School nutrition operators are worried that increasing the amount of protein in school meals could spell financial trouble for their programs. Photo: Shutterstock
This back-to-school season, meat is on the mind of many school nutrition professionals
The U.S Department of Agriculture (USDA)is getting ready to release its proposed ruleto make changes to its School Nutrition Standards to reflect the latest Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA) which were released earlier this year
While the USDA has not shared what will be included in the proposed rule, some school nutrition operators are concerned that there will be an increase in the amount of meat required in school meals since the 2025-2030 DGA’s increased the recommended protein targets for Americans to 1.2 to 1.6 grams per kilogram of body weight daily. Previous federal guidelines recommended just 0.8 grams per kilogram
Meat is traditionally the most expensive part of a school meal, and if there’s an increase of it on school lunch trays, that could make it more difficult for K-12 operators to keep costs in check
“It is almost unaffordable now to maintain the meal pattern as it is if you’re trying to also incorporate scratch cooking, more quality ingredients, local ingredients, more plant-based foods, things along that line,” says Amanda Warren, director of school nutrition for Staunton City Public Schools in Staunton, Virginia. “I think that doubling that center of the plate, as far as cost goes, is a major concern.”
Warren is one of over 900 school nutrition professionals and school districtswho penned a letter to the USDA earlier this yearasking the department to not to increase the meat/meat alternate requirement in the upcoming rule
As school nutrition programs already face rising costs, increasing the amount of meat required in school meals could them to sink further into financial turmoil
Operating on shoestring budgets
The K-12 foodservice segment is currently in the midst of a financial crisis. In the SNA’sSY 2025-26 School Nutrition Trends Report, which included responses from 1,240 school nutrition program directors across the nation, nearly all respondents reported challenges related to costs
Ninety-nine percent of respondents cited the need for more funding for their programs, with 98% reporting challenges with the cost of food, 95% reporting challenges with the cost of labor, and 95% reporting challenges with the cost of equipment. In addition, over half of respondents shared that they have “serious concern” about the financial sustainability of their program in three years
The current reimbursement rate for a school lunch under the National School Lunch Program is currently anywhere between $4.76 and $0.45 depending on whether a student qualifies for free or reduced-price meals and what state they are located in. Add more meat into the mix, and it becomes increasingly harder for that reimbursement rate to cover all the costs associated with producing a school meal
“That reimbursement has to pay for food, has to pay for labor, has to pay for equipment, has to pay for packaging, and so on and so forth,” says Ryan Cengel, food and nutrition director at Manor Independent School District in Manor, Texas. “It’s getting to the point with the rising costs of literally everything that we’re just not able to manage and maintain programs that are financially
There is also a concern that the rising costs associated with increase in protein will drive some school nutrition programs to lean more heavily on processed meat products which are typically cheaper but higher in sodium than their less-processed counterparts
This can make it harder for school nutrition operators to create menu items that are both flavorful and meet sodium restrictions
At Alexandria City Public Schools in Alexandria, Virginia, for example, the nutrition team relies on less processed protein options to have greater control over the amount of sodium in their meals
“If we want to go ahead and make cultural dishes like Peru we give it yucca and we’re able to control the sodium where we want,” says Executive Chef Jason Tepper. “But if our main ingredient is already coming in with an abundance [of sodium], it really makes it hard.”
The effects of higher meat requirements in school meals may also be felt beyond the nutrition program. If costs are too high and a school nutrition program can’t make ends meet, money to cover the cost of the program will come out of the district’s general fund, which will zap funding meant for other district re
“That’s going to affect the students learning and the ability for [the district] to hire teachers and pay teachers well and other support staff and things like that,” says Cengel. “There’s a lot of variables that are in play in these decisions, and I don’t think there wasn’t enough people that have a background in school nutrition and just nutrition in general, who were a part of the committee that made these Dietary Guidelines for Americans.”
Focus on fiber
Instead of placing a focus on protein, Warren, Cengel, and Tepper all agree that the USDA should direct its attention to fiber
“Organizations like the American Medical Association, The Academy nutrition, dietetics, the American Heart Association, they all disagree with the need for additional protein,” says Cengel. “People get enough protein. They need more fruits. They need more vegetables. They need they need more fiber in their diet.”
If the USDA was to include a protein increase in its changes to the school meal pattern, they should at least focus on increasing plant-based protein options, says Warren
“If we could get support from the USDA and move the lens away from animal proteins to more plant-based meals, that addresses a lot of nutrient gaps, it addresses cultural foods that we can incorporate, [it addresses]scratch cooking, all kinds of things,” she says
Currently, K-12 operators are in a wait-and-see mode to find out if more protein will be coming to school menus. Ultimately, they want the USDA to make evidence-based decisions as they work to make changes to the meal pattern requirements
“Where’s the data behind this, where’s the evidence? That’s what we need,” says Cengel. “We need to make evidence-based decisions, and that’s not happening at the moment. […] Some of the guidelines were just really kind of rushed through. Follow the money and see whose pockets are being lined by this, and you’ll figure out why those decisions were made.”
Legislation and Regulation
