FEEDING PROGRAM FORELEMENTARYPUPILS

IN TRINIDAD CENTRAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

I. Introduction

School FeedingProgram is considered to be asound investment in

education.

The link between malnutrition and poor health among Elementary school

children and absenteeism, early dropout and poor classroom performance as well

as effectiveness of school-based nutrition and health inventions in improving

school performance as well-established in the literature (Politt 1990 and taras

2005). Thus the Department of Education ( DepED ) has been conducting

conditional food transfer program since 1997.

The first Food for Education ( FFE ) program launched by theDepED in

1997 was a breakfast feeding program intended to address short-term hunger

among public school children. Short tern hunger is a period of hunger experienced

by children who have inadequate breakfast and/or walk long distances to school.

Through the years DepED’s feeding program changes in target beneficiaries,

coverage and service delivery mode and eventually shiftee focus from merely

addressing short term hunger to that of addressing undernutrition among children

enrolled in public elementary school..

Deped order No. 39, s. 2017, Operational Guidelines on the

Implementation of School-Based Feeding Program for School 2011-2022. The

priority target beneficiaries for SBFP shall be all SW and W kinder to Grade 6

students. The actual target beneficiaries shall be based on the Baseline

Nutritional Assessment of the current school Year.

1
 Since 1997, the government , through the Department of Education (

DepED), has been conducting a School-Based Feeding Program (SBFP) since

1997. As implemented in School Year 2013-2014, the SBFP ofdepED involved

feeding 40,361 severely wasted in the country. The Department of

Education(DepEDhas implemented the school based feeding program (SBFP’s).

The DepED’s first SBFP, then called Breakfast Feeding Program ( (BFP) aimed

to address short term hunger to addressing undernutrition among public

elementary pupils.

The feeding shall commence on June/July of every year and continue until

completion of the target feeding days.

Program Objectives

The program aims to do the following:

The School Based Feeding Program (SBFP) aims to:

 Rehabilitate at least 70% of severely wasted beneficiaries too normal

nutritional status at the end of the feeding days;

 Ensure 85% to 100% classroom attendance of beneficiaries;

 Ensure 100% deworming of target beneficiaries prior to feeding activity;

 Conduct group hand washing and tooth brushing activities as stipulated in

Deped Order NO. 10, s. 2016, to impart development of positive health-

promoting values and behaviours;

 Nutrition information and awareness among target beneficiaries through

the K to 12 Curriculum and its alternative modalities of education; and

2
  Encourage Gulayan sa Paaralan Program and backyard vegetable

gardening to augment the feeding program and to complement the nutrition

and poverty-reduction initiatives of the government.

 Improve children’s health and nutrition values and behaviour;

Methodology

This program evaluation had used the Kirkpatrick’s Four-Level evaluation

Model. Donald Kirkpatrick, former Professor Emeritus at the University of

Wisconsin, first published his model in 1959. He updated it in 1975, and again in

1993, when he published his best-known work, "Evaluating Training Programs."

Each successive level of the model represents a more precise measure of

the effectiveness of a training program. It was developed further by Donald and

his son, James; and then by James and his wife, Wendy Kayser Kirkpatrick.

In 2016, James and Wendy revised and clarified the original theory, and

introduced the "New World Kirkpatrick Model" in their book, "Four Levels of

Training Evaluation." One of the main additions is an emphasis on the importance

of making training relevant to people's everyday jobs.

The four levels are Reaction, Learning, Behavior, and Results. We look at each

level in greater detail, and explore how to apply it, below.

Level 1: Reaction

You want people to feel that training is valuable. Measuring how engaged they

were, how actively they contributed, and how they reacted to the training helps

you to understand how well they received it.

3
It also enables you to make improvements to future programs, by identifying

important topics that might have been missing.

Questions to ask trainees include:

 Did you feel that the training was worth your time?

 Did you think that it was successful?

 What were the biggest strengths and weaknesses of the training?

 Did you like the venue and presentation style?

 Did the training session accommodate your personal learning styles

 ?

 Were the training activities engaging?

 What are the three most important things that you learned from this

training?

 From what you learned, what do you plan to apply in your job?

 What support might you need to apply what you learned?

Level 2: Learning

Level 2 focuses on measuring what your trainees have and haven't learned. In the

New World version of the tool, Level 2 also measures what they think they'll be

able to do differently as a result, how confident they are that they can do it, and

how motivated they are to make changes.

This demonstrates how training has developed their skills, attitudes and

knowledge, as well as their confidence and commitment.

Level 3: Behavior

4
This level helps you to understand how well people apply their training. It can also

reveal where people might need help. But behavior can only change when

conditions are favorable.

