School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

February 13, 2020 – December 18, 2023 R46234

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition
December 18, 2023
Programs: Background and Funding
Kara Clifford Billings
The federal government has a long history of investing in programs for feeding children,
Analyst in Social Policy
starting with federal aid for school lunch programs in the 1930s. Today, federal child

nutrition programs support food served to children in schools and a variety of other
settings. Administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Food and

Nutrition Service (FNS), the child nutrition programs include the
• National School Lunch Program (NSLP),
• School Breakfast Program (SBP),
• Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP),
• Summer Food Service Program (SFSP),
• Seamless Summer Option (SSO),
• Summer Electronic Benefit Transfer for Children (Summer EBT) Program,
• Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program (FFVP), and
• Special Milk Program (SMP).
The child nutrition programs vary in terms of size and target population. The largest programs are NSLP and SBP
(the school meals programs), which subsidize meals for more than 30 million children in approximately 90,000
elementary and secondary schools in a typical school year. CACFP supports food served to children in child care,
day care, and afterschool settings; SFSP and SSO provide funding for summer meals and snacks; Summer EBT
provides grocery benefits for households with school-age children over the summer; FFVP sponsors fruit and
vegetable snacks in elementary schools; and SMP subsidizes milk in schools and institutions that do not
participate in other child nutrition programs. In general, the largest subsidies are provided for free or reduced-
price meals and snacks served to children from low-income households. Other child nutrition activities include
afterschool meal and snack programs, farm to school initiatives, and school meal equipment grants.
Selected Child Nutrition Programs: Estimated Participants and Meal Sites, FY2022

Source: CRS, based on USDA-FNS, “June 2023 Keydata Report,” September 8, 2023.
Notes: Numbers are rounded. FY2022 data are preliminary.
Federal spending on child nutrition programs and activities totaled roughly $38 billion in FY2022, the majority of
which was mandatory spending. Most child nutrition programs are considered appropriated entitlements, meaning
that their authorizing statutes establish a legal obligation to make payments, but that obligation is fulfilled through
Congressional Research Service

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

funding that is provided in annual appropriations acts. Most of the funding is provided in the form of per-meal
cash reimbursements that states distribute to schools and institutions. A smaller amount of federal funding is
provided in the form of federally purchased foods and cash for states’ administrative expenses.
The child nutrition programs are primarily governed by two statutes: the Richard B. Russell National School
Lunch Act and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 as amended. These laws were most recently reauthorized by the
Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 (HHFKA, P.L. 111-296), which made several changes to the child
nutrition programs. For example, the act created the Community Eligibility Provision, an option for eligible
schools to provide free meals to all students. It also required USDA to update nutrition standards in the school
meals programs and CACFP within a certain timeframe. While certain provisions of the HHFKA expired at the
end of FY2015, program operations have continued with annual appropriations. More recently, temporary changes
to the child nutrition programs were made in response to the COVID-19 pandemic (generally not discussed in this
report; see CRS Report R46681, USDA Nutrition Assistance Programs: Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic).
Congressional Research Service

link to page 9 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Background
The child nutrition programs (summarized in Table 1) support meals and snacks served to
children in schools, child care, summer programs, and other institutional settings in all 50 states,
the District of Columbia, and the U.S. territories.1 They also support summer grocery benefits for
households with school-age children. The programs are administered by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), which provides federal aid to state
agencies (often state departments of education) for distribution to school districts and other
participating institutions and, in the case of summer grocery benefits, for distribution to
households.2 In general, federal funding largely supports food for children from low-income or
otherwise qualifying households.3
A related program is the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and
Children (WIC), which provides grocery benefits to pregnant and postpartum women, infants,
and young children. WIC has typically been reauthorized with the child nutrition programs but is
generally not considered a child nutrition program because it is funded under a separate account,
and is not discussed in this report.4
The federal child nutrition programs date back to the National School Lunch Act of 1946, which
created the National School Lunch Program (NSLP).5 This act formalized federal support for
school lunches following early aid beginning in the 1930s. Other child nutrition programs were
added in the decades to follow as policymakers expanded feeding programs beyond the school
setting. The Child Nutrition Act of 1966 formalized the Special Milk Program (SMP) and created
the School Breakfast Program (SBP) as a pilot program.6 Soon after, a program for child care and
summer meals was piloted in 1968 and separated into the Child Care Food Program (now
CACFP) and the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP) in 1975.7 More recently, the Fresh Fruit

1 Virtually all of the child nutrition programs operate in Puerto Rico, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. The use of the
term “state” in this report refers to these jurisdictions as well. In the case of Summer EBT, it also includes some tribal
entities. The term does not include the Northern Mariana Islands and American Samoa, which receive block grants in
lieu of child nutrition programs. For more information on child nutrition programs in the Northern Mariana Islands and
American Samoa, see U.S. Department of the Interior, Office of Insular Affairs, Region IX Federal Regional Council,
Outer Pacific Committee, FY2016 Report on Federal Financial Assistance to the U.S. Pacific and Caribbean Islands,
May 1, 2017, p. 10, https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/uploads/fy16-report-on-federal-financial-assistance-to-the-
insular-areas.pdf.
2 For a list of administering agencies by state, see U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), Food and Nutrition Service
(FNS), “Contact Map,” https://www.fns.usda.gov/contacts/contact-map. In past instances, the federal government (via
USDA-FNS’s regional offices) has, for certain states, taken the place of state agencies (e.g., where a state has chosen
not to operate a specific program or where there is a state prohibition on aiding private schools).
3 In addition to serving children, CACFP supports food in adult day care facilities.
4 For example, see Title IV, Domestic Food Programs, of Division A of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023
(P.L. 117-328). For more information on WIC, see CRS Report R44115, A Primer on WIC: The Special Supplemental
Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children.
5 P.L. 79-396; Gordon W. Gunderson, National School Lunch Program: Background and Development, 1971,
http://www.fns.usda.gov/nslp/history. The 1946 law supported school lunch programs by giving formula grant funding
to states based on factors such as per capita income, rather than the present-day open-ended entitlements based largely
on eligibility and participation rules.
6 P.L. 89-642.
7 P.L. 90-302; P.L. 94-105. Adult day care was added in 1987 (Older Americans Act Amendments of 1987; P.L. 100-
175). Also see Institute of Medicine, Child and Adult Care Food Program: Aligning Dietary Guidance for All, 2011, p.
30; USDA-FNS, “Summer Food Service Program History,” March 31, 2019, https://www.fns.usda.gov/sfsp/program-
history.
Congressional Research Service

1

link to page 55 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

and Vegetable Program (FFVP) was piloted in 2002 and expanded to all states in 2008.8 (See the
Appendix A for a legislative history of child nutrition programs.)
Historically, the child nutrition programs have been aimed at both improving children’s nutrition
and supporting U.S. agriculture, with the dual mission “to safeguard the health and well-being of
the Nation’s children and to encourage the domestic consumption of nutritious agricultural
commodities and other food.”9
The child nutrition programs are currently authorized under the Richard B. Russell National
School Lunch Act (NSLA) and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966.10 Section 32 of the Act of August
24, 1935 also provides a portion of child nutrition funding. Congressional jurisdiction over the
underlying three laws has typically been exercised by the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and
Forestry Committee, the House Education and Workforce (or Labor) Committee, and, to a limited
extent (relating to Section 32), the House Agriculture Committee.
Congress has periodically amended the child nutrition programs’ authorizing laws and
reauthorizes expiring authorities. The child nutrition programs were most recently reauthorized
by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 (HHFKA, P.L. 111-296). Some of the authorities
created or extended in the HHFKA expired on September 30, 2015; however, program operations
have continued with annual appropriations.11 During the 114th Congress, the committees of
jurisdiction marked up child nutrition reauthorization bills but these proposals were not enacted.12
Likewise, during the 117th Congress, the House Education and Labor Committee reported a child
nutrition reauthorization bill (H.R. 8450) out of committee. The 117th Congress ended without
further action on the bill.
This report starts with an overview of child nutrition programs’ funding structure and then
provides detail on each program, including a discussion of how they are administered, eligibility
rules for institutions and participants, nutritional and other program requirements, and recent
policy changes. Changes to child nutrition programs that have applied during the COVID-19
pandemic are briefly discussed in the “Child Nutrition Program Operations During the COVID-
19 Pandemic” text box below. The Pandemic Electronic Benefit Transfer (P-EBT) program—not
considered a child nutrition program—is not discussed in this report.

8 P.L. 107-171; P.L. 110-246.
9 See declaration of purposes in the NSLA and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966.
10 In 1999, P.L. 106-78 renamed the National School Lunch Act in Senator Richard B. Russell’s honor.
11 Exceptions include a California program to provide SFSP snacks year-round, which was not extended. USDA’s
authority to conduct food safety audits and funding for a National Hunger Clearinghouse were not extended in FY2016
but were subsequently extended by appropriations acts in each of FY2017 through FY2022. For more information, see
CRS In Focus IF10266, Child Nutrition Reauthorization (CNR): An Overview; or CRS memo CD1304737, Expiration
of the Healthy, Hunger-free Kids Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-296), available to congressional clients on request.
12 For more information, see CRS Report R44373, Tracking Child Nutrition Reauthorization in the 114th Congress: An
Overview.
Congressional Research Service

2

link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 link to page 9 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Table 1. Child Nutrition Programs: Legislative Authorities and Descriptions

Program
Authorizing Statute
Description
Per-Child Benefit
NSLP
Richard B. Russell
Subsidized lunches (free, reduced-price, and paid
One lunch (option for
National School Lunch
rate) for children in preschool through grade 12.
one snack) daily
Act (NSLA)
A smaller number of children in residential child
(42 U.S.C. §1751 et
care institutions are also served.a
seq.)
Includes an afterschool snack program option (the
NSLP Afterschool Snack Program) and a summer
meals program option (the Seamless Summer
Option).
SBP
Section 4 of the Child
Subsidized breakfasts (free, reduced-price, and paid
One breakfast daily
Nutrition Act of 1966
rate) for children in preschool through grade 12.
(42 U.S.C. §1773)
A smaller number of children in residential child
care institutions are also served.a
CACFP
Section 17
Meals and snacks for children in child care centers,b Two meals and one
of the NSLA
day care homes, and emergency shelters, as well as
snack (or one meal and
(42 U.S.C. §1766)
a smaller number of older adults in adult day care
two snacks) dailyc
homes.
CACFP
Section 17(r) of the
Afterschool meals and snacks for children who
One meal and one snack
At-Risk
NSLA
attend an organized afterschool program in a low-
daily
Afterschool (42 U.S.C. §1766(r))
income area.
SFSP
Section 13
Summer meals for children who visit community
Two meals (or one meal
of the NSLA
sites or attend summer programs, or for
and one snack) dailyc
(42 U.S.C. §1761)
delivery/pick-up in rural areas.
SSO
Section 13(a)(8)
Summer meals for children who visit school sites
Two meals (or one meal
of the NSLA
or programs, or for delivery/pick-up in rural areas.
and one snack) dailyc
(42 U.S.C. §1761(a)(8))
Summer
Section 13A
Summer grocery benefits for households with
$40 per child in the
EBT
of the NSLA
children eligible for free and reduced-price meals.
household per summer
(42 U.S.C. §1762)
month
SMP
Section 3
Subsidized milk for institutions that do not
Quantity not specified
of the Child Nutrition
participate in another child nutrition meal service
Act of 1966
program, except that school food authorities may
(42 U.S.C. §1772)
use SMP for children in part-day preschool and
kindergarten programs (who do not have access to
school lunches).
FFVP
Section 19
Fresh fruit and vegetable snacks for children in
Quantity not specified
of the NSLA
elementary schools, particularly low-income
(42 U.S.C. §1769a)
schools. Funding is distributed via formula to states
and not all elementary schools may be covered.
Source: CRS, based on current law.
a. Residential child care institutions are defined in regulations to include “homes for the mentally, emotionally or
physically impaired, and unmarried mothers and their infants; group homes; halfway houses; orphanages;
temporary shelters for abused children and for runaway children; long-term care facilities for chronically il
children; and juvenile detention centers” (7 C.F.R. §210.2).
b. Child care centers include nonprofit organizations, certain for-profit organizations, and school food
authorities providing nonresidential child care services as well as emergency shelters.
c. CACFP emergency shelters, SFSP camps, and SFSP sites that primarily serve migrant children may receive
reimbursement for up to three meals or two meals and one snack per child daily.
Congressional Research Service

3

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Child Nutrition Program Operations During the COVID-19
Pandemic
Starting in March 2020 and continuing through school years 2020-2021 and 2021-2022, many
school districts operated the summer meals programs in lieu of the school meals programs.13 The
summer meals programs, under USDA policy facilitated by COVID-19 pandemic response laws,
enabled schools to serve free meals to all students without eligibility determinations. With
expanded waiver authority and supplemental funding from COVID-19 pandemic response acts,
USDA also waived several child nutrition program requirements during the pandemic.14 For
example, USDA allowed parent pick-up and home delivery of meals, waived certain nutritional
requirements, and allowed virtual monitoring of program operations.15
Some of the COVID-19 pandemic response authorities expired on June 30, 2022, and USDA
announced a transition back to normal child nutrition program operations starting in the 2022-
2023 school year. However, some waivers remained in effect and program operators received
enhanced funding (approximately $3 billion) in summer 2022 and school year 2022-2023 as a
result of the Keep Kids Fed Act of 2022 (P.L. 117-158).16 Also, in school years 2021-2022
through 2023-2024 USDA distributed $3.7 billion in “Supply Chain Assistance Funds” to states
and school food authorities using Commodity Credit Corporation authority.17 According to a
survey conducted by USDA, 97% of school food authorities reported at least one continuing
supply chain-related challenge in school year 2022-2023, such as increased costs, staffing
shortages, and product shortages.18
For further information on child nutrition policies during the pandemic, see CRS Report R46681,
USDA Nutrition Assistance Programs: Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic.

13 In school year 2021-2022, school districts had the option to operate SSO during the school year. In school year 2020-
2021, school districts and other types of meal providers such as nonprofit organizations were also allowed to operate
SFSP.
14 For child nutrition waiver authorities, see Section 12(l) of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act
(codified at 42 U.S.C. §1760(l)) and Sections 2102-2202 of the Families First Coronavirus Response Act (FFCRA; P.L.
116-127).
15 For a list of child nutrition program waivers that USDA has issued during the pandemic, see USDA-FNS, “Child
Nutrition COVID-19 Waivers,” https://www.fns.usda.gov/fns-disaster-assistance/fns-responds-covid-19/child-
nutrition-covid-19-waivers.
16 In school year 2022-2023, USDA distributed additional child nutrition funding through Supply Chain Assistance
Funds (cited below) and the Healthy Meals Incentives Initiative (https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/healthy-meals-
incentives, discussed further under “Other Child Nutrition Activities” in this report). For a list of waivers applicable to
summer 2022 and school year 2022-2023, see USDA, FNS, “CN Flexibilities for Summer 2022 and School Year 2022-
23,” September 22, 2022, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/flexibilies-summer-22-sy-22-23. For estimated funding, see
USDA-FNS, “2024 USDA Explanatory Notes – Food and Nutrition Service,” p. 35-14.
17 USDA-FNS, “Fourth Allocation of Supply Chain Assistance Funds to Alleviate Supply Chain Disruptions in the
School Meals Programs,” SP 19-2023, August 7, 2023, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/fourth-allocation-supply-chain-
assistance-sca-funds.
18 USDA-FNS, “Results of USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service-Administered School Food Authority Survey II on
Supply Chain Disruption and Student Participation,” July 25, 2023, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/results-fns-
administered-sfa-survey2-supply-chain-disruption.
Congressional Research Service

4

link to page 12 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Child Nutrition Funding
Federal Funding
Most funding for child nutrition programs is considered mandatory spending. However, unlike
some mandatory programs, child nutrition programs require an appropriation of funding. This is
because the programs’ authorizing laws include benefit and eligibility criteria that create the
requirement for a certain level of spending, but the statute does not provide the funding directly.
Such programs are sometimes referred to as appropriated entitlements or appropriated
mandatories.19 If the necessary funds are not appropriated and the authorized benefits are not
made available, entitled recipients (e.g., states, institutions, and participants) may have legal
recourse.20
The benefit and eligibility criteria that governs much of the appropriated mandatory spending for
child nutrition programs is open-ended. Because there is no specified limit on the number of
beneficiaries or the total amount of benefits that will be paid, spending fluctuates based on the
number of meals and snacks served in the programs and statutorily set, annually adjusted per-
meal reimbursement rates. Congress typically considers USDA’s forecast for program needs in its
appropriations decisions.
Appropriated mandatory funding in child nutrition programs is generally for per-meal cash
reimbursements, commodity assistance, and administrative funds. The programs also have a
smaller amount of discretionary funding (determined in annual appropriations acts) and
mandatory funding (directly provided in the authorizing law, not annual appropriations acts).
These funding streams are discussed in further detail below.
Child nutrition appropriations totaled $28.6 billion in FY2023 (P.L. 117-328). Just over $25
billion of these funds were transferred to the child nutrition programs from Section 32 of the Act
of August 24, 1935.21 Separately, Section 32 provided $238 million for FFVP for FY2023.22
Figure 1 presents FY2023 child nutrition appropriations by program and activity. Child nutrition
appropriations may not match expenditures because most child nutrition funds carry over (they
are available for two fiscal years) and because spending fluctuates with the number of meals
served.

19 For further discussion of appropriated entitlements, see CRS Report RS20129, Entitlements and Appropriated
Entitlements in the Federal Budget Process.
20 GAO Budget Glossary, p. 13, http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-05-734SP.
21 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Appropriations, H.R. 2617/P.L. 117-328 [Legislative Text and Explanatory
Statement]: Book 1 of 2: Divisions A-F, committee print, 117th Cong., 2nd sess., 2023, H.Prt. 50-347, p. 77. Section 32
is a permanent appropriation of 30% of the previous calendar year’s customs receipts. For more information on Section
32, see CRS In Focus IF12193, Farm and Food Support Under USDA’s Section 32 Account.
22 USDA-FNS, “FFVP: Allocation of Funds for Fiscal Year 2023,” SP 12-2022, June 23, 2022.
Congressional Research Service

5

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Figure 1. Appropriations for Child Nutrition Programs, FY2023

Sources: CRS, based on the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (P.L. 117-328) and U.S. Congress, House
Committee on Appropriations, H.R. 2617/P.L. 117-328 [Legislative Text and Explanatory Statement]: Book 1 of 2:
Divisions A-F, committee print, 117th Cong., 2nd sess., 2023, H.Prt. 50-347, p. 77 unless otherwise noted.
Notes: Rows may not sum to total due to rounding. Total available funding for the fiscal year may be higher
than appropriations due to carryover funds.
(a) The “Other” category includes funding for administrative reviews, food safety, technology, training and
technical assistance, research, and payment oversight.
(b) “Discretionary grants” includes funding for school meal equipment assistance grants, Team Nutrition, school
breakfast expansion grants, and the Summer EBT demonstration in FY2023.
(c) Section 18(g)(8)(A) of the NSLA (42 U.S.C. §1769(g)(8)(A)) provides $5 mil ion in annual mandatory funding
for the farm to school program. The program also received $20 mil ion in annual appropriations in FY2023.
Per-Meal Cash Reimbursements
The majority of federal funding in child nutrition programs (including in NSLP, SBP, CACFP,
SFSP, and SMP) takes the form of per-meal cash reimbursements. These rates are specified in the
programs’ authorizing laws with an annual inflation adjustment.23 Although all (including full-
price) meals/snacks served by participating providers are subsidized, those served for free or at a
reduced price to lower-income children earn higher rates. Meals must meet federal nutritional
requirements in order for the school district or institution to receive reimbursement.24

23 For more detail on how inflation adjustment is conducted, see the child nutrition program section of CRS Report
R42000, Inflation-Indexing Elements in Federal Entitlement Programs. Most reimbursements (including for schools
and child care centers) are indexed annually based on the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U)
Food Away from Home Component. For family child care homes, the annual indexing is based on the CPI-U Food at
Home Component.
24 The authorizing statutes for all four of the main child nutrition programs include nutritional requirements for the
meals and snacks served; these are sometimes referred to as “nutrition standards,” “nutrition guidelines,” or “meal
patterns.” The nutrition standards differ by program in consideration of different age groups served and the settings in
which meals are served, among other factors. See program regulations for nutritional requirements: NSLP, 7 C.F.R.
§210.10; SBP, 7 C.F.R. §220.8; CACFP, 7 C.F.R. §226.20; SFSP, 7 C.F.R. §225.16.
Congressional Research Service

