A policy report on the future of free school meals - A better childhood. For every child.
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
A policy report
on the future of
free school meals
A better childhood. For every child. www.childrenssociety.org.uk
Contents
1.
Introduction 3
2.
Summary 4
3.
Current provision of free school
meals in England 5
4.
What impact do the current free school
meal eligibility criteria have on family
finances and on decisions about
moving into work? 8
5.
Families’ views on free school meals 10
6.
What does the future of free school
meals look like? 14
7.
Extending free school meals to all
Universal Credit recipients 15
8.
Conclusion and policy recommendations 16
Acknowledgements
This report was written by: Many thanks to Zeina Whalley and Jo Cleaver for help
Sam Royston, with designing the survey of family attitudes to free
Laura Rodrigues school meals, and to Marsha Lowe, Charlie Powell
and David Hounsell (The Children’s Food Campaign), Jo Walker (The School
April 2012 Food Trust), Deven Ghalani (The Centre for Social Justice),
Nicola Moss and Professor Janet Walker for extremely
helpful comments on the report.
1. Introduction
Free school meals (FSM) However, there are significant Methods
are a crucial entitlement for issues with the current
This report draws on
families living in poverty. entitlement for, and delivery
a number of different
They help to ensure that of, FSM. The loss of FSM
sources to develop the
children from the lowest entitlement on moving into
analysis and results.
income families get a full time paid work means
These include:
nutritious meal in the that nearly a million children
middle of the day. in poverty in working
• Primary data – including
families are not entitled to
data from Her Majesty’s
As well as providing vital the benefit. There are also
Revenue and Customs
financial support for low ongoing issues about the
(HMRC), the Department
income families, FSM also stigmatisation of children
for Education (DfE), and
have important health and who receive them.
the School Food Trust.
educational benefits for the
These data are used to
children that receive them.1 The government is
estimate the numbers
Evidence shows that eating a undertaking a fundamental
of children entitled to
healthy school meal improves overhaul of the welfare
FSM and those who
children’s concentration system with the introduction
take up their FSM
during afternoon lessons and of Universal Credit, which
entitlement, and to
can have a positive impact will necessitate significant
develop cost estimates
on classroom behaviour.2 changes to FSM entitlement.
for the extension of
Nutritious school meals This presents a unique
FSM to working families
for disadvantaged children opportunity to improve the
in receipt of Universal
can also help children to eligibility criteria and delivery
Credit.
develop healthy eating habits of FSM so that provision
and have the potential to is extended to low income
• Data from the
decrease health inequalities. working families. By doing
Department for Work
this the government would
and Pensions (DWP)
be delivering on its ambition
about income disregards
to make work ‘pay’ and
and withdrawal rates
incentivise employment as
within the Universal
the route out of poverty.
Credit. These are used
to assess the impact of
different FSM options on
household incomes under
the Universal Credit.
• An online survey of 140
UK parents who are
currently, or had recently,
been entitled to FSM
(whether they took up
this entitlement or not).
Fair and square 3
2. Summary
Main findings: Policy recommendations:
• In England, about a third of • Our survey of parents 1. T
he government should
school aged children living indicates that the loss of FSM ensure that all children
in poverty3 are not entitled is a major work disincentive in poverty are entitled to
to receive FSM – around for them. Nearly half (45%) receive FSM, and promote
700,000. of parents in families in work incentives, by
receipt of FSM are worried extending FSM entitlement
• Although entitled, a further ‘a lot’ about the financial to school children in
500,000 do not take up implications of the loss of families in receipt of
their meals. This means that FSM on moving into work or Universal Credit.
more than half (around 1.2 taking on additional hours.
million) of all school aged Six out of 10 felt that this had 2. A
ll local authorities and
children living in poverty in an impact on their decisions school providers should
England do not receive FSM. about moving into work or introduce cashless systems
taking on additional hours. in order to de-stigmatise
• The main reason that so the receipt of FSM.
many children in poverty • A nationally representative
are not entitled to receive poll shows that more than 3. T
he government should
FSM is because their 90% of people believe that review the extent to which
parents are in work. The children in low income, maintained schools and
current eligibility criteria working families should be academies are adhering to
for FSM mean that parents entitled to receive FSM the nutritional standards
working 16 or more hours (see Figure 7). for school food, and
per week (24 hours for whether secondary school
couples from April 2012), • The introduction of the pupils who take up FSM are
lose their entitlement to Universal Credit presents a receiving enough to buy
FSM, no matter how watershed moment for the a full and nutritious meal,
little they earn. future of FSM. The abolition with a range of choices
of key benefits currently available within budget.
• FSM can also lead to children used for passporting to FSM
being entitled to a number entitlements means that a
of other benefits – such as complete new system of
school clothing allowances, entitlement needs to be
support with school trips, put in place before October
music lessons, and access to 2013. This provides a key
leisure centres. Families in opportunity to extend
low paid work may therefore FSM to all low income,
also not receive these other working families.
forms of support.
4 Fair and square
3. Current provision of free school meals in England
Current entitlement How many children
Calculating numbers of
criteria receive FSM?
children who are and
In England, families with There are around 2.2 million
are not entitled to free
a child attending a state state school children living in
school are normally entitled poverty6 in England. school meals
to receive FSM if they are • In January 2011 there
working under 16 hours per Around 1.5 million children were around 7.5 million
week (from April 2012, 24 in state schools in England children and young
hours for couples) and their meet the eligibility criteria for people in state maintained
income is under £16,190.4 FSM, meaning that there are schools in England.8
at least 700,000 children in
A small number of local poverty who do not. • Around one in five of
authorities have decided these children are entitled
to extend FSM beyond this However, not all of those to FSM.9 This equates to
eligibility. For example, children who meet the around 1.5 million state
Islington has independently eligibility criteria have a FSM school children in England.
decided to make FSM every day. Around 200,000
available to all nursery and of these children are not • Most recently available
primary school children.5 registered for FSM with their statistics indicate that
However, the national school, and of those registered, around 1.3 million children
entitlement criteria rule out each day around a further in England are eligible for
low income, working families 300,000 do not eat the meal. and claiming FSM.10
from receiving FSM. • Of children registered
Therefore of the 2.2 million for FSM11 80% (pupils in
school children living in primary schools) and
poverty in England only 69% (pupils in secondary
1 million receive FSM. This schools) took them up –
means that each day at least an average across the two
1.2 million children in poverty of almost 75%12 or around
do not get FSM.7 700,000 1 million children.
of these (or about a third of
school children in poverty) are
not entitled to FSM at all (see
Figure 1).
