“To change the lives of every child in the country” - no mean feat, you may agree, but this was the wish driving the government’s decision to launch the Schools Fruit and Vegetable Scheme (SFVS), Mike Tiddy, NHS PASA purchasing manager told FPJ last year. To kick-start the battle against the nation’s ailing health, the government rightly turned its focus to the root of the problem and pledged enough resources to give every four-to-six-year-old in LEA-maintained schools a piece of fruit every day.
What it boils down to is £66 million of the Department of Health’s budget for the last two years being spent on sourcing and delivering a child-friendly piece of fruit to two million pupils in 16,000 schools across the country. So, with all regions now fully on board, how is the scheme faring? Are lives being changed?
According to Richard Clements, account manager for the SFVS at major supplier Redbridge AFI, the answer to this question is simple: “We have 4,500 schools volunteering to join this scheme and we haven’t had a single one pull out, which they would have done if it wasn’t efficient or if it caused problems, wouldn’t they?” he asks. “Some of the teachers may consider they are not there to hand out fruit but they couldn’t be more enthusiastic, which tells a huge story I think.”
In terms of the aim to raise national consumption of fresh produce, measuring the success of the scheme is immensely difficult, Clements suggests, since, if a plateau in consumption was recorded there would be little way of measuring whether there would have been a drop had the scheme not been in operation. Tiddy agrees that gathering evidence for the scheme’s success takes time but says some conclusions can be drawn without too much hesitation. “We know children in the scheme eat more fruit and vegetables than they would if they were not participating,” he claims. “If this increase is sustained beyond childhood and into their adult life the evidence is that they will enjoy healthier lives and decrease their risk of developing chronic illness in later life. Along with a range of initiatives in schools to improve children’s diets, the scheme contributes to the overall government target to halt the increase in childhood obesity by 2010.”
More immediate benefits have been documented, as well, however. According to the DoH, an evaluation by the National Foundation for Educational Research demonstrated that children participating in the scheme ate significantly more fruit and showed increased knowledge of healthy eating, particularly among children from deprived areas. Additionally, a survey from research body NOP World found that more than a quarter of children and their families reported they were eating more fruit at home after joining the scheme, rising to nearly a third in the lower social classes.
Anecdotally speaking, praise has flown in from all corners - teachers, school staff, governors, parents, and the children themselves are full of admiration for the scheme, and real, tangible effects are being witnessed, according to the DoH’s findings:
• Children are encouraged to try new types of fruit - the fact that all children have the fruit initiates a kind of “positive peer pressure”.
• Eating together improves children’s social skills and self-confidence.
• Improvements in children’s behaviour and concentration are observed when fruit is eaten as a mid-morning snack.
• More children are making healthier food choices voluntarily - school caterers have noticed an increase in pupils choosing fruit instead of a hot dessert and more fruit is appearing in lunch boxes.
• The scheme boosts the impact of the healthy eating curriculum - activities around fruit and veg have more impact because children can see, taste or prepare it for themselves.
• Schools have been able to inspire children with an interest in gardening clubs and natural recycling, with some even composting fruit skins themselves.
• The scheme has prompted other healthy-eating developments in schools - improving provisions of drinking water, setting up fruit tuck shops to increase cross-school consumption and community-based activities, which highlight the 5 A DAY message, such as the Activ8 ‘fit for play’ event held by London mayor Ken Livingstone in Hyde Park last August and the Countryside Live event for schools in East London last September.
Meanwhile, according to Mark Driver of supplier Minor Weir & Willis, the scheme’s influence has reverberated even further, with supermarkets starting to introduce more small-hand-friendly fruit and vegetables with attractive packaging.