6

link to page 13 link to page 13 link to page 13 link to page 13 link to page 46 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Reimbursement rates differ by program based on different criteria. For example, in SBP, schools
in high-poverty areas receive an extra 45 cents per meal. Differences in reimbursement rates are
highlighted within the subsequent discussions of each program.
In general, FNS distributes per-meal reimbursements to state agencies, which disburse them to
participating school districts and institutions. Districts and institutions must record daily counts of
meals in each category and report monthly counts to the state agency in order to receive
reimbursement. Once they receive federal funds, participating institutions are allowed to spend
these funds on most aspects of their food service operations.
Table 2 provides an example of the per-lunch reimbursement rate for school districts and
participant benefits in NSLP. Reimbursement rates for each child nutrition program are listed in
the sections to follow.
Table 2. Example: NSLP Per-Meal Reimbursements, School Year 2023-2024
What the School Food
Authority Receives
(Per-Meal
What the Participating
Meal Category
Reimbursement Ratea)
Child Receives
Free
$4.25-$4.50
Free lunch
Reduced-price
$3.85-$4.10
Lunch for $0.40 or lessb
Paid
$0.40-$0.56
Lunch at ful priceb
Source: USDA FNS, “National School Lunch, Special Milk, and School Breakfast Programs, National Average
Payments/Maximum Reimbursement Rates,” July 7, 2023, 85 Federal Register 44270.
a. Chart shows reimbursement rates for the 48 contiguous states and the District of Columbia. For rates for
Alaska, Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands, see Federal Register notice. Ranges reflect
variations in reimbursement rates for lunches meeting certain statutory criteria. Average national rates are
shown; states may apportion funds among school districts above or below the average rates.
b. Some states and school districts cover the remainder of meal fees for students in the reduced-price and/or
paid rate categories.
Summer EBT Benefits
Like SFSP and SSO, Summer EBT is an appropriated entitlement. The law establishes a set
amount of benefits for households ($40 per eligible child per summer month) with an annual
inflation adjustment (discussed further in the “Summer EBT” section). Funding is to be
distributed to state agencies, territories, and tribes for distribution to households. While funding
has not yet been determined for summer 2024, USDA requested a $1.87 billion appropriation for
FY2024—including $170 million in state administrative costs and $2.5 million for federal
administrative costs—based on its projection of serving 27 million children.25
Commodity Assistance
Federal support for child nutrition programs is also provided in the form of USDA-purchased
foods (USDA Foods) and some cash in lieu of commodities. USDA Foods are foods purchased by

25 USDA-FNS, “2024 USDA Explanatory Notes–Food and Nutrition Service,” https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/
documents/35-2024-FNS.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

7

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

USDA for distribution to federal nutrition assistance programs, including child nutrition
programs.26
States, schools, and other institutions are entitled to a certain amount of commodity assistance
under the law, referred to as entitlement commodity assistance. In NSLP and CACFP, statute
provides a per-meal commodity reimbursement (an inflation-adjusted rate of 29.5 cents per meal
in school year 2023-2024).27 (Note: Commodity assistance is not provided specifically for SBP;
however, commodities distributed through NSLP may be used for school breakfasts.28) A smaller
amount of commodity assistance is also provided to certain types of institutions participating in
SFSP.29
Schools and institutions use entitlement commodity funds to select commodities from a USDA
Foods catalog.30 USDA then purchases the commodities and works with state distribution
agencies to send foods for further processing or distribute them to schools and institutions.
Schools/institutions and state agencies can elect to receive a certain amount of commodity
assistance in the form of cash (this is the case for less than 1% of NSLP commodity aid but nearly
all of the commodity aid distributed through CACFP).31

26 For more information, see USDA-FNS, “USDA Foods in Schools,” https://www.fns.usda.gov/usda-fis.
27 Section 6(c) of the NSLA (42 U.S.C. §1755(c)) and Section 17(h)(1)(B) of the NSLA (42 U.S.C. §1766(h)(1)(B));
and USDA-FNS, “Food Distribution Program: Value of Donated Foods From July 1, 2023, Through June 30, 2024,” 88
Federal Register 44775, July 13, 2023, https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2023/07/13/2023-14810/food-
distribution-program-value-of-donated-foods-from-july-1-2023-through-june-30-2024.
28 Section 6(d) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1755(d)) prohibits commodity support based on the number of
breakfasts served through SBP. However, Section 4(b)(4) of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (codified at 42 U.S.C.
§1773(b)(4)) authorizes USDA to provide at least 3 cents in commodity assistance per breakfast “whenever stocks of
agricultural commodities are acquired by the Secretary or the Commodity Credit Corporation and are not likely to be
sold by the Secretary or the Commodity Credit Corporation or otherwise used in programs of commodity sale or
distribution.”
29 Section 13(h) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1761(h)). Per program regulations, SFSP sponsor organizations
eligible for commodity assistance include “Self-preparation sponsors; sponsors which have entered into an agreement
with a school or school food authority for the preparation of meals; and sponsors which are school food authorities and
have competitively procured Program meals from the same food service management company from which they
competitively procured meals for the National School Lunch Program during the last period in which school was in
session.” (7 C.F.R. §225.9(b)). Statute does not specify the level of entitlement commodity funding for SFSP. In
FY2022, institutions participating in SFSP received a total of $27.6 million in commodity assistance, according to
USDA-FNS, “June 2023 Keydata Report,” September 8, 2023, https://www.fns.usda.gov/data/June-2023-keydata-
report.
30 For a list of products offered, see USDA-FNS, “USDA Foods Available List for School Year 2023-2024 for Schools
and Institutions,” https://www.fns.usda.gov/usda-fis/usda-foods-available. Under a Pilot Project for Unprocessed Fruits
and Vegetables authorized by the 2014 farm bill (§4202 of P.L. 113-79) under Section 6(f) of the NSLA (codified at 42
U.S.C. §1755(f)), USDA may allow up to eight states to use a portion of their commodity assistance dollars to purchase
unprocessed fruits and vegetables from suppliers outside of the federal USDA Foods supply chain. For a list of
participating states, see USDA-FNS, “Pilot Project for Procurement of Unprocessed Fruits and Vegetables,”
https://www.fns.usda.gov/usda-fis/pilot-project-procurement-unprocessed-fruits-and-vegetables.
31 0.1% of NSLP entitlement commodity aid and 99.9% of CACFP entitlement commodity aid was in the form of cash
in FY2022, according to USDA-FNS, “June 2023 Keydata Report,” September 8, 2023, https://www.fns.usda.gov/data/
June-2023-keydata-report. School food authorities participating in NSLP may elect to receive up to 5 cents of the per-
lunch commodity subsidy in the form of cash for processing and handling expenses (per program regulations at 7
C.F.R. §240.5). Kansas receives cash payments in lieu of USDA Foods as a result of the National School Lunch Act
and Child Nutrition Act amendments of 1975. In CACFP, states may request any amount of cash-in-lieu of
commodities per Section 17(h)(1)(D) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1766(h)(1)(D)).
Congressional Research Service

8

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

According to statute, entitlement commodity assistance must equal at least 12% of the total
funding provided for lunch reimbursements and child nutrition commodities.32 The majority of
commodity assistance is distributed through NSLP.33
The child nutrition programs can also receive bonus commodities, which are commodities that are
purchased at USDA’s discretion throughout the year to support the agricultural economy using
separate budget authorities. There are comparatively fewer bonus commodities distributed
through child nutrition programs.34
Administrative Funds
The Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act allows USDA to retain up to 3.5% of annual
child nutrition funding for its administrative expenses related to child nutrition programs and
WIC.35 In addition, the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 authorizes open-ended funding for USDA’s
administrative expenses in carrying out the programs and activities under that act (which include
SBP, SMP, other child nutrition activities, and WIC).36
There is also specific funding authorized for state agencies’ expenses related to the administration
of child nutrition programs. According to statute, federal funding for states’ administrative
expenses must equal at least 1.5% of federal expenditures on NSLP, SBP, CACFP, and SMP in
the second preceding fiscal year.37 The majority of these funds are allocated to states based on
their share of spending on the four programs. Any remaining funds are allocated by the Secretary
of Agriculture on a discretionary basis; per program regulations, states receive additional amounts
for CACFP, commodity distribution, and administrative reviews of schools/institutions.38 Once
states receive administrative funds, they can apportion them among child nutrition programs and
activities as they see fit.39
In addition, states receive separate administrative payments through SFSP that equal at least 2.5%
of their summer meal aid.40 For Summer EBT, states and Indian Tribal Organizations (ITOs) are

32 Section 6(e) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1755(e)). Not less than 12% of the assistance provided under
Section 6 (commodity assistance) and Section 4 and Section 11 (NSLP cash reimbursements) of the NSLA must be
provided as Section 6 commodity assistance. Prior to FY2018, bonus commodity assistance was allowed to count
toward this requirement.
33 Entitlement commodity assistance totaled $1.49 billion in NSLP, $176.5 million in CACFP, and $27.6 million in
SFSP in FY2022. USDA-FNS, “June 2023 Keydata Report,” September 8, 2023, https://www.fns.usda.gov/data/June-
2023-keydata-report.
34 There was $5.7 million in bonus commodities delivered through child nutrition programs in FY2019, $16.6 million
in FY2020, $13.1 million in FY2021, and $26.8 million in FY2022. USDA-FNS, “November Keydata Report
(September 2019 data),” December 13, 2019, https://www.fns.usda.gov/data/november-keydata-report-september-
2019-data; USDA-FNS, “March Keydata Report (November 2020 data),” March 12, 2021, https://www.fns.usda.gov/
data/march-keydata-report-november-2020-data; USDA-FNS, “January 2022 Keydata Report,” April 13, 2022,
https://www.fns.usda.gov/data/keydata-report; and USDA-FNS, “June 2023 Keydata Report,” September 8, 2023,
https://www.fns.usda.gov/data/June-2023-keydata-report.
35 Section 6 of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1755).
36 Section 14 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1783).
37 Section 7 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1776).
38 7 C.F.R. §235.4.
39 7 C.F.R. §235.6.
40 Section 13(k)(1) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1761(k)(1)); 7 C.F.R. §225.5.
Congressional Research Service

9

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

authorized to receive federal funding to cover half of their administrative expenses.41 States may
also retain a portion of FFVP aid for their administrative expenses.42
At the local level, schools and institutions may use per-meal reimbursements to cover their
administrative costs. In CACFP, institutions that oversee day care homes receive separate
monthly payments for administrative expenses based on the number of day care homes under
their jurisdiction.43
Other Federal Funding
A few child nutrition programs and activities have mandatory funding provided directly in the
authorizing law. For example, FFVP receives mandatory funding from Section 32 and the farm to
school program receives mandatory funding under the NSLA.44
There are also a few child nutrition activities that are funded on a discretionary basis, including
the Team Nutrition initiative and school meals equipment grants.
Other temporary sources of child nutrition funding may be available. For example, in school
years 2021-2022 through 2023-2024, USDA distributed “Supply Chain Assistance Funds” to
states and school food authorities using Commodity Credit Corporation authority.45
Nonfederal Funding
Federal subsidies do not necessarily cover the full cost of meals and snacks prepared by schools
and institutions.46 Child nutrition programs may also receive funds from participants, states,
school districts, local governments, and other entities. NSLP is the only child nutrition program
with a cost-sharing requirement for states, which amounts to a contribution of roughly $200
million from all states combined annually.47 Some states provide additional funding for NSLP and
other child nutrition programs beyond the required amount, including some states that provide

41 Section 502(c) of the FY2023 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 117-328).
42 Section 19 of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1769(i)(6)(B)).
43 Section 17(f)(3)(B) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1766(f)(3)(B)); 7 C.F.R. §226.12.
44 Other child nutrition activities with mandatory funding include the Institute of Child Nutrition, administrative
reviews, technical assistance for program integrity, and professional standards for school food service personnel. See p.
35-15 of USDA-FNS, “2024 USDA Explanatory Notes–Food and Nutrition Service,” https://www.usda.gov/sites/
default/files/documents/35-2024-FNS.pdf.
45 USDA-FNS, “Fourth Allocation of Supply Chain Assistance Funds to Alleviate Supply Chain Disruptions in the
School Meals Programs,” SP 19-2023, August 7, 2023, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/fourth-allocation-supply-chain-
assistance-sca-funds.
46 Based on a study by USDA of meal costs in school year 2014-2015, the average lunch reimbursement ($2.26)
covered 62% of the average reported (direct) cost ($3.66) of producing a reimbursable lunch and 41% of the average
full (including indirect) cost ($5.55) of producing a reimbursable lunch. USDA-FNS, School Nutrition and Meal Cost
Study, Final Report Volume 3: School Meal Costs and Revenues, Office of Policy Support, April 2019, p. 53,
https://www.fns.usda.gov/school-nutrition-and-meal-cost-study.
47 Section 7(a)(1) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1756(a)(1)). The required contribution in NSLP equals 30% of
Section 4 funds (the NSLP base reimbursement) made available to states in school year 1980-1981 (not inflation
adjusted), which was $200 million according to U.S. Congress, Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and
Forestry, Child Nutrition Programs: Description, History, Issues, and Options, committee print, 98th Cong., 1st Sess.,
January 1983, S. Prt. 98-15 (Washington, DC: GPO, 1983), p. 8. States must also maintain level funding to the amount
expended in FY1977 for state administrative expenses associated with NSLP, SBP, and SMP, per Section 7(f) of Child
Nutrition Act (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1776(f)).
Congressional Research Service

10

link to page 17 link to page 18 link to page 61

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

their own per-meal reimbursements. In addition, nine states (as of the cover date of this report)
have authorized funding to provide universal free school meals to all students.48
An FNS study of the school meals programs in school year 2014-2015 found that approximately
63% of school food service revenues came from federal funds, 31% came from student payments
for paid and reduced-price meals and other school foods, and 6% came from state and local funds
(shown in Figure 2).49
Figure 2. Average School Food Authority (SFA) Revenue by Source,
School Year 2014-2015

Source: CRS based on USDA FNS, School Nutrition and Meal Cost Study, Final Report Volume 3: School Meal Costs
and Revenues, Office of Policy Support, April 2019, https://www.fns.usda.gov/school-nutrition-and-meal-cost-
study.
Notes: Percentages do not add to 100% due to rounding. Graph reflects average revenue, and as such, the
percentage breakdown may vary between school food authorities. In addition, it is possible that the distribution
of school food authority revenue has changed since school year 2014-2015.
Spending Trends
Federal spending on child nutrition programs has generally increased over time (see Figure 3;
Appendix Table B-1 includes both nominal and inflation-adjusted amounts). There are several
reasons for this increase, including annual inflation adjustments to per-meal reimbursement rates,

48 School meal state policy trackers include Food Research and Action Center, “School Meals Legislation and Funding
by State,” updated July 2023, https://frac.org/wp-content/uploads/School-Meals-State-Legislation-Chart.pdf and School
Nutrition Association, “Quarterly State Legislative Reports,” https://schoolnutrition.org/LegislationPolicy/
StateLegislationPolicyReports. For a list of states that adopted state funding for universal free meals as of August 2023,
see Leah Butz, “States that Have Passed Universal Free School Meals (So Far),” Hunter College New York City Food
Policy Center, August 29, 2023, https://www.nycfoodpolicy.org/states-that-have-passed-universal-free-school-meals.
49 USDA-FNS, School Nutrition and Meal Cost Study, Final Report Volume 3: School Meal Costs and Revenues,
Office of Policy Support, April 2019, p. 43, https://www.fns.usda.gov/school-nutrition-and-meal-cost-study.
Congressional Research Service

11

link to page 10 link to page 18

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

a relative increase in free school meal participation compared to other meal categories, and recent
spending under pandemic response policies.50
A recent exception to this trend occurred in FY2020, at the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.
Participation in programs declined as institutions closed, decreasing spending. By FY2021, an
increase in summer meal program participation again increased spending (pandemic policies are
discussed in the “Child Nutrition Program Operations During the COVID-19 Pandemic” section).
Under current law, the Congressional Budget Office predicts that federal spending on the child
nutrition programs will continue to increase over the next decade, with annual outlays of more
than $50 billion by 2032 as a result of food price inflation and other factors.51
As shown in Figure 3, federal spending on the major child nutrition programs reached $34 billion
in FY2022 based on preliminary data. When spending on other child nutrition activities is
included, the total was roughly $38 billion.52
Figure 3. Expenditures on Selected Child Nutrition Programs, 1992-2022 (Actual)
(figure is interactive in the HTML version of this report)

Source: USDA-FNS, “Child Nutrition Tables: NSLP, SBP and SMP—Program Costs—Cash and Commodities;
Child and Adult Care Food—Participation, Meals and Costs; and Summer Food Service—Participation, Meals and

50 The proportion of children receiving free meals has generally increased over the past three decades while the
percentage of children receiving reduced-price and paid school meals has decreased since 2007 in NSLP and stayed
relatively constant in SBP. For more information, see CRS Report R46888, Amending Eligibility Rules for Free and
Reduced-Price School Meals: Background and Policy Options.
51 Congressional Budget Office (CBO), “Baseline Projections: Child Nutrition Programs,” May 2023,
https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2023-05/51293-2023-05-childnutrition.pdf. Also see page 26 (§502, Increasing
Access to Summer Meals for Children Through EBT and Alternative Delivery Options) of CBO, “Summary: Estimated
Budgetary Effects of Divisions O Through MM of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (P.L. 117-328), as
Enacted on December 29, 2022,” January 12, 2023, https://www.cbo.gov/system/files/2023-01/P.L. 117-328 _1-12-
23.pdf.
52 USDA-FNS, “2024 USDA Explanatory Notes–Food and Nutrition Service,” p. 35-16,
https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/35-2024-FNS.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

12

link to page 48 link to page 46 link to page 46 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Costs: National Level Annual Summary Tables: FY 1969-2022,” October 13, 2023, https://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/
child-nutrition-tables.
Notes: NSLP category includes entitlement and bonus commodities and spending on the Seamless Summer
Option. Figure does not show all child nutrition program spending (e.g., it excludes FFVP, state administrative
expenses, and discretionary grants). FY2022 data are preliminary.

