with a more relaxed atmosphere prevailing, and children more disposed to learning. Many principals stated that since the School Breakfast Program was initiated children no longer reported missing lunches. In the words of one teacher, "children had been taking apples, cookies, etc., from lunch bags and boxes because they really were hungry." In addition to these marked improvements in the children's physical conditions, classroom performance and behavior patterns, our study revealed that the breakfast program had an astonishing effect on school attendance patterns. Principals reported as much as 25percent decrease in tardiness and 10-percent increase in attendance once the breakfast program was implemented. We heard many stories of individual children who were chronically tardy or absent, but who started coming to school early every morning when the School Breakfast Program was functioning. In areas where extremely poor economic conditions exist-Appalachia, for exampleparents made a special effort to get their children to school, knowing the children would get two good meals there each day-more than is often provided at home. Another rather startling benefit of the School Breakfast Program has been its effect on community relations. Many principals told us that the School Breakfast Program has done more than any other program to convince parents that the school is trying to do something for their children. Community support of the breakfast program has been remarkable. Throughout the country we found that groups such as the PTA, Rotary, Masons, Grange, church groups and women's clubs have encouraged and even assisted in starting breakfast programs in the schools. I have saved the most obvious benefit of the School Breakfast Program for last-its effect on nutrition education. Throughout our studies teachers stressed that it was easier for students to understand the importance of eating a good breakfast and learning proper nutritional habits when the breakfast program was available at school as a "laboratory." The necessity of such nutrition education has been revealed in several recent studies. A survey conducted by the Massachusetts Department of Education of the eating habits of 80,000 schoolchildren in that State, revealed that the percentage of children coming to school without breakfast increased from 4 percent in the first three grades to 29 percent in grades 10 to 12. Of the remaining students, only 5 percent in the first three grades ate an adequate morning meal at home. In the upper grades, the proportion of children eating an adequate breakfast at home decreased to 3 percent. From this and similar surveys, we discovered that breakfast has become a widely neglected meal in America today. While the reasons vary greatly-some families simply do not have sufficient money to purchase nutritionally adequate foods, and other families do not have the time in the morning rush to sit down to a nutritional meal -the effect on the children is the same. A School Breakfast Program not only teaches the importance of breakfast, but also establishes good eating habits through a day-to-day experience. Additionally, an adequate School Breakfast Program introduces children to nutritious foods which they may never have at home. Many parents we inter viewed expressed appreciation for their children being introduced to new foods. BENEFITS TO CHILDREN To summarize the benefits of the School Breakfast Program, I would like to present the results of a survey conducted by the Director of School Food Service in Bridgeport, Conn. We have found this survey illustrative of the conclusions shared by educators throughout the country. Teachers, coordinators and principals were polled on the observable effects of a pilot breakfast program. They observed the following changes in students who participated in the program: 37 percent improved in health as indicated by fewer complaints of headaches and not feeling well; 52 percent showed improvements in behavior by being less restless, less irritable, and creating fewer disciplinary problems; 54 percent were more active in games and activities during recess; 55 percent attended classes more regularly; 56 percent improved in attitude by being more cheerful and helpful; 60 percent socialized at breakfast and then settled down to work; 66 percent showed an increase in attention span during the mornings; and, 70 percent discontinued eating empty snacks such as chips, candy, etc. As impressive as these results are, I would like to point out that the benefits of the School Breakfast Program vary greatly according to the adequacy of the meal provided. The most successful programs we visited were those which served a varied and appealing menu. Wherever a hot breakfast of eggs and bacon or French toast and ham was served, participation rates were high and the children were enthusiastic about the meal. Such programs, however, were invariably dependent on resources not available under the Federal School Breakfast Program. Most of these programs had additional sources of funding which Mark Irvings will explain in more detail. Some schools were simply lucky in having the services of people who donated much extra time to the program. Other schools paid the labor costs of the breakfast program illegally out of the School Lunch Program. Most schools that we visited which received only the 15 cents maximum Federal reimbursement were limited to serving milk, juice, and cereal or toast at best. Some schools only served milk and a fortified cake which the Department of Agriculture has approved to replace the grain and fruit components of the meal. Where these minimum breakfasts were served, children often left the table still hungry. In short, we found that the operation of an adequate breakfast program was the exception rather than the rule under the current Federal program. Despite the best efforts of