Child Nutrition and WIC Programs: Background and Funding

Child Nutrition and WIC Programs: Background and Funding

Order Code RL31577
CRS Report for Congress
Received through the CRS Web
Child Nutrition and WIC Programs:
Background and Funding
Updated August 3, 2004
Joe Richardson
Domestic Social Policy Division
Congressional Research Service ˜ The Library of Congress

Child Nutrition and WIC Programs:
Background and Funding
Summary
Federally supported child nutrition programs and related activities — including
school meal programs and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women,
Infants, and Children (the WIC program) — reach over 37 million children and
almost 2 million lower-income pregnant/postpartum women. In FY2004, anticipated
spending on these programs is $16.6 billion, and the FY2004 appropriations law
(P.L. 108-199) supports this spending level (although with new appropriations of a
lesser amount, some $16 billion). The Administration’s FY2005 revised budget
request envisions spending a total of $17.15 billion, supported by new appropriations
of $16.47 billion. The House FY2005 appropriations bill (H.R. 4766) would support
spending of $16.97 billion with new appropriations of $16.29 billion.

The School Lunch and School Breakfast programs provide cash subsidies to
participating schools for all meals they serve; larger subsidies are granted for free and
reduced-price meals served to lower-income children. The Child and Adult Care
Food Program subsidizes meals and snacks served by child care centers and day care
homes; in centers, higher subsidies are given for meals/snacks served to lower-
income children, while subsidies for homes generally do not vary by children’s
family income (but are larger for homes in lower-income areas or operated by lower-
income providers). Schools and organizations operating programs for children also
can receive subsidies for snacks (and, in some cases, meals) served in after-school
and other outside-of-school settings. The Summer Food Service program subsidizes
food service operations by public/private nonprofit sponsors in lower-income areas
during the summer; all meals/snacks they serve are subsidized, generally without
regard to individual children’s family income. The Special Milk program operates
in schools without a lunch program and subsidizes all milk they serve. All these
subsidies are inflation-indexed and are paid only where the subsidized meals/snacks
meet federal nutrition standards. In addition to cash aid, many providers receive food
commodities from the Agriculture Department, at a set value per meal (and may
receive “bonus” commodities from stocks acquired for agricultural support
purposes). Grants also are made to help cover state administrative expenses. And,
the WIC program provides nutrition services and tailored food packages to lower-
income pregnant, breastfeeding, and postpartum women, infants, and children who
are judged to be at nutritional risk. Other significant federal programs/activities
include: a WIC farmers’ market nutrition program, support for a Food Service
Management Institute, a small nutrition education initiative, and efforts to improve
meal quality, food service, and safety.
The programs are administered by the Agriculture Department’s Food and
Nutrition Service and state education, social service, and health agencies. They are
actually operated, under state oversight, by over 300,000 local providers (such as
schools, child care centers, and health clinics). Federal payments do not necessarily
cover all program costs, and non-federal support is significant (e.g., children’s
families’ meal payments, state and local contributions).

Contents
General Background . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1
Programs and Participation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
School Lunch Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3
School Breakfast Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5
Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6
Summer Food Service Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9
Special Milk Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
Commodity Assistance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
State Administrative Expenses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
The WIC Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Other Child Nutrition Programs and Activities . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
Funding for Child Nutrition and WIC Programs . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14
FY1996-FY1998 Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
FY1999 Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
FY2000 Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
FY2001 Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
FY2002 Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
FY2002 Appropriations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
Added FY2002 Funding for the WIC Program . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
Funding the FY2002 WIC Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program . . . . . 32
Additional Commodity Support in FY2002 (and FY2003) . . . . . . . . . 32
FY2002 Spending . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
FY2003 Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
FY2003 Appropriations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36
FY2003 Spending . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
FY2004 Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
FY2004 Appropriations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
FY2004 Spending . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
FY2005 Funding . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
FY2005 Appropriations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
FY2005 Estimated Spending . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54

List of Tables
Table 1A. Child Nutrition & WIC Appropriations: FY1996-FY1998 . . . . . . . . 16
Table 1B. Child Nutrition & WIC Spending: FY1996-FY1998 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
Table 2A. Child Nutrition & WIC Appropriations: FY1999 & FY2000 . . . . . . . 21
Table 2B. Child Nutrition & WIC Spending: FY1999 & FY2000 . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Table 3A. Child Nutrition & WIC Appropriations: FY2000 & FY2001 . . . . . . . 25
Table 3B. Child Nutrition & WIC Spending: FY2000 & FY2001 . . . . . . . . . . . 26
Table 4A. Child Nutrition & WIC Appropriations: FY2001 & FY2002 . . . . . . . 33
Table 4B. Child Nutrition & WIC Spending: FY2001 & FY2002 . . . . . . . . . . . 34
Table 5A. Child Nutrition & WIC Appropriations: FY2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
Table 5B. Child Nutrition & WIC Spending: FY2003 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42
Table 6A. Child Nutrition & WIC Appropriations: FY2004 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47
Table 6B. Estimated Child Nutrition & WIC Spending: FY2004 . . . . . . . . . . . 50
Table 7A. Child Nutrition & WIC Appropriations: FY2004 & FY2005 . . . . . . 53
Table 7B. Estimated Child Nutrition & WIC Spending: FY2004 & FY2005 . . 55

