Home » Headlines » Multi Year Assistance Programs » Emergency Program References » Non-Emergency Program References » International Food Relief Partnership » Conferences & Meetings » Agriculture » Environment » Related Links »
	Introduction   Home List of Acronyms List of Cooperating Sponsors Conversion Tables   Part One   Section I:   Commodities Commodity Availability Commodity Characteristics References   Section II:   Food Commodity   Fact Sheets Beans, Black Beans, Great Northern Beans, Kidney (Light Red, Dark Red, All types) Beans, Navy (Pea Beans) Beans, Pink Beans, Pinto Beans, Small Red Bulgur (BW) Bulgur, Soy Fortified (SFBW) Corn (bagged, bulk) Cornmeal Cornmeal, Soy-Fortified (CMSF) Corn Soy Blend (CSB) Corn Soy Milk (CSM) Corn Soy Milk, Instant (ICSM) Lentils Non Fat Dry Milk (NFDM) Peas Rice Rice (Parboiled) Sorghum Sorghum Grits, Soy-Fortified (SFSG) Fortified Refined Vegetable Oil Wheat Wheat Flour Wheat Soy Blend (WSB) Wheat Soy Milk (WSM)   Section III:   Storage/Shelflife   Specifications Storage Specifications Storage Inspection Checklist Shelf Life of Agricultural Commodities References   Section IV:   Controlling   Damage to Food   Commodities Cleaning and Inspecting Insect Control Rodent Control Reference Chart for Controlling Damage to Food Commodities References Part Two An Overview Module 1: Maternal and Child Health Programs Module 2: Food for Work Module 3: Food for Education Module 4: Non-Emergency Humanitarian Assistance Module 5: Emergency Programs Part Three Annex I: Definitions Annex II: Tools and Indicators Annex III: Recommended Energy Allowance Tables Annex IV: Recommended Dietary Allowance Tables Annex V: Sources for Obtaining Commodity Prices
	Advanced Search... Search USAID Personnel... Search USAID Documents...

Part II: Module 3: Food for Education

Updated January 2006

I. INTRODUCTION

USAID's Office of Food for Peace (FFP) administers PL 480, Title II food aid commodities. FFP provides Title II resources to Cooperating Sponsors (CSs) to implement sustainable development programs targeted to improve the food security of needy people, either by the direct distribution of agricultural commodities or the use of local currencies generated by the sale of these commodities.

USAID supports education efforts and often uses food aid to help improve education opportunities and educational progress by providing school lunches and take-home incentive rations. School lunches are used to encourage school enrollment, attendance, and to improve students' attentiveness-especially for those without breakfast at home. Food to schools may be referred to as Food for Education program only if school feeding is integrated with other activities aimed at improving the quality of the education at the school, e.g., teacher training, curriculum development, development and provision of academic materials, infrastructural improvements, or provision of school supplies. The non-food resources for these activities cannot be included in an activity funded by Title II Food for Education resources. Some can be supported with Title II commodities, but the food must be requested in a separate proposal, e.g., a Food for Work proposal. Normally, the government, Cooperating Sponsor, or other agencies should provide the non-food resources. School feeding that is not integrated with other activities must be referred to simply as "school feeding", not as Food for Education. The USAID/FFP office has made it clear that the FFE is the preferred approach.

Food insecure communities with poor school attendance are usually selected as targets. Within communities, some programs specifically target girls. This Module provides principles and examples of ration selection for FFE programs.

II. GUIDELINES FOR COMMODITY SELECTION FOR EDUCATION PROGRAMS

This module, following the general five step framework of Part Two of the CRG (Box 1). It includes key points of consideration for FFE programming under each step. This guidance is meant to be flexible enough to allow FFE Program Managers to select food aid rations appropriate for the situation. Box 1 lists the five steps.

Box 1: Five Steps for Commodity Selection 1. Program Design 2. Suitability of Food Commodities 3. Ration Specifications 4. Ration Calculation 5. Ration Ranking and Selection

STEP 1: PROGRAM DESIGN

Program design considerations are those program attributes that affect appropriate commodity selection. Key program design considerations discussed in this chapter include: (1) carrying out a needs assessment; (2) developing program activity objectives; (3) determining the appropriate use of food; (4) identifying the target population's characteristics; and (5) determining the distribution mode and frequency.

1. Needs Assessment

As programs with a food aid component are being designed, it is important to articulate why food aid is needed and how it will be used to meet program goals. A needs assessment or problem analysis will help to identify the nature, extent, severity, and distribution of the food needs. It should also include an assessment of food availability, an analysis of the main causes of malnutrition, identify the technical and geographical areas in which the program will work, and summarize the resources and institutional capacity for action. Attention should be given to the extent which problems in these priority technical and geographic areas are already being addressed.

