This memo provides clarification on the application of Sections 751 and 752 of the FNS Handbook 310. The clarifications reflect long-standing review procedures and information previously provided in response to policy inquiries and during trainings.

Clarifications Regarding the Use of Sections 751 and 752

Section 751-Determining a filed mandatory report form is complete

To determine if a filed mandatory report form is complete, the QC reviewer (QCR) must base their evaluation on the design of the form and whether the household responded to all household circumstance questions required by SNAP policy at 7 CFR 273.12(a)(1)(i)-(viii).

If the QCR identifies that a mandatory report was incomplete, the QCR must determine if the agency otherwise obtained the missing required information prior to issuing benefits for continued participation. If the agency obtained the missing required information, Section 751 does not apply.

Impact of form design when determining if a filed form is complete:

• If a form’s instructions require the household to only respond when they had a change in household circumstances, the QCR must consider any unanswered required questions as a response of “no change.”
• A form is not considered incomplete under Section 751 when categorically eligible (CE) households do not answer questions that are not applicable to CE households.
• A form is not considered incomplete under Section 751 when a household files a combined program mandatory report form (e.g. a form for SNAP and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families-TANF benefits), answers all the questions required for SNAP, but does not answer questions specified for the other program (TANF).

Section 752-Reviewing a case when a recertification application is filed, but is missing

A case is not considered ineligible under Section 752 when the case record indicates the household filed an application for recertification, but it is missing from the case record, consistent with Section 751 procedures for missing mandatory report forms. The QCR must follow the procedures in Section 322 to determine the information from the missing recertification application. All missing applications must be documented as deficiencies in the review record and reported to the local agency after transmission to FNS.

Procedural deficiencies related to Sections 751 and 752

The household was not interviewed as part of the certification action

The Food and Nutrition Act, as amended (the Act), and SNAP regulations require state agencies to conduct interviews for certain certification actions. However, consistent with long-standing review procedures, the occurrence or absence of an interview does not automatically determine ineligibility for QC review purposes. When identified, QCRs must continue their review, but document this procedural deficiency in the review record and report the information to the local agency after transmission to FNS.

Clarification when the household filed an alternative form to continue SNAP benefits

When the household files, or the state agency processes, an alternative form for a recertification or to comply with reporting requirements at 7 CFR 273.12, the case is not automatically determined ineligible for QC review purposes. When identified, QCRs must continue their review, but document this procedural deficiency in the review record and report the information to the local agency after transmission to FNS.

Regional offices should direct questions regarding these clarifications through the existing inquiry procedures. State agencies should direct questions regarding these clarifications to their regional office contacts.

Sincerely,

Rachel Frisk
Director
Program Administration and Nutrition Division
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program

On April 25, 2024, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) published the final rule, Child Nutrition Programs: Meal Patterns Consistent With the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (89 FR 31962). The rule finalized practical, science-based, long-term school nutrition requirements consistent with the goals of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020-2025 (Dietary Guidelines), extensive partner input, and lessons learned from prior rulemakings. The final rule also included minor updates to the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) and Summer Food Service Program (SFSP) to better align child nutrition program (CNP) requirements. These updates represent continued progress toward supporting the nutritional quality of school meals, strengthening the CNPs, and advancing USDA’s commitment to nutrition security.

This memorandum and the attached Questions and Answers (Q&A) clarify the updated regulatory requirement for program operators to accept medical statements from registered dietitians. This requirement applies to program operators of the National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program (collectively, the school meal programs) (7 CFR 210.10(m)(1)(i), 220.8(m)) and the CACFP (7 CFR 226.20(g)(1)(i)). The change requiring program operators to accept medical statements from registered dietitians must be implemented by July 1, 2025, for school meal programs and Oct. 1, 2025, for CACFP.

Program operators have the option, but are not required, to implement this change prior to the implementation dates.

With the final rule, USDA is balancing the importance of improving participant access to meals that meet their individual needs with the importance of ensuring that program operators have the information necessary to keep participants safe.

State agencies are reminded to distribute this information to program operators immediately. Program operators should direct any questions regarding this memorandum to the appropriate state agency. State agencies should direct questions to the appropriate FNS regional office.

Attachment

• Questions & Answers

Summary

In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this notice invites the general public and other public agencies to comment on this proposed information collection. This collection is a new collection. The burden activities that are covered by this Information Collection Request include the transition from individual collections for program waivers and state plans to a new application supporting multiple USDA programs. This application will allow state agencies to request program waivers and submit state plans to the USDA Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), FNS staff to manage data provided within the application, and covers the gathering and maintenance of all supporting data from each state agency. The Waivers and State Plans (WiSP) application will support the following USDA programs and be available to all participating state agencies in each program: Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Woman, Infants and Children (WIC), Farmers Market Nutrition Program (FMNP), and Seniors Farmers Market Nutrition Program (SFMNP).

Request for Comments

Written comments must be received on or before Feb. 28, 2025.

We invite you to submit written comments on this notice.

• Preferred method: Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to https://www.regulations.gov, and follow the online instructions for submitting comments electronically.
• Mail: Amanda Vega, WIC Program Integrity and Monitory Branch, Food and Nutrition Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria, Virginia 22314.
• Email: email comments to amanda.vega@usda.gov.

All responses to this notice will be summarized and included in the request for Office of Management and Budget approval. All comments will be a matter of public record.

Summary

The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) requests comments from the public to help inform future policymaking, guidance, and technical assistance related to grain-based desserts and high-protein yogurt (which may include Greek and Greek-style yogurt) crediting in the child nutrition programs. FNS welcomes comments from all interested partners, including child nutrition professionals, state agencies, the food industry, the research community, and other individuals and organizations with an interest in the child nutrition programs.

On Feb. 7, 2023, FNS issued a proposed rule to update CNP meal pattern requirements. Grains, especially whole grains, contribute critical nutrients. However, some grains, called grain-based desserts, are higher in added sugars. Under current policy, grain-based desserts include foods such as cakes, cookies, brownies, breakfast bars, and toaster pastries. The rule included a proposal to limit grain-based desserts in the School Breakfast Program (SBP) to no more than two ounce equivalents per week, consistent with the National School Lunch Program (NSLP). However, based on public comments, FNS did not finalize that proposed limit in the final rule. Public comments raised concerns that the proposal would limit options at school breakfast and recommended that FNS re-evaluate use of grain-based desserts at school breakfast. In the final rule, FNS committed to exploring methods for improving and simplifying grain-based dessert requirements by soliciting further partner input, which is one aim for this request for information.

Yogurt is another popular menu item in CNPs and a source of calcium, zinc, potassium, and probiotics.¹ It may be offered in a variety of forms: plain or flavored, unsweetened or sweetened, strained or non-strained, and/or high-protein or regular; as a standalone option or in different menu items, such as yogurt parfaits or smoothies. The variety of yogurt available at retail and in the K-12 market, including high-protein yogurt (e.g., Greek and Greek-style yogurt), has grown and evolved significantly. Therefore, in 2017, FNS requested public input on whether high-protein yogurt (including Greek and Greek-style yogurt) should credit differently than regular yogurt. Those comments were mixed and, as a result, FNS maintained consistent crediting for all yogurt in the CNPs. FNS is now seeking additional public input to determine if any new information warrants a change to yogurt crediting in the CNPs.

Request for Comments

Written comments must be received on or before March 26, 2025.

USDA invites the submission of the requested information through one of the following methods:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal (preferred method): Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Send written comments to the Child Nutrition Programs, USDA Food and Nutrition Service, Braddock Metro Center II, 1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 22314.

All comments submitted in response to this Request for Information will be included in the record and will be made available to the public. Please be advised that the substance of the comments and the identity of the individuals or entities submitting the comments will be subject to public disclosure. USDA will make the comments publicly available via https://www.regulations.gov.

Details on Current Policies and Areas for Public Input

FNS is committed to finding ways to ease menu planning for program operators and ensure that participants have access to a wide array of nutritious food and beverage choices. Staying up to date with the evolving food environment through ongoing conversations with stakeholders helps FNS learn about additional food options that could improve program menus. With these general interests in mind, FNS is seeking information on the questions in the chart below. We encourage partners to access the request for information and read the questions in the context of the full document.

Grain-Based Desserts

FNS is requesting feedback on three areas related to grain-based desserts:

Current Policies and Potential Alternatives for Grain-Based Desserts

Products that are considered grain-based desserts may be offered to meet part of the grains requirement in some CNPs to encourage whole grains consumption and/or provide participants with foods they enjoy while still meeting nutrition standards. Certain grain products, including cookies, cakes, breakfast/cereal bars, and toaster pastries, are categorized as grain-based desserts based on their characteristics. FNS's current policy related to grain-based desserts is detailed in The Food Buying Guide for Child Nutrition Programs, Exhibit A.

Questions for Commenters

1. What challenges do program operators face in identifying grain-based desserts, under the current policies?
2. Is the current NSLP policy that permits up to 2.0-ounce equivalents of grain-based desserts per week effective at reducing added sugars in school lunches?
   1. The weekly added sugars limit for NSLP will be implemented by July 1, 2027. Will the current grain-based dessert limit for NSLP lunch still helpful for menu planning purposes, once the weekly added sugars limit is implemented?
3. Should FNS adjust its current grain-based desserts policies, such as changing which grain products are categorized as grain-based desserts?

Grains High in Added Sugars

In addition to potential changes to its current grain-based desserts policies, FNS is also interested in public input on alternative approaches that partners recommend to reduce added sugars in CNP meals. This includes seeking public input on grain products high in added sugars.

Questions for Commenters

1. Should FNS consider alternative approaches to its current grain-based desserts policies, such as replacing these policies with limits for "grains high in added sugars"?
2. If FNS were to establish limits for "grains high in added sugars," how should the limits be established?
   1. Should FNS adopt the US Food and Drug Administration's (FDA) definition for "high" for nutrient content claims used on food labels to define "grains high in added sugars"? What are the benefits or limitations of this approach?
   2. What opportunities and challenges could arise from having different limits for grains offered to children ages one through three, versus children and adults ages four and older?
   3. What other approaches should FNS consider to define “grains high in added sugars”?

Strategies to Reduce Added Sugars at School Breakfast

FNS recognizes the specific challenges with reducing added sugars in school breakfast. The agency invites public input on effective strategies to reduce added sugars at breakfast, including when using alternative school breakfast models.

Questions for Commenters

1. Are there strategies for reducing added sugars in the SBP that would support menu planners offering a variety of grains in alternative SBP service models (e.g., grab-and-go breakfasts, breakfast in the classroom)?
2. What menu items are schools serving to reduce added sugars at breakfast? Examples may include protein foods (e.g., eggs; meat; tofu; beans, peas, and lentils) or others.
   1. Please share examples of breakfast menu items lower in added sugars that are popular with students.
3. What additional resources from FNS could help program operators reduce added sugars in CNP menus, including breakfast? Resources could include marketing ideas/materials, menu planners, online trainings and courses, and others.

High-Protein Yogurt Crediting

FNS is requesting feedback on two areas related to yogurt crediting:

Current Policies

Yogurt is a popular menu item and may credit toward all or part of the meats/meat alternates component in the CNPs.² Currently, four ounces (weight) or 1/2 cup (volume) of yogurt credits in the CNPs as one ounce equivalent of meat alternate. High-protein yogurt (which may include Greek and Greek-style yogurt) credits the same as regular yogurt. The manufacturing process for high-protein yogurt (including some Greek and Greek-style yogurt) typically involves straining the product to remove liquid whey, resulting in a thicker yogurt with higher protein content.

Questions for Commenters

1. Are program operators currently offering Greek or Greek-style yogurt, or other types of yogurt that contain more protein than regular yogurt, as part of reimbursable meals or snacks?
   1. To which age groups and in which meals are these types of yogurt offered?
   2. How frequently are these types of yogurt offered?
   3. Are these types of yogurt popular with participants? Are they more popular than regular yogurt?
2. If program operators are not offering Greek or Greek-style yogurt, or other types of yogurt that contain more protein than regular yogurt, as frequently as desired, why not? What are the challenges with offering these types of yogurt?
3. Has high-protein yogurt available via USDA Foods in Schools helped school program operators offer high-protein yogurt to participants?
   1. Is high-protein yogurt incorporated into meals, particularly breakfast, in the same manner as traditional yogurt? Please share examples of how high-protein yogurt is used in menus and/or recipes; are traditional and high-protein yogurt used interchangeably or are there novel uses for high-protein yogurt in school meals?

Potential Alternatives

FNS is interested in public input on potential changes to the current yogurt crediting policies, including what changes would be beneficial to program operators and participants, and any challenges associated with potential changes.

