Scottish Milk and Healthy Snack Scheme and the Scottish School Milk Scheme: data collection

Executive Summary

Background and Methodology

This report provides an analysis of data collected on the operation of the Scottish Milk and Healthy Snack Scheme (SMHSS) and local authority school milk schemes to support the new Scottish School Milk Subsidy Scheme (SSMSS). The research, conducted through surveys issued to local authorities, childcare settings including childminders, and suppliers, aims to understand the costs involved in providing milk, non-dairy alternatives, and healthy snacks. This understanding is intended to inform the ongoing development and improvement of both schemes.

The Scottish Milk and Healthy Snack Scheme (SMHSS)

Launched on 1 August 2021, the SMHSS replaced the UK Nursery Milk Scheme. It supports child health by encouraging positive dietary habits, offering funding to eligible childcare settings for providing milk (or non-dairy alternatives) and healthy snacks to pre-school children in registered day care settings. The scheme covers the cost of 189mls of milk (or non-dairy alternative) and a portion of fruit or vegetables per child per day. The current national rate is 58.2p per eligible child per day, applicable across all settings and local authorities.

Data from local authorities showed there were 3,354 registered childcare settings and 140,834 children benefitting from the scheme in April 2023; an increase of 280 settings and 25,000 children compared to August 2021.

The Scottish School Milk Scheme (SSMS) and Scottish School Milk Subsidy Scheme (SSMSS)

The current School Milk Scheme (SMS) arrangements came to a close on 30 June and data in this report refers to this support. Local authorities in Scotland can offer school milk schemes tailored to their local needs. A new SMSS has been developed, aiming to provide direct funding to allow local authorities to offer local school milk schemes in their primary and special schools. The new scheme also includes non-dairy options to ensure inclusivity for all pupils.

Methodology

Diffley Partnership conducted the data collection through online forms developed in partnership with the Scottish Government. The development of these forms was also informed by engagement with the SMHSS Implementation and Operation Group.^[1] Three forms were issued which targeted local authorities, childcare settings, and suppliers for the SMHSS, while one form was issued to each local authority for the SSMSS. Responses were analysed to provide an overview of each scheme's operations and associated costs. However, some data limitations were noted, including incomplete records and information not being tracked.

SMHSS Provision

Response

The survey reached out to all 32 local authorities in Scotland, of which 31 submitted a response.

In terms of settings, 582 Early Learning and Childcare (ELC) settings responded to the data collection exercise. The composition of settings responding was as follows:

73% of the responses were from daycare settings (nurseries, playgroups, creches), and 27% were from childminders. This is noteworthy compared to Care Inspectorate data, which shows 79% of registered settings are daycare and 21% are childminders, indicating a higher proportional response rate from childminders.

Responses were almost evenly split between Private, Voluntary, or Independent (PVI) settings (56%) and local authority settings (44%).

Participation in the SMHSS was reported from settings across all 32 local authority areas in Scotland.

Provision of the SMHSS by Local Authorities

Among the 31 local authorities that responded to the request for information, 27 supplied detailed data regarding their childcare and daycare settings enrolled in the SMHSS. These 27 local authorities reported a total of 469 childminder settings and 1,788 daycare settings participating in the SMHSS. The four remaining local authorities pass funding directly onto individual settings to source their own milk or healthy snacks.

From all 31 local authority areas, the vast majority (81%) reported sourcing milk, 61% sourced healthy snacks, and 48% provided non-dairy alternatives. When excluding the four authorities that reported only passing on funding to settings, the figures showed that all these local authorities sourced dairy milk, with 76% sourcing healthy snacks and 60% sourcing non-dairy alternatives.

The primary factors influencing local authority sourcing decisions included cost (52%), the range of available options (23%), and convenience (13%). Additionally, considerations such as product quality and procurement contracts were significant.

Provision by Settings

A total of 488 (out of 582) settings that responded provided detailed information on their provision, representing a substantial engagement from various types of childcare settings. As of 1 August 2023, these settings reported a total enrolment of 20,795 children in the SMHSS.

In terms of sourcing milk, almost all (97%) of responding settings reported sourcing milk through the SMHSS. Additionally, 89% provided a healthy snack, while 50% offered non-dairy alternatives. However, only 4% sourced first infant formula, indicating a lower demand or logistical challenges in providing this option.

Cost was identified as the main driver for sourcing decisions by 57% of settings, with notable differences between Private, Voluntary, and Independent (PVI) settings and Local Authority (LA) settings. PVI settings prioritised cost (71%) and convenience (66%) more than LA settings (41% and 34%, respectively), likely due to the different procurement support available to them. Similarly, childminder settings cited cost (78%) and convenience (64%) more frequently than daycare settings (50% and 47%, respectively).

The methods of sourcing also varied significantly, with 39% of settings purchasing milk from a shop, 36% using a milk agent, and 14% sourcing directly from a dairy. PVI settings were more likely to purchase from shops (61%) compared to LA settings (12%), which often relied on supply from local authorities (76%).