Information about the target population's demographic profile, nutritional status, food consumption patterns, health statistics, socio-economic statistics, and other basic information needs for program design can be attained from primary sources, such as qualitative research, food consumption surveys, and nutritional status surveys. A useful publication on how to use these methods is USAID/CDIE's Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Tips. Other resources are listed in the Reference List. Useful information can also be obtained through secondary data reviews followed up with local key informant interviews. Other sources of secondary information include:

• USAID reports and/or Demographic Health Surveys (DHS)
• Ministry of Health and other in-country institutional statistics
• National surveys or governmental action plans
• International and bilateral donor agency situation analyses and reports
• Other cooperating sponsors working in country
• Internet databanks (such as UNICEF, WHO, World Bank, WFP, etc.)

Please refer to the current USAID/BHR's Title II Guidelines for Development Programs for further guidance on developing a needs analysis. Also refer to the Food Aid Management website for additional information.

2. Program Activity Objectives

No matter how the food will be used, the desired result of the food assistance intervention should be stated in terms of objectives. Once these have been defined, then, food commodities and rations should be selected to be consistent with these objectives. Each CS has its way of expressing objectives. However, using USAID's Managing for Results terminology will facilitate reporting to USAID (for definitions of terms, see Annex 1 in Part Three of the CRG). Objectives for USAID-funded programs should be result statements, that is, they should clearly describe the desired end result of the intervention. For example, "Improved attendance rates among school age children" is a result-oriented objective.

USAID recommends that each objective/result statement have at least one indicator to track progress of its achievement. Performance indicators are variables with a particular characteristic or dimension that can measure progress toward achievement of the desired result. Performance indicators should be direct, measurable, and sensitive to capture small changes over short time intervals. For example, an indicator for the result statement mentioned (Improved attendance rates among school age children) could be "attendance rates in target schools". USAID/CDIE's Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Tips provides general guidance on how to develop objectives and indicators. FANTA project's "Food for Education Indicator Guide" proposes a set of indicators to measure the performance of FFE programs plus guidelines for computing these indicators and can be found at www.fantaproject.org. Whenever possible, programs should include input as well as impact indicators for measuring progress of food aid programs. CSs should also provide baseline data for selected indicators or a plan for collecting these data. Baseline studies of the target population, that incorporate the selected indicators should be part of the needs assessment, but may be accomplished immediately after activity approval. CSs should also articulate an evaluation and monitoring plan that outlines the how indicators will be tracked and progress evaluated.

3. Food Use

In the past, school feeding (SF) programs used food primarily as an incentive to children and their families to improve attendance. Based on new findings that show that short-term hunger has a negative effect on attentiveness and learning, the role of food in FFE programs has been extended and refined to additionally focus on improving learning, attention, and retention of material. The consumption of food early in the school day is important, but it is often logistically difficult to prepare a breakfast at school. Therefore, the trend is towards mid-morning meals or snacks. Provision of the food only near or at the end of the school day will reduce the effectiveness of the ration in achieving the learning objectives, but FFE programs does help students' families offset the costs of sending the child to school.

4. Target Population

The target group for FFE programs is school age children in food insecure communities. Generally, all children in selected schools benefit, although the girls may be selected for extra benefits or may be the only beneficiaries. Feeding may also be restricted to only certain grades within the school. Targeting of individual children is not done on the basis of nutritional criteria, but nutritional status at the community or population level could be a basis for selecting schools or districts. Examples of other criteria that may be used for school and district selection are: adequacy of food production, indicators of socio-economic status, rates of student enrolment or attendance, or student achievement. To assure that educational benefits can be achieved, only schools that meet basic minimum standards of quality (to be determined in conjunction with the governing body and parents) should be targeted.

5. Distribution Mode and Frequency

The major mode of distribution for FFE programs is on-site feeding. However, take-home rations are sometimes provided. A description of both modes of distribution is provided below:

On-site school feeding: School feeding programs usually provide ready-to-eat meals or snacks on site. The food should be provided to the students early in the day to maximize the learning gains. Obviously, food is provided only the days that the child is actually in school (e.g. five or six days a week).

Take-home rations: Sometimes students are given a take-home ration in compensate the lost time they would normally have spent working at home during school hours. This is a common incentive to promote enrolment of girls.

