Presentation on Mid Day Meal

The Midday Meal Scheme is a school meal programme of the Government of India designed to improve the nutritional status of school-age children nationwide.

1. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10

2. Mid-DAY MEAL WHAT IS MID-DAY MEAL ? T he   Midday Meal Scheme  is a  school meal  programme of the  Government of India  designed to improve the  nutritional status of school-age children nationwide.

3. HISTORY Pre-Independence initiatives The roots of the programme can be traced back to the Pre-Independence era, when a Mid Day Meal Programme was introduced in 1925 in  Madras Corporation  by the British administration .  A Mid Day Meal Programme was introduced in the Union Territory of  Pondicherry  by the French administration in 1930 . === Initiatives by State government tee to children, with their launch of a Mid Day Meal Programme in primary schools in the 1962–63 school year. Thiru   K. Kamaraj , then Chief Minister of Tamil Nadu, introduced it first in Chennai and later extended it to all districts of Tamil Nadu.

4. Gujarat  was the second state to introduce MDM scheme in 1984, but it was later discontinued. A Mid Day Meal Scheme was introduced in  Kerala  in 1984, and was gradually expanded to include more schools and grades. By 1990–91, twelve states were funding the scheme to all or most of the students in their area:  Goa , Gujarat, Kerala, Madhya Pradesh,  Maharashtra ,  Meghalaya ,  Mizoram ,  Nagaland ,  Sikkim , Tamil Nadu,  Tripura  and  Uttar Pradesh .  Karnataka ,  Orissa , and West Bengal received international aid to help with implementation of the programme, and in  Andhra Pradesh  and  Rajasthan  the programme was funded entirely using foreign aid.

5. international voluntary/charity organizations have assisted.  Church World Service  has provided milk powder to Delhi and Madras Municipal Corporation;  CARE  has provided corn soya meal, Bulgar wheat, and vegetable oils; and  UNICEF  has provided high proteins foods and educational support. In 1982, 'Food for Learning' was launched with assistance from the  Food and Agriculture Organization  (FAO). Initially the programme was aimed at Scheduled Caste and Scheduled Tribe girls. In 1983, the federal Department of Education prepared a scheme under the auspices of the  World Food Programme  to supply meals to 13.6 million Scheduled Caste girls and 10.09 million Scheduled Tribe girls in classes I-V in 15 states and three union territories. The value of the food itself was $163.27 million per year .   Labor, facilities, and transportation costs were to be paid by the State governments. The reaction among the states and union territories was mixed. Many states were interested, but some were concerned about their ability to afford it if the FAO support were to be withdrawn. initiatives by the Central government International assistance

6. Supreme court order In April 2001,  People’s Union for Civil Liberties  (PUCL) initiated the  public interest litigation  (Civil) No. 196/2001, People’s Union for Civil Liberties v. Union of India & Others (PUCL )  – popularly known as the "Right to food" case. PUCL argued that  Article 21  – " Right to life" of Indian Constitution when read together with Articles 39 (a) and  47 , makes the Right to Food a derived  Fundamental Right  which is enforceable by virtue of the constitutional remedy provided under  Article 32  of the Constitution. PUCL argued that excess food stocks with the  Food Corporation of India  should be fed to hungry citizens. This included providing mid day meals in primary schools. The scheme came into force with the Supreme Court order dated 28 November 2001 , which requires all government and government-assisted primary schools to provide cooked midday meals.

7. Finances The central and state governments share the cost of the Midday Meal Scheme, with the center providing 75 percent and the states 25 percent. The central government provides grains and financing for other food. Costs for facilities, transportation, and labor is shared by the federal and state governments. The participating states contribute different amounts of money .  While the eleventh five-year plan allocated INR.38,490,0000,000 for the scheme, the twelfth five-year plan has allocated INR .90,1550,000,000, a 134 percent rise .  The public expenditure for the Mid Day Meal Programme has gone up from Rs. 73,240,000,000 in 2007–08 to Rs. 132,150,000,000 in 2013–14.The per day cooking cost per child at the primary level has been fixed to 3.59 while at the upper primary level is 5.38.

8. The MDM scheme has many potential benefits: attracting children from disadvantaged sections (especially girls, Dalit's and Adivasis) to school, improving regularity, nutritional benefits, socialization benefits and benefits to women are some that have been highlighted . Studies by economists show that some of these benefits have indeed been realized. The positive effect on enrollment of disadvantaged children (Druze and Kingdom), on attendance (by Chakraborty , Jayaraman , Pande ),  on learning effort (by Booruah , Afridi and Somanathan ), on improving nutritional inputs ( Afridi ), on improving nutritional outcomes (by Singh, Dercon and Parker), and so on. Caste based discrimination continues to occur in the serving of food, though the government seems unwilling to acknowledge this. Sukhdeo Thorat and Joel Lee found in their 2005 study that caste discrimination was occurring in conjunction with the Mid Day Meals programme. Evaluation of the scheme

9. Media reports also document the positive effect of the programme for women, especially working women and its popularity among parents, children and teachers alike. Media reports have also highlighted several implementation issues, including irregularity, corruption, hygiene, caste discrimination, etc. A few such incidents are listed below: -In December 2005, Delhi police seized eight trucks laden with 2,760 sacks of rice meant for primary school children. The rice was being transported from Food Corporation of India godowns  Bulandshahr district  to North Delhi. The police stopped the trucks and investigators later discovered that the rice was being stolen by an NGO . - In November 2006, the residents of Pembong village (30 km from  Darjeeling ) accused a group of teachers of embezzling midday meals. In a written complaint, the residents claimed that students at the primary school had not received their midday meal for the past year and a half.

10. - In December 2006,  The Times of India  reported that school staff were inflating attendance in order to obtain food grains . -Twenty-three children died in Dharma Sati village in Saran District on 16 July 2013 after eating pesticide-contaminated mid day meals.On 31 July 2013, 55 students at a government middle school fell ill at Kalyuga village in Jamui district after their midday meal provided by an NGO. On the same day, 95 students at Chamandi primary school in Arwal district were ill after their meal . - In November 2006, the residents of Pembong village (30 km from  Darjeeling ) accused a group of teachers of embezzling midday meals. In a written complaint, the residents claimed that students at the primary school had not received their midday meal for the past year and a half.

11. Despite the success of the program, child hunger as a problem persists in India. According to current statistics, 42.5% of the children under 5 are underweight. Some simple health measures such as using iodized salt and getting vaccinations are uncommon in India. "India is home to the world's largest food insecure population, with more than 500 million people who are hungry", India State Hunger Index (ISHI) said. Many children don't get enough to eat, which has far-reaching implications for the performance of the country as a whole. "Its rates of child malnutrition is higher than most countries in Sub-Saharan Africa," it noted. The 2009 Global Hunger Index  ranked India at 65 out of 84 countries. More than 200 million went hungry in India that year, more than any other country in the world. The report states that "improving child nutrition is of utmost urgency in most Indian states". Criticism

12. THE END