free school meals case studies report -...

Free school meals case studies report

InformationInformation document no: 100/2013 Date of issue: March 2013

Audience Governing bodies and headteachers of maintained schools in Wales, local authorities and school catering contractors.

Overview This case studies report seeks to understand the range of factors which may impact on the uptake of free school meals (FSM). Work undertaken with eight secondary schools allowed the underlying issues to be identified and understood.

Action None – for information only.required

Further Enquiries about this document should be directed to:information Pupil Wellbeing Branch Support for Learners Division Department for Education and Skills Welsh Government Cathays Park Cardiff CF10 3NQ Tel: 029 2082 5730 e-mail: [email protected]

Additional This document can be accessed from the Welsh Government’s copies website at www.wales.gov.uk/educationandskills

Related Appetite for Life Action Plan (Welsh Assembly Government, 2008) documents


Digital ISBN 978 0 7504 8740 5 © Crown copyright 2013 WG17347

Contents

Background 2Initial research into payment systems 2School meals agenda 3United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC) 4Case studies 4Key findings 6Strategies to encourage uptake, address key concerns and reduce stigma 6

Review of menus 11

Pupil questionnaires 14Approach taken 14Analysing the data 15What are the most important factors for FSM-entitled pupils 15Payment systems and FSM 18

School profiles and feedback from questionnaires 21School A 21School B 24School C 27School D 30School E 33School F 36School G 39School H 42

Appendix 1: Welsh Local Government Association (WLGA) report – Cashless systems and systems in place for distributing free school meals 45

Appendix 2: WLGA school profile questionnaire 54Appendix 3: WLGA menu information form 56Appendix 4: Pupil questionnaire 59Appendix 5: Data showing which factors are ranked as

most important by FSM-entitled pupils 61Appendix 6: Information about pupil population

completing questionnaires and detailed summary of responses to pupil questionnaires 66

Appendix 7: Menu information for case study schools 102

2


March 2013

Information document no: 100/2013

A child/young person will be eligible for free school meals (FSM)1 if certain eligibility criteria are met. If these criteria are met, the parent/carer, or a person acting on behalf of the parent/carer, can apply for their child to receive FSM. Not all eligible families apply for FSM for their child(ren). Moreover, even when children/young people are registered to receive FSM, not all of them will take up their entitlement.

The 2011 schools census showed that, of the 84,806 pupils entitled to FSM, 73.85 per cent took up their entitlement on census day. This problem is particularly acute at secondary school level – on census day in January 2011, only 68.39 per cent of the 32,314 entitled pupils took up their entitlement. (There is a caveat here inasmuch as the census information does not show the number of FSM-entitled pupils who were absent on census day. Consequently we don’t know the number of FSM-entitled pupils who were in school but who did not take a FSM.)

There is a widespread concern that some children and young people might not be taking up their FSM entitlement because of stigma. The Welsh Government and the Welsh Local Government Association (WLGA) have worked in partnership to produce this report which weighs up the range of factors affecting uptake of FSM, and suggests possible solutions.

Initial research into payment systems

The WLGA conducted an initial piece of research into the uptake of FSM entitlement in 2011. To begin with, the WLGA wrote to all 22 directors of education in April 2011, seeking to establish what systems secondary schools operated or planned to introduce for payment of school meals, and how this might affect pupils accessing their FSM entitlement. Questionnaires on payment systems were distributed to 222 schools, and 213 completed questionnaires were returned by schools.

Initial findings from the payment systems questionnaire showed:

• 38 per cent of secondary schools have a cashless system in place

• biometric systems account for 37 per cent of cashless systems in place

• card systems account for 35 per cent of cashless systems in place

Background

1 In this report the term ‘free school meal (FSM)’ is used to denote a free school lunch.

3


March 2013


• excluding cashless systems, the most popular systems for allocating FSM to eligible pupils are: daily ticket/card collection from office (15 per cent), giving a number at till (13 per cent) and saying name at till (13 per cent).

Table 1 compares the uptake of FSM in schools with and without cashless systems.

Table 1

FSM uptake % of schools without cashless system

% of schools with cashless system

100% 3.3% 2.3%

90–99% 4.7% 3.8%

80–89% 8.5% 6.1%

70–79% 11.7% 8.5%

60–69% 17.7% 7.5%

50–59% 8.5% 4.2%

40–49% 7% 4.2%

30–39% 0.45% 0.45%

20–29% 0 0.45%

10–19% 0 0.9%

0–9% 0 0

In summary, the initial information gathered from the payment systems questionnaire would suggest that cashless systems do not always result in higher levels of uptake of FSM. The recommendation arising from this piece of work was that further work (in the form of case studies) should be undertaken to gain a greater understanding of the range of factors which may impact on the uptake of FSM.

The full WLGA report, summarising the findings, is attached at Appendix 1. The WLGA sent this report to all local authority directors of education in July 2011.

School meals agenda

Any investigation into the uptake of FSM, has to be understood in the context of other developments around school meals in Wales,

4


March 2013


namely Appetite for Life, the Welsh Government’s agenda for improving the food and drink provided in schools, and the proposal in the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Bill to introduce flexible charging for school meals.

Under Appetite for Life, funding has been provided to local authorities since 2008/09 to support them in moving towards the Appetite for Life recommended food and nutrient standards. The Appetite for Life standards will shortly be underpinned by legislation. The Minister for Education and Skills has agreed to commence in 2013 the various provisions within the Healthy Eating in Schools (Wales) Measure 2009 and to make regulations about food and drink provided on school premises. This will ensure that all children and young people can enjoy a healthy, nutritious meal at lunchtime.

The Healthy Eating in Schools (Wales) Measure also includes provision for local authorities and governing bodies to promote FSM and to take reasonable steps to ensure that a pupil cannot be identified as someone who receives a FSM. These provisions will also come into force in 2013.

The School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Bill 2012 seeks to legislate to allow local authorities to introduce flexible charging for school meals. The aim is to give schools and local authorities greater flexibility over meal pricing, which could be used to help children of families on low incomes not eligible for FSM and increase the uptake of school meals. The Bill also includes a proposal to cap how much a pupil can be charged, to prevent schools and local authorities from charging more than the cost of providing milk, meals or other refreshments to pupils.

United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC)

The pupil questionnaires used in these case studies link to Article 12 of the UNCRC, which sets out the right of children and young people to express an opinion and to have that opinion taken into account when decisions are being made on any matter that affects them. The views of children and young people have therefore informed this piece of work.

Case studies

This case studies report builds on the recommendation made by the WLGA that further work should be undertaken to understand

5


March 2013


the range of factors which may impact on the uptake of FSM. This approach allows the underlying issues to be identified and understood, before seeking an appropriate solution.

The case studies focussed on secondary schools as the payment method does not tend to be an issue in primary schools, where dinner money is usually collected by the class teacher. Thus in primary schools, pupils who are entitled to FSM cannot be easily identified. In secondary schools, where school lunches are paid for at the point of sale, FSM-entitled pupils may be identified, depending on what strategies the school has in place to protect the identity of FSM-entitled pupils.

These case studies are based on a sample of eight secondary schools selected from seven local authorities across Wales. The results of the WLGA’s questionnaire on school payment systems and the 2010 annual school census were used to provide background data for the selection of case study schools. (Census information for January 2011 had not been published at this point.) Schools with high, medium and low FSM uptake and eligibility were targeted for inclusion as well as schools with different payment systems, and urban and rural schools based in different areas of Wales.

The subsequent methods for data collection for this report were:

• the annual school census (2011, Welsh Government), once available

• a school profile questionnaire, including questions about food policies, the dining room environment and access to leisure centres and vending machines, distributed to schools participating in the case studies (Appendix 2)

• menu information forms (Appendix 3) that were distributed to schools or the local authorities (depending on which body had responsibility for the catering) for the participating schools

• questionnaires (Appendix 4), asking pupils for their views on school meals, distributed to nine schools (questionnaires were returned for eight of the nine schools).

Eight participating schools returned 1,018 completed pupil questionnaires (62.84 per cent of the total questionnaires issued). The pupil questionnaires asked whether the pupil was entitled to have a FSM in order to try and identify the number of entitled pupils

6


March 2013


participating in the exercise and any differences in their response to those not entitled to FSM. However, eligible pupils who are not registered for FSM could not be identified through this study. This means that these case studies do not identify eligible pupils whose families may have chosen not to register them for FSM.

Key findings

Pupils were asked to consider a list of 10 factors affecting their choice around school meals, and to rank them in order of importance. The overall finding of these case studies was that the main concern for FSM-entitled pupils was queues. Other key concerns were: the type of food provided; cost (presumably the local authority ‘allowance’ for their meals); and, for FSM pupils not taking up their entitlement, what their friends did.

There is a caveat in respect of concerns about food. While food has emerged as one of the key concerns, the figures alone do not make it clear what it is about the food that pupils would change. Comments made by all pupils in the sample indicate that concerns around food can be either that the food is not healthy enough (‘I would like milk and healthy snacks, e.g. fruit salads’) or that it is ‘too’ healthy (‘The range of chocolate and fizzy drinks available is poor, and also very limited soft drinks’).

Another key finding arising from these case studies was that FSM-entitled pupils were not particularly concerned about payment systems, in relation to the other issues around school meals. These findings are described in greater detail in the ‘Pupil questionnaires’ section on page 14 of this report.

Strategies to encourage uptake, address key concerns and reduce stigma

Encouraging uptake of FSM

Encouraging the uptake of FSM is a two-pronged approach, which entails encouraging eligible families to register for FSM and encouraging pupils who are registered to take up their entitlement.

Local authorities are increasingly aware of the wider implications of encouraging eligible families to register for FSM, including the effects on the local authority’s financial settlement. Similarly, with the new Pupil Deprivation Grant, all of the grant funding will be delegated to schools and each school will receive an allocation according to the number of pupils of compulsory school age (5–15) entitled to FSM.

7


March 2013


Schools and local authorities may contact a parent/carer to ask them if they would like to apply for FSM for their child. However, FSM entitlement cannot be awarded for a pupil without a request for FSM having been made by, or on behalf of the parent/carer or pupil.

For pupils who are entitled to FSM but who don’t take up their entitlement, strategies to address their key concerns could have a beneficial effect on FSM uptake.

Queuing

Strategies to address the issue of queuing could include the following.

• Creating alternative selling points.

• Staggering lunch times, e.g. Years 7–9 to have lunch at 12.30 and Years 10–13 to have lunch at 13.00; such a system would require sufficient food and choice to be available for the second sitting.

• Allowing sufficient time for lunch.

• Queues to be managed to prevent pushing in. (Comments received from pupils indicate that in some schools ‘pushing in’ by older children is an issue.)

• Schools to think carefully about how teachers are served their school lunches. (Comments received indicate that pupils take a dim view of teachers ‘pushing in’.)

• There is a contradiction around queuing insofar as some pupils might choose to go offsite to buy their lunch rather than queue, but might then spend a significant proportion of their lunch break walking to an outlet outside school and queuing there.

• Schools/local authorities can consider investing in a pre-order system if queuing is a problem.

Food

As outlined in the ‘Key findings’ section on page 6, concerns about food don’t always have an obvious solution. In some cases pupils feel that the food is not healthy enough, in others the food is deemed ‘too’ healthy. With the commencement of provisions in the Healthy Eating in Schools (Wales) Measure, more challenging statutory

8


March 2013


standards around the food provided in schools will be in place in all school settings by September 2013. A previous project, the Appetite for Life Action Research Project (2008–10), has explored the issues raised in trying to move towards the new standards, and the ensuing report2 made recommendations on managing that transition. The Appetite for Life grant funding, which has been made available since 2008/09, is aimed at helping local authorities to support schools in making the transition to the new standards. Many local authorities have used the grant to fund taster sessions for pupils, to help them get used to the new food.