This significant step-up in demand for fresh produce is, of course, great news for suppliers as well. As well as supplying SFVS, like many other companies involved. Redbridge has latched onto the possibility of sending additional provisions to schools with its “7 +” scheme. “There are now 700 schools buying fruit from us for older children,” says Clements. “It usually costs the parents about £3 to give their children a piece of fruit every day for half a term. We deliver the extra fruit along with the fruit for the scheme so without it this probably wouldn’t have happened and it would probably stop if the scheme ended.” The enthusiasm of schools towards the possibility of having provisions for older students, despite the extra additional work implied, is a further indication of the scheme’s popularity, he adds.
As well as suppliers profiting from greater returns on their school deliveries, Tiddy says extending the scheme has also facilitated efficiencies within the supply chain as the systems have become more robust. Improved communication and co-operation between schools and suppliers has allowed for a reduced delivery service to the schools, without compromising the quality of the fruit since they are better prepared to handle it.
According to Alison Stafford, member of the DoH public health department and SFVS area co-ordinator for London, with a scheme such the SFVS, developments of this kind are to be expected and exploited wherever possible. “From the initiation of the original pilots to the present day, the SFVS has been an evolving entity that utilises the opportunities that arise both within schools and through relationships with our suppliers,” she says.
“Consequently we have worked with our suppliers to introduce new products that deliver both variety for the children and will expand their palates to encourage consumption outside of the scheme.”
The pilot scheme started with a fairly limited rota largely consisting of apples, bananas, easy peelers, and pears, although pears proved unpopular with many children. However, additional products have been piloted on a regular basis, in accordance with availability. Strawberries, for example, proved a big hit across the board during last summer’s UK season.
Vegetables are not generally favoured by youngsters but the scheme now includes a number of them, and according to all involved the uptake has been surprisingly positive. “As with any new food, children have initial reservations and need a number of opportunities to taste before they become accustomed to and enjoy the flavour and texture,” Stafford says. “Additionally by experimenting with form, such as using carrot batons and cherry tomatoes, we have developed ways to present vegetables in an enticing way without sacrificing the nutritious qualities.” Whole Chantanay carrots and mini cucumbers have also met with success, Tiddy adds.
As one would expect, with any project involving so many young children, extensive testing is conducted on all items before they are introduced to schools. For example, when cherry tomatoes were launched last year, to prevent the risk of choking, a large cocktail cherry-on-the-vine was selected after tests proved it was too large to fit down the throat of a four-to-six year old.
Stonefruit is still regrettably out of the question for safety reasons, but this decision is plainly defensible, Clements suggests. “When you are dealing with two million kids, if there is a chance they can damage themselves, you can guarantee at least one of them will so you can understand why the DoH wouldn’t want to take any chances.”
The apparent priority placed on safety was heavily challenged last September when the national media ran a story released by the Soil Association, which claimed fruit and veg used for the SFVS contained more pesticides and was lower in quality than fruit available in shops. The SA said its research, based on Government testing, revealed chemical residues were found in 84 per cent of fresh produce in schools, compared with 57 per cent in stores.
This declaration had the potential to see the scheme lose favour among important parties, in particular parents, who could easily fall prey to such scaremongering, and whose support is vital. “It was very disappointing as both the FSA and PRC (Pesticide Residue Committee) confirmed that the comparison of the data was misleading as the test results were not directly comparable,” Tiddy explains. “The PRC also stated that none of the residues found were at a level to cause concern for children’s health. We take the issue very seriously, which is why we have set up a dedicated monitoring programme to test the fruit and vegetables supplied and we are happy to publish our results each term. Our suppliers who also supply the retailers were very disappointed in the stance taken by the Soil Association; our organic carrot producer was particularly dismayed.”
So did the SA’s allegations succeed in compromising the scheme’s reputation long-term? It would appear not. “To be honest there was negligible interest in the Soil Association’s claims and we had less than half a dozen enquiries regarding it in London,” says Stafford. “The statements from the PRC, FSA (Food Standards Agency) and Fresh Produce Consortium were more than enough to satisfy interested parties. Therefore we can be pretty confident that no harm was done.” Clements tells a similar story. Out of 4,500 schools not a single person phoned up to complain, which is a testament to the faith of the parents and schools in the scheme and its suppliers, he says.