Figure 1: Entitlement to FSM and children in poverty
2.5
2.2m
Number of children (millions)
2
1.5m
1.5
1.3m
1m Meet entitlement criteria
1
for FSM
0.5 Registered for FSM
Receiving FSM
0
Children living in poverty Children entitled to FSM
Fair and square 5
Why do so many children Latest statistics show that 2. Not all families who are
in poverty not get free more than half of children entitled make a claim. Even if
school meals? in poverty (58%) live in low they are entitled to FSM, some
income working families.13 families choose not to make
There are three key reasons Many of these children will a claim. This may be because
why so many children in not be entitled to receive FSM their children do not want the
poverty do not receive FSM. because of their parents’ meals or it may be because the
work status. Respondents to parents do not feel the meals
1. Not all children living in our survey said: are of good enough quality for
poverty are entitled to receive their children. There are also
them. Children living in low ‘When I started working ongoing issues around the
income working households stigma attached to the receipt
are not normally entitled
(going from income
of FSM. Some of these issues
to receive FSM. As already support) as a single parent I are discussed in more detail
highlighted, around 700,000 found it too expensive to be in Chapter 5.
school children living in poverty able to pay for school meals
are not entitled to receive FSM. for my children.’ It is important to note that
schools are increasingly asking
This is because the eligibility parents to sign up for FSM
criteria for FSM mean that ‘the FSM system should be
even if their children decide
parents working 16 or more looked into, the weekly cost not to take them, because
hours per week – 24 hours of school meals is about £10 they may receive additional
for couples from April 2012 or more – times this by the support based on the number
– and so are entitled to number of children it would of children registered for
receive working tax credit, FSM. Of the estimated 1.5
lose their entitlement to FSM.
mean that I would need to
million children eligible for
pay £30 or more a week for FSM, around 200,000 are not
a cooked lunch. registered.
... around 700,000 school children living in 3. When the family have
made a claim, not all children
poverty are not entitled to receive FSM. choose to eat the meal. Even if
the parents choose to register
for FSM, children do not always
eat them. Of the around 1.3
million children registered
for FSM, around a quarter
(325,000) do not take them up
on any particular day.
Figure 2: When you are entitled to free school meals,
do children take them?
80%
72%
70%
60% 53%
50%
40%
29%
30% Primary
20% 17% Secondary
8% 10%
10% 7%
3% Free school meals survey, questions 13
0% (primary) and 21 (secondary): 97 and 62
responses respectively
Always Most of Occasionally Never (but
the time registered)
6 Fair and square
As shown in Figure 2, our
survey found a similarly mixed
Nancy and Mark’s family
picture of take up – whilst Nancy is unemployed the value of the FSM as it only
the majority of parents who and has a partner who is covers the equivalent of a
registered said their children on Employment Support slice of pizza and a drink. The
(in both primary and Allowance. They have three value of the FSM was £1.95
secondary school) ate FSM school age children, two are but Nancy thought that at
‘always’ or ‘most of the time,’ in primary school and are least £3 a day was necessary.
only around three quarters of receiving FSM, and one is in The meal at the secondary
primary, and half of secondary secondary school but because school was also unsatisfactory
school students were ‘always’ he recently changed schools, as it was mostly junk food,
taking one. One in 10 primary he is still waiting for his FSM leaving Nancy concerned
and one in five secondary application to be processed. about her son ‘not having a
school children registered proper meal’.
for FSM ‘never’, or only For Nancy’s children, their
‘occasionally’, had them. school lunch is the main meal Children at the school who
of the day. In the evening receive FSM get a token to
Some children do not always they often just have a smaller hand in so they are clearly
want their FSM as they may dinner, especially if they are all identifiable leading Nancy
not like them or have the tired. FSM are therefore very to also have concerns that
time to eat them because important as they guarantee this alienates her son from
of lunchtime activities. her children a good meal. his peers. The school was
Parents responding to our even thinking of introducing
survey noted: Before the FSM applications staggered lunches with
were completed for all her FSM children going into the
‘My son preferred to eat children, Nancy and her canteen before others leading
at break to participate partner had to provide packed to further segregation of
lunches for a few weeks. those in receipt of FSM.
in lunchtime clubs. FSM
She found that they cost the
is not available at break family around £30 a week Nancy is concerned about
time.’ (£10 per child). Nancy found the loss of FSM if she were
that the supplies and snacks to move into work because
for packed lunches were as well as rent, council tax,
‘Sometimes they don’t ‘ridiculously priced’. travel and childcare costs –
have time if they have paying for school lunches or
sports clubs etc’ Another additional cost was providing packed lunches
that she found her children is ‘so expensive’ with three
enjoyed snacking on the items children.
intended for their packed
lunch during the evening so it Nancy believes all children
was harder to budget. Once should get FSM as it would
she had FSM sorted for her guarantee all children get
children she had more for a good meal and it would
the weekly food shop: ‘that remove the prejudice towards
was an extra £30 of food in those on FSM:
the freezer’.
‘If every child had a free
She is very happy with the school meal then there
school meals her children are
provided for in their primary
would be no stigma
school as they have the choice because everyone would
of a good range of hot food. be the same. You feel
embarrassed to say you
At his previous school, her are on free school meals
eldest son received FSM. She
– the children see the
found that he needed some
extra money to supplement differences.’
Fair and square 7
4. What impact do the current free school meal
eligibility criteria have on family finances and on
decisions about moving into work?
FSM have a substantial In addition to the direct There are many working
financial value. The most value of the FSM entitlement, families who live below the
recent available data indicate receipt of FSM may also poverty line and do not
that school meals cost an provide access to other
average of £1.88 in local benefits. For example, the
qualify for free meals and
authority (LA) catered Direct Gov website notes: this is one area that needs to
primary schools, and £1.98 be looked at.’
in LA catered secondary ‘Some schools and local
schools.14 Assuming an Entitlements such as school
authorities offer extra
average across the two of clothing allowances,16 or
£1.93 for each child, FSM are
support to children reduced price access to leisure
worth approximately: who are registered – facilities17 contribute to the
for instance, help with the overall value of entitlement
£1.93 x 5 (days per week) = cost of school trips or to FSM.