National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and School
Breakfast Program (SBP)
NSLP and SBP (the school meals programs) provide federal support for meals served in roughly
90,000 public and private elementary and secondary schools nationwide.53 They also support
meals served in a smaller number of residential child care institutions.54 Schools receive federal
aid in the form of cash reimbursements for every meal they serve that meets federal nutritional
requirements (limited to one breakfast and lunch per child daily). The largest subsidies are
provided for free and reduced-price meals served to eligible students based on income eligibility
and categorical eligibility rules (discussed below). Schools also receive a certain amount of
commodity assistance per lunch served (discussed previously). Schools participating in NSLP
have the option of providing afterschool snacks through the program, and schools participating in
NSLP or SBP have the option of providing summer meals and snacks through the Seamless
Summer Option (discussed in the “After-School Meals and Snacks” and “Seamless Summer
Option” sections).
Schools are not required by federal law to participate in NSLP or SBP; however, some states
require schools to have a school lunch and/or breakfast program, and some require schools to
operate such programs through NSLP and/or SBP. Some states also provide state funding for the
school meals programs, including nine states (as of the cover date of this report) that have
authorized funding to provide free meals to all students.55 Schools that do not participate in the
federal school meals programs may still operate locally funded meal programs.56

53 As of fall 2022, 93,427 schools participated in NSLP and 89,718 schools participated in SBP (with substantial
overlap), according to USDA-FNS, “June 2023 Keydata Report,” September 8, 2023,
https://www.fns.usda.gov/data/June-2023-keydata-report. This includes private schools. In FY2022, nearly 4,500
private schools participated in NSLP and 3,000 private schools participated in SBP, according to CRS communication
with USDA-FNS in November 2023.
54 In fall 2022, more than 1,800 residential child care institutions (RCCIs) participated in NSLP and SBP (ibid). This
report refers to “schools,” but it should be understood that for NSLP and SBP, it means both schools and RCCIs.
RCCIs are defined as follows in school meal program regulations: “The term ‘residential child care institutions’
includes, but is not limited to: homes for the mentally, emotionally or physically impaired, and unmarried mothers and
their infants; group homes; halfway houses; orphanages; temporary shelters for abused children and for runaway
children; long-term care facilities for chronically ill children; and juvenile detention centers. A long-term care facility is
a hospital, skilled nursing facility, intermediate care facility, or distinct part thereof, which is intended for the care of
children confined for 30 days or more.” (7 C.F.R. §210.2). Nonresidential child care centers are eligible to participate
in CACFP.
55 School meal state policy trackers include Food Research and Action Center, “School Meals Legislation and Funding
by State,” updated July 2023, https://frac.org/wp-content/uploads/School-Meals-State-Legislation-Chart.pdf and School
Nutrition Association, “Quarterly State Legislative Reports,” https://schoolnutrition.org/LegislationPolicy/
StateLegislationPolicyReports. For a list of states that adopted state funding for universal free meals as of August 2023,
see Leah Butz, “States that Have Passed Universal Free School Meals (So Far),” Hunter College New York City Food
Policy Center, August 29, 2023, https://www.nycfoodpolicy.org/states-that-have-passed-universal-free-school-meals.
56 There is limited research on schools that opt out of the federal school meals programs. An older (1993) GAO
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service

13

link to page 51 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 (HHFKA; P.L. 111-296) made several changes to the
school meals programs. Among those changes was a requirement that USDA update the nutrition
standards for school meals and create new nutritional requirements for foods sold in NSLP and
SBP schools within a certain timeframe. The law also created the Community Eligibility
Provision, through which eligible schools can provide free meals to all students. These changes
are discussed further within this section.
NSLP and SBP are two separate programs, and schools can choose to operate one and not the
other.57 The programs are discussed together in this report because they share many of the same
requirements. Differences between the programs are noted where applicable. Participation in SBP
tends to be lower than in NSLP for several reasons, including the traditionally required early
arrival by students in order to receive a meal before school starts.
This section discusses topics specific to the school meals programs. Other food service topics
relevant to child nutrition programs more broadly (e.g., the farm to school program) are discussed
in the “Other Child Nutrition Activities” section.
Administration
Locally, the school meals programs are usually administered by school districts. Statute and
regulations designate school food authorities as the local authorities in charge of operating the
school meal programs; typically, these are food service departments within school districts.58
Local educational agencies—the broader school district or school board—also play a role in
administering the school meal programs.59 This report sometimes uses the term school district to
refer informally to the local administrative entities in the school meals programs.
In general, school food authorities handle food service operations and accounting responsibilities,
such as food procurement, preparation, and service and tracking meals for reimbursement, while
local educational agencies handle administrative duties, such as processing applications and
certifying children for free and reduced-price school meals.
At the state level, the school meals programs are most often administered by state departments of
education.60 State administrative agencies are responsible for distributing federal reimbursements
to school food authorities and overseeing school districts’ administration of the school meal
programs, including by conducting administrative reviews of school districts.61

analysis found that smaller and wealthier schools were more likely to drop out of NSLP. GAO found that common
reasons for departure included financial considerations and compliance with federal nutrition standards. See GAO,
Schools That Left the National School Lunch Program, December 1993, https://www.gao.gov/assets/80/78774.pdf.
57 USDA estimated that 94% of schools operating NSLP also operated SBP in FY2020 prior to the COVID-19
pandemic (USDA-FNS, “2023 USDA Explanatory Notes–Food and Nutrition Service,” p. 35-14,
https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/35-2023-FNS.pdf).
58 See definitions of school food authority and local educational agencies at 7 C.F.R. §210.2 and 7 C.F.R. §220.2.
59 Ibid.
60 For a list of state administrative agencies, see USDA FNS, “Contact Map,” https://www.fns.usda.gov/contacts/
contact-map.
61 Section 22(b)(1)(C)(i) of the NLSA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1769c(b)(1)(C)(i)). HHFKA required states to “conduct
audits and reviews during a three-year cycle or other period prescribed by the Secretary.” Regulations require reviews
once every three years, with the potential for a one-year extension (a four-year cycle) (7 C.F.R. §210.18(c)). On
February 22, 2019, USDA published a policy memorandum (SP 12-2019, Flexibility for the Administrative Review
Cycle Requirement, https://www.fns.usda.gov/school-meals/flexibility-administrative-review-cycle-requirement) that
allows state agencies to request a waiver to extend the review cycle for up to two additional years (a five-year cycle).
Congressional Research Service

14

link to page 21 link to page 22

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

At the federal level, FNS provides ongoing guidance and technical assistance to state agencies
and school food authorities through seven regional offices. FNS also provides oversight of state
agencies, including by conducting management evaluations.62
Figure 4 depicts the federal, state, and local roles in administering the school meals programs.
Figure 4. Federal, State, and Local Roles in the School Meals Programs

Source: CRS, based on current law and regulations.
Eligibility and Reimbursement
The school meals programs do not exclusively serve low-income children. Any student in an
NSLP or SBP participating school may purchase a school meal; however, children must meet
program eligibility rules in order to receive a free or reduced-price meal.
In most schools (excluding schools that participate in the Community Eligibility Provision or
other special options), children are certified for free or reduced-price school meals through one of
two pathways: (1) income eligibility for free and reduced-price meals (information typically
collected via household application) and (2) categorical eligibility for free meals (information
collected via household application or direct certification). Each year, schools must verify a
sample of household applications for accuracy. The pathways through which children are certified
for free or reduced-price school meals are shown in Figure 5.
If children are certified for free meals, the school food authority receives the free meal
reimbursement for those meals. If children are certified for reduced-price meals, the school food
authority receives a slightly lower reimbursement. School food authorities also receive a much
smaller paid-rate reimbursement for meals served to children who pay for “full price” meals.
School food authorities must follow federal guidelines in setting the price of paid meals.63

62 U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), USDA Has Reported Taking Some Steps to Reduce Improper
Payments but Should Comprehensively Assess Fraud Risks, GAO-19-389, May 2019, p. 7.
63 The HHFKA set requirements around the price of paid meals, amending Section 12(p) of the NSLA (codified at 42
U.S.C. §1760(p)). However, appropriations laws in FY2018 and FY2019 waived these requirements for many schools.
For more information, see CRS Report R45486, Child Nutrition Programs: Issues in the 115th Congress, and USDA-
FNS, “Paid Lunch Equity: Guidance for SY 2020-21,” January 22, 2020, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/paid-lunch-
equity-guidance-school-year-2020-21.
Congressional Research Service

15

link to page 28

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Certain schools follow different eligibility and reimbursement procedures because they
participate in the Community Eligibility Provision or other special options (discussed below in
the “Special Options” section).
Figure 5. Certification Pathways for Free and Reduced-Price School Meals
Household Application and Direct Certification Processes

Source: CRS adaptation of figure from U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO), School Meals Programs:
USDA Has Enhanced Controls, but Additional Verification Could Help Ensure Legitimate Program Access, GAO-14-262,
May 2014, p. 13.
Notes: FPG = federal poverty guidelines; SNAP = Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Graphic does
not depict direct certification of children for reduced-price meals through Medicaid in demonstration states or
practices used in Community Eligibility Provision (CEP) schools and other schools using special options.
Income Eligibility
Children are eligible for free or reduced-price meals if their household’s income falls within the
following ranges:
• Free meals: household income at or below 130% of the federal poverty
guidelines.64
• Reduced-price meals (charges of no more than 40 cents per lunch and 30 cents
per breakfast): household income above 130% and less than or equal to 185% of
the federal poverty guidelines.65

64 For the purposes of school meal eligibility, household is defined as “a group of related or nonrelated individuals, who
are not residents of an institution or boarding house, but who are living as one economic unit” (7 C.F.R. §245.2).
65 Section 9(b)(1) of the NSLA (42 U.S.C. §1758(b)(1).
Congressional Research Service

16

link to page 23 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

These thresholds are based on the annual federal poverty guidelines established by the U.S.
Department of Health and Human Services, and are updated annually for inflation. FNS publishes
the corresponding income limits by household size for free and reduced-price meals in the
Federal Register on an annual basis.66 Table 3 provides an example of the income limits for free
and reduced-price meals for a household of four.
To become income eligible for school meals, a parent or guardian must complete a paper or
online application that includes the income of each household member, the household size, and
other information.67 Household income is defined as total gross income (before taxes or
deductions), including earnings and wages, certain public assistance benefits (such as
unemployment compensation, social security benefits, and child support payments), and
retirement and pension income.68 Households are asked to provide current weekly, biweekly,
twice monthly, or monthly income, which school district officials compare to the federal poverty
guidelines to determine eligibility for free meals, reduced-price meals, or neither.69 Households
only need to fill out one application if they have multiple children in the same school district.
Table 3. School Meals Income Eligibility Guidelines for a Household of Four
For the 48 Contiguous States and the District of Columbia, School Year 2023-2024
Income Eligibility
Threshold
(% of the federal
Annual Income for a
Meal Type
poverty guidelines)
Household of Four
Free
Less than or equal to 130%
Less than or equal to $39,000
Reduced-price
Greater than 130% and less
Greater than $39,000 and less
than or equal to 185%
than or equal to $55,500
Paid
N/A
N/A
Source: USDA FNS, “Child Nutrition Programs: Income Eligibility Guidelines,” 88 Federal Register 8397,
February 9, 2023.
Note: This school year is defined as July 1, 2023, through June 30, 2024. For other years, household sizes, and
guidelines for Alaska and Hawaii, see USDA FNS’s website: http://www.fns.usda.gov/school-meals/income-
eligibility-guidelines.

66 USDA FNS, “Child Nutrition Programs: Income Eligibility Guidelines,” 88 Federal Register 8397, February 9,
2023.
67 There is a requirement that the adult household member filling out the application provide the last four digits of
his/her Social Security number (Section 9(d)(1) of the NSLA), or, according to program regulations, indicate that they
do not have one (7 C.F.R. §245.6(a)(6)). The law does not allow for citizenship eligibility restrictions; Section 742(a)
of P.L. 104-193 states that individuals who are eligible for free public education benefits under state and local law shall
remain eligible to receive school lunch and school breakfast benefits.
68 7 C.F.R. §245.6(a)(5)(ii). Also see USDA-FNS, “Child Nutrition Programs: Income Eligibility Guidelines,” 85
Federal Register 16050, March 20, 2020, USDA-FNS, Eligibility Manual for School Meals: Determining and
Verifying Eligibility, July 2017, https://www.fns.usda.gov/eligibility-manual-school-meals, and USDA-FNS, “Applying
for Free and Reduced Price School Meals,” https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/applying-free-and-reduced-price-school-
meals.
69 Ibid. Households are asked to report this income for the most recent period prior to the application, unless it does not
reflect their typical income, in which case they can provide the amount of income they normally receive in a month.
Congressional Research Service

17

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Categorical Eligibility
As an alternative to income eligibility, children can become eligible for free school meals if they
fall into a certain category (called categorical eligibility). Per statute, children are automatically
eligible for free lunches and breakfasts (without consideration of household income) if they are
• in a household receiving benefits through the following programs:
• SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program);
• FDPIR (Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations, a program that
operates in lieu of SNAP on some Indian reservations); or
• TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families);
• enrolled in Head Start;
• in foster care;
• a migrant;
• a runaway; or
• homeless.70
Categorical eligibility for free meals may be determined via a household application (households
provide a case number on the application) or through direct certification (discussed in the next
section). The vast majority of categorically eligible children are certified for free meals through
direct certification.71
Categorical eligibility for free school meals with SNAP and TANF began in the 1980s (then, the
Food Stamp and Aid to Families with Dependent Children programs, respectively).72 Categorical
eligibility enabled schools to make use of other programs’ more in-depth certification processes
and reduced the number of applications that families had to fill out.73 Other programs and
categories were added over time.
Direct Certification
Direct certification is a process through which state agencies and school districts automatically
certify children for free meals based on documentation of the child’s status in a program or
category without the need for a household application.74 States are required to conduct direct

70 See Section 9(b)(12)(A) of the Russell National School Lunch Act (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1758(b)(12)(A)), for the
more specific definitions of these categories. SNAP, FDPIR, and TANF have income limits, but the other qualifications
as defined in the statute are not limited by income.
71 According to CRS calculations using USDA-FNS 742 data for FY2022, 97.5% of categorically eligible students
were directly certified for free school meals, compared to 2.5% certified by household application.
72 USDA-FNS, Direct Certification in the National School Lunch Program: State Implementation Progress: Report to
Congress, December 2008, p. 3, https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/DirectCert08.pdf.
73 See, for example, U.S. Government Accountability Office, School-Meals Programs: USDA Has Enhanced Controls,
but Additional Verification Could Help Ensure Legitimate Program Access, GAO-14-262, May 2014, pp. 16-19,
http://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-14-262.
74 Direct certification authority is in Section 9(b)(4)-(5) of the Russell National School Lunch Act (codified at 42
U.S.C. §1758(b)(4)-(5)). Direct certification is defined in NSLP/SBP program regulations at 7 C.F.R. §245.2.
Congressional Research Service

18

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

certification with SNAP and have the option of conducting direct certification with the other
programs and categories that convey categorical eligibility.
For SNAP and other federal programs, the direct certification process typically involves state
agencies (e.g., state SNAP and state educational agencies) cross-checking program rolls.75 A list
of matched children is sent to the school district, which certifies children for free meals without
the need for a household application.76 For foster, homeless, migrant, and runaway children,
direct certification typically involves school district communication with a local or state official
who can provide documentation of the child’s status in one of these categories.77
The 2004 child nutrition reauthorization act (P.L. 108-265) required states to conduct direct
certification with SNAP, with nationwide implementation taking effect in school year 2008-2009.
As of school year 2018-2019 (the most recent data available), USDA reported that 98% of
children in SNAP households were directly certified for free school meals.78
The HHFKA made further policy changes to expand direct certification. One of those changes
was the initiation of a demonstration project to test direct certification with Medicaid (see the text
box below). The law also funded performance incentive grants for high-performing states and
authorized corrective action plans for low-performing states in direct certification activities.79
Direct Certification with Medicaid Demonstration
The HHFKA initiated a demonstration project to conduct direct certification of children individually participating
in Medicaid and children in Medicaid households. Unlike the other programs used to directly certify children for
school meals, Medicaid does not convey categorical eligibility for free school meals, but rather identifies children in
households that would meet the income eligibility thresholds for either free or reduced-price school meals.80
Fol owing the demonstration authority in the HHFKA as well as pilot authority in the Richard B. Russell National
School Lunch Act, some states are currently directly certifying children based on Medicaid data.81 As of school
year 2023-2024, there were 38 states operating direct certification with Medicaid. Two states used Medicaid to
directly certify children for free meals only (130% of the poverty level or below).82 Thirty-six states were
operating under an expanded direct certification demonstration project to test direct certification with Medicaid
for free and reduced-price meals (up to 185% of the poverty level).83

75 USDA-FNS, Direct Certification in the National School Lunch Program: State Implementation Progress, School
Year 2014–2015: Report to Congress, Office of Policy Support, Special Nutrition Programs Report No. CN-15-DC,
December 2016, p. xiii, https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/ops/NSLPDirectCertification2015.pdf.
76 However, parents and guardians are notified of the child’s enrollment in free meals and are allowed to opt-out.
77 USDA-FNS, Eligibility Manual for School Meals: Determining and Verifying Eligibility, July 2017,
https://www.fns.usda.gov/eligibility-manual-school-meals.
78 USDA-FNS, Direct Certification in the National School Lunch Program State Implementation Progress Report to
Congress SY 2017-2018 and SY 2018-2019, June 2021, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/direct-certification-national-
school-lunch-program-state-implementation-progress-report.
79 See CRS Report R41354, Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization: P.L. 111-296, for further discussion of these
and related policies.
80 USDA-FNS, “Request for Applications to Participate in Demonstration Projects to Evaluate Direct Certification with
Medicaid,” January 27, 2016, https://www.medicaid.gov/federal-policy-guidance/downloads/cib-02-12-16.pdf.
81 Section 9(b)(15) of the NSLA (codified at 42 USC §1758(b)(15)), as added by Section 103 of P.L. 111-296; Section
18(c) of the NSLA (codified at 42 USC §1769(c)).
82 Kentucky and New York, according to CRS communication with USDA-FNS in October 2023.
83 For a list of participating states, see USDA-FNS, “National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program
Demonstration Projects to Evaluate Direct Certification with Medicaid,” January 13, 2023,
https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/direct-certification-medicaid-demonstration-project.
Congressional Research Service

19

link to page 27 link to page 13 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

FNS has published several evaluations of the demonstration projects.84 These evaluations found that in states with
available data, direct certification with Medicaid led to more children being certified through direct certification
rather than application and to some newly certified children. They also found that state administrative costs were
“modest” during start-up and declined over time.85
Verification of Eligibility
Each fall, districts are required to verify a sample of approved household applications on file,
with a focus on applications close to the eligibility threshold (“error-prone” applications).86
School districts may also conduct verification of questionable applications. Verification is not
required for children who are directly certified for free or reduced-price meals. (Note that districts
participating in Provisions 1, 2, and 3 must meet verification requirements for the years in which
they administer household applications.)
Many districts employ direct verification (matching data from other low-income programs) to
conduct their verification activities, but if data cannot be verified in this way, schools must
contact households to verify the information provided on the application. A child’s eligibility
status may stay the same or change (e.g., from free meals to reduced-price meals or loss of
eligibility) as a result of verification of household income, or if the household does not respond to
verification outreach (in which case eligibility would be lost, though that decision can be
appealed).
Reimbursement
School food authorities must keep track of the daily number of meals they serve in each category
(free, reduced-price, and paid) that meet federal nutrition requirements. School food authorities
then submit claims for reimbursement to the state agency, which submits the claims to FNS.
Approved reimbursements are distributed to school food authorities by the state agency, usually
on a monthly basis. Per statute, reimbursement rates are adjusted for inflation annually.87 Table 4
shows NSLP and SBP reimbursement rates for school year 2023-2024. (Note that school food
authorities also receive a per-lunch commodity reimbursement, discussed previously under
“Commodity Assistance”.)

84 USDA-FNS, Office of Policy Support, Evaluation of Demonstrations of National School Lunch Program and School
Breakfast Program Direct Certification of Children Receiving Medicaid Benefits: Year 1 Report, prepared by
Mathematica Policy Research, January 2015, https://www.fns.usda.gov/evaluation-demonstrations-national-school-
lunch-program-and-school-breakfast-program-direct; USDA-FNS, Final Report: Direct Certification with Medicaid for
Free and Reduced-Price Meals (DCMF/RP) Demonstration, Year 1, prepared by Mathematica Policy Research, August
2019, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/evaluation-direct-certification-medicaid-free-and-reduced-price-meals; USDA-
FNS, Direct Certification with Medicaid for Free and Reduced-Price Meals (DCM-F/RP) Demonstration, Year 2,
prepared by Mathematica Policy Research, September 2020, https://www.fns.usda.gov/nslp/evaluation-direct-
certification-medicaid-free-and-reduced-price-meals-dcm-frp; and USDA-FNS, Office of Policy Support, Direct
Certification with Medicaid for Free and Reduced-Price Meals (DCM-F/RP) Demonstration, School Year 2019-2020
Report, prepared by Mathematica Policy Research, March 2022, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/usda-dcm-frp-
demonstration.
85 Ibid.
86 In general, local educational agencies must review the smallest of 3,000 of all applications or 3% of error-prone
applications. If the local educational agency has a nonresponse rate below 20% or has more than 20,000 children
approved by application for free/reduced-price meals and a recently improved response rate, they may use alternative
sampling approaches. See Section 9(b)(3)(D) of the NSLA or program regulations at 7 C.F.R. Section 245.6a.
87 See Section 4 and Section 11 of the NSLA for the lunch reimbursement rates and Section 4 of the Child Nutrition
Act of 1966 for breakfast reimbursement rates.
Congressional Research Service

20

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

The law provides a higher reimbursement rate for meals meeting certain criteria. For example,
school food authorities that are compliant with the updated federal nutrition standards for school
meals receive an additional 8 cents per lunch.88 School food authorities also receive an additional
2 cents per lunch if they serve 60% or more of their lunches at a free or reduced price. For
breakfasts, school food authorities receive higher reimbursements if they serve 40% or more
lunches at a free or reduced price (referred to as severe need schools).
Once school food authorities receive the cash reimbursements, they can use the funds to support
almost any aspect of the school food service operation. However, federal cash reimbursements
must go into a nonprofit school food service account that is subject to federal regulations.89
Payments for non-program foods (e.g., vending machine sales) must also accrue to the nonprofit
school food service account.90
FNS periodically studies the costs of producing a reimbursable meal. In April 2019, FNS released
a School Nutrition and Meal Cost Study, which found that the average reported cost of producing
a reimbursable lunch was $3.81 in school year 2014-2015 (reported costs were defined as those
charged to the school food service account).91 This exceeded the average federal cash
reimbursement ($3.32) for lunches in school year 2014-2015. When unreported costs were
included (costs outside of the food service account; for example, labor costs associated with
processing applications), the cost of producing the average reimbursable lunch was $6.02. As
noted previously, children’s payments and state and local funds may also cover meal costs.
Table 4. Reimbursement Rates: NSLP and SBP
Per-Meal Reimbursements for the 48 Contiguous States and the District of Columbia,
School Year 2023-2024
Lunch Rate
Bonus for School Food
Bonus for SFAs Certified as
Authorities (SFAs) That Served
Compliant with Nutrition
Maximum

Base Rate
60%+ Lunches at F/RP
Standards
Rate
Free
$4.25
+$0.02
+$0.08
$4.50
Reduced-price
$3.85
+$0.02
+$0.08
$4.10
Paid
$0.40
+$0.02
+$0.08
$0.56
Breakfast Rate
SFAs That Served Less Than 40%
SFAs That Served 40%+

of Lunches at F/RP
Lunches at F/RP
Free
$2.28
$2.73
Reduced-price
$1.98
$2.43
Paid
$0.38
$0.38

88 The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 (P.L. 111-296) provided an additional 6 cents per-lunch reimbursement
(adjusted annually for inflation) to schools meeting the updated nutritional guidelines requirements. USDA-FNS,
“National School Lunch, Special Milk, and School Breakfast Programs, National Average Payments/Maximum
Reimbursement Rates,” July 7, 2023, 88 Federal Register 43266 (separately lists rates for Alaska, Guam, Hawaii,
Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands).
89 7 C.F.R. §210.14.
90 Section 12(p) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1760(q)).
91 USDA-FNS, School Nutrition and Meal Cost Study, Final Report Volume 3: School Meal Costs and Revenues,
Office of Policy Support, April 2019, https://www.fns.usda.gov/school-nutrition-and-meal-cost-study.
Congressional Research Service

21

link to page 29 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Sources: USDA-FNS, “National School Lunch, Special Milk, and School Breakfast Programs, National Average
Payments/Maximum Reimbursement Rates,” July 7, 2023, 88 Federal Register 43266 (separately lists rates for
Alaska, Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands). For historical rates, see
https://www.fns.usda.gov/school-meals/rates-reimbursement.
Notes: F/RP = free or reduced-price. The percentage of lunches/breakfasts served at F/RP is based on the
percentage of meals served two school years prior. The federal per-meal reimbursement rates are averages.
States can apportion funds among school food authorities above or below the average rates; however, in NSLP
they can only do so up to the maximum rate. States may also supplement federal reimbursements with state
funding.
Special Options
Community Eligibility Provision (CEP)
The HHFKA authorized the Community Eligibility Provision (CEP), an option that allows
eligible schools, groups of schools, and school districts to offer free meals to all enrolled
students.92 To participate in CEP, the school(s) must have an identified student percentage (ISP)
of at least 25% (USDA lowered the eligibility threshold from 40% to 25% as of school year 2023-
2024).93 The ISP is the percentage of students in the school(s) who are certified for free meals
without a household application (i.e., who are directly certified for free meals through SNAP or
another program/category).94 In addition, the school(s) must operate both NSLP and SBP in order
to participate in CEP, and they must opt-in to CEP.
Based on the statutory parameters, FNS piloted CEP in various states over three school years, and
expanded the option nationwide in school year 2014-2015. Eligible schools, groups of schools,
and entire school districts may participate; if participation is as a group, the ISP is calculated on a
group basis. Local educational agencies have until June 30 of each year to notify USDA of the
schools in their jurisdiction that will participate in CEP.95 According to a database maintained by
the Food Research and Action Center, approximately 40,235 schools participated in CEP in
school year 2022-2023, up from 30,620 schools in school year 2019-2020.96 Figure 6 displays the
estimated proportion of CEP schools out of all NSLP schools since school year 2014-2015 (the
first year of nationwide implementation).

