Copyright © Joint Publication of the Maltese Presidency and the European Union, 2017

First published in 2017 by the Maltese Presidency and the European Commission

Reproduction is authorised provided the source is acknowledged.

The publisher has used its best endeavours to ensure that the URLs for external websites referred to in this report are correct and active at the time of going to press. However, the publisher has no responsibility for the websites and can make no guarantee that a site will remain live or that the content is or will remain appropriate.

This publication is a Joint Publication of the Maltese presidency and the European Commission. The output expressed does not imply a policy position of the European Commission. Neither the European Commission nor any person acting on behalf of the Commission is responsible for the use which might be made of this publication.

JRC Science Hub

https://ec.europa.eu/jrc/

Good healthy nutrition is essential for all children to reach their full potential at every stage of their development: from excelling at playing to learning, doing sports and simply being happy

Europe Direct is a service to help you find answers to your questions about the European Union

Free phone number (*): 00 800 6 7 8 9 10 11

(*) Certain mobile telephone operators do not allow access to 00 800 numbers or these calls may be billed.

A great deal of additional information on the European Union is available on the Internet.

It can be accessed through the Europa server http://europa.eu

How to obtain EU publications

Our publications are available from EU Bookshop (http://publications.europa.eu/howto/index_en.htm), where you can place an order with the sales agent of your choice.

The Publications Office has a worldwide network of sales agents.

You can obtain their contact details by sending a fax to (352) 29 29-42758.

JRC105657

EUR 28544 EN

PDF | ISBN 978-92-79-67466-2 | ISSN 1831-9424 | doi:10.2760/269508
EPUB | ISBN 978-92-79-67465-5 | ISSN 1018-5593 | doi:10.2760/55249

Luxembourg: Publications Office of the European Union, 2017

© European Union, 2017

Authors

JRC: Sandra Caldeira, Stefan Storcksdieck genannt Bonsmann, Ioanna Bakogianni

Maltese EU Presidency team: Charmaine Gauci, Antoinette Calleja

DG SANTE: Artur Furtado

All authors read and approved the final version of the report.

Contributors

Maltese presidency working group on childhood obesity (in alphabetical order): Samuel Aquilina, Mario Caruana, Claire Copperstone, Michelle Deguara, Charmaine Gauci (chair), Moira Grixti, Antoinette Saliba, Charlene Vassallo

Participants at the technical meeting on 1-2 December 2016 in Malta (in alphabetical order): Samuel Aquilina, Inga Birzniece, Lena Bjorck, Stefan Storcksdieck genannt Bonsmann, Mariella Borg Buontempo, Sandra Caldeira, Mario Caruana, Claire Copperstone, Michelle Deguara, Vesselka Duleva, Artur Furtado, Mojca Gabrijelcic, Daniela Galeone, Amandine Garde, Charmaine Gauci, Dolores Gauci, Joseph Grech, Kenneth Grech, Moira Grixti, Jo Jewell, Almantas Kranauskas, Heli Kuusipalo, Elaine Lautier, Eliza Markidou, Lucienne Pace, Antoinette Pickard, Margret Ploum, Mario Scicluna, Charlene Vassallo, Paula Vassallo, Sharon Vella, Adelheid Weber.

Representatives from Slovenia, Finland and Sweden provided invaluable feedback on obstacles related to the implementation of procurement of foods for health.

Acknowledgements

The authors are grateful for the critical review of technical and legal aspects of the report by Mariya Pelovska (DG GROW), Enrico Degiorgis (DG ENV), Iain Formosa (DG JRC), Giuliana Talamona (DG JRC), and Jan Wollgast (DG JRC). Furthermore, the authors are indebted to the members of the High Level Group on Nutrition and Physical Activity and the EU Platform on Diet, Physical Activity and Health for providing their constructive feedback.

Design: Outlook Coop, Tanya Borg

Public Procurement of Food for Health

TECHNICAL REPORT ON THE SCHOOL SETTING

WHAT IS THIS DOCUMENT AND HOW TO USE IT?

• The purpose of this document is to support Member States in translating their national school food standards related to health and nutrition into food procurement specifications. This is done by collecting the major obstacles experienced in real-life implementation and by sharing relevant examples from across Europe.

• It is intended as a practical tool for a) those who purchase food and food-related services in or for schools at national, regional or local level; and b) health and nutrition awareness and capacity building. It includes a range of options and considerations that each Member State may wish to use and adapt in respect of its specific context. This will likely require discussions at national level with all relevant stakeholders so that legal background, individual culture and traditions or the market structure are taken into consideration.

• All Member States have reported difficulties and common challenges in increasing the implementation based on their existing national school food policies and in having them effectively and routinely activated at operational level. In respect of subsidiarity, supporting the Member States in that task is the main objective of the document, in the knowledge that initiatives in this area support the promotion of healthy diets, of food reformulation, of pupils’ and students’ learning, and of the protection of children in general.

• It is suggested that this document is viewed and kept as a living text, with regular technical updates. Such regular revisions would ensure that its usefulness is safeguarded and improved.

• Member States are encouraged to assess how this document is used, with what results, and how it can be improved.

Hon Chris Fearne

Minister for Health, Malta

Foreword

Our children are increasingly growing up to be overweight or obese. Globally the number of overweight children under the age of five is estimated to be over 42 million. In Europe, the percentage of children who are overweight or obese is worryingly high. According to the World Health Organization, around 1 in 3 children in the EU aged 6–9 years were affected by obesity or excess weight in 2010. This constitutes a major public health concern.

Food matters. Children need to eat nutritious food starting from a young age in order to grow and develop into healthy adults. Indeed, many of the unfavourable outcomes related to childhood obesity track into adulthood and therefore the reason why this serious problem needs to be tackled from a young age. What our children eat today and their understanding of how food impacts their health is crucial for tackling the problem of obesity.

This document reflects our commitment to improving the well-being of our children. It seeks to encourage the best possible start in life. Because of the sheer value and volume of food consumed in schools it is important that the implementation of health-sensitive food procurement is properly recognised and understood as a substantial policy tool that provides the opportunity for distilling considerations about health, society, economy and the environment.

Procuring healthier food for our children of course has a direct effect on their health. However, the procurement process itself will also drive the market and creat incentives for industry to produce healthier foods.

I take this opportunity to congratulate all those who have worked so tirelessly on this document, which is being launched during the Maltese Presidency of the Council of the European Union. I am confident that it will serve to help bring better quality food to our children as well as to give an added impetus to industry to consider the healthier option as the more viable option.

Preface

Elke Anklam

Director of DG JRC.F: Health, Consumers and Reference Materials, European Commission

John F Ryan

Director of DG SANTE.C: Public Health and Crisis Management, European Commission

Ten years have now passed since the European Commission adopted the White Paper “A Strategy on Nutrition, Overweight, and Obesity-related health issues”. Through the High Level Group on Nutrition and Physical Activity, the Commission has been working very closely with all the EU Member States, Norway and Switzerland on actions that can be taken to reduce the risks associated with poor nutrition and limited physical exercise, while addressing the issue of inequalities. The Action Plan on Childhood Obesity and the Joint Action on Nutrition and Physical Activity focused and strengthened these actions even further. This guidance is born out of the close interaction between Member States and the Commission, resulting from these tools and the synergies they bring.

The Republic of Malta has chosen to concentrate on childhood obesity during its presidency of the Council of the EU using the work and outputs developed to date. The European Commission’s DG JRC (Joint Research Centre) and DG SANTE (Health and Consumers) have joined efforts to promote evidence-informed policies and interventions at local, regional, national and European levels to halt the rise in overweight and obesity in children and young people.

Good healthy nutrition is essential for all children to reach their full potential at every stage of their development – from excelling at playing to learning, doing sports and simply being happy. This guidance answers the request of Member States for further support in translating their existing national school food standards related to health and nutrition into food procurement specifications. The guidance respects and embraces the diversity of elements that each Member State considers in their national school food policies. It builds on this diversity to increase the portfolio of tools and reflections that each procurement officer, nutritionist, headmaster or public health official can consider when procuring food and food services for children in school. Using and adapting the suggestions contained will likely require discussions at national and local level with all relevant stakeholders and these will certainly strengthen the outcome.

For this reason, while we are confident that this guidance is an important step towards a conscious effort to improve the public procurement of nutritious and balanced school food and meals, we are also convinced that it is one that can and should be revised and improved over time. We rely on the feedback and experience of those using this guidance, and encourage users to assess how this document has been used, with what results and how it can be improved.

Executive Summary

An urgent call to action

Childhood and adolescence are periods of development when establishing healthful diet and lifestyle habits is essential. A look at the current prevalence rates of overweight (approx. 15%) and obesity (approx. 5%) among children and youths in the EU shows an urgent need for improvement. Considering the amount of time that children spend at school, as well as the fact that in many European countries students consume at least one daily main meal there, schools are an ideal environment for supporting healthy behaviours.

It is laudable that all EU Member States have school food policies and guidelines in place to define healthy diets and nutritious food offerings. The implementation of such policies through a procurement process for school food that is health-sensitive can have a number of both short- and long-term benefits. These include improved student health and performance at school, increased societal awareness about the links between food and health, and reduced healthcare costs. It can also help steer the market and create economies of scale and spill-over effects in other sectors or age groups.

Benefits of public procurement of food for health

• Increased availability and accessibility to nutritious and safe food

• Improved dietary habits and reduced incidence of childhood obesity and overweight

• Positive effects on school attendance and performance

• Minimisation of health inequalities

• Development of health-minded children and schools

Harnessing the power of public procurement of food for health

At an estimated €82 billion, the European social food service market is sizeable in both reach and force. Progressive and targeted public procurement of food for health can reward food business operators who provide nutritionally balanced meals and food products, prompting innovation, food reformulation and social responsibility to achieve better diets and positively impact public health. In fact, success stories are already visible, with articles about the health benefits of better school food provision via procurement beginning to emerge in the scientific literature. Another favourable trend is that schools have been quick to apply green public procurement criteria. The same forward-thinking and flexibility should be expected and promoted for public procurement of food for health.

Supporting Member States

While the EU legal framework offers substantial scope for health-sensitive public procurement of food, authorities face a number of challenges. In schools, a major obstacle is the translation of school food standards into adequate procurement contract language. In order to ensure the smooth implementation of public procurement of food for health, it is important to set clear specifications about the foods and food services to be procured. This technical report meets this need.

The specification sheets included in this document are based on the recommendations from the national school food policies mapped in 2014. They include specifications and other considerations for key food groups and nutrients as well as specifications regarding food preparation and the catering service in general.

This report provides a strong justification for action and supports Member States in the real-life tasks necessary to effectively translate national school food policies into healthy school food environments. In doing so, it also raises awareness about the importance of promoting healthy diets for the benefit of children and schools, and for health systems and the economy. After all, schools are not just places to learn about mathematics, history, science and languages but also places where children should be given the opportunity to thrive by developing good eating and lifestyle habits that can last a lifetime.

SETTING THE SCENE

Why Food Procurement for Health in Schools?

Children’s health

Children are a global priority and they need to eat nutritious food starting from a young age in order to grow and develop into healthy adults. A healthy diet needs to provide adequate energy and nutrients and be balanced and varied in all food groups.¹ A well-nourished child is a child that is healthier and better capacitated to learn and develop at school; hence the procurement of food in school needs to assure a healthy diet for the children. In addition, the early years of life – mostly spent at school – are essential for the setting of (healthy) eating habits; it has been shown that eating patterns developed during childhood remain in adulthood.²

The increasing prevalence of overweight and obesity especially in children is a major public health issue in most developed countries, including in Europe, as well as in developing countries. Figure 1 shows the prevalence of overweight or obesity in 11y-, 13y-, and 15y-old boys and girls in the EU-28 plus Norway and Switzerland for the year 2015. Translating these into numbers, the European Association for the Study of Obesity has estimated that out of a total of 74 million school-age children in the EU³, some 12-16 million are affected by overweight (including 3-4.5 million affected by obesity).⁴

As in adults, overweight and obesity in children can have multiple negative consequences for physical and emotional health both acutely and in the long term while also impeding social wellbeing and the economy. Table 1 describes some of the consequences of childhood (and adult) overweight and obesity.

Figure 1 – Childhood overweight and obesity in the EU
Data reported by EU-28 Member States (except Cyprus) plus Norway and Switzerland as part of the monitoring of the Action Plan on Childhood ObesityData were reported in 2015 but they represent 2015 or latest data available. Grey (girls) or blue (boys) circles correspond to the value in one country.

Table 1: Some consequences of childhood overweight and obesity⁵ (adapted with permission)

| Type of problem | Examples
Immediate health consequences | Physical health | Physical discomfort; difficulties in running and physical activity; intertrigo; orthopaedic problems; breathlessness; asthma
| Emotional health | Teasing and bullying; discrimination; embarrassment; school underachievement; low self-esteem
Later health consequences | Physical health | Reduced average life span; earlier onset of chronic disease such as type 2 diabetes; metabolic syndrome; orthopaedic problems; increased risk of some cancers. Intergenerational impact of obesity
| Emotional health | Low self-esteem; depression
Social wellbeing | Discrimination | Public transportation, toilets, theatre often not sized for people/children with obesity; fashionable clothing not sized for people/children with obesity
Economic | Individual costs | Greater costs for clothing, transportation, possibly for private health insurance; discrimination at income level in adults with overweight/obesity
| Health service | Increased costs to public and private health care from obesity and related diseases; health inequalities
| Infrastructure | Redesigning public buildings and transports

The reasons for the high prevalence of childhood overweight and obesity are complex and multifactorial. They arise from both the micro- and macro-environment we live in, which amongst other factors include overall diet, lack of physical activity, and easy access to energy-dense foods high in fat and sugars. Given that children spend close to a third of their daily life within the school environment in most European countries, it is only logical to capitalise on the school setting to promote health and educate children in nutrition matters.⁶ Schools are a key environment to teach large groups of children of all social classes healthy eating and thus ideally long-term positive dietary behaviours. Many school-age children in Europe consume at least one of the daily main meals at school. Eating healthily in these meals not only ensures meeting the immediate dietary needs of the children but also reinforces their healthy eating knowledge and behaviour. Hence, it is vitally important that the food being served complies with principles of good nutrition. Additionally, school meals offer a unique opportunity for children to develop their palates and learn to appreciate different types of foods compatible with health. As messages learned and behaviours formed in school may be taken home, targeting this age group is not only relevant for defining healthy lifestyles for the entire lifespan of the children but also for reaching out to the entire family and community. Interventions to minimise health inequalities also have a higher chance of success if applied as early as possible and once more – seeing that all children attend school – school appears as the obvious place to protect children while instilling healthier behaviours.

Indeed, the EU Action Plan on Childhood Obesity 2014-2020⁷ and many other EU or UN initiatives⁸ highlight schools as a key environment for health promotion, including physical activity and diet, and Member States are highly aware of the role they play in this regard. National public authorities are already deeply involved with the educational sector at all levels and can exert a substantial influence in these settings, namely in defining food standards and in procuring food. All Member States have made laudable strides in this area, with voluntary or mandatory school food policies in place in the 28 EU countries.⁹ However, challenges remain in turning those policies into healthy food realities. There is vast potential in using the food-related procurement process for this purpose and thus ensuring healthier food provision and choices in schools. This is where the concept of food procurement for health – buying foods or food services that promote healthy diets – comes in. Governments and public institutions have the power to create demand for nutritionally balanced foods and diets through public procurement. More than that, as pointed out in the Council conclusions on food product improvement, “[g]overnments have the responsibility for setting public health objectives”¹⁰, and using public procurement based on guidelines on the composition of foods to be provided by schools and other public bodies can support these objectives substantially. The Council conclusions¹⁰ acknowledge that Member States differ in their point of departure in that some may already have criteria for school meals and other food provided via public procurement.

Food procurement

Every year, over 250 000 public authorities in the EU spend around 14% of Gross Domestic Product (GDP), equalling €1.9 trillion, on the purchase of services, works and supplies.¹¹ The total social food service market¹², including private sector expenditure, has been estimated at €82 billion.¹³ This constitutes a sizeable market as well as a powerful market force which should not be ignored. Because of the sheer value and volume of food public procurement, public institutions have the potential to drive the market and prompt innovation towards the provision of more nutritionally balanced foods and healthier diets in a fair and transparent way. Public sector institutions as centres of procurement represent a significant part of the procurement of any national food economy and a large portion of food people eat every day. It is also interesting to note that the education sector appears to be flexible enough to adopt new approaches of improved food service. A recent review of green public procurement (GPP) schemes¹⁴ identified schools as the public sector that most frequently applies these recently introduced schemes.¹⁵ Other reasons may justify schools featuring so prominently: parents’ concern about the quality of food provided to their children and schools’ appreciation for the opportunity to teach green, i.e. sustainable, food habits in an applied manner. In any case, the same logic can be applied with regard to making the food and drink offer in schools (and other settings) more nutritionally balanced. The fact that the education sector has a significant economic and social size increases the impact of focused action and the spill-over potential (of setting an example and creating critical mass, both for companies and for families).

As a discipline of European law and policy, the regulation of public procurement in the EU has multiple dimensions. It exposes an economic and a legal approach to the integration of public markets in the EU. The economic approach to the regulation of public procurement aims at creating an integral EU public market. In this respect, the principles of transparency, non-discrimination and objectivity in the award of public contracts seek to foster competition across the EU. In parallel with the economic arguments, the legal approach supports the fundamental principles of the treaties such as the free movement of goods and services, the right of establishment, and the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of nationality. As a policy tool, the EU public procurement regime also seeks to reinforce common EU goals such as the protection of the environment, combating climate change, higher resource and energy efficiency and innovation. “By using their purchasing power to choose socially responsible goods, public authorities can set a positive example and encourage enterprises to make wider use of social standards in the management, production and provision of services.”¹⁶

Among others, public bodies are encouraged to make strategic use of green procurement, social procurement and the procurement of innovation.¹⁷ Indeed, public procurement is capable of acting as a highly dynamic and powerful socio-economic lever. Ensuring and promoting public health can also be enshrined through sound public procurement and examples exist in many instances from ensuring workers’ health and protection to food safety in catering services. Additional examples of public procurement of food for health also exist already in Member States¹⁸ on which other Member States could draw and the EU is well placed to facilitate the exchange of best practice between Member States. Article 168 of the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union provides a rationale for EU intervention.¹⁹ It is all the more important that these discussions take place at both EU and Member State levels, seeing the role that food procurement can play in encouraging food reformulation – a policy area closely linked to the functioning of the EU internal market where the EU, as in all its policies, shall ensure “a high level of human health protection in the definition and implementation of all Union policies and activities.”²⁰ Eventually, the policies and norms should focus towards improving the process and facilitate cross-sectoral work, i.e. between education, health, public administration, agriculture and environment sectors.

Aims and scope of this report

This document centres on school food to support healthy eating as an integral part of learning that drives dietary behaviour change. It offers an opportunity for distilling considerations about health, society, economy and the environment through public procurement by providing technical guidance to facilitate health-sensitive, food-related public procurement. It thus aims to:

• make the case for considering health aspects in food-related public procurement;

• offer best practice and operational guidance for translating existing healthy school food standards into appropriate procurement specifications.

In this way, it will promote effectiveness and efficiency in the use of resources of public health authorities. Likewise, by stimulating innovation and social responsibility, it will reward those food business operators who are able to put on the market more balanced alternatives. This will help promote a market with more health-driven options by acting both on the demand and supply side.