Questions for Commenters

1. Should FNS create a separate crediting standard for high-protein yogurt that is different than the crediting standard for regular yogurt? Why or why not?
2. If high-protein yogurt contributes differently to the CNP meal patterns than regular yogurt, how should high-protein yogurt be credited? Be as specific as possible, such as the volume or weight needed.
3. If high-protein yogurt were to contribute differently to the CNP meal patterns than regular yogurt, should FNS adopt FDA’s definition of “high” for nutrient content claims used on food labels to define high-protein yogurt?
   1. What are the benefits or limitations of this approach?
   2. What opportunities or challenges could arise from having different limits for high-protein yogurt offered to children ages one through three, versus children and adults ages four and older?
4. If high-protein yogurt contributes differently to the CNP meal patterns than regular yogurt, should USDA place any limits on the types of yogurt that can qualify as high-protein yogurt?
   1. Should changes be limited to any specific type of high-protein yogurt?
   2. Should yogurt that is thickened by adding thickening agents (e.g., polysaccharides or optional dairy ingredients) credit differently in CNPs? If yes, what implications might that approach have on the requirement for program operators to plan CNP menus using food-based menu planning?
   3. Should changes include plant-based yogurt alternatives (e.g., soy-based yogurt alternatives)?
5. What other approaches should USDA consider for how to define and credit high-protein yogurt?

In addition, FNS welcomes additional input on its current yogurt crediting policies, potential alternatives for high-protein yogurt, and other feedback from partners.

¹ U.S. Department of Agriculture, Agricultural Research Service, Beltsville Human Nutrition Research Center. FoodData Central, available at: https://fdc.nal.usda.gov/fdc-app.html#/food-details/2647437/nutrients.
² USDA’s School Nutrition and Meal Cost Study found that low-fat or fat-free yogurt was offered in 10 percent of all daily lunch menus and was more frequently offered in daily menus in elementary schools than middle or high school menus. In SBP, yogurt (mostly low-fat or fat-free) was the most frequently offered meat/meat alternate item and was included in one-quarter (25 percent) of all daily breakfast menus. Additional information is available in the study report.

Summary

This information collection is for activities associated with SNAP demonstration projects and the SNAP State Options Report, respectively. Demonstration projects are pilot or experimental projects that waive requirements of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (the Act) (7 USC 2011 et seq.) and SNAP regulations to test program changes to increase efficiency and improve the delivery of benefits to eligible households. Section 17(b) of the Act authorizes the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) to approve demonstration projects. SNAP state agencies must request approval to operate demonstration projects and submit data reports to evaluate its impact. FNS may approve demonstration projects for a maximum five-year term and the projects must maintain cost neutrality and include an evaluation component. The SNAP State Options Report summarizes each state agency's policy choices concerning approximately 20 SNAP policy options and waivers. FNS produces the report on an annual basis and posts it on its public website.

Request for Comments

Comments regarding this information collection received by Jan. 27, 2025 will be considered.

Written comments and recommendations for the proposed information collection should be submitted within 30 days of the publication of this notice on the following website www.reginfo.gov/​public/​do/​PRAMain. Find this particular information collection by selecting “Currently under 30-day Review—Open for Public Comments” or by using the search function. An agency may not conduct or sponsor a collection of information unless the collection of information displays a currently valid OMB control number and the agency informs potential persons who are to respond to the collection of information that such persons are not required to respond to the collection of information unless it displays a currently valid OMB control number.

Summary

The Food and Nutrition Service is correcting a final rule that appeared in the Federal Register on Oct. 31, 2024. The document makes access and parity improvements in USDA's food distribution programs to support access for eligible populations and streamline requirements for program operators.

Dates

Effective Dec. 30, 2024.

Supplementary Information

In FR Doc. 2024-24966 appearing on page 87228 in the Federal Register of Thursday, Oct. 31, 2024, the following corrections are made:

1. § 247.5 [Corrected]

On page 87244, in the third column, in amendatory instruction 4, correct paragraphs (b)(15) through (17) to read as follows:

(b) * * *

(15) Ensuring that program participation does not exceed the state agency's caseload allocation on an average monthly basis;

(16) Making publicly available a list of all CSFP local agencies on a publicly available internet web page. The state agency must post the name, address, and telephone number for each local agency. The list must be updated, at a minimum, on an annual basis; and

(17) Posting the State Plan that is currently in use on a publicly available internet web page.

2. § 247.9 [Corrected]

i. On page 87245, in the first and second columns, in amendatory instruction 9 correct paragraphs (b)(1) and (d)(3)(xxiv) to read as follows:

(b) * * *

(1) The state agency may accept as income-eligible for CSFP benefits any applicant that documents that they are certified as fully eligible for the following federal programs: the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), the Low Income Subsidy Program, or the Medicare Savings Programs.

* * * * *

(d) * * *

(3) * * *

(xxix) Payments to the Assiniboine Tribe of the Fort Belknap Indian community and the Assiniboine Tribe of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation (Montana) (Pub. L. 98-124, sec. 5);

3. § 251.4 [Corrected]

On page 87250, in the first column, instruction 26 for § 251.4, correct instruction 26.f. to read as follows:

f. Removing the term “donated commodities” wherever it appears in paragraph (g) and adding in its place the term “USDA Foods”;

4. § 253.2 [Corrected]

On page 87254, in the first and second columns, in amendatory 36, correct the definitions of “Indian Tribal Organization (ITO) and “state agency” to read as follows:

* * * * *

Indian Tribal Organization (ITO) means:

(1) The recognized governing body of any Indian tribe on a reservation; or

(2) The tribally recognized intertribal organization which the recognized governing bodies of two or more Indian tribes on a reservation authorize to operate SNAP or a Food Distribution Program on their behalf.

* * * * *

State agency means:

(1) The agency of state government, including the local offices thereof, which enters into an agreement with FNS for the distribution of USDA Foods on all or part of an Indian reservation, and

(2) The ITO of any Indian tribe, determined by the Department to be capable of effectively administering a Food Distribution Program, which enters into an agreement with FNS for the distribution of USDA Foods on all or part of an Indian reservation.

(3) State agencies are also referred to as FDPIR administering agencies.

5. § 253.5 [Corrected]

On page 87255, in the first column, in amendment 39, correct the section heading to read as follows:

§ 253.5 State agency requirements.

6. § 253.6 [Corrected]

i. On page 87255, in the second column, in amendment 40, correct paragraphs (a)(2), (d)(3)(vii); and (e)(1) to read as follows:

* * * * *

(a) * * *

(2) Nonhousehold members. The following individuals residing with a household shall not be considered household members in determining the household's eligibility. Nonhousehold members specified in paragraphs (a)(2) (i) and (iv) who are otherwise eligible may participate in the program as separate households.

* * * * *

(d) * * *

(3) * * *

(vii) The earned income (as defined in paragraph (d)(2)(i) of this section) of children who are members of the household, who are students at least half time and who have not attained their eighteenth birthday. * * *

* * * * *

(e) Income deductions —(1) Earned income deduction. Households with earned income, as defined in paragraph (d)(2)(i) of this section, shall be allowed a deduction of twenty percent of their gross earned income. Earned income excluded under paragraph (d)(3) of this section shall not be considered earned income for the purpose of computing this deduction.

Summary

This is a Request for Information to inform the U.S. Department of Agriculture's (USDA's) development of the Child Nutrition Programs Tribal Pilot Projects, as authorized in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024. The Act authorized USDA to conduct pilot projects to allow one or more Tribes or Tribal organizations to administer one or more child nutrition programs, assuming the roles and responsibilities typically held by state agencies. USDA will use comments received in response to this Request for Information to inform the application process, and eligibility and selection criteria, for the Child Nutrition Tribal Pilot Projects. USDA invites feedback from Tribes; Tribal organizations, leaders, representatives, and associations; state agencies that administer the child nutrition programs; and others interested in opportunities to promote Tribal sovereignty in the operation of the child nutrition programs. This notice is not a request for proposals and does not commit the government to issue a solicitation, make an award, or pay any costs associated with responding to this announcement. All submitted information will remain with the government and will not be returned.

Request for Comments

Written comments must be received on or before March 24, 2025.

USDA invites the submission of the requested information through one of the following methods:

• Federal eRulemaking Portal (preferred method): Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting comments.
• Mail: Send written comments to the Child Nutrition Programs, USDA Food and Nutrition Service, Braddock Metro Center II, 1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 22314.

All comments submitted in response to this Request for Information will be included in the record and will be made available to the public. Please be advised that the substance of the comments and the identity of the individuals or entities submitting the comments will be subject to public disclosure. All responses will become part of the public record and will not be held confidential. USDA will make the comments publicly available via https://www.regulations.gov.

Supplementary Information

Child Nutrition Programs Administration

Federal Child Nutrition Programs are administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) and help to ensure that participants have access to nutritious meals and snacks in schools, summer programs, child and adult care centers, family day care homes, and afterschool programs.

Administering the Child Nutrition Programs requires partnership at many levels. The Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act specifies that the federal government enters into agreements with state agencies to administer the child nutrition programs within each state.¹ USDA provides administrative funds to state agencies that administer the child nutrition programs.² State agencies, in turn, establish agreements with local program operators, such as school districts and community organizations, which operate the child nutrition programs and serve meals to child and adult participants in their communities. State agencies establish statewide policies and procedures for administering the child nutrition programs, consistent with federal requirements; provide policy guidance, training, and technical assistance to local program operators; monitor key aspects of performance by conducting comprehensive reviews; and report consolidated meal counts to FNS for reimbursement funds. FNS provides reimbursement to the state agencies, and state agencies are responsible for paying the federal reimbursement to each local program operator, including Tribal program operators. In some states, more than one state agency administers the child nutrition programs. For example, in a single state, one state agency may administer the National School Lunch Program, while another state agency administers the Child and Adult Care Food Program. Nationwide, there are 70 state agencies that administer the child nutrition programs. Under the Tribal Pilot Projects, Tribes and/or Tribal organizations will directly administer one or more child nutrition programs, assuming the roles and responsibilities typically held by state agencies.

Child Nutrition Tribal Pilot Projects

Section 758 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024, Public Law 118-42 (“The Act”), provided $2 million for Tribal Pilot Projects that will permit Indian Tribes and/or Tribal organizations to administer child nutrition programs, assuming the roles and responsibilities typically held by state agencies.³

The Act authorized a maximum of 10 Tribal Pilot Projects, to operate for up to two years, with grants ranging from $10,000-$100,000 per school year. The Act specifies that the following entities may operate Tribal Pilot Projects:

• an Indian Tribe, as defined by section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Assistance Act (25 USC 5304);
• a Tribal organization approved by an Indian Tribe;
• a Tribal educational agency;
• a consortium of Indian Tribes; or
• a partnership between an Indian Tribe and either:
  • a state educational agency,
  • a local educational agency,
  • a Tribal educational agency, or
  • the Bureau of Indian Education.

Grantees may administer one or more of the following child nutrition programs:

• National School Lunch Program, as authorized by the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 USC 1769, “NSLA”);
• School Breakfast Program, established by the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 USC 1773);
• Child and Adult Care Food Program, as established under section 17 of the NSLA (42 USC 1766); and/or
• Summer Food Service Program, as established under section 13 of the NSLA (42 USC 1761).

Finally, grantees may administer child nutrition programs in the following locations:

• a school funded by the Bureau of Indian Affairs (as defined in section 1141 of the Education Amendments of 1978 (25 USC 2021));⁴
• a school (as defined in section 12(d) of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 USC 1760(d)) that is on or near an Indian reservation; or
• an early child care and education facility.

Input from Tribal Communities

Tribal input is critical to ensure that the Tribal Pilot Projects reflect the needs of grantees and the communities they serve. In June 2024, FNS engaged in Nation-to-Nation consultation with Tribal leaders to gather input on the Tribal Pilot Projects. This input also helped to develop this Request for Information.⁵ To gather additional input, FNS will organize meetings and listening sessions with Tribes, groups that represent Tribal food sovereignty, Tribal Child Nutrition Program operators, and state agencies that administer child nutrition programs in states that share boundaries with present-day reservations.

FNS will use information gathered in response to this request to develop a process under which eligible Tribes and/or Tribal organizations may apply to operate a Tribal Pilot Project. This Request for Information will also help FNS understand what (if any) support eligible Tribes and Tribal organizations may need to successfully operate a Tribal Pilot Project, and to determine how the Tribal Pilot Projects will be evaluated.

Maximizing the Value of Public Feedback and Questions for Commenters

USDA invites commenters to respond to any or all of the questions below. Responses to the questions below will be especially helpful to FNS as the Agency works to implement the Child Nutrition Tribal Pilot Projects.⁶ FNS encourages public comment on these questions and seeks any other information relevant to the Child Nutrition Tribal Pilot Projects. FNS seeks public input to ensure that the Tribal Pilot Projects support Tribal sovereignty and nutrition security and best serve the communities in which they will operate. With these general interests in mind, FNS seeks input on the following questions:

1. The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024, identifies the entities that may operate and implement the Tribal Pilot Projects. What, if any, additional criteria should be established for a Tribe and/or Tribal organization to be considered eligible to participate in the pilot projects?
2. Are there any specific criteria that should be prioritized in the selection process? For example, should FNS give priority to a Tribe or Tribal organization with experience operating a child nutrition program, or other FNS nutrition assistance program, or to a pilot project that is implemented by a group of Tribes or Tribal organizations?
3. A Tribe or Tribal organization may partner with a state educational agency, a local educational agency, a tribal educational agency, or the Bureau of Indian Education to administer child nutrition programs.
   1. How might Tribes or Tribal organizations partner with each of these entities?
   2. Should FNS consider any criteria or parameters regarding partnerships?
4. Considering the state agency roles and responsibilities referenced in the Child Nutrition Programs Administration section of this Request for Information, what support (if any) might Tribes and Tribal organizations need to implement the Tribal Pilot Projects and administer one or more child nutrition programs?
5. Given the amount of funding available and timeframe for implementation, should FNS:
   1. Limit grantees to administering only one child nutrition program?
   2. Permit grantees to administer only part of a child nutrition program? If yes, what opportunities or challenges might partial administration present?
6. How can FNS best ensure that Tribes or Tribal organizations have access to staff, technology, and financial support needed to successfully administer child nutrition programs?
7. Should FNS fund as many pilot projects as possible (up to 10) in the first year? Or should FNS fund a limited number of projects in the first year, with future projects funded in subsequent years, to incorporate best practices and lessons learned as pilot projects evolve?
8. What outcomes should FNS measure to evaluate the Tribal Pilot Projects? How should FNS measure sustainability or feasibility of long-term implementation?
9. Is there anything else FNS should consider when implementing the Tribal Pilot Projects?

