Presentation on theme: "SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM: School Lunch Specialist v. Head Cook."— Presentation transcript:
SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM: School Lunch Specialist v. Head Cook
Department/Class School Lunch Supervisor Various School Districts Competitive Approved: 1982 No revisions Head Cook Sheriff, School Districts Non-Competitive Approved: 1961 1997, 2008
DISTINGUISHED FEATURES School Lunch Specialist Responsible for managing program in a large or several small schools. May work under a School lunch Director or District Administrator. Supervision of Cooks and other program personnel. Related work as required. Head Cook Responsible for planning menus, purchasing food, preparation and service. Under general supervision with wide leeway allowed. Supervision of Cooks, Food Service Helpers, and other personnel Related work as required.
TYPICAL WORK School Lunch Specialist Plan and supervise preparation and service of lunches Plans or recommends changes in menus Requisitions food, supplies, equipment Input on maintenance of plant and equipment Maintains inventory Supervises collection and accounting of cash receipts Head Cook Plans meals, maintains inventory, prepares orders. Supervises and assists cooks, aids and (residents) dishwashers Records and reports on food service production Assists in the maintenance of the kitchen budget.
KNOWLEDGE, SKIILS, ABILITIES, PERSONAL CHARACTERISTICS School Lunch Specialist Fundamentals of nutrition, school lunch program Ability to supervise work of others Knowledge of food values, preparation, menus, equip Keep and prepare reports Good relationship with children and adults Physical ability to handle the work Head Cook Knowledge of institutional food service Knowledge of principals and practices of supervision Knowledge of food values, menu planning Food preparation practices, sanitation, inventory, ordering Establish and maintain good relations with others Keep and prepare reports Physical ability to handle the work.
OTHER SCHOOLS IN TST? School Lunch Supervisor Groton (TST share) Lansing (TST share) Ithaca Head Cook Trumansburg (TST share) South Seneca (TST share) Newfield
WHY CHANGE OUR CONFIGURATION? Lansing vs. TST employee – Strategic Plan – BOE committees becoming more defined, focused, active 0.64FTE vs. 1.0FTE – See above – Hands-on management/leadership – Facilitation of critical service times Personnel in house – Experienced employees with supervisory capabilities – Current configuration leads to perceived separation between buildings
COST ANALYSIS ASSUMPTIONS: – Limit posting to current staff to prevent addition of health insurance and retirement liability – Increase hours of other current staff with no impact on above – Possible addition of one new body at fewer hours than would qualify for health insurance
PROCESS January, 2011: MJK met with current BOCES itinerant. – (The discussion and related research has been ongoing since Spring, 2009) March 25: MJK met with staff in each café, (intended for 3/16/2011) March 28: Head Cook position posted internally (2-week internal posting) May 2 (or week of?): Interviews – Interview committee: volunteers from the School Lunch program, BOE members from Health Committee LFA representatives Administrative representatives LSSA representatives May 9: Dr. Grimm makes recommendation to BOE
SUMMARY Cost analysis supports change from 0.64 FTE to full-time Supervisor at similar cost. Increased presence in district with FT Supervisor during critical service time(s) No title conflict, districts and BOCES use titles interchangeably Increased presence in district for Strategic Plan/BOE committee meetings