STEP 2: SUITABILITY OF COMMODITIES

Suitability of the ration is defined by assessing those attributes of the individual ration recipient, target household, or community that will most affect utilization of the food aid commodities. Determining suitability must take into account nutritional needs, physiological appropriateness, food consumption preferences and patterns of the food aid recipient(s), locally available foods, food processing storage capacities, and local market prices. These factors all affect the selection and appropriate allocation of food aid rations. Below is a checklist for use in considering food aid rations for an intended target group(s). A detailed description of these factors can be found in Annex III.

Nutritional content is the nutritive content of the food commodity. Major nutrient considerations should include energy (calories), protein, and micronutrients (vitamins and minerals). Populations deficient in micronutrients would benefit from fortified food commodities. It is always important to consider the nutritional content of the commodities when designing ration packages. The age, sex, and activity level (e.g., depending on distance to walk to school), of the target school group are primary determinants of their nutritional needs. The ambient temperature during the school year must also be considered in cold climates. Special considerations of the disease burden affecting the school child may influence the amount of food provided. For example, HIV/AIDS affected people require additional energy. Refer to the FANTA publication HIV/AIDS: A Guide for Nutritional Care and Support (2004) [http://www.fantaproject.org/downloads/pdfs/HIVAIDS_Guide02.pdf].

Physiological appropriateness relates to the physical characteristics of the food commodity that affect its use by the target group. Consult local nutrition experts wherever available. Anything that could decrease utilization of the ration, such as food allergies and lactose intolerance, should be identified and taken into consideration.

Cultural suitability: Consider the cultural acceptability, including taste preferences, traditional taboos, and local practices of the target population or group that will affect food use and consumption. For example, most Brazilians prefer black beans while Nicaraguans prefer small red beans. Another important consideration is whether the commodities are culturally suitable for the particular role they are to play in the project. It is key to identify major constraints to using particular commodities.

Availability of processing and/or storage facilities: Food preparation, processing, and storage facilities need to be considered when designing food supplements for FFE programs. Important questions to ask are: (1) are mills available to process whole grains; (2) are school facilities adequate for storing the food supplement; (3) what fuel, preparation equipment or cooling facilities are available; and (4) what other locally available foods are available to improve taste, acceptability and nutrient diversity.

Characteristics of local food production are factors that provide an understanding of which local foods are relatively available and affordable to the target group. Often parents are asked to contribute fresh foods or condiments to add to the food aid commodities to add micronutrients or increase the palatability of the school meals. If take-home rations are provided it would be wise to look at the production cycle helps to identify how food harvests correspond to the school year. Commodities for take-home could be selected to help fill those gaps. Also, care should be taken in the commodity selection to assure that there is no disincentive to local production.

Cost will, in part, determine which food ration will be used.

Using this list, exclude commodities which do not meet the physiological criteria, are not culturally acceptable, are difficult to store or process, and/or will compete with local food production from the list of potential commodities. Making these decisions will aid in creating a short list of commodities from which to chose. Annex III provides a detailed description of the factors mentioned above.

STEP 3: RATION SPECIFICATIONS

The size of the ration should be based on specified nutritional needs and/or income values, costs or ration standards that other agencies are currently using. Past program ration specifications for size and type of ration, the approval of the USAID mission, and commodities that have been already ordered and are in the pipeline (up to several months in advance of the start of a program) are also key considerations.

To determine ration size, first determine the nutritional or income value that a ration must have to achieve the project objectives and impact. Then list suitability criteria and key characteristics that are important to the full utilization and consumption of the ration as described in Step 2. Below are suggestions on how to best determine the nutritional or income value of FFE food rations.

1. Determining Nutritional Values

The nutritional value of the ration is described in terms of its energy (calories), protein, fat and micronutrient content. Establishing the beneficiaries' minimum energy and protein needs, which depend on the child's age and sex, provides a basis for defining a supplement package appropriate to meet project requirements. These requirements are described in terms of the average number of kilocalories and grams of protein needed per person per day before selecting the commodities. In addition, the fat in the rations should provide 10-20% of the total energy.

FFE programs generally provide only a snack or a meal, which would not be expected to fill the nutrition deficit completely. There are no fixed guidelines for calculating the nutritional value of supplementary food rations for a FFE program, since the food supplement is not based on the nutrient deficit of the target group. Past experience with food aid programs may be the best way to determine the nutritional value of the food ration. However, it can be assumed that the meal provided will substitute for at least one meal normally provided at home. Thus, the following general steps could be used for calculating the nutritional value of the meal.

• Determine which meal the food supplement would replace-breakfast or lunch.
• Determine the percentage of energy that meal represents. For example, if the breakfast is usually light, it may represent 10-15% of a child's total intake per day. If the meal is served as a lunch, the percentage of energy may be higher given that lunch is usually the bigger meal in most countries.
• Multiply the percentage times the Recommended Energy and protein allowances. The CRG uses Annex III and IV, however, CSs may use their own dietary standards.

