Trump wants schools to prepare lunch from scratch. Here’s why that’s harder than it sounds

On a Monday morning in September, three cafeteria staffers worked swiftly and methodically to prepare lunch for 300 children at Thomas Hooker Elementary School.

Frozen popcorn chicken nuggets were taken out of bags before the workers smothered them in an orange glaze and put them in a warming oven to be served with fresh-made brown rice and green beans. Premade hamburger patties on buns were topped with cheese and heated. Baby carrots, sliced cucumbers and cherry tomatoes sat in small cups, along with fresh apples and oranges and a choice of canned fruits.

The lunch preppers don’t have much space or equipment to work with — greatly limiting the amount of food they can make from scratch. The school in Connecticut was built in the 1960s without a kitchen, at a time when many children went home for lunch. Meriden Public Schools eventually cobbled together a kitchen out of three closets, where the cafeteria manager’s desk is a few feet from the pot washing sink, which is in a separate room from the stove, refrigerators and other appliances.

The process, as Susan Maffe, director of food and nutrition services for the school district, puts it, “is definitely very challenging.”

The situation at Thomas Hooker typifies the hurdles many districts would face to make more of their meals from scratch — as the Trump administration is pushing them to do. Serving more “real food” and cutting down on ultra-processed offerings in schools is a key pillar of Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s Make America Healthy Again movement.

“We need to expand scratch cooking, reduce added sugars and ultra-processed food, serve more fresh produce, whole grains and high-quality protein,” Kennedy said at a news conference in August on improving school meals. “Schools tell us they need better kitchens, equipment, training, practical models for cooking from scratch.”

To help schools overhaul their menus, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins announced at the event that the US Department of Agriculture would provide $70 million in equipment grants toward improving their kitchens. And HHS said it will invest $30 million in research to identify cost-effective ways to make school meals healthier.

School nutrition officials share that goal but say the money will be nowhere near enough what’s needed to achieve it.

“$70 million won’t go far across 50 states,” said Gay Anderson, chair of the School Nutrition Foundation, a charitable arm of the national professional organization on school nutrition.

Meriden alone spent more than $300,000 for equipment purchases and repairs last year, Maffe said. But Connecticut is set to receive just $209,000 for the entire state in an initial tranche of grants.

Equipment isn’t the only obstacle school districts face in trying to increase their scratch-made offerings. A lack of skilled labor, space and funding for general operations are also challenges that the USDA grants don’t address.

Adding to the pressure, the districts are awaiting new USDA nutrition standards for the national school meals program, which provides breakfast to roughly 15 million children and lunch to about 30 million kids daily. The proposal, which will likely take several years to implement, is expected to emphasize serving even more food that’s freshly made.

Currently, only 16% of school districts around the country serve at least some items made from scratch on a daily basis, according to a recent survey by the School Nutrition Association. About 71% of districts serve a scratch-made offering — one that’s made using fresh, raw and whole ingredients to prepare some or all of a meal — at least once a week.

School kitchens vary widely in their setups and capabilities. Some districts have central kitchen facilities, which prepare at least part of the meals that are then transported daily to schools. Elsewhere, breakfasts and lunches are prepared onsite in school kitchens that differ significantly in their equipment and staffing from district to district, and even from school to school within the same district.

But most have one thing in common.

“Schools are simply not equipped to scratch prepare all menu items — more than 93% cited the need for more staff, culinary training, equipment and infrastructure to reduce reliance on UPFs,” or ultra-processed foods, the School Nutrition Association wrote in a position paper earlier this year.

Anderson knows just how desperate many school districts are for new kitchen appliances, since she oversees an annual equipment grant program for the School Nutrition Association’s foundation.

The foundation awarded more than $660,000 in grants this year that will allow 65 districts to buy ovens, food processors, refrigerators, package sealing equipment, produce spinners and more. The awardees work with manufacturers to provide items that meet their specific needs.

But the foundation cannot help many others who apply, and the USDA’s grant program is far from enough , Anderson said.

Even her own school district in Sioux Falls, South Dakota, serves little, if anything, from scratch. The district has a central kitchen facility, where 50 staffers prepare the meals, truck them to 24 elementary schools and serve them to students. Breakfast has to be delivered the day before and refrigerated onsite. Lunch is delivered as close to mealtime as possible.

The elementary schools have no kitchens — just sinks, fridges and cupboards. The 11 middle and high schools in the district are better equipped, serving food that’s prepared onsite but largely goes from freezer to oven, such as turkey pancake wraps for breakfast and pizza and chicken tenders for lunch. Some fresh-made items include fried rice and gravy.

Just equipping the elementary schools to serve hot breakfasts would cost $350,000, Anderson said. Yet, the entire state is set to receive only $69,000 from the initial tranche of USDA equipment funds.

“We want to give the students the most nutritional meal possible,” Anderson said. “We just have to be able to have the proper funding so we can be creative and make these things work.”