The scope of the document is limited to school food procurement and those aspects that relate to the health of the pupils and the nutritional quality of the food and meals served or made available and accessible to them. The guidance applies independently of whether the procurement authority decides to outsource or whether it provides the services in-house. In other words, the specifications proposed in the procurement specification sheets cover both the purchasing of food and the contracting of catering services. The considerations and examples presented merely complement all other hygiene, safety, social, environmental, management and operational provisions that are addressed by those who purchase food or food services in these institutions.

For good reasons referred to above and further detailed below, school settings are a clear primary target for this initiative aiming at improving the implementation and promotion of existing national food standards and nutritional guidance. It goes without saying though that the school food standards and the procurement processes discussed here can be adapted for use by any other public or private food purchasers (e.g. hospitals, retirement homes, prisons, canteens of ministries and public companies, defence forces, catering for events). In all these areas, food procurement for health can bring lasting benefits and foster prosperity.

Public Procurement of Foods

Directive 2014/24/EU²¹, which replaces the classical public sector Directive 2004/18/EC, defines public procurement as “the acquisition by means of a public contract of works, supplies or services by one or more contracting authorities from economic operators chosen by those contracting authorities, whether or not the works, supplies or services are intended for a public purpose.”²²

Public procurement is governed by rules intended to remove barriers and open up markets in a non-discriminatory, transparent and competitive way. By 18 April 2016, EU Member States had to transpose the following three relevant public procurement directives into national law:

• Directive 2014/24/EU on public procurement of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC;

• Directive 2014/25/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on procurement by entities operating in the water, energy, transport and postal services sectors and repealing Directive 2004/17/EC;

• Directive 2014/23/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on the award of concession contracts.

This document will make reference to Directive 2014/24/EU²¹ on public procurement and notes that Title III, chapter I covers the particulars of social and other specific services, including school catering and canteen services. Further, reference will be made to the following closely related terms “food public procurement”, “school food public procurement” and “public procurement of food for health”. Food public procurement relates to both the purchasing of (raw) food and the contracting out of catering services fully or in parts by public bodies. It applies to different settings and venues such as hospitals, care homes, armed forces, prisons, and canteens in governmental buildings and of course education settings including universities and public schools.¹⁴ This document focuses on the school setting and thus school food public procurement. As for public procurement of food for health, it is understood here as the process of obtaining foods or food services for public institutions and ensuring that these promote healthy diets.²³

Underneath it are corresponding school food policies that drive or require the purchase and sales of health-promoting products.²⁴ Indeed, public procurement as a follower of public policy is inextricably linked with adjacent policies, and in particular social policy.²⁵ It is therefore reasonable to expect that the process of public procurement in general and food public procurement in particular is sensitive to health-related aspects.

Ideally, a well-planned food procurement process that is mindful of the impact of diets on health will:

• Encourage healthy diets, the balanced and adequate consumption of nutritious foods;

• Contribute to meeting population nutrient intake goals;

• Address food safety through appropriate hygiene standards;

• Improve food production, processing and distribution; contribute to reformulation and product improvement, to expand and support the portfolio of food business operators regarding healthier options and the offer of more nutritionally balanced products;

• Act on the school setting as a priority but promote spill-over effects on other sectors (leading by example and expanding the market);

• Support the fight against health inequalities as evidence shows that school meals and school settings and reformulation can be major tools for that purpose;

• Ensure fair competition between all European businesses, including the small and local producers;

• Improve the sustainability of diets and efficiency of the food and catering services, and reduce food waste;

• Increase co-operation among buyers, producers and other stakeholders in the food supply chain for the purposes of public health;

• Increase awareness among decision-makers, tender drafters, public health officials but also suppliers, retailers, chefs and the general population on the importance of this topic.

How much food and how many meals are procured in the EU?

Meals and food and drink services can be provided in various ways. Table 2 describes these and notes that food-related procurement processes can refer to these different means, most notably to the procurement of foods directly or to the procurement of meals, i.e. a catering service.

Table 2: Descriptive summary of different means of food and drink service provision (modified from ²⁶)

Means of food & drink service provision | Description
Catering service | The preparation, storage and, where appropriate, delivery of food and drinks for consumption by the consumer/client/patient at the place of preparation, at a satellite unit or at the premises/venue of the client.
Contract catering firm | A business engaged in (amongst other activities or services) providing a meals service (for example by running a staff restaurant or providing school meals) or providing drinks and snacks through tuck shops or vending machines.
Conventional kitchen | A kitchen (at the place of consumption) where all, or a significant part of, food is prepared from raw ingredients.
Centralised production unit | Central kitchens or central food factories that send out completed dishes or pre-processed ingredients/meals to satellites. Can include both ready-prepared services and assembly-serve services.
Vending and hot drink machines | Machines that are available at all times with snacks, fruit, drinks and/or sandwiches etc. that are ready to eat/drink or that can be reheated.
Water dispensers | A device specifically for dispensing drinking water, which might have the possibility of heating and/or cooling the drinking water.

In 2015, over 250 000 public authorities in the EU spent around 14% of GDP, equalling €1.9 trillion, on the purchase of services, works and supplies.¹¹ In 2014, the value of the total social food service market in the EU-28 was estimated at €82 billion (public and private expenditure combined).¹³ Country-level expenditure on food public procurement is summarised in Table 3.

Table 3 – Examples of national public sector expenditure on food and drink procurement (compiled from Member States’ input and online search)

Country code | Country | Expenditure estimates | Reference
EE | Estonia | Ca. €15 million annually | Member State feedback
IE | Ireland | €195 million annually | http://www.epa.ie/pubs/reports/green%20business/GreenPublicProcurementfinalwebv2.pdf
MT | Malta | Breakfast Clubs: ca. €1.35 million (2014-2016) Lunches provided in Resource Centres: €61,541.86 (2014-2015); €64,501.21 (2015-2016) | Member State feedback
RO | Romania | Approx. RON 435 million (ca. €100 million) + €8 million from EU annually | Member State feedback
SI | Slovenia | Ca. €40 million at national level, plus contribution from local communities (and parents) | Member State feedback
FI | Finland | €350 million annually | http://mmm.fi/documents/1410837/1890227/LocalFood_ButOfCourse.pdf/ef43072b-6700-47ad-af7e-5972e7fe046f
SE | Sweden | Approx. SEK 8.9 billion (ca. €941 million) annually for the public sector in total (costs for the foods only; costs for staff, equipment, etc. not included.) | Member State feedback
UK | England | £1,200 million (ca. €1,400 million) annually | https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/332756/food-plan-july-2014.pdf
UK | Scotland | £149.4 million (ca. €175 million) annually | http://www.gov.scot/Publications/2014/06/2619
UK | Wales | £74.4 million (ca. €87 million) annually | https://businesswales.gov.wales/foodanddrink/sites/fooddrink/files/Presentation%20-%20NPS.pdf

Over the past few years, the total number of meals provided annually in social food service¹² across 15 EU countries²⁷ has been stable at just under 18.5 billion; circa one third is covered by private contract catering firms.¹³

Figure 2 gives a percentage breakdown of the volume (number of meals) and value (in €) of the contract catering service by region across the same 15 EU countries mentioned above.¹³

Figure 2 – Regional split and total contribution of the contract catering service in volume (number of meals) and value (€) in 15 EU countries, representing 88% of the EU-28 total volume.¹³ Reproduced with permission.

Member States differ in their public expenditure for food and catering services. Whereas some countries (e.g. Denmark, Germany, and Sweden) have been reported to spend more than 80% of their service budget on self-operation, others including Ireland, Spain and Portugal dedicate 60% or more to the contracting out of these services to catering companies.²⁸

In terms of number of meals served, the share of the education sector was 31.4% of the total social food service of 18.5 billion meals reported for 15 Member States²⁷ in 2013.¹³ The service is handled by public providers in the majority of cases (average split across the 15 countries of 78% public and 22% private providers).¹³ This means that both from an absolute point of view (billions of meals, billions of euros) and from a relative perspective, the tool of public procurement has a massive leverage potential. An important market signal can be given to operators, creating critical mass, moving a niche approach to a more mass market, rewarding food business operators that provide nutritionally balanced meals and food products, prompting innovation, food reformulation and social responsibility to achieve public health impact that can go well beyond the immediate target population.

The EU public procurement legal framework: an outline

The EU public procurement directives lay out detailed rules on EU-wide competitive tendering procedures. Contracts that do not fall within the scope of the EU public procurement directives either because they fall below the financial thresholds or excluded by reason of their subject matter remain subject to the fundamental rules of the Treaty²⁹ and principles deriving therefrom. These include the free movement of goods (Article 34 TFEU et seq), freedom of establishment (Article 49 TFEU et seq), the freedom to provide services (Article 56 TFEU et seq), non-discrimination and equal treatment, transparency, proportionality and mutual recognition. The EU public procurement directives aim to introduce into national law a minimum body of public procurement rules for the award of public contracts that fall within its scope. The following presents a brief sketch of the basic rules as stipulated by the public procurement directives relative to these guidelines.

Specific and direct reference is made to Directive 2014/24/EU on public procurement as this governs most of the public sector contracts that fall within the scope of these guidelines.

i. Public contracts

For the purpose of the public procurement directives, public contracts are contracts for pecuniary interest concluded in writing between one or more economic operators and one or more contracting authorities and having as their object the execution of works, the supply of products or the provision of services.³⁰

ii. Contracting authorities

Contracting authorities within the meaning of the public procurement directives means the State, regional or local authorities, bodies governed by public law or associations formed by one or more such authorities or one or more such bodies governed by public law.³¹

iii. Public supply contracts

Public supply contracts within the meaning of the public procurement directives mean public contracts having as their object the purchase, lease, rental or hire-purchase, with or without an option to buy, of products. A public supply contract may include, as an incidental matter, siting and installation operations.³²

iv. Public service contracts

For the purpose of the public procurement directives, public service contracts have as their object the provision of services other than the activities related to works as listed in Annex II of Directive 2014/24/EU, the execution, or both the design and execution, of a work, or the realisation, by whatever means, of a work corresponding to the requirements specified by the contracting authority exercising a decisive influence on the type or design of the work.³³

v. Public procurement thresholds

The public procurement directives are applicable to public contracts that meet or exceed the stipulated value thresholds exclusive of value-added tax (VAT). The current thresholds³⁴ under Directive 2014/24/EU are €135 000 for public supply and service contracts awarded by central government authorities listed in Annex 1 of the Directive. The value threshold for supply and service contracts awarded by other authorities is €209 000.³⁵

vi. General principles of procurement

Contracting authorities shall treat economic operators equally and without discrimination and shall act in a transparent and proportionate manner.³⁶

According to the established case law of the Court of Justice of the European Union, the general principle of equality of treatment, of which the prohibition of discrimination on grounds of nationality is merely a specific enunciation, is one of the fundamental principles of Community law. This principle requires that similar situations shall not be treated differently unless differentiation is objectively justified.³⁷

To ensure compliance with the principle of equal treatment in the award of contracts, contracting authorities are obliged to create the necessary transparency to enable all tenderers to be reasonably informed of the criteria and arrangements which will be applied in the contract award decision. Contracting authorities should therefore be obliged to indicate the contract award criteria and the relative weighting given to each of those criteria.³⁸

The design of the procurement shall not be made with the intention of excluding it from the scope of the public procurement Directive or of artificially narrowing competition. Competition shall be considered to be artificially narrowed where the design of the procurement is made with the intention of unduly favouring or disadvantaging certain economic operators.³⁹

Further, Member States shall take appropriate measures to ensure that in the performance of public contracts economic operators comply with applicable obligations in the fields of environmental, social and labour law established by Union law, national law, collective agreements, or by the international environmental, social and labour law provisions listed in Annex X of Directive 2014/24/EU.⁴⁰

vii. Exclusion from participating in the procurement procedure

Exclusion mechanisms have been regarded as supporting and encouraging compliance with the implementation of policies. Article 57 of Directive 2014/24/EU provides the grounds for which contracting authorities shall exclude an economic operator from participating in a procurement procedure where any tenderer has been the subject of a conviction by final judgement. Some of these reasons⁴¹ are participation in a criminal organisation, corruption, fraud, terrorist offences or offences linked to terrorist activity, money laundering or terrorist financing, child labour and other forms of trafficking in human beings. Other forms of exclusion can be on grounds for breach to pay taxes or social security contributions, bankruptcy or the economic operator is the subject of insolvency or winding-up proceedings.⁴²

viii. Defining requirements: Technical specifications

The requirements of procurement are defined by providing technical specifications and are guided by way of Article 42 and Annex VII of Directive 2014/24/EU. Technical specifications as defined by Annex VII refer to standards as set out by International standardisation organisations, European standardisation organisations and national standardisation organisations. When such an approach is used reference will need to be accompanied by the words ‘or equivalent’ whereby such equivalents must be accepted. The burden of proving equivalence is on the tenderers. Technical specifications can also be defined in terms of performance or functional requirements, including environmental characteristics, provided that the parameters are sufficiently precise to allow tenderers to determine the subject matter of the contract and to allow contracting authorities to award the contract.⁴³ Unless justified by the subject matter of the contract, technical specifications shall not refer to a specific make or source, or a particular process which characterises the products or services provided by a specific economic operator, or to trade marks, patents, types or a specific origin or production with the effect of favouring or eliminating certain undertakings or certain products. Such reference shall be permitted only on an exceptional basis.⁴⁴

ix. Selection criteria

Pursuant to Article 58, selection criteria may relate to the economic operator’s suitability to pursue the professional activity; the economic and financial standing; the technical and professional ability.⁴⁵ Such criteria need to be related and proportionate to the subject matter of the contract. The regulations draw a clear distinction between selection criteria, that is checking the suitability of a contractor, and award criteria, which relate to the quality of the service or work that is being proposed. “[T]he criteria should not be confused and […] criteria relating to the contractor’s suitability should not be taken into account in connection with the award of the contract”.⁴⁶

x. Award criteria

Contracting authorities need to decide upon the final tenders or offers on the basis of objective award criteria. Such award shall be made on the basis of the most economically advantageous tender determined according to price or cost, using a cost-effectiveness approach, such as life-cycle costing in accordance with Article 68 of Directive 2014/24/EU, and may include the best price-quality ratio, which shall be assessed on the basis of criteria, including qualitative, environmental and/or social aspects, linked to the subject matter of the public contract in question. Such criteria may comprise, for instance organisation, qualification and experience of staff assigned to performing the contract, where the quality of the staff assigned can have a significant impact on the level of performance of the contract; or after-sales service and technical assistance, delivery conditions such as delivery date, delivery process and delivery period. The cost element may also take the form of a fixed price or cost on the basis of which economic operators will compete on quality criteria only.

Member States may provide that contracting authorities may not use price only or cost only as the sole award criterion or restrict their use to certain categories of contracting authorities or certain types of contracts. Award criteria need to be linked to the subject matter of the public contract.⁴⁷

xi. Information obligations

Commensurate with the principle of eliminating preferential and discriminatory purchasing behaviour by way of ensuring transparency, the procurement directives support a range of detailed information requirements on advertising and reporting. The following requirements are worth noting:

• Prior Information Notices – these are notices sent by contracting authorities for publication where they make known their intentions of planned procurements. Publication is made either by the Publications Office of the European Union or by the contracting authorities on their buyer profiles. The detailed information requirements are set out in Article 48 and Annex V part B of Directive 2014/24/EU.

• Contract Notices – contract notices are to be used as a means of calling for competition in respect of all procedures. The detailed information requirements for contract notices are set out in Annex V part C of Directive 2014/24/EU and need to be published in accordance with Article 51 of that Directive.⁴⁸

• Contract Award Notices – after the conclusion of a contract or framework agreement, following the decision to award or conclude it, contracting authorities shall not later than 30 days send a contract award notice on the results of the procurement procedure. The detailed information requirements are set out in Annex V part D of Directive 2014/24/EU and need to be published in accordance with Article 51 of that Directive.⁴⁹

xii. Contract performance conditions

Contract performance conditions lay down specific requirements relating to the performance of the contract. Unlike contract award criteria which are the basis for a comparative assessment of the quality of tenders, contract performance conditions constitute fixed objective requirements that have no impact on the assessment of tenders. Contract performance conditions should not directly or indirectly be discriminatory and need to be linked to the subject matter of the contract, which comprises all factors involved in the specific process of production, provision or commercialisation. This includes conditions concerning the process of performance of the contract, but excludes requirements referring to a general corporate policy.

The contract performance conditions should be indicated in the contract notice, the prior information notice used as a means of calling for competition or the procurement documents.⁵⁰

xiii. Procurement procedures

Directive 2014/24/EU authorises the conduct of the following procurement procedures:

• Open Procedure⁵¹

• Restricted Procedure⁵²

• Competitive Procedure with Negotiation⁵³

• Competitive Dialogue⁵⁴

• Innovation Partnership⁵⁵

• Use of negotiated procedure without prior publication⁵⁶

The open procedure represents the most frequently adopted and most cost-effective procedure. For example, nearly 90% of contract award notices for food and beverages in the EU use the open procedure.⁵⁷ In the open procedure, any interested economic operator may submit a tender. The minimum time limit for submission of tenders is 35 days from the publication date of the contract notice. Under specific conditions, if a prior information notice was published, this time limit can be reduced to 15 days.⁵⁸ In a restricted procedure, any interested economic operator may ask to participate but only those who are pre-selected based on objective criteria will be invited to submit a tender. The time limit to request participation is 30 days from the date of publication of the contract notice. The public authority then selects the candidates possessing the capabilities required, who then have 30 days to submit a tender from the date when the invitation was sent. Under specific conditions, this time limit can be reduced to 10 days, if a prior information notice has been published.⁵⁹ In urgent cases, duly substantiated by the contracting authority where the afore mentioned time limits are rendered impracticable, the public authority may set a time limit of 15 days to receive participation requests and 10 days for the submission of the tenders.⁶⁰

Public procurement for school food

Given the existence of national school food policies across the EU⁹, making food procurement for health in schools a reality is a matter of turning the nutrient and food standards in those policies into procurement language and building capacity among procurers and suppliers to define and deliver on appropriate food and food service contracts. For most Member States, the educational sector is run by a combination of centralised processes and some degree of autonomy of local decision units (schools). This means that there can be many hundreds or thousands of actors engaging or involved in procurement processes and that there is corresponding scope for improving their communication and implementation of existing national guidelines.

Table 4 outlines core public procurement requirements. These requirements are relevant at various stages for defining: the scope of the contract (subject matter); the eligibility criteria for tenderers (selection criteria); the responsiveness of tenders to the works, supplies or services requested (technical specifications); the relative merit of the different bids (award criteria); and how well the chosen tenderer executes the proposed works, supplies or services (contract performance conditions).

Table 4 – Overview of Procurement requirements with relative food examples (modified from²⁶)⁶¹

Procurement components
Definition
Food procurement examples
Food service procurement examples

Subject matter
The subject matter of a contract refers to the goods, services or work intended to be procured. As a general rule the criteria shall apply on the subject matter of a contract. Common Procurement Vocabulary (CPV)⁶¹ must be used in the wording of the subject matter of the contract (see Annex 1 for details on CPV).
The supply of food and drink to public sector schools.
The provision of food and drink catering services to public sector schools.