92 For further detail on CEP, see CRS Report R46371, Serving Free School Meals through the Community Eligibility
Provision (CEP): Background and Participation.
93 USDA-FNS, “Child Nutrition Programs: Community Eligibility Provision-Increasing Options for Schools,” 88
Federal Register 65778, September 26, 2023.
94 A school’s number of identified students is essentially the same as its number of directly certified students, except
that the number of identified students does not include students who are directly certified for reduced-price meals
through the Medicaid demonstration. For the definition of “identified students” in regulations, see 7 C.F.R.
§245.9(f)(1)(ii).
95 7 CFR §245.9(f)(4); USDA-FNS, “National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program: Eliminating
Applications through Community Eligibility as Required by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010,” 81 Federal
Register 50194, July 29, 2016.
96 Food Research and Action Center (FRAC), “Community Eligibility: The Key to Hunger-Free Schools, School Year
2022–2023,” May 2023, https://frac.org/cep-report-2023.
Congressional Research Service

22

link to page 10 link to page 10 link to page 30

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Figure 6. CEP Schools as a Proportion of NSLP Schools, SY2014-2015 to
SY2022-2023

Sources: CRS estimates applying the number of CEP schools from FRAC, “Community Eligibility: The Key to
Hunger-Free Schools, School Year 2022–2023,” May 2023, https://frac.org/cep-report-2023 to the number of
NSLP schools from USDA-FNS Keydata Reports (USDA-FNS, “June 2023 Keydata Report,” September 8, 2023,
https://www.fns.usda.gov/data/June-2023-keydata-report; USDA-FNS, “September 2022 Keydata Report,”
December 9, 2022, https://www.fns.usda.gov/data/september-2022-keydata-report; and USDA-FNS, “September
2021 Keydata Report,” December 10, 2021, https://www.fns.usda.gov/data/september-2021-keydata-report).
Notes: In school years 2020-2021 and 2021-2022, the vast majority of schools operated under pandemic
policies that enabled them to receive reimbursement for free meals served to all students. Therefore, CEP
participation in these years is not relevant. In addition, NSLP participation is lower in school year 2020-2021 than
a typical year because many school food authorities chose to operate the summer meals programs instead of
NSLP as a result of pandemic response policies (discussed in the “Child Nutrition Program Operations During
the COVID-19 Pandemic” section).
Though CEP schools serve free meals to all students, they are not reimbursed at the free rate for
every meal served. Instead, the law provides a funding formula: the ISP is multiplied by a factor
of 1.6 to estimate the proportion of students who would be eligible for free or reduced-price
meals had they been certified via application.97 The result is the percentage of meals served that
will be reimbursed at the free-meal rate, with the remainder reimbursed at the much lower paid-
meal rate. For example, if a CEP school has an ISP of 40%, then 64% of its meals served would
be reimbursed at the free-meal rate and 36% would be reimbursed at the paid-meal rate. Schools
that identify 62.5% or more students as eligible for free meals receive the free-meal
reimbursement for all meals served (62.5% multiplied by 1.6 equals 100%). Figure 7 provides a
visual representation of the CEP reimbursement formula for participating schools, groups of
schools, and school districts.

97 Statute allows USDA to set the reimbursement multiplier between 1.3 and 1.6; USDA has set the multiplier at 1.6.
USDA-FNS, “National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program: Eliminating Applications Through
Community Eligibility as Required by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010,” 81 Federal Register 50194, July
29, 2016, p. 50201.
Congressional Research Service

23

link to page 27

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

CEP participating schools must recalculate their ISP at least once every four years, but they can
choose to do so more frequently if desired.98 While eligibility determinations occur every four
years, schools can drop out of CEP at any time.99
CEP is intended to reduce paperwork for families and schools and enable schools to provide more
free meals. However, the option may or may not be financially beneficial for schools depending
on their proportion of identified students.
Figure 7. Community Eligibility Provision (CEP) Reimbursement Formula

Source: Graphic created by CRS based on current law.
Notes: The Identified Student Percentage (ISP) is the percentage of enrol ed children who are certified for free
meals without a household application. The ISP is multiplied by 1.6 to calculate the proportion of meals
reimbursed at the free rate; the remainder of meals are reimbursed at the lower paid rate. For free and paid
reimbursement rates in school year 2023-2024, see Table 4.
Provisions 1, 2, and 3
Schools, groups of schools, and school districts can also use Provisions 1, 2, and 3 to establish
alternative certification and reimbursement procedures. These options are intended to reduce
paperwork for school administrators and families.100 The options predate CEP, and unlike CEP,
they still require some household applications. A school’s decision to participate in a special
option may depend on financial considerations. There were approximately 1,500 schools
operating Provisions 1, 2, or 3 in FY2022.101
Provision 1 allows schools with high proportions (80% or more) of students eligible for free and
reduced-price meals to make free meal eligibility determinations that remain in effect for two

98 7 C.F.R. §245.9(f).
99 7 C.F.R. §245.9(j).
100 USDA-FNS, “Provisions 1, 2, and 3,” May 6, 2014, https://www.fns.usda.gov/school-meals/provisions-1-2-and-3.
101 CRS calculations using preliminary USDA-FNS 742 data for FY2022.
Congressional Research Service

24

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

school years. This reduces the number of applications they have to process (though they still have
to process reduced-price meal applications annually).102
Provision 2 and Provision 3 are open to all schools. Similar to CEP, schools, groups of schools,
or school districts must agree to provide free meals (lunches or lunches/breakfasts) to all students
in order to participate in Provision 2 or Provision 3. Under Provision 2, schools are reimbursed
over a four-year period using the proportion of meals served at a free/reduced-price/paid rate
during the first year. Eligibility determinations in the first year are based on direct certification
and household applications (a difference from CEP). Under Provision 3, schools are similarly
required to make eligibility determinations in the first year of a four-year period. However, in this
case, schools receive the same level of federal assistance over the next three years, which is
adjusted for enrollment and inflation (there are no separate payments for free/reduced-price/paid
meals).103
Nutrition Standards and Food Service
Nutrition Standards for School Meals
Nutritional requirements for school meals have changed throughout the history of the school
meals programs.104 The most recent child nutrition reauthorization, the HHFKA in 2010, required
USDA to update the nutrition standards for school meals within 18 months of the law’s enactment
based on recommendations from the Food and Nutrition Board at the National Academies of
Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.105 The law also provided a “performance-based” bonus
reimbursement of 6 cents per lunch (adjusted annually for inflation) for schools certified as
compliant with the updated standards (the rate is 8 cents in school year 2023-2024).
USDA published the updated nutrition standards for school meals in 2012.106 They were based on
the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans (per an existing statutory requirement) as well as the
recommendations from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine.107 The
standards required increased servings of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and meats/meat
alternates in lunches and breakfasts. They also restricted milk to unflavored low-fat (1%) and
flavored and unflavored fat-free varieties, set limits on calories and sodium in school meals, and
prohibited trans fats in school meals, among other changes. Separate from the final rule, USDA

102 Section 11(a)(1) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1759a(a)(1)); 7 C.F.R. §245.9; USDA-FNS, “Provisions 1, 2,
and 3,” May 6, 2014, https://www.fns.usda.gov/school-meals/provisions-1-2-and-3.
103 Ibid.
104 The current nutrition standards for school meals are located at 7 C.F.R. §210.10 (lunches) and 7 C.F.R. §220.8
(breakfasts).
105 Section 201 of P.L. 111-296. Institute of Medicine, National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine,
School Meals: Building Blocks for Healthy Children, Washington, DC, 2010.
106 USDA-FNS, “Nutrition Standards in the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs,” 77 Federal
Register 17, January 26, 2012, https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2012/01/26/2012-1010/nutrition-standards-
in-the-national-school-lunch-and-school-breakfast-programs. For related resources, see USDA-FNS website at
http://www.fns.usda.gov/school-meals/nutrition-standards-school-meals.
107 The 1994 child nutrition reauthorization (P.L. 103-448) required schools to serve meals consistent with the Dietary
Guidelines for Americans. The Dietary Guidelines for Americans are food-based recommendations developed jointly
by USDA and the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services and updated every five years. For more information,
see CRS Report R44360, Dietary Guidelines for Americans: Frequently Asked Questions.
Congressional Research Service

25

link to page 32 link to page 33 link to page 33 link to page 33 link to page 33 link to page 33 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

also implemented a requirement in the HHFKA that schools make water available to children
during meal service in the cafeteria.108
The revised nutrition standards largely took effect in school year 2012-2013 for lunches and in
school year 2013-2014 for breakfasts. A few requirements phased in over multiple school
years.109 Some schools experienced difficulty implementing the new standards.110 Subsequent
changes to the whole grain, sodium, and milk requirements were made through appropriations
acts and USDA rulemaking.111 Most recently (as of the cover date of this report), in February
2023, USDA released a proposed rule that would make changes to milk, sodium, and whole grain
standards and institute a new limit on added sugars in school meals, among other policies.112
States and school districts are allowed to implement additional nutritional requirements for school
meals, as long as they meet the federal standards.
Table 5 provides an overview of the federal nutrition standards for school lunches.
Table 5. Summary of the Nutrition Standards for School Lunches
Grades K-5 Grades 6-8 Grades 9-12

Required offerings per week (minimum per day)a
Fruits (cups)
2.5 (0.5)
2.5 (0.5)
5 (1)
Vegetables (cups) (subgroup requirements not shown)b
3.75 (0.75)
3.75 (0.75)
5 (1)
Grains (ounce equivalents)c
8-9 (1)
8-10 (1)
10-12 (2)
Meats/meat alternates (ounce equivalents)
8-10 (1)
9-10 (1)
10-12 (2)
Fluid milk (cups)d
5 (1)
5 (1)
5 (1)
Daily amount based on average weekly requirement
Minimum-maximum calories (kcal)e
550-650
600-700
750-850

108 USDA-FNS, “Revised Child Nutrition Reauthorization 2010: Water Availability During National School Lunch
Program Meal Service,” SP-28-2011, July 12, 2011. Also see USDA-FNS, “Clarification on the Milk and Water
Requirements in the School Meal Programs,” SP 39-2019, September 23, 2019.
109 For the original implementation schedule based on the January 2012 final rule, see USDA-FNS Implementation
Timeline, http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/implementation_timeline.pdf.
110 For further background, see CRS Report R45486, Child Nutrition Programs: Issues in the 115th Congress.
111 Appropriations acts in FY2015, FY2016, FY2017, and FY2021 made changes to milk, whole grain, and/or sodium
requirements. In December 2018, USDA under the Trump Administration issued a final rule making changes to such
requirements in school year 2019-2020 forward (these policies are discussed in CRS Insight IN11009, USDA’s Final
Rule on Milk, Whole Grains, and Sodium in School Meals and CRS Report R45486, Child Nutrition Programs: Issues
in the 115th Congress). The December 2018 rule was subsequently vacated by a U.S. District Court (see USDA-FNS,
“Child Nutrition Programs: Rescission of Milk, Whole Grains, and Sodium Flexibilities: Notice of Vacatur” 85 Federal
Register 74847, November 24, 2020), reverting the programs to the milk, sodium, and whole grain policies established
in the 2012 final rule. In February 2022, USDA under the Biden Administration issued a final rule making changes to
the milk, whole grain, and sodium requirements starting in school year 2022-2023 and stating its intentions to issue
further rulemaking for subsequent school years (see USDA-FNS, “Child Nutrition Programs: Transitional Standards for
Milk, Whole Grains, and Sodium,” 87 Federal Register 6984, February 7, 2022).
112 For more information, see CRS Report R47522, USDA’s February 2023 Proposed Rule to Update Nutrition
Standards for School Meals.
Congressional Research Service

26

link to page 33 link to page 33 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Grades K-5 Grades 6-8 Grades 9-12

Saturated fat (percentage of total calories)
<10%
<10%
<10%
Sodium Interim Target 1 (mg)f
≤1,230
≤1,360
≤1,420
Sodium Interim Target IA (mg)f
≤1,110
≤1,225
≤1,280
Trans fat
Nutrition label or manufacturer specifications
must indicate zero grams of trans fat (less than
0.5 grams) per serving.
Source: Table adapted from 7 C.F.R. §210.10(c) as of October 2023.
a. School food authorities must allow high school students and can optionally allow students at the middle and
elementary school levels to decline up to two components at lunch, except that the students must select at
least a 0.5 cup of the fruit or vegetable component.
b. Requirements related to vegetable subgroups (dark green, red/orange, legumes, starchy, other) are not
shown. Up to half of the fruit or vegetable offerings may be in the form of 100% juice.
c. At least 80% of grains offered weekly must be whole grain-rich (defined as containing at least 50% whole-
grains, and the remaining grain, if any, must be enriched).
d. All fluid milk must be low-fat (1% fat or less) or fat-free. Milk may be flavored or unflavored, provided that
unflavored milk is offered. With milk and with other foods, schools must make substitutions for students
who are considered to have a disability and whose disability restricts their diet, and may make substitutions
for medical or special dietary needs.
e. Discretionary sources of calories (solid fats and added sugars) may be added to the meal pattern if within
the specifications for calories, saturated fat, trans fat, and sodium.
f.
Sodium Interim Target 1 must be met in SY2022-2023. Sodium Interim Target 1A must be met in SY2023-
2024.
Nutrition Standards for Competitive Foods
The HHFKA also required USDA to develop nutrition standards for other foods sold in NSLP-
and SBP-participating schools on campus during the school day. These foods are known as
competitive foods (i.e., foods sold in competition with school meals). Competitive foods include
foods and drinks sold in vending machines, a la carte lines, snack bars and concession stands, and
school fundraisers. These foods do not receive a federal reimbursement. The HHFKA required
USDA to publish proposed nutrition standards for competitive foods within one year of the law’s
enactment and align the standards with the most recent Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
Relying on recommendations made by the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and
Medicine, FNS promulgated a proposed rule in April 2013 and then an interim final rule in June
2013, which went into effect in school year 2014-2015.113 The interim final rule created nutrition
standards for all non-meal foods and beverages that are sold during the school day (defined as
midnight until 30 minutes after dismissal). The final rule, published in July 2016, maintained the

113 Institute of Medicine, National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine, Nutrition Standards for Foods
in Schools: Leading the Way toward Healthier Youth, 2007, https://www.nap.edu/catalog/11899/nutrition-standards-
for-foods-in-schools-leading-the-way-toward; USDA-FNS, “Interim Rule: NSLP and SBP Nutrition Standards for All
Foods Sold in Schools as Required by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010,” 78 Federal Register 79567,
December 31, 2013, https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2013/12/31/2013-31350/national-school-lunch-
program-and-school-breakfast-program-nutrition-standards-for-all-foods-sold-in.
Congressional Research Service

27

link to page 51 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

interim final rules with minor changes.114 Under the final standards, competitive foods must have
certain primary ingredients, meet whole-grain requirements, and comply with calorie, sugar,
sodium, and fat limits, among other criteria. Schools are also limited to a list of zero- and low-
calorie beverages they may sell (with larger portion sizes and caffeine allowed in high schools).115
Fundraisers held outside of the school day and fundraisers in which the food sold is clearly not
intended for consumption on campus during the school day are not subject to the competitive
food nutrition standards. In addition, the law and the final rule provided states with discretion to
exempt infrequent fundraisers selling foods or beverages that do not meet the nutrition standards.
The federal standards are minimum standards, and states and school districts are permitted to
issue more stringent policies. Many districts already had local competitive food standards in place
prior to the HHFKA because of the 2004 child nutrition reauthorization law (P.L. 108-265), which
required local educational agencies to implement local school wellness policies that included
nutritional guidelines for foods sold in schools (local school wellness policies are discussed in the
“Other Child Nutrition Activities” section).
Local School Wellness Policies
Local educational agencies participating in the school meals programs are required to have a local
school wellness policy, which sets nutrition and health-related goals and guidelines for schools
within the jurisdiction.116 Local school wellness policies must include goals related to nutrition
and physical activity, nutrition standards for school foods that meet or exceed federal nutrition
standards, and an implementation plan, among other content. Local educational agencies must
provide opportunities for input from parents, students, school nutrition professionals, physical
education teachers, school health professionals, school administrators, and the general public in
developing and updating local school wellness policies.
Food Procurement and Preparation
The majority of foods used in the school meal programs are purchased by school food authorities
using federal cash reimbursements or other funds. School food authorities also receive USDA
Foods (as discussed previously). School food authorities must comply with federal procurement
rules when purchasing foods for the school meals programs.117 In addition, there is a “Buy
American” requirement in statute that requires schools participating in the school meal programs
to purchase domestic commodities and products “to the maximum extent practicable.”118

114 USDA-FNS, “National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program: Nutrition Standards for All Foods
Sold in School as Required by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010; Final Rule,” 81 Federal Register 50131,
July 29, 2016, https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2016/07/29/2016-17227/national-school-lunch-program-
and-school-breakfast-program-nutrition-standards-for-all-foods-sold-in. Related resources are available at the USDA-
FNS website, https://www.fns.usda.gov/school-meals/tools-schools-focusing-smart-snacks.
115 7 C.F.R. §210.11.
116 The 2004 child nutrition reauthorization created the requirement that local educational agencies establish school
wellness policies, and the HHFKA expanded requirements around local school wellness policies. Section 9A of the
Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. §1758b); 7 C.F.R. §210.31.
117 7 C.F.R. §210.21.
118 Section 12(n) of the NSLA (42 U.S.C. §1760(n)). USDA has issued guidance on the implementation of this
provision; see USDA-FNS, “Compliance with and Enforcement of the Buy American Provision in the National School
Lunch Program,” SP 38-2017, June 2017, https://www.fns.usda.gov/school-meals/compliance-enforcement-buy-
american. For further discussion, see CRS Report R45486, Child Nutrition Programs: Issues in the 115th Congress.
Congressional Research Service