Other concerns around the food that were made explicit in comments received centred around availability (‘More food needs to be made halfway through the lunchtime because, by then, it is either cold or there will be no choices’) and variety (‘There is not a big enough range – need to sell nicer things’). Where a school is aware that availability of food is an issue in its canteen, the school needs to work in partnership with its catering team to ensure that this is addressed. With regards to the variety of food on offer, catering teams need to ensure that sufficient choice is available, but this does not mean endless choice. There may be a need to manage pupils’ expectations on this issue, and catering teams may require the support of schools to achieve this. One of the conclusions of the Appetite for Life Action Research Project was that the school canteen, rather than being expected to behave as an extension to the high street (offering as much free choice as possible), needs to be understood as an extension of the classroom.

Cost

For FSM-entitled pupils taking up their entitlement, it would seem that the amount that they are able to spend has emerged as an issue, with 19.89 per cent of FSM-entitled pupils including cost in their top three concerns. The value that local authorities allocate to FSM-entitled pupils for their daily lunch may be based on the value of a set meal. This value may therefore not be enough to enable FSM-entitled pupils to buy what they want for lunch.

This concern is reflected in the overall pupil sample, where 36.15 per cent of all pupils included cost in their top three concerns. This is unsurprising in the current economic climate, where families are dealing with rising costs and pay freezes.

2 www.wales.gov.uk/about/aboutresearch/social/latestresearch/appetiteforlife/?lang=en

http://www.wales.gov.uk/about/aboutresearch/social/latestresearch/appetiteforlife/?lang=en

9


March 2013


Different local authorities subsidise school meal provision to a greater or lesser extent, depending on the authority. The Wales Audit Office report into the cost of producing school meals in Wales3 identified a wide variation in the cost of school meals across Wales and showed that in 2007/08 local authorities funded approximately 42 per cent of the school meal service, equating to over £37 million. One of the recommendations arising from this report was that local authorities should identify and disseminate good practice in providing quality school meals at a reasonable cost.

The introduction of flexible charging through the School Standards and Organisation (Wales) Bill will allow schools and local authorities greater flexibility over meal pricing. This proposed change would also prevent schools and local authorities from charging more than the cost of providing a meal or drink to pupils, as currently there is no cap on how much a pupil can be charged.

Friendship groups

For FSM-entitled pupils not taking up their entitlement, what their friends do at lunchtime emerged as one of the top three concerns for 2.84 per cent of them. Allowing pupils to sit in friendship groups, regardless of whether they bring a packed lunch or take a school meal, could help improve uptake of school meals. This of course is dependent on how many pupils the dining area can accommodate.

Protecting the identity of pupils that receive FSM/data protection

Schools need to think about strategies to protect the identity of pupils that receive FSM. In particular, FSM-entitled pupils should not be required to undertake any action that allows them to be identified, e.g. queuing for dinner tickets.

Schools act as Data Controllers when they collect, store and process personal information about pupils, including information on which pupils are entitled to FSM. This means that schools must satisfy certain obligations in order to comply with the Data Protection Act 1998 (‘the Act’). (General guidance on data management in schools is included on the Welsh Government’s website4.) Where schools use biometric payment systems they are required to comply with the principles of the Act, in relation to all personal data collected and held by them.

3 www.wao.gov.uk/assets/englishdocuments/school_meals_report.pdf4 www.wales.gov.uk/ims

http://www.wao.gov.uk/assets/englishdocuments/school_meals_report.pdf

http://www.wales.gov.uk/ims

10


March 2013


Guidance on data protection is available on the Information Commissioner’s Office website5.

Other strategies

Individual schools could use the pupil questionnaire at Appendix 4 to conduct their own survey of pupil views, and to use the information gathered to identify and address any particular issues for their schools.

5 www.ico.gov.uk

http://www.ico.gov.uk

Review of menus

11


March 2013


Work has been ongoing in schools across Wales since 2008/09 to move towards more challenging food and nutritional standards, in line with the Appetite for Life agenda. Compliance with the Appetite for Life standards varies. Depending on their starting point, some schools have had to do more work than others to move towards compliance with the standards.

In managing this transition to more challenging standards, schools and local authorities have had to deal with a reluctance on the part of some pupils to try healthier school meals, and a resulting impact on uptake of school lunches. Since 2008/09, schools and local authorities across Wales have worked hard to persuade pupils and their parents/carers to try new foods on offer, through taster sessions and attendance at parents’/carers’ evenings.

Against this background of ongoing improvements to school meals, it was considered appropriate to look at the food and drink on offer in the case study schools in order to gauge to what extent their menus complied with Appetite for Life standards.

To obtain a complete picture of food and drink provision at the eight secondary schools involved in the case studies, each school was asked for information relating to their food provision at lunchtime (see Appendix 3 for a copy of the menu information form). The information provided was varied and in order to compare the information each school menu was assessed during the autumn term 2011 against the following Appetite for Life food standards:

• meat products – not permitted on school menu more than twice per week

• potatoes/potato products cooked in fats and oils – not permitted on school menu more than twice per week

• other products cooked in fats and oils – not permitted on school menu more than twice per week

• oily fish – should be on the menu twice every four weeks

• confectionery/savoury snacks – not permitted

• drinks – only permitted drinks should be available

• fruit-based desserts – should be on the menu twice per week.

12


March 2013


Summary information provided about the food standards showed that out of the eight schools:

• five schools serve between 4 and 30 meat products per week and therefore do not meet this standard

• four schools serve no more than two potatoes/potato products cooked in fats and oils per week and therefore meet this standard; the other four schools do not meet the standard

• six schools serve no more than two other products cooked in fats and oils per week and therefore meet this standard; the other two schools do not meet the standard

• three schools serve oily fish twice over a four-week period and therefore meet this standard; the other five schools do not meet the standard

• seven schools serve confectionery and/or savoury snacks and therefore do not meet this standard

• four schools serve drinks that meet the drinks standard; the other four do not

• six schools serve two fruit-based desserts per week and therefore meet this standard; the other two schools do not meet the standard.

In brief, information provided about the variety of foods available showed the following.

• The maximum number of main course choices available each day was two.

• Only one school didn’t have a vegetarian main course available each day.

• Pasta with up to three different fillings are available each day.

• Between two and eight different fillings for jacket potatoes are available each day.

• Up to 10 single-serve/snack items are available each day.

• Sandwiches/wraps/rolls/baguettes with up to ten different fillings are available each day.

• Between three and seven different choices of carbohydrates are available each day.

13


March 2013


• Between three and four different vegetable choices are available each day.

• Between two and five dessert choices are available each day.

A breakdown of the menu information for each of the eight participating schools is shown at Appendix 7.

Pupil questionnaires

14


March 2013


Approach taken

The overall results of the pupil questionnaires are covered in this section of this report, and the results for individual schools are covered in the next section.

The pupil questionnaires (Appendix 4) were used to obtain feedback from as many children and young people who are eligible for FSM as possible, from the participating schools. A total of 1,620 questionnaires were issued to eight participating schools. To avoid identifying, and possibly stigmatising, pupils entitled to FSM, the questionnaires were distributed to all pupils in selected registration groups. Schools were asked to target at least one registration class per school year. In selecting the registration classes, schools were asked to consider targeting classes where there were a higher proportion of pupils who were entitled to FSM. Of the 1,018 returned questionnaires, 17.29 per cent were completed by pupils entitled to FSM (176 pupils).

Pupils completing the pupil questionnaires were asked to consider the list below and to rank, in order of importance, the factors that affected their choice around school meals, with 1 being the most important and 10 being the least important:

• queues

• food

• portion sizes

• where lunch is eaten

• cost

• payment method

• whether friends take school meals

• other food eaten in the day

• lunchtime clubs/activities

• other.

15


March 2013


Analysing the data

The data from the questionnaires has been used to identify:

• factors ranked number 1 by FSM-entitled pupils (i.e. the ‘top’ concerns)

• factors ranked number 1, 2 and 3 by FSM-entitled pupils (i.e. the ‘top three’ concerns).

By looking at the top three factors, the aim is to get a broader picture of pupils’ most pressing concerns. For example, in the following sample response queues only features as a top concern for one pupil, but all three pupils have ranked queues in their top three.

Ranking 1 2 3

Pupil A Food Cost Queues

Pupil B Portion size Queues Payment method

Pupil C Queues What friends do Food

What are the most important factors for FSM-entitled pupils

The overall findings of the pupil questionnaires are in Tables 2 and 3, and this is supported by more detailed data in Appendices 5 and 6.

16


March 2013


0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%Pe

rcen

tage

of F

SM-e

ntit

led

coho

rt

taking up their entitlement

not taking up their entitlement

all

Queues Food Portionsize

Wherelunch

is eaten

Cost Paymentmethod

Whatfriends

do

Other foodseaten in day

Lunchtimeclubs

Other

0%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

40%

45%

Perc

enta

ge o

f FSM

-ent

itle

d co

hort

taking up their entitlement

not taking up their entitlement

all

Queues Food Portionsize

Wherelunch

is eaten

Cost Paymentmethod

Whatfriends

do

Other foodseaten in day

Lunchtimeclubs

Other

Table 2 – Factors ranked Number 1 by FSM-entitled pupils

Table 3 – Factors ranked Number 1, 2 and 3 by FSM-entitled pupils

17


March 2013


As demonstrated by Tables 2 and 3, regardless of whether you look at the number one factor or the top three factors, pupils entitled to FSM are primarily concerned about queues, with 32.95 per cent of all FSM-entitled pupils listing it as their top concern and 49.43 per cent of all FSM-entitled pupils including queues in their top three concerns. The percentages6 for the different cohorts are below in Table 4.

Table 4

Pupils taking up their entitlement

Pupils not taking up their

entitlement

All FSM-entitled pupils

Factor ranked number 1

Queues 19.32% Queues 3.41% Queues 22.73%

Factor ranked in top three

Queues 31.25% Queues 7.95% Queues 39.20%

This concern is reflected in the overall pupil sample, where 25.34 per cent of the cohort put queues as their top concern, and 47.15 per cent included queues in their top three concerns.

After queues, other headline concerns are food, cost and, for FSM pupils not taking up their entitlement, what their friends do. The ranking varies according to whether you look at the factor ranked number one or at the top three factors ranked (see Table 5). For FSM-entitled pupils, cost is presumed to be the limit that they are able to spend on a school meal.

6 The percentage figures are based on full FSM-entitled cohort of 176 pupils.

18


March 2013


Table 5


Pupils not taking up their

entitlement


Factor ranked number 1

Cost 9.09%What

friends do

1.7% Cost 9.66%

Factor ranked in top three

Food 23.86% Food 6.82% Food 30.68%

For the overall pupil sample, 16.8 per cent ranked cost as their primary concern, and 36.15 per cent listed cost in their top three concerns. Of the overall pupil sample, 9.92 per cent ranked food as their main concern, and 34.18 per cent included food in their top three concerns.

Tables 11 and 12, showing the percentages of all factors ranked first and all factors included in FSM-entitled pupils’ top three, are at Appendix 5.

Payment systems and FSM

There have been concerns about the impact that payment systems have on identifying, and thus stigmatising, children and young people in receipt of FSM, particularly in secondary schools where meals are paid for at the point when they are provided. Cashless systems have been cited as the way forward to ensure that this does not happen. The FSM questionnaire was an opportunity to identify to what extent pupils were concerned about the payment systems.

The findings of the pupil questionnaire indicate that FSM-entitled pupils in the sample were not particularly concerned about payment systems, in relation to the other issues around school meals (see Tables 2 and 3). These findings are supported by the data gathered from the WLGA review of payment systems which indicated that cashless systems do not always result in higher levels of uptake of FSM. The number of FSM-entitled pupils who ascribed no rating at all to payment systems is much higher than those who allocated a rating (120 not rated, or 68.18 per cent), which could indicate a degree of indifference to the payment system in comparison with other issues.

19


March 2013


Of those who rated payments systems as a concern, the numbers are too small to predicate an overall trend (see Table 6).

A further analysis was carried out to check whether the type of payment systems used by pupils affected their views at all (Tables 7 to 9). In the event, FSM-entitled pupils in schools with biometric systems were marginally more concerned about payment systems than a similar cohort of pupils in schools that used cash systems. (Payment systems were ranked in the top three concerns by 6.35 per cent of FSM-entitled pupils in schools using biometric systems, and by 3.61 per cent of the same cohort in schools using cash systems.)

