And Others the National Evaluation of School Nutrition Programs. System

Total Page:16

File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb

And Others the National Evaluation of School Nutrition Programs. System DOCUMENT RESUME ED 218 opl PS 012 919 AUTHOR Nelson, Kathryn; Ed.; And Others TITLE The National Evaluation of School Nutrition Programs. Review of Research :. Volume' 2. INSTITUTION System Development Corp., Santa Monica, Calif. SPONS:AdENCY Ftiod and Nutrition Service (DOA), Washington, DC. Office of Policy, Planning and Evaluation. )PUBDATE Apr 81 El 330p.; For related documents, see PS 012 918-920. EDRS RICE MF01/PC14 Plus Postage. DESCRI TORS *Breakfast Programs; Delivery Systems; Elementary Secondary Oducation; Federal Legislation; *Federal Programs; Literature Reviews; *Lunch Programs; *Nutrition; Participant Characteristics; Program -Effectiveness; *Program Evaluation; Research Methodology IDENTIFIERS Food Consumption; *Milk Programs ABSTRACT 'Findings of a review 4f research pertaining to federally subsidized school nutriition-programs are preSented in this :report. The aim of iimarreview of Tesearch ii to-provide guidante for the-desig*-of the sUbseguerit parts of the evaluation by describing , the-;t0hool nutrition programs and their operations and by providing- -haseliniAnformation on nutritional status assessment,on the nutritional status of school -age children,on program impact, and on the ctrrespendence between- targeting- -of prOgrat:benefits- and teCipients' needs. The review identifies areasthat need fUrther inVestigation and also identifies methodological approaches that lead to 10C-teased-knowledge of the programs and their effects. Chapter 4 in ,thIS-SecOnd volume of iht review describes the few large and several smaller studies which have investigated the impact of,ichool -nutrition Programs: Much of this chapter is concerned withan .analysis of the methodologies used in the reported studies. Chapter 5 first eXamines how benefits are targetid, next focusing on the correspondence between the nutritional needs of schoOl-age children .and the'- programs' nutritional benefits. Chipter 6 summarizes what is -known and-not known about the school nutritionprograms, describing whatikinds.of research are. needed. All of the studies examinedare listed in the bibliography; also'appended is the Omnibus Budget Reconciliation ACt of 1981 (PL97-35). (RH) *********************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. ****************************************t****************************** fit 110 fh o to or ill.S;DiiIiiITMENT OF EDUCATION NATIONAL INSTITUTE OF EDUCATION EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTERtERICI This doe.ument has been reproducedas received frk the person or organizapon ors:mating d Minor changes have been made to improve reproduction duality. Points of view of opinions stated in this do cu mere do not per essanee eWesetd NIE positron of Poky I , NATIONAL EVALUATION OF SCHOOL NUTRITION PROGRAMS: . Ah U.S: DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE SXSTEM DE MENT CORPORATION FOOD AND NUTRITION SERVICE ADVISORY PANEL 2500 Colorado A enue Gertrude Applebatim Jack-Radzikowskj, Ph.D., Project Officer Santa Monica, C 90406 Direltor, Department of Food Services StaVen K. Gale,1Ph.D., Assochite Project Officer (213) 8204111 Corpus Office of Poliy, Planning and Evaluation Christi Independent School 500 12th Street, S.W. Distfict, Corpus Christi, Texas Jean Vellisefs, Ph.D., Project Manager 1 - Washington, D. C 20250 Ray Stewart; Ed.D., Associate Manager 'Alter F. Colender (202) 447-8223 Qire,'ctoir, ChildNutriti Programs Joyce Verineersch, Dr. P.H. NiWiersey State Dep rtment of Education SUBCONTRACTORS Project Research Nutritionist Trenton, Neii Jersey DECIMARESEARCH ,Ross Conner, Ph.D. 2760 Norili Miire Judit Katona-Apte, Dr. P.H. Akst: Professor of Social Ecology Santa Ana,'CA. 92'701 Research Nutritionist University of California at Irvine Vincent Bregfio; Ph.D., Project Director Irvine, California ToinGlenn, Senior Research Assairite. Lawrence A. Jordan, Ph.D. Manager Sampling, Design and Analysis Robert Karp, M.D. CASE WEST,ERN RESERVE UNIVERSLTY- Asst. Professor_of Pediatrics and Office-of Research Administrator Sally D. Hanes Directtir,NlitritiOn Programs CleVeland,'Ohio44106. Associate Maaagez Department of Pediatrics, -Jiiiits.Knispenh'iver, Assistant Director ThornakJefferson University Harold Hower,--M; D.; Coordinator Kenne,h M Maurer Philadelphia; Pennsylvania Econorsetrician Robert Linn, Ph.D Pnfrss6i 0t_ Psychology 4 Janet K. Rienbluilt University of Illinois Research Analgst Urbana, Illinois CONSIL TANTS AND -TEWICAL ADvisogs Joirn R. Shiban 'Sara Lynn Parker I Mr .ag,:rField Operations Nutrition Field Worker -. Philip Armstrong Food Research and Action Center -Amelia Miens IMary'Macari Washingion, D.