Box 2 provides an example of calculating the nutritional value of a FFE meal ration for 7 to 10 year old children based on percentage of recommended dietary allowances.

BOX 2 - EXAMPLE OF HOW TO CALCULATE A MEAL RATION FOR 7-10 YEAR OLD CHILD Assumptions: The mid-day meal represents approximately 45% of the target group's diet. 1) Determine recommended energy allowance (REA) for 7-10 year olds = 2,000 kcal (from Annex III) 2) Multiply 2,000 (kcal) x .45 = 900 kcal per child per day 3) Determine recommended protein allowance (RPA) for 7-10 year olds = 28 grams (from Annex IV) 4) Multiply 28 grams x .45 = 12.6, rounded to 13 grams protein per child per day Thus the nutritional value of the food supplement is 900 kilocalories and 13 grams protein.

General guidance provided by WFP/UNESCO/WHO for full day primary schools is to provide a:

• mid-morning snack containing 400-600 kilocalories per child and a
• full lunch of 700-900 kilocalories,
• for a total of 1200-1500 kilocalories per child (or 60-75% of REA), with 28-36 g protein (70-90% of RPA) and 13-17g fat. (Refer to WFP/UNESCO/WHO. Rome 1999. School Feeding Handbook.)

• A mid-morning snack only: 500 kcal (or 25% of REA); about 13g protein (33% of RPA); about 6 g fat.
• Two snacks (before school and mid-morning): 600-900 kilocalories (or 30-45% of REA); 16-24 g protein (40-50% of RPA); 7-11g fat.
• A mid-morning snack and lunch: 1200-1500 kilocalories; 28-36 g protein; 13-17 g fat (i.e., like full day schools).

Micronutrient deficiencies are widespread in developing countries where Title II food aid is distributed. All processed food cereals under Title II programs, with the exception of parbroiled rice, are fortified with B vitamins (thiamin, riboflavin, folic acid, and niacin), vitamin A, calcium, and iron. Blended cereals (corn-soy blend and wheat-soy blend) are further fortified with zinc, B12, pantothenic acid, iodine, magnesium, vitamin C, vitamin D, and vitamin E. Vegetable oil is fortified with vitamin A. If micronutrient deficiencies are known, the contribution from fortified commodities can be estimated by from the Commodity Fact Sheets in Section II of the CRG. Check with school authorities to ensure that children are not already been supplemented with multi-vitamins or specific vitamins such as vitamin A.

2. Income Transfer Value

Income transfer value is the value of the ration in monetary terms to the household receiving the food aid. If a FFE program uses food rations mainly for their income transfer (monetary) value, Program Managers will need to determine the ration package's target level and the minimum level of acceptable income transfer value. The cash value of rations is determined by the price (market or selling) of the local commodity that is most similar to the food aid commodity in the household diet. When used as an incentive to families to offset the costs of sending their children to school, past program experience, conversations with community leaders, tests of different income transfer value levels, and discussions with the USAID mission may be necessary before agreeing upon a minimum level. Commodities that substitute for highly valued and expensive food items, such as oil, may have a substantial income mediating effect, freeing up income typically used for purchasing these expensive items to buy additional local foods or goods.

STEP 4: RATION CALCULATION When designing ration packages program managers need to (1) choose the ration package based on the nutritive or income transfer values, (2) calculate the total amount of commodities needed for the program, and (3) determine commodity cost-effectiveness. The large number of commodities on the eligibility list makes it possible to design a variety of ration packages. It is useful to develop several alternative ration packages so that they can be compared for cost and other trade-offs. Programs may wish to consider alternative rations in the initial planning steps as contingency plans for when a commodity is not available, is delayed in transport, or when changes in commodity availability, prices, and packaging alter the relative cost effectiveness of ration packages.

Ration calculators that compute the quantity of foods necessary to provide a population all micronutrients at the lowest cost can help in the design of appropriate diets given locally available and affordable commodities. There are a number of calculators in existence or in development, including NutriSurvey (www.nutrisurvey.de/lp/lp.htm). These tools can be helpful in determining an appropriate population-level ration, but are not appropriate for therapeutic feeding, replacement feeding, or individual ration calculation.

1. Calculating the ration package

For logistical and management reasons, a ration package that meets nutritional values should use no more than three commodities per ration unless strong reasons exit. Because vegetable oil is a dense source of energy for food deficient populations, it should almost always be included in a ration package. While there is an element of trial and error, the following checklist helps provide a systematic approach for calculating the ration package and selecting the commodities to meet nutritional values. For the sake of calculation, commodity 1 will be fortified vegetable oil, commodity 2 will be a cereal or cereal blend, and commodity 3 will be a legume.

