Over the year of 2021 we have, we have documented tremendous improvements and remaining important challenges in Georgia’s general education system. However, during this extensive research it has become apparent that there is one area where reforms have been seriously lacking, and where there is no clear plan to improve things: schoolchildren’s nutrition. Some 77% of students surveyed in Georgia say that they sometimes (42%) or always (35%) feel hungry when they go to school, which has a direct impact on students’ low literacy scores. Our extensive article published on the subject in September 2021, reviews the legal and actual context of Georgia’s school nutrition.
Until very recently, in-school nutrition was almost completely overlooked in the national conversation about education. In October 2021 the Center for Training and Consultancy (CTC) published a policy document on school nutrition. The policy document outlines the socio-economic and health benefits of school nutrition, various international models for school nutrition, coverage/target groups, management and logistics, and funding model.
School nutrition provides numerous benefits on multiple levels, such as eradicating malnutrition, strong incentive for school attendance, reduction in child mortality rate, universality of general education, social protection, eradicating poverty and starvation, and promoting local business.
There are also multiple non-mutually exclusive international models of school nutrition, that Georgia can choose from, such as school meals, fortified meals, take-home rations, lunch box, home grown school meal, and micronutrient powder. The policy document suggests lunch boxes and fortified snacks or take-home rations as a school nutrition model, mainly due to lack of public school canteen infrastructure required for on-spot meal preparation, but also for cost reasons. The ration for primary and base level students might differ, based on the age differences and the time spent at school. Waste management is also considered as important part of school nutrition.
In terms of coverage, primary education level is of the highest priority, regardless of social status, followed by the base education due to the high number of hours spent at school by students on this level. In schools where the total number of students does not exceed 50, the school nutrition should be available for everyone. Since school canteens are important space and instrument for socialization, school climate and healthy eating, the nutrition program should not only cover the socio-economically vulnerable, but should instead include all students equally.
As for the program management and funding, it is recommended for the state to be in charge of the policy and overall management, with delegation to municipalities. One of the reasons for the delegation is that the municipalities already have experience of meal provision in pre-school education, making it possible to use the human resources and experience for schools. This could be complemented by programs promoting local entrepreneurship. CTC suggests gradual introduction of the program for piloting and adjusting the terms to the context in practice. Concentration of socially vulnerable students, geography, distance from the center, road infrastructure should also be taken into account for selecting pilot schools. This should be complemented by systematic quantitative data collection and monitoring, communication and coordination among the stakeholder institutions.
Following the policy document publication and the general political (opposition) and public campaign on the issue, in November 2021 the Georgian government announced their plans to work on the national school nutrition concept together with UNICEF. A special inter-agency working group will be set up on the school nutrition program for students, the detailed results of which will be made public.
