Margret Ploum

Margret Ploum

Team-leader Preventing Overweight

Netherlands Nutrition Centre The Hague

The healthy School Canteen Programme

Margret PloumNetherlands Nutrition Centre

Overall aim of Dutch government:

To realize healthy school canteens in all schools in The Netherlands by 2015

The Healthy School CanteenProgramme

WHY A HEALTHY SCHOOL CANTEEN?

Introduction video


Prevention� 15% of Dutch teenagers is overweight� 1 in 2 Dutch adults is overweight� Risk of chronic diseases� Risk of psychosocial problems


Other reasons� Influence of contextual factors:

- People will eat what is in front of them;- Supply creates its own demand;

� Research shows students want to have a healthy offer in the canteen� Indications healthy food is positively related to school results

Chad Germany

THE HEALTHY SCHOOL CANTEEN PROGRAMME

Healthy school canteen = A canteen with a supply that meets

the Dutch Nutritional Guidelines.

THE HEALTHY SCHOOL CANTEEN PROGRAMMEAccredited multi component approach

With support from all involved parties:� Students� Teachers� School board� Canteen employees� Parents� Municipal Health Services (MHS)� Caterers


3 step roadmap for school working groups:1. Agenda setting, to inform and to motivate (Ensuring

support of all involved parties);2. Action plan;3. Implementing, evaluation and embedding.


� Based on Dutch ‘Healthy School Method’


� ‘Know Your Food’ teaching material

� Bi-annual Healthy School Canteen Stimulation Award since 2006/2007:- Schools subscribe by handing in an action plan-


Services available:� Website (info & downloads)� Guidebooks for school team, canteen employees, MHS &

parents� PowerPoint presentations for school team & parents� Digital assortment tool� Posters� Healthy sandwich recipes� Local meetings with involved parties� Healthy school canteen brigade to support on location

TIMELINE: 2002-NOW

� 2002: Pilot (10 schools)� 2004: National implementation� 2006/2007: 1st Stimulation Award (20 schools)� 2008/2009: 2nd Stimulation Award (62 schools)� 2009/2010: 3rd Stimulation Award (90 schools)� 2011 Canteen Award (150 Schools)

2002 2006/2007 2008/2009 2009/2010 20152004

RESEARCH

� Pilot study (TNO, 2002):� Positive change in food offer � ‘Know your food method’ was used

� MHS’s positive about the programme

� Students reported buying more healthy foods in canteen� After 1 yr more students had the intention to eat healthier

RESEARCH

� Local implementation research by MHS (2006)� Embedment of new canteen policy depends strongly on

involved persons in working group; � School board providing enough time for working group is

important for it to function well; � Involvement of parents & students in working group, and

support by MHS important for success.

RESEARCH

� Facts about schools (Middelbeek, 2007)� 80% say they can influence their school canteen supply� 27% has an external caterer� 90% has a canteen and/or soft drink vending machine� 77% snack/candy machine� 50% sell unhealthy snacks� 64% sell unhealthy snacks in vending machines� 94% has vending machines with sugary soft drinks� 40% of schools forbid their students to leave school in school

break� No school has 100% healthy foods according to NNC criteria

RESEARCH

� Internal implementation research (Liebelt, 2008)� Adoption relatively low due to lack of time and support� Intention to implementation relatively high� Adoption higher if school was supported by MHS

RESEARCH

� Study on perception of parents (Haak, 2008)� Parents think healthy school canteen is important� Parents want a healthy school canteen� Parents find themselves partly responsible for eating habits

children� Parents don’t feel involved � Parents think school and government are responsible for

policies

RESEARCH

� Needs assessment and user study among school canteen managers (Van den Berg, 2009)

� ~50% of school canteen managers think an ideal school canteen (100% healthy foods) is possible

� They feel supported by:• a good school health policy• a HSC working group• Support of MHS • Extra budget

RESEARCH

� Evaluation of Stimulation Award (iResearch, 2010)

� School board & students of participating schools report positive change in canteen offer: more healthy foods.

� Much schools are supported by MHS: schools are content� Intention to embed the programme relies on formingA) A working groupB) An action Plan

RESEARCH

� Stimulation Award & budget motivates but are not reasons to participate

� Non-motivated schools: enough time and budget wouldmotivate to participate

CONCLUSIONS

Important factors:• Working group formed by all involved parties• Support by MHS is crucial• Writing an action plan very important• Budget is a stimulating factor• Enough time is needed to work out the programme well� School policy needed as foundation

The Healthy School Canteen Programme

�Students NUDGE�Teachers�School board�Canteen employees�Parents�Municipal Health

Services (MHS)�Caterers


What do students say?

“ No interest in healthy and sustainable diets”

Though,Most students expect only health

options in the school canteenTheir opinion: right products in right

ambiance helpful

The Healthy School Canteen Programme

Promotion –

looking for incentives…

School Canteen Award 2011� Use a celebrity� Call to action:

“Make that canteen healthier!”� Win a prize:

Canteen Make-over



Results

� So far 160 schools have participated

� Research shows:� assortment improves due to Healthy School Canteen

programme!

� Target 2011: 150 participating schools


Influencing behaviour, how?

� Looking for incentives� Bringing together involved parties

Discussion: Do we have the time?

� Determining factors� Policy� Participation� Environmental change

� Multi component strategy� Change possible - time consuming vs

obesity epidemic

� Other forces� Nutritional guidelines

Margret Ploum

Documents