£9.65 per school term week music lessons.’15
Parents told us about the
£9.65 x 38 (weeks per year) One of the parents impact of the loss of FSM on
= £367 averaged over the we surveyed noted: their family finances:
course of the year.
‘... receiving free meals also ‘the difference between
As already highlighted, me working or not is about
parents who begin to allows my children access to
music lessons at a reduced £40, half of which is now
work 16 hours or more per
week (24 hours for couples rate as well as half price paid out in school meals.
from April 2012), lose their entry at our local leisure It has a huge impact’
entitlement to receive FSM. centre, this allows them to
This can hugely undermine
work incentives.
participate in activities that I
would be unable to afford.
For example, a lone parent
with three school aged Figure 3: How worried are you about the financial implications
children would currently of losing your FSM if you or your partner move into work or
be entitled to £272 per take on additional hours?
week benefit income
(after housing costs) 50%
45.3%
when out of work. 45%
40%
Working 16 hours per 33.7%
35%
week on the minimum
wage (£6.08 per hour) 30%
their income would be 25%
around £363 per week (a 20%
gain of £91). £29 in school 15% 12.6%
meal costs reduces the 8.4%
10%
gain to £62, representing
5%
around a third of the
overall financial benefits 0%
of working. A lot A little Not at all Not applicable
(entitled but not
Free school meals survey, question 9, 95 responses receiving FSM)
8 Fair and squareWe asked parents who
are currently entitled to
Amy’s family
receive FSM how worried Amy is a single mother The secondary school her
they are about the financial with four children, one at children attend has a cashless
implications of the loss of primary school and two at system with each child issued
FSM if they moved into secondary school. She is with a meal card and for those
work or took on additional unemployed and receives on FSM this is topped up to
hours. Around half of income support. the value of the FSM. She
respondents said they feels that the meal card is less
worried ‘a lot’ about this. Her three children at school stigmatising because all her
Less than one in 10 were not receive FSM. She would find daughter’s friends have them.
worried at all about this. it very expensive to pay The card system means ’all
for her children’s school the kids are the same’ and she
Many parents were worried meals every day and is less believes all schools should use
that, in large part as a result worried now that they have a cashless card system.
of the loss of FSM, they could FSM. The school day is long
actually be worse off as a and she thinks it is really Amy does want to work
result of moving into work. important for her children to part-time eventually when
have something decent to her baby is older. However,
‘If I move into work I could eat to keep them going. she is worried about the
actually be getting less implications of losing FSM
money than I do now – I However, the FSM only if she moved into work
get disability benefits and covers enough for food and especially with having to
her children sometimes ask provide for four children and
would then have to start for extra money to buy a cover childcare and travel
paying for the school meals drink. She is also concerned costs.
but with a lower income’ that the food options at the
school are not very healthy Amy believes all low income
‘When I move into paid and the school should either families should receive FSM
work (I am currently a carer/ provide better monitoring even those who are working
of the children’s food full-time because many of
single parent) my income
choices or provide more them are still only just
will be lower – school nutritious options. ‘making ends meet.’
lunches are yet another
thing to worry about.’
There appears to be a clear
work disincentive effect. More
than a quarter of respondents
said that the impact on their Figure 4: To what extent does the impact on your FSM
FSM entitlement affected entitlement affect your decisions about moving into work
their decisions about moving or taking on additional hours?
into work or taking on
additional hours ‘a lot’. Six out 50%
of 10 said it affected these 45%
decisions to some degree. 40%
35% 32.6%
As discussed in more detail 29.5%
30% 27.4%
in Chapter 6, changes as a
result of the introduction of 25%
the Universal Credit could 20%
lead to the FSM eligibility 15%
10.5%
criteria having an even more 10%
substantial impact on work
5%
incentives.
0%
A lot A little Not at all Not applicable
(entitled but not
Free School Meals survey: question 11, 95 responses receiving FSM)
Fair and square 95. Families’ views on free school meals
Is there still stigma There was a great deal of ‘The only way anyone would
attached to FSM? variation in the level of concern know is if my kids choose
felt by parents. In part there to say. With the cashless
There have been longstanding was variation by age, with
concerns about the stigma primary school children less
system it’s completely
associated with the receipt of likely to be aware of who confidential.’
FSM. Research has identified was and was not in receipt
that many children do not of FSM. However, it was clear ‘Because of the system
claim their entitlement to that stigma was eliminated
FSM due to teasing, bullying (fingerprint at till), money
if children were in schools
and fear of stigma.18 Many is added automatically to
where FSM recipients cannot
parents we surveyed remained be identified. For example, in account... and nobody
concerned about this: schools where meals are pre knows who is who.’
paid for or where cashless
‘My older children have had systems operate – such as However, in the schools where
free meals in the past and a card based or biometric children who receive FSM were
have been bullied as a result’ system. One mother we easily identifiable there was a
interviewed stated that the different story:
One respondent noted that: card system they use at her
‘The staff think you’re child’s school means ‘all the ‘My child enjoys most of
kids are the same’. Parents his school meals. He’s
worthless’. from the survey also noted: becoming aware that not
Another simply highlighted everyone gets them free
‘As we have a cashless
‘Unkind and unpleasant though, and this is a cause
system others kids need
remarks’. for embarrassment - if the
never know my kids have
school could come up with
FSM. They are a godsend
a system where everyone
and I would really struggle
had a lunch ticket, paid for in
without them.’
advance, that would save a
lot of heartache’
For these reasons, one of
our recommendations is that
cashless systems are extended
to all schools, in order that
children in receipt of FSM
are not differentiated from
their peers.
10 Fair and squareWhat do parents think
of the quality and
nutritional value of FSM?