28

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Purchases may include local foods, as long as they comply with federal, state, and local
procurement regulations.119
Many school food authorities purchase and prepare their own meals, either at a centralized district
kitchen or onsite at individual schools.120 Alternatively, school food authorities may contract with
a private food service management company to contract out procurement and/or meal
preparation.121 The contracted company must comply with all school meal regulations and the
school food authority must retain general control over the operation of the school meals
programs, including financial oversight and compliance with nutrition standards.122
Meal Times and Settings
In general, lunches and breakfasts are intended to be consumed onsite during the school day.123
Surveys have found that schools typically provide roughly 20 minutes for breakfast and 25-30
minutes for lunch.124
Under SBP, students were traditionally required to arrive early for breakfast and eat it in the
cafeteria. However, in recent years, schools and states have increasingly adopted alternative
models of breakfast service such as breakfast in the classroom, grab-and-go carts, and breakfast
during morning breaks. Anti-hunger advocacy groups have encouraged the adoption of new
models of breakfast service as a way to increase SBP participation.125 According to a 2018 survey
by the School Nutrition Association (SNA), a membership and advocacy organization, more than
half of surveyed school districts offered both a traditional cafeteria line and alternative modes of
breakfast service, while 43% of schools offered a cafeteria line only. Common alternatives were

119 For more information, see CRS Report R43950, Local Food Systems: Selected Farm Bill and Other Federal
Programs.
120 A nationally representative study by USDA in school year 2014-2015 found that nearly 80% of public schools
participating in NSLP cooked meals onsite, with the remainder receiving partially or fully prepared meals from a
central kitchen or other production facility (USDA-FNS, Office of Policy Support, School Nutrition and Meal Cost
Study, Final Report Volume 1: School Meal Program Operations and School Nutrition Environments, Prepared by
Mathematica Policy Research and Abt Associates, April 2019, p. A.45, https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/
files/resource-files/SNMCS-Volume1.pdf).
121 The USDA study in school year 2014-2015 (ibid, p. A.59) found that 19.7% of public school food authorities used a
food service management company. They were most commonly tasked with menu planning, preparing and serving
meals, and overseeing private employees. A more recent, nationally representative survey conducted by USDA in
school year 2016-2017 found that 26.2% of public school food authorities used a food service management company
(USDA-FNS, Study of School Food Authority Procurement Practices, prepared by 2M Research, September 22, 2021,
p. 44, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/study-school-food-authority-procurement-practices).
122 USDA-FNS, “Contracting with Food Service Management Companies: Guidance for School Food Authorities,”
SP40, CACFP12, SFSP14-2016, May 2016, https://www.fns.usda.gov/updated-guidance-contracting-food-service-
management.
123 USDA-FNS, “Clarification of the Policy on Food Consumption Outside of Foodservice Area, and the Whole Grain-
Rich Requirement,” April 2014, https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/cn/SP41-2014os.pdf.
124 USDA-FNS Office of Policy Support, Special Nutrition Program Operations Study: State and School Food
Authority Policies and Practices for School Meals Programs School Year 2011-12, March 2014, https://fns-
prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/SNOPSYear1.pdf; and School Nutrition Association, School Nutrition Operations
Report: The State of School Nutrition 2018, August 2018.
125 For example, see Food Research and Action Center (FRAC), “School Breakfast Expansion Strategies,”
http://www.frac.org/programs/school-breakfast-program/school-breakfast-expansion-strategies; and Share Our
Strength, “2017-2018 State-level Policy and Legislative Trends,” http://bestpractices.nokidhungry.org/policy-and-
advocacy/school-breakfast.
Congressional Research Service

29

link to page 37 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

grab-and-go stations (particularly in middle and high schools) and breakfast in the classroom
(particularly in elementary schools).126
School Meal Equipment Assistance Grants
At different points in the school meals programs’ history, specific funds have been provided for
cafeteria equipment purchases (per-meal reimbursements may also cover equipment costs). Since
FY2013, annual appropriations acts have provided funding for school meal equipment assistance
grants to help schools prepare meals that comply with updated nutrition standards, improve food
safety, and support the establishment, maintenance, or expansion of school breakfast programs
($30 million was provided for FY2023).127 These grants are awarded by FNS to state agencies,
which distribute funds to school food authorities on a competitive basis.128
School Breakfast Expansion Grants
The HHFKA authorized competitive grants to states to help school districts “establish, maintain,
or expand the school breakfast program.”129 The law provides priority for school districts carrying
out projects in schools where at least 75% of students qualify for free or reduced-price meals and
those that have adopted or commit to adopting effective strategies to increase breakfast
participation, as identified by FNS. Appropriations acts in FY2020, FY2021, FY2022, and
FY2023 provided $5 million, $6 million, $6 million, and $3 million for these grants,
respectively.130 USDA awarded funds to four states and one territory in FY2021, and one territory
in FY2022.131
Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP)
CACFP provides federal reimbursements for meals and snacks served in approximately 140,000
child care centers, day care homes, and adult day care centers nationwide in a typical year (see
Table 6 for participation by type of institution).132 Reimbursements are provided for meals and
snacks served to children ages 12 and under, children of any age with disabilities, and chronically
disabled and elderly adults.133 CACFP also supports free meals and snacks for children ages 18

126 School Nutrition Association, School Nutrition Operations Report: The State of School Nutrition 2018, August
2018.
127 The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act (P.L. 111-5) provided $100 million for school meals equipment
assistance grants, which was spent in FY2009-FY2011. Appropriations acts in FY2010 and from FY2013 to FY2023
have provided subsequent funding for these grants.
128 For example, see USDA-FNS, “FY 2023 National School Lunch Program Equipment Assistance Grants for School
Food Authorities,” August 3, 2023, https://www.fns.usda.gov/nslp/fy-2023-equipment-assistance-grants.
129 Section 23 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. §1793).
130 P.L. 116-94, P.L. 116-260, P.L. 117-103, and P.L. 117-328. The FY2020 and FY2023 laws included a $1 million
reservation and the FY2021 and FY2022 laws included a $2 million reservation of funds for Puerto Rico, the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.
131 USDA-FNS, “2023 USDA Explanatory Notes–Food and Nutrition Service,” p. 35-35, https://www.usda.gov/sites/
default/files/documents/35-2023-FNS.pdf; USDA-FNS, “2024 USDA Explanatory Notes–Food and Nutrition Service,”
p. 35-39, https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/35-2024-FNS.pdf.
132 FY2022 data from USDA-FNS, “June 2023 Keydata Report,” September 8, 2023.
133 Reimbursements are also available for meals/snacks served to migrant children ages 15 or under and children with
disabilities of any age. Elderly is defined as individuals age 60 or older. 7 C.F.R. §226.2.
Congressional Research Service

30

link to page 48 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

and under in emergency shelters and afterschool programs in low-income areas (discussed in the
“After-School Meals and Snacks” section).134
In general, CACFP provides cash reimbursements for up to two meals and one snack or one meal
and two snacks per participant daily (a meal may be a breakfast, lunch, or supper).135 A smaller
share of federal aid takes the form of commodity assistance or cash in lieu of commodities and
funds for administrative costs (discussed previously).136 The eligibility and funding rules of
CACFP differ for centers (facilities or institutions) and day care homes (private homes). Day care
homes must be overseen by sponsoring organizations, which handle the financial and
administrative functions of the program for local providers. Centers have the option of operating
independently or under a sponsor.
Both centers and day care homes must comply with government-established standards for other
child care programs and meet federal CACFP nutrition standards.137
Table 6. CACFP Participation: Centers and Day Care Homes, FY2022
Average Number of
Participants Per
Outlets
Participants
Institution

Day care homes
74,100
571,300
8
Child care centers
64,600
4,102,300
64
Adult day care centers
2,300
114,000
50
Source: USDA-FNS, “June 2023 Keydata Report,” September 8, 2023.
Notes: Participation estimated by USDA-FNS based on average daily meals served; average number of
participants per institutions estimated by CRS. Total number of outlets and participants are rounded to the
nearest hundreds. Data are preliminary for FY2022.
Administration
At the local level, sponsor organizations administer CACFP for all participating day care homes
and centers that elect to have a sponsor. Sponsors are responsible for conducting audits of
providers, distributing federal reimbursements, and in some instances, preparing and distributing

134 For more information on CACFP for emergency shelters, see https://www.fns.usda.gov/participation-emergency-
shelters-child-and-adult-care-food-program-cacfp—questions-and-answers.
135 Section 17(f)(2)(B) of the NSLA (42 U.S.C. §1766(f)(2)(B)). Emergency shelters can receive reimbursement for up
to three meals per day per child.
136 In CACFP, states may request any amount of cash-in-lieu of commodities per Section 17(h)(1)(D) of the NSLA
(codified at 42 U.S.C. §1766(h)(1)(D)).
137 Section 17(a)(5) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1766(a)(5)); 7 C.F.R. §226.6(d). All CACFP-participating
child care centers and homes must be licensed child care providers. If federal, state, or local licensing is not available,
the institution must comply with federal, state, or local child care standards. Emergency shelters are not subject to this
requirement but they must meet state or local health and safety standards.
Congressional Research Service

31

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

meals.138 They can be public or nonprofit institutions or, in some cases, for-profit institutions.139
Centers that choose to handle their own administrative responsibilities are referred to as
independent centers.
Unlike centers, day care homes are required to have a sponsor organization. Sponsors receive
monthly federal administrative payments based on the number of homes for which they are
responsible (sponsors, on average, have more than 100 day care homes under their
supervision).140 They may also receive a portion of the per-meal reimbursement if they have an
agreement with the day care home to prepare meals.141 If a center opts to have a sponsor, the
sponsor may retain a portion of the per-meal reimbursements for its administrative expenses.142
In CACFP, the state administering agency is typically the state department of education or
department of health and/or human services.143 The state agency distributes federal funds and
conducts reviews of CACFP sponsor organizations and independent centers.144
Similar to the school meals programs, FNS provides oversight of state agencies and issues
guidance and regulations to states and providers.
Eligibility and Reimbursement
CACFP Centers
The following institutions are eligible to participate as centers in CACFP:
• public or private nonprofit (tax exempt) organizations providing nonresidential
child care or adult day care (including school food authorities and Head Start
centers),145
• private for-profit organizations providing nonresidential child care or adult day
care that enroll a certain proportion of low-income participants,146 and

138 Per statute, sponsors must make at least one scheduled visit to sponsored day care homes and centers each year and
periodic unannounced site visits at not less than three-year intervals (Section 17(d)(2) of the NSLA [codified at 42
U.S.C. §1766(d)(2)]). Per regulations, sponsors must make at least three site visits each year, two of which must be
unannounced, with limited exceptions (7 C.F.R. §226.16(d)(4)(iii)). CACFP has a “serious deficiency” process that
outlines the procedures involved in terminating an institution or provider from CACFP, which involves corrective
action plans and hearings (Section 17(d)(5) of the NSLA [codified at 42 U.S.C. §1766(d)(5)]).
139 For-profit institutions may be sponsors of for-profit centers if they are part of the same legal entity. Section
17(a)(2)(D) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1766(a)(2)(D)).
140 The number of day care homes divided by the number of sponsors of day care homes. USDA-FNS, “June 2023
Keydata Report,” September 8, 2023.
141 See program regulations at 7 C.F.R. §226.13.
142 Sponsors of centers may retain up to 15% of the per-meal reimbursements for administrative expenses. They may
also request a state waiver to exceed this limit. See program regulations at 7 C.F.R. §226.7(g).
143 For a list of CACFP state administering agencies, see USDA-FNS, “CACFP: Contacts,” https://www.fns.usda.gov/
contacts.
144 State agencies must annually review at least one-third of sponsors/independent centers. Further rules are specified at
7 C.F.R. §226.6(m).
145 Section 17(a)(2) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1766(a)(2)). Private nonprofit institutions must have tax-
exempt status under the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 per program regulations (7 C.F.R. §226.15).
146 Section 17(a)(2) and Section 17(d)(1)(B) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1766(a)(2), (d)(1)(B)). Private for-
profit institutions qualify if at least 25% of enrolled children meet the income eligibility criteria for free or reduced-
price school meals, if the institution receives compensation under the Social Services Block Grant for at least 25% of
its enrolled children, or if at least 25% of enrolled adults are Medicaid or Social Services Block Grant beneficiaries.
Congressional Research Service

32

link to page 40 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

• emergency shelters for homeless families.147
Adult day care centers and outside school hour centers fall under the first two categories, but they
are subject to specific federal regulations.148
Income eligibility rules for CACFP centers are the same as the school meals programs:
participants in households at or below 130% of the poverty line qualify for free meals and snacks
and those between 130% and 185% of the poverty line qualify for reduced-price meals and
snacks (a charge of no more than 40 cents for a lunch or supper, 30 cents for a breakfast, and 15
cents for a snack).149 CACFP centers also use similar categorical eligibility criteria, including
participation in Head Start, foster child status, and household participation in SNAP, FDPIR, or
TANF assistance. Adults are categorically eligible if they participate in SNAP, FDPIR,
Supplemental Security Income (SSI), or Medicaid.150 Eligibility is determined through paper
applications or, in some states, direct certification-like processes.
For CACFP centers, the reimbursement rates for breakfasts and lunches/suppers are the same as
the SBP breakfast reimbursement rate and NSLP lunch reimbursement rate, respectively. The
largest subsidies are provided for free and reduced-price meals and snacks, while paid meals
receive a lower reimbursement.151 Unlike the school meals programs, CACFP allows centers
certain flexibilities for tracking meal counts and submitting claims for reimbursement.152
Compared to school meals, CACFP centers are also less likely to collect meal payments from
participants and more likely to incorporate meal costs into tuition. Centers are not required to
adjust tuition and fees to account for CACFP funding. Centers are also allowed to charge families
separately for meals and snacks, as long as there are no charges for children who qualify for free
meals and limited charges for those who qualify for reduced-price meals.153
CACFP Day Care Homes
Day care homes are private homes that provide nonresidential child care services. In general, any
day care home that meets local, state, or federal child care standards may participate in CACFP.
Unlike centers, day care homes generally do not make eligibility determinations and receive the
same reimbursement rate for every meal served. Day care homes located in a low-income area or
with a low-income provider receive a higher, Tier I reimbursement rate (shown in Table 7). To
receive the Tier I rate, the home must be located in an area in which at least 50% of children are
eligible for free or reduced-price meals or be operated by a provider whose household income

147 Section 17(a)(2) and Section 17(t) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1766(a)(2), (t)). Emergency shelters are
facilities that provide temporary housing as defined in the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C.
§11351).
148 7 C.F.R. §226.19; 7 C.F.R. §226.19a.
149 Section 17(c)(4) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1766(c)(4)); 7 C.F.R. §226.2.
150 See definition of “free meal” at 7 C.F.R. §226.2. Statute provides categorical eligibility for adults who are members
of a household receiving assistance under the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. §2011 et seq.) and recipients of
SSI or Medicaid. Section 17(o)(5) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1766(o)(5)). Also see a summary of CACFP
eligibility rules at the USDA-FNS website, http://www.fns.usda.gov/cacfp/why-cacfp-important.
151 Section 17(c) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1766(c)).
152 7 C.F.R. §226.9. Also see USDA-FNS, Independent Child Care Centers Handbook: A CACFP Handbook, May
2014, pp. 46-51, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cacfp/cacfp-handbooks.
153 7 C.F.R. §226.6(f)(1)(i). Also see USDA-FNS, Independent Child Care Centers Handbook: A CACFP Handbook,
May 2014, pp. 18-19, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cacfp/cacfp-handbooks.
Congressional Research Service

33

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

level meets the free or reduced-price income standards.154 Day care homes that do not qualify for
Tier I rates receive Tier II (lower) rates. However, Tier II providers may seek the higher Tier I
subsidies for individual low-income children for whom household income information is
collected and verified.
Like centers, CACFP-participating day care homes may incorporate meal costs into tuition.
Unlike centers, federal rules prohibit any separate meal charges.155
Table 7. Reimbursement Rates: CACFP Centers and Day Care Homes
Per-Meal/Snack Reimbursement for the 48 Contiguous States and the District of Columbia,
School Year 2023-2024

Breakfast
Lunch/Supper
Snack
Centers
Free
$2.28
$4.25
$1.17
Reduced-price
$1.98
$3.85
$0.58
Paid
$0.38
$0.40
$0.10
Day Care Homes
Tier I
$1.65
$3.12
$0.93
Tier II
$0.59
$1.88
$0.25
Sources: USDA FNS, “CACFP: National Average Payment Rates, Day Care Home Food Service Payment Rates,
and Administrative Reimbursement Rates for Sponsoring Organizations of Day Care Homes for the Period July
1, 2023 Through June 30, 2024,” 88 Federal Register 43264, July 7, 2023. Separate rates are provided for Alaska,
Guam, Hawaii, Puerto Rico, and the U.S. Virgin Islands. For historical program reimbursement rates, see
http://www.fns.usda.gov/cacfp/reimbursement-rates.
Note: Table does not show monthly administrative payments to sponsoring organizations of day care homes.
Nutrition Standards and Food Service
Nutrition Standards
In addition to nutrition standards for school foods, the HHFKA required the Secretary of
Agriculture to update CACFP’s meal patterns. USDA’s final rule, effective October 1, 2017,
revised the meal patterns for meals and snacks served in centers and day care homes.156 It also
aligned nutrition standards for meals served to preschool-aged children through NSLP and SBP.
For infants (under 12 months of age), the new meal patterns eliminated juice, encouraged
breastfeeding, and set guidelines for the introduction of solid foods, among other changes. For

154 Section 17(f)(3)(A)(ii)(I) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1766(f)(3)(A)(ii)(I)). Sponsoring organizations may
use school data (provided by the state agency) to demonstrate that at least 50% of children in the day care home’s area
are eligible for free/reduced-price meals, or use Census data (provided by FNS) to demonstrate that at least 50% of
children in the area are members of households that meet the income standards for free or reduced-price meals. See
USDA-FNS, Area Eligibility in Child Nutrition Programs, CACFP04-2017, December 1, 2016,
https://www.fns.usda.gov/area-eligibility-child-nutrition-programs.
155 7 C.F.R. §226.18(d).
156 USDA-FNS, “Child and Adult Care Food Program: Meal Pattern Revisions Related to the Healthy, Hunger-Free
Kids Act of 2010: Final Rule,” 81 Federal Register 24348 et seq., April 25, 2016, https://www.federalregister.gov/
documents/2016/04/25/2016-09412/child-and-adult-care-food-program-meal-pattern-revisions-related-to-the-healthy-
hunger-free-kids-act.
Congressional Research Service

34

link to page 7 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

children ages one and older and adult participants, the new meal patterns increased whole grains,
fruits, and vegetables, limited milk to certain varieties157, limited sugar in cereals and yogurts, and
prohibited deep-fried foods. They also required that potable water be available to children
throughout the day.
Procurement and Meal Service
CACFP institutions may purchase their own foods and prepare their own meals, or they may
contract with a school or a food service management company that prepares meals for them. In
either case, institutions must comply with federal, state, and local procurement regulations.158 As
noted previously, CACFP institutions also receive a certain amount of USDA Foods.
Meals must comply with state or local health, safety, and sanitation requirements for storing,
preparing, and serving food, and institutions must acquire annual food safety inspections. Family-
style meal service is encouraged in CACFP.159
Summer Food
The SFSP and the Seamless Summer Option (SSO) provide federal reimbursements for summer
meals.160 SFSP is open to school food authorities, local public agencies, and private nonprofit
organizations, while SSO is specifically for school food authorities, allowing them to continue
operating under certain NSLP/SBP requirements into the summer. The programs share many of
the same requirements, including a requirement that children consume meals onsite—known as
the “congregate feeding” requirement—except in rural areas (discussed further below).161
Summer food benefits for households with school-age children are also available through the
Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer for Children (Summer EBT) program, which was
permanently authorized by the FY2023 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 117-328).
During the COVID-19 pandemic, the summer meals programs were used during the school year
to facilitate free meal service (not discussed in this section).162

157 The original rule limited milk to unflavored whole milk for one-year-olds, unflavored low-fat (1%) or fat-free
(skim) milk for two- to five-year-olds, and flavored or unflavored fat-free milk or unflavored low fat milk for children
six years and older. For children ages six and older, flavored 1% milk is now allowed under USDA-FNS, “Child
Nutrition Programs: Transitional Standards for Milk, Whole Grains, and Sodium,” 87 Federal Register 6984, February
7, 2022.
158 7 C.F.R. §226.22; USDA-FNS, Independent Child Care Centers Handbook: A CACFP Handbook, May 2014, pp.
38-39, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cacfp/cacfp-handbooks.
159 Ibid, p. 37.
160 For an overview of summer meal benefits for children, see CRS In Focus IF11633, Summer Food for Children: An
Overview of Federal Aid.
161 7 C.F.R. §225.6(e)(15). USDA issued waivers of this requirement during the COVID-19 pandemic. USDA has also
provided exemptions from the congregate feeding requirement to SFSP and SSO outdoor meal sites experiencing
excessive heat.
162 Pandemic response policies are discussed briefly in the “Background” section of this report and in detail in CRS
Report R46681, USDA Nutrition Assistance Programs: Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Congressional Research Service

35

link to page 43 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Summer Food Service Program (SFSP)
The SFSP provides federal aid to school food authorities and other local public and nonprofit
organizations that serve meals and snacks to children during the summer months.163 Federal aid is
provided in the form of per-meal cash reimbursements and a smaller amount of commodity foods
and administrative funds (discussed previously). The program serves roughly 2.5 million children
at around 40,000 meal sites in a typical summer.164
Similar to CACFP, SFSP is administered at the local level by sponsor organizations that operate
the program at one or more meal sites (the physical location where food is served and eaten). All
SFSP meal sites are required to have a sponsor. Sponsors may operate meal sites at a variety of
locations, including schools, recreation centers, parks, churches, and public libraries.
Unlike the other child nutrition programs, SFSP participation is generally limited (with the
exception of camps) to meal sites that serve children from “areas in which poor economic
conditions exist”—defined as areas or sites in which at least 50% of children are eligible for free
and reduced-price school meals (discussed further below).165
Administration
The following public and private nonprofit institutions are eligible to participate in SFSP as
sponsors:
• nonprofit organizations,
• school food authorities,
• state and local governments (including tribal governments),
• public or nonprofit summer camps (overnight and day camps), and
• public or nonprofit colleges and universities participating in the National Youth
Sports Program.166
Figure 8 displays the proportion of summer meal sponsors by institution type.