Provision of Dairy and Non-Dairy Products

All participating settings provided cow’s milk, with minimal provision of goat or sheep milk. Most settings (77%) reported providing milk in 200ml portions, which differed from the 189ml recommended under the SMHSS.

In contrast, non-dairy alternatives saw a diverse range of provisions. Oat milk emerged as the most commonly used alternative, provided by 80% of settings and 14 local authorities, despite Soya being the recommended non-dairy alternative under the SMHSS Statutory Guidance. Soya milk was also popular, supplied by 40% of settings and 11 local authorities. Almond and coconut milk were less frequently provided. Sourcing practices for non-dairy alternatives showed a preference for purchasing from shops (64%) or through local authority suppliers. The Soya Drink Specification was utilised by 56% of local authorities but was less common among settings (32%).

The reasons settings gave for not using the Soya Drink Specification included logistical challenges, supplier limitations, and the perceived need for a medical diet action plan for non-dairy alternatives under SMHSS. To note that this is not a requirement under the SMHSS Statutory Guidance, families can opt for a non-dairy alternative for medical, ethical or religious reasons. Preferences for alternatives like oat milk were often based on children’s tastes and the availability of options.

Provision of Healthy Snacks

The types of healthy snacks provided under the scheme varied widely, reflecting seasonal availability and children's preferences. Fruits such as apples, bananas, and berries, alongside vegetables like carrots and cucumbers, were common. Some settings also offered items outside the scheme's scope, like breadsticks and cheese, indicating potential misunderstanding or non-reference to the scheme’s Statutory Guidance.

Portion sizes for snacks were reported as flexible and tailored to individual needs, with measurements ranging from grams to hand-sized portions or whole pieces of fruit. This variability acknowledges the practical challenges in standardising portions and emphasises the importance of adaptability in providing nutritious snacks.

Most settings (87%) reported offering additional meals or snacks beyond those provided under the SMHSS, demonstrating a commitment to comprehensive child nutrition. Prior to enrolment in the SMHSS, 95% of settings already provided meals or snacks, underscoring the scheme's role in enhancing and supplementing existing provisions.

Two-thirds of settings sourced healthy snacks from shops, while about a quarter relied on local authority suppliers. This distribution indicates a blend of centralised and decentralised procurement practices, reflecting the diverse operational structures of childcare settings.

In summary, the provision of the SMHSS by local authorities and childcare settings highlights extensive engagement and varied approaches to sourcing and providing milk, snacks, and non-dairy alternatives depending on circumstance and whether settings are private or local authority settings.

SMHSS Contracts

Contracts - Local Authorities

Among the 31 local authorities that responded, only eight reported operating a single contract covering all milk, non-dairy alternatives, and first infant formula. Notably, three of these contracts also included the provision of a healthy snack. Contract periods varied, with four of the eight single contracts spanning 2-4 years. Prices were not fixed for any of these contracts, with most undergoing annual price reviews.

Fourteen local authorities reported having specific contracts for cow’s milk, leaving nine without contractual ties to any supplier. No contracts were reported for sheep’s milk, goat’s milk, or first infant formula. The most common contract length for cow's milk was 2-4 years, with five local authorities adhering to this period. Five other authorities had shorter contracts of 12 months to two years, and four were committed for at least four years. Only four authorities had fixed prices for the duration of their contracts, with costs reviewed semi-annually or annually.

Seven local authorities had contracts specifically for non-dairy alternatives. These contracts did not feature fixed prices and typically lasted 2-4 years, with price reviews occurring every six months for four contracts and annually for the rest.

Healthy Snack Contracts

Seven local authorities maintained contracts for the supply of healthy snacks. Three authorities had contracts lasting 2-4 years, one had a contract of 12 months to two years, and the remaining three were committed for at least four years. Prices were fixed in two out of the seven contracts, with annual reviews being the norm.

Childcare Settings

Nearly half (47%) of childcare settings reported that their local authority managed all their supply contracts for the SMHSS. Specifically, 58% indicated that local authorities handled dairy milk contracts, 42% for non-dairy alternatives, and 56% for healthy snacks. However, only 20% reported that local authorities managed the costs and contracts for first infant formula.

Only 11% of settings reported having a single contract covering milk, non-dairy alternatives, and first infant formula. Out of these, 25 settings managed such a single contract, with seven including healthy snacks. The most common contract period was 12 months to two years, with 14 settings committed for this duration. Seven settings had fixed prices for their contract period, with annual reviews being the standard for those without fixed prices.

For settings without a single contract, 11% had contracts specifically for cow’s milk, 2% for non-dairy alternatives, 1% for sheep milk, and 1% for healthy snacks.

Cost Analysis

Local Authorities

Local authorities were surveyed on how costs and purchasing decisions for the SMHSS were made. Half (50%) indicated that decisions were shared between the local authority and individual childcare settings. This mixed approach influences the data on contracts and costs, highlighting variations based on purchasing methods (e.g. direct shop purchases not requiring contracts) and product types. A quarter (27%) of local authorities made centralised decisions, while 23% left decisions to individual settings.

