Process evaluation of the Centrally Procured School Food Program (CPSFP) in Ontario, Canada: school-level perspectives
Why this work is in the frame
A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study explored the implementation of the Centrally Procured School Food Program (CPSFP)-a free, universal, volunteer-led snack program for elementary school children. To assess participants' perceptions and experiences with the CPSFP, interviews were conducted in school-level participants (n = 33) using a semi-structured interview guide. Fifteen on-site visits also were conducted at each school to observe implementation practices. Quantitative data were obtained through a general information form where participants provided school characteristics and weekly logbooks where they described program operations and food quality. Most participants expressed positive perceptions of the CPSFP, identifying it as a valuable program for their students. Successful program implementation was associated with an appreciation for the CPSFP and the participation of the school community. Challenges to program implementation included concerns with the volume and types of food provided, issues with classroom food delivery and distribution and communication challenges. Suggestions for improvement included building capacities and enhancing student engagement in the program. Participants provided an in-depth assessment of the implementation of the CPSFP. The lessons learned and suggestions provided may help not only enhance the reach, feasibility and fidelity of the CPSFP, but inform the best practices for similar programs.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.006 | 0.006 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.002 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.003 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.003 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it