Selection Criteria (SC)
Selection criteria refer to the tenderer, i.e., the company applying for the contract and not to the product being procured. It may relate to suitability to pursue the professional activity, economic and financial standing and technical and professional ability.
Capacity to deliver fresh products within X days of harvest (geographical presence, logistic capacity)
Capacity to deliver hot meals within 2 hours of preparation (geographical presence, logistic capacity)

Technical Specifications (TS)
Technical specifications constitute minimum compliance requirements that must be met by all tenders (pass/fail criteria). TS must be linked to the contract’s subject matter and must not concern general corporate practices but only characteristics specific to the product being procured. Offers not complying with the TS must be rejected. TS are not scored for award purposes, they are strictly pass/fail requirements.
Meat and meat products, biscuits, cakes and pastries (procured by volume) shall be lower in saturated fat, where available.
Vegetables and boiled starchy foods such as rice, pasta and potatoes, shall be cooked without salt.

Award Criteria (AC)

At the award stage, the contracting authority evaluates the quality of the tenders and compares costs. Contracts are ideally awarded based on the Most Economically Advantageous Tender (MEAT), which includes the following elements:

• Cost (price, total cost of ownership (TCO) or life cycle cost (LCC)

• Functional performance (technical merit, delivery time, etc.)

• Environmental performance (e.g., EU GPP criteria)

Everything that is evaluated and scored for award purposes is an AC. These may refer to characteristics of goods or to the way in which services or works are performed (in this case they are similar in form to Contract Performance Conditions (CPC, see below) but instead are evaluated at the award phase). AC must be linked to the contract’s subject matter and must not concern general corporate practices but only characteristics specific to the product being procured.

Additional variety of fresh fruit and vegetables (i.e. beyond that stipulated in technical specifications)
Caterer certified as provider of school food in line with national standards

Contract Performance Conditions (CPC)
Contract performance conditions are used to specify how a contract must be carried out. CPC must be linked to the contract’s subject matter and must not concern general corporate practices but only those specific to the product being procured. The economic operator may not be requested to prove compliance with the CPC during the procurement procedure. CPC are not scored for award purposes. Compliance with the CPC should only be monitored during the execution of the contract, therefore after this has been awarded. It may be linked to penalties or bonuses under the contract in order to ensure compliance.
Amount/percentage of fresh vegetables provided relative to quantity specified in the bid.
Monthly report of meals provided, foods consumed and assessed against nutrient requirements.

When drawing up tender documents it is helpful if the procurer details a reliable volume of activity (e.g. number of meals annually, number of daily users) in the specifications to allow bidders to fully understand the size and structure of the business.⁶² As for useful items to mention regarding healthier food services, this includes general qualitative requirements (types of supplies: fresh products, etc.), diversity of daily supply, frequency of each type of food, and nutritional requirements (for instance, the exclusion or inclusion of certain products).

Once the submission deadline for tenders has passed, selection criteria are applied to assess the eligibility of tenderers. Only proposals from bidders who pass these are then considered as to whether they meet the technical specifications (pass/fail criteria). In the case where only foods are procured, this could for example be a request for providing ten different types of fresh vegetables per week. Where the entire meal provision is contracted out to a caterer, a technical specification could be that daily offers comply with national school food standards such as age-appropriate portion sizes, nutrient content or calories per meal.

Proposals that have passed these two stages are then scored in terms of objective award criteria defined relative to the economic offer (the price) and the technical offer (the quality of goods or services proposed). As an example, the Belgian procurement guidance for the delivery of healthy, sustainable school lunches⁶³ suggests the following award criteria (weights in parentheses):

• Price (30 points)

• Development of a food plan that integrates quality, variety, seasonality, palatability and meal balance, frequency and portion size, as defined in the technical specifications (30 points)

• Quality guarantees in terms of nutrient-preserving cooking methods, use of short distribution channels, freshness and traceability of food origin as defined in the technical specifications (20 points)

• Information actions on sustainable food and taste (10 points)

• Measures taken with regard to environmental impact, health and staff assistance (5 points)

• Performance in terms of professional integration of disadvantaged groups (5 points)

The means by which each of these criteria is evaluated must be objective and well detailed (as in⁶³, further shown in Annex 2). When the assessment is concluded, the contracting authority makes public the successful bidder. In this respect contracting authorities are obliged to inform each candidate and tenderer of decisions reached concerning the conclusion for awarding the contract or for not awarding the contract for which there has been a call for competition.⁶⁴ Directive 2007/66/EC⁶⁵ on improving the effectiveness of review procedures concerning the award of public contracts ensures that any person having or having had an interest in obtaining a particular contract and who has been or risks being harmed by an alleged infringement has the right to put forth any complaints. Contracting authorities would need to wait for at least 10 days before the public contract can be signed off. This “standstill period” is designed to give bidders time to examine the decision and to assess whether it is appropriate to initiate a review procedure. If this standstill period has not been respected, the Directive requires national courts under certain conditions to set aside a signed contract, by rendering the contract “ineffective”. The Directive also seeks to combat illegal direct awards of public contracts, which is the most serious infringement of EU procurement law. National courts will also be able to render these public contracts ineffective if they have been illegally awarded without transparency and prior competitive tendering. In these cases the contract will need to be tendered again, this time according to the appropriate rules. National courts may decide that these contracts remain in force only if required by overriding reasons relating to a general interest. In those cases, alternative penalties must be applied instead. These alternative penalties must be effective, proportionate and dissuasive, and may entail the shortening of the duration of the contract or the imposition of fines on the contracting authority.⁶⁶

In the EU, “[c]ontracting authorities are responsible for obtaining the best value for taxpayers’ money for everything they procure. Best value for money does not necessarily mean accepting only the cheapest offer. It means the contracting authority has to secure the best deal within the parameters it sets. Best value for money could be defined as the optimum combination of whole-life cost and quality to meet the end-user’s requirements. Value for money may also include social considerations.”⁶⁷ Involving SMEs is a major aim in EU policy and becomes particularly important when there are few bidders and more competition needs to be stimulated for optimal cost-benefit.⁶⁸

In terms of the quality requirements, national school food policies commonly define age-appropriate amounts of nutrients and foods, proportions of fresh and processed foods, variety across time periods or menu cycles, to name a few.⁹ Additionally, reference is made in some of these policies as to what foods and drinks to make available (or not) in vending machines, or the required levels of training for any staff handling food. Where explicit and comprehensive school food standards exist⁹, these are likely to offer the most straightforward guidance for which foods and drinks or the related services to actually procure. As regards foods to consume more of for better health, emphasis is typically given to the plentiful provision of fruits and vegetables, often detailing variety and minimal processing as important factors. Furthermore, for cereal-based products such as bread and pasta, wholegrain options should be promoted to the extent feasible. Plain water, and easy access to it, is almost universally recommended. Concerning foods to be consumed less, restrictions or maximum quantities are commonly spelled out for products such as confectionery, savoury snacks, and sweetened beverages or beverages containing naturally present sugars. Guidance may also be found on food preparation, including advice on cooking methods, the use of appropriate oils and fats, and limiting the use of salt and sugars.

In the absence of specific mandatory school food standards, general food-based dietary guidelines (FBDGs) may be consulted to understand the types and quantities of foods that should appear on healthy menus. FBDGs give “advice on foods, food groups and dietary patterns to provide the required nutrients to the general public to promote overall health and prevent chronic diseases.”⁶⁹ Annex 3 provides links to national FBDGs where available. Alternatively, the selection of products can be guided by the nutrient requirements (dietary reference values) of the target student population. In this case, dedicated menu planning software based on food composition data may help turn abstract nutrient data into practical food choice and menu propositions. Nutrient profiling, which is “the science of classifying or ranking foods according to their nutritional composition for reasons related to preventing disease and promoting health”⁷⁰, could be applied as well. In Malta for example, the Healthy Eating Lifestyle Plan (HELP) is in place which addresses food provision in schools – including not only food- and nutrient-based standards but also specific nutrient profiling requirements.⁷¹ Most nutrient profile schemes have however been developed for marketing restriction purposes. For example in the EU, a number of multinational food manufacturers have committed to abide by self-developed voluntary nutrition criteria – the EU Pledge – to restrict advertising of food and drinks to children under the age of 12.⁷² Furthermore, the WHO Regional Office has developed its own nutrient profile model for the restriction of food and drink marketing to children.⁷⁰ A side-by-side comparison reveals that the criteria of the latter are mostly stricter than those proposed in the EU Pledge.⁷³ Annex 4 includes a summary of selected public and private nutrient profiling schemes.

It is important to mention in this document that complementary information beyond that directly affecting public health will have to be taken into consideration when the drafting takes place. In other words, the person or persons that will hold the pen may benefit from having access, in a single place, to a (non-exhaustive) list that reminds them of what other dimensions are relevant for such procurement. This is part of the aim of the procurement specification sheets provided herein and also the case of environmental or social considerations, promoted at EU level.

The European Commission defines green public procurement (GPP) as “a process whereby public authorities seek to procure goods, services and works with a reduced environmental impact throughout their life-cycle when compared to goods, services and works with the same primary function that would otherwise be procured.”⁷⁴ As said, in addition to environmental aspects, there may be substantial scope for social considerations and others. Socially responsible public procurement means “operations that take into account one or more of the following social considerations: employment opportunities, decent work, compliance with social and labour rights, social inclusion (including persons with disabilities), equal opportunities, accessibility design for all, taking account of sustainability criteria, including ethical trade issues and wider voluntary compliance with corporate social responsibility (CSR), while observing the principles enshrined in the Treaty for the European Union (TFEU) and the Procurement Directives”.⁶⁷

Figure 3 depicts the main tools that can be applied to the procurement of foods.

Figure 3 – Tools to assist with public procurement of food in schools

* The guide Buying Social⁶⁷ is based on the previous EU Directive on Public Procurement (Directive 2004/18/EC); hence care needs to be taken when applying its content under the new Public Procurement Directive 2014/24/EU.

§ The EU Green Public Procurement criteria currently in force are those of 2008.¹¹⁸ A revision is on-going (scheduled for completion by the end of 2017) which takes into account the new Public Procurement Directive 2014/24/EU and may result in substantial changes to the final criteria.

The next chapter describes what the impact can be of using these tools – mostly those related to health and nutritional quality of diets but not only – in public procurement of school food for health, learning and beyond (society, environment, economy, etc.).

WHAT ARE THE IMPACTS OF IMPLEMENTING A

“Food Procurement for Health” Approach in Schools?

It has been noted previously that most children in the EU go to school and can have at least one meal – mostly lunch – at school. Lunch is expected to provide roughly 35% of the daily energy to children. Add to that, breakfast or one or other snack that can also be served or bought in schools and it is easy to conclude that for a large number of EU children⁷⁵, more than half of their daily energy requirement can come from school food on every school day. Thus it is imperative that these foods are of high quality and provide not only the energy needed (and not more) but also all the nutrients essential for growth and development in line with age-appropriate recommendations. The implementation of a food procurement process that is health-sensitive improves the nutritional quality of the food service, is linked with increased markers of healthy eating in children and has a major role in bringing about dietary behavioural change.1,76 In both England and Scotland, the implementation of healthier school food increased the provision of fruit and vegetables and reduced the purchasing of processed foods, eventually resulting in higher fruit and vegetable consumption and reducing the intakes of critical nutrients (saturated fat, sugars, salt) and overall energy (as reviewed by Niebylski and colleagues¹). Various studies in US schools noted similar improvements in food and nutrient intakes upon improvement of food provision in school canteens and cafeterias.¹

In addition to providing healthier diets in schools and creating more demand for healthier foods and diets, the public procurement of foods for health has other benefits. While fortunately less relevant for the majority of European children – although it should be noted that in 2015, around 119 million people, or 23.7% of the population, in the EU were at risk of poverty or social exclusion⁷⁷ – this process can also have a positive impact on food security. Food insecurity and undernourishment are associated with impaired learning⁷⁸ and feeding programmes in deprived areas are thought to benefit school performance.⁷⁹ For example, disadvantaged students that were fed at school attended school more frequently and had positive educational and cognitive outcomes compared to control students.⁸⁰ Regarding the effect of healthier school lunch on students’ school performance, data are scarcer.⁸¹ However, there is evidence of an adverse association between overweight or obesity and cognitive function of children⁸², and the provision of healthier food can contribute to improved attainment.⁸³ At the same time, there is moderate evidence that consuming breakfast may be associated with better academic performance compared to skipping breakfast.⁸⁴ It should be noted though that improved school meals are most likely to benefit health and attainment when combined with other health-promoting measures as part of a whole school approach. In some EU countries (e.g. Belgium, Bulgaria, Slovenia, Sweden, Wales) schools also offer breakfast to varying degrees, and Annex 4 provides examples of healthy breakfast as specified in the German Quality Standards for School Food.⁸⁵ Where offering healthier diets is associated with a shift towards more plant-based foods, there are studies pointing to a lessening of the impact on natural resources.⁸⁶ Along the same lines, a study of UK primary school meals⁸⁷ estimated that getting all students to consume healthier meals (defined in the study as low in salt, free sugars and saturated fat) would result in substantially lower greenhouse gas emissions. In this regard it makes perfect sense to link up food and food service procurement for health with existing policies for green or sustainable public procurement.

It has also been noted that a procurement process that is mindful of health and nutritional requirements; a) sets a positive example for constituents, employees, parents and family, stakeholders, or other employers, and of course caterers, retailers and suppliers; b) builds awareness and support among decision makers, budget holders, and purchasing staff; and c) avoids negative publicity associated with purchasing less nutritionally balanced products.⁸⁸ In schools, this could also be perceived as a demonstration of the level of care and protection that a school dedicates to its pupils, an important factor when today’s citizens are conscious of and concerned with topics related to healthy lifestyles, balanced diets, (health) inequalities, protection of children, success in education, and environment protection.89,90,91

A summary of the potential benefits of school food procurement for health is depicted in the logic model presented in Figure 4. The model also proposes several other accompanying activities that can complement food procurement for health in schools as combining efforts at different levels ups the chances for these activities to be more effective. In the long run, any investment will pay its dividends considering all the benefits associated with having a healthier pupil pool in school. Policy-makers and schools wishing to focus on the promotion of fruits and vegetables and water consumption in schools as complementary activities can refer to two recent policy toolkits that highlight successful measures to promote these two health behaviours in schools.⁹²,⁹³

Figure 4 – Logic model of school food procurement for health and its potential benefits in the short, mid and long term

Through the procurement process and in particular when the health impact of the procured food is considered across many institutions, the demand for healthier products may increase considerably. This encourages the food industry to be more innovative and reformulate or improve their food products. It has been pointed out in the Directive 2014/24/EU that “[p]ublic authorities should make the best strategic use of public procurement to spur innovation. Buying innovative products, works and services plays a key role in improving the efficiency and quality of public services while addressing major societal challenges. It contributes to achieving best value for public money as well as wider economic, environmental and societal benefits in terms of generating new ideas, translating them into innovative products and services and thus promoting sustainable economic growth.”²¹ Public procurement can stimulate innovation of various kinds. In the case of foods for health, the demand created for foods and drinks with healthier profiles has helped drive the food industry to reformulate products towards lower fat (trans, saturated and total), salt and sugars content as well as increased use of fibre and wholegrain ingredients. The education sector must not underestimate the potential it has to drive this demand; for example, as a response to the revision of the Maltese school food policy⁹⁴, a local yogurt manufacturer has reformulated its products to reduce sugars and meet the criteria for this nutrient and artificial sweeteners. The Council conclusions on food product improvement also note that the “improvement of the composition of food products opens up great possibilities for innovation and business opportunities and can lead to a market advantage.”¹⁰ The market volume related to meeting the needs of the whole school population can drive demand in a manner that niche products become mass market, thus impacting availability and price, reducing the risk for companies to invest in research and innovation by adding further healthier products to their portfolio and marketing. Once a sizable fraction of the market is affected, then global and more sustainable shifts can take place (such as consumers’ acceptance of and preference for whole grains and less sweet or salty products).

Food companies may also be spurred into nutrition and health activities specifically related to food product improvement on the grounds that such actions reflect a high level of corporate social responsibility, thus adding to the market edge. Innovation applies equally to the food service. For example, caterers may develop new and improved means of preparing or delivering quality foods based on new and potentially more resource-efficient technologies.

WHAT IS HAPPENING IN THE

EU on Public Procurement of Foods?

As discussed, the public procurement process, including the procurement of food and catering services, is primarily governed by Directive 2014/24/EU and the transposing national legislation. Directive 2014/24/EU notes a “strong trend emerging across Union public procurement markets towards the aggregation of demand by public purchasers, with a view to obtaining economies of scale, including lower prices and transaction costs, and to improving and professionalising procurement management.”²¹ This trend appears to be paralleled in the food sector as well; a recent (2016) survey among Member States shows that well over half of the EU countries have issued guidance on how to apply the national legislation within the context of procuring foods in public settings (Figure 5). Table 5 lists examples of such guidance applied to public procurement of foods. Several of these do not address human health in the first place but focus on environment and sustainability aspects that will likely also yield health benefits directly or indirectly.

Figure 5 – Guidance on public procurement of foods in the EU
Percentage of EU countries (plus Norway and Switzerland) with (blue) or without (grey) existing food-related public procurement guidelines (n=22)⁹⁵

Most of the guidelines issued in the EU are targeted at schools but many also exist for hospitals, workplace canteens as well as sport clubs and others. An area where public procurement of foods is also needed and that may benefit from guidance is the acquisition of foods within the context of The Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived (FEAD)⁹⁶ that supports EU countries’ actions to provide material assistance, including foods and food baskets, to the most deprived.