High quality food provided in
schools can have a significant
impact on a child’s health
and development. This is
important as growing up with
a poor diet can lead to health
problems in childhood and
in later life. It can also have a
negative impact on children’s
mental well-being.19 Healthy
and balanced diets are also
crucial to limiting or avoiding
serious conditions such as
child and adult obesity,20
diabetes, high blood
pressure, cancer and heart
disease. Research has also
shown that school meals are
often healthier than packed
lunches, with only one
percent of packed lunches
meeting the nutritional
standards set for school
lunches.21 The nutritional
value and quality of FSM are
central to encouraging take A parent we interviewed told Some parents surveyed also
up and improving the health us that her son is a fussy suggested that in some cases
of our nation’s children. eater but is encouraged to the amount provided for
try a variety of food when he FSM is not sufficient to buy
When asked why their sees his friends eating their full meals for their children,
children take up FSM school meals. or that there is very limited
when entitled, around 30% choice for those in receipt
of parents with primary However, in the survey some of FSM:
school children, and 35% parents expressed their
of secondary school concern about the quality of ‘A main meal and pudding
parents, said one reason the school meal their children
was that they are healthy.
cost more than my
were receiving. Parents said:
A parent responding to daughter is given on
the survey stated: ‘I don’t think the school is her lunch card!’
providing enough healthy
‘The menu at my child’s ‘In secondary schools
options’
school is interesting, varied there is often a large
and nutritious.’ choice of meals available
‘The school meals are high
in fat and less likely to be – but only one choice for
Providing children with a
healthy for my children.’ FSM (the ‘meal-deal’).
nutritious meal at school can
also influence food choices Not very fair for the child.’
in the home as children learn
about healthy food options. Others raised the issue
Research has indicated that that support with FSM does
the food eaten at school not always include money
has a central role in shaping for a drink.
children’s diets.22
Fair and square 11There have been significant folate and vitamin D.26 FSM The survey asked parents
improvements in the enable children to have an which meal was their child’s
quality of school food in adequate meal when there main meal of the day and
the past few years with the may be reductions on food (as shown in Figure 5)
introduction of statutory spending at home27 as one although the majority said
nutritional standards for parent in our survey wrote: dinner, nearly a third said that
school food and the setting their child’s lunch at school is
up of the School Food Trust.23 ‘It ensures the children get their main meal.
These include restrictions on healthy balanced meals
confectionary, pre-packaged This highlights the importance
savoury snacks and high-sugar
when the budget at home of ensuring all school meals are
fizzy drinks, and increases is so tight.’ of high quality. An evaluation
in fruit, vegetables and high of Jamie Oliver’s ‘Feed Me
quality meat and fish. Research Nutritious school meals Better’ campaign, a campaign
from the School Food Trust for disadvantaged children which in 2004/05 focused
indicates the benefits these therefore have the potential on improving the quality of
improved standards have had to decrease these dietary school meals served in the
on pupil concentration and inequalities. For some school London Borough of Greenwich,
engagement with lessons.24 children their free school lunch found that the campaign
However, currently these may often be the only healthy had a positive effect on Key
statutory standards are only cooked food they get, and for Stage 2 results in English and
for maintained schools so do some it can be their only meal Science.28 The study found
not apply to academies and of the day. As one parent in the that the percentage of pupils
free schools. It is a concern survey stated: across Greenwich reaching
that with the recent increase level 4 in English increased by
in academies, many more ‘It’s peace of mind that he’s 4.5 percentage points, and the
children will be attending had a decent meal at school.’ percentage of pupils reaching
schools that do not have legal level 5 in Science increased
binding nutritional standards. The response from a parent by 6 percentage points. The
Academies and free schools below graphically illustrates nature of the campaign meant
must be covered by the the impact the loss of FSM can that the evaluation could
nutritional standards in order have on a child’s diet: use other local authorities
to ensure all children are with similar characteristics to
receiving nutritious, high ‘Child liked the meals when Greenwich as a natural control
quality food in school group, meaning the results
he was entitled to them.
(see recommendation c). identify a direct causal effect
Now he just has a bread roll of improved school meals on
FSM are particularly important if I don’t have the full money’ educational attainment.
for disadvantaged families.
Research studies have
Figure 5: Which meal is your child’s main meal of the day?
found that poor diets can be
prevalent and child obesity
is particularly high in low
income families.25 Healthy food
options can be less accessible 5.5%
and more costly making it
more difficult for financially
constrained parents to
provide nutritious meals
29.1%
for their children.
Breakfast
Poor children on average eat
65.5%
half the daily recommended Lunch
fruit and vegetable intake,
exceed recommended Dinner
daily sugars and saturated
fat intakes and often eat
inadequate levels of iron, Free school meals survey:
question 29, 110 responses
12 Fair and squareJennifer’s family
Jennifer is a single mother with The health visitor told Jennifer During school holidays,
four children, three of them about her entitlement to FSM Jennifer finds it very expensive
in primary school. One of her for her children. Two of the to pay for three extra lunches
children has Autistic Spectrum applications were processed per day and her weekly
Disorder, one has mental fine but one form got lost. shopping bill goes up between
health issues and the baby has So for eight weeks she had £30–£40. She finds that she
restricted growth syndrome. to pay for one child’s school cannot take her children out
She receives FSM for all her meal and this ‘did make on day trips or to activities as
primary school aged children things hard financially’. much as she would normally.
at the value of £1.85 per day.
She is concerned about the Jennifer is concerned that if
The children’s main meal of stigma of FSM and has said she moved into work, school
the day is their FSM and they that for the ‘older ones it has meal costs would be part of a
do get a healthy cooked meal to be kept discreet... otherwise range of extra costs she would
at school although she does they will be bullied’. She face. She believes all families on
think there could be more expressed a particular concern a low income, including those
variety. Her children like the that if her son with mental who are working, should get
school lunch as it is a hot meal health problems was bullied, FSM for their children.
and is well cooked. They also he could turn violent and be
like sitting and eating a meal expelled.
with their friends and are
more likely to try new foods
at school as their friends are
having them too.
Fair and square 136. What does the future of free school meals look like?
