Chapter 5 National School Lunch Program The National School Lunch Program (NSLP) is the who are not certified for meal benefits, elementary oldest and second-largest food and nutrition assistance school students are more likely to participate than sec- program (FANP) in the U.S. Department of Agriculture ondary school students, and males are more likely to (USDA) nutrition safety net. Targeted specifically to participate than females (Fox et al., 2001; Gleason, school-age children, the NSLP is the cornerstone of the 1996; Maurer, 1984; Akin, 1983a). largely school-based child nutrition programs, which also include the School Breakfast Program (SBP), the Since 1998, when the NSLP was expanded to include Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP), the after-school snacks, this component of the program has Summer Food Service Program (SFSP), and the been growing steadily. Between FY 2000 and FY Special Milk Program (SMP). 2002, the number of after-school snacks provided through the NSLP increased from 70 million to 123 Schools that participate in the NSLP receive Federal million (USDA/FNS, 2003a).78 reimbursement for each program meal served to stu- dents. USDA does not reimburse schools for adult The NSLP is administered by the Food and Nutrition meals, second meals, and a la carte items (including Service (FNS) and its regional offices. At the State extra servings of components of program meals). level, the program is administered by State agencies, Since 1998, the program has also covered snacks most often departments of education. State agencies served to children in after-school programs. Any child oversee Federal reimbursements, provide technical in a participating school is eligible to receive NSLP assistance, and monitor program performance. At the meals; in FY 2002, more than 28 million children par- local level, the program is operated by school food ticipated on an average school day. The program authorities (SFAs). Most SFAs are individual school served more than 4.7 billion lunches and 123 million districts; however, regional school unions and residen- after-school snacks, at a cost of $6.9 billion (USDA, tial childcare institutions also serve as SFAs. Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), 2003a). Federal Subsidies Program Overview Participating SFAs receive two types of Federal assis- tance: cash reimbursements and commodities. Cash The NSLP was established in 1946 to “safeguard the reimbursements are based on the number of lunches health and well-being of the Nation’s children and to and after-school snacks served, established reimburse- encourage the domestic consumption of nutritious ment rates, and the poverty level of participating stu- agricultural commodities and other foods....”77 A major dents. A cash subsidy is provided for every program impetus for the program was the prevalence of nutrition- lunch and snack served. Additional cash subsidies are related health problems identified during the screening provided for meals and snacks served to children who of young men for military service in World War II. qualify for free or reduced-price meal benefits. Currently, students eligible for free lunches and snacks Today, almost 99 percent of public schools and 83 per- are those from families with incomes at or below 130 cent of all public and private schools combined partici- percent of the Federal poverty level. Students from pate in the NSLP. Nationally, the program is available families with incomes between 130 and 185 percent of to about 92 percent of all students (Burghardt et al., poverty are eligible to receive reduced-price lunches 1993; Burghardt and Devaney, 1995). On an average and snacks.79 school day, about 60 percent of children in schools that offer the NSLP participate in the program (Fox et al., 2001). Participation varies with household income, 78To be eligible to receive reimbursement for after-school snacks, school age, and gender. For example, studies have shown that districts must participate in the NSLP and must sponsor or operate an after- school program that provides children with regularly scheduled educational students certified to receive free or reduced-price or enrichment activities in a supervised environment (USDA/FNS, 2003b). lunches are more likely to participate than students 79Federal regulations allow schools that operate in high-poverty areas (areas where 50 percent or more of school-age children are eligible for free or reduced-price meals) to receive the “free” reimbursement rate for all 77National School Lunch Act of 1946, Public Law 79-396. after-school snacks, regardless of the students’ family incomes. Economic Research Service/USDA Effects of Food Assistance and Nutrition Programs on Nutrition and Health / FANRR-19-3 175 Basic cash reimbursement rates for the 2002-03 school The components of the traditional NSLP meal year were $2.14 for free lunches, $1.74 for reduced- pattern are: price lunches, and $0.20 for lunches served to children who purchased meals at the full