Table 5 – European national and local examples of food public procurement initiatives, guidance and legislation (collated from Member States’ input,97,98)

Country code
Country
Food public procurement initiatives and guidance

BE
Belgium
School canteen guidelines

BG
Bulgaria
Regulation No 2 of 7 March 2013 on healthy eating for children aged from 0 to 3 years in kindergartens and school kitchens
Regulation No 6 of 10 August 2011 on healthy nutrition for children aged from 3 to 7 years in childcare facilities
Regulation No 37 of 21 July 2009 in healthy nutrition for children of school age

CZ
Czech Republic
107/2005 Coll. DECREE of 25 February 2005 on school catering; status as at 28 June 2015

DK
Denmark
Copenhagen: Procurement of 100% organic, seasonal food

DE
Germany
DGE Quality Standard for School Meals

EL
Greece
List of foods permitted for sale in school canteens

ES
Spain
Consensus Document on food in educational centres
Law 17/2011, of the 5th of July, about food safety and nutrition (article 40)
Model contract in Autonomous Community of Andalucia for catering services procurement procedure for schools (pages 13-24)
Model contract in Autonomous Community of Madrid for catering services procurement procedure for schools (pages 31-34)
Barcelona: Organic, seasonal food for kindergartens

FR
France
Lens: Organic Food Procurement for School Catering Services

IT
Italy
National school catering guidelines
Rome: Sustainable food procurement for schools
Turin: Monitoring low carbon, sustainable catering services

LV
Latvia
Recommendations on food product and catering services procurement procedure for schools, kindergartens, hospitals, and long-term social care and rehabilitation institutions
Public Procurement Law

LT
Lithuania
Rules for child nutrition in preschool, school and child social care institutions

HU
Hungary
EMMI Decree 37/2014. (IV.30) on the nutritional regulations of public catering

NL
Netherlands
Steps to a healthy school canteen – Healthy School Canteen Guidelines for use in schools

AT
Austria
Leitlinie Schulbuffet
A National Framework Contract for Green Dairy Products

SK
Slovakia
Metodická príručka pre verejné obstarávanie potravín pre školské stravovanie

FI
Finland
School meals in Finland
General guidelines 2014, see especially pages 38 and 52-54 about food services: http://www.ravitsemusneuvottelukunta.fi/files/attachments/fi/vrn/naringsrekommendationer_2014_web.pdf
Guidelines about food for students 2016 (legally enforced as state subsidies are paid only if catering follows recommendations, see especially pages 14-17): http://uudistuva.kela.fi/in/internet/liite.nsf/net/160212131948pk/$file/rekommendation_hogskolorfinal_nettiversio.pdf
Guidelines for school food 2017: http://urn.fi/URN:ISBN:978-952-302-812-8
Calculating the environmental impact of catering services

SE
Sweden
Good School Meals
Malmö: Sustainable food for thought

UK
United Kingdom
School Food Plan
Buying for schools
Balanced scorecard for public food procurement
Sustainable school meals in East Ayrshire

As already said, many schools through Europe provide meals to their students during the school day and there is now a drive in many EU countries to provide better quality, more balanced and more sustainable meals that promote and encourage healthy eating habits in children with the ultimate aim of improving overall diet and health. Different Member States have developed different criteria for different food categories which include fruit and vegetables, fish, meat and dairy products, processed food and drinks, sugar-sweetened beverages as well as catering service provision or vending machines content (in cases where they are allowed). Some countries have voluntary practices in place, whilst others have adopted mandatory practices and banning of specific foods and drinks. Free school meals are provided in several countries, and portion sizing considerations as well as age-appropriate guidelines are available in some countries. Summaries of the standards and measures in place in schools in the EU (as well as Norway and Switzerland) can be seen in the JRC school food policy country factsheets⁹⁹ and in the report on Mapping of national school food policies in the EU-28 plus Norway and Switzerland.⁹

Interestingly, many new criteria used in the public procurement of foods relate to environmental concerns and animal welfare. The fact that the European Commission and a number of EU countries have developed guidance in this area have probably helped gain this momentum. Among others, national green public procurement (GPP) criteria for food and catering services have been clearly tabled and include selection and award criteria for organic production, seasonal fruits and vegetables or minimising waste from food or food packages. Other criteria have been defined in other countries or settings and address issues such as fair trade, reduced meat consumption, animal welfare, use of aquaculture or genetically modified organisms (GMOs).²⁶ Copenhagen¹⁰⁰, the UK¹⁰¹, Rome¹⁰² and Malmo¹⁰³ are just some examples where intelligent public procurement specifications have been used for the benefit of those enjoying the meal and beyond. England, for example, applies the concept of a balanced scorecard, which allows for priority themes such as farm assurance, food waste management, and engagement with SMEs to be built into procurement decisions, alongside well established criteria, such as animal welfare, nutrition, and energy management.¹⁰¹ To ensure the continued quality of the food service, Rome carries out extensive monitoring by having dieticians check services provided against contractual agreements and getting independent daily food analyses from external laboratories.¹⁰² While Copenhagen also focuses on quality monitoring, checks are less frequent but include the obligation for suppliers not meeting contracted standards to bear the respective monitoring costs.¹⁰⁰ Malmo, in turn, highlighted the importance of properly training the kitchen staff. Personal involvement of the staff is secured by allowing them to develop their own action plans for the implementation of the project at production unit level.¹⁰³

Worldwide, the USA has been championing public food procurement and promoting local, state or national policies that address it.¹⁰⁴ Commonly, a certain percentage of foods and drinks (often 100%) purchased with public funds and provided in public settings – state buidlings, parks, cafeterias, vending machines, etc. – must comply with nutrition standards. Brazil’s experience is an oft cited example of how public procurement may contribute to a healthier, more sustainable and social environment. Albeit not directly applicable to the EU setting and compliant with EU public procurement law, the example is interesting as the Brazilian Food Acquisition Program (PAA) was designed so that “through a simplified public bidding process, PAA lets food be procured from family farmers to meet the needs of food-insecure communities.”¹⁰⁵ The model was later incorporated into the National School Feeding Program (PNAE) establishing a quota (30%) of resources that needs to be used to purchase food from family farmers. The nutritional criteria require nutritionally balanced meals for every age group, favour cooked and fresh food while avoiding processed foods with high levels of sodium, fat, and sugars. Seasonality and local produce are also contemplated.

OBSTACLES TO IMPLEMENTING

Procurement of Foods for Health

The implementation of the nutrition- and food-related standards in school food public procurement has been flagged as a challenging situation. In other words, despite the existence of school food standards these remain in practice and in many cases not fully implemented. As discussed, this is a serious obstacle for attaining Member State objectives related to public health but also to education and the internal market. In-depth structured interviews with 3 Member States¹⁰⁶, who have experience with public procurement from different angles, revealed that difficulties relate mostly to formulating the food and service requirements so that they are easy to understand and to follow up, yet specific enough to ensure a nutritionally balanced food offer. Chefs and kitchen staff, although instrumental in the process, have been found difficult to engage. The evaluation of the bids and the monitoring of contract performance were also flagged as important issues where insufficient or inappropriate resources and not having enough time for the complex procurement procedure further complicate the matter. Several other generic obstacles to implementing improved food procurement have been referred to in related contexts, for example concerning the take-up of GPP criteria. Stated issues include lack of a) political support; b) legal expertise among procurers; c) co-operation between authorities; and d) practical tools.¹⁰⁷ Some (or all) of these may be equally challenging in the context of procurement of foods for health. Other challenges such as pressure from bigger companies and frequent rotation of those taking decisions have been outlined by the Foodlinks project¹⁰⁸, which looked at the promotion and implementation of sustainable food procurement.

Cost and budget constraints have also been brought up as relevant in adopting and implementing the concept of procurement of foods for health in different settings.109,110 For example, these may be related to restrictions on the use of partly processed or frozen foods or the call for frequent food analyses.¹¹⁰ Understanding these concerns is crucial as the fear that introducing more or stronger health-related specifications would increase costs is an important point. In this respect, it is also vital to consider the experience of Member States. Countries such as Finland and Sweden have long-standing nutrition policies and have implemented these in schools with a cost per meal per student of €1.1 (2016). This shows that important improvements can be achieved while keeping costs controlled and the drafting of procurement should take this into consideration. In the UK, Bradford Council’s school meals organisation, the Education Contract Services have also reported on improvements to the quality of their school meals at no extra costs. These entailed obtaining most of their supplies from local sources, simplifying their menus, reducing the use of processed food, improving product specifications and adapting to seasonal availability and using fresh meat from local butchers as well as streamlining packaging and delivery arrangements.¹¹¹ Secondly, action and change in this area will probably come from a combination of factors and it is their combined effect that is relevant. In concrete, defining a procurement process that better translates and supports national school food standards will likely involve different changes. As in Bradford, several of these could eventually reduce costs, such as portion size considerations, attention to food waste, frequency of consumption of non-animal protein sources, increased consumption of vegetables and pulses, requests for seasonal fruit to be supplied or for dairy products with minimal processing.

Monitoring and evaluation of the food and services offered is another crucial issue. Children must be fed every day and when instances of non-compliance occur the school often cannot afford being as selective and critical as it should be towards its suppliers. Staff needs to be trained to be able to verify compliance and react in such circumstances, and contract performance conditions need to be well thoughtout in advance to prevent such instances. Having back-up stocks, staff training and some of the experiences described in the previous chapter in Rome or Copenhagen may aid in this regard.

A number of solutions – either tested or proposed – emerged from Member States’ feedback. For example, a local meal policy, developed in a transparent, inclusive way and endorsed politically has helped define common goals suitable for all steps in the procurement process. Knowledge about rules and execution of the actual procurement procedure was mentioned as equally important as knowledge about food and nutrition. Procurement professionals must be engaged and made fully aware of the context, needs and experiences of the school(s) or the sector. Public procurement authorities should be prepared to provide guidance, supervision and hands-on help to schools and kindergartens regarding food quality (advice, applications, menus, etc.). For ensuring optimal contract performance, the consistent application and enforcement of contractual penalties was highlighted as an important lever.

Other practical suggestions also surfaced. For example, dividing the tender into individual lots, e.g. bread, vegetables, meat, is a practical tool to give SMEs a better opportunity to compete with multinational enterprises. Where not already done, Member States may also wish to consider introducing the principle of short supply chains¹¹² (in terms of number of intermediaries along the food supply chain) in national procurement legislation.¹¹³ Overall, it takes time to build a competent procurement organisation and it is a continuous development of competence. As the search for further solutions continues, an open network for different stakeholders could be helpful in spurring the learning process.

In addition to the inspiring examples discussed before and listed in Table 5, Annex 6 lists a series of templates of tender calls or model contracts that can be used and adapted as deemed relevant by contracting authorities procuring food and food-related services for schools. In addition, the next chapter reflects on school nutrient-and food-related standards one by one and proposes means to translate them into public procurement specifications. In doing so it seeks to enhance clarity and objectivity when engaging in the public procurement of food for health in schools. Regarding the evaluation of bids, Annex 2 provides examples that Member States may find useful in developing their own assessment schemes.

Because the scope of this document is limited to school food procurement and the nutritional quality of the food and meals served, there are issues that, albeit being critical to the success of the food and meals served at school, are not contemplated here. This is the case for hygiene and food safety, matters of social integration, comprehensive sustainability considerations, and the creation of pleasant dining spaces where students can enjoy their tasty and nutritious meals together.¹¹⁴ The key role of headmasters and the utmost importance of the involvement of children and parents in the design and implementation of school food policies have been noted over and over again.109,115 Hence, even if such aspects are not dealt with directly in this report, a call for the involvement of parents, teachers, children and headmasters early on is in order. Figure 6 provides a summary illustration of all these factors used by Sweden in their “Good School Meals” guidance.¹¹⁴

Figure 6 – Essential dimensions of school food provision for consideration in public procurement (adapted from¹¹⁴)

TRANSLATING SCHOOL FOOD POLICIES

Into Public Procurement Specifications

Public procurement of food for health is a core strategy to create healthy food environments and make the healthy choice available and accessible to school-age children. As suggested previously (Figure 3), there are many models that can be used to clearly define the specifications of the products and services institutions seek to acquire. Whether these requirements will in any way affect the procurement process and how they can be implemented in line with legal obligations must be considered upfront. In addition, the purchasing institution will need to have a good overview of the products and services available to ensure that the requirements planned can be fulfilled by the market. Market research and engaging with potential suppliers can go a long way in establishing feasible specifications and criteria before launching the procurement with a view to preparing the procurement and informing economic operators of their procurement plans and requirements.¹¹⁶ For this purpose, contracting authorities may for example seek or accept advice from independent experts or authorities or from market participants. That advice may be used in the planning and conduct of the procurement procedure, provided that such advice does not have the effect of distorting competition and does not result in a violation of the principles of non-discrimination and transparency.¹¹⁶

Award criteria can be used to encourage tenderers to deliver an even better service or product. They can, for example, be used to call for an increased variety of products, lower-fat options, more plant-based menus, healthier food preparation methods or delivery conditions such as delivery date, delivery process and delivery period. Contract performance conditions are also useful instruments to re-state the commitments made by contractors and specify which actions are taken in case of breaches to these commitments. They deserve careful thinking as monitoring will be challenging in some cases and should be considered in advance.

In addition to procuring school food in line with different nutrition-related quality standards such as nutrient- and food-based dietary guidelines or nutrient profiles, other aspects have been touched upon in this document and by those procuring foods regularly. It is worth revisiting them here, before addressing how to implement the nutrition-related standards. As such, when procuring foods or food-related services purchasers can set other reasonable requirements as long as they are in line with the applicable legal framework. These may include specifying the shelf-life of products but also requesting more fresh and seasonal produce. Indeed, in today’s business environment, many fresh food companies have complex supply networks to distribute their products. The contract can also place an obligation for declaring the origin of the produce being supplied as well as traceability and recall procedures; specify Protected Geographical Indication (PGI) and Protected Designation of Origin (PDO) standards when justified by menu requirements; safeguard equal opportunity issues regarding medical, ethnic, cultural or religious dietary needs; and include support to fair trade. Requests for details on compliance with both European and national regulations concerning food safety and hygiene as well as on measures to prevent food and food package waste are other cases in point. As regards sustainability, the GPP criteria cover a wide range of issues from organic produce to animal welfare to CO₂ emissions and can be used or adapted to most contracts. Other aspects such as setting up regular meetings with the supplier and specifying delivery frequencies can also be built into the contract.

As described at the outset, the purpose of this document is to support Member States in translating their school national food standards related to health and nutrition into food procurement specifications. The document therefore does not provide comprehensive guidance for each step of the procurement process but rather focuses on the health-related specifications of the foods and food services that public institutions will be purchasing. It is worth mentioning that the same food and food service standards should apply independently of whether the authority decides to outsource the food service or whether it provides the services in-house.

This section and the specification sheets below in particular showcase examples from across Europe relevant to the procurement of foods in schools. They are intended as a practical tool for those who draft the specifications of the tender calls and contracts at national, regional or local level, in schools, and as a tool for health and nutrition awareness and capacity building. For each food, nutrient or general standard a range of options and considerations that each Member State may wish to use and adapt is presented. The breadth of options and approaches existing in Europe is very wide and the examples presented next are merely illustrative. Every procurement professional, school headmaster, school food purchaser will critically use what is presented and adapt it in full respect of its own specific context. To aid in the drawing up of clearer criteria, the tables below show exemplary school food standards taken from national-level sources and offer appropriate health-related considerations for food procurement specifications. Where translation into national language is required, public administrations in the EU may wish to consider the European Commission’s machine translation service MT@EC as a starting point.¹¹⁷

Methodology for developing the procurement specification sheets

The sheets take their point of departure in national school food policies that were mapped across the EU in a systematic manner using the School Nutrition Index of Policy Effectiveness (SNIPE) developed by Public Health Nutrition UK.⁹ Food groups and nutrients specified in the SNIPE questionnaire provide the categories addressed in the specifications sheets. Based on category-specific national school food standards that were chosen to exemplify the diversity of focus and options (see corresponding tables “Examples from national School Food Policies”), the sheets offer specifications and means to drive and monitor optimal procurement of food for health (see corresponding tables “Proposed specifications”). In addition to the school food policies in place throughout the EU, the specifications and considerations listed below are informed by a technical workshop with experts in nutrition, education, procurement and food law. Where relevant, EU Green Public Procurement (EU GPP) documents118,119, the UK Government Buying Standards for Food and Catering Services (UK GBS)¹²⁰, and other relevant standards and EU institutional procurement contracts for food and catering services served as additional resources for drafting the specification sheets. Once more, the specifications are illustrative and inspired by real-life examples directly drawn from Member States standards or expert input. They remain examples and the sheets contain a range of options and considerations that each Member State would certainly have to adapt in respect of its specific context. This will likely require discussions at national level with all relevant stakeholders so that legal background, individual culture and traditions or the market structure are taken into consideration. Regular revisions of these examples will ensure that they remain relevant and useful.

Specification sheets for foods, nutrients and others

Fruit and vegetables

Meat

Other sources of protein

Dairy products

Fish

Chocolate/Confectionery/Cakes/Biscuits

Starchy food cooked in fat or oil

Savoury snacks

Drinking water

Drinks

Salt

Energy

Total and saturated fat

Total carbohydrates

Sugars (incl. sweeteners)

Fibre

Protein

Micronutrients (iron, calcium, vitamin C, etc.)

Proposed cooking specifications

Proposed general specifications

FRUIT AND VEGETABLES

Examples from national School Food Policies

Country
Example from School Food Policy

BE (Flanders)
Weekly menu offers a variety of vegetables; lunch meal contains a large portion of vegetables (half the plate); at least 2 times per week fresh fruit for dessert

IE
One or more servings: vegetable - cooked or raw; salad vegetable, e.g. lettuce, tomato, cucumber, sweetcorn, peppers, celery, carrot - included in sandwiches; vegetable sticks e.g. cucumber, carrots, celery, pepper (red, yellow, green); all fresh fruit, e.g. apples, mandarines, satsumas, tangerines, peaches, pears, plums, bananas (try to buy in season and wash before school); oranges – slice into 6-8 segments and wrap in cling film; kiwis – slice in half and wrap in cling film, or eat with teaspoon; dried fruit – raisins, sultanas, apricots, figs; unsweetened pure fruit juice (one serving is: 1 large piece of fruit, i.e. 1 apple, 1 orange, 1 banana; 2 small pieces of fruit, i.e. 2 satsumas, 2 kiwis; 100ml of unsweetened pure fruit juice (1 small carton = 200ml); 1/2 tin of fruit, in own juice; 2 tbsp/3 tsp vegetable, i.e. carrots-chopped or grated; 1 small salad, i.e. lettuce, tomato, cucumber, celery sticks

AT
Minimum of 10 pieces of fruit (at least 3 different types) on display in every break

PT
Raw vegetable (salads) and/or cooked vegetable likely to be seasoned and served separately (e.g., green bean salad, courgettes, etc.) must be served daily, preferably in a separate dish, with at least three varieties and according to portion specification provided; cooked vegetable should wherever possible be part of side dishes (e.g. grilled salmon with baked potato and broccoli; Russian salad with tuna, etc.); for seasoning, should be available onion rings, lemon, coriander, parsley and oregano in proper spice packaging; dessert constituted of various fruit daily, preferably of the season, at least three varieties, according to specified amounts; simultaneously with raw fruit can be served boiled or roasted fruit without added sugar, no more than once a week; simultaneously with raw fruit, but on a different day than cooked/roasted fruit, fresh/vegetable gelatin/ice milk/yoghurt may also be served once a week

SE
100-125 g fruit and vegetables for lunch, offer at least 5 varieties including legumes, course vegetables and salad vegetables/fruit

Proposed specifications

Food group/Nutrient
Food (F) or Catering Service (CS)
Specification examples
Compliance
Comments

Fruit and vegetables
CS
At lunch, serve 100 g of ready-to-eat raw vegetables and fruit per dish (10 varieties each per week). (based on Sweden SFP and expert discussion)
Standard operating procedure for menu planning
Refers to portion size, variety, serving frequency of raw produce

CS
Raw vegetable (salads) and/or cooked vegetable likely to be seasoned and served separately (e.g., green bean salad, courgettes) must be served daily, preferably in a separate dish; at least three varieties and according to portion specification provided. (based on Portugal SFP)
Standard operating procedure for menu planning
Refers to serving frequency, variety, (portion size) of raw and cooked vegetables

F
Fresh produce must be delivered on demand and minimum twice weekly. (based on expert discussion)
Produce delivery sheets
Refers to food delivery of fresh produce

F and CS
Non-refrigerated natural environments seasonal fruit and vegetables shall be provided according to the seasonal produce calendars accompanying the tender. Natural environments seasonal produce include food products that are produced according to the local seasons, are not refrigerated and not grown in heated greenhouses. (based on EU GPP criteria)
The tenderer shall provide data (name and amount) on the fresh food products planned to be supplied in the execution of the contract indicating explicitly which products are natural environments seasonal produce and identification of the producer.
Refers to variety and seasonality of fresh produce

CS
A portion of fruit is cheaper than a portion of hot or cold dessert. (based on UK SFP)
Price list for menu items
Refers to price promotion of fruit as dessert

CS
Ensure a minimum of 20 pieces of fresh fruit (at least 3 different types) is on display in every break. (based on Austria SFP)
Standard operating procedure for menu planning
Refers to serving frequency, variety of fresh fruit

F
Any canned fruits and vegetables purchased must be packaged in 100% water, i.e. no sugar, salt or other ingredient added. (based on Bulgaria SFP)
Purchase and ingredients lists
Refers to nutrient content of canned fruit/vegetables

Other issues that the contracting authority may wish to consider in the procurement of products or services related to Fruit and vegetables:

• Consider encouraging variety with award criteria, e.g. points awarded proportionally for each additional variety provided (based on EU GPP criteria)