• Consider the caloric and protein nutritional values of the proposed food ration, which have been calculated using Step 3.
• Calculate the oil ration. Around 10 to 20% of the food ration's energy should come from oil. Multiply the total caloric value of the ration package by 10 to 20%. Then divide this amount by 9 (number of kcal per 1 gram of vegetable oil).
• Subtract the caloric contribution of oil from the total caloric value of the proposed food package.
• Select a cereal or cereal blend from the list of commodities in Section I of the CRG to make up the balance of kilocalories. At present, Title II cereals include wheat, sorghum, bulgur, corn, and rice. Blended cereals include corn-soy blends (CSB) and wheat-soy blends (WSB). Projects targeting a protein deficit population utilizing a two-commodity ration should first consider soy-fortified cereals. While blended, fortified, or value added foods should be considered first, Program Managers should also consider cost, energy and protein content, acceptability, ease of storage and processing attributes of commodities.
• Calculate the number of kilocalories per 1 gram of cereal/cereal blend by dividing the number of kilocalories per 100 grams of commodity (from Commodity Fact Sheets in Section II of the CRG) by 100.
• Divide the balance of kilocalories by the number of kilocalories per 1 gram of cereal/cereal blend.
• Calculate the number of grams of protein per 1 gram of cereal/cereal blend by dividing the number of grams of protein per 100 grams of commodity (from Commodity Fact Sheets) by 100.
• Multiply the amount of protein per 1 gram of cereal/cereal blend times the total grams of cereal/cereal blend in the ration package.
• Subtract the protein contribution of the cereal/cereal blend from total protein value of the proposed ration package. If more protein is needed, either increase the amount of cereal/cereal blend or use a three-commodity ration.
• For a three-commodity ration package, the third commodity should be dry beans, peas, lentils, and soy to increase the protein value of the package.
• Determine the grams of protein needed to make up the difference between the protein contribution of the cereal (soy-cereal blends are generally not used in 3-commodity rations). See Box 6 for specific instructions. Do not forget to take into account the caloric value of the protein source and, if necessary, adjust your cereal ration accordingly.
• Assess suitability and physiological appropriateness of the commodities (see Step 2 and Annex IV).

Box 3 provides a detailed example of how to calculate ration package with two commodities.

BOX 3: EXAMPLE OF HOW TO CALCULATE A TWO-COMMODITY RATION 1) The caloric and protein values for this example are 900 kcal and 13 grams (g) of protein per person per day, respectively. (from Box 2). 2) Multiply the total number of kcal times 10-20% to determine kcal from oil ration. 900 kcal x 0.20 = 180 kcal 3) Divide the number of kcal of oil by 9 (1 gram oil = 9 kcal). 270 kcal / 9 kcal = 30 g of fortified vegetable oil per child per day 4) Subtract the caloric contribution of oil from the total caloric value of the ration package. 900 kcal - 180 kcal fat = 720 kcal balance 5) Select a cereal or cereal blend to make up the balance of kilocalories. Using the Commodity Fact Sheets calculate the number of kilocalories per 1 gram of cereal/cereal blend by dividing the number of kilocalories of 100 grams of cereal/cereal blend by 100. This example uses cornmeal. 366 kcal / 100 g = 3.66 kcal per 1 gram of cornmeal. 6) Divide the balance of kilocalories by the number of kilocalories per 1 gram of cornmeal. 720 kcal / 3.66 kcal = 196 g of cornmeal per person per day 7) Calculate whether 196 grams of cornmeal provides enough protein. To do this, first determine the amount of protein per 1 gram of corn-soy blend by dividing the grams of protein per 100 g commodity (from Commodity Fact Sheets) by 100. 8.5 g / 100 g = 0.085 g 8) Then multiply the protein amount per 1 gram of corn soy blend times the total grams of corn-soy blend. 196 g x 0.085 g = 16.6 g of protein per child per day. This amount is slightly more than the 13 grams proposed. Thus, a two-commodity ration package of 30 grams fortified vegetable oil and 196 grams cornmeal provides 900 kilocalories and 16.6 grams of protein per child per day.

2. Calculate the Total Amount of Food Commodities Needed

Once the ration package is determined, Program Managers will need to calculate how much of the commodities (usually in metric tons) will be needed to feed the total number of students or household per year or project period. To calculate the number of metric tons needed for each commodity (vegetable oil, cereal, cereal blend, or legume) use the following steps.