-C. :George,,Brig6,-Ph.D. Sr. Field Operations Specialist Ruth-C.irol; Ed.D. David Price, Ph.D. Joliii Coulson, -Ph.D. -Beth Minton PrOfessor, Agricultural Economics JOsepii Edozien-, M.D. Field Operations Specialist Washington State University . -Gail Frank Pullman, Washington FialPh Fieriehs,:Dr. EH. Linda Soriano Richard Reed Steven Kaplin Field Nutritionist Member, Committee on Evaluation Ward-Keeslirig, Ph.D. and Information Systems, and Instrument Prdcessing , Child Nutritilon Director .Robert Levirie;:Ph.D. Aids Bel New York State Department of Education Lillie Parkin,'Ph.D. Albany, New ;York Grace Petot -Mariaii.Solomon, Ph.D. Training and Quality Assurance David Rush, mil Seymour Sudinan, Ph'.D. School of Public Health Donald West,-Ph.D. Lyn Hayes Columbia University Alfred Zerfas,-M.R.C.P.E. Sue .11ixson New York', New York `Maria Mazvosh Daniel Stufflebeam, Ph.D. Olga Sanders Director, Evaluation Center, and Noreen Shanahan Professor of Education Patricia Sorrells Western Michigan University Kalamazoo, Michigan Gary A. Duck, Ph.D. ManagerInstrumentation Ann R: Tolman Director, Child Nutrition Programs Doug Longshore Connecticut 'State Department of Education Instrumentation Specialist Hartford, Connecticut Myron Winick, M.D. Kathryn Nelson Professor of Pediatrics and Phase I Coordinator Director, Institute of Human Nutrition ColumbiaUniversity' Jane Green New York, New York Research Associate Project Secretaries Carol Bundles Peggy Hobbs Tti* Mieko M. Vale THE NATIONAL. EVALUATION OF SCHOOL NUTRITION PROGRAMS REVIEW OF RESEARCH' - VOLUME 2 * Edited by:_Kathryn Nelson Joyce'Vermeersch Lawrence=- Jordan 4ean.-WelliSoh Steven Gale The- reSearch reported herein Was performedpursuant to a contract with :the=l)ffice of Policy; andEvaluation, Foodand Nutrition 'SerViod p-. "Department of_Agricultdre. Contractors undertaking such Prjed1.4 under-GOVerhmehb SOorsorshi0are encouraged to express treely Weir profeSSional judgment in the -conduct ofthe" project. Therefore, :points of view OroPifitons--stated do not,(necessarily, represent offioial USDA position or policy. SYSTEM, DEVELOPMENT CORPORATION 2500 COLORADO AVENUE :SNTA MONICA, CALIFORNIA 90406 APRIL 1981 t ACKNOtiLEDGEMENTis I gere7W-want'to acknowledgethe peopAwho madesignificant ContribUtions dUring the review process, in, additionto thosenamed as authors. Many i peoplecontributed )to thereview of research by Searching forrelevant studies, abstractinginformation, composingtables, preparing preliminary drafts,- and conducting substantive and editorialreviews. If someone who helped Usis not mentioned, it is due toan oversight and we apologize. .First, we want tomxpress our appreciation to ,the people in the Food and Nutrition `Service (FNS) ofthe .DepartMentof Agriculture-(USDA), Jack 4adzikoWski, the USDA Project Officer for theNational Evaluation of School ,NIUtrition'irogramt--(NESNP)has been unfailing in his support, patience and good humor. He and Steven Gale,, NutritionalCoordinator- for the PrOgrat EValuation Staff of the Officeof Planning, Policy-and Elialuation, critiqued draftdaterialsland coordinated inputs from othermembers of the, -FNS staff. They 1were extremely- sensitiveto. the interests and concerns of the diverse audiences for this report and guided'us towardmaking the report useful to decision-makers, prectitionerd and researchers. Athol*, other FNS staff who review drts of the report, we are especialiy grateful to- Fran Zixn and TereSa-,Trogden for theit information and-insights concerning nutritional assessment and program-operations. _Nekt; we want to thank themembers of the NESNP Advisory Group who reviewed our:_drafts,provided information On operational. procedures,and suggested additional topicS ,to be covered in the review. (The Advisory. Group membership isshownonthe.1NESNP organization, chart.) Finally; we Want to aclinciviledge the contributions of NESNP, staff. Ruth Bornstein (consultant) wrote the preliminarydraft of