Aulo Gelli|Edoardo Masset|Gloria Folson|Anthoni Kusi|Daniel Arhinful|Felix Asante|Irène Ayi|Kwabena M. Bosompem|Kristie Watkins|Lutuf Abdul-Rahman|Rosanna Agble|Getrude Ananse-Baden|Daniel Mumuni|Elisabetta Aurino|Meena Fernandes|Lesley Drake
Evaluation of alternative school feeding models on nutrition, education, agriculture and other social outcomes in Ghana: rationale, randomised design and baseline data
International Food Policy Research Institute|University of Sussex|Institute of Development Studies|Noguchi Memorial Institute for Medical Research|University of Ghana|University of Ghana|Noguchi Memorial Institute for Medical Research|University of Ghana|University of Ghana|Noguchi Memorial Institute for Medical Research|University of Ghana|Noguchi Memorial Institute for Medical Research|University of Ghana|Imperial College London|Imperial College London|Imperial College London|Imperial College London|Imperial College London|Imperial College London|Imperial College London|Imperial College London
homegrown school feeding programmes complex interventions potential link increased demand school feeding goods services communitybased stakeholders including smallholder farmers womens groups limited rigorous evidence however case practice evaluation examine explicitly holistic perspective simultaneous impact national school meals programme micronutrient status alongside outcomes nutrition education agriculture domains 3year study involves clusterrandomised control trial designed around scaleup national school feeding programme including 116 primary schools 58 districts ghana randomly assigned interventions 1 school feeding programme group including schools communities standard government programme implemented 2 homegrown school feeding including schools communities standard programme implemented alongside innovative pilot project aimed enhancing nutrition agriculture 3 control group including schools households communities intervention delayed least 3 years preferably without informing schools households primary outcomes include child health nutritional status school participation learning smallholder farmer income intermediate outcomes along agriculture nutrition pathways also measured evaluation follow mixedmethod approach including child household school communitylevel surveys well focus group discussions project stakeholders baseline survey completed august 2013 endline survey planned november 2015the tests balance show significant differences means number outcome control variables across intervention groups important differences across groups include marketed surplus livestock income per capita food consumption intake school attendance anthropometric status 25 515 years age groups addition approximately 19 children target age group received form free school meals baselinedesigning implementing evaluation complex interventions complex undertaking involving multidisciplinary research team working close collaboration programme policylevel stakeholders managing complexity analytical operational perspective important challenge analysis baseline data indicates random allocation process achieve statistically comparable treatment groups differences outcomes control variables across groups controlled estimating treatment effectsisrctn66918874 registered 5 march 2015