today’s nutrition environment: trends in government nutrition policies
DESCRIPTION
Today’s Nutrition Environment: Trends in Government Nutrition Policies. Lisa Watson Watson Mulhern LLC. Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act 2009. Federal Nutrition Policy Impacts Sales. Dairy example:. Total Fluid Milk In Schools: $1.36 Bil /yr. FACT: Even subtle changes - PowerPoint PPT PresentationTRANSCRIPT
Today’s Nutrition Environment:Trends in Government Nutrition Policies
Lisa WatsonWatson Mulhern LLC
Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act 2009Child Nutrition and WIC
Reauthorization Act 2009
FACT:Even subtle changes
in government programscan have profound impact on overall dairy consumption.
Total Fluid MilkIn Schools:$1.36 Bil/yr
Total Cheese in Schools: $552 Mil/yr
Dairy in WIC, Food Stamps, Other
Food Assistance Programs:
$5.07 Bil/yrTotal: $6.98 Billion
Impact of 5% Drop in Gov’t
program Usage =
- $350 Mil/yr
Impact of 5% Drop in Gov’t
program Usage =
- $350 Mil/yr
Federal Nutrition Policy Impacts Sales Federal Nutrition Policy Impacts Sales Dairy example:
Act authorizes all federal school meal and child nutrition programs
Programs are permanently authorized, but are reviewed by Congress every five yearso Current law expires end of September 2009
Reauthorization amends two existing statuteso National School Lunch Act (created 1946 “as a measure of national
security to safeguard the health and well-being of the Nation’s children”
o Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (established the School Breakfast Program)o Other programs later added, including the Child and Adult Care Food
Program and the Summer Food Program
Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization ActChild Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act
National School Lunch Program School Breakfast Program Child and Adult Care Food Program Summer Food Service Program Afterschool Snack and Meal Program Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants
and Children (WIC) WIC Farmers Market Nutrition Program Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program Special Milk Program
Programs Up For ReviewPrograms Up For Review
A few slides on process
CNR 2009CNR 2004
USDA
DG 2005
USDA
IOM
Wait until DG 2005 completed to revise
•Meet, meet, meet•No clear consensus•Punt to IOM to recommend standards based on the science
•Report due late 2009•Comments pushing IOM hard to make case for additional funding to meet standards
Instructs USDA to revise meal standards based on latest dietary guidance
•Individual food groups are identified with disease prevention•Recommended increases in whole grains, f/v, and low/ nonfat dairy
How did we get here?
CNR theoretically should reflect report recommendations
CNR 2009
CNR 2004
USDA
DG 2005
USDA
IOM
Wait until DG 2005 completed to revise
•Meet, meet, meet•No clear consensus•Punt to IOM
•Report due late 2009•Comments pushing IOM hard to make case for additional funding to meet standards
Instructs USDA to revise meal standards based on latest dietary guidance
•Individual food groups are identified with disease prevention•Recommended increases in whole grains, f/v, and low/ nonfat dairy
Dietary
Guidelines 2010 Start all over again . . . ?
The ProcessThe Process 1) FY 2010 budget submitted to Congress next month2) March 2009, SNA and FRAC spring conferences; CNR
hearings expected3) April 15: Budget Resolution to allocate $ by
committee/function4) <WINDOW FOR CNR DELIBERATIONS>5) October 2009: Appropriations completed
SNA is most powerful, but consumer groups on the riseo Historically seen as “SNA’s bill”o But more criticism of school meal programs
Additional funding?o Program quality could improve with more $o New equipment funding in Senate stimulus billo Many observers doubt major funding increase
National nutrition standardso Much more likely now than last yearo USDA Discretion vs. details in statuteo Could accelerate trend to kick out sodas, snack foodso Sugar is “avoidance nutrient” – limits likely on total grams in vended
products
Child Nutrition Programs: Major Issues for CongressChild Nutrition Programs: Major Issues for Congress
Key 2009 CNR Issue
A variety of advocates likely to seek additional funding -- makes process much more difficult, reducing likelihood of action
IOM report could help make case for more funding Most Reauthorization items are entitlements; few discretionary
dollarso Opportunity for “tradeoffs” limited
House Education and Labor has full docket in 2009 No items in CNR have to move this year
o NSLP, SBP, Special Milk authorized permanentlyo Others could be extended fairly easily
Lawmakers could use rationale of IOM report not being completed until fall 2009 and DG process not done until 2010, both of which ideally should influence child nutrition program funding and structure
Potential Factors on 2009 MovementPotential Factors on 2009 Movement
Increase funding Per meal reimbursement Update Federal reimbursement rates semi-annually Expand “free” meal category from 130% of poverty to 185%
(eliminating reduced price meal) Provide 10 cents in USDA commodities for each school breakfast
served Improve nutrition standards
Grant Secretary of Ag statutory authority to regulate sale of all foods/beverages on school campus (ending “time and place” rule)
Require USDA to implement a consistent, science-based national interpretation of the DGA for all school meals reimbursed by USDA
Key Player: SNAKey Player: SNA
Improve access to nutritious foods in schools, child care centers and homes, in afterschool programs, on weekends, during the summer and in the home.