legislative history in - Chapter. I, and Ken Maurer (project economist) drafted the section on school ii. and-student'participatioh, also in. Chapter I; Lilli Parkin and Fred Zerfas (consultant's) wrote the preliminary drafts for Chapter on dietary measures and anthrlpometrics, i.espectively; Jane Green (NESNP research associate) and Linda Marie Collins(FNS summer intern)preparedcomprehens detailed critical analyses of Chapters II and IV,respectively;Laura teeb (NFSNP research assistant) located research and abstracted data for several If the chapters; Saddra Brighouse located studies and constructed tables for Chap III;- Carol Bundies (project secretary),/ Frank Tierney, Pam Doherty, and Bri.:1 Severy (SDC editors) patiently and diligently workedon the many iterations needed'to complete this 'report. iii TABLE OF CONTENTS Page LIST OF/TABLES viii LIST OF FIGURES xi INTRODUCTION 1 SIUMMART OF CHAPTER I 19 CHAPTER
Recommended publications
  • D.C. School Breakfast Scorecard
    The District of Columbia’s School Breakfast Scorecard for School Year 2017–2018 Acknowledgments D.C. Hunger Solutions gratefully acknowledges the support of the following funders to improve and expand participation in the child nutrition programs in 2017–2018: n The Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation; n Clark Charitable Foundation; n Naomi and Nehemiah Cohen Foundation; n Consumer Health Foundation; n John Edward Fowler Memorial Foundation; n Hunger Is, a program of Albertsons Companies Foundation; n Kaiser Permanente of the Mid-Atlantic States; n Eugene and Agnes E. Meyer Foundation; n The Moriah Fund; n Morningstar Foundation; n Prince Charitable Trusts; n Share Our Strength; n Walmart Foundation; and n World Bank Community Connections Campaign. This report was written by Paige Pokorney, anti-hunger program associate for child nutrition programs at D.C. Hunger Solutions. About D.C. Hunger Solutions D.C. Hunger Solutions, founded in 2002 as an initiative of the Food Research & Action Center, seeks to create a hunger-free community and improve the nutrition, health, economic security, and well-being of low-income residents in the District of Columbia. To learn more about D.C. Hunger Solutions, visit www.dchunger.org. The District of Columbia’s School Breakfast Scorecard n dchunger.org 3 Introduction On an average day during the 2017–2018 but the District has been losing ground in school year, more than 30,000 low-income the last few years. In the 2010–2011 school students in the nation’s capital ate school year, D.C. ranked first in the nation, but has breakfast. With 69.1 low-income students since fallen in the rankings as other states participating in school breakfast for every have prioritized expanding access to school 100 who received school lunch, D.C.
    [Show full text]
  • 30 Rock: Complexity, Metareferentiality and the Contemporary Quality Sitcom
    30 Rock: Complexity, Metareferentiality and the Contemporary Quality Sitcom Katrin Horn When the sitcom 30 Rock first aired in 2006 on NBC, the odds were against a renewal for a second season. Not only was it pitched against another new show with the same “behind the scenes”-idea, namely the drama series Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip. 30 Rock’s often absurd storylines, obscure references, quick- witted dialogues, and fast-paced punch lines furthermore did not make for easy consumption, and thus the show failed to attract a sizeable amount of viewers. While Studio 60 on the Sunset Strip did not become an instant success either, it still did comparatively well in the Nielson ratings and had the additional advantage of being a drama series produced by a household name, Aaron Sorkin1 of The West Wing (NBC, 1999-2006) fame, at a time when high-quality prime-time drama shows were dominating fan and critical debates about TV. Still, in a rather surprising programming decision NBC cancelled the drama series, renewed the comedy instead and later incorporated 30 Rock into its Thursday night line-up2 called “Comedy Night Done Right.”3 Here the show has been aired between other single-camera-comedy shows which, like 30 Rock, 1 | Aaron Sorkin has aEntwurf short cameo in “Plan B” (S5E18), in which he meets Liz Lemon as they both apply for the same writing job: Liz: Do I know you? Aaron: You know my work. Walk with me. I’m Aaron Sorkin. The West Wing, A Few Good Men, The Social Network.