the local administrators, schools have been severely hindered by the inadequate funding of the School Breakfast Program. NEED FOR SUPERVISORY PERSONNEL FUNDING Senator HART. Maybe we will hear more on this when Mr. Irvings talks about the financing. However, I remember, upon occasions, talking to school administrators and teachers and not getting the same enthusiasm that the survey you report to have made in Bridgeport suggests. I am not saying that they denied that there was not an increase in attention, a lessening of conflict in the classroom and all that. Nonetheless, particularly from some teachers, I received the impression they feel that we have already assigned them more chores than reasonably can be expected. They have that feeling about lunches. I would think that you would have run into teachers who said, "I am already required to do more than I can, and I cannot supervise breakfast for 30 kids." Miss VAUPEL. Yes, sir. In addition to those who were praising the program, there were those who did not appreciate having to go to school early to supervise the program. For this reason, we have included in our recommendations a provision for supply of additional funds for supervision of the program. We feel it is unfair to ask teachers to come and spend their mornings, which they usually spend in conference with their children, in supervising another program, but this has been the case because there were no funds for supervision in the program. Therefore, teachers had to be asked to volunteer their time. PREPARED STATEMENT OF SUZANNE VAUPEL The first purpose of our project was to evaluate the nutritional and educational consequences of the Breakfast Program. To do this we conducted indepth studies of a sampling of individual School Breakfast Programs. At each school we interviewed the people most directly involved with the programthe administration, teachers, parents and children. The schools we chose to visit represented the following geographical breakdown: California and Colorado in the West; Iowa, Kansas and Nebraska in the Midwest; Illinois and Minnesota in the North Central Region; Texas in the Southwest; and, Massachusetts and New York in the Northeast. We chose schools which were representative of various demographic situations. We obtained the following breakdown: Urban areas: Chicago, Kansas City, Los Angeles, Louisville and Saint Paul; Smaller towns and suburban areas: Stockton and Fairfield, California; Mapleton, Colorado; Tampa, Florida; Manhattan an dShawnee Mission, Kansas; Quincy, Massachusetts; and Hammondsport, New York. Rural areas: Mount Ayr, Iowa; Laurel County, Kentucky; Frasee, Minnesota; Ravenna, Nebraska and San Diego, Texas. In our sampling, we also made an effort to visit schools which had various types of kitchen facilities and serving areas. A few schools had a self-contained kitchen and cafeteria. The majority, however, were schools which had been built without kitchens and which had to devise alternative methods of cooking and serving. Some schools received meals cooked in the kitchens of other schools ("satellite" kitchens). These meals were either pre-packaged or transported in bulk. Other schools received meals from a central kitchen which served the whole school system. Locations where the children were served also varied greatly. While a few schools had cafeterias, most had to utilize some other area. We found schools using the gymnasium, auditorium, all purpose room, portable annex, outdoor tables, or even the classrooms to serve the breakfast. Regardless of the facilities available, however, we found the programs equally successful. In all the schools visited we found the educational and nutritional consequences of the Breakfast Program to be rather astonishing. Most obvious were the changes in the physical condition of the children. Teachers said they no longer heard constant complaints of headaches, stomach aches and cramps in their morning classes. The commonplace occurrence of a crying child saying. "I just don't feel good" no longer happened. School nurses pointed out even more substantial physical improvements, such as fewer illnesses and the disappearance of sores around the mouth which resulted from Vitamin C deficiency. Further notable improvements were observed in the classroom performance of participants in the School Breakfast Program. Before the Program was operating children were irritable, restless, and often daydreaming or falling asleep in their morning classes. Once their primary need for food was satisfied with breakfast the children were more alert and able to concentrate on their studies. Teachers and principals were astounded at the improvement in the children's attention span and achievement. Teachers were pleased that the morning hours, which can be the most productive, were no longer wasted. Improvements in the behavior patterns of children were also remarkable. Children were less antagonistic towards each other and their teachers once the School Breakfast Program began. Principals who had to spend most of their mornings breaking-up fights said that even an occasional clash on the playground was the exception. Teachers noted a conspicuous improvement in classroom behavior, with a more relaxed atmosphere prevailing, and children more disposed to learning. Many principals stated that since the School Breakfast Program was initiated children no longer reported missing lunches. In the words of one teacher "children had been taking apples, cookies, etc. from lunch bags and boxes because they really were hungry." (Mrs. Florence Adolphy, Burlington Community School, Burling, Iowa) In addition to these marked improvements in the children's physical conditions, classroom performance and behavior patterns, our study revealed that the Breakfast Program had an astonishing effect on school attendance patterns. Principals reported as much as 25-percent