• Multiply the number of grams of the commodity per person per day times the total number of persons to receive the commodity.
• Multiple the total number of grams of the commodity needed to feed the target group times the total number of days the program will provide the ration package.
• Determine the number of metric tons of commodity needed by dividing the total number of grams of commodity needed per program period by 1,000,000 (number of grams in a metric ton).
• Complete the same calculation for each commodity (vegetable oil, cereal, cereal blend, or legume) that comprises the ration.

Box 4 provides an example of how to calculate the total amount of commodities needed to provide the two-commodity ration package from Box 3 to 15,300 children for one school year of 180 school days.

BOX 4: CALCULATING AMOUNT OF COMMODITIES NEEDED FOR 15,300 STUDENTS FOR 180 SCHOOL DAYS. 1) Multiply grams of oil per person per day times 15,300 persons times 180 days. 30 g oil (Box 3) x 15,300 persons = 459,000 g per day x 180 days = 82.620,000 g per year 2) Divide the total number of grams of vegetable oil per year by 1,000,000 (number of grams per metric ton) 82,620,000 g / 1,000,000 = 83 metric tons of fortified vegetable oil per school year 3) Multiply grams of cornmeal per person per day times 15,300 persons times 180 days. 195 g cornmeal (Box 3) x 15,300 persons = 2,983,000 g per day x 180 days = 537,030,000 g per school year. 4) Divide the total number of grams of cornmeal by 1,000,000 537,030,000 g / 1,000,000 = 437 metric tons of cornmeal per school year

3. Determine Cost Effectiveness of ration package

Cost is often not the primary factor for selecting the commodities. Food preferences, availability, and potential disincentive effects often outweigh cost considerations. However, the cost-effectiveness of the commodity, i.e., the ratio of its cost to its nutritive or income value, may help in determining whether it is cost-effective and/or appropriate for the food aid component of a development assistance or emergency program. CSs should determine the primary purpose of the food aid program (nutritional benefit or income transfer) and conduct the appropriate cost-effectiveness analysis.

Calculating the cost-effectiveness of desired commodities in terms of cost per unit of nutritional value (one kilocalorie or one gram of protein) or income transfer value (in USD to the recipient) provides information about which commodities provide the most nutritional benefits or highest income at the lowest cost to the project. It is important to note that cost per calorie of fortified foods will always be higher than bulk grains, but in that fortified foods are rich in micronutrients, they add key nutritional value to many program situations.

Cost Effectiveness per Nutritional Value: To determine the cost effectiveness value of a commodity per its nutritive value, calculate the cost per one kilocalorie and one gram of protein. Two pieces of information are needed for the calculation: 1) A price estimate for the commodity of interest (sources for obtaining commodity prices are listed in Annex V); and 2) The nutritional value of the commodity (refer to the Commodity Fact Sheets in Part I, Section II of the CRG). Once these pieces of information are obtained, the cost-effectiveness of a ration package per its nutritional value can be calculated in the following way.

a) Per Energy value:

• To calculate the cost of the commodity per 100 grams, divide the cost per metric ton by 10,000 (a MT is equal to 10,000 units of 100 grams).
• Divide the cost per 100 grams of commodity by the number of kilocalories per 100 grams of commodity. This will give the dollar cost per one kilocalorie of commodity.

b) Per protein value:

• To calculate the cost of a commodity per 100 grams, divide the cost per metric ton by 10,000 (a MT is equal to 10,000 units of 100 grams)
• Divide the cost per 100 grams of commodity by the number of grams of protein per 100 grams of commodity. This will give the dollar cost per one gram of protein provided by the commodity.

Box 5 gives an example of how to calculate the cost effectiveness of both the caloric and protein nutritive values for cornmeal.

BOX 5: EXAMPLE OF COST PER NUTRITIVE VALUE OF CORNMEAL Per caloric content of cornmeal: $ (per MT) Cornmeal18 / 10,000 = $ (per 100 g) Cornmeal $ (per 100 g) Cornmeal / 366.0 kcal (per 100 g) Cornmeal = $ (per 1 kcal) Cornmeal Per protein content of cornmeal: $ (per MT) Cornmeal / 10,000 = $ (per 100 g) Cornmeal $ (per 100 g) Cornmeal / 8.5 g protein (per 100 g) Cornmeal = $ (per 1 g protein) Cornmeal

This type of analysis would be used to compare different commodities that are suitable for meeting the same nutritional objectives in order to determine which ration package is most cost-effective. Decisions about cost-effectiveness of a commodity should be made in tandem with the objectives of the program. If the objective of the program is to improve nutritional status of a target group, a commodity with a high protein and micronutrient value might be considered. However, if the main objective is to provide energy to maintain the nutritional status of the target group, a commodity with a less expensive source of energy may be the most cost-effective.

