Mid Day Meal Scheme: Education Aspirations Outweigh Free Meals For Some Poor Families

Some low-income families are opting for low-cost private schools over government schools despite the latter offering free cooked meals, believing that private institutions provide better education.

A small study by researchers from IIT Kanpur and Lancaster University has highlighted how parental aspirations, perceptions of school quality and social stigma can influence decisions to access India's ambitious Mid-day Meal Scheme launched three decades ago across the country.

However, this choice comes at a cost. Some families reported cutting back on food expenditure at home to pay private school fees, adding to the financial strain on already stretched household budgets.

The findings raise questions about whether the programme needs to look beyond nutrition and school attendance to address the wider concerns shaping families' choices.

Published in the Journal of Social Policy, the study draws on interviews with 246 members of 60 low-income households in Uttar Pradesh and Goa. While its limited sample does not establish a nationwide trend, it offers insights into why some economically disadvantaged families may not avail themselves of free school meals. It also calls for a large study to find out the trend across the country.

The scheme provides free cooked meals to around 118 million children in government and government-aided schools. It was designed to address classroom hunger, improve children's nutritional status and encourage school attendance.

However, the researchers found that some parents prioritised what they perceived as better educational opportunities in low-cost private schools over the benefit of free meals available in government schools. For these families, educational aspirations appeared to outweigh the immediate economic advantage of the scheme.

The choice, however, could come at a cost. Some families reported cutting down on food expenditure at home to meet private school fees, adding to the financial pressure on already stretched household budgets.

The study also identified social stigma as a factor influencing the acceptance of free meals. Associations with poverty and social disadvantage, shaped by caste, class, gender and religion, sometimes made children uncomfortable about standing in queues for food or asking for additional servings.

For the poorest households, other considerations also came into play. The need for children to contribute to household work and indirect schooling expenses, including transport, could outweigh the benefit of a free meal.

Dr Swayamshree Mishra, lead author of the study from Lancaster University's School of Social Sciences, said the Mid-day Meal Scheme remains a lifeline for families facing extreme hardship. However, parents do not assess school meals solely in terms of nutrition. Their decisions are also influenced by hopes for their children's education, dignity and everyday economic pressures.

The researchers have called for a broader approach to the programme, including improving infrastructure in government schools to strengthen parents' confidence in public education, involving communities in designing menus and adopting communication strategies to reduce the stigma associated with free meals.

They have also recommended addressing indirect schooling costs, such as transport, and recognising how school meals ease the daily caregiving burden on working mothers.

While the findings cannot be generalised to all beneficiaries, they point to an important policy consideration: improving the nutritional content of meals alone may not be sufficient to ensure wider participation. The scheme's effectiveness is also linked to the quality of government schools, parents' educational aspirations and the social circumstances in which families make schooling decisions.

Charumita Vasudev from IIT Kanpur and co-author of the study said the programme needs to be viewed as part of a broader strategy connecting child nutrition, quality education, household food security and social dignity.

The other researchers of the study were Ankita Rathi and Jasmine Fledderjohann from Lancaster University's School of Social Sciences, and Sukumar Vellakkal from IIT Kanpur's Department of Economic Sciences.