Disclaimers: This is a Request for Information. This is not a Request for Proposals or a Request for Applications and is not to be construed as a commitment by the U.S. Government to issue any solicitation or Notice of Funding Opportunity, or ultimately award a contract or assistance agreement based on this Request for Information, or to pay for any information voluntarily submitted as a result of this request. The USDA posts its competitive business opportunities on www.grants.gov. It is the potential offeror's/applicant's responsibility to monitor these sites for announcements of new opportunities. Please note that responding to this Request for Information will not give any advantage to any organization or individual in any subsequent competition. Responses may be used by USDA without restriction or limitation, therefore proprietary information should not be sent.

Collection of Information Requirements: This document does not impose information collection requirements, that is, reporting, recordkeeping or third-party disclosure requirements. However, this document does contain a general solicitation of comments in the form of a Request for Information. In accordance with implementing regulations of the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, specifically 5 CFR 1320.3(h)(4), this general solicitation is exempt from the Paperwork Reduction Act. Facts or opinions submitted in response to general solicitations of comments from the public, published in the Federal Register or other publications, regardless of the form or format thereof, provided that no person is required to supply specific information pertaining to the commenter other than that necessary for self-identification, as a condition of the Agency's full consideration, are not generally considered information.

¹ For more information, see the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, 42 USC 1756.
² For more information about State Administrative Expense Funds, see 7 CFR part 235.
³ “Indian Tribe” has the meaning given the term in section 4 of the Indian Self-Determination and Education Assistance Act (25 USC 5304).
⁴ The Education Amendments of 1978 (25 USC 2021) defines the term “Bureau-funded school” to mean (A) a Bureau school; (B) a contract or grant school; or (C) a school for which assistance is provided under the Tribally Controlled Schools Act of 1988 [25 USC 2501 et seq.].
⁵ FNS participated in a Nation-to-Nation Consultation with Tribal leaders on Self-Determination in Food on June 5, 2024, at the National Congress of American Indians' Mid-Year Convention in Cherokee, North Carolina. Additional information is available at: https://www.usda.gov/​sites/​default/​files/​documents/​usda-food-self-determination-framing-paper.pdf.
⁶ Section 758 of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024, PL 118-42 provides $2 million for pilot projects to Tribes and/or Tribal organizations to operate child nutrition programs as state agencies. The Act authorized a maximum of 10 pilot projects, to operate for up to two years, in Bureau of Indian Education-funded schools, schools on or near Indian reservations, or in early child care and education facilities. Grants from $10,000-$100,000 per school year are authorized.

On Dec. 17, 2024, the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) published the final rule, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Program Purpose and Work Requirement Provisions of the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (89 FR 102342).

FNS is issuing this set of questions and answers to clarify questions concerning the provisions of the final rule. FNS expects these questions and answers will assist Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) state agencies in implementing and complying with SNAP policy, especially able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWD) time limit policy.

FNS anticipates releasing additional guidance in the coming months. State agencies with additional questions should contact their respective regional office representatives. Thank you for your continued partnership in serving SNAP households.

The contents of this document do not have the force and effect of law and are not meant to bind the public in any way. This document is intended only to provide clarity to state agencies and the public regarding existing requirements under the law or agency policies.

Sasha Gersten-Paal
Director
Program Development Division
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program

Attachment

• Questions and Answers

On Nov. 18, 2024, the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) published the final rule, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Standardization of Heating and Cooling Standard Utility Allowances. For a summary of the final rule provisions, please see the Dec. 3, 2024, memorandum, SNAP - Implementation of Regulatory Changes to Standard Utility Allowances.

This memorandum covers questions related to provisions in the rule and the implementation process. FNS plans to publish additional question and answer guidance in the following months.

State agencies with questions regarding the final rule implementation should contact their respective regional office representatives.

Sasha Gersten-Paal
Director
Program Development Division
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
Food and Nutrition Service
U.S. Department of Agriculture

Attachment

• Questions and Answers #1 

The purpose of this memorandum is to provide recommendations on infant feeding and infant meal pattern requirements in the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) based on recommendations from the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) and guidance from the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (Dietary Guidelines). The attachment to this memorandum provides frequently asked questions and answers. This memorandum supersedes CACFP 11-2023, Feeding Infants and Meal Pattern Requirements in the Child and Adult Care Food Program, Questions and Answers (Revised September 2023).

In addition to the information included in previous memoranda, this memorandum specifically:

• Updates guidance regarding who may write medical statements to request modifications on behalf of infants with disabilities in the CACFP;
• Describes the option to substitute vegetables for grains in eligible areas;
• Updates product-based sugar limits for breakfast cereals and yogurt from total sugars to added sugars;
• Includes updated information on tofu crediting;
• Includes one new question regarding tempeh crediting;
• Adopts standardized terminology such as “institutions and facilities;” and
• Reorganizes information throughout the memorandum for clarity.

Background

On April 25, 2016, USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) published the final rule “Child and Adult Care Food Program: Meal Pattern Revisions Related to the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act” (81 FR 24347) to update the CACFP meal pattern regulations at 7 CFR 226.20 for the first time since the program’s inception in 1968.

The 2016 final rule amended CACFP regulations to update the infant meal pattern requirements from three into two infant age groups and began the introduction of solid foods around 6 months of age. When developing the updated infant meal pattern, FNS relied on recommendations from the AAP, the leading authority for children’s developmental and nutritional needs from birth through 23 months. At the time, the Dietary Guidelines did not provide recommendations for children under the age of 2. However, the most recent 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines include recommendations for children under 2 years of age.

On April 25, 2024, the USDA FNS published the final rule, “Child Nutrition Programs: Meal Patterns Consistent with the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans” (89 FR 31962), to better align program nutrition requirements for consistency with the goals of the most recent edition of the Dietary Guidelines. This rule also seeks to better align CACFP nutrition requirements with school meal requirements in an effort to simplify operations for institutions and facilities that operate both programs. While the majority of provisions in the 2024 final rule focus on school meals, some provisions apply to infant feeding in the CACFP, including improvements to the nutritional quality of program meals supporting cultural food preferences.

Offering Infant Meals

Infants enrolled for care at a participating CACFP institution or facility must be offered a meal that complies with the CACFP infant meal pattern requirements (7 CFR 226.20(b)). An institution or facility must make reasonable modifications, including substitutions for meals and snacks, for infants with a disability and whose disability restricts their diet (7 CFR 226.20(g)(1)).

CACFP regulations define an enrolled child as “a child whose parent or guardian has submitted to an institution a signed document which indicates that the child is enrolled in child care” (7 CFR 226.2). An institution or facility may not avoid this obligation by stating that the infant is not “enrolled” in the CACFP, or by citing logistical or cost barriers to offering infant meals. Decisions on offering program meals must be based on whether the infant is enrolled for care in a participating CACFP institution or facility, not if the infant is enrolled in the CACFP.

Infants may experience hunger outside of typical mealtimes. For this reason, it is recommended that infants be fed on demand, which means feeding them when they show signs of being hungry. Infant meals must not be disallowed due solely to the fact that they are not served within the institution or facility’s established mealtime periods.

Creditable Infant Formulas

As part of offering a meal that is compliant with the CACFP infant meal pattern requirements, institutions and facilities with infants in their care must offer at least one type of iron-fortified infant formula (7 CFR 226.20(b)(2)). Institutions and facilities may purchase infant formula online or in-person from retailers (e.g., local, regional or national vendors), pharmacies, and membership-based warehouses.

The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) defines iron-fortified infant formula as a product “which contains 1 milligram or more of iron in a quantity of product that supplies 100 kilocalories when prepared in accordance with label directions for infant consumption” (21 CFR 107.10(b)(4)(i)). The number of milligrams (mg) of iron per 100 kilocalories (calories) of formula can be found on the Nutrition Facts label of infant formulas.

The following criteria may be used to determine whether a formula is eligible for reimbursement:

1. Ensure that the formula is not an FDA Exempt Infant Formula. An exempt infant formula is an infant formula labeled for use by infants who have inborn errors of metabolism or low birth weight, or who otherwise have unusual medical or dietary problems, as defined in 21 CFR 107.3. The FDA has a webpage, Exempt Infant Formulas Marketed in the United States by Manufacturer and Category that provides more information and a list of FDA Exempt Infant Formulas.
2. Look for “Infant Formula with Iron” or a similar statement on the front of the formula package. All iron-fortified infant formulas must have this type of statement on the package.
3. Use the Nutrition Facts label as a guide to ensure that the formula is iron-fortified. The nutritive values of each formula are listed on the product’s Nutrition Facts label. To be considered iron-fortified, an infant formula must have 1 mg of iron or more per 100 calories of formula when prepared in accordance with label directions.

Additionally, to be creditable for reimbursement, infant formula must meet the definition of an infant formula in section 201(z) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 USC 321(z))¹ and meet the requirements for an infant formula under section 412 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 USC 350a)² and the regulations at 21 CFR parts 106 and 107³. Requiring an infant formula to be compliant with the FDA regulatory standards on infant formula is consistent with the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children’s (WIC) infant formula requirements. It also ensures that all infant formulas served in the CACFP meet nutrient specifications and safety requirements.

If a formula is purchased outside of the United States, it is likely that the formula is not regulated by the FDA. Infant formula that is imported into the U.S. as a result of the 2022 FDA Infant Formula Enforcement Discretion Policy may be served in the CACFP as detailed in CACFP 01-2023, Creditability of Infant Formulas Imported Through the Food and Drug Administration’s 2022 Infant Formula Enforcement Discretion Policy in the Child and Adult Care Food Program, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cacfp/creditability-infant-formulas-imported-through-fda-2022-enforcement-discretion-policy. Infant formulas that are not regulated by the FDA are not creditable in the CACFP.

Formulas classified as Exempt Infant Formulas by the FDA may be served as a part of a reimbursable meal if the substitution is due to a disability and is supported by a medical statement signed by a state licensed healthcare professional or a registered dietitian. Prior to the April 2024 final rule, institutions and facilities could only accept medical statements signed by licensed physicians or licensed healthcare professionals authorized by state law to write medical prescriptions.

Medical statements must be submitted and kept on file in a secure location by the institution or facility. For more information on providing meal accommodations for participants with disabilities, see CACFP 14-2017, SFSP 10-2017 Modifications to Accommodate Disabilities in the Child and Adult Care Food Program and Summer Food Service Program https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/modifications-accommodate-disabilities-cacfp-and-sfsp.

State agencies should contact their FNS regional office when they are uncertain if an infant formula is creditable.

Parent or Guardian Provided Breastmilk or Formula

An infant’s parent or guardian may, at their discretion, decline the infant formula offered by the institution or facility and provide expressed breast milk or a creditable infant formula instead. Meals containing parent or guardian provided expressed breast milk or creditable infant formula that are served to the infant by the child care provider are eligible for reimbursement, including meals when an infant is only consuming breast milk or infant formula. In recognition of the numerous benefits of breastfeeding, including the AAP and Dietary Guidelines recommendation to feed infants human milk (breast milk) exclusively for approximately 6 months after birth, if possible, and continue to feed infants breast milk, along with complementary foods through at least the first year of life, and longer if desired, institutions and facilities may claim reimbursement of meals when a parent directly breastfeeds their infant at the institution or facility. This includes meals when an infant is only consuming breast milk. This added flexibility in the infant meal pattern is consistent with FNS efforts to support and encourage breastfeeding. Therefore, meals when a parent directly breastfeeds their infant on-site are eligible for reimbursement.

While institutions and facilities must maintain menus to show what foods an infant is served, there is no Federal requirement to document the delivery method for breast milk (e.g., if it was served in a bottle by the day care provider or if the parent breastfed on-site). An institution or facility may simply indicate on the menu that the infant was offered breast milk. Additionally, institutions and facilities do not need to record the amount of breast milk a parent directly breastfeeds their infant.

When a parent or guardian chooses to provide breast milk (expressed breast milk or by directly breastfeeding on-site) or a creditable infant formula and the infant is consuming solid foods, the institution or facility must supply all the other required meal components for the meal to be reimbursable.