Cost per Income Value: Another analysis that could be done for when CSs use food aid commodities to provide a given value or an incentive or wage. In this context, cost effectiveness is the cost of a commodity per $5.00 of income value. For each commodity under consideration, use commodity price estimates to calculate the income value of 1 kg of that commodity. Then calculate the amount of the ration that is required to yield $5.00 income value. Box 6 provides an example.

BOX 6 - EXAMPLE OF INCENTIVE VALUE CALCULATION 1) Calculate the cost of one kg of cornmeal to the household if purchased in the local market: $ (per 1 kg) cornmeal in local market 2) Next, divide the cost of one kg of cornmeal into $5.00: $5.00 ÷ $ (per 1 kg) cornmeal in local market = kg cornmeal (per $5.00) *See Part II Overview for a cost effectiveness method comparing this cost to the cost to the program of delivering the cornmeal to the school.

Changes in commodity availability, prices, and packaging can alter the relative cost effectiveness of ration packages. It is useful to develop at least one alternative ration packages so that it can be compared for cost and other trade-offs.

Take into consideration the following when designing an alternative ration package:

• Design rations that meet specifications using no more than three commodities per ration.

• Use commodities, which provide the maximum gain to recipients at lowest cost to the project.
• Based on the cost per unit of nutritional and/or income transfer value provided to the recipient, use the most cost-effective commodities and design at least one alternative package if a new project is being planned.
• Compare the nutritional and/or income transfer values of currently used rations with specifications and key suitability criteria.
• Alter the ration packages according to how they will meet nutritional or income transfer objectives as well as their cost-effectiveness.

STEP 5: RANKING AND SELECTION

It is important to rank your ration packages and commodities in order to select the most cost-effective and appropriate rations to meet program objectives. Cost plays a vital role in the size and effectiveness of projects, and budgetary requirements can be affected by the inclusion of certain commodities, especially when ordered in large quantities. Costs of the individual commodities are vital in obtaining a total ration cost. Calculating the costs of commodities involves decisions about which cost elements to consider. At a minimum, Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) values and various in-country transportation and storage costs can be used. Other factors to consider are:

• Market disruptions: The Bellmon determination must ensure that the local market is not disrupted. Market considerations in local areas where programs are targeted might also come into play. For example, it may be less disruptive to provide certain foods in the lean season rather than the harvest season. Guidance on conducting the Bellmon analysis may be found online at www.usaid.gov/hum_response/ffp/bellmon.htm

• Logistics and management: Some commodities may impose undue management or cost burdens due to unusual local conditions (transportation, storage, handling, pilferage, accounting costs, etc.) or unsuitable packaging for the shelf life of the commodity.

The usual sources of these data for considering secondary purposes, potential market disruptions, and logistical problems include past evaluations of the same or similar programs; interviews with local personnel, Ministries of Agriculture or Finance; USAID mission agricultural offices, and USDA representatives at U.S. Embassies.

Thus, ration packages can be ranked by nutritional value, income transfer value, total cost, and other factors, such as, secondary purposes of the ration, market disruptions, and logistical problems. Alternative rations should meet all the minimum standards of nutritional and/or income transfer value as well as other critical specifications. Decisions to change ration packages can be made easily and less arbitrarily when alternative rations and their main attributes have been worked out in advance.

III. REFERENCE LIST

1. Catholic Relief Services, CRS Food Security Programming Guide: Chapter Food Assisted Education. January 1999 (draft)

2. Food and Nutrition Technical Assistance (FANTA) Project, Academy for Educational Development, 1825 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C., 20009-5721. Tel: 202-884-8000; Fax 202-884-8432. E-mail: fanta@aed.org; Web site www.fantaproject.org. FANTA has the following publications:

• Agricultural Productivity Indicators Measurement Guide. Patrick Diskin
• Anthropometry Indicators Measurement Guide. Bruce Cogill
• Food For Education Indicator Guide. Joy Miller del Rosso and Gilles Bergeron
• Food Security Indicators and Framework for Use in the Monitoring and Evaluation of Food Security Programs. Frank Riely, Nancy Mock, Bruce Cogill, Laura Bailey and Eric Kenefick
• General Indicators of Appropriate Feeding of Children 6 through 23 months from the KPC 2000+. Mary Arimond and Marie T. Ruel
• HIV/AIDS: A Guide for Nutritional Care and Support 2004. FANTA
  
• Household Dietary Diversity Score (HDDS) for Measurement of Household Food Access: Indicator Guide. Anne Swindale and Paula Bilinsky.
  
