Guyana's Hinterland and Community-Based School Feeding Programme
Guyana s Hinterland Community-Based School Feeding Program (SFP) began in 2007 with the objective of building more community participation in schools and improving children s human development outcomes, such as student enrollment and attendance, nu...
Main Authors: | , |
---|---|
Format: | Publications & Research |
Language: | English en_US |
Published: |
World Bank, Washington, DC
2014
|
Subjects: | |
Online Access: | http://documents.worldbank.org/curated/en/2012/07/19783271/guyanas-hinterland-community-based-school-feeding-programme http://hdl.handle.net/10986/20176 |
Summary: | Guyana s Hinterland Community-Based
School Feeding Program (SFP) began in 2007 with the
objective of building more community participation in
schools and improving children s human development outcomes,
such as student enrollment and attendance, nutritional
status and learning outcomes. In addition, the program
supports improvement of schools organization of primary
level in Regions 1, 7, 8 and 9. In order to participate in
the program, schools and their associated communities are
required to submit school feeding proposals, undergo
training in basic financial bookkeeping, food hygiene and
nutritious meal preparation, using locally produced foods
whenever possible. Communities must also ensure school
kitchens meet the requirements and guidelines of the
Ministry of Health, ensuring an adequate safe-water supply.
To evaluate the program, the Government of Guyana and the
World Bank collected survey data from schools, students,
teachers and parents in three rounds 2007, 2008 and 2009 in
Regions 1 and 7. This report shows the findings and impacts
of SFP using all survey rounds. Regions 1 and 7 are
characterized by high poverty levels and agricultural labor
intensity. Both factors highlight the potential of
organizing SFP around local producers, so that a regular
supply of low-cost food can be guaranteed to the local
schools and children living in precarious conditions.
Seventeen of the sixty-four schools participating in the
impact evaluation are in Region 7, and the rest are in
Region 1. Randomization for the selection of comparison
groups was not achieved, due to the participation rules.
However, sample selection correction methods were used to
correct for observable and unobservable biases. |
---|