Skip to main content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Resource | Policy Memos | FNS-GD-2004-0007 Accounting for Donated Foods in Cost-Reimbursable Contracts Between School Food Authorities and Food Service Management Companies

FD-023 policy memo accounting for donated foods in cost-reimbursable contracts between school food authorities and food service management companies

FD-023
02/25/2004
Resource | Policy Memos | FNS-GD-2004-0006 Sponsor Monitoring Requirements in the Child and Adult Care Food Program

We have recently received several questions regarding the requirements for sponsors’ review of their facilities. These questions focused on the long-standing requirements that new facilities be reviewed within the first four to six weeks of operation, and that each facility must be reviewed three times each year.

CACFP Memorandum #1-04
01/27/2004
Resource | Policy Memos | FNS-GD-2004-0005 Extension of Certain Child Nutrition Programs Provisions through March 31, 2004

On Nov. 22, 2003, PL 108-134 was enacted. This law continues appropriations for the child nutrition programs and extends several provisions that were to expire on Nov. 21, 2003.

01/12/2004
Resource | Policy Memos | FNS-GD-2004-0003 Fraud Policy: 7 CFR 273.16

This memorandum is to reiterate and clarify current policy governing intentional program violations as set forth in the Food Stamp Program regulations.

01/01/2004
Resource | Policy Memos | FNS-GD-2004-0002 Head of Household as Individual Responsible for Intentional Program Violations

The following memo represents our position on the question of whether the head of household may be held responsible for an IPV when the household member that committed the IPV cannot be determined.

01/01/2004
Resource | Policy Memos | FNS-GD-2004-0001 Revisiting Policy Regarding Head of Household as Individual

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.

01/01/2004
Page updated: October 14, 2021