7 With 1 being the most important and 10 being the least important.

FSM-entitled pupils

Cash systems – 83 pupils

+ Rating –

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 √No

rating

75 taking up their entitlement

0 3 0 2 4 2 4 4 1 0 0 55

8 not taking up their entitlement

0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0 2 0 0 5

FSM-entitled pupils

Payment method – 176

+ Rating7 –

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 √No

rating


1 3 2 4 7 8 6 8 4 0 0 100


0 0 1 0 3 1 2 3 2 0 1 20

Table 6

Table 7 – Ratings ascribed to the payment system in schools with cash systems

20


March 2013


FSM-entitled pupils

Biometric system – 63 pupils

+ Rating –

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 √No

rating


1 0 2 2 3 3 1 1 3 0 0 30


0 0 1 0 0 0 2 3 0 0 1 10

FSM-entitled pupils

Cashless with card – 30 pupils

+ Rating –

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 √No

rating


0 0 0 0 0 3 1 3 0 0 0 15


0 0 0 0 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 5

Table 8 – Ratings ascribed to the payment system in schools with biometric systems

Table 9 – Ratings ascribed to the payment system in schools with cashless with card systems

School profiles and feedback from questionnaires8

21


March 2013


School A

Profile

School A is an English-medium school in an urban area which has opted out of local authority catering. It has 625 pupils on its roll (651 in 2010), of which 38.9 per cent are eligible for FSM (38.6 per cent in 2010) and on the day of recording 62.1 per cent of eligible pupils took up their FSM entitlement (71.7 per cent in 2010). School A uses a cash-only payment system for school meals and those eligible for FSM are allocated their meal via a ticket system which pupils must collect from the main office before lunchtime. School A serves on average 400 pupils per day at lunchtime and has capacity for 150 pupils in the dining room at any one time. Lunchtime lasts 50 minutes and all pupils have lunch at the same time. A ‘locked gate policy’ was introduced in 2010 for Year 7 only. There is no leisure centre on the grounds of the school. There are five serving outlets at lunchtime with four tills; a pre-order service is available before lunchtime. Pupils entitled to FSM can only use their entitlement at break times if they are off-site at lunchtime. School A has a food policy that was introduced in 2009 and is reviewed annually.

School A has a three-week lunch menu cycle. The lunch provision consists of one main course choice daily and no vegetarian choice. The lunch provision also includes a pasta option with two fillings available per day, jacket potatoes with five filling options available two to three times per week and ten single-serve/snack items available daily. Baguettes/sandwiches/rolls with seven filling options are also available daily. Lunch provision also includes five single-serve carbohydrate options daily and four vegetable options, three dessert options and five different types of drinks.

Measured against the Appetite for Life food standards, the school’s lunch provides 30 meat products across the week which exceeds the maximum number of two meat products that are permitted to be served over a weekly cycle. Three potato products cooked in fat/oil are available weekly which exceeds the maximum of two per week. Five other products cooked in fat/oil are served weekly; this does not meet the food standard. Information is not available for the number of times oily fish are served across the menu cycle. The confectionery standard is not met as confectionery is provided. Drinks provided do not meet the drinks standard and two fruit-based desserts are not available weekly, therefore not meeting the fruit-based dessert standard.

8 The figures quoted for pupil roll, percentage eligible for FSM and the percentage taking up their entitlement is taken from the 2010 and 2011 census information.

22


March 2013


Findings of pupil questionnaires

The factors that affect choice around school meals were ranked by pupils in order of importance (with 1 being the most important).

Data for FSM-entitled pupils – factors affecting choice included in their ‘top three’


Pupils not taking up their entitlement

Queues 41.46% Queues 12.19%

Food 31.71% Food 7.31%

Cost 14.63%What friends do 4.87%

Where lunch is eaten 4.87%

It is presumed that the cap on what FSM-entitled pupils are able to purchase is felt not to be enough.

Data for all pupils in sample

The following are the top three factors affecting choice.

• Queues – 48.89%

• Food – 36.3%

• Cost – 22.96%

Comments received from pupils

Comments fall into broad categories. A sample of the comments received is below, grouped according to themes.

Queuing

• Line always too big and wastes time.

• I would like there to be two bars for hot food so there is less of a queue.

• We should be allowed out for dinner as it takes about 20 minutes to queue and by the time we get food it’s time for registration.

• The queue does my head in, it’s always too long.

23


March 2013


The food – availability, choice, and quality

• Maybe have more food because there are quite a lot of Year 7s and if I line up when I get there the food is gone.

• I would like milk and healthy snacks, e.g. fruit salads.

• Sometimes there is not much choice.

• Should have more juice options not just orange – should have different flavours.

• There is not a big enough range – need to sell nicer things.

• The warmth and freshness because the chips are always warmed up and freezing.

• Sometimes you find hair in the food. They should wear nets.

• It’s nice food and very cheap for what you get.

Hankering for unhealthy food

• Bring back crisps, fizzy drinks, biscuits.

• The range of chocolate and fizzy drinks available is poor, and also very limited soft drinks.

• They do not have enough range for picky eaters. Like fizzy drinks and chocolate.

Canteen environment

• The noise level in the canteen is too loud.

Bullying

There is only one comment to indicate bullying – ‘Others take the mick’. This pupil is entitled to FSM and takes up his entitlement, but it’s not clear whether this is a factor in his being teased by other children.

24


March 2013


School B

Profile

School B is a Welsh-medium school in a rural area where the catering is provided by the local authority. It has 944 pupils on its roll (968 in 2010), of which 15.8 per cent are eligible for FSM (12.8 per cent in 2010) and on the day of recording 65.1 per cent of eligible pupils took up their FSM entitlement (92.7 per cent in 2010). School B uses a cashless with card payment system for school meals and those eligible for FSM have their account topped up by the school daily. School B serves on average 415 pupils per day at lunchtime and has capacity for 228 pupils in the dining room at any one time. Lunchtime lasts 45 minutes and all pupils have lunch at the same time. A ‘locked gate policy’ was introduced in 1995 for Years 7–11 only. There is no leisure centre on the grounds of the school. There are four serving outlets at lunchtime with three tills; a pre-order service is available before lunchtime. Pupils entitled to FSM cannot use their entitlement at break times. School B has a food policy that was introduced in 2008.

School B has a three-week lunch menu cycle. The lunch provision consists of one main course choice and one vegetarian choice daily. The lunch provision also includes a pasta option with three fillings available per day, jacket potatoes with two to three filling options available daily and six single-serve/snack items available daily. Baguettes/sandwiches/rolls with six filling options are also available daily. Lunch provision also includes seven single-serve carbohydrate options daily and three to four vegetable options, more than four desserts options and six different types of drinks.

Measured against the Appetite for Life food standards, the school’s lunch provides 17 meat products across the week which exceeds the maximum number of two meat products that are permitted to be served over a weekly cycle. Nine potato products cooked in fat/oil are available weekly which exceeds the maximum of two per week. Two other products cooked in fat/oil are served weekly; this meets the food standard. The lunch provision does not meet the oily fish standards as no oily fish are offered over the four-week period. The confectionery standard is not met as confectionery is provided. Drinks provided do not meet the drinks standard. Two fruit-based desserts are available weekly, meeting the fruit-based dessert standard.

25


March 2013







Queues 45.45% Queues 13.64%

FoodWhere lunch is eaten

31.82%each

Food 9.09%

Portion sizesWhere lunch servedLunchtime activities

4.55% each

Portion sizeWhere lunch is eatenCostOther food eaten in day

4.55% each



• Queues – 52.71%

• Cost – 36.43%

• Food – 34.11%


Comments fall into broad categories. A sample of the comments received are shown below, grouped according to themes. The original Welsh-medium comments have been translated to English for the purposes of this report.

Queues

• The queue is like 15 minutes to get food.

• When we queue it takes time to get the food and by the time we’ve had the food it’s time to go.

• The sixth form can’t push in now. This had affected my choice.

26


March 2013


• The sixth formers should have the right to go to the front of the queue.

• Give sixth formers the right to skip the queue.

• Older people than me push into the queue.

Food

• There’s not a lot of healthy stuff.

• A wider choice of foods is required.

• Want more choice of food.

• When there’s no food left.

Hankering for unhealthy food

• More food that’s full of fat and chocolate.

Dining environment

• The dinner ladies scream at people for no reason.

• The dinner ladies are very nice.

Cost

• Need to reduce the prices.

Time allowed for lunch

• Not a lot of time for lunch break.

• The amount of time that lunch break goes on for because there is not enough time to queue and eat.

27


March 2013


School C

Profile

School C is an English-medium school in an urban area, where the catering is provided by the local authority. It has 775 pupils on its roll (745 in 2010), of which 20.3 per cent are eligible for FSM (25.5 per cent in 2010) and on the day of recording 72.0 per cent of eligible pupils took up their FSM entitlement (41.6 per cent in 2010). School C uses a cash-only payment system for school meals and those eligible for FSM are allocated a unique number which is ticked off a list at the till point. School C serves on average 210 pupils per day at lunchtime and has capacity for 220 pupils in the dining room at any one time. Lunchtime lasts 45 minutes and all pupils have lunch at the same time. The school does not operate a ‘locked gate policy’. There is no leisure centre on the grounds of the school. There are two serving outlets at lunchtime with three tills; a pre-order service is available before lunchtime. Pupils entitled to FSM can use their entitlement at break times.

School C has a three-week lunch menu cycle. The lunch provision consists of one main course choice and one vegetarian choice daily. The lunch provision also includes a pasta option with three fillings available per day, jacket potatoes with four filling options available daily and three single-serve/snack items available daily. Baguettes/sandwiches/rolls with nine filling options are also available daily. Lunch provision also includes three single-serve carbohydrate options daily and four vegetable options, more than four dessert options and four different types of drinks.

Measured against the Appetite for Life food standards, the school’s lunch provides three to four meat products across the week which exceeds the maximum number of two meat products that are permitted to be served over a weekly cycle. Two potato products cooked in fat/oil are available weekly and there are no other products cooked in fat/oil served weekly. This meets these two food standards. The lunch provision meets the oily fish standards, providing two oily fish every four-week period. No confectionery is provided, thereby meeting the confectionery standard. All drinks provided meet the drinks standard. Two fruit-based desserts are available weekly, meeting the fruit-based dessert standard.

28


March 2013







Queues 20% The small sample of pupils did not rank factors, and only one of the respondents ticked factors he regarded as important, namely queues and cost.

Portion sizes 15%

Food 10%



• Queues – 17.39%

• Food and Cost – 11.59% each

• Portion size – 7.25%


Comments fall into broad categories. A sample of the comments received are shown below, grouped according to themes.

Queues

• Takes forever to queue.

• Sometimes there’s no food left and everybody pushes in the queue.

Food – quality and availability

• School dinners are not as tasty as they used to be before.

• School meals are great! Thank you.

• I like the pasta thing and milk shakes.

29


March 2013


• I don’t like all the food that there is.

• Need more food – sometimes they run out.

Cost

• Lunch bags are a rip-off in the canteen.

• Too much for a cup drink and cookie.

• It is a rip off.

Canteen environment

• Dinner ladies are always talking and it takes too long to get dinner ‘cause they always ignore you.

• I think that they should let every year in at different times.

Portion sizes

• Portion sizes are for primary schoolchildren and not for secondary.

30


March 2013


School D

Profile

School D is an English-medium school in an urban area, where the catering is provided by the local authority. It has 786 pupils on its roll (779 in 2010), of which 15.9 per cent of pupils are eligible for FSM (14.1 per cent in 2010) and on the day of recording 96.8 per cent of eligible pupils took up their FSM entitlement (100 per cent in 2010). School D uses a cash-only payment system for school meals and those eligible for FSM are allocated their meal via a ticket system which pupils must collect from the main office before lunchtime. School D serves on average 550 pupils per day at lunchtime and has capacity for 150 pupils in the dining room at any one time. A staggered lunchtime is in operation, with lunchtime lasting one hour. A ‘locked gate policy’ was introduced in 1985. Although there is a leisure centre on the grounds of the school, the leisure centre vending is not accessible to pupils. There is one serving outlet at lunchtime with four tills; no pre-order service is available before lunchtime. Pupils entitled to FSM can use their entitlement at break times. School D has a food policy that was introduced in 2011.