As a result of the introduction There will be no threshold Figure 6 illustrates the potential
of the Universal Credit, the (either of hours or earnings) impact on the income of a
eligibility criteria for FSM within the new Universal lone parent with three school
have to change substantially Credit system at which the aged children with an earnings
by September 2013. This is family gain a substantial limit of £7500 per year (£144 a
because key benefits which increase in benefit income. week) to be imposed on FSM
determine whether a family Instead, household income entitlement.
is entitled to FSM (including increases gradually as
Income Support, Job Seekers’ earnings increase. This It is clear that this situation
Allowance and Child Tax Credit means that there is no would create a severe work
and Working Tax Credit) point at which the loss of and work progression,
will all cease to exist for new FSM is covered by other disincentive. A family earning
claimants,29 and be replaced by benefits. This creates a ‘cliff £143 per week would be
the Universal Credit. edge’ where if a claimant substantially better off than
exceeds this point, the costs a family who (as a result of
Under the current system, exceed the benefits. This taking on additional hours or
the loss of FSM at 16 effectively means that you receiving a pay rise) earned
hours of work per week, lose money for earning more just over the £144 threshold.
(24 couples from April) is or working longer.
partially alleviated by gaining Because of how Universal
substantial additional benefit The government has Credit entitlement is structured
income (through Working indicated that they are – with high withdrawal rates of
Tax Credit) at the same considering how to replace benefits when earning more or
hours threshold. This means the current entitlement working longer hours – many
that although the benefit of criteria, perhaps through an of the families affected will
working 16 hours per week income threshold at which have to earn far more before
are reduced by the loss of FSM entitlement is lost.30 they recover the loss of FSM.
FSM, the family will normally However, the final decision
still gain income overall at the for how FSM are dealt with
point where they lose their remains under consideration.
FSM entitlement.
Figure 6: Household income under Universal Credit31 for lone parent with three children
with earnings limit of £144 per week for FSM entitlement.
£550
(including FSM equivalent value)
£530
Weekly household income
hh income = £499 £499
£510
£490
£470
£450 (Where rent is
£430
£85 pw, council
tax is £15 pw and
£410 the family are in
£390 receipt of FSM
which is included
£370 as equivalent
£350 cash value32)
£0 £50 £100 £150 £200 £250 £300 £350
Weekly household earnings £144 £231
14 Fair and squareIn the case given, the parent
would need to earn an
7. Extending free school meals to
additional £88 per week (more
than £4500 per year) before
all Universal Credit recipients
their income fully recovered
from the loss of FSM. This
means that the person’s The introduction of the Universal Credit creates a unique
earnings would need to opportunity to ensure that all children in poverty get FSM,
increase from £7500 to more including those in lower income working families, by extending
than £12000 a year before their FSM entitlements to all Universal Credit claimants. We estimate
overall income, including the that this would mean an additional 1.3 million children would
value of FSM, reached the level receive FSM. For a full explanation of how this proposal would
it was at when their earnings work, see Appendix 1.
were below £7500.
What are the benefits of 3) Work incentives would
The loss of FSM is also likely to extending entitlement? be substantially better
be exacerbated as the family for parents with school
1) Children in poverty in aged children compared
would also lose the additional
working families would to alternative options for
entitlements that are provided
receive FSM. Many families the provision of FSM under
locally as a result of the receipt
with children may continue to the Universal Credit. For a
of FSM, including uniform
retain some level of Universal detailed explanation of the
allowances and reduced price
Credit entitlement even with reasons for improved work
access to leisure facilities. Once
relatively high earnings. incentives, see Appendix 1.
these are taken into account
Extending FSM to these
the effective ‘cliff edge’ may
households would mean that
be even greater.
almost all children in poverty
What would this cost?
in working households, and Our estimates suggest that
The government need to
out-of-work households, the cost of providing FSM
consider alternative options
would receive FSM. to all children in families in
for provision of FSM which
receipt of Universal Credit
do not create a benefit cliff
in England would be around
edge that leaves low income 2) Extending entitlement
£500 million per year.
families worse off for earning to children in low income
more. We believe that the working families could help
However, if necessary, the
best way to address this is to reduce stigma for all
cost to government could be
to extend FSM to children in recipients, since FSM would
significantly reduced through
all families eligible to receive be available to a significantly
partial payment from parents
the Universal Credit. This increased proportion of
by reducing their Universal
option is discussed in more children, and would not be
Credit ‘income disregard’.
detail in the following chapter. associated with worklessness.
This could reduce the cost to
government to around £290
million were a reduction in
household income disregards
... a benefit cliff edge that leaves low income of around £5 per week applied
families worse off for earning more. for each child receiving FSM
in the household. For a full
explanation of how these
reduced income disregards
could be applied, see
Appendix 1.
For a full explanation of the
costs of extending FSM to all
children in families in receipt
of Universal Credit see
Appendix 1, and Appendix 2
for full policy costing tables.
Fair and square 15What public support Figure 7: Should FSM be provided for school children living in
would there be for poverty, including those in working families?
doing this?
There is widespread support
100%
for allowing children in low 91%
90%
income, working families to
have FSM. 80%
70%
A nationally representative poll 60%
conducted by GFK NOP on 50%
behalf of The Children’s Society
40%
(Figure 7) found that more
30%
than 90% of people believe
that FSM should be available 20%
8%
for all children in poverty, 10%
1%
including those in working 0%
families. Yes No Not sure
Base: UK, all adults 16+, 1000 respondents, 6 Feb 2012
8. Conclusion and policy recommendations
FSM are a key benefit for low a situation where low income for parents with children in
income families, ensuring that families lose out for increasing receipt of FSM.
children in these families get their working hours or their pay.
a healthy lunch at school and 2) All local authorities and
easing the strain on tight Issues of stigma around the schools providers should
family budgets. receipt of FSM still exist, as introduce cashless systems
do issues around the quality in order to de-stigmatise the
However, around 700,000 of these meals. As well as receipt of FSM.
children in poverty are not extending FSM eligibility to
Currently around half of
entitled to receive FSM, with working families, action also
secondary schools use cashless
many of these coming from needs to be taken to address
systems for the payment for
low income, working families. these issues.
