March 11, 2016

Infrastructural problems impede Ghana School Feeding Programme
Masahudu Ankiilu Kunateh, Ghanadot

Accra, May 6, Ghanadot - Studies have shown that poor basic infrastructural services in the area of health, agricultural and education couple with overall weakness in institutional collaboration between the Ghana School Feeding Programme (GSFP) and its collaborative decentralized ministries are impeding the implementation of the programme.

According to report entitled “Challenges of Institutional Collaboration” which was conducted and commissioned by SEND Ghana, a Non-Governmental Organisation (NGO) disclosed that about 61% of beneficiary schools of the programme did not have good kitchen structures.

While about 78% of schools did not have adequate stock of kitchenware especially plates and cups. As a result pupils were required to eat in turns such that one cluster was served after the other has finished using the plates and cups.

This coping strategy unduly prolonged lunch breaks in the affected beneficiary schools, thus reducing contact/instructional hours with negative effectives on the education.

The study covered a total of 21 districts purposively selected from the Upper West, Upper East, Northern and Greater Regions based on the active presence of SEND Ghana in those districts. Indeed, the operational districts of SEND Ghana are among those with the highest poverty incidence in Ghana and as such, by extension, it could be said that the selection of the 21 districts for the study was based on their high levels of poverty.

The also revealed that among the 83% of schools provided with water tanks, about 37% of the tanks supplied were not in use due to operational challenges.

In some cases, the water tanks supplied have not been used for the past two years due to the inability to connect the tanks to water source.

In other cases, the disuse of water tanks has resulted from the poor access of some schools to a water source. Such cases are indicative of the cost associated with the formulation of national plans without the inclusion of the views of the various School Implementation Committees (SICs) to reflect local realities.

Furthermore, about 43% of beneficiary schools did not have access to safe water. This compelled pupils to take time off to trek for water to support the feeding programme.

Nearly 26% of beneficiary schools have no access to toilet facilities with about 35% lacking urinal facilities. This has serious implications for school attendance of adolescent girls especially during menstruation.

To add up, almost 87% of beneficiary schools lacked hand-washing facilities. This is serious given the health implications of the intake of faecal matter associated with poor sanitation and eating with unclean hands.

Launching the report in Accra, the Head of Social Policy Department of the University of Ghana, Dr. Ellen Bortei-Doku announced that cooks operating in about 22% of beneficiary schools have not undergone any training in nutrition and hygiene.

Consequently, basic health standards were not observed in the preparation and serving of food to pupils in the affected schools.

Remarkably, pupils in all the beneficiary schools were given health education. In most schools, some teachers were specially trained to provide health education to pupils.

However, nearly 70% of beneficiary schools have not received any training in the maintenance of water and sanitation facilities.

She stressed that supervisory inspections in about 96% beneficiary schools did not focus on any health related services or adherence to health standards in the feeding programme but mainly on getting pupils fed.

Also, monitoring of the programme was predominantly done by the GSFP desk officers without the active involvement of the Ghana Health Service (GHS).

Contrary to expectations, the bulk of foodstuffs used for the feeding programme were procured from the open markets within and outside of the various districts.

Although in some cases, certain ingredients for the programme were not locally available or produced in sufficient quantities, the programme failed to buy from farmers in cases where foodstuffs were available.

Ghanadot