Canada-wide survey of school food programs
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Canada remains one of few Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) countries without a well-established nationally harmonized and funded school food program (SFP); however, the Canadian federal government recently announced the development and implementation of a national SFP that might supersede the uncoordinated patchwork of SFPs currently delivered across Canada. We designed and conducted novel survey research to systematically identify the characteristics of organization-led SFPs, building on previous research that focused on the characteristics of provincial and territorial government involvement in school food programming. An electronic survey was developed to include items deemed most relevant based on applicable literature and expert content validation, and distributed to organizations involved in the purchasing, planning, and/or preparation of school foods. Responses were categorized post hoc into the RE-AIM categories to assess SFP Reach, Effectiveness, Adoption, Implementation, and Maintenance. Analysis identified key SFP implementation characteristics (including funding source, payment model, and student eligibility), program components, SFP goals/mandates, and factors that determine what foods are served; and assessed correlations among key characteristics. Results from 67 SFPs across 10 provinces indicate considerable variability in SFP characteristics. SFP-delivering organizations reported a predominant goal of reducing student food insecurity, while nutrition and cost were cited as the main factors determining food served. Collectively, organizations were found to rely primarily on donations, while provincial funding accounted for only 30% of total funding. These findings reveal strengths and areas for improvement within Canada's current school food landscape and highlight important gaps that could be addressed with federal involvement.
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.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.002 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.005 | 0.011 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.006 | 0.001 |
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 itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".