School D has a three-week lunch menu cycle. The lunch provision consists of two main course choices and one vegetarian choice daily. The lunch provision also includes a pasta option with three fillings available per day, jacket potatoes with five filling options available daily and eight single-serve/snack items available daily. Baguettes/sandwiches/rolls with five filling options are also available daily. Lunch provision also includes four single-serve carbohydrate options daily and three to four vegetable options daily, more than four dessert options and four different types of drinks.

Measured against the Appetite for Life food standards, the schools lunch provides 16 meat products across a week which exceeds the maximum number of two meat products that are permitted to be served over a weekly cycle. Information was not available for the number of times potatoes cooked in fat/oil or other products cooked in fat/oil are served over the week. The lunch provision meets the oily fish standards, providing two oily fish every four-week period. The confectionery standard is not met as confectionery is provided. The lunch provision does not meet the drinks standard. Two fruit-based desserts are available weekly, meeting the fruit-based dessert standard.

31


March 2013







Queues 36.36% The one FSM-entitled pupil in the sample not taking up FSM entitlement neither ranked nor ticked any of the factors.

Food 27.27%

Where lunch is eatenCost

13.64% each



• Queues – 54.47%

• Cost – 44.02%

• Food – 39.55%



Food – quality, variety and availability

• The school dinners are nice!

• There’s a good variety of food every day.

• Not enough variety of drinks.

• More vegetarian food please.

• Not enough food for others and when me and my friends go to line up there is no food left.

• When you go to lunchtime club and it runs on you go for lunch at about one o’clock and most of the food is gone so you only have one or two things to choose from.

32


March 2013


• The school have what I like for lunch such as salads. I love salad; it’s really healthy.

• More healthier meals.

• Hair on pizzas. Plastic in [my friend’s] curry. No nice drinks.

Queues

• People push in the line.

• Too long to queue.

• It’s rubbish – everyone is trying to get to the front. You should be able to pre-order food.

• I think that having long queues needs to be changed because it takes forever and by the time I’m eating I don’t feel like eating. When I go to sit, there are barely any seats left by my friends.

• I feel the Year 10s and Year 11s shouldn’t be allowed to push in in front of the rest of the school.

Dining environment

• RE seating – not much room.

• Don’t change the dinner ladies because they are very nice.

Friends

• Because if my friends are not having lunch I don’t want to be alone.

• I have to have school meals when all my friends are on sandwiches. (A FSM-entitled pupil taking up her entitlement)

Cost

• The cost has gone up too much and they could have kept them like they were when we came up last year.

• The costs are going up way too much so I have to start bringing packed lunch.

33


March 2013


School E

Profile

School E is a Welsh-medium school in an urban area, where the catering is provided by the local authority. It has 805 pupils on its roll (774 in 2010), of which 12.5 per cent are eligible for FSM (12.0 per cent in 2010) and on the day of recording 93.1 per cent of eligible pupils took up their FSM entitlement (84.9 per cent in 2010). School E uses a cashless biometric payment system for school meals and those eligible for FSM have their account topped up by the school daily. School E serves on average 600 pupils per day at lunchtime and has capacity for 225 pupils in the dining room at any one time. Lunchtime lasts 50 minutes and all pupils have lunch at the same time. A ‘locked gate policy’ was introduced in 2000 for Years 7–11 only. Although there is a leisure centre on the grounds of the school, the leisure centre vending is not accessible to pupils. There are three serving outlets at lunchtime with five tills; a pre-order service is available before lunchtime. Pupils entitled to FSM cannot use their entitlement at break times. School E has a food policy that was introduced in 2009 and will be reviewed in 2012.

School E has a two-week lunch menu cycle. The lunch provision consists of one main course choice and one vegetarian choice daily. The lunch provision also includes a pasta option with one filling available per day, jacket potatoes with four filling options available daily and five single-serve/snack items available daily. Baguettes/sandwiches/rolls with five to seven filling options are also available daily. Lunch provision also includes four single-serve carbohydrate options daily and three vegetable options, five dessert options and four different types of drinks.

Measured against the Appetite for Life food standards, the school’s lunch provision includes two meat products across the week which meets the meat products standard. Two potato products cooked in fat/oil are available weekly and one other product cooked in fat/oil is served weekly. This meets these two food standards. The lunch provision meets the oily fish standards, providing two oily fish every four-week period. The confectionery standard is not met as confectionery is provided. All drinks provided meet the drinks standard. Two fruit-based desserts are available weekly, meeting the fruit-based dessert standard.

34


March 2013







QueuesCostLunchtime activities

50% each Only one pupil ranked factors in order

of preference here, the ranking was:1. Queues 2. Food3. Portion size.

FoodWhere lunch is eatenPayment methodWhat friends doOther food eaten in day

16.67% each



• Queues – 85.07%

• Cost – 67.16%

• Food – 37.31%


Comments fall into broad categories. A sample of the comments received are shown below, grouped according to themes. The original Welsh-medium comments have been translated to English for the purposes of this report.

Queues

• People pushing into the queue.

• When you’re standing in the queue people push in every time.

Cost

• Please reduce the cost.

• The cost is bad, bring it down please.

• The food is too dear, £10 keeps me for three days.

35


March 2013


Food – variety, portion size, choice

• More variety. More healthy sandwiches. More healthy foods.

• Need more food.

• The choice of food that’s on offer.

• I like the chips.

• More food on the plate, not half full.

Dining room environment

• Need more seats and somewhere to put our bags.

• We want a television and more seats.

• More seats in the canteen.

• The thumbprint doesn’t always work.

36


March 2013


School F

Profile

School F is an English-medium school in a rural area, where the catering is provided by the local authority. It has 1,709 pupils on its roll (1,735 in 2010), of which 6.3 per cent are eligible for FSM (5.7 per cent in 2010) and on the day of recording 72.2 per cent of eligible pupils took up their FSM entitlement (76.8 per cent in 2010). School F uses a cashless biometric payment system for school meals. School F serves on average 800 pupils per day at lunchtime and has capacity for 170 pupils in the dining room at any one time. Lunchtime lasts 50 minutes and all pupils have lunch at the same time. A ‘locked gate policy’ was introduced in 1999 for pupils in Years 7–11. There is a leisure centre on the grounds of the school and pupils have access to the vending in the leisure centre during school hours. There are five serving outlets at lunchtime with four tills; a pre-order service is not available before lunchtime. Pupils entitled to FSM can use their entitlement at break times. School F has a food policy that was introduced in 2009.

School F has a three-week lunch menu cycle. The lunch provision consists of one main course choice and one vegetarian choice daily. The lunch provision also includes a pasta option with three fillings available per day, jacket potatoes with eight filling options available daily and nine single-serve/snack items available daily. Baguettes/sandwiches/rolls with eight filling options are also available daily. Lunch provision also includes five single-serve carbohydrate options daily and three vegetable options, four dessert options and five different types of drinks are available daily.

Measured against the Appetite for Life food standards, the school’s lunch provides 25 meat products across the week which exceeds the maximum number of two meat products that are permitted to be served over a weekly cycle. Two potato products cooked in fat/oil are available weekly and there are no other products cooked in fat/oil served weekly. This meets these two food standards. The lunch provision does not meet the oily fish standards as no oily fish are offered over the four-week period. The confectionery standard is not met as confectionery is provided. Drinks provided meet the drinks standard. Two fruit-based desserts are available weekly, meeting the fruit based-dessert standard.

37


March 2013







QueuesChoice

35.29% each

QueuesCost

11.76% each

Food 29.41% Portion sizesWhere lunch is eatenPayment method

5.88% eachPortion sizes 17.65%



• Queues – 61.21%

• Cost – 49.7%

• Food – 42.42%



Queues

• Some kids are pushing in.

• Lots of people push in front of you in the queue.

Cost

• The cost of most things are too high.

• Your price for drinks are too high.

Food – quality, availability and portion size

• More variety and healthier food in the sixth form canteen.

• More vegetarian food.

38


March 2013


• They could be healthier.

• Keep food hot for people that can’t get there before 1:00pm and still have a good range of food.

• It’s good.

• Have more choice.

• They should not put spring onions in all of the jacket potatoes.

• The meals need to be bigger.

• More food needs to be made halfway through the lunchtime because, by then, it is either cold or there will be no choices.

Dining environment

• The staff can sometimes be rude.

• Most of the dinner ladies aren’t friendly.

Payment system

• Broken ATM shoots out coins – we should pay in cash.

• I don’t really like the cash machines with the PINS, it should just be cash-in-hand it would be easier.

39


March 2013


School G

Profile

School G is an English-medium school in an urban area, where the catering is provided by the local authority. It has 933 pupils on its roll (988 in 2010), of which 31.3 per cent are eligible for FSM (29.1 per cent in 2010) and on the day of recording 47.9 per cent of eligible pupils took up their FSM entitlement (47.2 per cent in 2010). School G uses a cashless biometric payment system for school meals introduced in September 2011. School G serves on average 380 pupils per day at lunchtime and has capacity for 200 pupils in the dining room at any one time. Lunchtime lasts 45 minutes and all pupils have lunch at the same time. A ‘locked gate policy’ was introduced in 2011 for pupils in Years 7–9. There is no leisure centre on the grounds of the school. There is one serving outlet at lunchtime with two tills; a pre-order service is available before lunchtime. Pupils entitled to FSM can use their entitlement at break times to pre-order lunch only. School G has a food policy that was introduced in 2008 and is due for review in October 2011.

School G has a two-week lunch menu cycle. The lunch provision consists of two main course choices and one vegetarian choice daily. The lunch provision also includes a jacket potato option with two filling options available daily and one single-serve/snack item available daily. Baguettes/sandwiches/rolls with four to six filling options are also available daily. Lunch provision does not include single-serve carbohydrate options or single-serve vegetable options daily. Carbohydrates and vegetables are sold as part of the main course. There are two dessert options daily. Drink information was not available.

Measured against the Appetite for Life food standards, the school’s lunch provides two to three meat products across the week which on some weeks may exceed the maximum number of two meat products that are permitted to be served over a weekly cycle. Two to three potato products cooked in fat/oil are available weekly which exceeds the maximum of two per week. No other products cooked in fat/oil are served weekly, this meets the food standard. The lunch provision does not meet the oily fish standards as no oily fish is offered over the four-week period. The confectionery standard is not met as confectionery is provided. There was no information available on whether the school was meeting the Appetite for Life drinks standard or fruit-based dessert standard.

40


March 2013







QueuesFood

10% each

QueuesFood

7.5% each

Portion sizes 7.5%Whether friends take school meals

5%

Cost 5% Cost 2.5%



• Queues and Food – 17.42% each

• Cost – 12.88%

• Whether friends take school meals – 8.33%



Queues

• The queue is too long so sometimes I don’t have food.

• Queues too long.

Food

• Not much choice.

• I don’t like nothing they serve, it don’t taste very nice, not good quality.

• Some of the food uncooked.

• School meal service is good.

41


March 2013


Cost

• I don’t like the food and it costs a lot of money a week.

Dining environment

• Need more dinner ladies.

42


March 2013


School H

Profile

School H is an English-medium school in an urban area, where the catering is provided by the local authority. It has 1,712 pupils on its roll (1,715 in 2010), of which 4.3 per cent are eligible for FSM (4.6 per cent in 2010) and on the day of recording 90.4 per cent of eligible pupils took up their FSM entitlement (16.5 per cent in 2010). School H use a cashless with card payment system for school meals and those eligible for FSM have their account topped up by the school daily. School H serves on average 1,000 pupils per day at lunchtime and has capacity for 450 pupils in the dining room at any one time. Lunchtime lasts 60 minutes and all pupils have lunch at the same time. A ‘locked gate policy’ was introduced in 2003 for Years 7–11 only. There is not a leisure centre on the grounds of the school. There are two serving outlets at lunchtime with four tills; a pre-order service is not available before lunchtime. Pupils entitled to FSM can use their entitlement at break times. School H has a food policy that was introduced in 2010 and will be reviewed in 2013.