Besides a lack of appliances, many districts don’t employ full-time cafeteria staffers. Turnover is high because workers can often earn more at retail or warehouse jobs.

That adds to the challenge of trying to prepare more food from scratch, which would require training the staff to handle raw meat, adhere to recipes and nutrition standards and safely use the equipment, including sharp knives and steamers.

And then there’s the existing funding shortfall. Feeding lunch to the children in Meriden cost about $5.07 per meal last year, including $2.44 for labor, $2.04 for food and 20 cents for equipment, with the rest going towards custodial services, office supplies, utilities and staff training.

But Maffe’s federal reimbursement was only about $4.80 per meal. That’s blowing a projected $250,000 hole in her budget, which she has to make up through selling healthy snacks and beverages at lunch, providing catering for school district events and utilizing some state funds since the district doesn’t provide any support for the school meals operations.

Maffe is wary of the looming federal nutrition guidelines. If she were required to put more fresh-made food on the menu at Thomas Hooker, she said, “I have no idea how I would do it. I really don’t.”

Asked about school districts’ concerns, a USDA spokesperson said that reimbursement rates are set by Congress. Also, the agency has provided grants to support equipment purchases for nearly 20 years, the spokesperson said.

“Making America Healthy Again starts in the classroom, and USDA is excited to do its part,” the spokesperson said.

Some school districts have made more progress in serving fresh food to their students.

Last fall, Littleton Public Schools in Colorado opened a $4 million central production kitchen with the goal of cooking more from scratch. It used money fronted by the school district, leftover Covid-19 funds in the nutrition service’s budget and donations from local foundations.

The central kitchen’s three chefs prepare such offerings as zucchini muffins and pancake mixes for breakfast and, for lunch, the ingredients for homemade chili, tacos with locally sourced beef and chicken pot pie. They also whip up marinara sauce and spice mixes. The items are then cooked or finished at the district’s 21 schools.

Prior to the central kitchen, only about a quarter of lunch items were made from scratch, said Jessica Gould, the nutrition services director. The facility allowed them to more than double the amount.

Of course, shifting to healthier, fresh-made food could pose another problem.

“Some kids are used to Kraft mac and cheese,” Gould said. “We’re trying to make a big leap here. To get their taste buds to follow is going to be our next challenge.”

九月的一个星期一早上，托马斯·胡克小学食堂的三名工作人员迅速而有条不紊地为 300 名儿童准备午餐。

冷冻爆米花鸡块从包装袋中取出后，工作人员会淋上橙汁，放入保温烤箱，搭配新鲜煮熟的糙米饭和四季豆一起上桌。预制汉堡肉饼夹在面包里，上面放上奶酪加热。小胡萝卜、黄瓜片和圣女果盛放在小杯子里，旁边还有新鲜的苹果、橙子以及各种罐装水果可供选择。

午餐准备人员空间和设备都非常有限，这大大限制了他们能够从零开始制作的食物种类。这所位于康涅狄格州的学校建于上世纪60年代，当时没有厨房，很多孩子都回家吃午饭。梅里登公立学校最终利用三个壁橱拼凑出了一个厨房，食堂经理的办公桌离洗碗池只有几英尺远，而洗碗池又位于一个单独的房间里，与炉灶、冰箱和其他电器分开。

正如学区食品和营养服务主管苏珊·马菲所说，这个过程“绝对极具挑战性”。

托马斯·胡克学校的情况体现了许多学区在努力让学生从零开始制作更多餐食时所面临的困境——而特朗普政府正大力推动他们这样做。在学校提供更多“真正的食物”，减少超加工食品的供应，是美国卫生与公众服务部部长小罗伯特·F·肯尼迪“让美国再次健康”运动的关键支柱。

肯尼迪在8月份举行的关于改善学校膳食的新闻发布会上表示：“我们需要推广现做现卖，减少添加糖和超加工食品，提供更多新鲜农产品、全谷物和优质蛋白质。学校告诉我们，他们需要更好的厨房、设备、培训以及现做现卖的实用模式。”

为了帮助学校改进菜单，农业部长布鲁克·罗林斯在活动上宣布，美国农业部将提供7000万美元的设备补助金，用于改善学校厨房设施。同时，美国卫生与公众服务部表示，将投资3000万美元用于研究，以寻找经济有效的方法来改善学校膳食的健康程度。

学校营养官员也认同这一目标，但他们表示，这笔钱远远不足以实现这一目标。

“7000万美元在50个州根本不够用，”学校营养基金会主席盖伊·安德森说道。该基金会是全国学校营养专业组织的慈善机构。

马菲表示，仅梅里登市去年就花费了超过30万美元用于设备购置和维修。但康涅狄格州在首批拨款中仅能获得20.9万美元。

设备并非学区在拓展自主研发课程方面面临的唯一障碍。缺乏熟练劳动力、场地和日常运营资金也是美国农业部拨款无法解决的挑战。

雪上加霜的是，各学区正等待美国农业部针对全国学校供餐计划出台新的营养标准。该计划每天为大约1500万儿童提供早餐，为约3000万儿童提供午餐。这项提案预计需要数年时间才能实施，其重点在于提供更多新鲜烹制的食物。