163 Sponsors may operate SFSP from May through September for children on school vacation. Sponsors may also
receive SFSP reimbursements for meals during unanticipated school closures, and sponsors administering SFSP under
a continuous school calendar system may operate SFSP at any time (7 C.F.R. §225.6(e)).
164 USDA-FNS, “June 2023 Keydata Report,” September 8, 2023. Participation data prior to the COVID-19 pandemic
from USDA-FNS, “November Keydata Report (September 2019 data),” December 13, 2019, https://www.fns.usda.gov/
data/november-keydata-report-september-2019-data. According to a May 2018 GAO report, estimates of participation
in SFSP may be unreliable because they have been calculated inconsistently across states and years. See U.S.
Government Accountability Office, Actions Needed to Improve Participation Estimates and Address Program
Challenges, GAO-18-369, May 2018, https://www.gao.gov/products/GAO-18-369.
165 Section 13(a) of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. §1761(a)).
166 Section 13(a)(7) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1761(a)(7)). “Nonprofit” means tax exempt under Section
501(a) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (7 C.F.R. §225.2). While SFSP sponsors are limited to nonprofit or public
institutions, state agencies may approve open meal sites located at a for-profit institution. Federal funding for the
National Youth Sports Program expired in 2006 (U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Office of the
Assistant Secretary for Health, The National Youth Sports Strategy, October 2019, p. 31, https://health.gov/sites/
default/files/2019-10/National_Youth_Sports_Strategy.pdf).
Congressional Research Service

36

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Figure 8. Summer Meal Sponsors by Type, 2018
Estimated Percentage of Sponsors in SFSP and SSO by Organization Type

Source: USDA-FNS, USDA Summer Meals Study Volume 2. Sponsor and Site Operational Characteristics, prepared by
Westat, October 2021, pp. 3-4 to 3-7, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/usda-summer-meals-study.
Notes: Numbers may not sum to 100% due to rounding.
Eligible sponsors must also provide year-round services to the community, with limited
exceptions.167 In addition, all sponsors except camps must “conduct a regularly scheduled food
service for children from areas in which poor economic conditions exist” (discussed further in the
next section).168
According to statute, when selecting sponsors, states must give priority to school food authorities,
public and nonprofit organizations that have demonstrated successful program performance in a
prior year, new public sponsors, and new nonprofit sponsors (in that order). States must also
prioritize sponsors located in rural areas.169
Sponsors are responsible for selecting meal sites, distributing meals to sites, and monitoring
sites.170 Officials at meal sites are responsible for distributing meals to children, monitoring the
food service, and keeping track of meals served for reimbursement. At times, a sponsor may also
be a site (for example, camps are both sponsors and meal sites).
State administering agencies (often state departments of education) approve sponsors, distribute
federal funds, and conduct reviews of sponsors and sites.171 State agencies receive SFSP funds for

167 Residential camps are not subject to this requirement. Section 13(a)(3)(D) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C.
§1761(a)(3)(D)).
168 Section 13(a)(3)(C) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1761(a)(3)(C)).
169 Section 13(a)(4) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1761(a)(4)).
170 Most sponsors are responsible for overseeing 1-10 sites according to USDA-FNS, USDA Summer Meals Study
Volume 2. Sponsor and Site Operational Characteristics, prepared by Westat, October 2021, p. 3-1,
https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/usda-summer-meals-study. Sponsors must conduct at least one site visit during the first
week of program operation; review food service operations at least once during the first four weeks of program
operation; and then maintain “a reasonable level of site monitoring” (7 C.F.R. §225.15(d)).
171 State agencies must review sponsors at least once every three years, with more frequent reviews of certain sponsors.
Further details are available at 7 C.F.R. §225.7(d)(2)(ii).
Congressional Research Service

37

link to page 15 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

administrative costs in addition to general child nutrition program administrative funds (discussed
previously in the “Administrative Funds” section).
FNS distributes funds and commodities to state agencies, oversees states’ implementation of
SFSP, and provides guidance and technical assistance to states and participating institutions.
Eligibility and Reimbursement
SFSP’s eligibility and reimbursement rules differ for different types of areas and meal sites.
Rural areas: As a result of the FY2023 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 117-328),
sponsors may provide free meals for off-site consumption (i.e., pick-up or delivery) to children in
rural areas172 if (1) the area is also considered low-income (defined as at least 50% of children
qualifying for free or reduced-price school meals)173 or (2) the individual child qualifies for free
or reduced-price school meals.174 Sponsors may receive reimbursement for up to two meals, or
one meal and one snack, per child daily (however, sponsors may seek state approval to distribute
up to 10 days worth of meals at a time). This policy became effective in summer 2023.
Open sites are meal sites that are open to all children in the community.175 Open sites are the
most common type of site, comprising an estimated 83% of summer meal sites in summer
2018.176 In order to participate in SFSP, open sites must be located in an area in which at least
50% of the children would be eligible for free or reduced-price school meals as demonstrated
through school data, Census data, or other approved data sources.177 Meals must be served free to
all children at these sites, and the sponsor of the site receives reimbursement for every meal
served (up to two meals or one meal and one snack per child daily).
Closed enrolled sites are meal sites (other than camps) that only serve enrolled children. In order
for the site to participate in SFSP, at least 50% of the enrolled children must qualify for free or
reduced-price school meals based on the submission of a household application or other
documentation.178 Like open sites, meals are served free to all children and the sponsor receives
reimbursement for every meal served (up to two meals or one meal and one snack per child
daily).
Camps include residential and day camps that provide organized programs for enrolled children.
Unlike open and closed enrolled sites, camps do not have to demonstrate that a certain percentage
of children meet the free and reduced-price eligibility standards in order to participate in SFSP.

172 SFSP regulations define rural at 7 C.F.R. §225.2. USDA-FNS publishes a map of such rural areas at USDA-FNS,
“Rural Designations,” https://www.fns.usda.gov/sfsp/rural-designation.
173 USDA-FNS, “Area Eligibility in Child Nutrition Programs,” SP 08-2017, CACFP 04-2017, SFSP 03-2017,
December 1, 2016, https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/cn/SP08_CACFP04_SFSP03-2017os.pdf.
174 USDA-FNS, “Implementation Guidance: Summer 2023 Non-Congregate Meal Service in Rural Areas – Revised,”
February 28, 2023, https://www.fns.usda.gov/sfsp/implementation-guidance-summer-2023-non-congregate-meal-
service-rural-areas.
175 Open sites may become “restricted open sites” if they need to restrict attendance for reasons related to security,
safety, or control (7 C.F.R. §225.2). According to USDA guidance, sponsors of restricted open sites must publicly
announce the restriction. USDA-FNS, Administration Guide: Summer Food Service Program, September 2016, p. 12,
https://www.fns.usda.gov/sfsp/handbooks.
176 USDA-FNS, USDA Summer Meals Study Volume 2. Sponsor and Site Operational Characteristics, prepared by
Westat, October 2021, p. 3-7, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/usda-summer-meals-study.
177 Section 13(a)(1)(A) of the NSLA (42 U.S.C. §1761(a)(1)(A)). For more information on area eligibility, see USDA-
FNS, “Area Eligibility in Child Nutrition Programs,” SP 08-2017, CACFP 04-2017, SFSP 03-2017, December 1, 2016,
https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/cn/SP08_CACFP04_SFSP03-2017os.pdf.
178 7 C.F.R. §225.15(f).
Congressional Research Service

38

link to page 45 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Instead, eligibility works like NSLP and SBP: camps make eligibility determinations using
similar income and categorical eligibility criteria for free and reduced-price meals. However,
unlike the school meals programs, camps receive the same reimbursement rate for free and
reduced-price meals. Camps may receive reimbursement for up to three meals or two meals and
one snack per eligible child daily. Camps are not required to serve meals for free to all children,
and there is no paid reimbursement provided for full-price meals.
Migrant sites must demonstrate that they predominantly serve migrant children as certified by a
migrant organization or a sponsor. They follow the same eligibility and reimbursement rules as
open sites, except that they may receive reimbursement for up to three meals or two meals and
one snack per child daily.
SFSP reimbursement rates (inflation-adjusted rates displayed in Table 8) are based on a statutory
formula that takes into account operating costs (e.g., food, storage, and labor costs) and
administrative costs.179 While such factors are taken into account in calculating the rates, once
sponsors receive the funds they can use them for any allowable program cost. Higher
reimbursements are provided for sponsors of rural meal sites and “self-preparation” sites (meal
sites in which a sponsor rather than vendor prepares food).
Table 8. Reimbursement Rates: SFSP
Per-Meal/Snack Reimbursement Rates for the 48 Contiguous States and the District of Columbia,
Calendar Year 2023

Breakfast Lunch/Supper
Snack
Rural or Self-Prep
$2.83
$4.95
$1.17
All Other Sites
$2.77
$4.87
$1.14
Source: For program reimbursement rates as well as Alaska’s and Hawaii’s rates, see USDA-FNS, “Summer
Food Service Program: 2023 Reimbursement Rates,” 88 Federal Register 1039, January 6, 2023.
Notes: Rates are rounded to the nearest cent. “Rural” means “(a) any area in a county which is not a part of a
Metropolitan Statistical Area or (b) any ‘pocket’ within a Metropolitan Statistical Area” that is geographically
isolated from urban areas (7 C.F.R. 225.2). “Self-Prep” means that meals are prepared by the sponsor or site
(and not by a vendor).
Nutrition Standards
Meals and snacks served through SFSP must meet federal nutrition standards. In contrast to the
child nutrition programs discussed thus far, SFSP’s nutrition standards are not required to align
with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, but are “prescribed by the Secretary on the basis of
tested nutritional research.”180 Program regulations outline the nutrition standards for breakfasts,
lunches/suppers, and snacks.181 The standards prescribe minimum servings of fruits and
vegetables, meats/meat alternatives, breads/bread alternatives, and milk. Unlike school meals and
CACFP, there are no limits on calories, saturated and trans fats, and milk varieties in SFSP.
Participating school food authorities may instead choose to use the NSLP and/or SBP nutrition
standards for SFSP.182

179 The authority for operating cost reimbursements is provided in Section 13(b)(1) of the NSLA (42 U.S.C.
§1761(b)(1)), and the authority for the administrative cost reimbursement is provided in Section 13(b)(3) of the NSLA
(42 U.S.C. §1761(b)(3)).
180 Section 13(f) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1761(f)).
181 7 C.F.R. §225.16(d).
182 7 C.F.R. §225.16(f).
Congressional Research Service

39

link to page 27 link to page 13 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Meal Service
As noted, children are required to consume meals onsite in SFSP. There are also requirements
around the timing of meals in SFSP: there must be at least three hours between meal or snack
services and four hours between lunch and dinner if there is no snack served.183 Like the other
child nutrition programs, SFSP sponsors must comply with local or state health and sanitation
requirements.
Seamless Summer Option (SSO)
School food authorities may participate in SFSP, or they can choose to offer summer meals
through SSO. SSO allows school food authorities to continue operating under certain NSLP/SBP
requirements into the summer.184 For example, it allows them to use the school meals programs’
nutrition standards, administrative review process, and reimbursement rates (see Table 4 for
NSLP/SBP reimbursement rates). Other requirements are the same as SFSP, including rural area
and site eligibility rules.185 School food authorities are the only eligible sponsor in SSO, but they
can operate the program at a variety of meal sites (e.g., parks, recreation centers, libraries).
The school lunch and breakfast reimbursement rates used in SSO are lower than SFSP’s
reimbursement rates. However, school food authorities participating in SSO also receive the
NSLP commodity reimbursement (discussed in the “Commodity Assistance” section). School
food authorities may also have a reduced administrative burden under SSO. A 2018 study by
USDA found that three-quarters of sponsors operated SFSP and one-quarter operated SSO.186
Summer EBT
Following a more than decade-long demonstration (discussed below), the Summer EBT program
was given permanent authorization by the FY2023 Consolidated Appropriations Act (P.L. 117-
328), which gave all states and territories and some ITOs the option to operate Summer EBT
starting in summer 2024. According to the law, participating jurisdictions are to distribute federal
funds to eligible households—in an amount of $40 per child per month during the summer—
which households can redeem at SNAP-authorized retailers for groceries. Children who receive
free or reduced-price meals during the school year will be automatically enrolled in the program
(though families may opt out). States participating in the program must also establish an
application process—using the same eligibility criteria as free or reduced-price school meals—for
other children.
P.L. 117-328 establishes separate program options for ITOs participating in WIC (some of whom
previously operated the Summer EBT demonstration through WIC), territories that do not operate
SNAP (American Samoa, Puerto Rico, and the Northern Mariana Islands), and children who
attend year-round schools.
The law requires grantees to cover at least half of administrative costs and authorizes federal
funding to cover the other half.

183 In addition, suppers cannot be served after 7 p.m. without a waiver from the state agency. 7 C.F.R. §225.16(c).
184 Section 13(a)(8) of the NSLA (codified at 42 U.S.C. §1761(a)(8)).
185 For a comparison of SFSP and SSO, see USDA-FNS, “Comparison of Programs: SFSP/NSLP/Seamless Option,”
January 22, 2015, https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/SFSP_SeamlessComparisonChart.pdf.
186 USDA-FNS, USDA Summer Meals Study Volume 2. Sponsor and Site Operational Characteristics, prepared by
Westat, October 2021, pp. 3-4 to 3-7, https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/usda-summer-meals-study.
Congressional Research Service

40

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Summer Meal Demonstration Projects
Summer meal demonstration projects were first authorized and funded by the FY2010
appropriations law (P.L. 111-80).187 Using such funds, USDA tested a number of summer meal
delivery alternatives, including Summer EBT, food backpacks, food boxes, and meal delivery for
children in rural areas.188 Findings from Summer EBT were among the most promising, showing
significant impacts on reducing food insecurity and improving nutrient intake.189 Starting in
FY2015, appropriations acts designated summer meal demonstration funding for Summer EBT.190
Using appropriated funds, the Summer EBT demonstration operated during summers 2011-2023
in selected states and ITOs.191 The project provided electronic food benefits to households with
children eligible for free or reduced-price school meals. Depending on the site and year, either
$30 or $60 per month was provided on an EBT card. States and jurisdictions had the option to
administer the project through SNAP or WIC. Participants in jurisdictions providing benefits
through SNAP redeemed benefits for SNAP-eligible foods at SNAP-authorized retailers, while
participants in the WIC EBT jurisdictions were limited to a smaller set of eligible foods at WIC-
authorized retailers.192
Special Milk Program (SMP)
SMP provides funding for milk served in approximately 1,700 schools, child care institutions,
summer camps, and other institutions in FY2022.193 Generally, schools and other participating
institutions may not participate in another child nutrition meal service program along with SMP.
However, schools may administer SMP for pre-kindergartners and kindergartners who are in part-
day sessions and do not have access to the school meals programs.194

187 Section 749(g) of P.L. 111-80. The FY2010 appropriation was $85 million, which funded demonstration activities in
summers 2011 to 2014. For more information, see CRS Report R45486, Child Nutrition Programs: Issues in the 115th
Congress.
188 For further discussion, see CRS In Focus IF11633, Summer Food for Children: An Overview of Federal Aid;
USDA-FNS, “Enhanced Summer Food Service Program (eSFSP),” https://www.fns.usda.gov/ops/enhanced-summer-
food-service-program-esfsp; and USDA-FNS, “USDA Highlights Success of Rural Summer Meals Delivery Project in
Texas,” August 13, 2019, https://www.fns.usda.gov/pressrelease/fns-001119.
189 Collins et al., Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer for Children (SEBTC) Demonstration: Evaluation Findings for
the Full Implementation Year, prepared by Abt Associates, Mathematica Policy Research, and Maximus (Alexandria,
VA: USDA-FNS, 2013), p. 105. Improvements in food insecurity varied significantly between Summer EBT sites. For
evaluations of other approaches tested through the Enhanced Summer Food Service Program (eSFSP), see USDA-FNS,
“Enhanced Summer Food Service Program,” November 8, 2013, https://www.fns.usda.gov/ops/enhanced-summer-
food-service-program-esfsp.
190 Additional appropriations for Summer EBT have been provided in each of FY2015 through FY2023.
191 Grantees in various years included Connecticut, the Cherokee Nation, the Chickasaw Nation, Delaware, the Inter
Tribal Council of Arizona, Michigan, Missouri, Nevada, Oregon, Tennessee, Texas, Virginia, Washington, and
Wisconsin. In summers 2021-2023, state grantees did not operate Summer EBT demonstrations due to the availability
of the Pandemic Electronic Benefit Transfer (P-EBT) program. However, three tribes (the Cherokee Nation, Chickasaw
Nation, and Inter Tribal Council of Arizona) operated Summer EBT demonstration projects.
192 For more information on the Summer EBT demonstration, see USDA-FNS, “2024 USDA Explanatory Notes – Food
and Nutrition Service,” p. 35-49; and USDA-FNS, Summer Electronic Benefit Transfer for Children (SEBTC)
Demonstration: Summary Report, prepared by Abt Associates Inc., May 2016, https://www.fns.usda.gov/sfsp/summer-
electronic-benefit-transfer-children-sebtc-demonstration-summary-report.
193 USDA-FNS, “National Level Annual Summary Tables FY1969-2021: Special Milk–Outlets and Milk Served,”
April 7, 2022, https://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/child-nutrition-tables.
194 Section 3 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. §1772).
Congressional Research Service

41

link to page 48 link to page 40 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

In SMP, participating institutions provide milk to children for free and/or at a subsidized paid
price. Institutions are reimbursed differently based on whether they decide to provide milk for
free to all children, sell milk to all children, or combine these options (provide free milk to
eligible children and sell milk to other children) (see Table 9). If institutions choose the combined
option, they must establish eligibility rules for free milk.195
USDA updated the nutritional requirements for milk served in SMP alongside changes to the
CACFP nutrition standards.196 The final rule, which took effect on October 1, 2017, required
unflavored whole milk for one-year-olds, unflavored low-fat (1%) or unflavored fat-free milk for
children ages 2-5, and unflavored low-fat (1%) or flavored/unflavored fat-free milk for children
ages six and older (a subsequent rule in February 2022 allows flavored low-fat milk for the six-
and-older age group).197 The regulations also allowed for reimbursement of non-dairy milk
substitutes in cases of medical or special dietary needs.
Table 9. Reimbursement Rates: SMP
Per Half-Pint Reimbursement, 50 States and the District of Columbia, School Year 2023-2024
Free Milk to Low-

All Milk Served
Paid Milk
Income Children
Schools that only sell
milk
$0.26
N/A
N/A
Schools that provide
only free milk
$0.26
N/A
N/A
Schools that sell milk
Average cost per
and provide free milk
N/A
$0.26
half-pint of milk
Source: USDA-FNS, “National School Lunch, Special Milk, and School Breakfast Programs, National Average
Payments/Maximum Reimbursement Rates,” July 1, 2023, 88 Federal Register 43266.
Note: The average cost per half-pint of milk is determined based on receipts submitted by the institution.
After-School Meals and Snacks
CACFP and NSLP both provide federal support for snacks and meals served during after-school
programs.198 The CACFP At-Risk Afterschool component provides reimbursement for up to one
snack and one meal (usually supper) per child daily, whereas the NSLP Afterschool Snack option
provides reimbursement for snacks only. Reimbursement rates for CACFP At-Risk Afterschool
meals/snacks and NSLP afterschool snacks are the same as CACFP reimbursement rates (listed in
Table 7).

