DepEd Order No. 013, s. 2026 • School-Based Feeding Program • School Health and Nutrition
DepEd Order No. 013, s. 2026: Complete Guide to the School-Based Feeding Program
The School-Based Feeding Program, or SBFP, remains one of the Department of Education’s major interventions for improving learner health, nutrition, attendance, school participation, and readiness to learn. Through DepEd Order No. 013, s. 2026, the Department of Education provides institutional guidelines for the planning, implementation, monitoring, evaluation, and reporting of the SBFP in public schools.
This guide explains the important provisions of the Order in clear and practical terms for school heads, teachers, feeding coordinators, health personnel, parents, local government partners, and other education stakeholders.
What Is the School-Based Feeding Program?
The School-Based Feeding Program is a nutrition and education intervention that provides targeted learners with safe, adequate, and nutritious food. It is not merely a meal distribution activity. It is designed to support learners’ physical growth, improve nutritional status, strengthen attendance, promote classroom participation, and contribute to better learning outcomes.
The program is anchored on Republic Act No. 11037, also known as the Masustansyang Pagkain para sa Batang Pilipino Act. Under the 2026 guidelines, SBFP implementation is further strengthened through clearer rules on target beneficiaries, feeding modalities, cycle menu development, food safety, procurement, partnerships, monitoring, and reporting.
Why the New SBFP Guidelines Matter
Poor nutrition affects more than physical health. It can affect concentration, attendance, school participation, behavior, and academic performance. A learner who comes to school hungry or undernourished may find it harder to focus, participate, and complete learning tasks.
DepEd Order No. 013, s. 2026 recognizes this connection between nutrition and learning. The Order positions the SBFP as a strategic platform for delivering targeted nutrition support while also contributing to broader education outcomes.
Main Policy Direction: Transition Toward Hot Meals
One of the most important directions of the Order is the gradual transition of the SBFP toward freshly prepared hot meals. The policy states that SBFP shall progressively move toward hot meal implementation, with the objective that all SBFP beneficiaries shall be provided with hot meals by 2030.
This means that while Nutritious Food Products, or NFPs, may still be used in certain situations, they are not the preferred long-term approach. The preferred modality is the provision of daily freshly prepared hot meals, subject to school capacity, available resources, infrastructure, supply chain, and other local conditions.
Scope of the Guidelines
The guidelines govern the planning, implementation, monitoring, evaluation, and reporting of the School-Based Feeding Program. They apply to the DepEd Central Office, Regional Offices, Schools Division Offices, and all public elementary and secondary schools implementing the SBFP.
The guidelines cover major components such as feeding modalities, implementation strategies, school kitchen and infrastructure development, procurement of food supplies and related services, human resource support, capacity building, fund management, financial accountability, audit compliance, risk management, monitoring, and reporting.
Target Beneficiaries of the SBFP
The SBFP covers public elementary and secondary schools. However, the program prioritizes specific groups of learners depending on their nutritional status, grade level, vulnerability, and available funds.
Primary Beneficiaries
The primary beneficiaries include learners from Kindergarten to Grade 6 who are classified as wasted, severely wasted, severely stunted, or stunted. For Fiscal Year 2026, the program also covers all incoming Kindergarten and Grade 1 learners under a universal feeding directive, in addition to Grades 2 to 6 learners who fall under the identified nutritional categories.
Other primary beneficiaries include learners at risk of dropping out, Indigenous People learners, learners from indigent families, pregnant adolescent learners, enrolled adolescent mothers with zero to one-year-old children, and undernourished learners belonging to vulnerable and marginalized groups beyond Grade 6.