    [Show full text]
  • Stories of the Fallen Willow
    Stories of the Fallen Willow by Jessica Noel Casimir Senior Honors Thesis Department of English and Comparative Literature April 2020 1 dedication To my parents who sacrifice without hesitation to support my ambitions, To my professors who invested their time and shared their wisdom, And to my fellow-writer friends made along the way. Thank you for the unconditional support and words of encouragement. 2 table of contents Preface…………………………………………………………………………….4 Sellout……………………………………………………………………………..9 Papercuts…………………………………………………………………………24 Static……………………………………………………………………………...27 Dinosaur Bones………………………………………………………………..…32 How to Prepare for a Beach Trip in 4 Easy Steps………………………………..37 A Giver…………………………………………………………………………...39 Hereditary………………………………………………………………………...42 Tomato Soup…………………………………………………………………...…46 A Fair Trade………………………………………………………………………53 Fifth Base…………………………………………………………………………55 Remembering Bennett………………………………………………………….…60 Yellow Puddles……………………………………………………………………69 Head First…………………………………………………………………...…….71 3 preface This introduction is meant to be a moment of honesty. So, I’ll be candid in saying that this is my eighth attempt at writing it. I’ve started and stopped, deleted and retyped, closed my laptop and reopened it. Never in my life have I found it this difficult to write, never in my life has my body physically ached at the thought of sitting down and spending time in my own headspace. Right now, my headspace is the last place on earth I want to be. I’ve decided that this will be my last attempt at writing, and whatever comes out now will remain on the page. I am currently sitting on my couch under a pile of blankets, reclined back as far as my seat will allow me to go. My Amazon Alexa is belting music from an oldies playlist, and my dad is sitting at the kitchen table singing along to “December, 1963” by The Four Seasons as he works.
    [Show full text]
  • Masterarbeit / Master's Thesis
    MASTERARBEIT / MASTER’S THESIS Titel der Masterarbeit / Title of the Master‘s Thesis „Representations of Female Nerds in U.S.-American Sitcoms“ verfasst von / submitted by Beate Reichl, BA BA angestrebter akademischer Grad / in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Arts (MA) Wien, 2018 / Vienna 2018 Studienkennzahl lt. Studienblatt / A 066 844 degree programme code as it appears on the student record sheet: Studienrichtung lt. Studienblatt / Anglophone Literatures and Cultures degree programme as it appears on the student record sheet: Betreut von / Supervisor: Univ.-Prof. Mag. Dr. Alexandra Ganser-Blumenau Acknowledgements First, I would like to thank my supervisor, Prof. Alexandra Ganser-Blumenau. Then, I would like to offer my special thanks to my aunt, Susanne Reichl, for being my continuous role model and adviser. Finally yet importantly, I wish to acknowledge the never-ending support provided by my husband, Manuel Engel, my parents and close friends. Table of Contents List of Figures .............................................................................................. i 1 Introduction ................................................................................................ 1 2 Representations of the Nerd ...................................................................... 2 Representation .................................................................................... 2 Stereotypes ......................................................................................... 3 The Nerd
    [Show full text]
  • Big Game in the Big Easy Delicious Boys Hoops Girls Hoops
    Video: Irate Man Attacks Paramedics; Police Say Fight Was Unprovoked / Main 5 $1 Big Game in the Big Easy Bring the Taste of the Delta to Your Super Bowl Meal / Life: Food Early Week Edition Tuesday, Jan. 29, 2013 Reaching 110,000 Readers in Print and Online — www.chronline.com W.F. West’s Science Blazer Basketball Programs Earn Statewide Praise Girls Hoops Lady Blazers Destroy Clippers / Grants Sports for Robots Boys Hoops Blazer Men Improve to 6-2 in League Play / Sports Delicious Annual Taste of Lewis County Is See Main 14 a Tour for the Senses / Main 3 Pete Caster / [email protected] Kendra Allen, a senior at W.F. West High School, launches a ping-pong ball with a robot that she and her robotics class partner, Carli Stowe, built for a class project. This program, among others, has earned W.F. West High School the title of a state “Lighthouse School” for science, technology, engineering and mathematics. Allen, who inished her project last week, demonstrated how her robot could pick up a ping-pong ball, move to the launching pad, then shoot the ball six feet. If all of those requirements were met the student would get an ‘A’ on the project. White said about 1/3 of the class completely met the requirements of the project. Winlock Middle School Awarded Funding for Robotics Program Weather TONIGHT: Low Rain Likely see details on page Main 2 43 TOMORROW: Weather picture by Amaya High Espinoza, Onalaska Elementary, 3rd Grade 48 The Chronicle, Serving The Greater Lewis County Area Since 1889 Pete Caster / [email protected] Eighth graders Bradley Follow Us on Twitter Kelly, left, Adam Hylton, center, and Michael @chronline Rosenberry, work at licking plastic balls Find Us on Facebook towards a make-shift www.facebook.com/ goal during their Ro- botics 101 class at Win- thecentraliachronicle lock Middle School on Monday.