School H has a three-week lunch menu cycle. The lunch provision consists of one main course choice and one vegetarian choice daily. The lunch provision also includes a pasta option with two fillings available per day, jacket potatoes with two filling options available daily and one single-serve/snack item available daily. Baguettes/sandwiches/rolls with six filling options are also available daily. Lunch provision also includes three single-serve carbohydrate options daily. Four vegetable options, four dessert options and four different types of drinks are available daily.

Measured against the Appetite for Life food standards, the school’s lunch provides two meat products across the week which meets the meat product standard. Two potato products cooked in fat/oil and two other products cooked in fat/oil are available weekly. This meets these two food standards. The lunch provision does not meet the oily fish standards as one oily fish is offered over the four-week period. The confectionery standard is not met as confectionery is provided. Drinks provided meet the drinks standard. Two fruit-based desserts are available weekly, meeting the fruit-based dessert standard.

43


March 2013







Food 50% Only one pupil ranked factors in order of preference here, the ranking was:1. Food2. Other food eaten in the day3. Whether friends take school

meals.

QueuesPortion sizeCost

25% each

Whether friends take school meals

12.5%



• Queues – 42.78%

• Cost – 42.25%

• Food – 40.64%



Queues (only four comments on queues in total)

• People push in the queues so I’d rather not wait.

Cost

• Amount of money given on free school meals.

• I have dinners in week one but not in week two because of the cost.

• I never have the meals but the only reason I don’t have them is because of the cost. The price needs to go down.

• Lower the cost of the sandwiches.

44


March 2013


Food – variety, availability, quality

• Have more of different foods because they all disappear by the time you get to the end of the queue.

• Because the portion sizes are very filling and very tasty.

• No, it’s very good.

• Not allowed pizza and chips, no more chicken burgers.

• I don’t like the new food.

• No, everything is nice and lovely.

• Variety of food. If you come in late, there’s hardly any nice food left.

• There could be Halal meat.

• More unhealthy food. Chips, pizza, etc. We only live once.

• It is very good at the moment. It will be ruined if they change it.

Dining environment

• The service is very good because the dinner ladies are very friendly and it is easy to get along with them.

• Dinner ladies are grumpy.

• Customer service (needs to be nicer).

• Colour scheme of the canteen is not to my taste.

• It’s good; change where we eat the school meal as friends might have packed lunch.

Appendix 1: Welsh Local Government Association (WLGA) report – Cashless systems and systems in place for distributing free school meals

45


March 2013


A questionnaire was distributed to all 22 local authorities via the Directors of Education to establish what systems secondary schools currently operate or plan to introduce for payment of school meals and how this may affect pupils accessing their free school meal entitlement.

All 22 local authorities responded; 19 local authorities sent complete data for all the secondary schools in their authority while 3 local authorities had some data missing.

Data regarding the take up of free school meals (FSM) and eligibility was taken from the January 2010 School’s census. The total number of FSM taken on the day of the census has been worked out as a percentage using the numbers that are eligible per school and the numbers that actually took a FSM. Where data for FSM showed more than 100% take up the figure has been taken as 100%. This is on four occasions.

Complete information regarding the types of payment, types of FSM systems and FSM take up was received for 213 of the 222 secondary schools.

Number and types of cashless systems in place

81 (38%) of those secondary schools who responded have cashless systems. There are three main types of cashless systems – card, fob and biometric. Some schools operate cashless systems that use a combination of cash, biometrics, cards and/or pin numbers. Cards and biometrics are the most popular systems in use. Table one shows the types and numbers of cashless systems in place.

46


March 2013


Table one: Types and numbers of cashless systems

Type of Cashless system No of schools % of schools

Card 28 35

Fob 8 10

Biometric 30 37

Cash & Cashless (with card) 2 2

Biometric & Card 1 1

Biometric & pin number 12 15

Free School Meals (FSM)

In order to compare the data, the take up of FSM has been divided into bandings; 100%, 90 – 99%, 80 – 89% etc. Table two and three compares the take up of FSM of those schools that have cashless systems and those that don’t within the bandings.

Table two: Percentage take up of FSM using total number of schools i.e. 3.3% of 213 schools have 100% take up of FSM without cashless systems

FSM take up % of schools without cashless system

% of schools with cashless system

100% 3.3% 2.3%

90 – 99% 4.7% 3.8%

80 – 89% 8.5% 6.1%

70 – 79% 11.7% 8.5%

60 – 69% 17.7% 7.5%

50 – 59% 8.5% 4.2%

40 – 49% 7% 4.2%

30 – 39% 0.45% 0.45%

20 – 29% 0 0.45%

10 – 19% 0 0.9%

0 – 9% 0 0

47


March 2013


Table three: Percentage take up of FSM using number of schools for each system i.e. 5% of 132 schools have 100% take up of FSM without cashless systems

FSM take up % of schools without cashless system (132)

% of schools with cashless system (81)

100% 5% 6%

90 – 99% 8% 10%

80 – 89% 13% 15%

70 – 79% 19% 22%

60 – 69% 29% 19%

50 – 59% 14% 12%

40 – 49% 11% 9%

30 – 39% 1% 1.5%

20 – 29% 0 1.5%

10 – 19% 0 3%

0 – 9% 0 0

NB: Schools operating a cash & cashless system have been counted in the “with cashless” column in both tables.

Free School Meals (FSM) Payment Systems

Those schools that operate a cashless system use this to allocate eligible pupils their FSM – 38% of schools. For those schools that operate cash only systems, there are a variety of systems in place to allocate FSM to eligible pupils which include:

• pupils collecting a ticket/token/card from the main office/reception or dining hall/corridor before lunch;

• saying their name or giving a number at the till point; or

• a combination of a ticket/token/card plus name or number.

There are also individual systems in place in some schools that include:

• issuing a photo card annually to be shown at the till;

• collecting weekly passes/tickets labelled with the days of the week; and,

• collecting tickets from midday supervisors.

48


March 2013


These systems are shown in table four.

FSM Payment System %

Ticket/card collection from office – daily 15%

Ticket/card collection from office – weekly 1%

Ticket/card collection from dining hall/corridor 9%

Number on list at till 13%

Name on list at till 13%

Cashless account 38%

Number & Name at till 1.5%

Ticket/card collection from office or dining hall 0.5%

Ticket/card collection from dining hall & name at till 0.5%

Ticket/card collection from office & name at till 1.5%

Ticket/card collection from office & number at till 2.5%

Ticket/card collection from office, name & number at till 0.5%

Other systems• Each child has a plastic card with their photo, name and class details on which is given

out at morning registration on a daily basis; this card is then handed to the till operator when they go to the till.

• Pupils collect their tickets daily during morning break at 1 of 3 locations. Each year group is assigned to a specific collection point.

• Each child collects their tickets for the week on a Monday morning from the school clerk. The tickets are labelled Monday to Friday.

• Issued with an individual photo card/pass annually.• Issued with ID photo card/pass with name on daily by midday supervisor.• Cards can be collected anytime from dedicated staff.• Pupils are issued with a FSM ticket at the beginning of term. They show this ticket in the

dinner hall.• Pupils issued with unique card on a monthly basis which is presented at the till daily.

4%

Table four: Types of systems in place for allocating FSM to eligible pupils

49


March 2013


• Excluding cashless systems, the most popular systems for allocating FSM to eligible pupils are; daily ticket/card collection from office (15%), number at till (13%) and name at till (13%).

• The take up of FSM across all the bandings and systems varies. Overall, the banding 60 – 69% accounts for the greatest FSM take up comprising of 17.7% of schools without cashless systems where: 6.1% of schools use the system “daily ticket/card collection from office”; 2.3% use the system “ticket/card collection from dining hall/corridor”; 3.3% use the systems “number on list at till” and “name on list at till”; 1.8% use “other systems” and 0.45% use “number & name at till” and “ticket/card collection from office & name at till”.

The main systems and ranges of take up across all bandings are shown below:

• Daily ticket/token/card from the office ranges between 0.45 – 6.1% take up.

• Ticket/token/card from dining hall/corridor ranges between 0.9 – 3.3% take up.

• Name at till ranges between 0.45 and 3.3% take up.

• Number at till ranges between 0.45 and 3.3% take up.

• Cashless systems ranges between 0.45 and 8.5% take up.

Table five (pages 52 and 53) shows the percentage uptake of FSM within each banding and the systems in place to allocate eligible pupils their FSM

Plans to change the systems currently in place

One question asked if there were any plans to change the main payment system for school meals. 16% of schools indicated that they are looking into cashless systems for the future as the main payment system for school meals.

A further question asked if there were any plans to change the way FSM were allocated to pupils. 8.5% of schools indicated that they would like a cashless system in order to change the way FSM payments are allocated to eligible pupils. Of these schools, the FSM take up ranges between c.31% and 100%.

50


March 2013


49% of schools stated “no” or “unknown” as to whether they had plans to change their current system of FSM payment.

Summary

• 38% of schools operate cashless payment systems for school meals. Of these; 2.3% achieve 100% take up of FSM.

• 3.3% of schools without cashless systems achieve 100% take up of FSM.

• 15% of schools operate a “daily ticket/token/card from the office” system with 0.45% achieving 100% take up of FSM. Using this system, 6.1% of schools achieve between 60 – 69% take up of FSM.

• 17.7% of schools without cashless systems achieved take up of FSM between 60 – 69%.

• 11.7% of schools without cashless systems achieved between 70 – 79% take up of FSM of which 6.6% use a ticket/token/card collection system.

• 8.5% of schools with cashless systems achieved FSM take up between 70 – 79%.

• 0.9% of schools with cashless systems achieved FSM take up between 10 – 19%.

From the information gathered it would suggest that cashless systems do not always result in higher levels of take-up of free school meals. For example: a secondary school with FSM eligibility levels of c. 22% who operate a cashless system are achieving take up of c. 16% whilst a secondary school with similar levels of FSM eligibility (19%) who also operate a cashless system have achieved 100% take-up. There are also cases where no cashless system exists and a 100% take up is achieved.

FSM take up can be affected by not only the payment systems in place to allocate eligible pupils their FSM but by a number of outside factors including; friendship, environment of the dining hall, off site policy, as well as the food provision. These factors were not part of the questionnaire. Cashless systems may also be used for other purposes such as registration, entry into buildings, library loans – this information was not collected as part of this exercise.

51


March 2013


Recommendations

Further work (in the form of case studies) should be undertaken to gain a greater understanding of the range of factors which may impact on the take up of FSM.

52


March 2013


Tab

le f

ive:

FSM

Pay

men

t Sy

stem

an

d %

up

take

of

FSM

F

SM

Paym

ent

Syst

em

100%

FSM

up t

ake

90 –

99%

FSM

up t

ake

80 –

89%

FSM

up t

ake

70 –

79%

FSM

up t

ake

60 –

69%

FSM

up t

ake

50 –

59%

FSM

up t

ake

40 –

49%

FSM

up t

ake

30 –

39%

FSM

up t

ake

20 –

29%

FSM

up t

ake

10 –

19%

FSM

up t

ake

0 –

9%FS

M u

p ta

ke

Daily

tic

ket/c

ard

colle

ctio

n fro

m o

ffice

0.45

%1.

34%

2.3%

3.3%

6.1%

0.9%

1.8%

Wee

kly

ticke

t/car

d co

llect

ion

from

offi

ce

0.45

%0.

45%

Tick

et/c

ard

colle

ctio

n fro

m d

inin

g ha

ll/co

rrido

r

0.9%

3.3%

2.3%

1.3%

0.9%

Num

ber o

n lis

t at t

ill0.

9%1.

34%

1.34

%2.

8%3.

3%1.

34%

2.3%

0.45

%

Nam

e on

list

at

till

0.9%

1.34

%2.

3%0.

45%

3.3%

2.3%

1.34

%

Cash

less

ac

coun

t2.

