Page 121 - ON THE WAY TO HEALTHIER SCHOOL CANTEENS - Irma Evenhuis

Pilot tests revealed some issues with using the Canteen Scan in sports canteens and worksite cafeterias, including where policy should be recorded and how organisations should include vending machines if they are scattered around the building and not controlled by the same company as the cafeteria.
Conclusions:
The Canteen Scan is a valid and reliable online tool to assess availability of products in school cafeterias. It can also evaluate product availability in vending machines and product accessibility validly and reliably when filled out by SCA’s, but not yet when filled out by canteen employees. This study contributed to knowledge about how to validly and reliably assess the health level of canteens, and how to combine the assessment of food availability and accessibility in one online tool. At present, the tool is being improved based on the results and recommendations derived from this study, and in collaboration with stakeholders from the setting schools, sports and worksites.
Part II: Evaluation of the support to implement healthier school canteen guidelines
Summary of part two
As reported in Chapter 5, the effects of the implementation plan on the health level of
the school canteen (cafeteria and vending machines) and student purchase behaviour
were evaluated. In this study, 10 intervention schools received support with implementing
the Guidelines for Healthier Canteens, while the control schools only received general information about the guidelines. The schools that received support made more changes
towards a healthier canteen compared to the control schools. In particular, the availability
of healthier foods and drinks in the cafeteria and the fulfilled accessibility of healthier food
and drinks increased. The effect on vending machines, however, was limited. With regard
to the self-reported purchase behaviour of students, we cannot draw clear conclusions. In 7 our study, students reported bringing most food and drinks from home. In addition, they
bought products in shops around school or in the school canteen. The reported purchases in the schools’ cafeteria and vending machines were limited, on average less than one purchase per week. Changes in their purchases as result of the intervention, or due to a healthy availability or accessibility in the canteen, were not detected.
In addition to the effect evaluation, Chapter 6 describes the process evaluation of the implementation plan, showing the effect of the tools on factors affecting implementation as perceived by stakeholders, and the quality of each implementation tool. It showed that compared to the stakeholders involved in schools that did not receive the support, stakeholders belonging to schools that received the tools scored higher on their knowledge (“I have all information I need”) and motivation, and lower on their need for support. Although these quantitative changes were small, they were supported by the qualitative results. For example, stakeholders mentioned that the different tools complemented each other and that all the tools together supported them in creating a healthier canteen. In particular, the advisory meeting and report, the students’ fact sheet, the communication materials and the Canteen Scan were evaluated as most positive tools. However, each tool has a specific function and stakeholders appreciated that they could choose themselves if, when and what support they used. For example, the newsletter worked as a reminder, while the students’ fact sheet was used to discuss the canteen topic with school management.
119