Secondary Beneficiaries
Secondary beneficiaries may be accommodated subject to availability of funds. These include other enrollees in IP Schools and Last Mile Schools with a population of 100 learners and below, learners in Special Needs Education, Alternative Learning System learners, and members of school sports clubs.
| Beneficiary Group | Priority Level | Key Consideration |
|---|---|---|
| Incoming Kindergarten and Grade 1 learners | Primary | Covered under universal feeding directive for FY 2026 |
| Grades 2 to 6 learners who are wasted, severely wasted, severely stunted, or stunted | Primary | Based on nutritional assessment |
| Learners at risk of dropping out | Primary | Supports attendance and school participation |
| IP learners and learners from indigent families | Primary | Recognizes vulnerability and access concerns |
| Pregnant adolescent learners and adolescent mothers | Primary | Supports nutritionally vulnerable learners |
| SNED, ALS, Last Mile School learners, and school sports club members | Secondary | Subject to availability of funds |
Duration of Feeding Days
The SBFP shall be implemented for a minimum of 120 feeding days to achieve a significant impact on the nutritional status of learners. Subject to availability of funds, the feeding period may be extended to a maximum of 220 feeding days, including academic breaks or summer remediation programs.
For School Year 2026–2027, fortified meals shall be provided for 200 feeding days. This may still be adjusted depending on conditions and availability of funds.
| Feeding Period | Number of Days | Remarks |
|---|---|---|
| Minimum feeding period | 120 feeding days | Required to achieve significant nutritional impact |
| Maximum feeding period | 220 feeding days | Subject to availability of funds |
| SY 2026–2027 | 200 feeding days | Subject to fund availability and possible adjustments |
Feeding Commodities Under the SBFP
The SBFP provides food commodities designed to meet the nutritional needs of targeted learners, improve dietary diversity, and support learner health.
1. Fortified Meals
Fortified meals may be in the form of hot meals or Nutritious Food Products. Hot meals are freshly prepared meals with increased essential micronutrients and should provide at least one-third of the daily requirement based on the Philippine Dietary Reference Intake.
Nutritious Food Products, or NFPs, are food products that meet the nutritional standards prescribed and recommended by DOST-FNRI and approved by DOH-NNC for feeding programs.
2. Milk
Milk feeding shall be implemented in accordance with joint guidelines issued by DepEd and the Department of Agriculture-Philippine Carabao Center. Schools shall serve as drop-off points for milk commodities intended for milk feeding.
Feeding Modalities
The Order provides different feeding modalities to allow a phased and practical transition toward hot meal provision. Schools and SDOs must consider their current capacity, infrastructure, manpower, kitchen facilities, supply chain, and operational realities.
1. Pure Hot Meals
This is the preferred feeding modality. It provides beneficiaries with freshly prepared, nutritionally balanced hot meals daily for a minimum of 120 and a maximum of 220 feeding days per school year.
Meals may be prepared in kitchens managed by DepEd, supported by the LGU, operated by accredited partners, or provided through accredited catering services. All meals must follow approved cycle menus and food safety standards.
2. Combination or Hybrid Modality
The hybrid modality consists of hot meals and NFPs provided alternately based on the approved cycle menu. The Order recommends that hot meals should make up at least 60 percent of the cycle menu.
This modality may be adopted by schools or clusters with limited kitchen capacity or those still transitioning toward full hot meal implementation.
3. NFP as Transitional Modality
In areas where daily hot meal provision is not immediately feasible due to documented infrastructure, geographic, logistical, operational, or supply-chain constraints, NFPs may be allowed as a transitional modality.
However, this cannot be used simply for convenience. The SDO must submit justification, subject to approval by the Regional Office. A capacity assessment is required to determine the feasible ratio of hot meals and NFPs.
Capacity Assessment: A Critical Requirement
Before deciding on the feeding modality, SDOs are required to conduct a capacity assessment. This assessment helps determine whether schools can implement pure hot meals, hybrid feeding, or NFP-based transitional feeding.
The assessment should consider available kitchens, manpower, feeding spaces, food preparation capacity, supply chain, local suppliers, facilities, and the nutritional needs of learners.
For school heads, this means that the first major step is not menu preparation. The first major step is determining whether the school has the actual capacity to implement hot meals safely, regularly, and properly.
Implementation Modalities
The SBFP may be implemented through different operational arrangements depending on available resources, local capacity, and partnerships.
DepEd-Led Implementation
Under DepEd-led implementation, DepEd offices and schools assume primary responsibility for the planning, coordination, execution, and monitoring of SBFP operations.