195 Institutions can set eligibility at or below the income threshold for free school meals (130% of the poverty line) (7
C.F.R. §215.13a).
196 USDA-FNS, Child and Adult Care Food Program: Meal Pattern Revisions Related to the Healthy, Hunger-Free
Kids Act of 2010, final rule, 81 Federal Register 24347, April 25, 2016, https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/
2016/04/25/2016-09412/child-and-adult-care-food-program-meal-pattern-revisions-related-to-the-healthy-hunger-free-
kids-act.
197 Ibid; USDA-FNS, “Child Nutrition Programs: Transitional Standards for Milk, Whole Grains, and Sodium,” 87
Federal Register 6984, February 7, 2022.
198 The CACFP At-Risk Afterschool snack/meal program is authorized in Section 17(r) of the NSLA (42 U.S.C.
§1766(r)); the NSLP snack program is authorized in Section 17A of the NSLA (42 U.S.C. §1766a).
Congressional Research Service

42

link to page 38 School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

CACFP At-Risk Afterschool Meals and Snacks
The CACFP At-Risk Afterschool component was authorized as a demonstration project in 1994
(P.L. 103-448), expanded over time, and made available to all states by the HHFKA.199 At-Risk
Afterschool meal providers include the same types of institutions that are eligible to become
CACFP centers (see the institutional eligibility rules in the “CACFP Centers” section); however,
they do not need to operate the child/day care component of CACFP in order to operate the At-
Risk Afterschool component. Additionally, At-Risk Afterschool providers must be located in
areas where at least 50% of children in the community are eligible for free or reduced-price
school meals.200 The afterschool program must also have “an educational or enrichment
purpose.”201 Unlike the traditional CACFP, which is available to children ages 12 and under, the
At-Risk Afterschool component allows participation through age 18.
Participating institutions receive reimbursement for up to one snack and one meal (e.g., supper)
per child daily, and meals and snacks are provided for free to all children. Meals and snacks must
meet federal nutrition standards.202 Institutions may operate the At-Risk Afterschool program in
the after-school hours and on weekends, holidays, and breaks during the school year.
In FY2022, the CACFP At-Risk Afterschool component served a daily average of 3.1 million
children.203
NSLP Afterschool Snacks
The NSLP Afterschool Snack option was authorized in the 1998 child nutrition reauthorization
act (P.L. 105-336). It allows NSLP-participating schools to receive federal reimbursement for one
snack per child daily in eligible afterschool programs during the school year.204 According to
USDA guidance, eligible afterschool programs must provide “organized, regularly scheduled
activities in a structured and supervised environment,” including an educational or enrichment
activity.205
Schools that choose to operate the NSLP Afterschool Snack component may do so in one of two
ways: (1) like the CACFP At-Risk Afterschool component, if at least 50% of children are eligible
for free and reduced-price meals, the schools may provide free snacks to all children, or (2) if this
criterion is not met, the schools may offer free, reduced-price, or full price snacks, based on
household income eligibility (like the school meals programs). The vast majority of snacks
provided through this program are under the first option.206 Snacks served through the NSLP
Afterschool Snack component must comply with federal nutrition standards.207

199 Prior to HHFKA, 13 states were permitted to offer CACFP At-Risk After-School meals (instead of just a snack); the
law allowed all CACFP state agencies to offer such meals. S.Rept. 111-178, p. 7.
200 Emergency shelters do not need to meet this requirement.
201 Section 17(r) of the NSLA (42 U.S.C. §1766(r)).
202 7 C.F.R. §226.20.
203 CRS communication with USDA-FNS in November 2023.
204 Schools may also operate the NSLP Afterschool Snack component in the hours after summer school sessions.
205 USDA-FNS, “NSLP Afterschool Snack Service—FAQs,” November 2013, https://www.fns.usda.gov/school-meals/
afterschool-snacks-faqs.
206 J. Guthrie, Feeding Children After School: The Expanding Role of USDA Child Nutrition Programs, USDA
Economic Research Service, Amber Waves, March 1, 2012, https://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2012/march/
feeding-children-after-school.
207 7 C.F.R. §210.10(o).
Congressional Research Service

43

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

In recent years, the NSLP Afterschool Snack component has served a daily average of roughly
one million children.208
Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program (FFVP)
FFVP provides formula grants to states to fund fresh fruit and vegetable snacks in selected
elementary schools.209 Under a statutory formula, about half the funding is distributed equally to
each state and the remainder is allocated by state population. States must prioritize funding for
schools with high proportions of students who are eligible for free or reduced-price meals.
Schools must participate in NSLP in order to receive a FFVP grant. States set annual per-student
grant amounts (between $50 and $75). Schools may provide fresh fruit and vegetable snacks to
students at any time of day outside of the breakfast or lunch service.210 Schools offer snacks to all
children in attendance (regardless of family income).
As noted previously, FFVP’s funding structure differs from the other child nutrition programs.
FFVP is funded by a mandatory transfer of funds from Section 32 of the Act of August 24, 1935.
The authorizing law provided $150 million for school year 2011-2012, which is adjusted annually
for inflation.211 For FY2023, FNS allocated approximately $238 million (including carryover
funds) for FFVP to states.212
FFVP has been amended over time both by farm bills and by child nutrition reauthorization bills.
FFVP was created by the 2002 farm bill (P.L. 107-171) as a pilot project. The 2004 child nutrition
reauthorization act (P.L. 108-265) made the program permanent and provided funding for a
limited number of states and Indian reservations. The 2008 farm bill (P.L. 110-246) expanded
FFVP’s mandatory funding through Section 32 and enabled all states to participate in the
program. The 2014 farm bill (P.L. 113-79) essentially made no changes to FFVP but provided $5
million for a demonstration project to test offering frozen, canned, and dried fruits and vegetables
in the program. Four states (Alaska, Delaware, Kansas, and Maine) participated in the pilot in
school year 2014-2015 and an evaluation was published in 2017.213

208 FY2019 data from USDA-FNS, “September 2020 Keydata Report,” January 27, 2021, https://www.fns.usda.gov/
data/september-2020-keydata-report; FY2020 data from USDA-FNS, “March Keydata Report (November 2020 data),”
March 12, 2021, https://www.fns.usda.gov/data/march-keydata-report-november-2020-data; FY2021 data from
“September 2022 Keydata Report,” December 9, 2022, https://www.fns.usda.gov/data/september-2022-keydata-report;
FY2022 data from USDA-FNS, “June 2023 Keydata Report,” September 8, 2023, https://www.fns.usda.gov/data/June-
2023-keydata-report.
209 Section 19 of the NSLA (42 U.S.C. §1769a). FFVP currently operates according to statute and USDA guidance.
USDA-FNS issued a proposed rule in 2012 to codify statutory requirements in regulations, but a final rule has not been
published.
210 USDA-FNS, Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program: A Handbook for Schools, December 2010, https://fns-
prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/handbook.pdf.
211 Section 19(i) of the NSLA (42 U.S.C. §1769a(i)).
212 USDA-FNS, “Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program (FFVP): Allocation of Funds for FY2023,” June 23, 2022,
https://www.fns.usda.gov/ffvp/allocation-funds-fy-2023.
213 Briefel et al., Evaluation of the Pilot Project for Canned, Frozen, or Dried Fruits and Vegetables in the Fresh Fruit
and Vegetable Program (FFVP-CFD), prepared by Mathematica Policy Research (Alexandria, VA: USDA-FNS,
January 2017), https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/ops/FFVP-CFD.pdf. For more information on proposals
to include frozen, canned, and dried fruits and vegetables in FFVP, see CRS Report R45486, Child Nutrition
Programs: Issues in the 115th Congress.
Congressional Research Service

44

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Other Child Nutrition Activities
Federal child nutrition laws authorize, and child nutrition funding supports, several additional
initiatives and activities, such as studies and evaluations, training and technical assistance,
technology improvements, and food safety initiatives.214 Selected initiatives and activities are
discussed below.
Healthy Meals Incentives Initiative
In 2022, USDA (during the Biden Administration) announced that it would use $100 million in
COVID-19 response funding under the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (P.L. 116-260) to
implement a Healthy Meals Incentives Initiative.215 The initiative includes (1) grants for small
and/or rural school food authorities to invest in staffing, training, and kitchen improvements,
among other changes intended to improve nutrition in school meals,216 (2) School Food System
Transformation Challenge grants to “stimulate innovation ... in the K-12 school food
marketplace” through collaborative projects between school districts, food producers, suppliers,
distributors, and/or community partners,217 (3) non-monetary recognition awards for school food
authorities that have made significant improvements to nutrition in school meals,218 and (4)
summits for grant recipients to share best practices.
FNS contracted with four entities (Boise State University, Chef Ann Foundation, Full Plates Full
Potential, and Illinois Public Health Institute) to carry out the School Food System
Transformation Challenge grants and with Action for Healthy Kids to carry out the other three
components of the initiative.219
Farm to School Program
The farm to school program, which includes grants to organizations, technical assistance, and
research, was authorized by the HHFKA in 2010.220 It expanded upon FNS’s existing farm to

214 This section does not list all related child nutrition activities. For further details on these and other functions funded
by the child nutrition programs account, see USDA-FNS, “2024 USDA Explanatory Notes–Food and Nutrition
Service,” https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/35-2024-FNS.pdf.
215 USDA-FNS, “Healthy Meals Incentives for Schools,” https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/healthy-meals-incentives.
Broadly, Division N, Title VII, Section 751 of P.L. 116-260 provided funding for the Secretary of Agriculture “to
prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus by providing support for agricultural producers, growers, and
processors impacted by coronavirus, including producers and growers of specialty crops, non-specialty crops, dairy,
livestock, and poultry, producers that supply local food systems, including farmers markets, restaurants, and schools.”
According to USDA’s Request for Applications (RFA) for the subgrants, “the activities under this RFA are expected to
result in increased demand for nutritious agricultural products and therefore benefit the producers that supply SFAs
with these products.”
216 Action for Healthy Kids, “Healthy Meals Incentives Grants for Small and/or Rural School Food Authorities:
Request for Applications,” April 6, 2023, https://healthymealsincentives.org/wp-
content/uploads/2023/04/HMI_SubGrantRFA_4623_FINAL.pdf.
217 USDA-FNS, “USDA Makes Available More Than $60 Million in School Meals, Launches New Partnership,”
October 11, 2023, https://www.fns.usda.gov/news-item/usda-0207.33; USDA-FNS, “Development and Implementation
of Healthy Meals Incentives School Food System Transformation Challenge Sub-Grants – Cooperative Agreement:
Fiscal Year 2023 Request for Applications (RFA),” CFDA 10.579, November 10, 2022.
218 Ibid. This initiative is based in part on the previous USDA HealthierUS School Challenge (carried out under the
Obama Administration), according to USDA-FNS, “2024 USDA Explanatory Notes–Food and Nutrition Service,”
https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/35-2024-FNS.pdf.
219 USDA-FNS, “Healthy Meals Incentives for Schools,” https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/healthy-meals-incentives.
220 Section 243 of P.L. 111-296, adding Section 18(g) of the NSLA (42 U.S.C. §1769(g)).
Congressional Research Service

45

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

school efforts, defined broadly as “efforts that bring regionally and locally produced foods into
school cafeterias,” with a focus on enhancing child nutrition.221 The goals of these efforts include
increasing fruit and vegetable consumption among students, supporting local farmers and rural
communities, and providing nutrition and agriculture education. The farm to school program has
mandatory funding of $5 million, which has been supplemented with discretionary funds in recent
years.222
One component of the farm to school program is farm to school grants, which are awarded by
FNS on a competitive basis to schools, nonprofit entities, and agricultural producers and
processors for the purpose of establishing programs that improve schools’ access to locally
produced foods. They may be used for training, supporting operations, planning, purchasing
equipment, developing school gardens, nutrition education, developing partnerships, and other
activities.223 In FY2023, FNS awarded $10.7 million for 103 grants, which were projected to
serve more than 3,000 schools and 1.2 million students.224
In FY2022, FNS used American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (P.L. 117-2) funding to provide an
additional $60 million in non-competitive farm to school program funding to states for use over a
four-year period. FNS distributed the funding using a formula based on states’ NSLP
participation.225
Institute of Child Nutrition
The Institute of Child Nutrition provides technical assistance, instruction, and materials for
nutrition and food service professionals and other local administrators of child nutrition programs
on a variety of topics. The institute receives $5 million a year in mandatory funding appropriated
in statute.226 The institute is currently located at the University of Mississippi.
Team Nutrition
The Team Nutrition initiative supports federally and state-developed nutrition education and
promotion initiatives. This includes grants for state agencies to develop programs to improve
school meal quality, such as by training school nutrition professionals. From 2004 to 2018, Team
Nutrition also included the HealthierUS Schools Challenge, which was a voluntary certification
initiative designed to recognize schools that create a healthy school environment through the
promotion of nutrition and physical activity.227

221 USDA-FNS, The Farm to School Program—2012-2015: Four Years in Review, p. 3.
222 Mandatory funding for the farm to school program is provided under Section 18(g)(8)(A) of the NSLA (42 U.S.C.
§1769(g)(8)(A)). The program also received $14 million in annual appropriations in FY2023.
223 For more information, see USDA-FNS’s Office of Community Food Systems website: http://www.fns.usda.gov/
farmtoschool/farm-school; and CRS Report R46538, Local and Urban Food Systems: Selected Farm Bill and Other
Federal Programs.
224 USDA-FNS, “Biden-Harris Administration Announces Investments in Urban Agriculture, Food and Market Access
through President Biden’s Investing in America Agenda,” July 21, 2023, https://www.fns.usda.gov/news-item/usda-
0155.23.
225 USDA-FNS, “2024 USDA Explanatory Notes – Food and Nutrition Service,” p. 35-40.
226 Section 21(e)(1)(A) of the NSLA (42 U.S.C. §1769b-1(e)(1)(A)).
227 See the USDA-FNS website, http://www.fns.usda.gov/hussc/healthierus-school-challenge-smarter-lunchrooms.
Congressional Research Service

46

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Food Safety
Foods served in any child nutrition program must comply with state or local health, safety, and
sanitation standards for food storage, preparation, and service. Schools participating in the school
meals programs must obtain food safety inspections by a state or local government agency at least
twice a year.228 There are also food safety inspections for USDA Foods.229 FNS also receives
annual funding to carry out food safety training for state and local program operators.230
FNS Activities
Approximately $100 million was provided in FY2023 for FNS activities including technology,
research, training and technical assistance, and payment oversight.231 This funding supports, for
example, computer systems such as the USDA Foods ordering and purchasing application, FNS
technical assistance, and guidance to states in implementing corrective actions to payment
errors.232
Further Information
CRS reports:
• CRS In Focus IF10266, Child Nutrition Reauthorization (CNR): An Overview
• CRS Report R46681, USDA Nutrition Assistance Programs: Response to the
COVID-19 Pandemic
• CRS In Focus IF11633, Summer Food for Children: An Overview of Federal Aid
• CRS Report R46888, Amending Eligibility Rules for Free and Reduced-Price
School Meals: Background and Policy Options
• CRS Report R46371, Serving Free School Meals through the Community
Eligibility Provision (CEP): Background and Participation
• CRS Report R47199, The School Foodservice Workforce: Characteristics and
Labor Market Outcomes
• CRS Report R42353, Domestic Food Assistance: Summary of Programs
• CRS Report R45486, Child Nutrition Programs: Issues in the 115th Congress
• CRS Report R44373, Tracking Child Nutrition Reauthorization in the 114th
Congress: An Overview
• CRS Report R41354, Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization: P.L. 111-296
(summarizes the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010)
• CRS Report RL34081, Farm and Food Support Under USDA’s Section 32
Program

228 Section 9(h) of the NSLA (42 U.S.C. §1758(h)).
229 Section 29 of the NSLA (42 U.S.C. §1769j).
230 USDA, FNS, “2024 USDA Explanatory Notes – Food and Nutrition Service,” p. 35-14.
231 Ibid.
232 For more information on these and other USDA-FNS activities, see USDA-FNS, “2023 USDA Explanatory Notes–
Food and Nutrition Service,” https://www.usda.gov/sites/default/files/documents/35-2023-FNS.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

47

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

• CRS Report RL33299, Child Nutrition and WIC Legislation in the 108th and
109th Congresses (summarizes the Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act
of 2004)
Other resources:
• USDA-FNS website: https://www.fns.usda.gov
• The USDA-FNS page of the Federal Register: https://www.federalregister.gov/
agencies/food-and-nutrition-service
• USDA-FNS Congressional Budget Justifications: https://www.usda.gov/cj

Congressional Research Service

48

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Appendix A. A Brief History of Federal Child
Nutrition Programs
Other Historical Resources
The Emergence of School
The National Food Service Management Institute (now
Lunches and the National
the Institute of Child Nutrition), with funding from
USDA, produced a 15-minute video documenting the
School Lunch Program
history of the child nutrition programs through 2007.
“A Journey Through the History of Child Nutrition
When the first federal aid for school lunches
Programs” is available on the Institute of Child
was provided in the 1930s, local school lunch
Nutrition’s YouTube page (https://youtu.be/
programs were already operational in many
9E29Qg5G0g4).
cities and localities across the United States.233
Many of these early lunch programs were started by charitable women’s organizations at the turn
of the century in an effort to feed hungry children. Over time, they transitioned to school boards
and school districts. These programs received a combination of private, local, and state
funding.234
The federal government became involved in school lunch programs during the Great Depression
both as a way to feed hungry children and support the farm economy. Initially, federal aid was
provided in the form of cafeteria equipment and labor. In 1932, the Reconstruction Finance
Corporation began providing loans to states and school districts to cover the cost of cafeteria
space and equipment for school lunch programs.235 In 1935, the Works Progress Administration, a
New Deal agency, began sponsoring women’s employment in school lunchrooms. Federal food
support for school lunches began that same year, when Section 32 of the Act of August 24, 1935
(P.L. 74-320) was enacted. The act provided 30% of customs receipts to USDA to purchase
surplus commodities from farmers impacted by the depression. These commodities were donated
through various outlets for domestic consumption, including school lunch programs.
With commodity aid came the first federal regulations for school lunch programs. USDA required
recipient organizations, through their agreements with state agencies, to operate school lunch
programs on a nonprofit basis, maintain any existing local funding for school lunches, keep
records of foods received, serve meals free to poor children, and ensure that such children would
not be identified to their peers, among other requirements.236
The availability of federal aid contributed to a rapid increase in the number of school lunch
programs. However, in 1943, federal commodity aid declined as Section 32 surplus commodities
were diverted to feed U.S. armed forces in World War II. In addition, federal support for

233 The first cities to institute school lunch programs included Boston, Chicago, Cleveland, Cincinnati, Los Angeles,
Milwaukee, New York, Philadelphia, and St. Louis. G.W. Gunderson, The National School Lunch Program:
Background and Development, USDA-FNS, 1971, https://www.fns.usda.gov/nslp/history (hereinafter, Gunderson
1971); A.R. Ruis, Eating to Learn, Learning to Eat: The Origins of School Lunch in the United States (New
Brunswick: Rutgers University Press, 2017), pp. 22-27; Susan Levine, School Lunch Politics: The Surprising History
of America’s Favorite Welfare Program (Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2008), p. 22 (hereinafter, Levine
2008).
234 Ibid.
235 Levine 2008, p. 44.
236 Gunderson 1971; The Bureau of Agricultural Economics, USDA, “The School Lunch Program and Agricultural
Surplus Disposal,” Miscellaneous Publications No. 467, October 1941.
Congressional Research Service