In addition to its evaluations of the use of pesticides, the SA also released a list of recommendations for improving the SFVS. The association claimed organisers should:
• Re-launch the scheme with a stronger commitment to quality and taste;
• Increase the use of in-season, UK-grown fruit and vegetables;
• End the artificial, “cosmetic” standards for blemish-free school fruit and vegetables;
• Increase the organic fruit and vegetables;
According to Clements, when it comes to children, quality, appearance and taste are a pre-requisite for success so attempting to cut corners on any of these issues would be futile. “We are required to provide class I fruit,” he says. “If everything was class II, how many complaints would we get? Children would not be enthusiastic about eating the produce if it didn’t look or taste good, so the consumption levels would not increase and the whole point of the scheme would be lost.”
Seasonality and locality are also highly considered, Tiddy claims. “We have and will continue to support production in the UK of produce suitable for the scheme - the baby cucumbers and sugar-snap peas can be grown in the UK.” Yet, there will always be a need to source from other countries, to provide children with products they will eat and enjoy. “Already approximately 40 per cent of produce was grown in the UK in the Autumn term but in order to encourage children’s consumption bananas and soft citrus remain the most popular products.” The matter has legal implications as well, Clements explains. “It is illegal to target only UK producers. It would be a breach of the EC guidelines. What they can do is set periods to encourage the inclusion of UK product which is what they do.”
As for organic producers, they are not excluded and the scheme already contracts organic producers. “They can’t specify organic or non-organic,” Clements says. “If an organic producer shows an interest in supplying and puts a tender forward, it will be considered like any other.”
Having assuaged the pesticide drama, as the current supply contracts approach the expiration date, the scheme’s leaders have now faced accusations in the media about a spending crisis in the NHS and its likely impact on DoH-funded programmes, such as the SFVS.
However, while Tiddy is as apprehensive as anyone to see the now rather long-overdue budget allocations for the next contracting period, there is no cause for alarm, he suggests. “The government is fully committed to the Schools Fruit and Vegetable scheme and in the short term, co-ordinators’ contracts have been extended for at least three months beyond the end of this financial year, while long-term plans for this important scheme are put in place.”
Despite the negative press, weighing up the cost of the scheme against its potential benefits it has the potential to reap will find in favour of continuing the scheme every time, Clements concludes. “It is easy to criticise the scheme because it has to have controls and systems which don’t seem necessary to some people. But, you have got two million kids really enjoying the fruit. Every health message you see now mentions the benefits of eating fresh produce and this scheme is an integral part of improving the long-term health of the nation.”
SCHOOL QUOTES
“The scheme was very useful in kick starting our HPS [Health Promoting Schools] healthy eating initiative. We have noticed that many children starting school at 4+ neither know fruit names or how to begin to eat them.” Gail Atkinson, HPS Co-ordinator, Ridgeway School.
“Children are much more aware of fruit and veg and know where they come from. They can also talk about how many fruits and veg they need to eat each day. Fruit time is our social-circle time in the classrooms which has linked really well to our PSHE.” Jo Seagrave, Lantern Lane Primary School.
“We often hear comments like “I feel better after my .....” or “I feel like doing more work now I’ve scrumched my apple”. Parents say children ask for fruit in their lunchbox, more fruit has been sent for Christmas and other parties than used to be, and children like fruit with other foods, such as cheese, more than they used to.” Head teacher, Middleton School.
“All children, including the juniors, are now only allowed a fruit or vegetable snack at break times. The children therefore eat more healthily and the amount of litter around the site has been substantially reduced as there are now no discarded snack packets.” Ron Wardle, Headteacher, Springfield School.
“Eating fruit in nursery and infant school provides valuable energy to maintain concentration levels, especially for children who did not have breakfast and reinforces the cultural norm of fruit as a snack rather than crisps or sweets. I urge you to maintain this excellent example of investing in our future.” Claire Novak, health promotion specialist.
No comments yet