price (referred to as • Meat or meat alternate: 1 serving per meal “paid meals”).80 Snacks were reimbursed at rates of $0.58, $0.29, and $0.05, respectively. • Vegetables, fruits, and/or full-strength juices: 2 or more servings per meal Children eligible for reduced-price lunches cannot be charged more than $0.40 per lunch. SFAs set their • Grains/breads: 1 or more servings per meal/8 serv- own prices for full-price/paid lunches, but must ings per week operate their school meal service program on a non- • Milk: 1 serving per meal. profit basis (USDA/FNS, 2003c). Of the 4.7 billion lunches served in FY 2002, 48 percent were served Over the years, research has shown that, with few excep- to children eligible for free meals and 9 percent tions, the meals offered in the NSLP provide students the to children eligible for reduced-price meals 81 opportunity to satisfy one-third of their daily needs for (USDA/FNS, 2003a). food energy and an array of essential vitamins and min- erals (Burghardt et al., 1993; Wellisch et al., 1983). Schools receive agricultural commodities on an entitlement basis and may also receive bonus com- In the early 1990s, however, USDA’s first School modities. Entitlement commodity assistance is based Nutrition Dietary Assessment Study (SNDA-I) exam- on the number of reimbursable lunches served the ined the nutrient content of school lunches in compari- previous school year. For the 2002-03 school year, son with recommendations included in the Dietary the cash value of entitlement commodities was Guidelines for Americans (USDA and U.S. Department $0.1525 per meal (USDA/FNS, 2003c). Schools may of Health and Human Services, 1990) and the National elect to receive cash in lieu of commodity foods. In Research Council’s Diet and Health report (National addition to entitlement commodities, schools may Research Council, 1989). SNDA-I found that, in com- request bonus commodities—commodities that parison with these guidelines, NSLP meals were high become available through agricultural surplus—in in fat, saturated fat, and sodium, and low in carbohy- amounts that can be used without waste. The types drates (Burghardt et al., 1993). At the time the SNDA- and amounts of bonus commodities available vary I data were collected (the 1991-92 school year), from year to year depending on purchasing decisions schools were not required to offer meals that were made by USDA. consistent with these guidelines. Nutrition Standards The School Meals Initiative To be eligible for Federal subsidies, NSLP meals must for Healthy Children meet defined nutrition standards. Program regulations In response to the SNDA-I findings, USDA made a have long stipulated that lunches should provide one- commitment to implement the Dietary Guidelines in third of the children’s Recommended Dietary the NSLP. The embodiment of this commitment is the Allowances (RDAs). To ensure that these standards are School Meals Initiative for Healthy Children (SMI). The met, program regulations have historically included SMI, launched in 1995, is designed to improve the food-based menu planning guidelines. These guide- nutritional quality of school meals by providing schools lines, originally known as the “Type A meal pattern,” with educational and technical resources that can be define specific types of food to be offered as well as used to (1) assist foodservice personnel in preparing minimum acceptable portion sizes. nutritious and appealing meals and (2) encourage chil- dren to eat more healthful meals. Key components of the SMI include revised nutrition standards for school 80Reimbursement rates for both lunches and snacks are higher in Hawaii meals, a major restructuring of menu planning require- and Alaska. In addition, lunch reimbursement rates are higher for schools ments, and a broad-based nutrition education program. that operate in high-poverty areas (60 percent or more of students eligible for free or reduced-price meals). The nutrition standards established under the SMI 81Information on the percentage of after-school snacks served to chil- dren eligible for free or reduced-price meal benefits is not available in pub- maintain the longstanding goal of providing one-third licly available summaries of administrative data. of students’ daily needs for food energy and nutrients. In 176 Effects of Food Assistance and Nutrition Programs on Nutrition and Health / FANRR-19-3 Economic Research Service/USDA Chapter 5: National School Lunch Program addition, the standards include goals for fat and saturated Related Program Changes fat content that are consistent with the Dietary The SMI has been supported by several parallel initia- Guidelines recommendations.82 The Healthy Meals for tives. For example, considerable effort has been devoted Healthy Americans Act (P.L. 103-448) formally required to improving the nutrient profile of the commodity that school meals be consistent with the Dietary foods provided to NSLP schools (Buzby and Guthrie, Guidelines and that schools begin complying with SMI 2002).