This report summarizes the results of the school year 2008-09 application verification process for the NSLP and SBP. Each year, LEAs review a sample of applications that they approved for free or reduced-price school meal benefits at the start of the school year.
This study identifies how spending patterns, such as the rate at which households spend their benefit, changed following the ARRA benefit increase and analyzes how spending patterns differed across household characteristics, time and states.
This report explores the feasibility and potential cost of enabling EBT systems to differentiate between program-eligible and ineligible items. It considers the cost of upgrading systems in stores that now have scanners and the cost of installing new systems in stores without scanners. The report also examines the potential for the purchase of ineligible items even with the introduction of new technological controls.
The National School Lunch Program operates in over 94,000 schools and institutions. More than 26 million children receive meals through the program on any given day; about half of these meals are provided free of charge. The School Breakfast Program operates in approximately two-thirds of the schools and institutions that offer the NSLP, most commonly in schools that serve large numbers of economically disadvantaged children.
From October 1, 1993 to September 30, 1996, the Food and Nutrition Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture sponsored demonstration projects in Georgia, Hawaii, Missouri, South Dakota, and Texas to demonstrate the feasibility and effectiveness of operating the Food Stamp Employment and Training (E&T) program under the same legislative and regulatory terms as the Job Opportunities and Basic Skills (JOBS) program for Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) recipients. Common objectives of the demonstrations were to increase compliance with E&T participation requirements among mandatory work registrants, target services to individuals most at risk of long-term dependency and those most likely to benefit from E&T services, improve participant outcomes, and improve the cost efficiency of welfare to work services.