    [Show full text]
  • Evaluation of Demonstrations of National School Lunch Program
    Evaluation of Demonstrations of National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program Direct Certification of Children Receiving Medicaid Benefits: Access Evaluation Report Nutrition Assistance Program Report January 2015 Food and Nutrition Service Office of Policy Support USDA is an Equal Opportunity Provider Food and Nutrition Service, Office of Policy Support January 2015 Evaluation of Demonstrations of National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program Direct Certification of Children Receiving Medicaid Benefits: Access Evaluation Report Authors: Lara Hulsey Anne Gordon Joshua Leftin Nicholas Beyler Allen Schirm Claire Smither-Wulsin Will Crumbley Submitted by: Submitted to: Mathematica Policy Research Office of Policy Support P.O. Box 2393 Food and Nutrition Service Princeton, NJ 08543 3101 Park Center Drive Alexandria, VA 22302 Project Director: Allen Schirm Project Officer: Allison Magness This study was conducted under Contract number AG-3198-B-12-0006 with the Food and Nutrition Service, United States Department of Agriculture. This report is available on the Food and Nutrition website: http://www.fns.usda.gov/research- and-analysis Suggested Citation: Hulsey, L., Gordon, A., Leftin, J., et. al (2015). Evaluation of Demonstrations of National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program Direct Certification of Children Receiving Medicaid Benefits: Access Evaluation Report. Prepared by Mathematica Policy Research, Contract No. AG-3198-B-12-0006. Alexandria, VA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, Office of Policy Support, Project Officer: Allison Magness. This page has been left blank for double-sided copying. Access Evaluation Report Mathematica Policy Research CONTENTS EXECUTIVE SUMMARY ................................................................................................. xi I INTRODUCTION .............................................................................................. 1 A. The School Meals Programs and Direct Certification ...............................
    [Show full text]
  • Texas School Breakfast Report Card 2016
    2016 EDITION TEXAS SCHOOL BREAKFAST REPORT CARD Understanding the Program 6 Introduction 10 School Breakfast Program 14 Breakfast Benefits 16 Breakfast Service Models Making Breakfast Work 20 Success Strategies 28 State Participation 32 Resources Checking Participation Rates 36 Appendix Finding resources 58 Glossary 62 Endnotes and Credits ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Texas School Breakfast Report Card is a project of Baylor University’s Texas Hunger Initiative. This third edition was prepared by Taylor McKinney and designed by Ashley Yeaman. Other contributors include Rebecca Fortson, Amy Jimenez, Benjamin Riley and Madyson Russell. We are thankful to the individuals, school districts and partner organizations that contributed to this report so that Texas schools may be better equipped to strengthen their school breakfast programs. The Texas Hunger Initiative would also like to thank Share Our Strength and the Walmart Foundation for their continued partnership that enables our work toward ending hunger in Texas. THANKS TO SCHOOL DISTRICTS On behalf of the Texas Hunger Initiative, we would like to thank the child nutrition departments, communication departments and other administrators from the following school districts who contributed to the 2016 School Breakfast Report Card. Amarillo ISD Dallas ISD Lubbock ISD Anthony ISD Fort Worth ISD McAllen ISD Arlington ISD Garland ISD North East ISD Austin ISD Irving ISD Round Rock ISD Brady ISD Karnack ISD San Angelo ISD Beaumont ISD La Vega ISD Socorro ISD Corsicana ISD Littlefield ISD Spring ISD VIEW THE REPORT ONLINE You can download a complete PDF file of this report online at www.tinyurl.com/SBRC2016. To learn more about the Texas Hunger Initiative’s efforts around school : breakfast visit: www.baylor.edu/texashunger/breakfast.