根据学校营养协会最近的一项调查，目前全国只有16%的学区每天提供至少一些自制食品。约71%的学区每周至少提供一次自制食品——即使用新鲜、未经加工的完整食材烹制的部分或全部餐食。

学校食堂的设施和能力差异很大。一些学区设有中央厨房，负责准备至少一部分餐食，然后每天运送到各个学校。而其他学区则在校内食堂现场准备早餐和午餐，这些食堂的设备和人员配备在不同学区之间，甚至同一学区内不同学校之间都存在显著差异。

但它们大多有一个共同点。

“学校根本没有能力从零开始准备所有菜单上的菜品——超过 93% 的学校表示需要更多的工作人员、烹饪培训、设备和基础设施来减少对超加工食品的依赖，”学校营养协会在今年早些时候的一份立场文件中写道。

安德森非常清楚许多学区对新厨房设备的迫切需求，因为她负责学校营养协会基金会的年度设备拨款计划。

该基金会今年发放了超过66万美元的拨款，用于资助65个学区购买烤箱、食品加工机、冰箱、包装封口设备、蔬果脱水机等设备。受助学区与制造商合作，采购符合其特定需求的物品。

安德森说，但该基金会无法帮助其他许多申请者，而美国农业部的拨款计划远远不够。

即使是她所在的南达科他州苏福尔斯市的学区，也很少提供现做的餐食。该学区设有一个中央厨房，50名工作人员在那里准备餐食，然后用卡车运送到24所小学，再由学校分发给学生。早餐必须提前一天送达，并在学校冷藏。午餐则尽可能在用餐时间前送达。

这些小学没有厨房，只有水槽、冰箱和橱柜。该学区的11所初中和高中设施较好，提供的食物虽然都是现场制作，但大多是从冷冻柜直接加热的，例如早餐是火鸡煎饼卷，午餐是披萨和鸡柳。一些新鲜制作的菜品包括炒饭和肉汁。

安德森说，仅仅为小学配备提供热早餐的设施就需要35万美元。然而，整个州从美国农业部首批设备资金中只能获得6.9万美元。

安德森说：“我们想为学生们提供尽可能营养丰富的膳食。我们只需要有足够的资金，就能发挥创造力，把这些事情做好。”

除了缺少设备外，许多学区也没有聘用全职食堂员工。由于员工在零售或仓储工作中往往能赚到更多钱，因此食堂员工流动率很高。

这也增加了从零开始准备更多食物的挑战，这需要培训员工如何处理生肉、遵守食谱和营养标准以及安全使用设备，包括锋利的刀具和蒸笼。

此外，还存在资金缺口。去年，梅里登的儿童午餐每份成本约为 5.07 美元，其中包括 2.44 美元的人工费、2.04 美元的食品费和 20 美分的设备费，其余部分用于清洁服务、办公用品、水电费和员工培训。

但马菲获得的联邦报销款每餐只有约4.80美元。这预计会在她的预算中造成25万美元的缺口，她不得不通过在午餐时间出售健康零食和饮料、为学区活动提供餐饮服务以及利用一些州政府资金来弥补这一缺口，因为学区不为学校供餐运营提供任何支持。

玛菲对即将出台的联邦营养指南感到担忧。她说，如果她被要求在托马斯·胡克餐厅的菜单上增加更多新鲜制作的食物，“我不知道该怎么做。真的不知道。”

针对学区的担忧，美国农业部发言人表示，报销标准由国会设定。该发言人还表示，近20年来，该机构一直提供拨款支持设备购置。

“让美国再次健康起来要从课堂开始，美国农业部很高兴能为此贡献一份力量，”发言人说。

一些学区在为学生提供新鲜食物方面取得了更大的进步。

去年秋天，科罗拉多州利特尔顿公立学校开设了一座耗资 400 万美元的中央厨房，目标是更多地从零开始烹饪食物。这笔资金来自学区预付的款项、营养服务预算中剩余的 COVID-19 专项资金以及当地基金会的捐款。

中央厨房的三位厨师负责准备早餐食品，例如西葫芦松饼和煎饼粉；午餐则提供自制辣椒、本地牛肉玉米饼和鸡肉馅饼的食材。他们还会调制番茄酱和香料混合物。这些食品随后会在学区的21所学校进行烹饪或最后的加工。

营养服务主管杰西卡·古尔德表示，在中央厨房启用之前，午餐中只有大约四分之一的菜品是现做的。启用中央厨房后，这一比例翻了一番还多。

当然，转向更健康、新鲜制作的食物可能会带来另一个问题。

“有些孩子已经习惯了卡夫牌通心粉奶酪，”古尔德说。“我们正在努力做出一个重大改变。如何让他们接受新的口味将是我们接下来的挑战。”