Ontario Schools’ Readiness for School Food and Beverage Policy Implementation

Abstract

School food policies are developed to influence students' eating habits and ultimately impact students' overall health and well-being, but little is known about schools' readiness for implementing these policies. The purpose of this study was to examine schools' organizational readiness to implement Ontario's School Food and Beverage Policy (Program and Policy Memorandum No. 150, 2010). In addition to policy analysis, six principals and two vice-principals from six elementary and secondary schools who were directly involved in the planning and preparation for the policy were interviewed in three district school boards in Southern Ontario. Findings suggest that there is a need for more effective dissemination, in-service training, and education for school stakeholders in order to engage and stimulate interest and compliance of the nutrition standards. Finding nutritious foods that are appealing for students; as well as developing supportive partnerships within and outside the school to reinforce consistent messages to students are both areas that require further attention. The results of this research serve as a framework for potential solutions to school nutrition policies, strategies, and interventions and may also inform key stakeholders and policy makers in adapting and refining policies as a means of supporting the implementation process for successful outcomes.

Support for healthy eating at schools according to the comprehensive school health framework: evaluation during the early years of the Ontario School Food and Beverage Policy implementation

“…10 Preliminary studies indicate that some school stakeholders have encountered difficulties implementing P/PM 150, thereby limiting the ability of schools to reach full policy compliance. [11][12][13] These findings are consistent with reports that nutrition policy adherence typically takes years. 14,15 Policies can falter when the local context is unsupportive of the change (e.g.…”

Barriers to Nutrition Promotion in Private Secondary Schools in Kolkata, India: Perspectives of Parents and Teachers

“…Such limited involvement of key stakeholders is a significant barrier to implementation of healthy school food policies [ 23 , 27 ]. Unlike Indian schools, studies conducted in schools in Portugal [ 40 ], China [ 41 ] and other countries have shown that schools encourage the participation of all key stakeholders including parents, teaching staff, and pupils in their canteen operations [ 23 , 26 , 42 , 43 , 44 ]. Considering this strong support in favor of the engagement of parents, teachers, and students in school operations, Indian schools might consider this nutrition promotion strategy in improving the healthiness of their canteen services.…”

“…Parents of adolescents studying in year 9 and secondary school biology and home science (i.e., Home Economics) educators were invited to participate in the study. Both of these stakeholder groups were recruited because they are generally recognized as key and meaningful players in the school system [ 26 , 27 ]. Moreover, both these groups were likely to be well-informed about various nutrition promotion issues in Indian secondary schools [ 14 , 17 ].…”

“…Therefore, the current investigation aimed to understand the views of Indian parents and teachers about the possible barriers to nutrition promotion. The perspectives of parents and teachers are critical to this investigation as both these groups play an important role in the successful implementation of school-based nutrition programs [ 26 , 27 ].…”

Parents’ and Teachers’ Views of Food Environments and Policies in Indian Private Secondary Schools

“…Therefore, the present study aimed to examine the perspectives of teachers and parents about the current school food environments and their views of possible future healthy school food environments and policies. The views of parents and teachers are important because the successful implementation of school food policies involves the cooperation of these two groups of stakeholders [ 29 , 30 ].…”