• Consider requesting [X] % of fruits and vegetables provided must be organically produced according to Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 (based on expert discussion and EU GPP criteria)

• Consider requesting [X] % of bananas and any other relevant products provided must follow fair trade criteria (based on EU GPP criteria)

• Consider exploring short food supply chains (SFSCs)¹¹²

• Consider requesting that fruits and vegetables are trimmed of all leaves and stalks. (based on expert discussion)

• Consider including dried fruits and berries; no preservatives, no fats may be added. (based on expert discussion)

• The presence of allergens in dried fruits shall be indicated. (based on expert discussion)

• Consider offering a small pack of mixed nuts (20-30 g) as a snack alternative to fruit in Secondary schools. Nuts are not to be offered to young children (potential choking hazard). (based on expert discussion)

• Consider charging contractor per calendar day if items are not delivered within the stipulated time frame and specifications. (based on expert discussion)

MEAT

Examples from national School Food Policies

Country | Example from School Food Policy
BE (Flanders) | 4x lean meat, 4x moderately fat meat per 10 days; limit fatty meats; meat portion is 100 g
BE (Wallonia) | Red meat 2-3 times per meal cycle of 20
CZ | 55-163 g meat per day
DK | Served meat should contain max. 10 g fat/100 g
DE | Meat max. 8 times out of 20 dishes, of which max. 4 times processed meat
FR | Min. 4 out of 20 dishes, meals with non-minced meat (beef, veal, lamb, offal)
IT | Meat (all kinds of) 1-2 times per week
LV | At least 200 g of lean meat (or fish (fillet)) per week
UK | Red meat must be provided at least twice each week in primary schools, and at least three times each week in secondary schools; except that a day when a food from meat products group (burger, sausage, meat pie, etc.) which contains red meat is provided may count towards this total

Proposed specifications

Food group/Nutrient | Food (F) or Catering Service (CS) | Specification examples | Compliance | Comments
Meat | F and CS | Provide only fresh, non-processed lean red meat, with less than 10% of fat or fresh poultry. (based on expert discussion) | Nutritional composition analysis and visual inspection | Refers to freshness of product and nutrient content of red meat and poultry
CS | Serving size of meat should be minimum 55 grams and maximum 163 grams depending on age group. (based on Czech SFP) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning and nutritional composition data | Refers to serving size of meat in main dishes
CS | Serve maximum 8 meals with meat per meal cycle of 20. (based on Germany SFP) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning | Refers to serving frequency

Other issues that the contracting authority may wish to consider in the procurement of products or services related to Meat:

• Consider requesting [X] % of meat provided must be organically produced according to Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 (based on EU GPP criteria)

• Consider requesting [X] % of meat and meat products supplied should be produced respecting animal welfare standards (based on EU GPP criteria)

• Consider requesting a daily vegetarian offer (based on Switzerland SFP)

• The example above requests fresh meat only; contracting authorities may wish to consider frozen or processed meats with or without including limits set as % per volume or number of times per meal cycle (based on expert discussion)

• Consider referring to specifications on fish and other sources of protein

• Consider establishing a minimum and maximum number of times for offering red meat. (based on expert discussion)

• Consider alternating different types of meat keeping in mind the aforementioned specifications. (based on expert discussion)

• Consider requesting indication of origin for meat (as in UK GBS)

• Consider exploring short food supply chains (SFSCs)¹¹²

OTHER SOURCES OF PROTEIN

Examples from national School Food Policies

Country | Example from School Food Policy
CH | Serve pulses at least once per week
ES | Serve eggs 1-2 times per week, pulses also 1-2 per week
HU | Depending on age and number of meals per day; serve eggs max. 8 out of 10 days; number of times legumes served depends on the type of catering and on the month
SI | Protein foods such as milk and dairy products, eggs, legumes and nuts are recommended to be served 7 days per week
SE | Legumes (lentils, beans, peas, soya products, tofu) should be included in most of the vegetarian dishes

Proposed specifications

Food group/Nutrient | Food (F) or Catering Service (CS) | Specification examples | Compliance | Comments
Other sources of protein | CS | Offer a vegetarian protein source (pulses, eggs) as main course at least 2 times per week. Portion size must be in line with protein specifications. (based on expert discussion) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning and nutritional composition data | Refers to nutrient content and portion size of vegetarian protein sources
CS | Serve 5-10 portions of pulses per week (different varieties, i.e. beans, lentils, chickpeas, peas), as soup, salad, main or side dishes. Portion size must be in line with protein specifications. (based on expert discussion) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning and nutritional composition data | Refers to portion size and variety of pulses
CS | Serve eggs 1-2 times per week, at least 80% of the times as boiled eggs or other preparations free of added fat, salt or sugar. (based on expert discussion) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning and recipes | Refers to nutrient content, serving frequency and cooking methods for egg dishes
F | Serve tofu, quorn, tempeh, seitan, etc. as alternative plant protein sources. (based on Switzerland SFP and Ireland SFP) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning and recipes | Refers to variety and selection of alternative plant protein sources

Other issues that the contracting authority may wish to consider in the procurement of products or services related to Other sources of protein:

• Consider award criteria with additional points for the provision of a vegetarian protein source every day (based on expert discussion)

• Consider requesting [X] % of products provided must be organically produced according to Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 (based on EU GPP criteria)

• Consider requesting [X] % of egg or dairy products supplied should be produced respecting animal welfare standards (based on EU GPP criteria)

DAIRY PRODUCTS

Examples from national School Food Policies

Country
Example from School Food Policy

BE (Wallonia)
yogurt 4/20, dairy desserts 2-3/20; preference to lower-fat and -sugar varieties

DK
Milk 0.5L a day (0.7 g fat/100 g); serve cheese with maximum 17% fat

IE
one serving; milk all types include the same amount of calcium; cheese - all types including cubes, sticks, slices, triangles, spreads; yoghurt all types (one serving is: 1 glass/ mini carton of milk; 1 yoghurt (125ml); 28g cheddar type cheese; 2 processed cheese slices

FR
Min. 8/20 meals with cheese of min. 150 mg Ca per portion; min. 4/20 meals with cheese of 100-150 mg Ca; min. 6/20 meals with dairy food or milk-based dessert of more than 100 mg Ca and less than 5 g fat per portion

LV
At least 50 g of products rich in milk proteins (cottage cheese, cheese) per week. At least 250 g of milk, kefir, yoghurt or other cultured product per week

HU
5 L of milk or an equivalent amount of dairy products containing calcium per 10 days for whole day catering; 4 L of milk or an equivalent amount of dairy products containing calcium per 10 days for nursery catering; In case of 3 meals per day 3 L of milk or an equivalent amount of dairy products containing calcium per 10 days

AT
At least three types of ideal dairy products (e.g. milk, natural yoghurt, butter milk) offered daily

SI
Milk and dairy products should be included in school meals on daily basis, regardless in which meal

FI
Skimmed or semi-skimmed milk, fermented milk; products should have max 1% fat

Proposed specifications

Food group/Nutrient | Food (F) or Catering Service (CS) | Specification examples | Compliance | Comments
Dairy products | F and SC | Provide reduced fat milk with maximum fat content of 1%, without added sugars. (based on UK GBS and expert discussion) | Nutritional composition data | Refers to nutrient content of milk
F and CS | Provide plain yogurt with max 1.8% fat which does not contain artificial sweeteners (based on Germany SFP and expert discussion) | Nutritional composition data | Refers to nutrient content of yogurt
F and CS | Serve cheese with maximum total fat content of 25%. (based on UK GBS) | Nutritional composition data | Refers to nutrient content of cheese
F and CS | Cheese must contain 100-150mg of calcium per portion. (based on France SFP) | Nutritional composition data | Refers to nutrient content of cheese
F and CS | Provide milk-based desserts 2 times in a meal cycle of 20. Milk-based desserts shall contain minimum 100 mg calcium and less than 5 g fat per portion. (based on France SFP) | Nutritional composition data | Refers to nutrient content and serving frequency of milk-based desserts
F and CS | Provide unsweetened milk and nondairy milk equivalents such as soya, rice or oat drinks enriched with calcium every day. (based on Germany SFP, Slovenia SFP and expert discussion) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning and nutrition composition data | Refers to variety and serving frequency of milk and milk equivalents
CS | Provide at least three types of ideal dairy products (e.g. milk, natural yoghurt, butter milk) daily. (based on Austria SFP) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning | Refers to serving frequency
CS | Serve 40-60 grams of cheese per week. (based on Germany SFP) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning | Refers to serving size of cheese
CS | Serve 28 g cheddar type cheese or 2 cheese slices. (based on Ireland SFP) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning | Refers to serving size of cheese

Other issues that the contracting authority may wish to consider in the procurement of products or services related to Dairy products:

• If whole milk is to be provided, consider at least [X]% of milk provided shall be reduced fat with maximum fat content of 1% and shall not contain added sugars (based on UK GBS and expert discussion)

• If cheese with higher fat content is to be provided, consider at least [X]% of hard yellow cheese provided shall have maximum total fat content of 25% (based on UK GBS and expert discussion)

• Consider restricting the provision of sweetened dairy products and limit the ones which contain artificial sweeteners (based on expert discussion)

• Consider requesting [X] % of milk and dairy products supplied must be organically produced according to Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 (based on EU GPP criteria)

• Consider requesting [X] % of milk and dairy products supplied should be produced respecting animal welfare standards (based on EU GPP criteria)

• Consider requesting indication of origin for milk and dairy products (based on UK GBS)

• Consider providing lactose free milk and dairy products (based on Cyprus and England SFP)

FISH

Examples from national School Food Policies

Country | Example from School Food Policy
CH | Fish 1-2 times per week; alternate low-fat and oily fish (from properly managed stocks)
DK | One of five meals should be fish based; 200-300 g fish a week
HR | Fish at least 1-2 times a week; recommended to increase intake of omega-3 fatty acids in relation to intake of omega-6 fatty acids; food of animal origin rich in omega-3 fatty acids is oily fish (sardines, tuna, mackerel, etc.) and salmon

Proposed specifications

Food group/Nutrient
Food (F) or Catering Service (CS)
Specification examples
Compliance
Comments

Fish
F and CS
Alternate between offering low-fat and oily fish (all from sustainably managed stocks). (based on Switzerland SFP)
Standard operating procedure for menu planning. Sustainability labels. Data (name and the amount in mass) of marine and aquaculture food products planned to be supplied in the execution of the contract indicating specifically the products that comply with the requirements. Products that have been third party certified by widely accepted and recognised international organisations will be deemed to comply.
Refers to nutrient content and sustainability

CS
Serve minimum 1-2 age-appropriate portions of fish per week. (based on Switzerland SFP and Croatia SFP)
Standard operating procedure for menu planning
Refers to serving frequency and portion size

CS
Offer at least 6 different types of low-fat fish and 2 different types of oily fish per month. (based on Sweden SFP and expert discussion)
Standard operating procedure for menu planning
Refers to serving frequency and variety

Other issues that the contracting authority may wish to consider in the procurement of products or services related to Fish:

• Consider encouraging fresh, seasonal, local or domestic fish where relevant through specifications or award criteria, e.g. [X%] per volume or meal cycles (based on expert discussion)

• Consider encouraging variety with award criteria, e.g. points shall be awarded proportionally (up to a ceiling of X) to tenderers in which the variety of fish served per month is above [X] (based on Spain SFP, EU GPP criteria and expert discussion)

• Consider specifying omega-3 fatty quantities to be provided by oily fish per week. (based on expert discussion)

• Consider requiring that any fish or fish products [X%] purchased may not contain species and stocks identified in the Marine Conservation Society ´fish to avoid´ list or equivalent (based on EU GPP criteria)

• Consider requiring that aquaculture and marine products [X%] caught or produced through sustainable practices and methods as defined in a relevant label for sustainable fishing and aquaculture (based on EU GPP criteria)

CHOCOLATE/CONFECTIONERY/CAKES/BISCUITS

Examples from national School Food Policies

Country
Example from School Food Policy

BE (Flanders)
Max. 1/wk pastry, biscuits or ice cream

BE (Wallonia)
Give preference to e.g. dark chocolate, fruit chips, fruit paté, dry biscuits, jam with min 50% fruit, honey, sirop de Liège, fruit tart; tolerated are milk chocolate, jam with <50% fruit, marzipan, nut spread, éclair, meringue, popcorn (salted or sweet); only occasionally offer white chocolate, cream or butter patisserie, Berlin balls, etc

DK
Chocolate/confectionery/cakes/biscuits should never be served

DE
Max. 2/20 sweet main dishes

PL
Consumption of sugar and sweets allowed in limited quantities; products not recommended for children and adolescents include: cookies, cakes and sweets, due to their high sugar content

RO
High-sugar foods (>15 g sugar per 100 g) not allowed

Proposed specifications

Food group/Nutrient | Food (F) or Catering Service (CS) | Specification examples | Compliance | Comments
Chocolate/Confectionery/Cakes/Biscuits | F and CS | A single portion of chocolate, confectionery, cake or biscuits contains max [X] g of fat, [X] g of free sugars and provides max. [X] calories. (based on UK GBS) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning and nutritional composition data for all menu items | Refers to nutrient content and portion size
CS | Serve chocolate, confectionery, cakes or biscuits max. once per week. None should be served as a main meal. (based on Belgium (Flanders) SFP and expert discussion) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning | Refers to serving frequency.
F and CS | Chocolate, confectionery, cake or biscuits shall not be included in any vending machine offer. (based on expert discussion) | Vending machine product lists | Refers to vending machine practices.
F and CS | Ensure that confectionery and packet sweet snacks are in the smallest standard single serve portion size available within the market, not to exceed 8% of daily energy needs. (based on UK SFP and expert discussion) | Nutritional composition data and list of foods | Refers to portion size.

Other issues that the contracting authority may wish to consider in the procurement of products or services related to Chocolate/Confectionery/Cakes/Biscuits:

• Where criteria refer to free sugars, added sugars, non-milk extrinsic sugars or related, consider including a definition of the term. Free sugars as per WHO definition and the proposed limit of 10% (or optionally 5%) of daily energy shall be used preferably (based on expert discussion)

• Consider making at least 20% of chocolate purchase (in volume) from certified “fairly traded” sources (Fairtrade label of FLO or equivalent) (based on EU GPP criteria)

• Consider serving these sweet treats only as an exception, and preference should be given to traditional recipes (based on expert discussion)

STARCHY FOOD COOKED IN FAT OR OIL

Examples from national School Food Policies

Country | Example from School Food Policy
BE (Wallonia) | Deep fried potato dishes 2/20
CH | Max. 2 high-fat dishes (>10% fat) per week, not specific to mode of preparation
DE | Max. 4/20 deep-fried or bread-crumbed products (not limited to starchy foods)
LV | Fried potatoes (fries), potato croquettes and other food products boiled in oil and analogous food products are excluded
HU | Maximum 1/10
SI | Rare inclusion in the menu (e.g. 2 times per month) and in small quantities
UK (England) | Starchy foods cooked in fat or oil not provided on more than 3 days per week; on each day when a starchy food cooked in fat or oil is provided, a food from that group (other than bread) not so cooked must also be provided

Proposed specifications

Food group/Nutrient | Food (F) or Catering Service (CS) | Specification examples | Compliance | Comments
Starchy foods cooked in fat or oil | CS | Serve age appropriate portions according to Dietary Reference Values. (based on expert discussion) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning and nutritional composition data | Refers to nutrient content and portion size
CS | Serve starchy foods cooked in fat or oil maximum 2 times in a menu cycle of 20. (based on Slovenia SFP) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning | Refers to serving frequency

Other issues that the contracting authority may wish to consider in the procurement of products or services related to Starchy food cooked in fat or oil:

• Consider requesting [X] % of starchy foods provided must be organically produced according to Regulation (EC) No 834/2007 (based on EU GPP criteria)

• Please refer to sheets cooking and total and saturated fat

• Consider requesting for olive oil or sunflower oil high in oleic acid to be used for fried dishes (based on Spain SFP)

• Consider requesting that starchy foods used shall be fresh and raw, not frozen or pre-cooked (based on expert discussion)

SAVOURY SNACKS

Examples from national School Food Policies

Country | Example from School Food Policy
CH | Savoury snacks (together with soft drinks, energy drinks and ice tea, and sweets, pastry, confectionery) do not exceed 15% of total food & beverage choice
DK | Crisps and savoury snacks should not be served
ES | Crisps and savoury snacks should be removed from educational centres
HU | Maximum 1/10, also limit on salt content
UK (Northern Ireland) | The only savoury snacks available should be nuts and seeds with no added salt or sugar; savoury crackers or breadsticks may be offered provided they are served with fruit or vegetables or a dairy food

Proposed specifications

Food group/Nutrient
Food (F) or Catering Service (CS)
Specification examples
Compliance
Comments

Crisps and savoury snacks
CS
Savoury snacks should be limited to unsalted, unsweetened nuts and seeds. (based on Northern Ireland SFP and expert discussion)
Nutritional composition data
Refers to restrictions on offer and nutrient content

F and CS
Should savoury snacks other than the above be served or purchased: Savoury snacks shall contain less than 20 g total fat per 100 g and shall not contain partially hydrogenated vegetable oils (PHVO); if salted they shall contain a maximum of 1.5 g salt (0.6 g Na) per 100 g. (based on expert discussion)
Nutritional composition data and ingredients list
Refers to nutrient content

CS
Serve savoury snacks in packet sizes of 30 g or less and do not exceed 8% energy needs. (based on UK GBS and expert discussion)
Purchase lists and nutritional information on food labels
Refers to portion size and energy content

CS
Should savoury snacks other than unsalted, unsweetened nuts and seeds be served: Serve savoury snacks maximum 1 time per meal cycle of 10. (based on Hungary SFP and expert discussion)
Standard operating procedure for menu planning
Refers to serving frequency

Other issues that the contracting authority may wish to consider in the procurement of products or services related to Crisps and savoury snacks:

• Consider restricting the frequency of savoury snacks served or their availability by either limiting serving frequency/sizes (as above) or the volume purchased proportion e.g. savoury snacks together with sugar sweetened drinks and sweets, pastry, confectionery shall not exceed 15% of total food & beverage choice (based on Switzerland SFP)

• The presence of allergens shall be indicated (based on expert discussion)

DRINKING WATER

Examples from national School Food Policies

Country
Example from School Food Policy

BE (Flanders)
Fresh drinking water must be provided and be easily accessible
Depending on the number of pupils there are multiple distribution points available to ensure that students at least during breaks have the chance to drink (free) water; free water available at any time of the school day for all students; in the refectory water or low-fat milk is offered; students get the chance to drink water before and after exercise

CH
Offer free or cost reduced tap water

DK
Fresh drinking water provided without cost

ES
Water should be the only drink to accompany meals

HR
4-14 y: 1.2-1.8L of water
14-17 y: 2.6L of water

RO
Fresh drinking water is easily accessible

UK (England)
Drinking water must be provided free of charge at all times to registered students on the school premises

UK (Northern Ireland)
Drinking water i.e. tap water, must be provided free every day

Proposed specifications

Food group/Nutrient | Food (F) or Catering Service CS) | Specification examples | Compliance | Comments
Drinking water | CS | Fresh drinking water shall be freely available and water fountains easily accessible. (based on UK GBS and expert discussion) | Documentation on access points and regular water quality controls | Refers to product availability and accessibility
CS | Serve only water with lunch. (based on Spain SFP) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning | Refers to restrictions on offer

Other issues that the contracting authority may wish to consider in the procurement of products or services related to drinking water:

• Consider the environmental impact of bottled water and prefer water fountains or recyclable tanks to refill reusable bottles (based on expert discussion)

• If water is not provided free, ensure it is always the cheapest option (based on expert discussion)

DRINKS

Examples from national School Food Policies

Country
Example from School Food Policy

BE (Wallonia)
Diet sodas and drinks with max 2% sugar allowed occasionally; no alcoholic or diet drinks for small children

BG
Only bottled natural mineral, spring and table waters, 100% natural F&V juices; F and F&V nectars with max. 20% mono- and disaccharides; milk and milk/yoghurt drinks with max. 2% fat; fruit and herbal tea; hot chocolate

DK
Drinks limited to milk with 0.7 g fat/100 g or lower; fruit juice without sugar 2 times per 5 days. Soft drinks should not be served

EE
Water-based flavoured drinks, including energy and sports drinks which contain food colorants E 102, E 110, E 122, E 123, E 124, E 129, E 151, E 154, E 155, E 180 are not served as drinks

ES
Soft drinks should be removed from educational centres

FR
Water is the only recommended beverage

HR
Drinks should be limited to milk, water, juice; prefer freshly squeezed juices and herbal or fruit teas without added sugar or moderately sweetened with honey; avoid carbonated beverages and/ or no-carbonated sweetened drinks

LT
Soft drinks and energy drinks are prohibited

LU
Make water cheaper than sugared drinks; phase out all sugary drinks distributors

AT
Max 2 out of 10 beverages offered are products with moderate sugar levels, but no artificial sweeteners; no energy drinks; no caffeinated beverages for children under the age of 10; beverages with azo dyes which carry the label “may impair activity and attention in children” not offered

SE
No sweet drinks containing sugar or sweeteners served with meals (e.g. nectar, juice, soft drinks)

UK (England)
No drinks other than those included in group F (F1 - plain drinks: plain water (still or carbonated); milk (skimmed, semi-skimmed or lactose-reduced); fruit juice or vegetable juice; plain soya, rice or oat drinks enriched with calcium; plain fermented milk drinks; F2 - Combination drinks: Combinations of fruit juice or vegetable juice with; (a) plain water, in which case the fruit juice or vegetable juice must be at least 50% by volume and may contain vitamins and minerals; (b) milk (skimmed, semi-skimmed or lactose-reduced) or plain fermented milk drinks (in each case with or without plain water) in which case the milk or fermented milk drink must be at least 50% by volume and may contain vitamins, minerals and less than 5% added sugars or honey; (c) plain soya, rice or oat drink (in each case with or without plain water) in which case the soya, rice or oat drink must be at least 50% by volume and may contain vitamins, minerals and less than 5% added sugars or honey; combinations of milk (skimmed, semi-skimmed or lactose-reduced), plain fermented milk drinks or plain soya, rice or oat drinks (in each case with or without plain water) with cocoa, in which case the milk, fermented milk drink, soya, rice or oat drink must be at least 50% by volume and may contain vitamins, minerals and less than 5% added sugars or honey; flavoured milk (skimmed, semi-skimmed or lactose-reduced) containing not less than 90% milk by volume and which may contain vitamins, minerals and less than 5% added sugars or honey; Tea, coffee; Hot chocolate containing no more than 20 calories per 100 ml; whole milk may be provided for pupils up to the end of the school year in which they attain the age of five)

Proposed specifications

Food group/Nutrient | Food (F) or Catering Service (CS) | Specification examples | Compliance | Comments
Drinks | CS | Soft drinks and energy drinks shall not be served. Drinks should be limited to water, milk and fruit juice without sugar and artificial sweeteners. (based on Denmark SFP and Austria SFP) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning | Refers to restrictions on offer and nutrient content
CS | No alcoholic beverages. (based on expert discussion) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning | Refers to restrictions on offer and nutrient content
CS | Soft drinks shall not be included in vending machine offers. (based on Lithuania SFP) | Vending machine product lists | Refers to vending machine practices

Other issues that the contracting authority may wish to consider in the procurement of products or services related to Drinks:

• Consider environmentally-friendly packaging systems (e.g. returnable bottles) (based on draft EU GPP criteria proposal¹²²)

• Should the school offer products other than those above, consider the criteria set in other SFPs such as Belgium, Bulgaria, Austria or UK SFPs

SALT

Examples from national School Food Policies

Country | Example from School Food Policy
BE (Wallonia) | Keep frequency of foods rich in salt in check; salt must be iodised, at max 15 mg per kg
CH | Use salt sparingly in dishes, should not exceed 2.5 g salt (1 g Na) per dish; salt-containing seasoning only made available to customers on request; use herbs and spices for seasoning
LV | Amount of added salt in a prepared dish shall not exceed 0.4 g per 100 g of product
NO | High-salt foods (>1.5 g salt (0.6 g Na) per 100 g food) not allowed
PL | Content of salt in daily ration should not exceed 5 g

Proposed specifications

Food/Nutrient
Food (F) or Catering Service CS)
Specification examples
Compliance
Comments

Salt
F and CS
Do not serve/supply foods with salt content >1.5 g salt (0.6 g Na) per 100 g food. (based on Norway SFP and expert discussion)
Purchase orders, standard operating procedure for menu planning and nutritional composition data provided
Refers to nutrient content

F and CS
All salt must be iodised at max. 15 mg I per kg. (based on Belgium-Wallonia SFP and expert discussion)
Nutritional information on food labels
Refers to nutrient content (food fortification)

F and CS
At least 50% of meat and meat products, breads, breakfast cereals, soups and cooking sauces, ready meals and pre-packed sandwiches (procured by volume) meet UK Responsibility Deal or equivalent salt targets and all stock preparations are lower salt varieties (i.e. below 0.6 g/100 ml). (based on UK GBS)
Purchase orders, standard operating procedure for menu planning and nutritional composition data
Refers to nutrient content

Other issues that the contracting authority may wish to consider in the procurement of products or services related to Salt:

• Staff shall be trained in menu planning to meet the requirement specified above (based on expert discussion)

• Consider restricting the availability of table top salt – e.g. not available (based on expert discussion)

• Consider using herbs and spices instead of salt for seasoning (based on Switzerland SFP)

• If needed, consider reducing salt in dishes in a stepwise approach (based on expert discussion)

ENERGY

Examples from national School Food Policies

Country | Example from School Food Policy
BG | Specified by age group (6-10y, 10-14y, 14-19y), based on DRV for each age group, fixed distribution across 4-5 daily meal times
CZ | 18 E% for breakfast, 15 E% for snacks, 35 E% for lunch, 10 E% afternoon snack and 22 E% for dinner
IT | Lunch should provide 35% of daily energy (440-640 kcal/pre-school; 520-810 kcal/primary school; 700-830 kcal/secondary school); difference at same school level depends on recommendations concerning sex, age and level of physical activity
FI | One third of a child’s daily energy intake for lunch, amount of kcal depend on age: 6-9y: 550 kcal; 10-13y: 700 kcal; 14-16y: 850 kcal

Proposed specifications

Food group/Nutrient
Food (F) or Catering Service (CS)
Specification examples
Compliance
Comments

Energy
CS
Meals should provide [X] kcal depending on the Dietary Reference Values for the age group and gender concerned. (based on expert discussion)
Standard operating procedure for menu planning and nutritional composition data
Refers to energy content and portion sizes

CS
The distribution of daily calories across mealtimes shall be 18 E% for breakfast, 15 E% for morning snack, 35 E% for lunch, 10 E% for afternoon snack, and 22 E% for dinner. Where snacks are not foreseen, the morning snack calories shall be added to the breakfast calories and the afternoon snack calories to the dinner calories. (based on Czech SFP)
Standard operating procedure for menu planning and nutritional composition data
Refers to energy content and portion sizes

Other issues that the contracting authority may wish to consider in the procurement of products or services related to Energy:

• Staff shall be trained in menu planning to meet the requirements specified above (based on expert discussion)

• Usage of daily energy requirements does not apply for all MS. The use of FBDGs maybe a more user-friendly approach (based on expert discussion)

• Consider including thresholds on energy provisions from particular food and drink products and portion sizes, e.g. savoury snacks and confectionery and packed sweet snacks do not exceed 8% energy needs (based on UK GBS and expert discussions)

TOTAL AND SATURATED FAT

Examples from national School Food Policies

Country
Example from School Food Policy

CZ
Ratio of consumption of vegetable and animal fats is approximately 1:1, with an emphasis on increasing proportion of fats of vegetable origin

EE
Saturated fat: Not more than 10 E%

ES
Total fat: Maximum 35 E% from fats; for a serving with less than 200 kcal this is equivalent to a maximum content of 7.8 grams of fat
Saturated fat: Maximum 10 E% should come from saturated fat

HR
Total fat: E% from total fat depending on age: 7-9 years old: 30-35 E%; 10-13 years old: 30-35 E%; 14-18 years old: 25-30 E%
Saturated fat: Not more than 10 E%

IT
Total fat: 30E% of lunch
Saturated fat: Maximum 30% of total fat

LT
RDI 66-93 g (level depends on three age groups: 7-10y, 11-14y, 15-18y; and gender)

HU
For an average of ten catering days, at maximum 30% – for nurseries, 35% – of total daily energy amount may come from fats

PL
Limit the intake of fat, especially animal fat

FI
Saturated fat: Not more than 10 E% in the whole meal

Proposed specifications

Food group/Nutrient | Food (F) or Catering Service (CS) | Specification examples | Compliance | Comments
Total and saturated fat | CS | Total fat shall make up maximum 30% of menu calories. (based on several EU SFPs) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning and nutritional composition data | Refers to nutrient content
CS | Saturated fat makes up max 10% of menu calories. (based on several EU SFPs) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning and nutritional composition data | Refers to nutrient content
CS | Ratio of plant to animal fat should be [X:Y] averaged over all dishes provided in meal cycle. (based on Czech SFP) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning and nutritional composition data | Refers to nutrient content
CS | Minimum 2/3 of the total E% fat should be non-saturated fats. (based on expert discussion) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning and nutritional composition data | Refers to nutrient content
F and CS | At least 50% of hard yellow cheese has a maximum total fat content of 25 g per 100 g. (based on UK GBS) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning and nutritional composition data | Refers to nutrient content in cheese
F and CS | Oils and spreads shall be based on unsaturated fats. (based on UK GBS) | Nutritional composition data | Refers to nutrient content in oils and spreads

Other issues that the contracting authority may wish to consider in the procurement of products or services related to Total and saturated fat:

• If oils and spreads based on saturated fats are to be provided, consider requesting at least [X]% of oils and spreads shall be based on unsaturated fats (based on Sweden SFP)

• Consider encouraging use of unsaturated fats with award criteria e.g. points shall be awarded proportionally to tenderers in which the proportion of oils and spreads based on unsaturated fat is higher

• Consider requesting at least [X]% of supplied food products containing palm oil must contain palm oil from sustainable sources (based on draft EU GPP criteria proposal¹²²)

TOTAL CARBOHYDRATES

Examples from national School Food Policies

Country | Example from School Food Policy
BG | Amounts specified by age group (6-10y, 10-14y, 14-19y), based on DRV for each age group
CH | 50% of bread offer is wholegrain; wholegrain options of other cereal-based foods to be included
IT | 50-65 E% from total carbohydrates per meal
LT | Age-dependent RDI for total carbohydrates of 294-396 g

Proposed specifications

Food group/Nutrient | Food (F) or Catering Service (CS) | Specification examples | Compliance | Comments
Total carbohydrates | CS | Total carbohydrates make up 50-65 E% per meal (using age-appropriate portions). (based on Italy SFP) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning and nutritional composition data | Refers to nutrient content
CS | At least 50% of total carbohydrates offered must be complex carbohydrates (whole grain or minimally processed). (based on expert discussion) | Standard Operating Procedure for menu planning and nutritional composition data | Refers to nutrient content
F and CS | 50% of bread offer shall be wholegrain. (based on Switzerland SFP) | Purchase orders, standard operating procedure for menu planning and nutritional composition data | Refers to nutrient content in bread

Other issues that the contracting authority may wish to consider in the procurement of products or services related to Total carbohydrates:

• Consider that specific dietary requirements such as coeliac disease are taken into account (based on expert discussion)

• Consider encouraging the provision of whole grain foods with award criteria e.g. points shall be awarded proportionally to tenderers supplying a higher proportion of carbohydrates coming from whole grain foods (based on draft EU GPP criteria proposal¹²² and Czech SFP)

SUGARS (INCL. SWEETENERS)

Examples from national School Food Policies

Country
Example from School Food Policy

BG
Canned Fruit & Vegetable may not contain preservatives, colours or sweeteners

EL
Artificial sweeteners are not allowed in junior high school and high school canteens for some beverages (chamomile, tea, sage)

ES
Foods should be free of artificial sweeteners

HR
Simple sugars <10 E%. Eat rarely or avoid carbonated or non-carbonated sweet drinks manufactured with artificial colours and fruit flavours, and added sugar or artificial sweeteners

HU
For an average of ten catering days, added sugar content may amount to 8% of daily total energy amount at maximum
For soft drinks, no artificial sweetener/colourants below age 6

LV
Soft drinks with food additives (incl. sweeteners) not allowed, except for lunch

AT
No artificial sweeteners allowed in soft drinks or other drinks

UK (Northern Ireland)
Artificial sweeteners permitted for combination drinks (smoothies and other drinks combining water, milk, unsweetened fruit or veggie juice, yoghurt or milk drinks)

UK (Scotland)
Sugar-free soft drinks, including low or no added sugar versions not allowed

UK (Wales)
Fizzy soft drinks including diet or sugar free versions in primary and secondary schools are not allowed

Proposed specifications

Food group/Nutrient | Food (F) or Catering Service (CS) | Specification examples | Compliance | Comments
Sugars (incl. sweeteners) | CS | Total calories from sugars make up max 10% of menu calories (based on age-appropriate portions). (based on Croatia SFP) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning, recipes, and nutritional composition data | Refers to nutrient content
F and CS | No foods containing artificial sweeteners shall be provided. (based on Spain SFP) | Ingredients list and recipes | Refers to nutrient content

Other issues that the contracting authority may wish to consider in the procurement of products or services related to Sugars (incl. sweeteners):

• Consider restricting the availability of table top sugars – e.g. not available or limit portion size (based on expert discussion)

• Consider inclusion of GPP criteria on fair trade for sugars (based on EU GPP criteria)

FIBRE

Examples from national School Food Policies

Country | Example from School Food Policy
EE | 14-22 g of fibre in meal
HR | >10 g fibre/1000 kcal
IT | 5/6/7.5 g per meal, depending on school level.
PL | Content of dietary fibre in daily diet should be 20-40 g, dinner fibre content should not be less than 6 g

Proposed specifications

Food group/Nutrient | Food (F) or Catering Service (CS) | Specification examples | Compliance | Comments
Fibre | CS | Minimum content of 14-22 g of fibre in the lunch offered. (based on Estonia SFP) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning and nutritional composition data | Refers to nutrient content. Main sources of fibre vary in MS. For instance wholegrain bread, pulses, nuts, seeds could be encouraged.
F and CS | Wholegrain bread should be provided every day. (based on Denmark SFP) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning | Refers to nutrient content in bread
F and CS | Breakfast cereals shall be higher in fibre (i.e. more than 6 g/100 g) and shall not exceed 15 g/100 g total sugars and 1.6 g/100 g salt. (based on UK GBS and WHO nutrient profile model) | Purchase orders for breakfast cereals and nutritional composition data | Refers to nutrient content in breakfast cereals

Other issues that the contracting authority may wish to consider in the procurement of products or services related to Fibre:

• Consider requesting high fibre choices on a daily basis such as whole grain cereals and cereal based products (based on expert discussion)

• Consider encouraging the provision of not only breakfast cereals but also other cereal based products meeting the fibre and nutrient profile requirements (e.g. as in the UK GBS, requesting a minimum % per volume of products with such specifications or with award criteria with increasing points to be awarded proportionally to tenderers that provide up to 100% of relevant food products meeting the nutrient thresholds)

PROTEIN

Examples from national School Food Policies

Country | Example from School Food Policy
BG | Specified by age group (6-10y, 10-14y, 14-19y), based on DRV for each age group
IT | 15 E% of the lunch menu (10-31 g depending on school level); animal/vegetable protein ratio 2:3
PL | At least 10-14 E%, wherein share of animal protein should be at least half of total meal protein pool

Proposed specifications

Food group/Nutrient | Food (F) or Catering Service (CS) | Specification examples | Compliance | Comments
Protein | CS | At least 10-14 E% of age-specific recommendation of protein per meal. (based on Poland SFP and expert discussion) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning and nutritional composition data. | Refers to nutrient content and portion size
CS | Lunch meals must contain a daily portion of protein foods (delivering 10-31 g protein). (based on Italy SFP and expert discussion) | Standard operating procedure for menu planning and nutritional composition data. | Refers to nutrient content, portion size and serving frequency
CS | Ratio of plant to animal protein shall be 2:3 averaged over all dishes provided in a week. (based on Italy SFP) | Standard Operating Procedure for menu planning and nutritional composition data | Refers to serving frequency and menu planning

Other issues that the contracting authority may wish to consider in the procurement of products or services related to Protein:

• Staff shall be trained in menu planning to meet the requirements specified above (from expert discussion)

• When considering meat as a source of animal protein favouring lean meat with lowest percentage of animal fat (from expert discussion)

• Please refer to sheet other sources of protein, fish and meat

MICRONUTRIENTS (IRON, CALCIUM, VITAMIN C, ETC.)

Examples from national School Food Policies

Country | Example from School Food Policy
IT | Salt must be iodised; 5-9 mg iron and 280-420 mg calcium per meal depending on age group
PL | At least 30% of age-specific recommendation for calcium, iron, vitamin A, vitamin C, and folate per lunch meal

Proposed specifications

Food group/Nutrient | Food (F) or Catering Service (CS) | Specification examples | Compliance | Comments
Micronutrients (iron, calcium, vitamin C, etc.) | CS | Meet country- and age-specific recommendation for these micronutrients per meal, based on energy distribution for breakfast, lunch, dinner and snacks as given in sheet Energy. | Standard Operating Procedure for menu planning and nutritional composition data | Refers to nutrient content
CS | Use iodised salt in all salt-containing recipes. (based on Italy SFP and Finland SFP) | Nutritional information food labels | Refers to nutrient content (food fortification) and food preparation

Other issues that the contracting authority may wish to consider in the procurement of products or services related to Micronutrients:

• Staff shall be trained in menu planning to meet the micronutrient requirements of the various age groups (based on expert discussion)

• May consider fortification with certain micronutrients (as in the case of vitamin D in milk in Finland or iron in wheat flour in the UK)

PROPOSED COOKING SPECIFICATIONS

Food (F) or Catering Service (CS) | Specification examples
CS | Catering staff will not add salt when cooking vegetables (fresh, frozen or canned) and starchy carbohydrates such as rice, potatoes and pasta (based on UK GBS)
CS | Salt must not be added in the preparation, after cooking or prior to serving (based on UK GBS)
CS | For the preparation of vegetables and potatoes, cooking methods to retain nutrients are applied (based on Germany SFP)
CS | When offering fried foods, use only fresh fat, without overheating of the fat, not using partially hydrogenated vegetable fat, replacing frying fat at the end of each use and not re-using this fat in other preparations (based on Bulgaria SFP)
CS | Olive oil or sunflower oil high in oleic acid should be used for fried dishes (based on Spain SFP)
CS | Switch from deep-frying to lower-fat modes of preparation (based on Austria SFP)

PROPOSED GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS

Food (F) or Catering Service (CS)
Specification examples

CS
Consider specifications regarding nutritional quality of menu planning
E.g.: “All proposed meals or menus have to be planned by or checked for nutritional quality by a dietician or nutritionist.”
(based on expert discussion and ¹²¹)

CS
Consider specifications regarding food and nutrient composition analyses. The frequency and extent of these analyses has been noted to impact on costs and the capacity of smaller entities to comply.
E.g. “The contractor undertakes to have the preparations quantitatively analysed. The nutritional parameters to analyse are: energy, protein, fat, saturated fats, carbohydrates, [sugars], sodium, fibre and micronutrients.”
(from¹²¹, p. 5)

CS
Consider specifications regarding the display and labelling of dishes regarding nutritional composition and price.
E.g.: “The choice of dishes shall be clearly identified in the Cafeteria; the prices shall be visibly displayed. All dishes shall be displayed […] with a full description of their composition (nutrients, all basic ingredients and seasoning).”
(from ¹²¹, p. 12)

CS
Consider specifications regarding staff training
Comprehensive examples can be found in ¹²¹, pp. 19-20, and ¹²², pp. 42-44.