3%3.

8%6.

1%8.

5%7.

5%4.

2%4.

2%0.

45%

0.45

%0.

9%

Num

ber &

N

ame

at ti

ll0.

45%

0.45

%0.

45%

Tick

et/c

ard

colle

ctio

n fro

m o

ffice

or

dini

ng h

all

0.45

%

53


March 2013


F

SM

Paym

ent

Syst

em

100%

FSM

up t

ake

90 –

99%

FSM

up t

ake

80 –

89%

FSM

up t

ake

70 –

79%

FSM

up t

ake

60 –

69%

FSM

up t

ake

50 –

59%

FSM

up t

ake

40 –

49%

FSM

up t

ake

30 –

39%

FSM

up t

ake

20 –

29%

FSM

up t

ake

10 –

19%

FSM

up t

ake

0 –

9%FS

M u

p ta

ke

Tick

et/c

ard

colle

ctio

n fro

m d

inin

g ha

ll &

nam

e at

till

0.45

%

Tick

et/c

ard

colle

ctio

n fro

m o

ffice

&

nam

e at

till

0.45

%0.

45%

Tick

et/c

ard

colle

ctio

n fro

m o

ffice

&

num

ber a

t till

0.45

%

Tick

et/c

ard

colle

ctio

n fro

m o

ffice

, na

me

& nu

mbe

r at t

ill

0.45

%

Oth

er

syst

ems

0.45

%0.

45%

0.45

%0.

45%

1.8%

1.34

%0.

45%

Appendix 2: WLGA school profile questionnaire

54


March 2013


This questionnaire aims to gather information to inform guidance about payment systems for school meals both paid and free. Please circle/delete yes/no or fill in your answer in the box provided.

1. General

1.a Name of School

1.b On average, how many pupils overall in your school have a school lunch per day? Include all pupils not just those who have free school meals

2. Policy

2.a Does your school have a locked gate policy? Yes No

2.b If yes, when was it introduced? (Year)

2.c If yes, does it apply to the whole school? Yes No

2.d If no, what years does it apply to? e.g. years 7 – 10

2.e Is there a leisure centre on the grounds of the school? Yes No

2.f If yes, is the leisure centre vending accessible to pupils in school hours?

Yes No

2.g Does the school have a policy that includes food and drinks, e.g. food and fitness, healthy living etc?

Yes No

2.h If yes, when was it introduced and when is it due to be reviewed? Introduced:

Reviewed:

3. Dining Environment

3.a What is the pupil seating capacity in the dining room?

3.b How many outlets are there in the school to purchase food from at lunchtime? e.g. dining hall, vending machines, tuck shops, café areas etc

3.c Does the dining hall have a dual purpose, e.g. gym, assembly hall etc? Yes No

3.d How many till points are there for serving at lunch time?

3.e Do you offer a pre-ordering service for lunch? Yes No

55


March 2013


3.f Can pupils who are eligible for free school meals use their entitlement at morning break?

Yes No

3.g Do you operate a staggered lunch time? Yes No

3.h How long is the lunch time? Minutes

4. Contact Details

Completed by:

Position:

Telephone Number:

Email address:

Thank you for completing this questionnaire

Appendix 3: WLGA menu information form

56


March 2013


School Name:

Food items offered over the 3 week menu cycle

EXAMPLE – Menu Menu

Main Course 2 main course option daily;• Traditional dish • Pasta dish

Vegetarian 1 vegetarian main course option daily

Pasta King type service 3 pasta sauce available daily; • Tomato • Sweet and sour• BBQ or Meatball (meatball only served

once over weekly menu)

Jacket potatoes 5 fillings available daily

Snack items 8 items available daily; • Hot dog• Chicken burger• Sausage roll• Turkey burger• Sausage• Fish stars• Pizza• Hot wrap

Sandwiches 5 fillings available daily; • Cheese (5 types)• Tuna (3 types)• Turkey (1 types)• Ham (1 type)• Chicken (2 types)

57


March 2013


EXAMPLE – Menu Menu

Baguettes 5 fillings available daily; • Cheese (5 types)• Tuna (3 types)• Turkey (2 types)• Ham• Egg

Vegetables 4 vegetables offered daily;• 2 hot vegetables served daily • Baked beans daily• Salad

Carbohydrates 4 carbohydrate options available daily; • 2 Main course• Jacket potato • Bread

Dessert 4+ dessert items offered daily;• Main dessert • Home bakes (flapjack, biscuits, cookies,

muffin, crispy cakes, welsh cake) • Fruit• Yoghurt

Drinks 5 types of drinks available daily; • Fruit juice • Water (plain and flavoured)• Milk (plain and flavoured milk)• Chilled drinks • Hot drinks

Extras Tomato ketchup, salad cream, margarine

58


March 2013


Appetite for Life food standards

Number of meat products served across weekly cycle

5 served across weekly cycle

Number of potatoes cooked in fat/oil served across weekly cycle


Number of other products cooked in fat/oil served across weekly cycle


Number of oily fish served over 4 weeks

1 oily fish served on menu cycle

Are confectionery or savoury snacks served across weekly cycle?

Yes Iced sponge

Do drinks provided meet the drinks standard?

No Flavoured water provided

Are two fruit-based desserts offered weekly?

Yes

Appendix 4: Pupil questionnaire

59


March 2013


School Meal Questionnaire

Q1. About you:

I am a: Boy Girl

I am in:

Year 7 Year 8 Year 9 Year 10 Year 11 Year 12 Year 13

Q2. What do you usually eat for lunch?

School Meal Packed lunch Snack bought Meal at home outside of school

Q3. Are you entitled to have a free school meal?

Yes No

Q3.a. If yes, do you take it up?

Yes No

Q4. How often do you eat a school lunch?

Every day 3–4 times a week 1–2 times a week Sometimes Never

60


March 2013


Q5. What would need to change for you to have a school meal or to encourage you to use the school canteen?

(Please choose any things on the list below that affect your choice, and put them in order of importance: 1 = most important)

How long it takes to queue

Range of food on offer

Portion sizes

Where I eat my lunch (seating area)

Cost

How I pay – [cash/dinner ticket/card/biometric]

Whether my friends eat school lunch

What other food I eat during the day

Lunchtime clubs/activities

Other reasons

Please tell us what they are: ....................................................................................................

................................................................................................................................................

................................................................................................................................................

Q6. Anything else you would like to tell us about the school meals service.

................................................................................................................................................

................................................................................................................................................

................................................................................................................................................

Appendix 5: Data showing which factors are ranked as most important by FSM-entitled pupils

61


March 2013


Figures are based on a cohort of 176 pupils of whom 143 (81.25 per cent) take up their entitlement and 33 (18.75 per cent) do not. The percentage figures in the last two tables are based on the full FSM-entitled cohort of 176 pupils.

FSM-entitled pupils

Queues

+ Rating9 –

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 √Not

rated

Taking up their entitlement

34 16 5 1 0 2 0 2 2 1 20 60

Not taking up their entitlement

6 8 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 5 11

Table 1

FSM-entitled pupils

Food

+ Rating –

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 √Not

rated


9 19 14 8 3 3 2 2 1 0 5 77


2 6 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 17

Table 2

9 With 1 being the most important and 10 being the least important.

62


March 2013


FSM-entitled pupils

Portion sizes

+ Rating –

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 √Not

rated


1 8 9 8 8 7 4 4 2 1 5 86


1 0 2 1 0 3 2 2 0 1 0 21

Table 3

FSM-entitled pupils

Where lunch is eaten

+ Rating –

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 √Not

rated


2 2 6 9 9 4 7 5 2 2 3 92


0 1 3 5 2 0 1 0 0 0 1 20

Table 4

FSM-entitled pupils

Cost

+ Rating –

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 √Not

rated


16 8 6 7 3 1 2 1 5 3 9 82


1 1 3 1 0 2 3 1 0 0 4 17

Table 5

63


March 2013


FSM-entitled pupils

Payment method

+ Rating –

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 √Not

rated


1 3 2 4 7 8 6 8 4 0 0 100


0 0 1 0 3 1 2 3 2 0 1 20

Table 6

FSM-entitled pupils


+ Rating –

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 √Not

rated


0 4 8 5 8 8 8 5 2 1 6 88


3 0 2 3 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 20

Table 7

FSM-entitled pupils

Other food eaten in day

+ Rating –

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 √Not

rated


1 2 3 4 3 6 8 13 6 0 2 95


0 1 1 0 3 2 1 3 1 1 1 19

Table 8

64


March 2013


FSM-entitled pupils

Lunchtime clubs/activities

+ Rating –

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 √Not

rated


1 2 4 6 5 6 5 3 12 2 0 97


0 1 0 0 1 1 0 1 6 0 0 23

Table 9

FSM-entitled pupils

Other

+ Rating –

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 √Not

rated


1 0 3 1 2 1 2 3 3 13 0 114


0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 3 1 26

Table 10

65


March 2013


Factor ranked number 1 by FSM-entitled pupils




Queues 19.32% 3.41% 22.73%

Food 5.11% 1.14% 6.25%

Portion size 0.57% 0.57% 1.14%

Where lunch is eaten 1.14% 0.00% 1.14%

Cost 9.09% 0.57% 9.66%

Payment method 0.57% 0.00% 0.57%

What friends do 0.00% 1.70% 1.70%

Other food eaten in day 0.57% 0.00% 0.57%

Lunchtime clubs 0.57% 0.00% 0.57%

Other 0.57% 0.00% 0.57%

Table 11

Factors ranked numbers 1, 2 and 3 by FSM-entitled pupils




Queues 31.25% 7.95% 39.20%

Food 23.86% 6.82% 30.68%

Portion size 10.23% 1.70% 11.93%

Where lunch is eaten 5.68% 2.27% 7.95%

Cost 17.05% 2.84% 19.89%

Payment method 3.41% 0.57% 3.98%

What friends do 6.82% 2.84% 9.66%

Other food eaten in day 3.41% 1.14% 4.55%

Lunchtime clubs 3.98% 0.57% 4.55%

Other 2.27% 0.00% 2.27%

Table 12

Appendix 6: Information about pupil population completing questionnaires and detailed summary of responses to pupil questionnaires

66


March 2013


Pupils completing the pupil questionnaires were asked to consider a list of factors and to rank, in order of importance, the factors that affected their choice around school meals, with 1 being the most important and 10 being the least important.

When the completed pupils’ questionnaires were returned it was found that in many cases, across all participating schools, this section had not been completed correctly. Some pupils had not ranked all of the factors on the list; some pupils simply ticked a number of boxes; other pupils neither ranked nor ticked any of the boxes. Where none of the boxes had been completed, there was no information on factors affecting choice that could be included in the case study. Where pupils had ticked a number of boxes, those factors with ticks have been noted for information. However, questionnaires with ticked boxes could not be included in the overall information on ranking.

There is a caveat around the data on the number of pupils taking school meals, packed lunches, snacks or meals at home, as the figures for each school do not add up to the overall sample. This is because pupils do not always do the same thing at lunchtime five days per week.

