Opinion: Why Utah lawmakers should implement universal school lunch

President Lyndon B. Johnson declared full educational opportunity as one of our nation’s goals, saying, “Every child must be encouraged to get as much education as he has the ability to take.” He signed the Elementary and Secondary School Act, later updated by former President George W. Bush as the No Child Left Behind Act and further advanced by former President Barack Obama as the Every Student Succeeds Act.
To guarantee that all children are encouraged to obtain as much education as they are able, we need to ensure that no child is left hungry so that every child has an equal opportunity to reach their academic potential.
There is substantial evidence to support that a universal lunch program can foster academic excellence, especially when combined with strong nutritional standards. A review of 47 studies and government reports found that universal access to lunch increases participation in school lunch programs, especially among students who did not previously qualify for free or reduced-price meals. Additionally, there was strong support for the association between universal school lunch and higher academic performance and better diet quality, as well as no adverse impact on body mass index. There was mixed support for increasing school attendance, except among higher-risk students.
The Community Preventive Services Task Force — a panel of nonfederal public health and prevention experts — recommends the Healthy School Meals for All program. During the COVID-19 pandemic, Utah provided Healthy School Meals For All across all public schools. A qualitative analysis of Healthy School Meals For All in Utah found that while there was general awareness of food insecurity and interest in local charity efforts, there was disagreement on the institutions responsible for increasing access to food; elected leaders had mixed viewpoints, whereas food service directors were supportive of continuing the program.
Arguments often used against government involvement in school lunches have focused on cost and parental responsibility, the same arguments used against states providing universal education. Given the association between school lunch and educational success, a universal lunch program would be a smart decision because it could boost the money that taxpayers are already investing, that is, to get as much education as each student is able to take.
Furthermore, investing in school lunch programs could provide a net benefit to our communities by reducing the burden on health programs and economic costs related to disease, poverty and food insecurity, and it would eliminate student meal debt and potentially prevent the need of heartbreaking events to inspire action.
The cost to implement Healthy School Meals For All in Utah is approximated around $51 million, and the Utah State Board of Education estimated around $42 million to provide lunches to all students. Utah already participates in the Community Eligibility Provision across nearly all schools that qualify (i.e., schools that have 40% or more students enrolled in free/reduced lunch).
The state revenue source for school lunch is from state-controlled alcohol sales. Currently, only 10% of this revenue is appropriated to the Uniform School Fund for school meals, whereas nearly 85% goes to the state’s general fund. It seems reasonable to increase the appropriation to the Uniform School Fund.
If our state leaders are not ready for a statewide universal lunch program, then there are smaller steps they should consider. For instance, the state could remove the “reduced” category, as proposed last legislative session. The state could also create a grant mechanism for districts to test a universal program. A pilot approach would create a rich, data-informed opportunity to evaluate its cost, implementation and impact. If the state is hesitant to take responsibility, then local school districts should lead the way by piloting a program. We will not be able to analyze the return on this investment unless we try it. Partnering with local farms and implementing methods to reduce waste and increase participation, such as allotting more time for school lunch and scheduling recess prior to lunch, could maximize the benefits.
More than 80% of countries across the world provide school meals to over 400 million children daily. Providing school lunch is not an innovative idea — it is a worldwide norm. The dietary and academic benefits of a universal program warrants, at minimum, a tryout.
Kevin M. Korous is a researcher, writer and statistician and holds a Ph.D. in family and human development. He is a candidate for Granite School Board Precinct 2.