Proposed cuts to the Vancouver School Board’s (VSB) culinary arts programs, along with a plan to contract out the district’s school-meals programs for low-income students, triggered harsh backlash last week, and rightly so.

If anything, the VSB should be looking for ways to enhance and expand opportunities for students to learn where food comes from and how to prepare and share it. Healthy meals should be available for all students who need them, not just for those who “qualify” due to being in government care or in families receiving social assistance.

VSB managers presented the proposed cuts and contracting-out plan at a public committee meeting last week, and they released a consultant’s report making the case for “streamlining” the district’s complex web of food-service programs.

It’s the beginning of a months-long consultation on the future of the VSB’s food-service programs.

The problem

I disagree with a lot of what’s being proposed by VSB managers and the food-service consultants, but they’re right about the need to upgrade the district’s aging commercial kitchen equipment in schools.

The VSB’s school kitchens didn’t escape the impact of 16 years of B.C. Liberal’s inadequate funding for public schools, any more than teacher salaries and general school maintenance did.  They all fell behind and left an expensive backlog that needs catching up, and that won’t come cheap.

The easy solution is to simply close VSB kitchens and reduce the number of culinary arts programs from seven high schools down to two, with a vague plan to add a “centre of excellence” down the road. That's what the district’s managers and consultants are proposing. It’s also the wrong thing to do.

The opportunity

I visited most of the VSB’s culinary arts programs in my eight years as a school trustee. They were outstanding. Culinary arts students learn to work in a commercial-kitchen environment and are taught by teachers and Red Seal chefs. They prepare food that’s served in school cafeterias and provide catering for school-district events, including the annual VSB retirement reception. Their food is professionally presented and as delicious as anything you’d get from a professional catering company.

Students in the program often go on to work in restaurants and hotels and have their pick of jobs even before they graduate. Those who choose to go off travelling after finishing high school, leave with skills that are in demand all over the world.

The pride and passion I saw in those students was remarkable. They’d found something they loved doing, and it also happened to be in an industry that’s short of skilled workers, with thousands of jobs to fill. Their futures looked bright. If anything, a successful and relevant program like that should be expanded to more schools, not fewer. It’s only offered in schools on Vancouver’s East Side and should be expanded to schools on the West Side as well.

With all the talk of giving students opportunities for hands-on learning, you’d think the school board would be looking for ways to expand successful programs to more schools instead of cutting them.

The VSB is in the planning process of rebuilding or upgrading several of its seismically high-risk secondary schools. It’s an opportunity to design and install state-of-the art commercial teaching kitchens with up-to-date equipment in all of them.

That’s an investment that will pay off in the long run, as students who choose the culinary arts path will leave school ready to start working and paying taxes—and participating in B.C.’s growing economy.

Kitchens in schools that aren’t being seismically upgraded or replaced need expensive upgrades as well, and the VSB must make the case to the provincial government for funding to do that. They should start by inviting tourism- and hospitality-industry representatives to join them, along with students, parents, teachers, and cafeteria workers who all know the value of these programs and why they need to be widely accessible. 

I’ve learned over the years that when you make a compelling case to government and show up with allies who support you, sometimes you get what you ask for. On the other hand, if you don’t ask, you seldom get anything.

Food for kids, and for thought

It’s time to ditch the austerity mindset that’s plagued our public education system for too long. You can spend the public’s money responsibly by investing in what’s important and what works. The unfortunate trend in the public-education sector has been to close or cut when there isn’t enough money, be it programs, schools or staffing, instead of investing and improving. Let’s change direction and look at education as a prudent, long-term investment, not an expense.

The Culinary Arts program is an important educational piece, but the other part of the VSB’s food-service equation is the district’s meals programs for kids who arrive at school hungry.

Nourishing young bodies—and minds

Over the years, the VSB has added a range of food programs to meet growing demand as school boards developed a better understanding of the link between nutrition and learning and how poverty affects students’ outcomes at school.

Research shows there are families who struggle to feed their kids in all parts of Vancouver, although there are much higher concentrations of poor families in some communities. Every few years, the VSB reviews how it spends the limited provincial funds it gets for school meals, alongside its many food programs that are supported through city funding or charitable donations.

Determining who is most needy and deserving, when so many young families are strained financially, is a painful and disheartening process. The district generally uses statistical methods, and in particular what it refers to as the “social services index (SSI)”, which looks at students who are in government care or in families that receive social assistance, to determine who should get free or subsidized school meals. Unfortunately, that leaves out kids whose families have to choose between paying high Vancouver rents or buying groceries.

It also ignores the reality that families who are getting by can suddenly not be, due to losing a job, an eviction notice, an illness, family breakdown, or any number of financial stresses. Sometimes they get back on their feet in a few weeks or months, but kids need to eat every day.

The VSB’s meal programs in several schools in lower-income communities are flexible enough that kids who don’t meet statistical profiles can still get school meals when they need them. They operate on a pay-what-you-can model, where parents send in their payment (or no payment) in a sealed envelope. It’s a stigma-free way to make sure everyone gets a nourishing meal, whether parents pay for it or not.

If the VSB proposals go ahead, those cafeterias would close and their unionized employees would be laid off. An outside contractor would be paid to deliver packaged meals to students identified by school principals as meeting the criteria for the food program.

That would inevitably leave a lot of hungry kids without food, and risk creating a stigma for those who get the delivered meals. It would also put VSB cafeteria workers who make a living wage and get decent benefits, out of work. Those laid off who have kids could find themselves in need of subsidized meals for their own family, in a tragically ironic twist, where the VSB contributes to the city’s child-poverty problem instead of alleviating it. It would also end relationships between food-service workers and the students they feed, which is no small thing.

The good news

The proposals to cut and contract out are moving into a discussion-and-consultation phase. Decisions about implementing them will be made by the elected trustees, and they’re not scheduled to vote on this until late spring.

It’s an opportunity to take this in a more positive and thoughtful direction. Why not create a model that integrates food-services programs to include food gardens, connections with local farmers, and food preparation and service? Students could learn about nutritious foods from a variety of cultures, to reflect the diversity of our city. The district could look at “contracting in” the handful of cafeterias that are already operated by outside providers, creating learning and work-experience opportunities for students in culinary arts programs.

It could explore dual-credit opportunities with local postsecondary institutions, so students get a head start on advanced certifications and postsecondary course credits. It could look at innovative models to bring all food preparation in-house, recognizing how valuable the relationships are between caring adults and students, including those who assist with school food preparation and service.

We know that kids who are hungry and malnourished can’t focus on learning. Providing healthy meals and a supportive environment, supporting by caring adults, nourishes not only young bodies but also their hearts and minds.

I read through the VSB’s lengthy food-services report (if you want to read it yourself, scroll down through the agenda from last week’s VSB student learning and well-being committee meeting). It brought to mind Oscar Wilde’s definition of a cynic: someone who knows the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

Yes, it will cost money to build new kitchens and upgrade existing ones, but I can’t think of a better investment of public funds than on teaching skills that students can use to live healthy and prosperous lives.

Vancouver is known as a foodie city, so let’s make its school food programs a source of pride and excellence at every school.

Let your school trustees know there is much more to food programs than the bottom line, and that they’re worth investing in.

Now that’s food for thought.