67


March 2013


Total number of pupils participating Number of girls participating Number of boys participating

1018 546 472

Number of FSM-entitled pupils participating

Number of FSM-entitled pupils taking up their entitlement

Number of FSM-entitled pupils not taking up their entitlement

176 143 33

Percentage of sample entitled to FSM Percentage of FSM-entitled pupils taking up their entitlement

Percentage of FSM-entitled pupils not taking up their entitlement

17.29% 81.25% 18.75%

Yeargroup

7 8 9 10 11 12 13

250 204 170 182 92 70 50

Total pupil population completing questionnaires

Number of pupils taking:

School meals Packed lunches Meal at home Snack

54 348 46 149

68


March 2013


Factors affecting choice around school meals

Order of importance ranking by pupils

Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 34 16 5 1 0 2 0 2 2 1 20 60

Food 9 19 14 8 3 3 2 2 1 0 5 77

Portion sizes 1 8 9 8 8 7 4 4 2 1 5 86

Where lunch is eaten 2 2 6 9 9 4 7 5 2 2 3 92

Cost 16 8 6 7 3 1 2 1 5 3 9 82

Payment method 1 3 2 4 7 8 6 8 4 0 0 100


0 4 8 5 8 8 8 5 2 1 6 88

Other food eaten in the day

1 2 3 4 3 6 8 13 6 0 2 95

Lunchtime clubs/activities 1 2 4 6 5 6 5 3 12 2 0 97

Other 1 0 3 1 2 1 2 3 3 13 0 114

Top 3 factors affecting choice for FSM-entitled pupils taking up their entitlement

Queues – 55 pupils put in top 3

Food – 42 pupils put in top 3

Cost – 30 pupils put in top 3

Expressed as percentage of FSM-entitled sample

31.25% 23.86% 17.05%

Total sample – data for FSM-entitled pupils taking up their entitlement

69


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 6 8 0 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 5 11

Food 2 6 4 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 1 17

Portion sizes 1 0 2 1 0 3 2 2 0 1 0 21


Cost 1 1 3 1 0 2 3 1 0 0 4 17

Payment method 0 0 1 0 3 1 2 3 2 0 1 20


3 0 2 3 1 2 2 0 0 0 0 20


0 1 1 0 3 2 1 3 1 1 1 19


Other 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 1 3 1 26

Top 3 factors affecting choice for all pupils not taking up their entitlement



Cost and what friends do – each put in top 3 by 5 pupils

apiece


7.95% 6.82% 2.84% each

Total sample – data for FSM-entitled pupils not taking up their entitlement

70


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 258 166 56 34 5 7 5 6 2 5 146 328

Food 101 125 122 63 40 33 10 12 8 3 78 423

Portion sizes 12 46 76 76 60 59 33 28 25 11 37 555


Cost 171 102 95 46 32 19 20 9 8 7 112 397

Payment method 12 28 24 45 53 63 71 61 39 13 27 582


15 28 59 63 56 58 54 63 31 6 51 534


1 14 17 36 45 49 69 94 59 11 18 605


Other 5 3 10 13 17 15 24 24 32 74 12 789

Top 3 factors affecting choice for all pupils


Cost – 368 of pupils put in top 3

Food – 348 of pupils put in top 3

Expressed as percentage of total pupil sample

47.15% 36.15% 34.18%

Total sample – data for all pupils in sample

71


March 2013



135 85 50




41 36 5



30.37% 87.8% 12.2%

Yeargroup

7 8 9 10 11 12 13

30 34 25 28 18 N/A N/A



54 15 11 58

School A – pupil population completing questionnaires

72


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 13 4 - - - 2 - - - - - 17

Food 3 6 4 3 - 1 2 - - - - 17

Portion sizes - 3 2 3 2 1 3 1 - - - 21

Where lunch is eaten 1 - 3 3 2 3 - 3 1 - - 20

Cost 3 2 1 2 - - - - 4 1 - 23

Payment method - 3 - 1 4 - 1 3 1 - - 23


- - - 1 1 2 2 4 2 - - 24


- - - 1 1 2 2 4 2 - - 24

Lunchtime clubs/activities - 1 1 2 2 1 1 1 3 1 - 23

Other - - 1 1 1 - - 1 6 - 26






41.46% 31.71% 14.63%

School A – data for FSM-entitled pupils taking up their entitlement

73


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 1 4 - - - - - - - - - -

Food 3 - - 1 - - - - - - - 1

Portion sizes - - - 1 - 1 1 - - 1 - 1

Where lunch is eaten - - 2 - 1 - 1 - - - - 1

Cost - - 1 1 - - - 1 - - - 2

Payment method - - - - 1 - - - 2 - - 2


1 - 1 1 - - 1 - - - - 1


- - - - 1 - - 2 - - - 2

Lunchtime clubs/activities - 1 - - - 1 - - 1 - - 2

Other - - - - 1 1 - - - 1 - 2




What friends do and where lunch is eaten – each put in top 3 by 2 pupils apiece


12.19% 7.31% 4.87% each

School A – data for FSM-entitled pupils not taking up their entitlement

74


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 47 17 2 3 1 3 1 - - - 18 43

Food 18 19 12 12 2 3 4 1 1 - 5 58

Portion sizes 0 10 8 6 9 6 10 7 2 4 3 70

Where lunch is eaten 2 7 11 5 12 14 2 8 5 - 3 66

Cost 5 7 19 8 1 4 5 3 5 2 2 74

Payment method 1 4 - 6 14 2 8 11 11 1 - 77


3 4 11 16 7 10 7 5 1 1 7 63


- 1 2 5 5 9 11 14 10 - 2 76

Lunchtime clubs/activities - 5 4 4 7 3 9 6 15 6 1 75

Other - 1 2 5 5 9 11 14 10 - 2 76






48.89% 36.3% 22.96%

School A – data for all pupils in sample

75


March 2013



129 61 68




22 16 6



17.05% 72.73% 27.27%

Yeargroup

7 8 9 10 11 12 13

24 24 25 21 14 12 9



76 36 5 15

School B – pupil population completing questionnaires

76


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 7 2 1 - - - - - - - 2 4

Food - 2 5 1 - - - - - - - 8

Portion sizes - - 1 - 2 - 1 - - - - 12

Where lunch is eaten - - 1 1 1 1 - - - - - 12

Cost 3 3 1 1 1 - - - - - - 7

Payment method - - - - - 3 - 1 - - - 12


- 1 - 2 - - 2 - - - 1 10


- - - 1 - - - 2 1 - - 12

Lunchtime clubs/activities - - 1 - - - - - 2 - - 13

Other - - - - - - - - - 1 - 15



Food and cost – each put in top 3 by 7 pupils apiece

Portion sizes/where lunch served/what

friends do/lunchtime activities – each put in top 3 by 1 pupil

apiece


45.45% 31.82% each 4.55% for each

School B – data for FSM-entitled pupils taking up their entitlement

77


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 2 1 - - 1 1 - - - - - 1

Food - 1 1 - 1 - - - - - - 3

Portion sizes 1 - - - - - 1 1 - - - 3

Where lunch is eaten - 1 - 2 - - - - - - 1 2

Cost - - 1 - - 1 1 2 1

Payment method - - - - 2 1 - - - - - 3


- - - 1 - 1 1 - - - - 3


- - 1 - - - - 1 - 1 - 3

Lunchtime clubs/activities - - - - - - - - 1 - - 5

Other - - - - - - - - 1 - - 5




Portion size/where lunch is eaten/cost/other food eaten in day – each put in top 3 by 1 pupil

apiece


13.64% 9.09% 4.55% each

School B – data for FSM-entitled pupils not taking up their entitlement

78


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 47 17 4 1 1 - - 1 - - 20 38

Food 3 17 24 6 4 2 1 - - - 11 61

Portion sizes 2 5 5 12 10 4 4 1 1 - 3 82


Cost 18 18 11 8 4 4 2 1 - - 23 40

Payment method 2 3 2 6 6 10 9 7 2 - 7 75


2 2 5 8 4 6 10 9 - - 8 75


- 1 3 4 5 4 5 12 7 1 4 83


Other - - - 1 1 - - - 2 3 - 122






52.71% 36.43% 34.11%

School B – data for all pupils in sample

79


March 2013



69 41 28




20 18 2



28.99% 90% 10%

Yeargroup

7 8 9 10 11 12 13

68 0 0 1 0 N/A N/A



57 13 1 1

School C – pupil population completing questionnaires

80


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 1 1 2 - - - - - - - 7 7

Food 2 - - - - - - 1 - - 1 14

Portion sizes 1 2 - - - - - - - - 4 11

Where lunch is eaten - - - 1 - - 1 - - - 2 14

Cost - - 1 - 1 - - - - - 4 12

Payment method - - - - - 2 - - - - - 16


- 1 - - 1 - - - 1 - 1 14


- - 1 1 - - - 1 - - 1 14

Lunchtime clubs/activities - - - 1 - - 1 - 1 - - 15

Other - - - - - - - - - - - 18



Portion sizes – 3 pupils put in top 3



20% 15% 10%

School C – data for FSM-entitled pupils taking up their entitlement

81


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues - - - - - - - - - - 1 1

Food - - - - - - - - - - - 2

Portion sizes - - - - - - - - - - - 2

Where lunch is eaten - - - - - - - - - - - 2

Cost - - - - - - - - - - 1 1

Payment method - - - - - - - - - - - 2


- - - - - - - - - - - 2


- - - - - - - - - - - 2

Lunchtime clubs/activities - - - - - - - - - - - 2

Other - - - - - - - - - - - 2

Top 3 factors affecting choice for all pupils not taking up their entitlement Small sample of pupils did not rank factors, and only one of the

respondents ticked factors he regarded as important.Expressed as percentage of total pupil sample

School C – data for FSM-entitled pupils not taking up their entitlement

82


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 4 5 3 2 1 - - - - - 22 32

Food 5 3 - - 1 - 1 2 - - 5 52

Portion sizes 1 2 2 1 - 1 - - 1 - 7 54

Where lunch is eaten 3 - 1 4 - 1 1 1 1 - 11 46

Cost 2 2 4 1 1 - 1 - - 1 16 41

Payment method - 2 - 2 - 4 - - - - 3 58


- 1 2 - 4 - - 2 1 - 4 55


- - 1 2 2 - 1 1 2 - 2 58

Lunchtime clubs/activities - - 1 1 1 1 3 - 1 - 1 60

Other - - - - - - - 1 - - 2 66



Food and cost – each put in top 3

by 8 pupils

Portion size – 5 pupils put in top 3


17.39% 11.59% each 7.25%

School C – data for all pupils in sample

83


March 2013



134 54 80




22 21 1



16.42% 94.45% 4.55%

Yeargroup

7 8 9 10 11 12 13

35 24 26 37 12 - -



98 35 4 4

School D – pupil population completing questionnaires

84


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 4 3 1 1 3 9

Food 3 1 2 1 1 2 11

Portion sizes - 1 - 1 1 1 - 2 2 - - 13

Where lunch is eaten 1 2 - 1 1 - 1 - - - - 15

Cost 1 1 1 2 - 1 - - - - 1 14

Payment method - - - 1 - - 3 1 - - - 16


- - 2 1 2 1 - - - - 1 14


- 1 1 - 1 1 - 1 1 - 1 14

Lunchtime clubs/activities - - - - - 1 - 1 2 1 - 16

Other 1 - - - - - 1 - - 2 - 17




Where lunch is eaten and cost – each put in top 3 by 3 pupils

apiece


36.36% 27.27% 13.64% each

One FSM-entitled pupil does not take up the FSM entitlement; however this pupil did not rank or tick any of the factors.

School D – data for FSM-entitled pupils taking up their entitlement

85


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 36 26 11 6 - 1 - 2 - 2 9 41

Food 22 10 21 12 10 5 - 1 1 2 7 43

Portion sizes - 4 10 17 12 14 4 4 6 1 4 58


Cost 26 18 15 8 4 2 1 - - 1 7 52

Payment method 1 7 1 5 9 8 15 11 6 9 2 60


- 6 7 5 11 10 3 16 13 1 2 60


- 5 2 3 3 5 15 18 15 3 2 63

Lunchtime clubs/activities 3 1 6 5 6 9 10 8 17 4 - 65

Other 2 1 - 3 2 1 7 3 6 16 - 93






54.47% 44.02% 39.55%

School D – data for all pupils in sample

86


March 2013



67 33 34




6 5 1



8.96% 83.33% 16.67%

Yeargroup

7 8 9 10 11 12 13

24 22 21 0 0 0 0



34 27 17 2

School E – pupil population completing questionnaires

87


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 2 1 - - - - - 1 - - - 1

Food - 1 - 1 2 - - - 1 - - -

Portion sizes - - - 2 - 2 - - - 1 - -

Where lunch is eaten - - 1 - 2 - 1 - - 1 - -

Cost 1 2 - - - - 1 - 1 - - -

Payment method - - 1 - 1 1 1 - 1 - - -


- - 1 - - 2 1 1 - - - -


1 - - - - - 1 3 - - - -

Lunchtime clubs/activities - 1 2 1 - - 1 - - - - -

Other - - - 1 - - - 3 1 - - -


Queues/cost/lunchtime clubs – each put in

top 3 by 3 pupils apiece

Food/where lunch is eaten/payment method/what friends do/other food eaten in day – each put in top 3 by 1 pupil

apiece


50% each 16.67%

School E – data for FSM-entitled pupils taking up their entitlement

88


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 1 - - - - - - - - - - -

Food - 1 - - - - - - - - - -

Portion sizes - - 1 - - - - - - - - -

Where lunch is eaten - - - - 1 - - - - - - -

Cost - - - - - 1 - - - - - -

Payment method - - - - - - 1 - - - - -


- - - 1 - - - - - - - -


- - - - - - - - 1 - - -

Lunchtime clubs/activities - - - - - - - 1 - - - -

Other - - - - - - - - - 1 - -


Only one pupil ranked factors in order of preference here, the ranking was:1. Queues 2. Food3. Portion size.


