DMUSD Child Nutrition Committee

1. DMUSD Child Nutrition Committee Board Meeting Presentaion July 6, 2011

2. Child Nutrition Committee • Yana Mohanty, CNC Committee Chair, Ocean Air Parent • Tamra Atwood, CNC Committee co-Chair, Ashley Falls Parent • Jen Woodmansee, CNC Committee Secretary, Del Mar Heights Parent • Lee Yen Anderson, Del Mar Heights parent • Pam Baldwin, DMUSD Lunch Program Staff Member • Jenn Beamer, Ashley Falls Parent • Jodie Block, Sage Canyon Parent • Patty Danon, Torrey Hills Parent • Naomi Harris, Ashley Falls Parent • Heather Keith, Torrey Hills Parent • Katie Pelisek, Center for a Healthy Lifestyle • Tencia Pritchett, Carmel Del Mar Parent • Sheila Reilly, Parent of Ocean Air Alumni • E. A. Stewart, Del Mar Hills Parent • Lola Walker, Ashley Falls Parent The CNC would like to thank Cathy Birks, Assistant Superintendent, Business Services, and district staff who provided us with all the information we needed to make an informed choice.

3. CNC Tasks, per Superintendent Peabody’s directions • What parents and children would like to have served for school lunches. • What is available from possible vendors. • Input on vendors. • Ways of keeping the program revenue neutral. • Ensure communication between the school community and board in regards to the lunch, snack and wellness programs. • Follow any guidelines that come from the Strategic Management process.

4. Keeping the program revenue neutral Expenses Revenue Cafeteria Fund FOOD FOOD sales Staff salaries & benefits NSLP reimbursements for each meal served What we learned: Gasoline and maintenance for trucks PARTICIPATION IS CRUCIAL

5. Daily Average Lunch Purchases, 2010-2011 academic year Introduction of new SDUHSD menu 18% 17% 17% 17% 17% 17% 17% 16% 15% 14% Labels show % participation (4352 enrolled students) Current program is NOT increasing participation

6. DMUSD lunch pricing and participation trends, 2007-present *Data gathered from district purchases. Actual participation rates are slightly lower. If this participation trend continues, we will be using up reserves no matter which vendor we choose

7. DMUSD lunch pricing and overhead trends, 2007-present DMUSD overhead Price district pays for food & milk.

8. Stabilizing lunch costs • Stabilizing lunch prices, particularly district overhead, is vital to future health of Cafeteria fund • Participation dropped sharply in 2009 with $0.75 price increase (food quality remained the same) • Participation rate will eventually saturate even with ANY lunch program

9. According to district-wide lunch survey, the lunch program has lost participants for these reasons:

10. What parents and children would like to have served for school lunches. Very important Important Only slightly important Not important Data from February 2011 Lunch Survey

11. Criteria that more than 2/3 of respondents deemed important made it into the RFP of June 3, 2011 These will henceforth be referred to as the “8 preferred criteria”

12. Revenue neutrality: suggestions summary • Choose vendor that meets needs of community, including teachers • Stabilize lunch costs • Note: Choicelunch proposal included a pick up/delivery option for 6 cents more per meal • 1000 meals/day, 180 days/yr makes for $10,800 per year on spent on delivery • that’s less than the projected amount district will spend on maintenance of vehicles alone

13. Six (6) proposals came in on 6/17/2011 The 2 vendors requiring equipment storage were not considered.

14. What is available from possible vendors? Each potential vendor and proposal was reviewed and discussed in detail –       2 spreadsheets were compiled to further compare vendors –       1) Extent to which each vendor fulfills the 8 criteria –       2) Analysis of menu variety based on 21-day sample menus provided by vendors –       Also looked at menu planning option used by each vendor (district prefers Enhanced Menu planning) –       Also looked at packaging used by vendors (district requires Environmentally Friendly Packaging) –       Also considered vendor's reputation/business history

15. Comparison of Choicelunch and Encinitas USD (2 lowest priced proposals) *CNC was instructed not to talk to vendors, so the “non response” items could not be addressed.

16. Variety of Entrees Offered in 21-Day Menu

17. How we arrived at our vote After careful review of each proposal, CNC unanimously voted for Choicelunch for the following reasons: • Was the lowest priced proposal that reasonably meet all 8 preferred criteria • Has diverse menus with lots of variety • Has environmentally friendly biodegradable packaging • Mission statement directly addresses healthy lunches for children • Has experience servicing public school districts on NSLP • Peanut/tree nut facility safe for children with allergies

18. Why we didn’t vote for Encinitas USD(lowest priced proposal) The CNC felt that this proposed vendor would not yield an increase in participation numbers for the following reasons: • Many menu items offered similar to past and current DMUSD menu, which is not performing well. • This would be first time vendor is supplying a full service lunch program outside of its own district. • Limited variety. • Did not address most of the 8 preferred criteria. • Did not address packaging.

19. Going forward CNC is looking forward to working on Wellness and Nutrition Education to • Promote a healthy lifestyle for our children • Promote healthy eating through our new and improved lunch program • Help increase participation in lunch programs by • Working with new vendor on marketing and advertising • Organizing tastings at back to school night • Enlisting the help of PTA’s • We appreciate the Board and Staff taking the time to consider these important changes, and for taking  positive step for our children!