school food.33 Such systems
The loss of FSM when parents
ensure that children in receipt
move into paid employment Policy recommendations of FSM are not identified
of more than 16 (single) or
1) The government should as such. However, many
24 (couple) hours per week,
extend FSM entitlement to secondary schools still use
regardless of income, is not
school children in families in cash payment for school food,
only unfair, but it also creates
receipt of Universal Credit. with a voucher or token for
a severe work disincentive. Six
those in receipt of FSM. In such
out of 10 parents in our survey There are two key reasons cases, children in receipt of
said that the loss of FSM has an why the government should FSM can be identified, and as
impact on their decisions about extend FSM to school children a result, these children may be
whether to move into work or in families in receipt of the stigmatised.
take on more hours. Universal Credit. Firstly, it
would mean that almost all We recommend that cashless
There is a risk that this situation children living in poverty would payment systems are
could become even worse be entitled to FSM, including implemented in all schools so
following the introduction of the those in low income working that children in receipt of FSM
Universal Credit. The possibility families. Secondly, it would help are never identified as such.
of introducing an earnings to promote work incentives
threshold for FSM could lead to and ensure that work ‘pays’
16 Fair and squareOne of the principle barriers All school food should satisfy needed. The government
to this is cost.34 The average the new statutory requirements should review the level of
cost of installing a system is for balanced meals and support being provided for
around £16,00035 and the healthier school food. FSM in secondary schools
total cost of installing a However, currently academies and whether it is sufficient to
system in English secondary and free schools are exempt provide a full and nutritious
schools that do not have one from these requirements. The meal, and to provide children
would be in the region of £20 government should continue receiving FSM with a choice
million.36 The Department to promote nutritious and of options.
for Education should high quality school food by
consider what financial reviewing the extent to which There should also be more
support they could provide these standards are being emphasis on asking children
to schools without cashless adhered to across the country, and young people their
payment systems in place, and ensuring all state funded opinion on lunchtimes, school
to enable them to introduce schools, including academies meals and what they would
such systems. and free schools, have to like to eat. This would be
adhere to the school food an informative and valuable
3) The government should standards. The government exercise and could improve
review the extent to which should also consider whether pupil uptake of FSM and
state maintained schools and Ofsted should return to interest in healthy eating.
academies are adhering to inspecting school food. One way of doing this was
the nutritional standards for demonstrated in Newham
school food, and whether Many of the parents we where school nutritional
pupils in receipt of FSM are surveyed raised concerns that action groups gave pupils
receiving enough support to the support they received the opportunity to share their
purchase a full and nutritious for FSM was insufficient views on school meals with
meal, with a range of choices to purchase the meal their school governors, staff and
available within budget. secondary school children catering representatives.37
Fair and square 17Appendix 1: Extending free school meals to all
children in families in receipt of Universal Credit
Our estimates suggest that the So a lone parent with one The cost calculations in
cost of extending FSM for all child would receive a minimum Appendix 2 indicate that a
children in families in receipt income disregard under reduction in the level of the
of Universal Credit in the UK Universal Credit of around income disregard of £5 for
would be around £500 million £53 per week. In order to pay each child in the household
per year. However, if necessary, for the extension of FSM to could pay for nearly half of
the cost to government could working families, part payment the cost of extending FSM to
be significantly reduced for this additional entitlement working families – this would
through partial payment by could come from reducing the reduce the cost to government
working parents through income disregards within their to around £290 million. Under
reductions in their Universal Universal Credit entitlement. this option every contributing
Credit ‘income disregard’. family would still receive a
A reduction in the family’s greater value through school
How would a part-funded income disregard would meals received for their
option work? mean that as they move into children than they would lose
work, the amount of Universal in cash through a reduced
Income disregards in the Credit they receive will begin income disregard.
Universal Credit are the to be reduced on the basis
amount the family can earn of earnings at a slightly lower For a lone parent with two
before their Universal Credit earnings point. However, under children, their minimum
entitlement begins to be our policy proposals these earnings disregard38 under
reduced. After this point, for families will continue to receive Universal Credit will be around
each additional £1 which is FSM as they move into work. £58 per week.39 Under these
earned (net), 65p is withdrawn proposals this would be
from Universal Credit reduced to £48 per week
entitlement. where they receive FSM for
the two children.
How could this work in practice?
• A family makes a claim for Universal Credit at the point their first child is born.
They are found to be eligible and their claim begins.
• At the point the child starts primary school, they become entitled to FSM. They tell
the school that they would like to take up their entitlement. Having made their
application for FSM, they are told that they need to inform the DWP of this.
• The family notify the DWP that they have one child receiving FSM.
• The child starts receiving FSM.
• The DWP adjusts the household Universal Credit entitlement accordingly.
• When the child stops receiving FSM, the parents notify the DWP of this, and
Universal Credit entitlement is adjusted again to reflect their entitlement to a
higher income disregard.
18 Fair and squareHow much would these It is worth noting that the is fully funded by government
policy options cost? cost to government would be or part funded by in-work
slightly higher if the reduction families. We estimate that, in
Bringing all children in families in the income disregard was cash terms, families would be
entitled to receive Universal applied to the first three better off by between £198 and
Credit into entitlement for FSM children only to reflect that £367 per child receiving FSM
would mean that 3.8 million households get no additional per year43 depending upon
children40 could be entitled income disregard within whether families part fund or
to receive FSM. Based on Universal Credit after their government funds all of the
current take up rates of school third child. additional cost respectively.
meals, and projected take up
rates of Universal Credit,41 it Full policy cost tables are Even based on conservative
is estimated that around 2.3 included in Appendix 2. estimates (where all working
million children would take up parents with children now
this entitlement.
