1. Charge to the Hill Industry Perspective
Cheryl L. Isberner
Land O’Lakes
March 4, 2013
Greeting and Introduction

2. Asks The 2013 SNA issue paper states the following:
SNA supports the elimination of the weekly limits on Grains and Meat/Meat Alternates served in the National School Lunch Program. SNA strongly urges Congress and USDA to make this temporary solution for SY permanent immediately.
SNA urges a delay in the implementation of the School Breakfast Program modifications pending resolution of outstanding issues related to the School Lunch Meal Pattern. Upon implementation of the School Breakfast Program modifications, SNA urges the elimination of the weekly limits on Grains served in the School Breakfast Program and also recommends allowing full substitutability of Meat/Meat Alternates for Grains.
Support the standardization of the NSLP
Continued strides to improve health and wellness of the nation’s children

3. Recent Extension
SP : “Extending Flexibility in the Meat/Meat Alternate and Grains Maximums for School Year ;” February 25, 2013 Only Temporary Relief
We appreciate the much-needed relief, but it is still only temporary.
USDA says:
“In addition, we understand the need for longer term guidance on this issue, and are currently considering options for addressing this flexibility beyond next year. We continue to welcome input from a broad range of program stakeholders and interested parties regarding the impact of this flexibility.”
That is another small step in the right direction, but for the program to serve its mission—providing needy children with nutritious meals—industry and school food authorities need permanence and certainty.
The stop-gap measures do not allow for consistent ordering, much less, long term planning and production [INSERT EXAMPLE OF HOW FAR AHEAD ORDERS ARE MADE AND HOW FAR AHEAD LOL PLANS].

4. The current situation is untenable.
School Lunch
The current situation is untenable.
 WHY DO WE NEED THE ASKS?
The current situation is not working.
Presenting serious challenges for School Foodservice Directors
Unintended consequences

5. School Lunch Uncertainty for School Foodservice Directors
While some Food Service Directors have decided to add proteins back onto their menu cycles, this relaxation of the maximums has not provided widespread relief, as a large portion – if not the majority – of directors are not interested in changing for the short term with the uncertainty that the impact will reach beyond the school year. They are concerned that a short term change in the program will only result in student disappoint again in the fall. And there is fear that the immense amount of labor required to comply with application for the $.06 reimbursement will have to updated and repeated again

6. School Lunch Participation
To keep children engaged in the program, the flexibility to combine proteins and grains is imperative. 8 out of 10 dishes on children’s restaurant menus contain a combination of grains and proteins. Although the ones served in NSLP need to be as healthy as possible, limiting access to the items that kids expect only challenge the frequency with which children will want to participate.
To keep kid favorite items on the menu, SDs have been forced to find infinitesimally smaller portions of things like hamburger patties and cheese so that they can keep favorites like the Cheeseburger on the menu (1 ¾ oz burger with ¼ oz of cheese…..really???). A plain old hamburger just isn’t as appealing as a cheeseburger and it is not what they are being served at home or in restaurants. Hard to keep students engaged in a meal program when the choices are not things they typically eat.
A recent study found that at-home lunches served to kids aged 6-12 and consisted of sandwiches approximately 38 percent and 40 percent of the time, respectively. The maximums have led to the elimination of sandwiches from many menus.
Sandwiches are a key element of meals eaten at home by year olds.
Lifting the grain and meat weekly limits will allow children to get the food items that familiar and desirable. Keeping satisfaction and participation rates high

7. Unintended Consequences
School Lunch
Unintended Consequences
The grain and protein maximums combined with the calorie requirements are creating gaps in the menu offerings that result in the need to incorporate items of minimal nutritional value. The items are typically inexpensive “fillers” that may result in the addition of products that are fat or sugar based, while excluding proteins or grains because the maximums have already been met.
Putting maximums on grains and proteins limits the cost levers that SDs have to provide an fiscally responsible program. Grains in particular can be a healthy, financially viable option to meeting the calorie maximums. Instead they must use low cost food items that contain no protein or grain but have fat, sugar or empty calories to meet the calorie minimums.
Another unintended consequence of limiting the grains and proteins……operators are looking for products that don’t contain protein or grains. They can meet the calorie requirement, but don’t have protein.

8. Let’s not rush things at the expense of our children’s health!
School Breakfast
Let’s not rush things at the expense of our children’s health!
Additionally we would like to see a delay in implementation of the new ruling for the School Breakfast Program for two reasons. We believe school foodservice directors need time to adjust to the extensive changes to the School Lunch menus. Second it is important that the current ruling be altered to allow proteins to be served alongside grains at breakfast which can enhance the nutrition of school meals. Implementing without these issues resolved will only result in continued decline in participation rates among the most needy populations segments.

9. Let’s do one thing at a time so we can do it right!
School Breakfast
Let’s do one thing at a time so we can do it right!
• Lunch program implementation has been very difficult and consumed significant amounts of resources from the School Foodservice Directors and their staffs
• Continuing to implement additional programs that may require additional changes is time-consuming and unproductive

10. Kids need their protein!
School Breakfast
Kids need their protein!
• Grains are certainly a key component of any nutritional program, the lack of required protein for breakfast is very concerning
• As educators, parents, and researchers know, breakfast, particularly a breakfast providing protein, is essential to reducing appetite, sustaining blood sugar levels, and is necessary for academic success.

11. THANK YOU