Enhance nutrition environment to promote healthy eating habits for women and children.
Modernize and streamline program operations to improve program integrity and efficiency.
Key Player: FRACKey Player: FRAC
Key Player: NANA
Update the national nutrition standards for school foods sold in vending machines, a la carte, school stores, etc., and apply them to the whole campus for the full school day.
Increase reimbursement rates for school meals. Require employment of qualified nutrition professionals at school
food service district level. Encourage state child nutrition programs and schools to work
toward the most recent edition of the DGA. Require USDA to publish a proposed rule w/in 12 months (and
finalize w/in 24) of IOM report. Provide $1m for IOM study assessing the nutritional quality of
school meals and compliance with school meal standards. Provide $10m/year for non-food assistance grants (equipment
purchase, etc.) to make it easier to provide meals consistent w/ DGA and food safety practices.
Fund DoD Fresh Program @$100m; encourage purchase of local produce when possible.
Remove requirement specifying that schools have to sell milk at “various fat levels” and allow only lowfat or nonfat.
Change requirement for soymilk to be nutritionally equivalent to lowfat milk only for nutrients of concern for children.
Increase (by $2m) funding to national Food Service Management Institute to improve training and assistance in meeting DGA.
Continue to improve nutritional quality of USDA Foods (commodities).
Strengthen local school wellness policieso Variety of suggestions, mostly related to implementation, as well as
increased role for USDA Team Nutrition
NANA’s Key Positions To Date (continued)
NANA’s Key Positions To Date (continued)
Strengthen local school wellness policieso Variety of suggestions, mostly related to implementation, as well as
increased role for USDA Team Nutrition Strengthen nutrition education and promotion
o Streamline and reform nutrition education and strengthen/provide reliable funding for Team Nutrition
o Training and certification in nutrition and food safety for food service directors
Support and strengthen WIC o Preserve nutrition integrity of packageo Strengthen nutrition education and breastfeeding supporto Support implementation of new packages and technology needed to
effectively implement WIC program (infrastructure, MIS)o Update health outcomes research and effectiveness evaluationo Should NOT cap nutrition services funding
Major Nutrition Policy TrendsMajor Nutrition Policy Trends
Obesity remains top issue
Obesity remains top issue
Major Nutrition Policy TrendsMajor Nutrition Policy Trends
Focus on kids’ health Marketing/advertising School nutrition/activity
Focus on kids’ health Marketing/advertising School nutrition/activity
Major Nutrition Policy TrendsMajor Nutrition Policy Trends
Corporate change through public pressure
Alliance for Healthier Generation
Self-imposed advertising limits
Corporate change through public pressure
Alliance for Healthier Generation
Self-imposed advertising limits
Major Nutrition Policy TrendsMajor Nutrition Policy Trends
Greater emphasis on standards
IOM focus on Childhood ObesityIOM focus on Childhood Obesity
2004Kids are
getting fat; prevention
key
2004Focus on physical
environment
2005Marketing is making
kids fat
2006Gov’t is
not doing enough
2007Get “junk food” out of schools
Nutrition Standards and Meal Requirements for National School Lunch and Breakfast Programs
2008-9Align meal standards w/ science
IOM Urges Restrictive School Food & Beverage Competitive Food StandardsIOM Urges Restrictive School Food & Beverage Competitive Food Standards
IOM Process for Nutrition Standards and Meal Requirements, NSL&BP
Process appears rigorous and extremely detailed Hearing on “Phase 1” (basic assumptions and
approach) January 28 Few arguments to recommended approach during
oral comments Primary focus on need to challenge assumptions of
static funding
Nutrition Standards Can Have Unintended Consequences
Nutrition Standards Can Have Unintended Consequences
Sodium – The New Fat?Sodium – The New Fat?
Clearly a priority of Dietary Guidelines 2010 Committee One focus of
IOM evaluation
The Bottom Line
The timing of relevant reports and the economic environment make it difficult to predict whether CNR will move forward in 2009 versus 2010.