    [Show full text]
  • SY 2020-2021 FAQ for National School Lunch Program Meals
    MEMORANDUM TO: National School Lunch and School Breakfast Program School Food Authorities (SFAs) FROM: Lakeisha Hood, Director of Food, Nutrition and Wellness SUBJECT: School Nutrition Programs Re-Opening Under COVID-19 for the 2020-2021 School Year Question and Answers (Q&As) DATE: August 27, 2020 Pursuant to Section 2202(a) of the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (the FFCRA) (P.L. 116-127) and based on the exceptional circumstances of this public health emergency, USDA Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) extended a number of nationwide waivers to support student access to nutritious meals while minimizing potential exposure to the novel coronavirus (COVID–19) for school year (SY) 2020-2021. These waivers are posted on the Florida Automated Nutrition System (FANS) Download Forms, COVID-19 section. Consistent with Section 2202(a)(2) of the FFCRA, these waivers are automatically available to SFAs without further application. Nationwide Waiver to Allow Non-congregate Feeding in the Child Nutrition Programs – EXTENSION #2 . Nationwide Waiver to Allow Meal Service Time Flexibility in the National School Lunch Program, School Breakfast Program, and Child and Adult Care Food Program – EXTENSION #2 . Nationwide Waiver to Allow Parents and Guardians to Pick Up Meals for Children – EXTENSION #2 . Nationwide Waiver to Allow Meal Pattern Flexibility in the Child Nutrition Programs – EXTENSION #4 . Nationwide Waiver to Allow Offer Versus Serve Flexibility for Senior High Schools in the National School Lunch Program for School Year 2020-2021 . Nationwide Waiver of Onsite Monitoring Requirements in the School Meals Programs – EXTENSION #2 . Nationwide Waiver of Food Service Management Contract Duration in the National School Lunch Program and Summer Food Service Program 2020-2021 School Year Question and Answers (Q&As) August 27, 2020 Page 2 Consistent with Section 2202(a)(2) of the FFCRA, these waivers are automatically available to SFAs by opting into the flexibility through the National School Lunch Program - Back to School Flexibilities survey.
    [Show full text]
  • Social Security Programs in the United States
    FOOD AND NUTRITION ASSISTANCE are provided to States to encourage maintaining program spend- ing levels. Families cannot spend more than five cumulative years on TANF. States can specify fewer years, and exempt up to 20% of the caseload from the time limit. After the time limit is exceeded, they can elect to provide noncash assistance and vouchers to families using Social Services Block Grant or State funds. Child care funding is provided to help more mothers move into jobs. Women on welfare continue to receive health coverage for their families, including a year or more of transitional Medicaid when they leave welfare for work. To be eligible for TANF block grants, States must operate a child support enforcement program meeting Federal requirements. The Federal Case Registry and National Directory of New Hires will be used to track delinquent parents across State lines. Child support can be withheld directly from wages, and paternity estab- lishment is streamlined; cash assistance will be reduced by at least 25% in cases of failure to cooperate with paternity establish- ment. The law establishes uniform interstate child support laws, central registries of child support orders and collections, and toughened enforcement of child support. Unmarried minor parents are required to live with a respon- sible adult or in an adult-supervised setting and participate in educational and training activities in order to receive assistance. Efforts are to be under taken to prevent nonmarital teen pregnancy. Food and The U.S. Department of Agriculture provides children and Nutrition needy families access to a more healthful diet through its food assistance programs and comprehensive nutrition education Assistance efforts, and provides farmers an outlet for the distribution of food purchased under farmer assistance authorities.