Expressed Breastmilk Storage

In the Pediatric Nutrition Handbook, 8th Edition, the AAP generally recommends storing expressed breast milk in the refrigerator for up to four days. This recommendation may vary if the breast milk is to be fed to an infant that is either preterm and/or ill. For general CACFP purposes, breast milk may be stored at the institution or facility in a refrigerator for up to four (4) days from the date the breast milk was expressed. Bottles of expressed breast milk must be stored in a refrigerator kept at 40° Fahrenheit (4° Celsius) or below. Previously frozen breast milk that is thawed and stored in the refrigerator should be used within 24 hours and should never be refrozen. This is consistent with recommendations from the AAP and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. If applicable, state or local authorities have stricter health and safety regulations for handling and storing food, including breast milk or formula, the stricter regulations should be followed.

Formula Food Safety Considerations

The FDA strongly advises against homemade formula, stating that recipes are often not safe, do not meet infants’ nutritional needs, and in some cases, can be life threatening. Homemade infant formulas are not regulated by the FDA and are not creditable under any circumstances in the CACFP.

When preparing infant formula, only use water from a safe source. If you are not sure if your tap water is safe to use for preparing infant formula, contact your local health department or use bottled water. Use the amount of water and number of powder scoops listed on the instructions of the infant formula label when preparing formula from powder. Be sure to use the scoop provided by the manufacturer. Always measure the water first and then add the powder. Using more or less water and powdered formula than instructed changes the amount of calories and nutrients in the bottle which can affect an infant’s growth and development. Formula that is not prepared correctly cannot credit towards a reimbursable meal or snack in the CACFP, unless a written medical statement from a state-licensed healthcare professional or registered dietitian is provided.

Use prepared infant formula within 2 hours of preparation. If the prepared infant formula is not being fed within 2 hours, refrigerate it right away in a refrigerator kept at 40° Fahrenheit (4° Celsius) or below, keep refrigerated until feeding, and use within 24 hours. Once you start feeding an infant, make sure the infant formula is consumed within 1 hour. Throw away any leftover formula that is in the bottle.

Do not buy or use infant formula if the container has dents, bulges, pinched tops or bottoms, puffed ends, leaks, rust spots, or has been opened. The formula in these containers may be unsafe. Check the infant formula “use by” date. The “use by” date is the date up to which the manufacturer guarantees the nutrient content and the quality of the formula. After this date, a package or container of infant formula should not be fed to infants. Store unopened containers of infant formula in a cool, dry, indoor place – not in a refrigerator or freezer, or in vehicles, garages, or outdoors.

Institutions and facilities should prepare, use, and store infant formula according to the product directions on the container or as directed by the infant’s health care provider.

Solid Foods (Complementary Foods)

The CACFP infant meal pattern includes two infant age groups: birth through the end of 5 months and the beginning of 6 months through the end of 11 months. These infant age groups are consistent with the infant age groups in the WIC program. In addition, the infant age groups will help delay the introduction of solid foods until around 6 months of age. It is important to delay the introduction of solid foods until around 6 months of age because most infants are typically not developmentally ready to consume solid foods until midway through the first year of life. The Dietary Guidelines states that human milk (breast milk) can support an infant’s nutrient needs for about the first 6 months of life, except for Vitamin D and potentially iron. At about age 6 months, infants should be introduced to nutrient-dense, developmentally appropriate foods to complement breast milk or iron-fortified infant formula. Some infants show developmental signs of readiness before age 6 months but introducing complementary foods before age 4 months is not recommended. According to the AAP, 6 to 8 months of age is often referred to as a critical window for initiating the introduction of solid foods to infants. In addition, by 7 to 8 months of age, infants should be consuming solid foods from all food groups (vegetables, fruits, grains, protein foods, and dairy).

Solid foods must be served to infants around 6 months of age, as it is developmentally appropriate for each individual infant. Once an infant is developmentally ready to accept solid foods, the institution or facility is required to offer them to the infant. FNS recognizes, though, that as solid foods are introduced gradually, new foods may be introduced one at a time over the course of a few days, and as an infant’s eating patterns may change. For example, an infant may eat a cracker one week and not the next week. Institutions and facilities must follow the eating habits of the infant. Meals should not be disallowed simply because one food was offered one day and not the next if that is consistent with the infant’s eating habits. In addition, solid foods served to infants must be of a texture and consistency that is appropriate for the age and development of the infant being fed.

There is no single, direct signal to determine when an infant is developmentally ready to accept solid foods. An infant’s readiness depends on their rate of development and infants develop at different rates. Institutions and facilities should be in constant communication with infants’ parents or guardians about when and what solid foods to serve while the infant is in their care. As a best practice, FNS recommends that parents or guardians request in writing when an institution or facility should start serving solid foods to their infant. When talking with parents or guardians about when to serve solid foods to infants in care, the following guidelines from the AAP can help determine if an infant is developmentally ready to begin eating solid foods:

• The infant is able to sit in a high chair, feeding seat, or infant seat with good head control;
• The infant opens their mouth when food comes their way. The infant may watch others eat, reach for food, and seem eager to be fed;
• The infant can move food from a spoon into their throat; and
• The infant has doubled their birth weight and weighs about 13 pounds or more.

Allowing solid foods to be served when the infant is developmentally ready (around 6 months of age) better accommodates infants’ varying rates of development and allows institutions and facilities to work together with the infant’s parents or guardians to determine when solid foods should be served.

Institutions and facilities are required to make substitutions to meals for participants with a disability that restricts a participant’s diet on a case-by-case basis and only when supported by a written statement from a state-licensed healthcare professional or registered dietitian. The statement must be submitted and kept on file in a secure location by the institution or facility.

Institutions and facilities may receive reimbursement for a meal variation without a medical statement when the accommodation can be made within the program meal pattern. For example, if an infant has an allergy to one fruit or vegetable, the institution or facility can substitute another fruit or vegetable. Institutions and facilities are not obligated to meet requests that are not related to a participant’s disability; however, program regulations encourage Institutions and facilities to meet and consider participants’ dietary preferences when planning and preparing meals and snacks. Variations must be consistent with the meal pattern requirements.

For more information and best practices on serving solid foods to infants with non-disability related dietary requests, please refer to CACFP 14-2017, SFSP 10-2017 Modifications to Accommodate Disabilities in the Child and Adult Care Food Program and Summer Food Service Program https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/modifications-accommodate-disabilities-cacfp-and-sfsp.

Vegetables and Fruits

The primary goal of the CACFP meal pattern is to help children establish healthy eating patterns at an early age. Offering a variety of nutrient dense foods, including vegetables and fruits (cooked, mashed, pureed, or small diced, no larger than ½ inch, as needed to obtain the appropriate texture and consistency), can help promote good nutritional status in infants. Additionally, the AAP recommends infants consume more vegetables and fruits. Vegetables, fruits, or a combination of both are required at breakfast, lunch, and supper meals as well as snacks for infants that are developmentally ready to accept them (around 6 months of age). However, fruit juice, vegetable juice, or a combination of both juices cannot be served as part of a reimbursable meal for infants of any age under the infant meal pattern.

Grains

Grains are an important part of meals and snacks in the CACFP. To make sure infants get enough grains, required amounts of grain items are listed in the infant meal pattern as ounce equivalents (oz eq). Ounce equivalents approximate the amount of grain in a portion of food. Iron-fortified infant cereal is the only grain that may count towards a reimbursable breakfast, lunch, or supper in the CACFP infant meal pattern. Serving infant cereal in a bottle is not allowed. Neither the infant cereal nor the breast milk or formula in the bottle may be claimed for reimbursement when infant cereal is added to breast milk or formula in a bottle, unless it is supported by a signed medical statement. Institutions and facilities may serve bread/bread-like items, crackers, iron-fortified infant cereal, or ready-to-eat cereal as part of a reimbursable snack to infants that are developmentally ready to accept them. The ounce equivalent requirements vary for the different grain items.

As a reminder, all ready-to-eat cereals served to infants must meet the same sugar limits as breakfast cereals served to children and adults in the CACFP. The April 2024 final rule updated the product-based sugar limits for breakfast cereals by replacing total sugar limits with added sugar limits. Through Sept. 30, 2025, breakfast cereals must contain no more than 6 grams of total sugars per dry ounce. By Oct. 1, 2025, breakfast cereals must contain no more than 6 grams of added sugars per dry ounce. However, with state agency approval, institutions and facilities may choose to implement the added sugars limits for breakfast cereals (including ready-to-eat cereals for infants) early. Ready-to-eat cereals must also be whole grain-rich, enriched, or fortified in order to be creditable in the CACFP. For more information on the breakfast cereal sugar limits and creditable grains, please see memorandum CACFP 05-2025, Grain Requirements in the Child and Adult Care Food Program; Questions and Answers, Dec. 19, 2024, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cacfp/grain-requirements-cacfp-questions-and-answers.

In an effort to accommodate cultural food preferences and to address product availability and cost concerns in outlying areas, eligible Institutions and facilities have the flexibility to serve vegetables to meet the grains requirement. Effective July 1, 2024, these eligible program operators include institutions and facilities in American Samoa, Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands, and institutions or facilities in any state that serve primarily American Indian or Alaska Native participants. USDA recognizes the concern that allowing this flexibility for infants could result in a reduced consumption of critical nutrients, such as iron. However, the infant meal pattern allows a variety of foods to meet the required meal components for meals and snacks, and only currently requires a grain item at snack when an infant is developmentally ready to accept those foods. Allowing institutions and facilities to serve culturally responsive meals and snacks can improve meal consumption and strengthen relationships between providers, families, and participants. Any vegetable, including vegetables such as breadfruit, prairie turnips, plantains, sweet potatoes, and yams, may be served to meet the grains requirement in eligible programs. Additional detail on this flexibility can be found in CACFP 03, 2025, Substituting Vegetables for Grains in American Samoa, Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Tribal Communities, Oct. 30, 2024, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/substituting-vegetables-grains-hawaii-territories-tribal.

Meats and Meat Alternates

Meats and meat alternates are good sources of protein and provide essential nutrients, such as iron and zinc for growing infants. FNS acknowledges that yogurt is often served to infants as they are developmentally ready. In recognition of this, the infant meal pattern allows yogurt, including soy yogurt, as a meat alternate for older infants who are developmentally ready to accept yogurt. The April 2024 final rule updated the product-based sugars limits for yogurts by replacing total sugars limits with added sugars limits. Through Sept. 30, 2025, yogurts must contain no more than 23 grams of total sugars per 6 ounces. By Oct. 1, 2025, yogurt must contain no more than 12 grams of added sugars per 6 ounces. However, with state-agency approval, institutions and facilities may choose to implement the added sugars limits for yogurt early.

In addition, while cheese food and cheese spread are creditable for children one year and older, the infant meal pattern does not allow cheese food or cheese spread to credit as a meat alternate. This is due to these products’ higher sodium content, and the AAP and Dietary Guidelines recommend caregivers choose products lower in sodium. Natural or processed cheese is creditable while cheese product is not creditable in the CACFP for infants or any other age group.

Tofu may credit as a meat alternate in the CACFP infant meal pattern. Tofu must be commercially prepared and meet the following definition, established in 7 CFR 226.2: “a soybean-derived food...basic ingredients [in tofu] are whole soybeans, one or more food-grade coagulants (typically a salt or acid), and water.” Noncommercial tofu and soy products are not creditable. The minimum serving amount of tofu for infants 6 through 11 months is 0-4 tablespoons (¼ cup), or 2.2ozw, containing at least 5 grams of protein. For more information refer to CACFP 02-2024, Crediting Tofu and Soy Products in the School Meals Programs, Child and Adult Care Food Program, and Summer Food Service Program, Nov. 29, 2023, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/crediting-tofu-and-soy-yogurt-products-school-meal-programs-and-cacfp.

DHA Enriched Infant Foods

Docosahexaenoic acid, known as DHA, is an omega-3 fatty acid that may be added to infant formulas and infant foods. While more research on the benefits of DHA and ARA (arachidonic acid, an omega-6 fatty acid) is needed, some studies suggest they may have positive effects on visual function and neural development. Since 2015, FNS allows infant foods containing DHA to be creditable in the CACFP infant meal pattern. Infant foods containing DHA may be served and claimed as part of a reimbursable meal, as long as they meet all other crediting requirements. Infants with a known DHA allergy should not be served foods containing DHA.

Compliance

As currently required, institutions and facilities must demonstrate that they are serving meals that meet the meal pattern requirements, including the infant meal pattern requirements outlined in this memorandum. Institutions and facilities must keep records of menus (7 CFR 226.15(e)(10)). However, state agencies have the authority to determine other types of acceptable recordkeeping documents (7 CFR 226.15(e)). To the extent practicable, state agencies should not impose additional paperwork requirements to demonstrate compliance with the meal pattern requirements for infants. Rather, FNS encourages state agencies to maintain current recordkeeping requirements or update existing forms to avoid any additional burden. For additional information on documenting meals, please see CACFP 17-2017, Documenting Meals in the Child and Adult Care Food Program, June 30, 2017, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cacfp/documenting-meals-child-and-adult-care-food-program.

