The WIC Food Cost-Containment Practices Study describes the voluntarily approaches state agencies used in 2018 to reduce food costs when selecting and authorizing WIC foods. This study is the second of its kind; the first was conducted by the USDA Economic Research Service in 2003. This report examines how six types of food cost-containment practices are associated with food costs and WIC participant satisfaction, benefit redemption, and food consumption in 12 state agencies.
This report responds to the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, which directs the FNS to provide a report on the amount of added sugars in school meals.
The WIC Infant and Toddler Feeding Practices Study 2 (WIC ITFPS-2)/ “Feeding My Baby” Study is the only national study to capture data on caregivers and their children over the first 5 years of the child’s life after enrollment in WIC, regardless of their continued participation in the program. This report focuses on the dietary intake patterns, eating behaviors, and weight status of children during the fifth year of life. The report also examines associations between WIC participation and key diet and health-related outcomes.
This study used 2011–2016 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) data to examine the relationship between estimated program participation, diet quality, indicators of nutrition and health, food consumption patterns, and nutrient intakes.
FNS has historically estimated the participation rate of SNAP by using Census data and samples of SNAP administrative data, but modeling SNAP eligibility using survey data has a number of challenges. In response, FNS, the Economic Research Service, and the Census Bureau sought potential solutions to these issues by linking Census survey data with monthly administrative records at the person level.
This report, the latest in a series of annual reports on WIC eligibility, presents 2019 national and state estimates of the number of people eligible for WIC benefits and the percents of the eligible population and the US population covered by the program, including estimates by participant category. The report also provides estimates by region, state, U.S. territory and race and ethnicity.
To ensure program integrity, school districts must sample household applications certified for free or reduced-price meals, contact the households, and verify eligibility. This process (known as household verification) can be burdensome for both school officials and households. Direct verification uses information from certain other means-tested programs to verify eligibility without contacting applicants. Potential benefits include: less burden for households, less work for school officials, and fewer students with school meal benefits terminated because of nonresponse to verification requests.
USDA requested that the committee provide recommendations for the updating and revision of the Nutrition Standards and Meal Requirements for the school lunch and breakfast programs. The committee was asked to (1) outline the proposed criteria and process to be used to develop recommended revisions to the Nutrition Standards and Meal Requirements for both meal programs, (2) discuss how the concepts presented in Institute of Medicine reports and focused on the application of Dietary Reference Intakes to planning and assessment will be applied to school meals in Phase II, and (3) propose plans for undertaking a sensitivity analysis and for considering cost implications and market effects.
This report, required under the 2008 Farm Bill, reviews the nutritional quality of the food package provided through USDA’s Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations, comparing its content to scientific standards including the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, the Dietary Reference Intakes, the Thrifty Food Plan nutrient standards and the Healthy Eating Index-2005.
The Child and Adult Care Food Program subsidizes nutritious meals and snacks served to participants in child care nationwide, providing different levels or “tiers” of meal reimbursement based on the income level of participating children, providers, and nearby geographic areas. Policymakers have long been concerned that programs such as CACFP are not as accessible to eligible children in rural areas as in urban areas.