Why work incentives benefiting from receipt of FSM
would improve for parents were previously providing a
This would mean that an low cost packed lunch every
additional 1 to 1.5 million with school aged children. day for their children) families,
children (1.3 million central Extending FSM to all Universal in cash terms, would be better
estimate – depending on effect Credit recipients offers off by between £78 and
of behavioural response on substantially improved work £247 per child receiving
FSM take-up rates), would incentives. This is for three FSM per year.44
receive FSM. Based on the main reasons:
current average price of £367 3) The increases in income
per child, each year, (and 1) The earnings point at required to overcome the
production cost of £43742), which FSM are lost reflects cliff edge are substantially
FSM entitlement could be household circumstances reduced.
extended to all children in and is high up the income This is because families no
families in receipt of Universal distribution. longer entitled to FSM because
Credit for between £404m and There would still be a point their earnings are too high,
£625m per year (depending at which entitlement to FSM keep a higher proportion of
upon behavioural responses is lost, however, the earnings any additional earnings than
impacting on take-up rates), point at which this threshold is those who are still in receipt
with a central estimate of reached would be considerably of Universal Credit. Basic
£502m per year. higher than those available rate tax payers in receipt of
under current financial Universal Credit will keep as
This cost can be fully covered constraints. This approach little as 24p for each additional
by government, or as explained would also reflect different pound they earn; for those
in this appendix, part funded household circumstances whose earnings are too high to
by in-work families whose (and in particular numbers receive Universal Credit, they
children would gain entitlement of children in the household) will typically keep 68p for each
to FSM. The amount it would since the larger the family pound they earn.
cost government to give FSM the higher the earnings point
to these children would vary at which Universal Credit As a result the significance of
depending on the amount entitlement is lost. the benefit ‘cliff edge’ is greatly
that the income disregard reduced, since the household
was reduced. The cost to 2) In-work parents will will need to earn considerably
government could be reduced experience an increase in their less to overcome the effective
to between £231m and £367m disposable incomes. cut in household income
(depending upon response in Parents who are already in caused by the loss of FSM.
take-up rates), central estimate work, or move into work,
of £291m, were a reduction in will experience an increase
household income disregards in their disposable incomes,
of around £5 applied for each regardless of whether the
child receiving FSM in the extension of FSM to all families
household. in receipt of Universal Credit
Fair and square 19Appendix 2: Extending free school meals to all children
in families in receipt of Universal Credit – policy costings
Proposed policy options: costs to government and in-work families (£ million)
Annual estimates additional to Spending Review
In-work Additional Total No. In-work Required Proportion
families government additional additional families Universal government
contributions contribution annual cost children contribution Credit additional
receiving per child income
FSM per week (£) disregard
reduction
per child (£)
In-work families part-fund through £5 income disregard reduction
Decreased
take-up 173.2 230.8 404.0 1,025,000 3.25 5.00 57%
Constant
take-up 211.3 291.1 502.4 1,250,000 3.25 5.00 58%
Increased
take-up 258.8 366.5 625.3 1,531,250 3.25 5.00 59%
Government funds full additional cost
Decreased
take-up 0.0 404.0 404.0 1,025,000 0.00 0.00 100%
Constant
take-up 0.0 502.4 502.4 1,250,000 0.00 0.00 100%
Increased
take-up 0.0 625.3 625.3 1,531,250 0.00 0.00 100%
Proposed policy options: range of costs to government (£ million)
Decreased take-up Constant take-up Increased take-up
In-work families part-fund additional cost 230.8 291.1 366.5
Government funds full additional cost 404.0 502.4 625.3
Key assumptions
Variable Assumptions
umber of children
N • We estimate that 1 million children are currently receiving FSM (See Chapter 3).
currently receiving FSM
umber of eligible
N • There are 7.5 million children of school age in state maintained schools in England45
children under We also know that 50% of all UK children are estimated to be in households eligible to
policy proposal receive Universal Credit.46 Therefore we assume that 3.75 million English school children
will be eligible for Universal Credit under our policy proposal.
• We assume a 90% Universal Credit take up rate (see below) therefore we assume that
3.38 million children will be in families eligible for FSM.
verage cost of
A • Latest annual survey of take-up of school meals47 estimated that the average annual cost
school meals of school meals across all schools was around £367 per child in 2010/11.
• Increasing take-up could allow for providers to take advantage of economies of scale
resulting in a reduced average cost per school meal produced. An evaluation of the
FSM extension in Scotland48 found mixed effects of the extension on average costs.
We therefore assume there is negligible impact of economies of scale on average meal
costs, although this may be a conservative estimate if providers can reduce costs in
response to a significant increase in demand.
20 Fair and squareVariable Assumptions
FSM take-up rates • We have calculated that the current rate of take-up of FSM by those eligible for them is
two-thirds (see Chapter 3).
• There is a lack of robust evidence on the potential behavioural response, of either the
families whose children are already eligible for FSM or the families who become eligible
for FSM, to an increase in number of children eligible for FSM. We have therefore provided
a range of potential take-up rates once eligibility is extended. A decreased take-up rate is
estimated at 60% and an increased take-up rate is estimated at 75%.
Universal Credit • The take up rate for Child Tax Credits is 80%49 we use this as an example of take-up of an
take-up rates existing benefit by families.
• Department for Work and Pensions Universal Credit assumptions are that 100% of existing
benefit claimants will take-up Universal Credit and that 50% of those not currently
claiming benefits will do so under Universal Credit.50
• Therefore we assume 90% of families entitled to Universal Credit will take it up –
(100% x 80%) + (50% x 20%) = 90%
Savings produced • Universal Credit works on the basis that a certain amount of household earnings is
by a reduction in ‘disregarded’ for the purposes of means testing for Universal Credit entitlement.
earnings disregards
• The calculations above assume that a £5 per week reduction in the disregard will reduce
Universal Credit entitlement for working households by around £3.25 per week – meaning
that working households effectively contribute £3.25 per week, or £4.45 per FSM week
(38 school weeks in the school year) per child, towards each week of FSM they receive.
This is on the basis of a withdrawal rate of 65% for Universal Credit; each £1 of earnings
disregarded is worth 65p to households who are receiving Universal Credit and who have
earnings above the level of the earnings disregard.
• There will be some working households on the margins that will not be able to make
the full level of contribution to their FSM entitlement. This is either where (1) earnings
are below the current level of earnings disregard, so they will not see the full impact of a
reduction in the disregard level, or (2) Universal Credit entitlement is so low that the full
level of contribution cannot be deducted before entitlement reaches £0. We have not
included these circumstances into the cost model, as there is likely to be a small number
of households in these circumstances.
Payment for out-of- • Current FSM policy provides meals to out-of-work households. We assume that the
work households Government continues to fund 100% of the cost of school meals for those families who
are out-of-work.
Additional cost of • The price of school meals are typically subsidised, so that the price to parents at the point
higher overall school of delivery, is lower than the cost of production. School Food Trust survey data puts the
meal take up average cost of production of a school meal at £437 per year,51 this is £70 per year higher
than the average price of the meal (£367).
