This report summarizes the results of the school year 2007-08 application verification process for the National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program.
The purpose of this pilot was to test possible methods that could lead to valid estimations of the number of meals served by family day care homes. The estimated number of meals served can be used to develop estimates of over- and under-counts of meal claims that result in erroneous payments.
The Improper Payments Information Act of 2002 requires all federal agencies to calculate the amount of erroneous payments in federal programs and to periodically conduct detailed assessments of vulnerable program components. This is the third wave of a program assessment of the Family Day Care Home component of USDA's Child and Adult Care Food Program.
FNS proposed to select a random sample of sponsoring organizations and, from each, use a random selection of the sponsor’s monitoring visits of family day care homes. Using these data, FNS would compare the number of meals claimed with the number of children observed at the time of the visit.
Program errors and the risk of erroneous payments in the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and School Breakfast Program (SBP) continue to be a concern. Slightly more than one in five students were certified inaccurately or erroneously denied benefits in school year (SY) 2005-06. New data estimates the gross cost of school meals erroneous payments due to certification error at about $935 million while other operational errors represent about $860 million.
The Improper Payments Information Act of 2002 requires all federal agencies to calculate the amount of erroneous payments in federal programs and to periodically conduct detailed assessments of vulnerable program components. This program assessment of the Family Day Care Home component of USDA's Child and Adult Care Food Program provides a national estimate of the share of CACFP family day care homes that are in the wrong reimbursement tier.
This report presents the results of a case study of verification in 21 large metropolitan SFAs around the country. The study examined outcomes of the verification process and made an independent assessment of income eligibility of households with specific verification outcomes using data from in-person interviews with families.