Per-serving costs for various milk types and non-dairy alternatives, revealed consistent pricing for semi-skimmed and whole cow’s milk with mean and median values at £0.23. Non-dairy alternatives were generally more expensive, with a mean cost of £0.32 and a median of £0.35. No data was available for goat or sheep’s milk or first infant formula due to limited demand.

The services included in the milk unit price varied, with delivery being the most common service reported by 17 authorities for milk and 11 for non-dairy alternatives. Other services, such as beakers or jugs, were rarely included, indicating a focus primarily on delivery logistics.

There were fewer healthy snack costs provided by local authorities as many settings managed the sourcing of healthy snacks themselves. The mean cost for all healthy snacks was £0.25 and the median was £0.23 for local authorities.

Childcare Settings

The cost data for various milk and alternative products in childcare settings are presented below:

• Semi-skimmed cow’s milk: Mean cost £0.27, median £0.17
• Whole cow’s milk: Mean cost £0.31, median £0.22
• Semi-skimmed goat’s milk: Mean cost £0.76, median £0.49
• Whole goat’s milk: Mean cost £0.76, median £0.49
• Semi-skimmed sheep milk: Mean cost £0.27, median £0.25
• Whole sheep milk: Mean cost £0.33, median £0.40
• Non-dairy alternative: Mean cost £0.59, median £0.40
• First infant formula: Mean cost £1.29, median £1.20

The data shows significant variability across different products, with non-dairy alternatives and first infant formula being notably more expensive. However, very few settings reported any first infant formula costs. This variation impacts the affordability and accessibility of these products for childcare settings.

Healthy Snacks

A wide range of healthy snack costs was reported by settings, with an average cost per portion of £0.27 and a median of £0.20 once non-compliant snacks and outliers were removed. The cost range was broad, reflecting the variety of snacks provided and the flexibility required to meet the nutritional needs and preferences of children.

Summary

The analysis of SMHSS contracts and costs highlights the complexities and variances in how local authorities and childcare settings manage and finance the provision of milk, non-dairy alternatives, and healthy snacks. Single contracts, though streamlined, are infrequently used, suggesting a preference for flexibility and responsiveness to price fluctuations and supplier availability. The mixed decision-making processes further complicate the picture, as they lead to a diverse range of contractual obligations and cost structures. This diversity underscores the need for ongoing assessment and potential standardisation to ensure equitable and efficient delivery of the SMHSS across Scotland.

Scottish School Milk Schemes

The data gathered from local authorities provides analysis of the school milk schemes currently being offered across Scotland. It should be noted that many local authorities reported that they did not operate a milk scheme and many who did complete the return gave incomplete information suggesting that information is not currently being tracked centrally in many local authorities. Before any new scheme is delivered it would be prudent for Scottish Government to set clear expectations of local authorities regarding which data they should be storing and able to report in relation to the scheme.

It should be noted that while local authorities have the powers to offer a school milk scheme if they deem it appropriate to support local needs and priorities, they are not under a statutory obligation to do so. Where local authorities chose to run school milk schemes, it is for them to design and implement them in line with local circumstances. Therefore, local authorities may oversee schemes with varying degrees of formality and delegation to the school level to deliver based on each school’s specific context and needs. As such the level of data or reporting on each school milk scheme or arrangement may vary. It is therefore recognised that this will have an effect on the amount of data each local authority has been able to provide as part of this exercise.

Uptake of the School Milk Schemes

Schemes were reported as being offered in Primary schools at a higher rate than other types of school. In responses from local authorities, a total of 1,037 primary schools, 57 special schools and 22 secondary schools were reported as being covered by the SMS.

Provision of Non-Dairy Products

The data indicates a growing recognition of dietary diversity and the need to consider varying pupil preferences and requirements. While dairy milk remains a staple in school milk schemes, 752 primary schools, 22 secondary schools, and 43 special schools operating a milk scheme were reported to be offering non-dairy alternatives. This trend reflects a proactive approach toward inclusivity and accommodation of pupils with specific dietary needs or preferences.

Fruit/Vegetable or Healthy Snack Provision

The provision of healthy snacks as part of school milk schemes was less prevalent across all school types. Only 19% of primary schools, 1% of secondary schools, and 15% of special schools operating a milk scheme were reported as offering such snacks. However, many local authorities were unable to provide information about the uptake of this offer.

Costs and Supply

Analysis of cost data revealed notable variation in the expenses attributed to with providing milk and non-dairy alternatives. The median cost of providing dairy milk is £0.28, with a mean cost of £0.30 across 12 local authorities. For non-dairy alternatives, the mean cost was £0.38 and median cost is £0.30 based on data from 7 local authorities. Limited data availability for fruit/vegetable costs suggests a need for improved data collection mechanisms and transparency in cost reporting.

Milk Procurement and Service

The primary sources of milk procurement vary among local authorities, with Scotland Excel emerging as the prominent public procurement service. Milk agents and direct supply from dairies also appear to play significant roles in procurement. Milk is primarily served during interval and lunchtime, with canteen staff and teachers being the main administrators. Pouring from larger cartons into cups is the predominant method of milk service.