The evaluation examined the impact of a $30 per child per month benefit on reducing child, adult and household hunger relative to a $60 monthly benefit. It found that the $30 benefit was as effective in reducing the most severe category of hunger among children during the summer as the $60 benefit.
Each year, FNS estimates the number of eligible individuals for WIC during an average month of the calendar year. FNS uses estimates of the number of individuals eligible for WIC and the number likely to participate to better predict future funding needs, measure WIC performance, and identify potentially unmet nutrition assistance needs.
This report is meant to be the first systematic study of the roles different organizations play in designing and implementing SNAP based incentive programs, how they choose markets for their programs, and how they evaluate success of their programs.
Under the Community Eligibility Provision, schools do not collect or process meal applications for free and reduced-price meals served in the National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program. Schools must serve all meals at no cost with any costs in excess of the federal reimbursement paid from non-federal sources.
To ensure program integrity, school districts must sample household applications certified for free or reduced-price meals, contact the households, and verify eligibility. This process (known as household verification) can be burdensome for both school officials and households. Direct verification uses information from certain other means-tested programs to verify eligibility without contacting applicants. Potential benefits include: less burden for households, less work for school officials, and fewer students with school meal benefits terminated because of nonresponse to verification requests.
This report describes how the Direction Card system works; the process undertaken by ODJFS and its EBT vendor to design, develop, and test the system; the implementation process and experiences; and the cost of system design, development, and implementation. Volume 2 of this report compares the ongoing administrative costs of system operations and system levels of benefit loss and diversion with those of on-line EBT systems and the Dayton pilot.
This report fulfills the request from Congress in the House Appropriations Committee Report (HR 107-116), which accompanied the Agriculture Appropriations Act for fiscal year 2002.