ArticleBMC public health2025
Free, healthy school lunches in New Zealand: A Value for Investment analysis.
Article in BMC public health, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Cross-Sector Policies for Achieving Equitable Obesity Prevention and Food Security: A Review of Real-World Actions.Current obesity reports · 2026Review
- Beyond the menu: how student agency, cultural acceptability, and equity shape realized sustainability in school food environments.Frontiers in nutrition · 2026Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundUniversal, healthy school meal programs can address poor nutrition, improve educational outcomes and job and life opportunities, and support environmental sustainability. While many countries have extensive experience with such programs, New Zealand's initiative (Ka Ora, Ka Ako) was launched in 2020 as part of the COVID-19 recovery strategy and, by 2024, reached over 236,000 (~ 27%) school students.
objectivesThis study aimed to assess the value generated from the investment (~ NZD320 million/year) in Ka Ora, Ka Ako and its potential for further value creation.
methodsThe study employed the participatory Value for Investment framework to assess the program across five economic domains: effectiveness, efficiency, economy, equity, and cost-effectiveness. Four workshops with key community, government, and research stakeholders co-developed 21 evaluation criteria and rated the program's performance based on evidence from program monitoring data, national research and international studies.
resultsKa Ora, Ka Ako rated very well overall, with seven criteria rated as excellent, 12 as good, two as adequate, and none as poor. All six primary outcomes set as the original purpose of the program, relating to alleviating hunger, improving nutrition, improving health and wellbeing, reducing financial burdens on families, reducing barriers to education and supporting local economies, were rated good (4) or excellent (2). The program's continuity was rated only as adequate due to announced major budget cuts and uncertainty about future funding. Although enhancing environmental sustainability was not part of the program's original purpose, some sustainability criteria-packaging and food waste management-were rated as good. However, the criterion for sustainable food procurement systems was rated only as adequate. In light of these findings, the study assessed Ka Ora, Ka Ako as providing very good value for investment overall.
conclusionsThe use of the Value for Investment approach was key because school lunch programs have many dimensions and the participatory research processes of the approach enabled stakeholders to emphasize the program's wide-ranging social and health benefits while identifying areas for improvement. While Ka Ora, Ka Ako rated very well across most of the 21 value dimensions, there are major concerns that this level of quality will not be upheld under the program's budget cuts from 2025 onwards.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.