LGU-Led Implementation
Under LGU-led implementation, the program may be carried out in partnership with local government units. This approach may use existing LGU feeding systems, facilities, manpower, and local supply chains.
LGU-led implementation must be covered by a Memorandum of Agreement that clearly defines roles, responsibilities, resource commitments, accountability mechanisms, fund transfer or billing arrangements, reporting requirements, and compliance with auditing and procurement rules.
Partnerships With Non-Government Stakeholders
The Order also recognizes partnerships with non-government stakeholders such as NGOs, CSOs, faith-based organizations, and private sector partners. These partnerships may support capacity building, manpower, facilities, equipment, and food commodities.
However, all partner-led feeding initiatives must still follow DepEd-approved menus, food safety standards, operational protocols, reporting requirements, and applicable government rules.
Step-by-Step SBFP Implementation Process
The Order outlines a structured sequence for SBFP implementation. This ensures that feeding is systematic, safe, accountable, and aligned with nutritional goals.
| Stage | Description | School-Level Focus |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Pre-Implementation and Planning | Set objectives, schedules, resources, and operational arrangements. | Assess kitchen, manpower, feeding space, partners, and supplies. |
| 2. Learner and School Preparation | Prepare learners, personnel, facilities, and stakeholders. | Conduct nutritional assessment, deworming, and facility checks. |
| 3. Cycle Menu Development | Develop nutritionally balanced menus. | Coordinate with SDO and use approved cycle menus. |
| 4. Procurement Management | Source food supplies and services according to procurement rules. | Ensure proper documentation and compliance. |
| 5. Food Preparation and Safety | Prepare food according to approved menus and safety standards. | Observe hygiene, quality control, and proper food handling. |
| 6. Food Distribution and Actual Feeding | Distribute meals and conduct actual feeding. | Monitor feeding, handwashing, cleanliness, and waste management. |
| 7. Operational Monitoring | Monitor compliance, quality, progress, and effectiveness. | Prepare reports, records, and implementation evidence. |
Pre-Implementation and Planning
Prior to the feeding period, SBFP implementers must establish a strong operational foundation. This includes conducting an inventory and capacity assessment of kitchens, identifying functional canteens that may serve as kitchens, determining the appropriate feeding modality for each school or cluster of schools, engaging partners, consolidating infrastructure and manpower needs, and conducting market scoping.
This stage is important because weak planning leads to weak implementation. If schools do not assess their facilities, manpower, suppliers, and learners’ needs before feeding begins, they may encounter problems in food safety, procurement, distribution, documentation, and reporting.
Cycle Menu Development
Cycle menu development is central to the quality of the feeding program. Menus must be balanced, culturally appropriate, cost-effective, and nutritionally adequate.
The Order requires the menu to provide at least one-third of the recommended energy or nutrient intake. It also encourages the use of the Pinggang Pinoy model, learner and parent engagement, a 20-day or 40-day cycle menu, five-day-per-week feeding frequency, and priority for locally produced agricultural and fishery products.
Learner and School Preparation
Schools must prepare both the learners and the physical environment before actual feeding. This includes initial nutritional assessment, deworming, micronutrient supplementation, referral of wasted and severely wasted learners for further medical assessment, and checking the functionality of kitchens, feeding spaces, and handwashing facilities.
School preparation may also include refurbishment, conversion, construction, donation, LGU support, or acquisition of mobile kitchens, as long as technical and safety standards are followed.
Procurement Management
Procurement under the SBFP must follow the principles of transparency, accountability, quality, and cost-effectiveness. The Order encourages local sourcing from agricultural and fishery producers when allowed by applicable procurement rules and when it supports timely delivery of quality ingredients.
For schools and SDOs, procurement documentation is a major compliance area. All purchases, deliveries, service arrangements, and payments must be properly supported by documents and aligned with existing procurement, accounting, and auditing rules.
Food Preparation and Safety
Food safety is one of the most critical parts of the SBFP. Food preparation must follow hygiene practices, standardized recipes, quality control measures, and food safety standards.
Schools must ensure that food handlers observe proper sanitation, ingredients are safe and fresh, cooking areas are clean, meals are prepared according to approved menus, and food is distributed in a manner that prevents contamination.