Please see the Questions and Answers in the Attachment for examples of best practices for demonstrating compliance with the infant meal pattern.

State agencies are reminded to distribute this information to program operators immediately. Program operators should direct any questions regarding this memorandum to the appropriate state agency. State agency contact information is available on the USDA webpage. State agencies should direct questions to the appropriate FNS regional office.

For J. Kevin Maskornick
Director, Community Meals Policy Division
Child Nutrition Programs

Attachment

• Questions and Answers
   

¹ Section 201(z) of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 USC 321(z)): https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2010-title21/pdf/USCODE-2010title21-chap9-subchapII-sec321.pdf

² Section 412 of the Federal Food, Drug, and Cosmetic Act (21 USC 350a): https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/USCODE-2010-title21/pdf/USCODE-2010title21-chap9-subchapIV-sec350a.pdf

³ 21 CFR parts 106 and 107: https://www.ecfr.gov/current/title-21/chapter-I/subchapter-B

The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) is clarifying student eligibility policy to help state agencies screen and certify eligible students and support work readiness for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Although students who are at risk of food insecurity may be eligible for SNAP, many are not participating in the program. A recent Government Accountability Office report estimated 3.3 million students were eligible for SNAP, but 67 percent reported not receiving benefits.

Individuals enrolled at least half time in an institution of higher education (IHE) are eligible for SNAP if they meet certain criteria (exemptions), provided at Section 6(e) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (the Act) and 7 CFR 273.5(b). FNS' Feb. 7, 2023, Institutions of Higher Education and Student Eligibility Rules memo clarified which individuals are considered enrolled in an IHE, and therefore subject to student eligibility rules. FNS understands there is confusion around student exemptions, and is issuing this memorandum to clarify several of these exemptions:

• The physically or mentally unfit exemption at Sec. 6(e)(2) of the Act and 7 CFR 273.5(b)(2);
• The work study exemption at Sec. 6(e)(4) of the Act and 7 CFR 273.5(b)(6);
• The exemption for individuals assigned to or placed in an IHE through certain employment and training programs outlined at Sec. 6(e)(3) of the Act and 7 CFR 273.5(b)(11); and
• The exemption for the work incentive or Job Opportunities and Basic Skills (JOBS) program under Title IV of the Social Security Act, or its successor program, at Sec.6(e)(7) of the Act and 7 CFR 273.5(b)(4).

The definition of a student covered in this memo and other SNAP memos is for SNAP eligibility purposes only.

Schools should determine who is a “student” for their own purposes, which may confer advantages such as access to a campus library or a student ID card.

State agencies with questions should contact their regional office representatives.

Sasha Gersten-Paal
Director
Program Development Division
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program

Attachment

• Questions and Answers

This memorandum explains the grain requirements for the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) and includes questions and answers. This memorandum supersedes CACFP 09-2018, Grain Requirements in the Child and Adult Care Food Program; Questions and Answers, published April 4, 2018.

Background

On April 25, 2024, the USDA Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) published the final rule, “Child Nutrition Programs: Meal Patterns Consistent With the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans” (89 FR 31962). The majority of the 2024 final rule focused on gradual updates to the school nutrition requirements, however the rule also included updates to the CACFP to better align child nutrition program (CNP) requirements. The purpose of this memorandum is to provide updated guidance on the provisions of the 2024 final rule that apply to the grains requirements in the CACFP, which included adding a definition for whole grain-rich into CACFP regulations; changing product-based limits for breakfast cereals and yogurts from total sugars to added sugars; and updating guidance on substituting vegetables to meet the grains requirements for eligible program operators. In addition to the information included in previous memoranda, this memorandum specifically:

1. Provides updated guidance on added sugars;
2. Provides updated guidance on substituting vegetables for grains in eligible settings;
3. Adds two Q&As related to substituting vegetables for grains and using non-grain pasta products, respectively;
4. Adopts standardized terminology such as “institutions and facilities;” and
5. Reorganizes information throughout the memorandum for clarity.

Although FNS’ goal is to streamline guidance and align CNPs to the greatest extent possible, the agency recognizes that CACFP operates differently than the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and School Breakfast Program (SBP) and serves distinct populations. Therefore, there are some instances when CACFP guidance differs from school meal programs guidance. For more information on the preschool meal pattern requirements for NSLP and SBP, see SP 01-2018, Updated Infant and Preschool Meal Patterns in the National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program; Questions and Answers, Oct. 19, 2017.

Requirements

Grains are a required component at breakfast, lunch, and supper meals in the CACFP. Grains are not required at snack (with the exception of the snack requirements for 6-11 month old infants) but may be served as one of the two meal components. At breakfast, CACFP institutions and facilities may serve meats/meat alternates in place of the entire grains component, up to three times per week. Creditable grains include whole grains, enriched grains, fortified ready-to-eat cereals, bran, and germ. The CACFP meal patterns require that at least one serving of grains per day must be whole grain-rich for children and adults (7 CFR 226.20(a)(4)(i)(A)). A whole grain-rich product has a grain content that is between 50 and 100 percent whole grain with any remaining grains being enriched (7 CFR 226.2). While there is no minimum whole grain-rich requirement for grains served to infants, CACFP institutions and facilities are encouraged to serve whole grain-rich grains to infants developmentally ready to accept them.

There are several ways that state agencies, institutions, and facilities may determine how grain items credit toward the meal pattern requirements. The grains component is measured in ounce equivalents (oz eq). One quarter (0.25) of an oz eq is the smallest creditable grain amount. If the minimum daily requirement for grains is 1.0 oz eq, for example, this minimum could be met by offering one food item or multiple food items, such as offering two separate 0.5 oz eq grain items. This 0.25 minimum creditable requirement does not apply to the CACFP infant meal pattern.

The ounce equivalents for grains may be determined by using the weights or volumes listed in the chart titled ‘Exhibit A: Grain Requirements For Child Nutrition Programs,’ part of the Food Buying Guide for Child Nutrition Programs (FBG). Institutions and facilities may also use the Grains section of the FBG, as well as Appendix A of the FBG; the latter features the Recipe Analysis Workbook (RAW), which is a tool used to determine the expected meal pattern contribution and crediting statement for a standardized recipe. Institutions and facilities may also use the Crediting Handbook for CACFP, to determine ounce equivalents crediting. Additionally, institutions and facilities may use a Child Nutrition (CN) label or a manufacturer’s Product Formulation Statement (PFS) to obtain information on how a product contributes toward meal pattern requirements.

Enriched Grains and Fortified Breakfast Cereals

Enriched grains are refined grains that have been processed to remove the nutrient-rich bran and germ, and then have thiamin, riboflavin, niacin, folic acid, and iron added after processing. Similarly, a food that is fortified has certain vitamins and minerals added to increase the nutritional quality. Foods made from refined grains that meet at least one of the following are considered creditable:

1. The food is labeled as “enriched.” For example, long grain rice that is enriched will have the product name “enriched long grain rice.”
2. An enriched grain is listed as the first ingredient on the food’s ingredient list or second after water. The ingredient list will usually say “enriched flour” or “enriched wheat flour,” or there is a sub-listing of nutrients used to enrich the flour, for example, “yellow corn flour {iron, folic acid, riboflavin, niacin, and thiamine}.”
3. For breakfast cereals, the product is labeled as “fortified” or the ingredient list names the vitamins and minerals that have been added to the product. If a breakfast cereal is fortified, it does not need to be enriched. For example, the ingredient list of a fortified breakfast cereal may read, “Ingredients: Wheat flour, sugar, contains 2% or less of salt, baking soda, caramel color, BHT for freshness. Vitamins and Minerals: Vitamin C (sodium ascorbate, ascorbic acid), niacin, vitamin B6 (pyridoxine hydrochloride), reduced iron, zinc oxide, folic acid, vitamin B2 (riboflavin), vitamin B1 (thiamin hydrochloride), vitamin A palmitate, vitamin D, vitamin B12.”
   
   NOTE: The ingredient list of a non-fortified cereal would not name any added vitamins and minerals. For example, the ingredient list of a non-fortified breakfast cereal may read, “Ingredients: rice flour, corn flour, evaporated cane juice, pomegranate juice concentrate, sea salt.” This cereal would not be considered a creditable grain because it is not made from whole or enriched grains and is not fortified.

Whole Grain-Rich

A whole grain contains all parts of the grain kernel (bran, germ, and endosperm), and therefore does not need enrichment. For a grain product to be considered whole grain-rich, the grain content of a product must be between 50 and 100 percent whole grain with any remaining grains being enriched. For meals served to children and adult participants, at least one serving of grains per day must be whole grain-rich. Although whole grain-rich grains may be served to infants, the daily whole grain-rich minimum does not apply to infant meals.

Any one of the following six options may be used to determine if a grain product meets the whole grain-rich criteria. Use of these methods is intended to be flexible so that individual operators, who may use different methods to purchase food (such as wholesale or retail), can easily identify creditable whole grain-rich foods. The operator must only ensure that a food meets at least one of the following to be considered whole grain-rich:

1. The product is found on any state agency’s current Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC)-approved whole grain food list.

   Except for some cereals, whole grain bread and other whole grain options found on any state agency’s WIC-approved food list meet the whole grain-rich criteria for all CNPs. This may include but is not limited to tortillas, pastas, rice, and breads on a state WIC list. Not all cereals on a WIC list are required to be whole grain-rich. When using the WIC list to choose a whole grain-rich cereal, the operator should be sure to choose one that is marked as whole grain on the WIC list. Program operators can obtain a copy of a state agency’s WIC-approved food list by contacting WIC at the relevant state agency.

2. The product is labeled as “whole wheat” and has a Standard of Identity issued by the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA).

   An FDA Standard of Identity is a set of rules for what a certain product (like whole wheat bread) must contain or may contain to legally be labeled with that product name. FDA provides Standards of Identity for certain whole wheat bread products (21 CFR 136.180) and certain whole wheat pasta products (21 CFR 139.138).

   Only breads with these exact product names conform to an FDA Standard of Identity and can be considered whole grain-rich using this method:

   • Whole wheat bread
   • Entire wheat bread
   • Graham bread

   • Whole wheat rolls
   • Entire wheat rolls
   • Graham rolls

   • Whole wheat buns
   • Entire wheat buns
   • Graham buns

   
   Only pastas with these exact product names conform to an FDA Standard of Identity and can be considered whole grain-rich using this method:

   • Whole wheat macaroni product
   • Whole wheat macaroni

   • Whole wheat spaghetti
   • Whole wheat vermicelli

   
   Other grain products labeled as “whole wheat” that do not have an FDA Standard of Identity, such as crackers, tortillas, bagels, and biscuits, must be evaluated for whole grain-rich creditability for CACFP using one of the other methods on this list.

   Please be aware that manufacturers may label their products with terms that are similar to, but slightly different from, FDA Standard of Identity terms defined above. Some frequently encountered terms include “whole grain,” “made with whole grains,” “made with whole wheat,” or “contains whole grains” for example. These terms do not indicate an FDA Standard of Identity for whole wheat products. Foods labeled with these terms must be evaluated for whole grain-rich creditability for CACFP using one of the other methods on this list.

3. The product includes one of the following FDA approved whole-grain health claims on its packaging, exactly as written:

   “Diets rich in whole grain foods and other plant foods and low in total fat, saturated fat, and cholesterol may reduce the risk of heart disease and some cancers.”
   
   OR
   
   “Diets rich in whole grain foods and other plant foods, and low in saturated fat and cholesterol, may help reduce the risk of heart disease.”

4. The product meets the whole grain-rich criteria under the NSLP.

   Use of the NSLP whole grain-rich criteria may ease menu planning and purchasing for schools that operate CACFP, as they can use the same whole grain-rich criteria for both programs. The NSLP whole grain-rich criteria apply for all grain products with the exception of grain-based desserts, which are not creditable under CACFP.

5. The product meets FNS' Rule of Three, a three-step process for identifying whole grain-rich products in the CACFP.

   FNS developed the Rule of Three in recognition that CACFP operators purchase food differently than school meal program operators, particularly smaller sized CACFP operators who often shop in retail environments and may not have access to a manufacturers’ PFS’ or products specially formulated for school meal programs.

   To meet the Rule of Three, the first grain ingredient must be whole grain, and the next two grain ingredients (if any) must be whole grains, enriched grains, bran, or germ. Any grain derivatives (by-products of grains) may be disregarded. Any non-creditable grain ingredients (e.g., flours that are not enriched or whole) that are labeled as two percent or less of product weight are considered insignificant and may also be disregarded. The Rule of Three applies to the grain portion of mixed dishes, as well. See Attachment 1: Rule of Three Supplementary Information for more detail on implementing the Rule of Three.

   When applying the Rule of Three for ready-to-eat breakfast cereals, if the first grain ingredient is a whole grain and the cereal is fortified, the product meets the whole grain-rich criteria. In this situation, the second and third grain ingredients, if any, do not need to be considered.

6. The product has proper documentation from a manufacturer or a standardized recipe demonstrating that whole grains are the primary grain ingredient by weight.