Effectively measuring behavior is a longer-term process that should take place

over weeks or months following the initial training. Questions to ask include:

 Did the trainees put any of their learning to use?

 Are trainees able to teach their new knowledge, skills or attitudes to other

people?

 Are trainees aware that they've changed their behavior?

One of the best ways to measure behavior is to conduct observations and

interviews. Another is to integrate the use of new skills into the tasks that you set

your team, so that people have the chance to demonstrate what they know.

Level 4: Results

At this level, you analyze the final results of your training. This includes outcomes

that you or your organization have decided are good for business and good for

your team members, and which demonstrate a good return on investment (ROI).

Level 4 will likely be the most costly and time-consuming. Your biggest challenge

will be to identify which outcomes, benefits, or final results are most closely linked

to the training, and to come up with an effective way to measure these outcomes

in the long term.

Modern trainers often use the Kirkpatrick model backward, by first stating the

results that they want to see, and then developing the training that is most likely to

5
deliver them. This helps to prioritize the goals of the training and make it more

effective.

Respondents

The respondents of this study are the thirty (10) Elementary School

Administrators who have implemented School-Based Feeding Program and 30

Elementary Grade teachers who have been randomly selected to participate in

this study.

Data Gathering Procedure

In order to gather the necessary information with regards to this program

School-Based Feeding Program Evaluation, the researcher first seek an approval

from the District Supervisor y giving a letter of intent to conduct the study. This

permit has been used to ask permission form the School Administrators that a

study will be conducted with regards to the their implementation of School-based

Feeding Program.

After which, questionnaire has been distributed to the respondents

(teachers and administrators) and orient them on how they are going to answer.

Right after the questionnaire has been retrieved, and the data were tabulated,

analysed, and interpreted.

Instrumentation

Research Instrument

A questionnaire was prepared by the researcher in order to gather

necessary information about the inquiry. Inputs to this questionnaire have been

6
extracted from local sources and literatures with relation to the implemnatation of

School Based Feeding Program.

Basically, the questionnaire is divided into three (3) parts to be answered

by two (2) sets of respondents – the selected elementary school administrators

and teachers. The questionnaire bears the same content for the two types of

respondents.

Part 1 elicits information on “Implementation of the Program”. Respondents

were instructed to rate their opinions using the following scale below.

Numerical Rating Implementation

1……………… Very Low
2……………… Low
3……………… High
4……………… Very High
Part II asked information on “Level of Management Skill of School Heads in

the Implementation of The Feeding Program”, wherein on the several indicators

given, the respondents were to indicate their responses by using the following

scale:

Numerical Value Implementation

5………………… Very Skilful
4……………….. Skilful
3……………….. Moderately Skilful
2……………….. Slightly Skilful
1……………….. Not Skilful
Part III elicits responses on the “Problems encountered By the School

Heads and Teachers in the Implementation of Feeding Program “, wherein they

7
are going to indicate their responses by checking the appropriate column if for

them that indicator is considered to be a problem or not.

8
 RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

This part relates the findings of the study based from collected information

using the survey questionnaire that was administered to the selected

administrators and teachers.

Table 1

Implementation of Feeding Program in Terms of Promoting Public

Awareness and Emerging Involvement in Feeding Program

Indicators Category Responses Total Weighte Interpr

4 3 2 1 d Mean etation

a. Utilizing the developed Administra (20) (11) (31) 3.1 High

advocacy and marketing tors 6 4 10

materials from the SBFP.

Teachers (50) (30) (80) 2.6 High

20 10 30

b. Conducting extensive Administra (15) (8) (5) (28) 2.8 High

awareness campaigned and tors 7 2 1 10

other marketing activities

which may include interview Teachers (70) (20) (90) 3.0 High

among parents for the 25 5 30

feeding program.

TOTAL Administra (35) (19) (5)

tors 13 8 1

(120)
Teachers (50)
45
15)

Grand Mean Administra 2.95 High

tors

9
 Teachers 2.8 High

Legend

Numerical Rating Implementation

0.5 – 1.00 Very Low

1.5 – 2.00 Low

2.5 – 3.00 High

3.5 – 4.0 Very High

Implementation of Feeding Program in Terms of Promoting Public

Awareness and Emerging Involvement in Feeding Program. Table 1 divulged

information on Implementation of Feeding Program in Terms of Promoting Public

Awareness and Emerging Involvement in Feeding Program. As depicted in the

table, the administrators of 3.1 which means “high’ in terms of Utilizing the

developed advocacy and marketing materials from the SBFP. Likewise the

teacher-respondents gave an overall rating 2.6 in the same indicator which is also

“high” in terms of implementation.

