← Sitora Research
Public health & policy · August 2026

Beyond Compliance: School Health Reform 2026

Reforming school food, health education and physical activity in England, with Lancashire as a 2026 case study.

Core proposition

England should move from minimum school-food compliance to measurable responsibility for the health environment schools create.

Why school policy matters

Schools do not cause childhood obesity on their own. Family income, neighbourhood food environments, genetics, sleep, marketing, activity and wider social conditions all matter.

But the school day is one of the few environments government can influence repeatedly across childhood through food, health education and opportunities for movement.

Compliance does not always mean the healthiest pattern is the default

The current English School Food Standards contain meaningful protections. The report argues that the next question should be broader: what dietary pattern is the school normalising five days a week?

In the Lancashire Spring/Summer 2026 primary menu analysed for the report, a sweet headline dessert appeared on 12 of 15 days, while fruit, yoghurt and other alternatives were also available. This does not show what individual children ate. It shows how menu architecture can repeatedly foreground one choice over another.

International systems point to different design tools

France

Cycle-based frequency rules make repeated menu patterns measurable.

Finland

A balanced daily meal is defined positively and connected to pupil welfare and education.

Japan

Food education is integrated into school life so the canteen and curriculum reinforce each other.

Brazil

Public procurement rules shape what can be bought with school-food funding before it reaches the menu.

A whole-school health standard

The proposal combines three areas government often treats separately: what children are fed, what they are taught about health and how much opportunity they have to move. The aim is to align the food environment, health education and physical activity rather than run them as disconnected initiatives.

The Healthy School Score

The suggested 100-point score measures factors the school can control. It deliberately excludes individual pupil BMI and avoids equating local obesity prevalence with school quality.

45

Food environment

Menu standards, fruit and vegetables, wholegrains, pulses, sweet-food frequency, processing, drinks and ingredient transparency.

20

Health & food education

Curriculum delivery, food literacy, cooking, parent communication and consistency between teaching and catering.

25

Physical activity

PE provision, daily movement, extracurricular activity, inclusive participation and active travel.

10

Improvement & governance

Evidence quality, annual review, response to findings, improvement plans and governing-body oversight.

Implementation should be firm but fair

1. Legislate
2. Transition
3. Monitor
4. Improve first, escalate later

Government should define stronger measurable standards first, give schools and caterers time to adapt, then introduce annual evidence-based monitoring. A weak score should trigger practical correction and re-review before punitive escalation.

Safeguard against stigma

A public score should never include individual pupil weight, named health data or a simplistic obesity-rate league table. It should measure the environment created by the school and show context, evidence dates and improvement status.

Related Sitora research