    [Show full text]
  • Child Nutrition Reauthorization
    Updated February 26, 2021 Child Nutrition Reauthorization (CNR): An Overview Introduction example, the law created the Community Eligibility Child nutrition reauthorization (CNR) refers to Congress’s Provision, an option within NSLP/SBP that allows eligible process of making changes to the permanent statutes that schools to provide free meals to all students. The law also authorize the child nutrition programs, the Special required USDA to update the nutrition standards for school Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and meals and establish nutrition standards for other foods sold Children (WIC), and related activities: in schools during the school day. For WIC, the law included the requirement that states transition, by October 1, 2020, the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, from their primarily paper voucher-based WIC benefits to the Child Nutrition Act of 1966, and Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT). In some cases, the new (less often) Section 32 of the Act of August 24, 1935, policies were described within the statute; in other cases, which transfers funds to the child nutrition programs the details were laid out in USDA-promulgated regulations. annually. Recent Reauthorization Efforts The most recent CNR was the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids th Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-296). Some of the authorities created During the 114 Congress, the committees then exercising or extended in that law expired on September 30, 2015. jurisdiction (the House Education and Workforce Committee and Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry However, the vast majority of program operations have continued with funding provided by appropriations acts. Committee) marked up CNR bills but reauthorization was not completed (see CRS Report R44373, Tracking Child Programs Typically Included in CNR Nutrition Reauthorization in the 114th Congress: An Overview).
    [Show full text]
  • USDA Domestic Food Assistance Programs: FY2019 Appropriations
    USDA Domestic Food Assistance Programs: FY2019 Appropriations May 24, 2019 Congressional Research Service https://crsreports.congress.gov R45743 SUMMARY R45743 USDA Domestic Food Assistance Programs: May 24, 2019 FY2019 Appropriations Randy Alison Aussenberg The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2019 (P.L. 116-6) was enacted on February 15, Specialist in Nutrition 2019. This omnibus bill included appropriations for the U.S. Department of Agriculture Assistance Policy (USDA), of which USDA’s domestic food assistance programs are a part. Prior to its enactment, the federal government had continued to operate for the first six months of Kara Clifford Billings the fiscal year under continuing resolutions (CRs). This report focuses on the enacted Analyst in Social Policy appropriations for USDA’s domestic food assistance programs and, in some instances, policy changes provided by the omnibus law. CRS Report R45230, Agriculture and Related Agencies: FY2019 Appropriations provides an overview of the entire FY2019 Agriculture and Related Agencies portion of the law as well as a review of the reported bills and CRs preceding it. USDA experienced a 35-day lapse in FY2019 funding and partial government shutdown prior to the enactment of P.L. 116-6. Domestic food assistance funding is primarily mandatory but also includes discretionary funding. Most of the programs’ funding is for open-ended, appropriated mandatory spending—that is, terms of the authorizing law require full funding and funding may vary with program participation (and in some cases inflation). The largest mandatory programs include the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly the Food Stamp Program) and the child nutrition programs (including the National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program).
    [Show full text]
  • Amanda D. Peterson MS, RDN, LDN; Kristi Wilkerson RD, LDN; Archana V
    EXPLORATION OF MEALTIME PRACTICES AND POLICIES AMONG NORTH CAROLINA HEAD START ORGANIZATIONS: DOES PRACTICE REFLECT POLICY? Kristina M. Bandy RD, LDN; Amanda D. Peterson MS, RDN, LDN; Kristi Wilkerson RD, LDN; Archana V. Hegde PhD; Corresponding Author: Virginia C. Stage PhD, RDN, LDN ABSTRACT Purpose/Objectives Early childhood educators (ECEs) are encouraged to utilize supportive feeding practices (SFPs) to promote children's healthy eating. SFPs include sitting with children during mealtimes, role modeling healthy eating behaviors, encouraging children to try new foods, and addressing children’s hunger cues. Although Head Start policies generally promote SFPs, recent revisions to federal standards removed the family-style meal service requirement, a key strategy for implementing SFPs. The purpose of this study was to explore current mealtime-related practices and policies being implemented in Head Start centers across North Carolina (NC) and alignment with SFPs. Methods A cross-sectional study design was used to collect data about mealtime policies, including those that support SFPs, from NC-based Head Start programs February-October 2017. A total of 24 Health/Nutrition Coordinators representing as many Head Start programs participated in the study due to their role in overseeing food and nutrition standards. Responses were measured using an online survey. Results The final sample of 24 Health/Nutrition Coordinators represented as many Head Start programs. Coordinators reported ECEs generally follow SFPs and policies at mealtimes with 62.5-100% of programs following seven of the nine SFPs surveyed. All programs reported implementing family-style meal service, however, findings highlighted some programs used practices that did not align with family-style meal service recommendations (e.g.
    [Show full text]