F and CS
Consider specifications regarding the safety of food products used for cooking and given out to the customers.
A comprehensive example is provided in ¹²¹, pp. 7-8

CS
Consider specifications regarding minimising food waste
E.g. “Following the current hygiene rules, the contractor undertakes to manage to the best of his ability all products, dishes and preparations offered in a way that minimises food waste and unsold items which, in accordance with these same rules, cannot be put up for sale again after performance of the service.”
(based on ¹²¹, p. 7 and ¹²²)

CS
Consider specifications regarding the organisation of regular customer satisfaction checks, including appropriate handling of customer complaints and suggestions.
A comprehensive example can be found in ¹²¹, p. 22

CS
Consider specifications regarding the means and procedures put in place for the promotion and control of quality and hygiene.
A comprehensive example is provided in ¹²¹, pp. 5-8

CS
Consider specifications regarding all environmental aspects in the context of management/ performance of the food service activities.
Comprehensive examples can be found in ¹²¹, pp. 8-9; ¹²², pp. 19-39; and ¹²⁰ p. 13

F and CS
Consider specifications related to Green Public Procurement as existing or proposed for a) Organic food products; b) Marine and aquaculture food products; c) Seasonal produce; d) Integrated production; e) Animal welfare; f) Fair trade products; g) Packaging; h) Sustainable palm oil; and i) others such as energy efficiency of equipment used, waste management, transportation. Comprehensive examples can be found in 120,122,123

F and CS
Consider specifications for seasonal produce, variety and low environmental impact.
E.g.: “For the selection of fruits and vegetables offered, the contractor shall respect the seasons and give priority, as much as possible, to fruits and vegetables with a limited ecological footprint, as well as varying colours, flavours and presentations. The recommended guidelines are found in the seasonal calendar provided in the contract.”
(based on ¹²¹, p. 7 and ¹²²)

F and CS
Consider specifications for using short food supply routes (limiting the ecological footprint).
E.g.: “The contractor shall encourage the support of production cooperatives, which will reduce the number of kilometres of transport between the producer and the processor/consumer.”
(based on ¹²¹, p. 7 and ¹²²)

F
Consider specifications concerning the traceability of fresh, chilled and frozen produce.
E.g.: “Catering contractors or food suppliers shall ensure the traceability of fresh, chilled and frozen produce in accordance with current [EU] legislation or equivalent.”
(based on ¹²⁰, p. 4)

CS
Consider specifications regarding the holding temperature for both hot and cold dishes.
E.g.: “For both sanitary and gastronomic reasons, the temperature of the dishes shall be optimal at the moment they are served, whether for hot dishes (55 °C) or cold preparations (3 °C to 7 °C).”
(from ¹²¹, p. 11)

CS
Consider specifications concerning the rotation of dishes.
E.g.: “The same dishes shall not be offered on set days or at an interval of less than 8 weeks.” (from ¹²¹, p. 11)

CS
Consider specifications for the caterer for the time (maximum X minutes) between the arrival of the pupil/student at the dining location and the provision of the meal.
E.g., for service line with cash registers: “The contractor takes all precautions to provide the service in such a way that the customer does not have to experience a longer than normal wait and that can guarantee quick service (maximum 10 minutes) between arrival in the restaurant and passing the cash register, exceptional events notwithstanding.”
(from ¹²¹, p. 12)

F and CS
Consider specifications that ensure inclusion of SMEs.
E.g.: “Provide opportunity for separate contracts for supply and distribution; and advertise all food-related tenders to SMEs.”
(based on ¹²⁰, p. 10)

F and CS
Consider specifications concerning equality and diversity.
E.g.: “The catering contractor or food supplier shall have a written equality and diversity policy to help ensure it and its sub-contractors are compliant with applicable employment law provisions. The contractor or food supplier shall have a policy in place as to carrying out its business in a way that is fair, open and transparent.”
(based on ¹²⁰, p. 10)

Annexes

Annex 1: Common Procurement Vocabulary (CPV)

When defining the subject matter of procurement contracts that fall under EU law, it is mandatory to use the Common Procurement Vocabulary (CPV). “The aim of the CPV is to standardise, by means of a single classification system for public procurement, the terms used by contracting authorities and entities to describe the subject of contracts, by offering an appropriate tool to potential users (contracting entities/authorities, candidates or tenderers in contract award procedure).”⁶¹

The use of standard codes makes it easier to implement the advertising rules and facilitates access to information. Translated into 24 official languages of the European Communities, the CPV simplifies the drafting of contract notices for the single market. Furthermore, the drafting of statistics on public procurement is streamlined since the CPV is compatible with trade monitors used throughout the world (especially those used by the United Nations). The CPV is subdivided into a main and a supplementary vocabulary.¹²⁴ The main vocabulary is based on a tree structure and provides wording to describe supplies, works or services forming the subject of the contract, e.g. “school meals” (CPV code 15894210-6) or “vegetables, fruits and nuts” (CPV code 03220000-9). The supplementary vocabulary allows for further details to be added regarding the specific nature or destination of the goods to be purchased, e.g. “for school use” (CPV code FA03-2).

In relation to school food and food service procurement for health, Table A - 1 gives examples of some relevant umbrella terms and their codes from the main vocabulary. Section G from the supplementary vocabulary provides additional terminology for scale and dimension, such as “specific unit size required”, the frequency (daily, weekly, monthly, annually) and other indications including “not exceeding”, “in excess of” or “a minimum of”. Furthermore, section H offers phrasing in relation to food, drink and meal provision, such as “cook and chill”, “vegetarian meal” or “unsalted”.

Table A - 1: Examples of Common Procurement Vocabulary (CPV) terms and their codes relevant for school food and food service procurement (compiled from ¹²⁴)

Main vocabulary wording
CPV code

For food procurement

• Food, beverages, tobacco and related products

15000000-8

• Animal products, meat and meat products

15100000-9

• Frozen fish, fish fillets and other fish meat

15220000-6

• Fruit, vegetables and related products

15300000-1

• Animal or vegetable oils and fats

15400000-2

• Dairy products

15500000-3

• Cereal or vegetable flour and related products

15612000-1

• School meals

15894210-6

• Snacks

15894400-5

• Vending-machine ingredients

15894500-6

For food service procurement

• School-meal services

55523100-3

• School catering services

55524000-9

Annex 2: Award stage contract evaluation guidance

Table A - 2: Example of Award criteria and evaluation-supporting information⁶³

Award criteria
How it is evaluated and the information tenderers need to provide

Price
The unit prices of meals will be multiplied by the presumed quantities, and a rule of three will apply between the candidates. The lowest bid will receive the maximum number of points

Development of a food plan that integrates quality, variety, seasonality, palatability and meal balance, frequency and portion size (as defined in technical specifications)

The tenderer shall submit:

• a proposal of menus for the months of March and September as presented to the guests;

• proposed 3-course technical sheets (for each of the above menus) describing the measures put in place by the tenderer for recipes and preparation techniques and cooking methods ensuring product quality, diversity, appeal and balance of meals and including nutritional evaluation by meal categories;

• technical sheets describing 3 extraordinary meals (with nutritional analysis): one festive meal, one exotic meal and one themed meal;

• internal procedures to ensure compliance with these intentions.

Quality guarantees in terms of nutrient-preserving cooking methods, use of short distribution channels, freshness and traceability of food origin (as defined in technical specifications)

The tenderer shall submit:

• the proposed products and their suppliers, in particular concerning the use of short distribution channels;

• proof of traceability, labels and other certificates from suppliers;

• internal procedures to ensure compliance with nutrient requirements through appropriate cooking methods.

Information actions on sustainable food and taste

This criterion will be analysed according to information proposals to parents and staff, through regular communication to inform about the practices implemented.

In order to assess these, the tenderer shall submit:

• a note, maximum 3 A4 pages, describing the actions proposed to parents and staff (content, approach, advertising/publicity, frequency, …);

• an example of a service initiation note.

Measures taken with regard to environmental impact, health and staff assistance

In order to assess these, the tenderer shall submit:

• the list of (non-food) products provided for the execution of this contract;

• a food waste prevention plan (1 page A4) including a list of priority measures to continuously reduce food waste;

• a note of up to 2 A4 pages describing the proposed measures for the prevention and management of non-food and food waste;

• a memorandum of up to 2 A4 pages describing the proposed actions for continued training of production and service personnel on sustainable food supply;

• internal procedures to ensure compliance with these intentions.

Performance in terms of professional integration of disadvantaged groups

Performance will be analysed in terms of the number of hours of training and / or professional integration of disadvantaged groups foreseen annually for this contract and the rate of employment of target audiences.

The offer with the highest number of hours and the highest coaching rate will receive 5 points. The other offers will score proportionately less.

The values are determined as follows:

• Value A = number of annual hours of training and / or insertion (the number of hours of insertion by commitment will be multiplied by 2 by the contracting authority in relation to the training hours);

• Value B = number of supervisors / number of supervised persons;

• Value C = Value A / Value B;

• Value D = Value A + Value C.

Example:

• Value A = 1000 hours (based on training of 5 people at 200 hours per year per person)

• Value B = 5 people (based on supervision rate of 5 people per supervisor)

• Value C = 200 hours (corresponds to 1 supervisor for the 5 persons, i.e. 200 hours)

• Value D = 1000 + 200 = 1200 total hours

Table A - 3: Example of a scoring grid from the UK that could be used for attributing points during the bid evaluation process in the Award Stage¹²⁵

Assessment
Score
Summary
Interpretation

Excellent
5
Very strong evidence of appropriate knowledge, skills or experience.
As well as addressing all, or the vast majority of, bullet points under each criteria heading, it will demonstrate a deep understanding of the project. All solutions offered are linked directly to project requirements and show how they will be delivered and the impact that they will have on other areas/stakeholders.

Good
4
Sufficient evidence provided of appropriate knowledge, skills or experience. Have confidence in their ability to deliver the required service
Will reflect that bidders will have addressed, in some detail, all or the majority of the bullet points listed under each criteria heading. Evidence will have been provided to show not only what will be provided but will give some detail of how this will be achieved. Bidders should make clear how their proposals relate directly to the aims of the project and be specific, rather than general, in the way proposed solutions will deliver the desired outcomes

Acceptable
3
Reasonable evidence of appropriate knowledge, skills or experience. Meets requirements in many areas but not all.
Will again address the majority of the bullet points under each criteria heading but will lack some clarity or detail in how the proposed solutions will be achieved. Evidence provided, while giving generic or general statements, is not specifically directed toward the aims/objectives of this project. Any significant omission of key information as identified under each criteria heading will point towards a score of 3.

Minor Reservation
2
Some evidence of appropriate knowledge, skills or experience. Meets requirements in some areas but with important omissions
Will reflect that the bidder has not provided evidence to suggest how they will address a number of bullet points under the evaluation criteria heading. Tenders will in parts be sketchy with little or no detail given of how they will meet project requirements. Evidence provided is considered weak or inappropriate and is unclear on how this relates to desired outcomes.

Serious Reservations
1
Very little evidence of appropriate knowledge skills or experience
Will reflect that there are major weaknesses or gaps in the information provided. The bidder displays poor understanding and there are major doubts about fitness for purpose.

Unacceptable
0
No evidence/response
Will result if no response is given and/or if the response is not acceptable and/or does not cover the required criteria.

This information is licensed under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 http://www.nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open-government-licence/version/3.

Annex 3: National food-based dietary guidelines in Europe

Table A - 4: National food-based dietary guidelines in Europe (compiled from ⁶⁹, online search and Member State input)

Country code
Country
Link to food-based dietary guideline

BE
Belgium (2005)
http://www.fao.org/nutrition/education/food-dietary-guidelines/regions/countries/belgium/en/

BG
Bulgaria (2008)
http://ncpha.government.bg/files/4preporaki_uchenici_17-19g.pdf

CH
Switzerland (2011)
http://www.sge-ssn.ch/ich-und-du/essen-und-trinken/ausgewogen/schweizer-lebensmittelpyramide/

CZ
Czech Republic (2012)
http://www.vyzivaspol.cz/vyzivova-doporuceni-pro-obyvatelstvo-ceske-republiky/

DK
Denmark (2015)
https://www.foedevarestyrelsen.dk/english/Food/Nutrition/The_dietary_recommendations/Pages/default.aspx

DE
Germany (2013)
https://www.dge.de/fileadmin/public/doc/fm/10-guidelines-for-a-wholesome-diet.pdf

EE
Estonia (2016)
Not officially published yet.
http://www.terviseinfo.ee/images/ETLS_avalikuks_aruteluks.pdf

IE
Ireland (2016)
https://www.healthpromotion.ie/hp-files/docs/HPM01040.pdf

EL
Greece (1999)
Revision in progress.
http://www.mednet.gr/archives/1999-5/pdf/516.pdf

ES
Spain (2008)
http://www.aecosan.msssi.gob.es/AECOSAN/docs/documentos/nutricion/Come_sano_y_muevete_12_decisiones.pdf

FR
France (2011)
Revision starting end of 2016.
http://www.fao.org/nutrition/education/food-dietary-guidelines/regions/countries/france/en/

HR
Croatia (2002)
http://www.fao.org/nutrition/education/food-dietary-guidelines/regions/countries/croatia/en/

IT
Italy (2003)
New FBDG pending approval
http://www.fao.org/nutrition/education/food-dietary-guidelines/regions/countries/italy/en/

CY
Cyprus (2007)
http://www.fao.org/nutrition/education/food-dietary-guidelines/regions/countries/cyprus/en/

LV
Latvia (2008)
http://www.fao.org/3/a-as687o.pdf

LT
Lithuania (2010)
http://www.smlpc.lt/media/file/Skyriu_info/Metodine_medziaga/Sveikos_mitybos_rekomendacijos_2010.pdf

LU
Luxembourg (2016)
http://www.sante.public.lu/fr/publications/m/mange-bouger-fr-de/index.html

HU
Hungary (2004)
Revision in progress.
http://www.fao.org/nutrition/education/food-dietary-guidelines/regions/countries/hungary/en/

MT
Malta (2015)
http://health.gov.mt/en/health-promotion/Documents/library/publications/Healthy%20plate%20EN.pdf

NL
Netherlands (2015)
https://www.gezondheidsraad.nl/en/publications/gezonde-voeding/dutch-dietary-guidelines-2015

NO
Norway (2014)
http://www.fao.org/nutrition/education/food-dietary-guidelines/regions/countries/norway/en/

AT
Austria (2010)
http://www.fao.org/3/a-as659o.pdf
http://www.bmgf.gv.at/cms/home/attachments/7/3/0/CH1046/CMS1290513144661/folder_erpyr_web.pdf

PL
Poland (2016)
http://www.izz.waw.pl/pl/strona-gowna/3-aktualnoci/aktualnoci/555-naukowcy-zmodyfikowali-zalecenia-dotyczace-zdrowego-zywienia

PT
Portugal (2003)
http://www.fao.org/nutrition/education/food-dietary-guidelines/regions/countries/portugal/en/

RO
Romania (2006)
http://www.fao.org/3/a-as693o.pdf
http://www.ms.ro/?pag=185

SI
Slovenia (2015)
http://www.fao.org/3/a-az912o.pdf

SK
Slovakia (2015)
http://www.uvzsr.sk/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=1014:odporuane-vyivove-davky-pre-obyvatestvo-vnslovenskej-republike&catid=66:vyiva-a-bezpenos-potravin&Itemid=72

FI
Finland (2014)
http://www.ravitsemusneuvottelukunta.fi/files/attachments/fi/vrn/ravitsemussuositukset_2014_fi_web.3.pdf

SE
Sweden (2015)
http://www.fao.org/3/a-az854e.pdf
https://www.livsmedelsverket.se/globalassets/rapporter/2015/rapp-hanteringsrapport-engelska-omslag--inlaga--bilagor-eng-version.pdf

UK
United Kingdom (2016)
http://www.fao.org/nutrition/education/food-dietary-guidelines/regions/countries/united-kingdom/en/

Annex 4: Selected European and international nutrient profile models

Table A - 5: Overview of some nutrient profile models from within and outside Europe¹²⁶

Nutrient Profile Model
Description

Brazilian model
Developed in 2006 by the Brazilian National Health Surveillance Agency (Anvisa), a government organisation, and introduced in 2010 to regulate food advertising to both adults and children. The model is based on negative nutrients only (that is, nutrients that are associated with adverse health outcomes).

Danish model
Developed by the Forum of Responsible Food Marketing Communication and introduced in 2008 as part of a voluntary code for food advertising. The Forum is a co-operation between nine commercial associations and the Danish Chamber of Commerce. The model is based on negative nutrients only.

Disney model
Developed by nutrition professionals for the Disney corporation and introduced in 2007 (updated in 2012) to regulate food advertising during programmes targeting children and families. The current version of the model is predominantly based on negative nutrients, but some food categories include a measure of positive food groups (for example, fruit and vegetables, whole grains).

EU Pledge Nutrition Criteria
The EU Pledge was launched as a voluntary initiative in 2007. Pledge signatories commit to changing food advertising to children. The EU Pledge Nutrition Criteria were developed in November 2012 to replace individual nutrient profiling models formulated by EU Pledge signatories. The model uses both positive and negative nutrients and food components.

PepsiCo model
Developed by PepsiCo in 2005. The model is used to regulate advertising of PepsiCo products with a target audience under 12 years of age. The model is based on negative and positive nutrients and food components.

UK model
Developed in 2005 by the Food Standards Agency, a government agency. Since 2007 the model has been used to support the regulation of food advertising during programmes aimed at children under the age of 16. The model is based on both negative and positive nutrients and food components. External validity of the model has been demonstrated.

US (CSPI) model
Developed by the Center for Science and the Public Interest (CSPI), a non-government organisation, and proposed as a set of voluntary guidelines for food manufacturers and media outlets to regulate advertising of foods to children in 2005. The model is based on negative nutrients, with a criterion that foods must contain at least 10% of the daily recommended intake of a positive nutrient, or contain half a serving of a fruit or vegetable, or be more than 51% wholegrain.

US (Interagency) model
Developed by the Interagency Working Group on Food Marketed to Children, a collaboration between the Federal Trade Commission, the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, the Food and Drug Administration, and the US Department of Agriculture in 2009. The model was developed to assist food manufacturers’ determine which foods should be advertised to children. The model examines whether a food item provides a meaningful contribution to a healthy diet by considering nine positive food groups, and the model also uses negative nutrients.