• FSMs have higher take up rates than paid for school meals – as a result costing the
extension of FSM should take into account the likelihood of increased overall take up of
school meals, and the additional cost-over-price of these additional meals.
• Extension of entitlement to free school meals to all children in families in receipt of
Universal Credit, is estimated to mean that 1.9 million more children are entitled to receive
FSM (3.4m compared to 1.5m at present).
• Based on an average take up rate of 33% for children not registered for FSM52 we may
estimate that around 630,000 of these children are already receiving school meals.
• The take up rate for FSM is substantially higher than school meals (around 67% of children
in families entitled to receive free school meals take them up each day). It is therefore
estimated that at a constant take up rate, of the 1.9 million children entitled around 1.3
million children will take them up.
• Therefore, an estimated additional 620,000 children (1.3 million additional FSM take up,
minus 630,000 already taking up paid for lunches who we assume will all take up the free
lunch option) will receive school meals.
• The cost-over-price of extending FSM to these children is estimated at £70 per year per
child, or a total of £44 million per year.
(If the FSM take-up rate dropped to 60% following extension, the additional cost-over-
price of higher overall school meal take up would be in the region of £28 million, if take-up
increased to 75%, the additional cost-over-price would be around £63 million.)
Fair and square 21Endnotes
1. ee for example: Berlot, M., James, J. (2009) Healthy School Meals and Educational Outcomes Institute for Economic and Social
S
Research Working Paper; School Meals Review Panel (2005) Turning the tables: transforming school food
2. S
chool Food Trust (2007) School lunch and behaviour: systematic observation of classroom behaviour following a school dining
room intervention; School Food Trust (2009) School lunch and learning behaviour in primary schools: an intervention study; School
Food Trust (2009) School lunch and learning behaviour in secondary schools: an intervention study
3. C
hildren are said to be living in poverty if they are in a household living on less than 60% of median household income after the
deduction of housing costs.
4. In England, children are entitled to receive FSM if their families receive: Income Support, income based Job Seeker’s Allowance, or
income related Employment and Support Allowance, the Guarantee credit of Pension Credit, or Child Tax Credit (CTC) and have
annual income of £16,190 or less. However, this does not apply if the family is receiving working tax credit (WTC) unless this is during
the four week ‘WTC run on’ period.
5. www.islington.gov.uk/education/studentsupport/free_school_meals.asp
6. 2
9% of children live in a household on less than 60% of median household income (after housing costs) (DWP (2011) ‘Households
Below Average Income: An analysis of the income distribution 1994/95 – 2009/10’ London: DWP) This equates to around 2.2 million
children in state schools in England.
7. Assuming all children in receipt of FSM are in poverty. The number is likely to be somewhat higher since some children in households
entitled to FSM will not be in poverty.
8. Department for Education (2011) ‘Schools, pupils and their characteristics January 2011’ London: DfE
9. H
MRC statistics show that in December 2011, 2.669 million children were in families either receiving child tax credit only, (or the
child premium on income support) and this support was not tapered (i.e. had income of under £15,860). www.hmrc.gov.uk/stats/
personal-tax-credits/cwtc-dec2011.pdf Based on 13 million children in the UK, this equates to around 20.5% of all children.
10. D
epartment for Education (2011) ‘Schools, pupils and their characteristics January 2011’ Table 3a: www.education.gov.uk/rsgateway/
DB/SFR/s001012/sfr12-2011.pdf note that registrations for FSM have increased substantially in recent years, they may have increased
since January 2011.
11. England only.
12. A
ssumes equal distribution of pupils in primary and secondary school – in fact around 55% of all children are in primary and 45% in
secondary school.
13. DWP (2011) ‘Households Below Average Income: An analysis of the income distribution 1994/95 – 2009/10’ London: DWP
14. M
ichael Nelson, Jo Nicholas, Lesley Wood, Ellen Lever, Laura Simpson and Beverley Baker (2011) ‘Sixth annual survey of take up of
school lunches in England’ School Food Trust/LACA
15. www.direct.gov.uk/en/Nl1/Newsroom/DG_200057
16. F
or example, eligibility criteria for Leeds school clothing allowance:
www.leeds.gov.uk/Advice_and_benefits/Benefits/Free_school_meals.aspx
17. F
or example Bracknell Forest ‘junior leisure saver scheme’
www.bracknell-forest.gov.uk/leisure-saver-scheme-application-form-for-juniors.pdf
18. P
amela Storey and Rosemary Chamberlain (2001) Improving the Take Up of FSM, Thomas Coram Research Unit, Institute of
Education
19. Bradshaw (2002) The well-being of children in the UK Save the Children, London
20. 4% of children aged 2-10 obese and one-third (33.6 per cent) of Year six children overweight or obese
www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publichealth/Obesity/DH_078098
21. BBC News (2010) Healthy Lunch Boxes a Rarity. Available: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/health/8451828.stm (Accessed 19 Mar, 2012)
22. School Meals Review Panel (2005) Turning the tables: transforming school food. Sheffield: School Food Trust
23. www.schoolfoodtrust.org.uk/the-standards
24. S
chool Food Trust (2009) School lunch and learning behaviour in primary schools: an intervention study. Sheffield: School Food
Trust; School Food Trust (2009) School lunch and learning behaviour in secondary schools: an intervention study. Sheffield: School
Food Trust
25. www.dh.gov.uk/en/Publichealth/Obesity/index.htm
26. Nelson, M., Erens, B., Bates, B., Church, S., Boshier, T. (2007) Low Income Diet and Nutrition Survey London: Food Standards Agency
27. At pg 150, Flaherty, Veit-Wilson, Dornan (2004) Poverty: the facts, 5th edition. Child Poverty Action Group, London
28. Belot and James (2011) Healthy school meals and Educational Outcomes, Journal of Health Economics 30(3), 489-504
29. Existing claimants will be transferred onto the Universal Credit between 2013 and 2017.
30. DWP (2010) ‘Universal Credit: Welfare that works’ London: DWP (p48)
31. Based on out of work benefit levels for Feb 2012.
32. £1100 annual value for three children is worth £21 per week when divided equally across the course of the year.
22 Fair and squareYou can also read