49

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

lunchroom labor disappeared with the elimination of the Works Progress Administration.237 In the
midst of declining aid, Congress provided the first cash assistance—$50 million in Section 32
funds—for “a school milk and lunch program” in the 1944 Department of Agriculture
Appropriation Act (P.L. 78-129). The introduction of cash assistance marked a shift in the lunch
program.238 For the first time, schools could purchase their own foods in addition to receiving
federally purchased commodities.
Annual appropriations acts continued cash support for school lunches until 1946, when the
National School Lunch Act (P.L. 79-396) was enacted. Signed into law on June 4, 1946, by
President Truman, the National School Lunch Act permanently authorized appropriations of
“such sums as may be necessary” for the National School Lunch Program. (The act would later
be renamed the “Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act,” recognizing Senator Russell’s
role in the passage of the legislation and his earlier support for the school lunch program within
New Deal programs and during his tenure as the Chairman of the Agriculture Appropriations
subcommittee.239) The law required participating schools to serve lunches for free or at a reduced
price to students who were deemed by local school authorities as unable to pay the full cost of a
lunch. Funds were to be distributed to states based on the number of school-aged children in the
state and the state’s need, as measured by per-capita income, and states were to match federal
funds dollar-for-dollar. States were to distribute funding on a monthly basis to schools based on
the number of meals served that met “minimum nutritional requirements prescribed by the
Secretary on the basis of tested, nutritional research” (P.L. 79-396).240 Cash assistance could not
be used for cafeteria equipment, and separate funds were authorized for this purpose ($10 million
annually); however, Congress subsequently prohibited appropriations for equipment assistance
from FY1948 to FY1967.241
NSLP remained relatively unchanged from 1946 to 1960. However, during this timeframe,
concerns emerged over the funding formula. One concern was that the formula prioritized
funding for schools with large numbers of school-aged children rather than actual participants in
the program. There was also concern that schools with high proportions of needy children
received the same amount of aid as those with wealthier families, even though they had to serve a
larger number of meals for free or at a reduced-price.242 In 1962, P.L. 87-823 changed the funding
formula to be based on the number of school lunches served in the state in the preceding school
year instead of the number of school-aged children. The law also authorized additional “special
assistance” for state-selected schools in poor economic areas (however, special assistance was not
funded until 1966).243

237 Gunderson 1971.
238 However, commodity assistance continued to make up a large share of federal support for school lunches, and
exceeded cash assistance until 1970. J.Y. Jones, “Appendix A: Child Nutrition Programs: A Narrative Legislative
History and Program Analysis” in U.S. Congress, House Committee on Education and Labor, Child Nutrition
Programs: Issues for the 103d Congress, 103rd Cong., 2nd sess., Serial No. 103-H (Washington, DC: GPO, 1994)
(hereinafter, Jones 1994).
239 J.T. Gay, “Richard B. Russell and the National School Lunch Program,” The Georgia Historical Quarterly, 80(4),
1996, pp. 860-863.
240 Jones 1994, p. 41. USDA provided the highest reimbursement (up to 9 cents) for a “complete” Type A meal that
was designed to provide one-third to one-half of a child’s daily nutritional intake; up to 6 cents was provided for an
“incomplete” Type B meal; and up to 2 cents for a Type C meal, which was simply a half-pint of milk. To see the
original nutritional requirements for each type of meal, see Gunderson 1971.
241 Jones 1994, pp. 59-61.
242 Jones 1994, pp. 41, 63-64; Levine 2008, p. 128.
243 CRS DL741517, “Brief History of Child Nutrition Legislation,” by Kathryn Michelman and Joe Richardson, 1974.
(continued...)
Congressional Research Service

50

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Other notable changes to NSLP occurred in the 1970s. In 1970, P.L. 91-248 extended special
assistance to all schools participating in NSLP.244 The law also reduced the state matching
requirement and established the first national eligibility guidelines for free and reduced-price
meals at 100% of the federal poverty level (later in the decade increased to 125% for free lunches
and 195% for reduced-price lunches). In 1971, another significant change occurred with the
enactment of P.L. 92-153, which guaranteed states a certain level of federal cash assistance by
specifying average per-meal reimbursement rates for free, reduced-price, and paid lunches.245
The Addition of Other Child Nutrition Programs
In the 1960s, federal child nutrition efforts expanded beyond school lunches.246 On October 11,
1966, the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (P.L. 89-642) was enacted.247 It formally authorized the
Special Milk Program (SMP) and authorized the School Breakfast Program (SBP) as a pilot
program. The SMP was based on predecessor USDA school milk programs that had operated
since the 1940s.248 SBP was a newer concept that USDA had piloted in the 1965-1966 school
year.249 In a House Agriculture Committee hearing on the Child Nutrition Act, then-Secretary of
Agriculture Orville L. Freeman testified that:
These proposals will permit us to begin a comprehensive effort to broaden child nutrition
programs in this country. They are based on what we have learned in 20 years of
administration of the National School Lunch Act, and they reflect a careful assessment of
gaps which now exist in the nutritional needs of children in this country.250
The SMP provided reimbursements for milk in schools, nonprofit child care centers, summer
camps, and other nonprofit institutions. At the time, schools and institutions could participate in
both SMP and NSLP. Meanwhile, SBP was authorized for two fiscal years and required states to
prioritize funds for “schools drawing attendance from areas in which poor economic conditions
exist and to those schools to which a substantial proportion of the children enrolled must travel
long distances daily” (P.L. 89-642).251 (Congress later expanded priority to include “schools in

According to Gunderson 1971, “The selection of the schools for receiving the special reimbursement from Section 11
funds was to be based upon five factors: The economic condition of the area from which the schools draw attendance;
The need for free or reduced-price lunches; The percent of free or reduced-price lunches being served in such schools;
The price of the lunch in such schools as compared with the average price of lunches served in the State; [and] The
need for additional assistance as evidenced by the financial position of the lunch program in such schools.”
244 CRS Memorandum 831481, Chronology of Major Federal Food Assistance Legislation (Food Stamps, Child
Nutrition Programs and Elderly Nutrition) 1932-1983, by Jean Yavis Jones, November 1983 (hereinafter, CRS
Memorandum 831481 (1983)).
245 CRS Memorandum 831481 (1983); Jones 1994, p. 43.
246 Levine 2008, p. 127; Jones 1994, p. 64.
247 Section 2 provided the purpose of the act: “In recognition of the demonstrated relationship between food and good
nutrition and the capacity of children to develop and learn, based on the years of cumulative successful experience
under the National School Lunch Program with its significant contributions in the field of applied nutrition research, it
is hereby declared to be the policy of Congress that these efforts shall be extended, expanded, and strengthened under
the authority of the Secretary of Agriculture as a measure to safeguard the health and well-being of the Nation’s
children, and to encourage the domestic consumption of agricultural and other foods, by assisting States, through
grants-in-aid and other means, to meet more effectively the nutritional needs of our children.”
248 Gunderson 1971.
249 U.S. Congress, House Committee on Agriculture, Hearing on H.R. 13361 and Bills to Amend and Make Permanent
the Special Milk Program for Children, committee print, 89th Cong., 2nd Sess., June 23 and June 24, 1966, H. Prt. 66-
126 (Washington, DC: GPO, 1966), p. 16.
250 Ibid, p. 12.
251 USDA-FNS, “School Breakfast Program: Program History,” July 2013, https://www.fns.usda.gov/sbp/program-
history.
Congressional Research Service

51

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

which there is a special need for improving the nutrition and dietary practices of children of
working mothers and children from low-income families” (P.L. 92-32).) The Child Nutrition Act
of 1966 also gave the Secretary the authority to provide higher reimbursements to schools with
“severe need.” Like NSLP, the law specified that breakfasts “meet minimum nutritional
requirements prescribed by the Secretary on the basis of tested nutritional research,” and be
served for free or at a reduced price to children unable to pay the full price of a meal, as
determined by local school authorities (P.L. 89-642).
In 1968, child nutrition efforts were further expanded with the authorization of the Special Food
Service Program for Children (SFSPC), a pilot program to fund meals in summer and child care
settings (P.L. 90-302). SFSPC provided the first federal assistance for summer meals for children
and the first dedicated assistance for meals served in child care settings.252 Similar to SBP, SFSPC
was targeted to areas with poor economic conditions and a high number of working mothers.
In 1975, the program was split into the separate Child Care Food Program (CCFP) and the
Summer Food Service Program (SFSP) (P.L. 94-105). CCFP was open to public and nonprofit
institutions that met child care licensing or other official child care standards, while SFSP
retained a focus on institutions in low-income areas.253 Meals were provided for free to all
children at SFSP sites, whereas CCFP conducted free and reduced-price eligibility determinations
like NSLP.
1980 to 2010
The long-standing growth of child nutrition programs was contrasted with budget cuts in the early
1980s, which were part of larger efforts to reduce federal domestic spending.254 The Omnibus
Reconciliation Act of 1980 (P.L. 96-499) reduced FY1981 funding for child nutrition programs
by approximately $400 million (9%) of the child nutrition budget.255 The law achieved savings by
lowering reimbursement rates in the programs and eliminating commodity assistance for
breakfast, among other changes.256 Larger spending cuts followed with the Omnibus
Reconciliation Act of 1981, which made changes that collectively cut $1.4 billion (25%) of the
child nutrition budget (Title VIII of P.L. 97-35).257 Many of the policy changes made by the law
remain in place today. For example, the law restricted eligibility from 195% of poverty to 185%
of poverty for reduced-price meals and set eligibility at 130% for free meals in the NSLP, SBP,
and CCFP. It also raised allowable charges for reduced-price lunches from 20 cents to 40 cents
and for reduced-price breakfasts from 10 cents to 30 cents.258 In a major change to SMP, the law
excluded schools/institutions that participated in another child nutrition meals program from
participating in SMP—cutting SMP’s budget by 77%.259 In CCFP, the law restricted participation
from children ages 18 and under to children ages 12 and under, and reduced the maximum

252 Early appropriations for school lunches in 1944 and 1945 had allowed states to spend a small percentage of funds on
food served in child care centers. The National School Lunch Act of 1946 made permanent support for meals served in
residential child care institutions only.
253 Low-income areas were defined as areas in which at least one-third of children qualified for free or reduced-price
meals.
254 Jones 1994, p. 44.
255 CRS Memorandum 831481 (1983); Jones 1994, p. 44.
256 CRS Memorandum 831481 (1983); Jones 1994, p. 86.
257 Jones 1994, p. 44.
258 CRS Memorandum 831481 (1983).
259 Jones 1994, pp. 44-45.
Congressional Research Service

52

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

number of reimbursable meals from three meals and two snacks per child daily to two meals and
one snack per child daily. The law also eliminated equipment assistance for school meals.
Child nutrition programs were subsequently excluded from budget deficit reduction measures in
the late 1980s and 1990s, and new policies led to the expansion of the programs during this
timeframe.260 For example, amendments to the programs in these years authorized start-up grants
for school breakfast programs, expanded CCFP to adult day care centers (and renamed the Child
and Adult Care Food Program, or CACFP), and provided new funding for afterschool snacks
through NSLP and CACFP.261 But what had potentially the longest-term impact on expansion was
a policy change intended to reduce paperwork in the school meals programs: automatic
(categorical) eligibility for free meals for children in food stamp (now SNAP) and Aid to Families
with Dependent Children (now TANF) households, which was enacted in 1986—and direct
certification of such children for free meals without household applications, which was enacted in
1989.262
Other policies in the late 1980s and 1990s focused on improving program integrity. The 1989
child nutrition reauthorization (P.L. 101-147) required USDA to create a standardized process
through which states would review school food authorities’ administration of NSLP and SBP
(known as administrative reviews).263 In CACFP, following USDA Office of the Inspector
General (OIG) audits in the 1990s that found instances of abuse and mismanagement, the
Agricultural Risk Protection Act of 2000 (P.L. 106-224) made a number of changes aimed at
improving program integrity in CACFP.264 The act required CACFP sponsors to conduct more
frequent and unannounced site visits of sponsored centers and homes, restricted nonprofit
institutions’ eligibility to those with tax-exempt status, and excluded institutions deemed
ineligible to participate in any other public program based on violations of program requirements.
Other legislation was aimed at improving program integrity in the school meals programs.
Program integrity continued to be a focus in the 2004 child nutrition reauthorization (P.L. 108-
265), which made changes to school food authorities’ verification of household applications for
free and reduced-price meals. Specifically, the law set a sample size of applications that schools
must review, established a focus on “error-prone” applications (applications near the income
eligibility thresholds), and authorized direct (automatic) household application verification
processes.265 In addition, the law required states to conduct additional administrative reviews of
school food authorities with a high level of administrative error or risk of error.266
The 2004 child nutrition reauthorization also continued the expansion of free school meals to new
categories of children. Specifically, the law extended categorical eligibility and direct certification

260 Jones 1994, p. 45.
261 Jones 1994, pp. 46-47.
262 USDA-FNS, Direct Certification in the National School Lunch Program: State Implementation Progress Report to
Congress, Office of Research and Analysis, December 2008, p. 3, https://www.fns.usda.gov/direct-certification-
national-school-lunch-program-state-implementation-progress.
263 Jones 1994, p. 68.
264 See, for example, USDA Office of Inspector General, Food and Nutrition Service: Child and Adult Care Food
Program: National Report on Program Abuses, Audit Report No. 27601-7-SF, August 1999, https://www.usda.gov/
oig/webdocs/27601-7-SF.pdf.
265 USDA-FNS, Verification of Eligibility for Free and Reduced Price Meals in the National School Lunch and School
Breakfast Programs, 73 Federal Register 76847, December 18, 2008.
266 For more information, see CRS Report RL33299, Child Nutrition and WIC Legislation in the 108th and 109th
Congresses.
Congressional Research Service

53

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

for free school meals to homeless children, migrant children, and children served under the
Runaway and Homeless Youth Act.
The most recent child nutrition reauthorization as of the date of this report was the Healthy,
Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 (HHFKA; P.L. 111-296). The HHFKA continued the expansion of
school meals in a few ways. It made foster children categorically eligible for free school meals,
and allowed direct certification of such children. It also included a pilot project for direct
certification (but not categorical eligibility) of children in Medicaid households for free and
reduced-price meals based on an income test. In addition, the HHFKA created the Community
Eligibility Provision (CEP), through which eligible schools can provide free meals to all students.
As discussed in this report, the HHFKA also made changes to nutritional requirements in the
school meals programs and CACFP. Specifically, the law required USDA to update the nutrition
standards for school meals within a certain timeframe and align the standards with the Dietary
Guidelines for Americans (per an existing statutory requirement).267 The law also required USDA
to issue new nutrition standards regulating all foods sold on school campuses during the school
day (“competitive foods”). (Previous standards applied only to competitive foods sold during
meal service.) In addition, the HHFKA required USDA to update the nutrition standards for
CACFP meals and snacks within a certain timeframe and align them with the Dietary Guidelines
for Americans.268

267 The 1994 child nutrition reauthorization (P.L. 103-448) required schools to serve breakfasts and lunches that were
consistent with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
268 For more information, see CRS Report R45486, Child Nutrition Programs: Issues in the 115th Congress. Also see
Janet Poppendieck, Free for All: Fixing School Food in America (Berkeley, CA: University of California Press, 2010).
Congressional Research Service

54

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Appendix B. Spending on Child Nutrition
Programs, FY1992-FY2022
Table B-1. Expenditures on Selected Child Nutrition Programs, FY1992-FY2022
(Actual)
(billions of nominal dollars)
Fiscal Year
NSLP
SBP
CACFP
SFSP
Total
1992
4.56
0.79
1.10
0.21
6.65
1993
4.75
0.87
1.22
0.22
7.07
1994
5.02
0.96
1.35
0.23
7.56
1995
5.16
1.05
1.46
0.24
7.91
1996
5.35
1.12
1.53
0.25
8.26
1997
5.55
1.21
1.57
0.24
8.58
1998
5.83
1.27
1.55
0.26
8.92
1999
6.02
1.35
1.62
0.27
9.25
2000
6.15
1.39
1.68
0.27
9.49
2001
6.48
1.45
1.74
0.27
9.93
2002
6.85
1.57
1.85
0.26
10.53
2003
7.19
1.65
1.93
0.26
11.02
2004
7.63
1.78
2.02
0.26
11.68
2005
8.03
1.93
2.11
0.27
12.34
2006
8.19
2.04
2.15
0.28
12.66
2007
8.74
2.16
2.24
0.29
13.43
2008
9.32
2.37
2.40
0.33
14.41
2009
9.99
2.58
2.53
0.35
15.46
2010
10.88
2.86
2.64
0.36
16.74
2011
11.30
3.03
2.72
0.37
17.43
2012
11.58
3.28
2.85
0.40
18.11
2013
12.22
3.51
2.99
0.43
19.16
2014
12.66
3.69
3.13
0.47
19.94
2015
13.00
3.89
3.31
0.49
20.69
2016
13.57
4.21
3.52
0.48
21.78
2017
13.64
4.25
3.54
0.48
21.92
2018
13.82
4.40
3.62
0.47
22.32
2019
14.20
4.55
3.73
0.47
22.96
2020
10.32
3.55
3.02
4.31
21.20
Congressional Research Service

55

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

Fiscal Year
NSLP
SBP
CACFP
SFSP
Total
2021
9.32
3.13
3.80
10.67
26.92
2022
22.98
6.50
3.93
0.60
34.01
Source: USDA-FNS, “Child Nutrition Tables: NSLP, SBP and SMP—Program Costs—Cash and Commodities;
Child and Adult Care Food—Participation, Meals and Costs; and Summer Food Service—Participation, Meals and
Costs,” October 13, 2023, https://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/child-nutrition-tables.
Notes: NSLP category includes entitlement and bonus commodities and spending on the Seamless Summer
Option. Graph does not show all child nutrition program spending (e.g., it excludes FFVP, state administrative
expenses, and discretionary grants). FY2022 data are preliminary.
Table B-2. Expenditures on Selected Child Nutrition Programs, FY1992-FY2022
(Inflation-Adjusted)
(billions of FY2022 dollars)
Fiscal Year
NSLP
SBP
CACFP
SFSP
Total
1992
8.74
1.52
2.10
0.39
12.75
1993
8.84
1.63
2.28
0.41
13.16
1994
9.18
1.76
2.48
0.42
13.84
1995
9.17
1.86
2.60
0.42
14.05
1996
9.32
1.95
2.67
0.43
14.37
1997
9.47
2.07
2.68
0.42
14.63
1998
9.86
2.15
2.62
0.44
15.07
1999
10.06
2.25
2.71
0.45
15.46
2000
10.01
2.27
2.74
0.44
15.46
2001
10.27
2.30
2.76
0.43
15.76
2002
10.71
2.45
2.89
0.41
16.46
2003
10.91
2.51
2.92
0.39
16.73
2004
11.28
2.63
2.99
0.39
17.28
2005
11.48
2.76
3.02
0.38
17.64
2006
11.31
2.82
2.97
0.38
17.49
2007
11.74
2.91
3.01
0.39
18.05
2008
12.10
3.07
3.12
0.42
18.71
2009
13.00
3.36
3.30
0.45
20.10
2010
13.90
3.65
3.37
0.46
21.38
2011
14.10
3.79
3.40
0.47
21.75
2012
14.17
4.01
3.49
0.49
22.17
2013
14.75
4.24
3.61
0.52
23.12
2014
15.04
4.38
3.72
0.55
23.69
2015
15.37
4.60
3.91
0.58
24.45
2016
15.94
4.95
4.13
0.56
25.57
2017
15.76
4.91
4.08
0.56
25.31
Congressional Research Service

56

School Meals and Other Child Nutrition Programs: Background and Funding

2018
15.61
4.96
4.09
0.53
25.20
2019
15.75
5.04
4.14
0.53
25.46
2020
11.23
3.86
3.29
4.69
23.08
2021
9.87
3.31
4.02
11.30
28.50
2022
22.98
6.50
3.93
0.60
34.01
Source: CRS calculations using USDA-FNS, “Child Nutrition Tables: NSLP, SBP and SMP—Program Costs—
Cash and Commodities; Child and Adult Care Food—Participation, Meals and Costs; and Summer Food
Service—Participation, Meals and Costs,” October 13, 2023, https://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/child-nutrition-tables.
Notes: Amounts are in FY2022 dol ars, adjusted for GDP inflation by CRS using Office of Management and
Budget (OMB), "Historical Tables: Table 10.1—Gross Domestic Product and Deflators Used in the Historical
Tables: 1940–2028," March 2023. NSLP category includes entitlement and bonus commodities and spending on
the Seamless Summer Option. Graph does not show all child nutrition program spending (e.g., it excludes FFVP,
state administrative expenses, and discretionary grants). FY2022 data are preliminary.

Author Information

Kara Clifford Billings

Analyst in Social Policy

Acknowledgments
Prior CRS reports written by Randy Aussenberg, CRS Specialist in Nutrition Assistance Policy, and Joe
Richardson, former CRS Specialist, provided framework for this report.

Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan
shared staff to congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and
under the direction of Congress. Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other
than public understanding of information that has been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in
connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the United States Government, are not
subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be reproduced and distributed in
its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include copyrighted images or
material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you wish to
copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.

Congressional Research Service
R46234 · VERSION 10 · UPDATED
57

Download PDF

Download EPUB

Revision History

Dec. 18, 2023

HTML · PDF

8% changed

May. 23, 2022

HTML · PDF

7% changed

Apr. 1, 2021

HTML · PDF

36% changed