In terms of “Conducting extensive awareness campaigned and other

marketing activities which may include interview among parents for the feeding

program”, both the administrators and teacher-respondents rated the indicator

‘high” in terms of its implementation which is evident on the weighted mean which

is 2.8 and 3.0 respectively.

Overall, in terms of Implementation of Feeding Program in Terms of

Promoting Public Awareness and Emerging Involvement in Feeding Program, the

administrators and teacher-respondents gave it a “high” rating having attained a

general weighted mean of 2.9 and 2.8 respectively.

10
 Table 2

Implementation of Feeding Program in Terms of Generating Resources

Indicators Category Responses Total Weighted Interpre

4 3 2 1 Mean tation

a. Determine target resources (25)

Administra (11) (8) (6) 2.5 High
and volunteers 10
tors 7 1 2

(75)
(15) 2.5 High
Teachers (60) 30
6
24

b. Meeting potential partners, (18) (28)

Administra (5) (5) 2.8 High
volunteers, community 6 10
tors 2 2
leaders/officials and members to

engage support from the

Teachers 2.8 High
community and local business (60) (85)
(25)
enterprises. 25 30
5

c. Ensuring that the Administra (27)

(20) (7) 2.7 High
pledges/commitments of tors 10
7 (3)
partners are delivered.

(32) (75)
Teachers (43) 2.5 High
10 30
20

Administra
d. Accepting donation from (40) (40)
4.0 Very
partners. tors 10 10
High

(55)
Teachers (35) (95)
16 3.0 High
14 30

Total Administra (69) (33) (18)

tors 23 13 7

11
 (187)
Teachers (138)

47
73

Grand Mean Administra 3.0 High

tors

2.7 High
Teachers

Legend

Numerical Rating Implementation

0.5 – 1.00 Very Low

1.5 – 2.00 Low

2.5 – 3.00 High

3.5 – 4.0 Very High

Table 3

Implementation of Feeding Program in Terms of Directing and Monitoring

the Implementation

Indicators Category Responses Total Weighted Interpre

Mean tation

4 3 2 1

a. providing guidance and

directions to work teams in the

performance of assigned tasks.

b. Ensuring program of work are

accomplished as planned.

c. monitoring of actual

accomplishments vis-à-vis

identified needs and planned

12
activities.

d. Preparing documents

required for tax incentives

availment by partners such as,

but not limited to:

d.1Memorandum of agreement

d.2 Deed of donation and/or

deed of acceptance.

Legend

Numerical Rating Implementation

1……………… Very Low

2……………… Low

3……………… High

4……………… Very High

Table 4

Implementation of Feeding Program in Terms of Preparing the Necessary

Documentation and Reports

Indicators Category Responses Total Weighted Interpre

Mean tation

4 3 2 1

Preparing the Necessary

Documentation and Reports

a. Taking photos and/or video

footages of activities, especially

the activities done in the school (

before, during, and after

photos).

13
b. Keeping and maintaining

records and pertinent papers

and documents

-Daily report on donations on

donations received

-Daily attendance of volunteers.

c. Summarizing and

consolidating the different forms

as a basis for drafting the

Feeding school accomplishment

form.
Legend

Numerical Rating Implementation

1……………… Very Low

2……………… Low

3……………… High

4……………… Very High

Indicators Category Responses Total Weighted Interpre

Mean tation

5 4 2 2 1

14
 II. General Description of the Program

The SBFP of DepED involves feeding primary pupils for 100 to 120

feeding days using 20 day cycle of standardized recipes with malunggay.

Each meal has at least 300 calories; this is lower than (876) calories per

meal in feeding programs elsewhere ( Adelamn et al. 2008) Further,

School Based Feeding Program gives lower feeding days compared to

180 feeding-day-average in developing countries ( Bundy et al. 2009).

lV. IMPLEMENTATION

All schools are expected to conduct nutritional assessment of kinder

to Grade 6 students in the first three weeks of June or during the BrigadaEskwela.

The World Health Organization Child Growth Standards ( WHO_CGS ) shall be

the basis for determining the nutritional status. The baseline data shall be taken

before the start of feeding and subsequent weighing shall be repeated every ( 3 )

months. The end line data shall be taken upon program termination. A Calibrated

weighing Scale. Preferably beam balance, shall be used to take the weight , and

steel tape/ microtoise shall be used to take the height. To ensure accuracy of BMI

computation, all schools are enjoined to make use of the BMI software.

