www.ers.usda.gov

Across America, meals provided through USDA’s National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and 

School Breakfast Program (SBP) supply most of the foods and beverages obtained by children 

at school. Most schools also sell competitive foods, or “à la carte” items, alongside USDA school 

meals, in vending machines, or in school stores and snack bars, with proceeds going to the school 

foodservice or fundraising school groups. These foods have been widely criticized as being of low 

nutritional value, undercutting public efforts to improve children’s diets and prevent obesity. The 

Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 requires schools that offer USDA school meals to limit 

competitive foods to those that meet updated nutrition standards, under development by USDA’s 

Food and Nutrition Service (FNS).

What Is the Issue?

Limiting the types of competitive foods available for sale may result in lost revenue for school 

foodservices, which depend to varying degrees on this revenue stream. Because USDA school meal 

programs are a part of the Nation’s nutrition safety net, the contribution that competitive food revenues make to foodservices serving economically vulnerable student populations is of particular 

interest. This report examines how updated nutrition standards for competitive foods might affect 

competitive food availability, and the implications for foodservice revenues. 

What Are the Findings?

Desserts, sweetened beverages, salty snacks, and candy made up more than half of competitive 

items selected by elementary and secondary school students in 2005. Most (80-90 percent) of the 

competitive food and beverage items selected by students would not fully meet updated nutrition 

standards, which would shift purchases from items high in fat, saturated fat, sugars, and sodium to 

foods featuring whole grains, low-fat dairy, fruits, and vegetables. 

One-third of elementary students consumed at least one competitive food on a typical school day 

in 2005, whereas 53 percent of secondary students did. Secondary students also consumed more 

competitive items than did elementary students. Average annual competitive revenues for elementary schools were about one-sixth those of middle schools and one-ninth those of high schools. At 

both the elementary and secondary school levels, school foodservices in more affluent districts 

obtained more revenues from competitive foods on a per-student basis. 

United States Department of Agriculture

A report summary from the Economic Research Service June 2013

ERS is a primary source 

of economic research and 

analysis from the U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, 

providing timely information on economic and policy 

issues related to agriculture, 

food, the environment,and 

rural America.

Find the full report 

at www.ers.usda.

gov/publications/eibeconomic-informationbulletin/eib-114.aspx

Joanne F. Guthrie, Constance Newman, Katherine Ralston, 

Mark Prell, and Michael Ollinger

Nutrition Standards for 

Competitive Foods in Schools

Implications for Foodservice Revenues

Economic 

Research 

Service

Economic 

Information 

Bulletin 

Number 114

June 2013

United States Department of Agriculture

Joanne F. Guthrie, Constance Newman, Katherine Ralston, 

Mark Prell, and Michael Ollinger

Nutrition Standards for Competitive 

Foods in Schools: Implications for 

Foodservice Revenues
School Food Authorities (SFAs), the foodservice management units for school districts, reported obtaining, on 

average, 12 percent of revenues from competitive foods in 2002-2003, a period in which there were few nutritional 

restrictions on competitive foods. Ten percent of SFAs received 36 percent or more of their revenues from competitive foods, which was attributable both to higher competitive food revenues and lower revenues from USDA school 

meals. SFAs with higher shares of competitive food revenue typically were located in more affluent districts and 

served fewer low-income students receiving free and reduced-price meals than did schools with low competitive 

food revenues. They also were more common in suburban, rather than urban or rural, districts and in the Northeast, 

Mid-Atlantic, and Midwest.

Establishing nutrition standards for foods sold at school in competition with the USDA meals should provide nutritional benefits, especially to secondary-school students and in the typically suburban, more affluent SFAs that obtain 

large shares of revenue from competitive foods and have low school meal participation. There may be additional 

benefits to lowering the profile of competitive foods in schools. Eliminating less nutritious competitive foods may 

also support efforts to improve the quality of USDA school meals. One study found NSLP lunches to be lower in 

fat in schools with no à la carte and vending. In the competition for student food spending, the absence of unhealthy 

alternatives may leave school foodservices more free to offer healthier meals that meet Federal nutrition standards. 

For school foodservices concerned about covering their expenses, the challenge will be to adapt to new standards 

and develop new strategies for maintaining revenues in a healthier school nutrition environment. The challenge is 

most pronounced in SFAs receiving a large proportion of revenues from competitive foods. Higher school foodservice revenues from competitive foods were associated with lower USDA lunch participation, suggesting that 

competitive food revenues may displace meal participation and associated revenue. In SFAs where competitive food 

revenues make up a larger share of overall revenues, foodservice managers may be apprehensive about nutritionmandated changes in offerings. Such SFAs will be especially interested in strategies for maintaining revenues when 

nutrition standards for competitive foods are implemented.

To offset revenue losses from removal of competitive foods that fail to meet nutrition standards, school foodservices 

can (1) seek out healthier competitive food options to replace those currently sold, or (2) re-emphasize their “core 

business” by expanding participation in school meals. For both strategies, appropriate pricing is key. The Healthy, 

Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 addressed pricing of meals and competitive foods, and new regulations based on this act 

may have important effects on revenues obtained both from USDA school meals and from healthier competitive foods.

How Was the Study Conducted?

This study made use of two national surveys conducted on behalf of FNS. Nationally representative school- and 

student-level data collected in 2004-05 were obtained from the School Nutrition Dietary Assessment III (SNDA-III), 

whereas the School Food Authority Characteristics Study (SFACS) provided school foodservice revenue and other 

data at the school district level from 2002-03. The SFACS sample was designed to generate national and regionally 

representative estimates, and although now a decade old, is still the most recent source for such data. At both the 

school and the SFA level, we examine the association of school foodservice competitive revenues with (1) the socioeconomic environment in which schools and SFAs operate; (2) school meal program characteristics like the average 

price charged for a full-price lunch; and (3) State and local characteristics that influence the school environment in 

which the foodservice operates. 

www.ers.usda.gov