WHO Europe nutrient profile model
Developed by WHO Europe and published in 2015. The model is designed for use by governments for the specific purpose of restricting food marketing to children. It is based on the Danish and Norwegian models and uses only negative nutrients.

Annex 5: Guidance on optimal breakfast and snack choices

Table A - 6: German quality standards regarding optimal choices for breakfast and snacks¹²⁷

Food Group | Optimal Choice | Examples for practical realisation
Grains, Grain Products and Potatoes | Wholemeal products | Bread, rolls
Muesli without added sugar | Mixture made from a variety of cereal flakes, linseed and dried fruits
Vegetables and salad | Vegetables, fresh or frozen | Carrots, bell peppers, cucumber, kohlrabi, tomatoes raw, for example cut into slices or staves, as bread topping
Salad | Butterhead lettuce, iceberg lettuce, lamb’s lettuce, endive, red oak leaf lettuce, cucumber, carrots, tomatoes, for example as mixed salad, as bread topping
Fruits | Fruits, fresh or frozen without added sugar | Apple, pear, plums, cherries, banana, mandarine, whole or as fruit salad, fruit kebab
Milk and milk products | Milk: 1.5% fat | As fresh milk, home-made mixed drinks (unsweetened)
Plain yoghurt: 1.5 to 1.8% fat | Pure, with fresh fruit, dip, dressing
Cheese: max. fat content of ≤ 50% fat in dry matter | As bread topping: Gouda, Feta, Camembert, Tilsit cheese
Quark: max. 20% fat in dry matter | Herb quark, dip, bread spread, with fresh fruit
Meat, Sausage, Fish, Egg | Meat products and sausage products as a bread topping: max. 20% fat | Turkey breast (coldcuts), turkey mortadella, cooked ham, lachsschinken (smoked, rolled fillet of pork), smoked pork chop (coldcuts), ham sausage
Saltwater fish, not from overfished stock | Tuna, pickled herring, rollmop
Fats and Oils | Rapeseed oil | Dressing
Walnut oil, wheatgerm oil, olive oil, soybean oil |
Beverages | Drinking or mineral water | Rose hip tea, chamomile tea, peppermint tea
Fruit tea, herb tea, unsweetened |
Rooibos tea, unsweetened |

Table A - 7: German quality standards regarding offering frequency for optimal breakfast and snacks choices¹²⁷

Food Group | Frequency | Examples for the practical implementation
Grains, Grain Products and Potatoes | daily wholemeal products | Wholemeal rolls, wholemeal bread, grain cereal flakes, muesli without added sugar
Vegetables and salad | daily | Raw vegetables, vegetable sticks, salad, topping for bread and rolls
Fruits | daily | Whole fruit, sliced fruit, fruit salad, muesli with fruit, quark/yoghurt with fresh fruit
Milk and Milk Products | daily | Fresh milk, yoghurt/quark, milk in muesli, herb quark, salad dressings, dips
Fats and Oils | Rapeseed oil is standard oil | Salad dressings, dips
Beverages | daily | Drinking or mineral water

Annex 6: Templates/model contracts for public procurement of school food and related services

The European Commission maintains an online repository of standard forms for public procurement, available at http://simap.ted.europa.eu/standard-forms-for-public-procurement.

The UK Government Department for Education hosts a section on its website dedicated to buying for schools¹²⁸, which offers step-by-step guidance as well as a host of document templates for various stages of the procurement process.

Links to these and other resources are summarised in Table A - 8 below.

Table A - 8: Sources of European Commission and national model contracts for public procurement of food and related services

Country code
Country
Source

DE
Germany
http://www.vernetzungsstelle-berlin.de/fileadmin/downloadDateien/Musterauschreibung_Mittagessen_GS_Gesamt.pdf

ES
Spain
http://www.juntadeandalucia.es/contratacion/document/download?refCode=2016-0000010113&refDoc=2016-0000010113-1

AT
Austria
https://www.bmb.gv.at/ministerium/rs/2012_08_beilage_22407.pdf?5h6xft

UK
UK (England)
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/school-procurement-example-contracts

European Commission
http://simap.ted.europa.eu/standard-forms-for-public-procurement
Management and operation of the JRC Geel site cafeteria and additional related services.
- Annex I - Technical specifications for a contract for the management and operation of the JRC-GEEL Site Cafeteria and additional related services

NOTES

Notes

¹ Niebylski et al. Int J Environ Res Public Health 2014;11(3):2608-2627

² Morgan & Sonnino. Int J Consum Stud 2007;31(1):19-25

³ Data from 25 countries

⁴ European Association for the Study of Obesity (EASO). Childhood Obesity section. Facts & Statistics. Last accessed 15/11/2016

⁵ Poskitt E & Edmonds L (2008) Management of Childhood Obesity: Cambridge University Press.

⁶ Similarly, the workplace setting would merit consideration as an area of opportunity.

⁷ EU Action Plan on Childhood Obesity 2014-2020.

⁸ Health in all policies (HiAP); Putting the EU strategy on nutrition, overweight and obesity-related health issues into operation; Action to reduce population salt intake for better health; Equity and health in all policies: Solidarity in health; Innovative approaches for chronic diseases in public health and healthcare systems; Vienna Declaration on Nutrition and Noncommunicable Diseases in the Context of Health 2020; WHO Ending Childhood Obesity Commission report

⁹ JRC Science and Policy Report (2014) Mapping of national school food policies across the EU28 plus Norway and Switzerland

¹⁰ Council of the EU (2016) Council conclusions on food product improvement

¹¹ European Commission. DG Growth. Public Procurement. Last accessed 25/11/2016.

¹² Social food service covers the following five sectors: 1) Business & Industry (manufacturing industry; service industry; government employees); 2) Education (state pre-primary, primary & secondary schools; private pre-primary, primary & secondary schools; special schools; further education); 3) Healthcare (state hospitals; private clinics); 4) Welfare (state homes for elderly; private homes for elderly; meals-on-wheels; other social homes); 5) Other sectors (armed forces; prisons; religious communities).

¹³ The contract catering market in Europe 2009-2014 – 15 countries. GIRA foodservice, October 2014.

¹⁴ JRC (2015) Revision of the EU Green Public Procurement Criteria for Food and Catering Services

¹⁵ This experience also makes them a particularly interesting testing ground for the implementation of procurement guidance for health.

¹⁶ European Commission. DG Growth. Supporting social responsibility in the economy through public procurement. Last accessed 16/12/2016.

¹⁷ European Commission. DG Growth. Public procurement strategy. Last accessed 25/11/2016.

¹⁸ The experiences of England and Scotland will be referred to later as changes in procurement and school food have led to welcome changes in the dietary intake of students. Austria and Sweden are other examples, and a summary of successful or ongoing public procurement initiatives and guidance documents is available in Table 4 below.

¹⁹ “Union action, which shall complement national policies, shall be directed towards improving public health, preventing physical and mental illness and diseases, and obviating sources of danger to physical and mental health. Such action shall cover the fight against the major health scourges, by promoting research into their causes, their transmission and their prevention, as well as health information and education, and monitoring, early warning of and combating serious cross-border threats to health.” (Article 168(1) TFEU); the Union shall encourage cooperation between the Member States in these areas and, if necessary, lend support to their action (Article 168(2)). In particular, Article 168 empowers the Commission, in close contact with the Member States, to take any useful initiative to promote such coordination, in particular initiatives aiming at the establishment of guidelines and indicators, the organisation of exchange of best practice, and the preparation of the necessary elements for periodic monitoring and evaluation” (Article 168(3) TFEU).

²⁰ TFEU Articles 9, 114(3) and Article 168(1) as well as Article 35 EU Charter.

²¹ Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council of 26 February 2014 on public procurement and repealing Directive 2004/18/EC

²² Article 1(2) of Directive 2014/24/EU

²³ Adapted from a definition reported in World Obesity website, Blog section, July 2015. “the process of obtaining foods to serve in public institutions and ensuring that these foods promote healthy diets”. Last accessed 25/11/2016

²⁴ Campbell et al. Can J Cardiol 2014;30(11):1456-9

²⁵ Calleja A. (2015) Unleashing Social Justice Through EU Public Procurement (Vol. 3). Routledge

²⁶ JRC (2015) Report on task 1 of the Revision of the EU GPP Criteria for the Product Group Food and Catering Services

²⁷ Belgium, Denmark, Germany, Ireland, Spain, France, Italy, Hungary, Netherlands, Austria, Poland, Portugal, Finland, Sweden, UK; altogether representing 88% of the total market in the EU-28.

²⁸ JRC (2015) Report on task 2 of the Revision of the EU GPP criteria for the Product Group Food and Catering: Market Analysis (draft) Working Document

²⁹ The term Treaty herein refers to the Treaty of Lisbon, which was signed by the EU Member States on 13 December 2007, and entered into force on 1 December 2009. It amends the Maastricht Treaty (1993), known in updated form as the Treaty on European Union (2007) or TEU, and the Treaty of Rome (1957), known in updated form as the Treaty on the Functioning of the European Union (2007) or TFEU.

³⁰ See Article 2(1)(5) of Directive 2014/24/EU

³¹ See Article 2(1)(1) of Directive 2014/24/EU

³² See Article 2(1)(8) of Directive 2014/24/EU

³³ See Article 2(1)(9) of Directive 2014/24/EU

³⁴ Values are revised every two years. Those stated are in force since January 2016.

³⁵ See, Commission delegated Regulation (EU) 2015/2170 of 24 November 2015 amending Directive 2014/24/EU of the European Parliament and of the Council in respect of the application thresholds for the procedures for the award of contracts.

³⁶ See, Article 18 of Directive 2014/24/EU

³⁷ Judgment of 8 October 1980. Case 810/79, Überschär.

³⁸ See, Recital 90 of Directive 2014/24/EU

³⁹ See, Article 18 of Directive 2014/24/EU

⁴⁰ See, Article 18 (2) of Directive 2014/24/EU. Annex X provides a list of international social and environmental conventions.

⁴¹ See Article 57 of Directive 2014/24/EU

⁴² See Article 57 of Directive 2014/24/EU

⁴³ See, Article 42(3)(a) of Directive 2014/24/EU

⁴⁴ See, Article 42(4) of Directive 2014/24/EU

⁴⁵ See, Article 58 (1)(a)(b)(c) of Directive 2014/24/EU

⁴⁶ Opinion of the Advocate General, 20 September 1988, Case 31/87, Beentjes, paragraph 37.

⁴⁷ See, Article 67 of Directive 2014/24/EU

⁴⁸ See, Article 49 of Directive 2014/24/EU

⁴⁹ See, Article 50 of Directive 2014/24/EU

⁵⁰ See, Recital 104 of Directive 2014/24/EU

⁵¹ See, Article 27 of Directive 2014/24/EU

⁵² See, Article 28 of Directive 2014/24/EU

⁵³ See, Article 29 of Directive 2014/24/EU

⁵⁴ See, Article 30 of Directive 2014/24/EU

⁵⁵ See, Article 31 of Directive 2014/24/EU

⁵⁶ See, Article 32 of Directive 2014/24/EU

⁵⁷ Public procurement in Europe – Cost and Effectiveness. Study prepared for the European Commission by PwC, London Economics and Ecorys, 2011.

⁵⁸ See, Article 27 of Directive 2014/24/EU

⁵⁹ See, Article 28 of Directive 2014/24/EU

⁶⁰ See, Article 28 (6) of Directive 2014/24/EU

⁶¹ European Commission (2008) Public Procurement in the European Union. Guide to the Common Procurement Vocabulary (CPV).

⁶² FERCO (2006) Guide to the economically most advantageous offer in contract catering.

⁶³ Cahier spécial des charges: Objet: confection et livraison de repas dans des collectivités d’enfants de 3 à 18 ans. Last accessed 20/01/2017.

⁶⁴ See, Article 55 of Directive 2014/24/EU

⁶⁵ Directive 2007/66/EC of 11 December 2007 amending Council Directives 89/665/EEC and 92/13/EEC with regard to improving the effectiveness of review procedures concerning the award of public contracts.

⁶⁶ See, Press Release, IP/07/1700, Brussels, 15 November 2007, available at: http://europa.eu/rapid/press-release_IP-07-1700_en.htm?locale=en

⁶⁷ Buying Social, European Commission 2010. NB: The Buying Social guide is based on the previous EU Directive on Public Procurement (Directive 2004/18/EC), hence care needs to be taken in applying its content under the new Directive 2014/24/EU.

⁶⁸ Uyarra et al. Technovation 2014;34(10):631-45

⁶⁹ FAO website. Food-based dietary guidelines. Last accessed 21/11/2016

⁷⁰ WHO Regional Office for Europe (2015) WHO Regional Office for Europe nutrient profile model

⁷¹ Maltese Ministry for Education and Employment (2015). Whole School Approach to a Healthy Lifestyle: Healthy Eating and Physical Activity Policy.

⁷² EU Pledge Nutrition Criteria White Paper, July 2015.

⁷³ JRC Science for Policy Report (2015) Comparison of the nutrient profiling schemes of the EU Pledge and the World Health Organization Regional Office for Europe

⁷⁴ European Commission COM (2008) 400, p. 4

⁷⁵ In the absence of data on how many children attend and eat at school in the EU, an interesting figure to gauge the size of the population potentially affected by procurement in schools is the number of 5-14yrs old in the EU, approximately 50 million in 2013.

⁷⁶ Gardner et al. Nutr Rev 2014;72(6):390-410

⁷⁷ EUROSTAT website. The share of persons at risk of poverty or social exclusion in the EU back to its pre-crisis level. Last accessed 24/11/2016.

⁷⁸ Winicki et al. Contemp Econ Policy 2003;21:145

⁷⁹ International Food Policy Research Institute (2004) Impact of feeding children in school: Evidence from Bangladesh

⁸⁰ Kristjansson et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev 2007;1:CD004676

⁸¹ Nelson et al. Front Public Health 2015(3):230

⁸² Martin et al. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2014;3:CD009728

⁸³ Public Health England (2013) Breakfast and Cognition – Review of the literature

⁸⁴ Burrows et al. J Hum Nutr Diet, advance online publication 7 Sep 2016

⁸⁵ DGE Quality Standards for School Meals, 4th edition, 2014

⁸⁶ Springmann et al. Proc Natl Acad Sci 2015;113(15:4146-51

⁸⁷ Wickramasinghe et al. Eur J Clin Nutr 2016;70(10):1162-7

⁸⁸ CDC - Improving the Food Environment Through Nutrition Standards: A Guide for Government Procurement

⁸⁹ Health and Food, Special Eurobarometer 246 (November 2006)

⁹⁰ Health determinants, Special Eurobarometer 329 (January 2010)

⁹¹ Attitudes of European citizens towards the environment, Special Eurobarometer 416 (September 2014)

⁹² JRC (2016) How to promote water intake in schools: a toolkit

⁹³ JRC (2016) How to promote fruit and vegetable consumption in schools: a toolkit

⁹⁴ Whole School Approach to a Healthy Lifestyle: Healthy Eating and Physical Activity Policy. Ministry for Education and Employment, Malta, 2015.

⁹⁵ Survey carried out by the Maltese Presidency and DG SANTE, 2016

⁹⁶ European Commission, DG Employment, Social Affairs & Inclusion. Fund for European Aid to the Most Deprived (FEAD). Last accessed 24/11/2016.

⁹⁷ UK Government website. Food buying standards for the public sector: The Plan: toolkit. Last accessed 24/11/2016.

⁹⁸ European Commission. DG Environment. GPP in Practice; Food and Catering group. Last accessed 17/12/2016

⁹⁹ Country profiles on national school food policies across the EU28 plus Norway and Switzerland

¹⁰⁰ Copenhagen: Procurement of 100% organic, seasonal food

¹⁰¹ Balanced scorecard for public food procurement

¹⁰² Rome: Sustainable food procurement for schools

¹⁰³ Malmö: Sustainable food for thought

¹⁰⁴ Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). Healthier Food Choices for Public Places. Examples of Policies to Increase Access to Healthier Food Choices for Public Places: National, State, and Local Food and Nutrition Guidelines. Last accessed 25/11/2016.

¹⁰⁵ Global Nutrition Report 2016

¹⁰⁶ Slovenia, Finland, and Sweden. Our sincere thanks go to the experts who provided their input.

¹⁰⁷ European Commission. DG Environment. Barriers to the take-up of GPP. Last accessed 24/11/2016.

¹⁰⁸ Foodlinks project (2013) Revaluing Public Sector Food Procurement in Europe.

¹⁰⁹ Robles et al. Adv Nutr 2013;4:191-202

¹¹⁰ Personal communication, FoodServiceEurope

¹¹¹ As described in Public Sector Healthy Food Procurement - A review to identify best practice, IRL National Nutrition Surveillance Centre

¹¹² JRC (2013) Short Food Supply Chains and Local Food Systems in the EU. A State of Play of their Socio-Economic Characteristics.

¹¹³ NB: Subcontracting and the number of subcontractors per se cannot be restricted. However, the contracting authority may not always be in a position to verify the technical and economic capacities of the subcontractors when examining the tenders and selecting the lowest tenderer. The Court has held that in such cases the old Directive 2004/18 (now Directive 2014/24) does not preclude a prohibition or a restriction on subcontracting the performance of essential parts of the contract. Such a prohibition or restriction is justified by the contracting authority’s legitimate interest in ensuring that the public contract will be effectively and properly carried out.

¹¹⁴ Swedish National Food Agency (2013) Good school meals, 2nd revised edition.

¹¹⁵ JRC Science and Policy Report (2014) School Food and Nutrition in Europe: policies, interventions and their impact.

¹¹⁶ See, Article 40 of Directive 2014/24/EU

¹¹⁷ European Commission Machine Translation MT@EC

¹¹⁸ European Commission, DG Environment. EU GPP criteria Food & Catering. Available from: http://ec.europa.eu/environment/gpp/pdf/toolkit/food_GPP_product_sheet.pdf

¹¹⁹ European Commission, DG Joint Research Centre, Green Public Procurement for Food and Catering Services. Available from: http://susproc.jrc.ec.europa.eu/Food_Catering/stakeholders.html

¹²⁰ Public Health England (2014) Government Buying Standards for Food and Catering Services (GBSF) Checklist. Available from https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/347877/GBSF_Checklist.pdf

¹²¹ European Commission (2014) Annex I - Technical specifications for a contract for the management and operation of the JRC-GEEL Site Cafeteria and additional related services. Last accessed 19/12/2016.

¹²² JRC (2015) Revision of the EU Green Public Procurement Criteria for Food and Catering Services. Disclaimer: The final EU GPP criteria may differ substantially from the draft versions displayed here.

¹²³ European Commission (2008) Catering & Food – Green Public Procurement Product Sheet.

¹²⁴ COMMISSION REGULATION (EC) No 213/2008 of 28 November 2007 amending Regulation (EC) No 2195/2002 of the European Parliament and of the Council on the Common Procurement Vocabulary (CPV) and Directives 2004/17/EC and 2004/18/EC of the European Parliament and of the Council on public procurement procedures, as regards the revision of the CPV

¹²⁵ Model invitation to tender letter. UK Government. Department for Education. 2016. Last accessed 05/01/2017.

¹²⁶ Scarborough et al. Eur J Clin Nutr 2013;67:815-820

¹²⁷ German Nutrition Society (DGE): DGE-Quality Standard for School Meals. Bonn, 4.th Edition (2014). © DGE

¹²⁸ UK Government, Department for Education. Collection Buying for schools. Last accessed 19/12/2016