The School Heads shall create an SBFP Core Group from among the

school personnel and parents who shall be responsible for managing and

implementing the program. The Core Group shall be composed of one ( 1 ) or two

( 2 ) teaching personnel ( feeding coordinator ) and one ( 1 ) or two ( 2 ) parents.

The members of the Core Group shall be submitted by the school Head to the

SDO for the reference in granting service credits teachers.

15
The SBFP Core Group shall:

a. Identify the target beneficiaries based on the provided criteria, for approval

by the School Head;

b. Finalize the cycle menu for the whole duration of feeding, the Work and

Financial Plan, and the Project Procurement Management for approval by

the School Head and for submission to the SDO;

c. Submit a copy of the approved PPMP to the School BAC or BAC

Secretariat for the preparation of the school Annual Procurement Plan for

approval; by the School Head;

d. Together with the School Head, identify parents/volunteers who shall help

in the whole program (identified parents/volunteers must be physically and

mentally fit );

e. Prepare the schedule for parents / volunteers who shall prepare and cook

the menu for the day, prepare the feeding area, supervise the daily feeding

and wash the dishes;

f. Educate and capacitate parents who shall help in the food preparation;

g. Recording and reporting using SBFP Forms; and

h. Submit the terminal report at the end of feeding to the SDO through the

District Office.

The Cycle Menu in feeding the targeted children shall be based on the

standardized recipes suggested by DepEd, National Nutrition Council

( NNC), International Institute for Rural Reconstruction ( IIRR ), JGF_BLT

Recipes Food and Nutrition Research Institute ( FNRI ), locally produced

standardized indigenous recipes and other standardized recipes.

16
LIST OF SBFP BENEFECIARIES
NUTRITIONAL STATUS AT START OF
FEEDING
Nutritional
Children by Grade Level
Status at No. of Total
Start of wasted Beneficiaries
feeding
1. KINDER 4 5 9
2. GRADE 1 1 4 5
3. GRADE 2 1 4 5
4.GRADE 3 1 1 2
5.GRADE 4 7 10 17
6. GRADE 5 1 13 14
7. GRADE 6 3 6 9
TOTAL 18 43 61

20 DAYS CYCLE MENU FOR SUPPLEMENTARY FEEDING

DAY 1 DAY 2 DAY 3 DAY 4 DAY 5

Malunggay
Fish Balls wirh Malu
Ukoy, Makalhip, Banana Blossom, Country Soup
sweet and Patties
\WEEK Rice Medley, Rice Rice
Sour Sauce Rice
1
Rice
Moringa
Egg with misua
WEEK Malu, Lollipop, MaluCrispies Corn
and malunggay Picadillo Rice
2 Rice Rice Soup
leaves, Rice
Rice
Moringa
WEEK Moringa, Shrimp, Pinanggat with Pinoy Corn Shanghai
Maalulai Rice
3 Royale, Rice kamote Tops Rice Soup Rice Rolls,
Rice
Squash with Picadillo
GinataangMungg Shrimp
WEEK Malu Supreme Dried Dilis, Con
o con Moringa AlugbatiGuisado,
4 Rice Beans and Moringa,
Rica Rice
Kangkong Rice Rice

17
TARGET BENEFICIARY AND PUPILS IN S.Y. 2018-2019

The S.Y 2018-2019 implementation of the SBFP

BUDGET

The budget allocation for feeding is Php. 16.00 per beneficiary multiplied by

the number of feeding days while the budget allocated for operational expenses is

Php. 2.00 per beneficiary multiplied by the number of feeding days.

The budget allocation for iron supplements is Php. 1.00 per beneficiary

multiplied by 20days and budget allocated for hygiene kit is Php. 25.00 per

beneficiary. Operational expenses include the purchase of basic eating/utensils,

stove, reasonable transportation expenses, water, dishwashing soap, LPG,

charcoal, firewood, kerosene, labor / service of cook, and common office supplies

needed for the preparation of reports. Other expenses related to SBFP ( payment

for health certificate of food handlers, orientation, monitoring and program

implementation review, among others, which are requisites for an efficient and

successful implementation ) shall be sourced from the local funds or

Regional/Division? School Maintenance and Other operating Expenses ( MOOE)

and other stakeholders.

In School Year 2018-2019, Trinidad Central Elementary School had a

budget amounted to Php.134,505.00 pesos that allowed to feed severely wasted

and wasted pupils of Trinidad Central Elementary School pupils for 120days.

