This memorandum supplements our Reauthorization Implementation Memo SP 4 by providing additional information on identifying migrant children and on the procedures that school food authorities and local education agencies should use to coordinate with the Migrant Education Program in order to document the categorical eligibility of migrant children for free meals.
The Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act of 2004 specifies that households’ eligibility for free and reduced price meals shall remain in effect beginning on the date of eligibility for the current school year and ending on a date during the subsequent school year, as determined by the Secretary.
In accordance with the Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act of 2004, the housing allowance for military personnel living in privatized housing will be permanently excluded from income when determining household eligibility for free and reduced price meals or free milk in all of the child nutrition programs.
This rulemaking proposes to amend Food Stamp Program regulations to implement 11 provisions of the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act of 2002 that establish new eligibility and certification requirements for the receipt of food stamps.
This notice announces the Department's annual adjustments to the Income Eligibility Guidelines to be used in determining eligibility for free and reduced price meals or free milk for the period from July 1, 2004 through June 30, 2005.
This report is the latest in a series of publications presenting estimates of the percentage of eligible persons, by state, who participate in the Food Stamp Program. This issue presents food stamp participation rates for states in an average month in fiscal year 2001 and for the two previous fiscal years. These estimates differ slightly from those reported last year because of the change in the reference period from the month of September to the average month across the fiscal year, and improvements in data and methods.
The head of household may not be held "automatically" responsible for trafficking the household's benefits if there is no direct evidence identifying him/her as the guilty party. However, OGC was also supportive of holding the head of household responsible when there was sufficient circumstantial evidence to show his/her complicity in the violative act.