School E – data for FSM-entitled pupils not taking up their entitlement

89


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 25 31 1 1 - - - 1 - - - 8

Food 4 8 13 13 5 10 - 2 1 1 - 10

Portion sizes - 2 14 9 4 9 4 3 3 2 - 17

Where lunch is eaten 1 2 6 4 15 7 11 6 - 1 - 14

Cost 27 9 9 3 4 2 1 1 2 - - 9

Payment method - 2 2 4 8 5 12 3 10 2 - 19


1 1 6 8 4 7 7 10 6 - - 17


1 - 1 3 5 7 7 14 6 4 - 19

Lunchtime clubs/activities 2 4 5 6 4 4 5 6 10 3 - 18

Other - - 3 3 1 - 1 2 6 18 - 33






85.07% 67.16% 37.31%

School E – data for all pupils in sample

90


March 2013



165 93 72




17 13 4



10.3% 76.47% 23.53%

Yeargroup

7 8 9 10 11 12 13

23 30 20 30 21 29 12



85 55 2 32

School F – pupil population completing questionnaires

91


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 3 3 1 1 - - - - - - 1 4

Food - 3 2 2 - - - 1 - - 1 4

Portion sizes - 2 1 1 1 3 - - - - - 5

Where lunch is eaten - - 1 1 - - 2 2 1 - 1 5

Cost 5 - 1 - - - 1 - - 1 - 5

Payment method - - 1 2 2 - - - 2 - - 6


- - - - - 1 1 4 1 1 1 4


- - - 1 1 1 2 1 2 - - 5

Lunchtime clubs/activities - - - - 3 3 1 - 1 - - 5

Other - - 1 - 1 - 1 - - 3 - 7


Queues and cost – each put in top 3 by 6 pupils apiece


Portion sizes – 3 pupils put in top 3


35.29% each 29.41% 17.65%

School F – data for FSM-entitled pupils taking up their entitlement

92


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 1 1 - - - - - - - - - 2

Food - - - 2 - - - - - - - 2

Portion sizes - - 1 - - - - - - - - 3

Where lunch is eaten - - 1 - - - - - - - - 3

Cost 1 - 1 - - - - - - - - 2

Payment method - - 1 - - - - 1 - - - 2


- - - - - 1 - - - - - 3


- - - - - 1 1 - - - - 2


Other - - - - - - - - - 1 - 3


Queues and cost – each put in top 3 by 2 pupils apiece

Portion sizes/where lunch is eaten/payment method – each put in top 3 by 1 pupil apiece


11.76% each 5.88% each

School F – data for FSM-entitled pupils not taking up their entitlement

93


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 56 31 14 11 - 1 2 - - 2 15 33

Food 15 24 31 14 13 5 4 2 4 - 6 47

Portion sizes 3 10 14 18 15 15 7 9 8 2 7 57


Cost 37 28 17 6 10 3 6 1 1 2 16 38

Payment method 3 8 11 12 9 20 19 11 7 1 5 59


3 2 8 17 14 15 14 15 8 2 4 63


- 2 5 9 16 15 13 20 17 1 2 65

Lunchtime clubs/activities - 9 3 4 7 7 6 14 33 12 - 70

Other 1 - 2 - 4 4 4 3 5 27 1 114






61.21% 49.7% 42.42%

School F – data for all pupils in sample

94


March 2013



132 86 46




40 28 12



30.3% 70% 30%

Yeargroup

7 8 9 10 11 12 13

15 43 27 38 0 6 3



57 60 4 13

School G – pupil population completing questionnaires

95


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 3 1 - - - - - - 2 - 7 15

Food - 3 1 - - 2 - - - - - 22

Portion sizes - - 3 1 1 - - 1 - - - 22

Where lunch is eaten - - - 1 2 - 2 - - - - 23

Cost 2 - - 1 1 - - 1 - 1 3 19

Payment method 1 - - - - 2 - 1 - - - 24


- 1 - 1 2 - 1 - - - 2 21


- 1 1 - - 1 1 1 - - - 23

Lunchtime clubs/activities - - - 1 - 1 1 1 1 - - 23

Other - - 1 - - - - - - - - 27


Queues and food – each put in top 3 by 4 pupils

apiece

Portion sizes – 3 pupils put in

top 3



10% each 7.5% 5%

School G – data for FSM-entitled pupils taking up their entitlement

96


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 1 2 - - - - - - - - 4 5

Food - - 3 - - - - - - - 1 8

Portion sizes - - - - - 2 - 1 - - - 9

Where lunch is eaten - - - 3 - - - - - - - 9

Cost - 1 - - - - 2 - - - - 9

Payment method - - - - - - 1 2 - - 1 8


2 - - - 1 - - - - - - 9


- - - - 2 1 - - - - 1 8


Other - - - - - - - - - - 1 11



apiece

Whether friends take school

meals – 2 pupils put in top 3

Cost – 1 pupil put in top 3


7.5% each 5% 2.5%

School G – data for FSM-entitled pupils not taking up their entitlement

97


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 15 5 3 1 - - 2 1 2 1 41 61

Food 3 15 5 - 1 2 - 2 1 - 26 77

Portion sizes 1 - 8 3 2 7 1 2 - - 8 100

Where lunch is eaten - 2 2 7 5 1 6 1 - - 5 103

Cost 11 4 2 3 4 - 2 2 - 1 25 78

Payment method 2 - 1 2 1 8 1 5 1 - 5 106


2 4 5 2 5 2 4 - - - 18 90


- 1 1 4 2 2 4 7 1 - 3 107

Lunchtime clubs/activities - - 1 1 2 1 2 1 14 - - 110

Other - - 1 - - - - 1 1 2 4 123



apiece


Whether friends take school

meals – 11 pupils put in top 3


17.42% each 12.88% 8.33%

School G – data for all pupils in sample

98


March 2013



187 93 94




8 6 2



4.28% 75% 25%

Yeargroup

7 8 9 10 11 12 13

32 27 25 27 27 23 26



63 107 2 25

School H – pupil population completing questionnaires

99


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 1 1 - - - - - 1 - - - 3

Food 1 3 - - - - - - - - 1 1

Portion sizes - - 2 - 1 - - - - - 1 2

Where lunch is eaten - - - 1 1 - - - - 1 - 3

Cost 1 - 1 1 - - - - - - 1 2

Payment method - - - - - - 1 2 - - - 3


- - 1 - 1 2 - - - - - 2


- - - - - 1 2 - - - - 3

Lunchtime clubs/activities 1 - - 1 - - - - 2 - - 2

Other - - - - - - - - 1 1 - 4



Queues/portion size/cost – each put in top 3 by 2

pupils apiece

Whether friends take school meals – 1 pupil put in top 3


50% 25% each 12.5%

School H – data for FSM-entitled pupils taking up their entitlement

100


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues - - - 1 - - - - - - - 1

Food 1 - - - - - - - - - - 1

Portion sizes - - - - - - - - - - - 2

Where lunch is eaten - - - - - - - - - - - 2

Cost - - - - - - - - - - 1 1

Payment method - - - - - - - - - - - 2


- - 1 - - - - - - - - 1


- 1 - - - - - - - - - 1

Lunchtime clubs/activities - - - - 1 - - - - - - 1

Other - - - - - - - - - - - 2


Only 1 pupil ranked factors in order of preference here. Their top 3 ranking was:1. Food2. Other food eaten in the day3. Whether friends take school meals.


School H – data for FSM-entitled pupils not taking up their entitlement

101


March 2013




Tick

ed a

s im

port

ant

Left

bla

nk

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

Queues 28 34 18 9 2 2 - 1 - - 21 72

Food 31 29 16 6 4 6 - 2 - - 18 75

Portion sizes 5 13 15 10 8 3 3 2 4 2 5 117


Cost 45 16 18 9 4 4 2 1 - - 23 65

Payment method 3 2 7 8 6 6 7 13 2 - 5 128


4 8 15 7 7 8 9 6 2 2 8 111


- 4 2 6 7 7 13 8 1 2 3 134


Other 2 1 2 1 4 1 1 - 2 8 3 162






42.78% 42.25% 40.64%

School H – data for all pupils in sample

Appendix 7: Menu information for case study schools

102


March 2013


School AAppetite for Life food standards

Number of meat products served across weekly cycle 30 per week – standard not met


3 per week – standard not met



Number of oily fish served over 4 weeks Information not available


Yes – standard not met

Do drinks provided meet the drinks standard? No – standard not met

Are two fruit-based desserts offered weekly? No – standard not met

Variety of foods

Menu cycle duration 3 weeks

Main course – number of choices per day 1

Vegetarian main course – number of choices per day 0

Pasta and sauces – number of fillings available per day 2 fillings 2–3 times per week

Jacket potatoes – number of fillings available per day 5 fillings 2–3 times per week

Single-serve/snack items – number of items available per day 10

Sandwiches/wraps/rolls – number of fillings available per day 7

Baguettes – number of fillings available per day 7

Carbohydrates 5

Vegetables (types: hot vegetables, salad, baked beans) – number of choices per day

4

Dessert (category types: fruit, yoghurt, main dessert and home bakes) – number of desserts available per day

3

Drinks (category types: water, fruit juice, milk, chilled drinks) – number of types of drinks available per day

5

103


March 2013


School BAppetite for Life food standards





2 per week – standard met

Number of oily fish served over 4 weeks None – standard not met




Are two fruit-based desserts offered weekly? Yes – standard met

Variety of foods




Pasta and sauces – number of fillings available per day 3

Jacket potatoes – number of fillings available per day 2–3 times per week




Carbohydrates 7


3–4


4


6

104


March 2013


School CAppetite for Life food standards

Number of meat products served across weekly cycle 3–4 per week – standard not met




None – standard met

Number of oily fish served over 4 weeks 2 every 4 weeks – standard met


No – standard met

Do drinks provided meet the drinks standard? Yes – standard met


Variety of foods





Jacket potatoes – number of fillings available per day 4




Carbohydrates 3


4


4+


4

105


March 2013


School DAppetite for Life food standards



Information not available








Variety of foods







Sandwiches/wraps/ rolls – number of fillings available per day 5


Carbohydrates 4


4


4+


5

106


March 2013


School EAppetite for Life food standards

Number of meat products served across weekly cycle 2 per week – standard met










Variety of foods









Carbohydrates 4


3


5


4

107


March 2013


School FAppetite for Life food standards





None – standard met

Number of oily fish served over 4 weeks None – standard not met





Variety of foods









Carbohydrates 5


3


4


5

108


March 2013


School GAppetite for Life food standards

Number of meat products served across weekly cycle 2–3 per week – standard not met


2–3 per week – standard not met



Number of oily fish served over 4 weeks None – standard met



Do drinks provided meet the drinks standard? Information not available

Are two fruit-based desserts offered weekly? Information not available

Variety of foods




Pasta and sauces – number of fillings available per day N/A





Carbohydrates N/A


N/A


2



109


March 2013


School HAppetite for Life food standards

Number of meat products served across weekly cycle 2 per week – standard met





Number of oily fish served over 4 weeks 1 every 3 weeks – standard not met





Variety of foods









Carbohydrates 3


4


4


4

free school meals case studies report -...

Documents