Food Distribution and Actual Feeding
During actual feeding, food commodities must be inspected for quality and safety before distribution. Learners should practice proper handwashing and hygiene before receiving meals. Feeding may be conducted in classrooms or designated feeding spaces, depending on the school arrangement.
Schools should also manage waste segregation, cleanliness of feeding areas, and direct observation of feeding activities. Proper documentation should be maintained daily.
Operational Monitoring
Operational monitoring ensures that the SBFP is implemented properly and that issues are addressed early. It tracks implementation progress, food quality, learner participation, compliance with food safety standards, financial accountability, and program outcomes.
Monitoring should not be treated as paperwork after the program. It should happen throughout the implementation period so that schools can correct problems while feeding is ongoing.
Important Annexes in the DepEd Order
The annexes are highly important because they provide the operational tools needed for implementation. School heads and SBFP coordinators should not ignore the annexes.
| Annex | Content | Why It Matters |
|---|---|---|
| Annex A | LGU Fund-Transfer Arrangement Criteria | Important for LGU-led implementation involving fund transfer. |
| Annex B | Cycle Menu Development and Sample Cycle Menu | Guides the preparation of nutritionally adequate meals. |
| Annex C | Food Safety Standards | Protects learners from food contamination and unsafe practices. |
| Annex D | Reporting Forms and Links | Provides documentation and reporting requirements. |
| Annex E | Matrix of Implementation Procedures | Clarifies responsibilities among SDOs, schools, and LGUs. |
| Annex F | Sample Capacity Assessment Tool | Helps determine whether hot meals, hybrid feeding, or NFPs are feasible. |
| Annex G | Template MOA with LGUs | Supports formal LGU partnership arrangements. |
School Head’s Practical Compliance Checklist
For school heads and SBFP coordinators, the Order may be summarized into practical compliance areas. These are the areas that should be prepared, monitored, and documented.
- List of identified beneficiaries based on the required criteria
- Initial nutritional assessment records
- Deworming and health-related records, when applicable
- Capacity assessment for kitchen, manpower, feeding space, and facilities
- Approved feeding modality for the school or cluster
- Approved cycle menu
- Food safety and sanitation procedures
- Procurement and delivery documents
- Daily feeding attendance and monitoring records
- Waste management and cleanliness procedures
- Progress reports and terminal report
- Documentation of partnerships, if applicable
Common Implementation Risks Schools Should Avoid
The SBFP can fail not because meals are unavailable, but because systems are weak. Schools should avoid the following common risks:
- Starting implementation without complete beneficiary identification
- Using NFPs without proper justification or capacity assessment
- Preparing meals without an approved cycle menu
- Ignoring food safety standards
- Weak documentation of actual feeding
- Incomplete procurement and delivery records
- Failure to monitor learner attendance and participation
- Late or incomplete reporting
- Unclear roles among school personnel, LGU partners, and other stakeholders
What This Means for Schools
DepEd Order No. 013, s. 2026 makes it clear that the SBFP must be implemented as a structured, accountable, and nutrition-sensitive program. Schools are expected to go beyond simple meal distribution. They must identify the correct beneficiaries, prepare facilities, ensure food safety, follow approved menus, observe procurement rules, document implementation, and submit required reports.
The long-term direction is also clear: the program is moving toward freshly prepared hot meals. Therefore, schools and SDOs should begin strengthening their kitchens, feeding spaces, manpower, partnerships, and local supply systems.
Final Thoughts
The School-Based Feeding Program is an important investment in learner health and education. When implemented properly, it can help reduce hunger, improve nutritional status, support school attendance, and strengthen learners’ readiness to participate in class.
However, successful implementation requires more than goodwill. It requires planning, safe food handling, proper targeting, sound procurement, strong partnerships, complete documentation, and consistent monitoring.
For schools, the best starting point is simple: identify the learners correctly, assess the school’s capacity honestly, choose the appropriate feeding modality, follow approved menus and food safety standards, and keep complete records from the first day of implementation until the final report.
Post a Comment