Comment from Noel Luhn

Providing breakfasts to many schools and school districts, I have learned a tremendous amount about breakfast; what students will and will not eat, concerns from school professionals and what SBP's do and do not work. Most people understand the importance of breakfast, so I will not go into that here. Hot breakfast programs are a start but fall short for the following reasons. It only reaches 30% of students due to time constraints and student preference. Nutrition is questionable at best. You can't ensure students will take each nutritional component. Out of sight out of mind=less breakfasts and, unless mandated... let's say a Home Economics class is implemented for first period class where breakfast is served, these issues will remain constant. The best alternative that I have seen is a "grab-n-go" pre- packaged breakfast or a combination of this and a hot breakfast. A "grab-n-go" (pre-packaged) breakfast, if nutritionally correct, is a great solution, even as an augmentation to a hot breakfast program. With "grab-n-go", regardless of what time bus's, arrive, there is little if any line, thus all students can participate, which should be the ultimate goal. As well, a "grab-n-go" breakfast lends itself to a Universal Breakfast Program and can easily be distributed to the classroom. Note: In most cases, where we have added a "grab-n-go" program, we have helped school's go from 30% participation to 80%+. The major concern I am hearing is the mandate to include a protein for breakfast. While I agree that a protein would be a little more beneficial, nutritionally speaking, the addition of this would cut down the number of potential students eating breakfast. Why? The #1 reason is cost and, in particular, the increased cost for protein to "grab-n-go". If the cost increase reduces the purchase of "grab-n-go", as this has been the most nutritious and cost effective way to increase participation, less students will eat tomorrow than they do today. Program defeated!