   Documentation from a manufacturer or a standardized recipe is particularly helpful when determining whole grain-rich creditability for grain products that do not have a whole grain as the first ingredient and for mixed dishes. When a grain product (such as bread) has a first grain ingredient that is not whole grain, the primary ingredient by weight may still be whole grain if there are multiple whole grain ingredients and the combined weight of those whole grains is more than the weight of the other grain ingredients. When the grain portion of a mixed dish (like a beef enchilada) is not entirely whole grain, it may be whole grain-rich depending upon the proportion of whole grains to other grain ingredients. See Attachment 2: Whole Grain-Rich: Examples of Proper Documentation for more information on implementing this option.

Child Nutrition Labels and Product Formulation Statements

Some commercially purchased food items containing a combination of meats and meat alternates and grains, such as pizza, burritos, corn dogs, and chicken nuggets, may not be listed in the Food Buying Guide; however, they still may be creditable with proper documentation, such as a CN label or a manufacturer’s PFS. The CN Labeling program is a voluntary federal labeling program for CNPs. A CN label identifies the contribution of a product toward the meal pattern requirements. Main dishes that contribute at least 0.50 oz eq meats/meat alternates per serving are eligible for a CN label. If the product also contributes to the grains component, the CN label will indicate the ounce equivalent of grains provided. When grains on the CN label are expressed as “oz. equivalent grains,” they credit as whole grain-rich. When grains on the CN label are expressed as “oz. equivalent grains (enriched),” they credit as enriched grains. When food items with a CN label are served according to directions, the label is sufficient documentation for monitoring purposes.

When a CN label is not available, institutions and facilities may request that the manufacturer provide a PFS to show how the creditable ingredients in the product contribute toward the meal pattern requirements. A manufacturer’s PFS is a signed certified document that provides a way for a manufacturer to demonstrate how a product may contribute to the meal pattern requirements. Institutions and facilities are ultimately responsible for ensuring menu items meet meal pattern requirements; therefore, it is the program operator’s responsibility to request and verify that the supporting documentation for the PFS is accurate. For more information on the CN label and a manufacturer’s PFS, please refer to the Manufacturer Documentation information page.

Grain-Based Desserts

Grain-based desserts cannot credit toward the grains requirement at any meal or snack in the CACFP (7 CFR 226.20(a)(4)(iii)). Grain-based desserts for CACFP are identified as items that have a superscript 3 or 4 in Exhibit A: Grain Requirements for CNPs, which is part of the Food Buying Guide. Under Exhibit A, the following foods are considered grain-based desserts in CACFP: cookies, sweet pie crusts, cobblers, fruit turnovers, doughnuts, cereal bars, breakfast bars, granola bars, sweet rolls, toaster pastries, cake, coffee cake, and brownies. Other grain-based desserts in CACFP include, but are not limited to: sweet bread puddings, sweet biscotti, sweet croissants, sweet pita chips, sweet rice puddings, sweet scones, gingerbread, marshmallow cereal treats, and ice cream cones.

It is important to note that cookies do not have an FDA Standard of Identity, so a food manufacturer may use clever names that could mislead the menu planner into serving a product that may not be allowed. When determining whether a food is a grain-based dessert, the menu planner should consider whether the food is commonly thought of as a dessert or treat.

Menu planners should also be aware that even if a product is not labeled as a traditional dessert item, it may contain high levels of added sugars. Menu planners should use their discretion when serving these foods. State agencies and sponsoring organizations can provide guidance when a menu planner is unsure whether a product could be considered a grain-based dessert.

FNS recognizes that institutions and facilities may want to occasionally serve grain-based desserts for celebrations or other special occasions. As a reminder, institutions and facilities continue to have the flexibility to serve grain-based desserts as an additional food item that does not contribute to the meal components required for reimbursement. However, non-creditable food items are not allowable costs and must be purchased using non-program funds.

Breakfast Cereals

The 2024 final rule updated CACFP total sugars limits for breakfast cereals and yogurt to added sugars limits that align with the NSLP/SBP product-based limits for breakfast cereals and yogurt.

Through Sept. 30, 2025, breakfast cereals must contain no more than 6 grams of total sugars per dry ounce. By Oct. 1, 2025, breakfast cereals served to infants, children, and adults must contain no more than 6 grams of added sugars per dry ounce (21.2 grams of added sugars per 100 grams of dry cereal) (7 CFR 226.20(a)(4)(ii)). However, with state agency approval, CACFP operators may choose to implement the added sugars limits for breakfast cereals (including ready-to-eat cereals for infants) early. Breakfast cereals include ready-to-eat cereals and instant and hot/cooked cereals (e.g., oatmeal). As a reminder, both infant cereals and ready-to-eat cereals must be iron-fortified to be reimbursable in the infant meal pattern. By Oct. 1, 2025, breakfast cereals must meet the added sugars limit and must be made from enriched or whole grain meal or flour, or be fortified, to be creditable in the CACFP.

There are multiple ways for institutions and facilities to determine if a breakfast cereal is within the added sugars limit, including:

• Use any state agency’s WIC approved breakfast cereal list. Consistent with CACFP, all WIC approved breakfast cereals must contain no more than 6 grams of added sugars per dry ounce (21.2 grams of added sugars per 100 grams).
• Use either the standard method or rounding method to calculate the added sugars amount per dry ounce.

Standard Method

1. First, find the serving size in grams at the top of the Nutrition Facts label, and then find the added sugars amount listed toward the middle.
2. Next, divide the added sugars amount by the serving size in grams.
3. If the answer is equal to or less than 0.212, then the cereal is within the required added sugars limit and may be creditable in CACFP.

Rounding Method

1. First, find the serving size in grams at the top of the Nutrition Facts label.
2. Multiply the serving size in grams by 0.212.
3. If the answer in step 2 ends in 0.5 or more, round the number up to the next whole number. If the answer in step 2 ends in 0.49 or less, round the number down to the next whole number. For example, if the answer in step 2 is 4.24, it is rounded down to 4; however, if the answer in step 2 is 4.59, it is rounded up to 5.
4. Next, find the added sugars amount listed toward the middle of the Nutrition Facts label.
5. Compare the number from Step 4 with the number in Step 3. If the number from Step 4 is equal to, or less than, the number in Step 3, the cereal meets the added sugars limit and may be creditable in the CACFP.

Both of these calculation methods may be used to determine whether a breakfast cereal meets the added sugars limit; however, there may be times when a breakfast cereal is within the added sugars limit when using one of these methods, but not the other. As long as a breakfast cereal meets the added sugars limit using at least one of the methods described above, it is considered within the added sugars limit.

Substituting Vegetables for Grains in American Samoa, Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Tribal Communities

To support cultural food preferences of program participants as well as address product availability and cost concerns in outlying areas, the 2024 final rule allows certain institutions and facilities to serve any vegetable to meet the grains requirement. Specifically, all institutions and facilities in American Samoa, Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, as well as institutions or facilities that serve primarily American Indian or Alaska Native participants in any state may exercise this flexibility. The flexibility to substitute vegetables for the grains requirement extends to the infant meal pattern. Additional information, including documentation requirements, can be found in CACFP 03-2025, Substituting Vegetables for Grains in American Samoa, Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, and Tribal Communities, Oct. 30, 2024.

Compliance

Institutions and facilities must demonstrate they are serving meals that meet the meal pattern requirements, including the grain requirements outlined in this memorandum. State agencies have the authority to determine what constitutes acceptable recordkeeping documentation to demonstrate compliance, including requesting product labels and ingredient lists.

Demonstrating compliance with the whole grain-rich requirement can be accomplished in a number of ways. As an example, institutions and facilities can indicate on the menu which grain items are whole grain-rich. This could be as simple as writing “whole wheat” or “WW” in front of “bread” so that the menu item reads “whole wheat bread” or “WW bread,” writing “whole grain-rich” or “WGR” in front of a food item, such as “whole grain-rich English muffins,” or including a check box signifying the food is whole grain-rich. It is the state agency and sponsor’s responsibility, as applicable, to verify that the grains served are creditable and the whole grain-rich items being served meet the whole grain-rich criteria presented in this memorandum. This may include reviewing grain products’ labels and other product information.

State agencies are reminded to distribute this information to program operators immediately. Program operators should direct any questions regarding this memorandum to the appropriate state agency. State agencies with questions should contact the appropriate FNS regional office.

J. Kevin Maskornick
Director
Community Meals Policy Division
Child Nutrition Programs

Attachments

• Attachment 1 - Rule of Three Supplementary Information
• Attachment 2 - Whole Grain-Rich: Examples of Proper Documentation
• Attachment 3 - Questions and Answers

Why FNS Did This Study

The Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) is a federal program that provides reimbursement to care providers for nutritious meals and snacks served to children and certain groups of adults. Emergency shelters have been eligible to participate in CACFP since July 1999, when the Homeless Child Nutrition Program was integrated into CACFP. Children and some adults with disabilities that are homeless and are temporarily residing at an emergency shelter are eligible to receive free meals through CACFP.

All CACFP participants at emergency shelters may receive up to three meals per day, but little is known about the organizations that participate in this component of CACFP or who they serve. This report describes the first national study of emergency shelters participating in CACFP. The objective of this study was to gain a general understanding of the characteristics of CACFP emergency shelters, who they serve, how CACFP fits into their operations, and their challenges with CACFP.

How FNS Did This Study

FNS sent a short survey to all 368 emergency shelters that participated in CACFP in fiscal year (FY) 2023. Two hundred and forty-two shelters (66%) responded to the web survey between October and December 2023.

FNS analyzed the survey data and combined it with other data sources, including public data posted at the national and state level and data from other FNS studies. State-level findings are included in Table A of this report. A more detailed description of each data set is available in Appendix B of this report.

Key Findings

Emergency shelters are a small but diverse group of providers that represent just 0.25% of CACFP participating sites. From March 2020 to September 2022, CACFP emergency shelters claimed approximately 234,000 meals per month on average. This component of CACFP can also play a role in disaster recovery—see the full report for an example of how CACFP emergency shelters were used to support families after Hurricane Harvey.

What is a CACFP emergency shelter?

• Most CACFP emergency shelters (92%) operate 365 days per year.
• Over half (62%) of CACFP emergency shelters reported that residents stay an average of 90 days or less. Four in ten (43%) indicated that there was an official limit on the number of days residents could stay at the emergency shelter. Limits may be set by the shelter or by local or state regulations.
• Most CACFP emergency shelters (80%) served fewer than 45 residents per day, but 11% served more than 90 residents per day.
• Most shelters (58%) indicated that their shelter uses a Homeless Management Information System.
• A little more than a quarter (28%) of shelters indicated that they were affiliated with a national non-profit organization, such as Catholic Charities, the Salvation Army, or the YMCA.
• Less than half (46%) of CACFP emergency shelters also provide child care.
• Most CACFP emergency shelters provide three or more of the following non-meal services to their residents: case management (95%), clothing assistance (93%), mental health services (60%), substance abuse services (38%), legal services (33%), or medical services (33%).

What populations do CACFP emergency shelters serve?

• One-fifth of shelters (21%) only serve children.
• About half the population served at shelters are adults whose meals may not be eligible for reimbursement under CACFP.
  • Most shelters (79%) serve meals to adults over age 18, but only 23% of shelters claim CACFP meals for adults with disabilities.
  • Over a quarter of CACFP emergency shelters (28%) also serve meals to non-residents whose meals cannot be reimbursed through CACFP.
• Most CACFP emergency shelters (77%) specialize in working with one or more of the following populations: victims of abuse (55%), families (45%), migrants (17%), or youth (15%).

How does CACFP fit into emergency shelters' operations?

• Most shelters (72%) claimed three meals per day during FY 2022.
• Most CACFP emergency shelters (73%) only participate in CACFP’s emergency shelter component. The remainder also participate in CACFP as child care centers (19%), outside school hours care centers (12%), and/or Head Start programs (4%). About 9% also participate in the CACFP At-Risk Afterschool program.
• One hundred and forty-two shelters provided reasons for participating in CACFP.
  • More than half of them (59%) said that the program was an important source of funding.
  • Nearly half (44%) said that the program enabled them to provide meal services to their residents. Many said that it was also important to them that the meals were healthy.
  • Thirteen shelters (9%) said that CACFP training and guidance played an important role in educating shelter staff and organizing meal services.
• Most CACFP emergency shelters (74%) receive funding from public and private funding sources. Just over half (51%) receive public funding from local, state, and federal sources other than CACFP.

What are the challenges that emergency shelters experience with CACFP?

• Most CACFP emergency shelters (63%) did not describe any challenges with the program.
• Among those that described challenges, administrative burden was the most cited challenge for emergency shelters. Specific causes of administrative burden included: a) navigating application and meal claiming systems that are designed for child care centers, b) planning, tracking, and claiming meal services for a population that changes frequently, and c) keeping participant information private while meeting CACFP monitoring requirements.
• Several shelters expressed difficulty balancing their mission to support their clients’ decision-making power while also meeting the meal pattern requirement. This was more common among shelters that specialize in working with victims of abuse and/or with families. Emergency shelters are the only CACFP providers that may interact directly with parents or guardians during a meal service, which can be challenging if parents’ or guardians’ preferences for feeding their children do not align with the meal pattern.
• Training was a challenge for some shelters. Respondents suggested making CACFP training available year-round to accommodate high staff turnover rates at shelters and advocated for training materials specific to the emergency shelter component of CACFP. Popular topics for additional training included: nutrition label reading, food purchasing and meal planning, using reporting tools, meal pattern substitutions, and the rules around claiming meals for adults with disabilities.

