1. LEARNING FROM EXPERIENCE Good practices from 45 years of school feeding Marc Regnault de la Mothe Policy, Planning and Strategy Division World Food Programme

2. ANALYTICAL PROCESS AND SELECTION  Collection of all SF evaluations and case studies within WFP archive  Removal of old data and poor evaluations  Removal of redundancies (on the basis of available evidence) 33 COUNTRIES + workshop findings Main findings (trends, successes and constraints) Selection of nine illustrative case studies 134 evaluations and case studies 70 evaluations and case studies 33 evaluations and case studies

3. POLICY IMPLICATIONS SCHOOL FEEDING QUALITY STANDARDS FOR PROGRAMME DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION Sound alignment with the national policy framework Stable funding and budgeting Evidence-based programme design Strong institutional and implementation arrangements Strong partnerships and inter-sector coordination Strong community participation and ownership (teachers, parents, children)

4. MAIN FINDINGS/1 FINDINGGOOD PRACTICESLESSONS LEARNED 1. Embedding school feeding in national policy frameworks 1.1 - Documenting and articulating the case for school feeding in a country 1.2 - “Being in the room” when policy decisions are made 1.3 - Facilitating discussions on school feeding with stakeholders (Pakistan) 1.1 - Governments need to consider school feeding as a priority 1.2 - Stakeholders from all sectors have to be involved (Malawi) 2. Finding interim funding solutions in view of the inclusion of school feeding in the national budget 2.1 - Ensuring agreement on milestones and timeframe for the transition (El Salvador) 2.2 - Assessing the cost of school feeding (Malawi) 2.1 - Stable and predictable funding is needed 2.2 - Finding the right balance between community participation and financing (Ethiopia)

5. MAIN FINDINGS/2 FINDINGGOOD PRACTICESLESSONS LEARNED 3. Planning handover arrangements in advance 3.1 - Involving high-level political figures to increase ownership of the programme (El Salvador) 3.2 - Enhancing local procurement to facilitate handover (Kenya) 3.1 - Need to provide guidance to country offices 3.2 - Need to coordinate parallel programmes 3.3 - Cash resources untied to tonnages delivered 4. A sound, in-depth assessment; defining objectives, targeting, and selection of modality and food basket 4.1 - Delivering a comprehensive, integrated package (Ethiopia, Lao PDR) 4.2 - Addressing gender inequality (Pakistan) 4.3 - Selecting the most appropriate modality (Afghanistan) 4.1 - Geographical targeting as opposed to individual or school-based (Kenya, Pakistan)

6. MAIN FINDINGS/3 FINDINGGOOD PRACTICESLESSONS LEARNED 5. Linking institutional set-up and implementation arrangements 5.1 - Having an institution that manages and implements school feeding with a strong inter-sector coordination (Lao PDR) 5.2 - Designing procuring and logistics arrangements (Brazil, Indonesia, Cambodia/Tanzania) 5.3 - Adapting M&E to existing systems (Kenya) 5.1 - Using school gardens mostly for educational purposes 6. Involving communities 6.1 - Using community-led planning tools (Ethiopia) 6.1 - Lack of involvement negatively affects ownership of the programme (Afghanistan)

7. CASE STUDIES vs. QUALITY STANDARDS QUALITY STANDARDS FOR PROGRAMME DESIGN AND IMPLEMENTATION COUNTRYRATIONALE Sound alignment with the national policy framework Lao PDR A strong presence in the policy framework Stable funding and budgetingEl Salvador Interim funding solutions for handover Evidence-based programme design Afghanistan Piloting different food baskets Pakistan Tackling gender inequalities Uganda Providing a comprehensive package Strong institutional and implementation arrangements Brazil A strong network of partners Kenya Local procurement to facilitate handover Strong partnerships and inter-sector coordination Malawi Partnering to improve food basket, deworming and local procurement Strong community participation and ownership (teachers, parents, children) Ethiopia Involving communities through CHILD

8. THANK YOU