• Improving the Use of Food Rations In Title II Maternal/Child Health and Nutrition Programs. Serena Rajabiun, Beatrice Rogers, Margarita Safdie, Anne Swindale
• Measuring Household Food Consumption: A Technical Guide. Anne Swindale and Punam Ohri-Vachaspati
• Months of Inadequate Household Food Provisioning (MIHFP) for Measurement of Household Food Access: Indicator Guide. Paula Bilinsky and Anne Swindale.
  
• Potential Uses of Food Aid to Support HIV/AIDS Mitigation Activities in Sub-Saharan Africa. FANTA
• Recommendations for the Nutrient Requirements for People living with HIV/AIDS. FANTA. 
• Sampling Guide. Robert Magnani
• Water and Sanitation Indicators Measurement Guide. Particia Billig, Diane Benahmane and Anne Swindale

3. Food Aid Management (FAM), 1625 K Street, NW 5th Floor, Washington, D.C. 20006 Tel: 202-223 4860; Web site www.foodaid.org. Provides USAID documents (FY 1990-ongoing).

4. Linkages Project. Facts for Feeding (English, Spanish, French). Academy for Educational Development, 1825 Connecticut Avenue, NW, Washington, D.C., 20009-5721. Tel: 202-884-8000; Fax: 202-884-8977; E-mail: linkages@aed.org; Website: www.linkagesproject.org.

5. Médecins Sans Frontières. Nutrition Guidelines. 1st Edition. 1995.

6. National Research Council. Recommended Dietary Allowances. National Academy Press, Washington, D.C., 1989.

7. Oxfam's Guide to Selective Feeding Programmes. In: Oxfam Practical Guide No. 1, 1984.

8. Sehgal, Meena. Review of CARE Food Ration Packages. Sponsored by CARE-USA and USAID, December 1995.

9. SARA Project. SARA Project. Nutrition and HIV/AIDS: Evidence, Gaps and Priority Actions. Ellen Piwoz. SARA Project, Academy for Educational Development. Web site: (http://www.fantaproject.org/downloads/pdfs/SARA_Nutrition&HIVbrief.pdf).

10. Smith Nazaire, Jennifer. Food-Assisted Education. Presenation to Food Aid Consultative Group (FACG). December 1998.

11. SUSTAIN, Micronutrient Assessment Project: Final Report. SUSTAIN, 1400 16th Street, NW, Box 25, Washington, D.C., 1999 Tel: 202-328-5183; Fax: 202-328-5175; Web site: www.sustaintech.org.

12. Tee, Dr. E-Siong and Florentino, Rodolfo. (Regional Forum and Workshop on) Recommended Dietary Allowances in the Southeast Asian Region: Scientific Basis and Future Direction. Singapore, March 10-11, 1997. In: Nutrition Reviews. Vol. 56, Number 4 (Part II), April 1998. Sponsored by International Life Sciences Institute (ILSI) Southeast Asia.

13. UNESCO. Food Aid for Education. UNESCO's Co-operation with the World Food Programme. 1994.

14. USAID/DCHA. U.S. International Food Assistance Report 1999. January 2000.

15. USAID/DCHA. Commodity Reference Guide (CRG). Section 1-4. April 1999 Web site: http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/humanitarian_assistance/ffp/crg.

16. USAID/DCHA/FFP. Title II Guidelines for Development Programs (DAP/PAA). January 2000. Web site: http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/humanitarian_assistance/ffp/fy04_dpp.html.

17. USAID/DCHA/FFP. Monetization Field Manual P.L. 480 Title II Programs. October 1998. Web site: http://www.usaid.gov/our_work/humanitarian_assistance/ffp/monetiz.htm.

18. USAID/CDIE. Performance Monitoring and Evaluation Tips. 1996. Web site: www.usaid.gov/pubs/usaid_eval.

19. U.S. Position Paper Prepared for the World Food Summit. July 1996.

20. WFP's School Feeding Programme Recommendation, Draft Guidelines. 1998.

21. WHO. Energy and Protein Requirements: Report of a Joint FAO Expert Consultation, WHO; Geneva, 1985.

22. WHO.  Nutrient Requirements for People Living with HIV/AIDS: Report of a technical consultation. World Health Organization, Geneva, Switzerland, 13-15 May 2003, www.who.int/gb/ebwha/pdf_files/EB116/B116_12-en.pdf.

23. World Bank/The Partnership for Child Development. School Feeding Programs: Improving Effectiveness and Increasing the Benefit to Education. A Guide for Managers. August 1999.

24. World Food Program, UNESCO, WHO. School Feeding Handbook. 1999.