Refocusing mid-day meals: What children really need | Number Theory

Introducing eggs in the meal is an effective way of improving nutritional quality and appeal of the scheme.

Over the last week, government school students in Uttar Pradesh, Rajasthan and Bihar came out in protest, asking for better facilities. In addition to poor infrastructure and shortage of teachers, mid-day meals (MDM) are an important aspect of government school education in India. Following Supreme Court orders in 2001, hot cooked meals for children up to Class 8 across government and aided schools were expanded to the entire country. The MDM is a legal entitlement under the National Food Security

Representational image. (Pexels)

Refocusing mid-day meals: What children really need

• 
  Universal on paper, but MDM coverage varies across states

  While MDM is a universal scheme covering all children in eligible schools, nationally only 76.2% of enrolled children are being served. The coverage is uneven across states, with Goa having the highest coverage of 97% and Bihar the lowest with 60%. What explains this large variation? A thorough evaluation is required, but anecdotal evidence suggests that this gap could be due to a combination of inflated enrolment figures and some better-off children opting out of the scheme because of quality concerns.
• 
  MDM also has a funds problem

  One of the reasons for quality concerns regarding MDM is that the scheme is under-funded. This is despite the fact that MDM is one of the rare schemes where the principle of inflation-indexing is built in. Reasons are manifold. The base costs have not been revised since 2009. The cost-sharing norms were revised in 2015, reducing the contribution of the union government from 75% to 60% of the cooking costs. Estimating allocations by states (at 40% of central allocations) and then doing an inflation adjustment using Consumer Food Price Index, one can see a decline 30% in real MDM allocations between 2012-13 and 2025-26. With increasing GDP and growing recognition of the nutritional challenge, we should be giving greater priority to the scheme; what we see is lower real allocations, which affect the quality and regularity of the scheme.
• 
  The debate on eggs is more fiscal than cultural

  Introducing eggs in the meal is an effective way of improving nutritional quality and appeal of the scheme. Eggs are a complete protein source, highly bioavailable, cost-effective, and logistically feasible. Barring religious opposition from a small minority, the bigger constraint is cost. While the richer southern states now provide 4-6 eggs a week in their school meals, the poorer states such as Bihar and Jharkhand give only 1 or 2 a week (Figure 3). Over 80% of the adult population in most states is non-vegetarian. Further, across the country, the vegetarian population is also typically upper caste and less likely to be in government schools. Rather than debate cultural objections, a red herring, the real constraint is the finances that can be addressed by raising cost norms. Currently, the cost is about ₹6 per egg. We can surely afford that for the children of this country who continue to be undernourished.