On Dec. 17, 2024, the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) published the final rule, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Program Purpose and Work Requirement Provisions of the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023 (89 FR 102342).

This rule finalizes the requirements of the Fiscal Responsibility Act (FRA) of 2023 (PL 118-5), including updating the SNAP purpose statement, amending the exceptions from the time limit, and reducing the annual allotment of discretionary exemptions. State agencies were required to implement these provisions before this rule’s publication. As a reminder, the changes to the exceptions from the time limit will end on Oct. 1, 2030, unless otherwise amended by law.

This rule also includes requirements initially proposed on April 30, 2024, which describe various able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWD) time limit policies including adding definitions of the FRA time limit exceptions, clarifying state agency screening and verification requirements. The final rule is effective Jan. 16, 2025. State agencies must implement provisions of this rule on Jan. 16, 2025, with a few exceptions.

The final rule codifies the requirements of the FRA and establishes requirements to assist state agencies in complying with SNAP work requirements policy and encourage collaboration across federal programs. This ensures state agencies properly apply time limit policy, protecting program access and program integrity.

The enclosure provides a summary of the final rule’s provisions and the timeline for implementation. FNS will issue additional guidance in the coming months. State agencies with questions regarding the final rule or its implementation should contact their respective regional office representatives.

Sincerely,

Sasha Gersten-Paal
Director
Program Development Division
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program

Attachment

• SNAP - Program Purpose and Work Requirement Provisions of the FRA Final Rule

Per regulations at 7 CFR 272.3(c), the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) may approve waiver requests of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program’s (SNAP) regulations, and per 7 CFR 282.1(a), FNS may approve demonstration projects that deviate from SNAP provisions in the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008. State agencies request FNS approval of a SNAP waiver or demonstration project through SNAP’s web-based Waiver Information Management System (WIMS). FNS’s responses to state agency requests are also documented in WIMS. FNS approval letters include the specific alternative procedures permitted for implementing approved waivers and demonstration projects.

SNAP’s quality control (QC) regulations at 7 CFR 275.10(a) and 7 CFR 275.11(g) indicate QC reviewers must take into account the alternative procedures permitted for approved waivers and demonstration projects when reviewing cases. This memorandum is to remind state agencies it is important for state SNAP QC staff to have access to WIMS. In addition, FNS encourages SNAP state agencies to regularly train all staff on the approved alternative procedures for all current SNAP waivers and demonstration projects.

WIMS Access and Resources

State agencies that need assistance in obtaining staff access to WIMS should reach out to their FNS regional office.

Staff may refer to the WIMS State User Manual for detailed instructions on how to request a waiver and how to view FNS responses and approvals.

State agencies with questions should contact their respective FNS regional office representatives.

Sincerely, 

Rachel Frisk
Director
Program Administration and Nutrition Division
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program

Summary

This final rule implements three provisions of the Fiscal Responsibility Act (FRA) of 2023, affecting the program purpose and individuals subject to the able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWD) time limit for SNAP and finalizes changes proposed April 29, 2024. These changes do the following: add language about assisting low-income adults in obtaining employment and increasing their earnings to the program purpose; update and define exceptions from the ABAWD time limit; and adjust the number of discretionary exemptions available to state agencies each year. This rule also clarifies procedures for when state agencies must screen for exceptions to the time limit and verification requirements for exceptions. 

Dates

Effective Date: This final rule is effective Jan. 16, 2025.

This memorandum provides CSFP state agencies, including ITOs, with guidance on the requirements for conferring CSFP income eligibility through participation in specific federal programs or state programs with income eligibility guidelines at or below the state agency’s CSFP threshold, per 7 CFR 247.9(b)(1) and (2). State agencies may optionally implement these provisions. State agencies which opt to implement one or both of these provisions must submit a state plan amendment following the process outlined in FD-157, Guidance for Submitting Amendments to CSFP State Plans to outline the federal and/or state level programs that will be accepted as conferring CSFP income eligibility. Beginning on Dec. 30, 2024, state agencies that have an approved state plan amendment on file may accept participation in identified programs as demonstrating income eligibility for CSFP.

Federal Programs Conferring CSFP Income Eligibility

Per 7 CFR 247.9(b)(1), state agencies may accept as income-eligible for CSFP benefits any applicant who documents that they are fully eligible for any of the federal programs listed below. State agencies may select any program or combination of these programs as conferring income eligibility within their state.

• The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP),
• The Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR),
• Supplemental Security Income (SSI),
• The Low-Income Subsidy Program (LIS), and
• the Medicare Savings Programs (MSP).

State Programs Conferring CSFP Income Eligibility

Per 7 CFR 247.9(b)(2), state agencies may accept, as evidence of income within the state agency’s CSFP guidelines, documentation of the applicant’s participation in state-administered programs not specified in the regulations that routinely require documentation of income, provided the programs have income eligibility guidelines at or below the state agency’s CSFP threshold. It is the state agency’s responsibility to identify and confirm income limits of any state-level programs that confer CSFP income eligibility.

Documentation of Participation in Federal or State Programs

To demonstrate income eligibility via participation in a federal or state-level program, applicants must document that they are certified as fully eligible for the federal program(s) listed at 7 CFR 247.9(b)(1) or document participation in any state-level program(s) identified per 7 CFR 247.9(b)(2). State agencies must describe in their state plan the method(s) of documentation that they will accept as demonstrating income eligibility for or participation in the program(s); and must apply those methods uniformly throughout the state. State agencies may allow self-attestation as a method for participants to document their participation in other programs.

Requesting Additional Income Information from Participants

Per 7 CFR 247.9(b)(3), applicants who are determined to be income eligible based on their participation in federal or state programs identified by the state agency shall not be subject to the income limits set at 7 CFR 247.9(b). CSFP local agencies should not request additional income information (e.g., monthly income) from participants who are determined to be income eligible via another federal or state-level program per 7 CFR 247.9(b)(1) or (2).

State agencies may direct any questions to their respective FNS regional office.

Sara Olson
Director
Policy Division
Supplemental Nutrition and Safety Programs

The 2024 SNAP E&T National Forum took place October 29-30, 2024, at the Tysons Marriott in Tysons, VA. The 2024 National Forum offered diverse sessions centered around the theme of Momentum. Harnessing the energy across the country from new state partnerships, innovative approaches, and a new national campaign, More Than a Job, our Forum theme of Momentum encapsulated our goal of building on SNAP E&T’s strong foundation—and continuing to strengthen and reimagine the program into the future.

Click the links below to view the presentations and recordings (if available) from the Forum sessions. Sessions are organized by topic track.

Opening Plenary

Watch the recorded session.

Welcome and Opening Remarks

• Cathy Buhrig, Associate Administrator, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Food and Nutrition Service, USDA

Opening Plenary: Partnerships Driving Work and Skill-Building Opportunities for SNAP Participants

• Cathy Buhrig, Associate Administrator, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Food and Nutrition Service, USDA
• Tracy Hartzler, President, Central New Mexico Community College
• Martin Scaglione, Chief Mission Officer, Goodwill Industries International
• Brad Turner-Little, President and CEO, National Association of Workforce Boards

Growing and Strengthening SNAP E&T Programs

Growing and Strengthening SNAP E&T Programs
Every state operates a SNAP E&T program; however, operating an effective program is complex. State agencies should be designing programs to meet the needs of participants and to be responsive to the communities in which it operates. Designing an E&T program is not a one-time effort and requires continual review and assessments of evolving community factors— including current labor market needs, provider availability and service quality—and the target population’s interests and needs. When there is not alignment, administrators should redesign aspects of the program. To help with this process, FNS has developed the Growing and Strengthening series: a set of tools that, together, will help determine if your SNAP E&T program is meeting your goals of operating an effective program. This session introduced the series and the existing tools.

Breaking Down Barriers and Building Futures with SNAP E&T
This was a live-streamed session at the 2024 SNAP E&T National Forum. This session explored how SNAP E&T providers and state agencies thoroughly assess participants to identify and address the multitude of barriers that can prohibit SNAP recipients from being successful in SNAP E&T. The session highlighted the importance of screening and referral, assessment, case management models and organizational and systemic collaboration. A state SNAP agency and several E&T providers shared their strategies for providing comprehensive wrap around services that result in successful program completions and transitions to fruitful careers.

Scaling a Statewide Coaching and Case Management Model in Colorado
This session explored how Colorado has integrated the Goal4 It! coaching model into its case management approach for Employment First (SNAP E&T) alongside other programs as part of a state-wide initiative to improve the consistency and quality of workforce development services. This session provided an overview of the Goal4 It! model and how it embeds science-based strategies for strengthening core self-regulation skills through goal achievement coaching. The session also shared state-level perspectives about the design and implementation of state-wide case management strategy in the context of a county-administered system, and how the state is promoting adoption and integration of the model through leadership development. Lastly, the session shared specific strategies of this model that advance and support the goals of SNAP E&T.

A Framework for the Effectiveness of SNAP E&T Programs: Listening Session
The Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, as amended, requires that USDA assess the effectiveness of State SNAP E&T programs as part of the Department’s program monitoring and oversight activities. FNS is adopting a broad consideration of what makes an effective SNAP E&T program, grounded in ensuring E&T programs are designed to truly meet the employment and training needs of all SNAP participants, meaningfully address barriers to employment. During this session, FNS solicited input and feedback from state SNAP agencies about what makes an effective SNAP E&T program, what elements should be included in a framework for determining an effective program and any additional considerations that should inform this effort.

Fueling Innovative Programs

Chamber of Commerce Partners with SNAP E&T: A Collective Impact Model
The state of Maine partners with Lewiston Auburn Chamber of Commerce and Strengthen LA to implement a collective impact model that leverages relationships with businesses and addresses workforce needs for career seekers. Collective impact is a model for addressing complex problems that require complex solutions and strategies to solve - a way of addressing issues that are just too big for any one organization to solve on their own. In this session, attendees learned more about the Collective Impact model, including how cross-sector partnerships can be nurtured. Attendees explored how to identify if existing efforts they are connected with might be a good fit for this model, and to expand the reach and impact of your work.

SNAP E&T 50% Reimbursement: Provider Onboarding
The SNAP E&T program in Hennepin County, Minnesota, is a state funded, county operated, 50% reimbursement program that works with community-based organizations to deliver services. As the program has evolved, we have created a thorough onboarding training path for the CBOs we partner with. This includes a comprehensive onboarding guide which provides step-by-step information to assist our providers from day one, a per provider customized PowerPoint presentation which covers key points of the onboarding guide and process and training on the fiscal responsibilities for reimbursement. This session included sharing the step-by-step process onboarding guide, including the documents and resources that are utilized.

Greater Impact Through Collaboration: Serving Individuals with Disabilities in SNAP E&T
Numerous public programs impact the lives of persons with disabilities in the United States. This panel discussion will focus on how SNAP and the AbilityOne Program can positively impact public administration and the disability community through collaboration. In this session, panelists offered perspectives from the federal government, a national provider network and a local E&T service provider. Each offered actionable ideas to better coordinate the activities of SNAP and the AbilityOne Program at a federal, state and local level, resulting in greater social and economic impact.

Connecting Rural Communities: The Role of Community Action Agencies in SNAP E&T
This session explored the pivotal role of Community Action Agencies (CAAs) in delivering SNAP E&T services to rural communities. As a National Partnership Grantee funded by FNS, NCAP has empowered rural CAAs to navigate the SNAP E&T landscape and establish themselves as key partners with their state SNAP agencies. Attendees gained insight into the Community Action Network and heard directly from Lakes and Prairies Community Action Agency about their innovative approaches to serving local job seekers. This session highlighted how state SNAP agencies can leverage CAAs to expand and enhance SNAP E&T services in rural areas, ensuring that these communities receive the tailored support they need to thrive.

Program Policy, Monitoring, and Evaluation

Moving Forward to Improve SNAP E&T Data
This was a live-streamed session at the 2024 SNAP E&T National Forum. This session provided participants with an overview of the three-year long assessment of the SNAP E&T Data Reporting project. The project objectives included identifying and describing the current state and Federal systems that collect, validate and analyze E&T data; and assessing the current and future E&T data needs of national, regional and state staff. This project culminated with a recommendation report to improve SNAP E&T data collection, validation and reporting at the national, regional and state levels, including the recommendation for the development of the Data Analysis and Tracking Application for SNAP Employment and Training (DATASET). DATASET is a single Federal E&T data system to collect all reports and forms from state agencies, such as the E&T State Plan, E&T Program Activity Reports (FNS-583) and Annual Outcome Reports. Participants will learn more about the study, recommendation report, and FNS' implementation plan.