decrease in tardiness and 10-percent increase in attendance once the breakfast program was implemented. We heard many stories of individual children who were chronically tardy or absent, but who started coming to school early every morning when the School Breakfast Program was functioning. In areas where extremely poor economic conditions exist-Appalachia, for example-parents made a special effort to get their children to school, knowing the children would get two good meals there each day-more than is often provided at home. Another rather startling benefit of the School Breakfast Program has been its effect on community relations. Many principals told us that the School Breakfast Program has done more than any other program to convince parents that the school is trying to do something for their children. Community support of the Breakfast Program has been remarkable. Throughout the country we found that groups such as the Parent-Teachers Association, Rotary, Masons, Grange, church groups and women's clubs have encouraged and even assisted in starting breakfast programs in the schools. I have saved the most obvious benefit of the School Breakfast Program for last-its effect on nutrition education. Throughout our studies teachers stressed that it was easier for students to understand the importance of eating a good breakfast and learning proper nutritional habits when the breakfast program was available as a "laboratory." The necessity of such nutrition education has been revealed in several recent studies. A survey conducted by the Massachusetts Department of Education of the eating habits of 80,000 school children, revealed that the percentage of children coming to school without breakfast increased from 4 percent in the first three grades to 29 percent in grades 10-12. Of the remaining students, only 5 percent in the first three grades ate an adequate morning meal. In the upper grades the proportion of children eating an adequate breakfast decreased to three percent. From this and similar surveys, we discovered that breakfast has become a widely neglected meal in America today. While the reasons vary greatlysome families simply do not have sufficient money to purchase nutritionally adequate foods, and other families do not have the time in the morning rush to sit down to a nutritional meal-the effect on the children is the same. A School Breakfast Program not only teaches the importance of breakfast, but also establishes good eating habits through a day-to-day experience. Additionally, an adequate School Breakfast Program introduces children to nutritious foods which they may never have had at home. Many parents we interviewed expressed appreciation for their children being introduced to new foods. To summarize the benefits of the School Breakfast Program I would like to present the results of a survey conducted by the Director of School Food Service in Bridgeport, Connecticut. We have found this survey illustrative of the conclusions shared by educators throughout the country. Teachers, coordinators and principals were polled on the observable effects of a pilot breakfast program. They observed the following changes in students who participated in the program: 37 percent improved in health as indicated by fewer complaints of headaches and not feeling well. 52 percent showed improvements in behavior by being less restless, less irritable, and creating fewer disciplinary problems. 54 percent were more active in games and activities during recess. 55 percent attended classes more regularly. 56 percent improved in attitude by being more cheerful and helpful. 60 percent socialized at breakfast and then settled down to work. 66 percent showed an increase in attention span during morning. 70 percent discontinued eating empty snacks such as chips, candy, etc. As impressive as these results are, I would like to point out that the benefits of the School Breakfast Program vary greatly according to the adequacy of the meal provided. The most successful programs we visited were those which served a varied and appealing menu. Wherever a hot breakfast of eggs and bacon or French toast was served participation rates were high and the children were enthusiastic about the meal. Such programs, however, were invariably dependent on resources not available under the Federal School Breakfast Program. Most of these programs had additional sources of funding which Mark Irvings will explain in more detail. Some schools were simply lucky in having the services of people who donated much extra time to the program. Other schools paid the labor costs of the breakfast program illegally out of the School Lunch Program. Most schools which received only the 15 cents maximum Federal reimbursement were limited to serving milk, juice, and a cereal or toast at best. Some schools only served milk and a fortified cake which the Department of Agriculture has approved to replace the grain and fruit components of the meal. Where these minimum breakfasts were served, children often left the table still hungry. In short we found that the operation of an adequate breakfast program was the exception rather than the rule under the current federal program. Despite the best efforts of the local administrators, schools have been severely hindered by the inadequate funding of the School Breakfast Program. Senator HART. Mr. Irvings. STATEMENT OF MARK IRVINGS, PROJECT COORDINATOR, FRAC, NEW YORK, N.Y. Mr. IRVINGS. Thank you, Senator. The nationwide study of the School Breakfast Program undertaken by FRAC arrived at two major findings: 1. Numerous obstacles have been erected, primarily by the USDA, which have severely limited the growth of the School Breakfast Program. The most significant of these obstacles has been the reimbursement structure of the presently constituted program which has served in inhibit schools without programs 76-300-72-pt. 1—3 |