Target Output

A. Proposed Activities

18
 1. Orientation of Parents Regarding feeding Program
2. Daily Feeding Program in School

B. Program Materials
 Feeding Center
 Cook ( Parents,Teacher )
 Plates, Fork, Spoon
 Gasul

C. Physical Target

 Wasted and Severely Wasted Pupils

61 -Total number of Participants

III. Work Plan

Goal Target Activities Time Persons Resources Output

Objective Frame Involved Needed Indicated
Healthy Pupils The pupils Feeding July- Parents Feeding Healthy
should Session March Teachers Center with Pupils, no
religiously 2008 Pupils all feeding malnourish
attend the materials.
daily
feeding
session.
Parents should See to it Make some July- School Sound Nutrition-
be aware of the that the lecture to 2018 Head System Oriented
nutritious food parents parents who Teachers Microphone
taken by the should needs Parents Laptop
children attend the assistance LCD
session regarding Projector
regarding the
the nutritional
nutritional status.
status.
Encourage See to it Teachers Year School Sound Healthyand
children to that the should Round Head System active Child.
attend child can followup the Teachers Microphone
classeseveryda avail the child Pupils Laptop
y. feeding nutritional Parents LCD

19
 program status every Projector
now and
then.
A healthy Child See to it Feeding Year School Feeding
that the Session, Round Head Center Healthy and
child will be checking Teachers active child
monitored the BMI Child
by using the
BMI if he or
she is
developing
when I
comes to
his or her
nutritional
status.

IV. Program Committees

Resource Speakers/Facilitators
1. Mr. Benedicto M. Merales
2. Mrs. Marrietta A. Dosabas
3. Mrs. Alma A. Rosellas

Secretariat / Support Staff

1. Mrs. EmelieGrafil
2. Mrs. Teresa Cacho

Hall Preparation / Feeding Area

1. Mr. Leo Matutes
2. Mr. AlmiraFlor
3. Mrs. Gloria Pagunsan

Food Preparation/Feeding Tools

1. Mrs. Catalina S. Serva
2. Ms. Fritzie J. Cabahug
3. Mrs. AlmiraFlor
4. Mrs. Susana Llorada

20
 Republic of the Philippines
NORTHWEST SAMAR STATE UNIVERSITY
Main campus, Calbayog City
COLLEGE OF EDUCATION
Graduate School

EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM
DEVELOPMENT AND EVALUATION

21
 FEEDING PROGRAM
OF
TRINIDAD CENTRAL ELEMENTARY SCHOOL

Submitted to:

DR. ENRIQUE B. MONTECALVO

Professor

Submitted by:

LILIA MAGISTRADO
Student
October 6, 2018

22
 Time Day 4 Time Day 4
7:00-7:30 Breakfast 1:30-2:30 P.M. Presentation of the
lesson plan
7:30-8:30 A.M. Registration 2:30-3:30 P.M. Eucharistic
Celebration
8:30-10:00 A.M. Group Workshop: 3:30-4:30 Distribution of
Lesson Plan Certificates to the
Participants
10:00-10:20 A.M. Break 4:30-5:00 Pictorials
10:20-12:00 Presentation of the BACK HOME HOME SWEET
lesson plan HOME
12:00 Noon Lunch Break

V. Financial Expenditure

BUDGET PROPOSAL

ACTIVITY :
SEMINAR-WORKSHOP ON ADULT FAITH FORMATION FOR
VALUES
EDUCATION TECAHERS

TARGET BENEFICIARIES: 100

DAYS REQUIRED: 4 days
Source of fund: MOOE

VENUE : Centennial Pastoral Center

DATE : July 15-18, 2018

# REQUIRED Total
Cost per
ITEM OF EXPENDITURE (e.g. # of pax / Unit/Hour
number of Amount
units / sets / hr) days
Food (Values Education Teacher-
Participants)
100 250.00 4 25,000.00
Tokens for the Speakers 6 1000.00 4 6,000.00
Learning Materials 100 50.00 4 5,000.00

23
Programs and Certificates 100 5.00 4 500.00
Centenial Pastoral Center (Rent) 1 4500 4 4500
TOTAL P41,000.00

VI. Program Committees

Resource Speakers/Facilitators
4. Mr. Benedicto M. Merales
5. Mrs. Marrietta A. Dosabas
6. Mrs. Alma A. Rosellas

Secretariat / Support Staff

1. Mrs. EmelieGrafil
2. Mrs. Teresa Cacho

Hall Preparation / Feeding Area

4. Mr. Leo Matutes
5. Mr. AlmiraFlor
6. Mrs. Gloria Pagunsan

Food Preparation/Feeding Tools

5. Mrs. Catalina S. Serva
6. Ms. Fritzie J. Cabahug

24
7. Mrs. AlmiraFlor
8. Mrs. Susana Llorada

25