SNAP E&T 101
This session was a brief overview of SNAP E&T history and policy basics. States have considerable flexibility in designing their SNAP E&T programs, including which participants to serve, which specific services to offer and who will provide the services. Attendees learned about the federal requirements and the flexibilities states have to design SNAP E&T programs that meet local workforce needs and the needs of SNAP participants in the state.

The Fiscal Life Journey of the SNAP E&T Program
This session took attendees through the fiscal life journey of SNAP E&T programs from a fiscal perspective. Program staff and fiscal staff from the Mid-Atlantic Regional Office discussed how they collaborate during E&T State Plan submissions, report monitoring and what FNS looks for in financial management reviews.

Measuring What Matters: Making the Most of SNAP E&T Outcomes
In this session, attendees learned how SNAP state agencies can leverage reporting flexibility to help their SNAP E&T program shine through their data. By using varying levels of outcomes, from measuring improvements in soft skills to employment gains and credentials, state agencies have the opportunity to celebrate SNAP E&T participants’ accomplishments, big and small. Panelists included FNS, a SNAP state agency, and a SNAP E&T provider on how to use data to tell your program’s story and measure the quality of your program.

Screenings Optimized: Four State Approaches to SNAP E&T Referrals
Many states have made significant progress developing best practices to comply with SNAP regulations for screening and referring participants to SNAP E&T by establishing efficient processes. This session featured a panel of voluntary, mandatory, county and State administered States sharing their challenges and solutions for screening and referring participants.

Working Together to Serve Able-Bodied Adults Without Dependents (ABAWDs)
SNAP work registrants are subject to the Able-Bodied Adults Without Dependents time limit and work requirement unless they meet an exception in federal law. ABAWDs can meet the ABAWD work requirement in several ways, including participation in SNAP E&T. FNS detailed the different ways that ABAWDs can meet the ABAWD work requirement and discuss how SNAP state agencies and providers can work together to support ABAWDs.

Demystifying SNAP Student Eligibility
For low-income college students, the cost of basic needs like food can make it difficult to stay on track with school. Many college students may be eligible for SNAP to help with groceries, but a lack of awareness about the program and confusion about eligibility rules keep students from accessing benefits. In this session, FNS tackled the basics about student SNAP eligibility, building on guidance FNS released in 2023. This session covered what it means to be a student, what SNAP considers an institution of higher education and who needs to meet a student exemption to be eligible. FNS also discussed how states can screen for student eligibility, how the student rules intersect with SNAP work requirements and some of the most promising practices for using data to target SNAP outreach to likely eligible students.

How to Work with Tribal Nations in Your State
This was a live-streamed session at the 2024 SNAP E&T National Forum. This panel session discussed protocols for scheduling meetings with tribal nations, conducting meetings with tribal citizens for tribal nations, tribal consultations, and documenting tribal consultation or outreach in the state plan. Each panelist comes with their unique perceptions and experience working with tribal nations. The panel consists of the Interim Superintendent from the Department of Education for the Laguna Pueblo, the Oklahoma State Liaison for Native Nations, a member of Choctaw Nation, the State of Arizona SNAP CAN Manager and two subject matter experts from the Southwest Regional Office.

Empowering the Voices of Clients and Customers

Implementing Executive Skills and Other Coaching Models to Improve Outcomes for Individuals with Low Incomes, Including SNAP E&T Participants
This was a live-streamed session at the 2024 SNAP E&T National Forum. This session will inspire and equip attendees to apply research on self-regulation and implementation science to improve programs like SNAP E&T and the lives of individuals with low incomes. Attendees learned about the foundational science of self-regulation, executive skills and goal pursuit in coaching participants to advance their economic mobility. While program leaders and staff are often trained in these areas, they struggle to implement these practices well. This session described and addressed common implementation challenges and strategies so that programs like SNAP E&T thrive.

Empowering Client Voices
In this hands-on, interactive session, participants learned a case management strategy for helping clients feel more engaged and empowered to ask questions and participate in decisions that affect them. Participants in this session learned the strategy, examine applications in the field, learn facilitation techniques and guidelines and discuss how to apply client empowerment principles in their work.

Participant Perspectives: Personal Journeys with More Than a Job NC
In this session, SNAP E&T participants, North Carolina partners and state staff shared their unique stories of how their roles have evolved into something more meaningful than just a job. This session offered a space for individuals to reflect on their personal journeys within the North Carolina workforce, highlighting the experiences that have shaped their careers and impacted their lives. Attendees gained insights into the diverse paths that professionals take and how personal values, challenges and successes intertwine with their work. Review this session to explore how careers can transcend job descriptions, becoming sources of purpose, growth and fulfillment.

Reentry Realities: Food Security, Supports and a Path to Economic Stability
The Center for Employment Opportunities led an interactive session to increase understanding of participant experience in SNAP E&T, focused on understanding the employment and mobility barriers experienced by individuals returning from incarceration. This session intends to create a space for storytelling and sharing, while also providing suggested tactics agencies can use for engaging and understanding participant experience to improve their programs. In this interactive session, audience members engaged with different stages that simulate the experience of the immediate weeks following incarceration to meet employment-related needs, including obtaining identification, maintaining housing, applying for benefits and complying with supervision requirements, such as treatment and parole officer meetings. Session attendees heard directly from those with lived experience, allowing even the most experienced professionals to have renewed appreciation for the value and determination of E&T participants with legal system involvement.

Partnerships with Advocates and Employers to Strengthen SNAP E&T Programs
This session highlighted partnerships between local anti-hunger advocates, employers and the state/county leaders responsible for designing and implementing effective SNAP E&T programs. The session featured speakers from Ohio and West Virginia. Ohio has been a mandatory E&T state that is transitioning to a voluntary E&T model in Fiscal Year 2025 after a collaborative, year-long process to evaluate and redesign SNAP E&T to better meet the needs of employers. By contrast, West Virginia is a voluntary E&T State with existing SNAP E&T partnerships with employers that have been supported and defended by anti-hunger advocates over the past year.

Maximize Your Message: How to Use Focus Groups, User-Testing, Data Analytics and Real-Life Experience to Attract and Inform Participants
How do we explain our programs? What messages work? Which don’t? In this session, panelists shared real world examples of how they have developed community informed, human centered messaging to raise awareness and encourage enrollment in SNAP E&T. This will include national, regional and local initiatives. Panelists talked about how focus groups, user testing, data analytics and real-world experiences informed the way they design – and test – their communications to maximize impact and speak to the needs of participants. The panel also talked about opportunities for future engagements.

Strategic Partnerships for Sustainable Growth

Transformative Impact: Community College and Human Service SNAP E&T Partnerships
This was a live-streamed session at the 2024 SNAP E&T National Forum. With a shared focus on propelling economic mobility and career pathways, community college and human service partnerships can have a transformative impact on people and communities. By expanding collaboration amongst community colleges, human services, and workforce partners to create robust SNAP E&T programs, states can braid resources and move from focusing on individual fixes to developing systemic solutions that boost college access and connection to careers that offer economic mobility. In this session, attendees will hear how states and community colleges can leverage SNAP access and SNAP E&T, and center lived expertise to reduce basic needs insecurity and close opportunity gaps. Review this session to gain tactical strategies you can replicate in your own communities and hear lessons learned from three national partners who have led or supported the development of SNAP E&T community college programs and intermediary models across multiple States.

Panel Discussion: The Role of Philanthropy in SNAP E&T
This was a live-streamed session at the 2024 SNAP E&T National Forum. Philanthropy plays a critical and often undervalued role in the SNAP E&T program. Many SNAP E&T providers use philanthropy as a source of nonfederal match, yet very few state SNAP agencies partner with philanthropy leaders. Together, state SNAP agencies and philanthropy leaders can make more intentional and impactful investments in SNAP E&T programs nationwide. In this panel discussion, attendees gained insight from philanthropy leaders who support SNAP E&T programs. Attendees learned how philanthropy leaders view their role in the SNAP E&T program, how they make investments and what partnerships can look like.

How College Consortia Can Elevate Your SNAP E&T Program
Community colleges are vital partners for strong SNAP E&T programs. However, college partnerships are unique and have their own distinct challenges. A college consortium, acting as an intermediary, can help states develop, build, and maintain these partnerships. This session looked at several models of college consortia and the advantages of each.

Braiding and Leveraging Funds
This was a highly interactive session to gain deep insight into one method of braiding and leveraging funding with SNAP E&T 50/50 reimbursement. Attendees learned how to effectively manage the braiding funding process from private sources (e.g. philanthropy, social enterprise, etc.) for reimbursement and how to leverage funding from various Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Titles I-IV for strong return on investment in social impact and cover financial expense.

SNAP E&T and Workforce Board Partnerships: Strategic Collaboration for Sustainable Growth
State and local Workforce Development Boards offer important strategic partnership opportunities for SNAP agencies and SNAP E&T programs by offering onramps to career pathway training, a pipeline to high-quality jobs with local employers and access to workforce services and funding that extend beyond the SNAP E&T program. This session focused on showcasing effective partnership models between State SNAP agencies and local Workforce Development Boards and program alignment case examples that highlight the opportunities which exist for local regions. The session offered the chance to hear from workforce boards that operate as both SNAP E&T intermediaries and service providers, state SNAP agency staff that oversee SNAP E&T/workforce partnerships and learn about important findings related to SNAP E&T/workforce board partnerships resulting from the National Association of Workforce Board’s National Partnership Grant.

Registered Apprenticeship for SNAP E&T
Registered Apprenticeship is an industry-driven, high-quality career pathway where employers can develop and prepare their future workforce, and individuals can obtain paid work experience, receive progressive wage increases, classroom instruction and a portable, nationally recognized credential. In this session, attendees learned how to sponsor a Registered Apprenticeship program and/or participate as an apprentice and start building your career.

These presentations do not represent the views of USDA and do not provide official policy guidance.

The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) is issuing this memorandum to clarify the options available to state agencies to conduct SNAP Fair Hearings (FH) and Administrative Disqualification Hearings (ADH) via teleconference or videoconference. This memorandum supersedes memoranda 82-14 for telephonic FHs and 83-5 for telephonic ADHs, and is effective immediately.

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) regulations at 7 CFR 273.15 and 7 CFR 273.16 are silent on state agency use of teleconference or videoconference FH and ADH procedures. Through this memorandum, FNS is clarifying that state agencies may conduct FHs and ADHs via teleconference or videoconference, with participants joining from any location. Regardless of the method used to conduct the hearing, state agencies must accommodate individuals with disabilities, share the written uniform rules of procedures and household’s rights and responsibilities, and comply with all other requirements specified in SNAP regulations at 7 CFR 273.15 and 7 CFR 273.16.

While SNAP regulations do not specify that FHs and ADHs must be held in-person, regulations at 7 CFR 273. 15(o) imply in-person hearings by referencing space limitations. Given this, state agencies that utilize teleconference or videoconference technologies should inform the household of the opportunity for a face-to-face hearing and grant a face-to-face hearing upon request.

When a state agency conducts FHs and ADHs via teleconference or videoconference, FNS strongly recommends state agencies provide households with the following:

• A secure and private platform over which the hearing will be conducted, as well as clear instructions on how to access the platform;
• A telephone number to contact if the conference fails to connect or there is a connection disruption during the hearing;
• A consent request if the state agency intends to record the hearing, and a guarantee that the state will maintain privacy of the recording.

State agencies intending to conduct FHs or ADHs via teleconference or videoconference should share the state’s written rules of procedure required by 7 CFR 273.15(i)(3) and 7 CFR 273.16(e)(2)(v) with their FNS regional office. State agencies may contact their regional office representative with any questions.

Sincerely,

Rachel Frisk
Director
Program Administration and Nutrition Division
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program

Dear State SNAP Directors:

The Social Security Administration (SSA) and the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) have news to share! SSA recently made changes to the Supplemental Security Income (SSI) program, making it stronger and simpler for more than a quarter of a million older adults and people with disabilities. These changes could potentially increase SSI payments and allow more people to become eligible for the program.

As of September 30, SSA expanded the definition of a public assistance household:

• If someone else in a household receives Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, the household is now considered a public assistance household for SSI purposes.
• SSA no longer requires that all members of a household receive public assistance for that household to be considered a public assistance household for SSI purposes.

Nationwide, SSA expects about 250,000 people already enrolled in SSI could get higher payments under this change, along with more than 100,000 people becoming newly eligible.

SSI provides monthly payments to eligible people with little income and resources to help pay for basic needs like rent, food, clothing, and medicine. For an SSI recipient affected by this rule, the increase could be more than $300 monthly, or $3,600 annually. Some households receiving increased SSI payments may see a decrease in their SNAP benefits.

This is one of three changes that went into effect on September 30 to update and simplify the SSI policy. These changes help more people access crucial SSI payments and reduce the burden on the public and agency staff. The changes also aim to provide a baseline level of financial support to those who need it most.

SSA is interested in collaborating with states to optimize support for these initiatives, ensuring swift and efficient service delivery to those who need it most, including evaluating opportunities for data sharing that would help SSA more efficiently administer this change. SSA and FNS are currently working to clarify data sharing for these purposes, and FNS will be in touch soon to provide clarification to states.

With your support, we can help our most vulnerable Americans meet their basic needs with dignity.