sodium content thereafter, the full impact of the changes will not be felt until many of today’s children have left school.
Beyond Nutrition
The rule includes many notable changes that go beyond what we think of as “nutrition,” such as making school lunches more culturally inclusive. For example, schools that serve primarily American Indian and Alaska Native children will be able to serve vegetables to fulfill the grain requirement, which is typically fulfilled with wheat, which is not a traditional Native food.
The “Buy American” provision of the new rule aims to increase the resilience of the nation’s local food supply chain by placing graduated limits on the amount of non-domestic foods school food authorities can purchase per grade level. This “geographic preference” for U.S.-produced foods encourages schools to include more unprocessed foods that are grown, raised or caught locally. But it could have unintended consequences. Limiting the amount of food that can be sourced from overseas could make it harder to purchase tropical fruits popular with children, such as bananas, kiwis and pineapples, as well as certain spices that are essential to increasing a culturally inclusive diet.
Towards a healthier future
Recognizing the importance of careful implementation, which was a major talking point when the HHFKA was introduced, USDA has chosen to phase in the new rules. The rules will take effect on July 1, 2024, but program administrators will have time to adjust; changes will not be mandatory until the 2025-26 school year at the earliest. This phased approach will allow schools ample time to seamlessly adapt their menus and operations to the new requirements.
Implementing the new rules will require additional support, training, and funding to help school districts meet the new goals. Through my work, I have observed how parallel, hands-on training is critical to systemic change in public school cafeterias across New York City. I also recognize that further discussion is needed about how USDA can support school districts as they make these changes. USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service recently announced $26 million in new grant funding to help implement the updated nutrition standards. These grant funding is a good start. But this is not enough funding to successfully implement the new rules. Much of the responsibility for implementation will fall on the shoulders of school food providers, and the federal government missed an opportunity to ensure buy-in and an effective transition.
School meals are clearly critical to children’s health. This is especially true for vulnerable children who rely on school meals for a large portion of their nutritional intake. As school meal policy continues to evolve, USDA must take the steps necessary to ensure that transitions are made in a thoughtful and effective manner, keeping in mind that these changes will have the greatest impact on our nation’s children who suffer from food and nutrition insecurity.
Alexina Cather is director of policy and special projects at Wellness in the Schools, a national nonprofit that promotes healthy eating and wellness among children in public schools.