Child Nutrition and WIC Programs:
Background and Funding
General Background
Child nutrition programs and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for
Women, Infants, and Children (the WIC program) provide cash, commodity, and
other assistance (including nutrition services and food packages in the WIC program)
under three major federal laws: the National School Lunch Act (originally enacted
in 1946 and renamed the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch in 1999), the
Child Nutrition Act (originally enacted in 1966), and Section 32 of the act of August
24, 1935 (7 U.S.C. 612c).1 The Agriculture Department’s Food and Nutrition
Service (FNS) administers the programs at the federal level; most funding is included
in the annual Agriculture Department appropriations laws; and congressional
jurisdiction is exercised by the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry
Committee, the House Education and the Workforce Committee, and, to a limited
extent, the House Agriculture Committee.
Major amendments affecting child nutrition and WIC programs were made in
the 1998 William F. Goodling Child Nutrition Reauthorization Act (P.L. 105-336)
and a number of laws enacted in the 106th and 107th Congresses — most notably as
part of larger measures not specifically targeted on child nutrition or WIC programs
(e.g., P.L. 106-170, P.L. 106-224, P.L. 106-554, P.L. 107-76, P.L. 107-171). The
most recent general reauthorization of child nutrition and WIC authorities was
enacted on June 30, 2004 (the Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act of 2004;
P.L. 108-265)
Note: For information about legislation and legislative issues see: (1) CRS
Report 96-987, Child Nutrition Legislation in the 104th Congress, (2) CRS Report 97-
108, Child Nutrition Issues in the 105th Congress, and (3) CRS Report RL31578,
Child Nutrition and WIC Legislation in the 106th and 107th Congresses.
Child nutrition and WIC programs are operated by a variety of local public and
private nonprofit providers, and the degree of direct state involvement varies by
program and state — e.g., in the WIC program, state health agencies exercise
substantial control; in the school meal programs, local schools and school districts
1 The School Lunch and Child Nutrition Acts provide most of the basic authorities for child
nutrition programs. Section 32 authority provides funding for cash child nutrition subsidies
(permanent appropriations under Section 32 are transferred to the child nutrition account
annually) and the acquisition of food commodities for distribution to child nutrition
programs (Section 32 money is used to buy surplus commodities). For more information,
see CRS Report RS20235, Farm and Food Support under USDA’s Section 32 Program.

CRS-2
(“school food authorities”) most often have the major role; in a few instances, the
federal government (FNS) takes the place of state agencies (for example, where a
state has chosen not to operate a specific program or where there is a state prohibition
on aiding private schools). At the state level, education, health, and agriculture
departments all have roles; at a minimum, they are responsible for approving and
overseeing local providers such as schools and making sure they receive the federal
support they are due. At the local level, program benefits are provided to over 36
million children and nearly 2 million lower-income pregnant and postpartum women
through some 100,000 public and private schools and residential child care
institutions, about 200,000 child care centers and family day care homes,
approximately 30,000 summer program sites, and, in the case of the WIC program,
some 10,000 local health care clinics/sites operated by nearly 2,000 health agencies.
All programs are available in the 50 states and the District of Columbia.
Virtually all operate in Puerto Rico, Guam, and the Virgin Islands, and there are no
restrictions on eligibility related to citizenship or legal residence status. American
Samoa gets assistance for school lunch and WIC operations, and the Northern
Marianas receive school lunch support. In addition, WIC benefits are available for
overseas military personnel, and Defense Department overseas dependents’ schools
participate in the School Lunch and Breakfast programs.
In the meal service programs like the School Lunch and School Breakfast
programs, summer programs, and assistance for child care centers and homes, federal
aid is in the form of legislatively set subsidies paid for each meal/snack served that
meets federal nutrition guidelines. Most subsidies are cash payments to schools and
other providers; just under 10% are in the form of federally donated food
commodities. While all meals/snacks served are subsidized, those served free or at
a reduced price to lower-income children are supported at higher rates. All federal
meal/snack subsidy rates are indexed annually for inflation,2 as are the income
standards of eligibility for free and reduced-price meals/snacks.3 But federal
subsidies do not necessarily cover the full cost of the meals and snacks offered by
participating providers, and states and localities contribute significantly to cover
program costs — as do children’s families (by paying charges for nonfree meals and
snacks). Required nonfederal cost-sharing (“matching”) is relatively minimal —
states must expend at least an amount totaling just over $200 million a year
nationally in order to receive federal school lunch funds. Federal per-meal/snack
child nutrition subsidies may cover local providers’ administrative costs, but separate
federal payments for administrative expenses are limited to administrative expense
grants to state oversight agencies, a small set-aside of funds for state audits of child
care sponsors, and special administrative payments to sponsors of summer programs
2 Using the “food away from home” component of the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for All
Urban Consumers.
3 Cash subsidy rates and income eligibility standards typically differ (are higher) for Alaska
and Hawaii. However: (1) while free milk eligibility standards vary for Alaska and Hawaii
in the Special Milk program, federal subsidies do not; and (2) since commodity support is
provided without regard to free/reduced-price eligibility determinations, it does not differ
for Alaska and Hawaii. Cash subsidy rates and eligibility standards for the District of
Columbia, Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands are those for the contiguous 48 states.

CRS-3
and family day care homes. Under the WIC program, federal appropriations pay the
cost of specifically tailored food packages and include specific amounts for related
nutrition services and administration.
The basic goals of the federal child nutrition programs are to improve children’s
nutrition, increase lower-income children’s access to nutritious meals and snacks, and
help support the agricultural economy. Most child nutrition programs are treated as
entitlements: federal funding is “guaranteed” to schools and other providers based
on the number of meals/snacks/half-pints of milk served, who is served (e.g., free
meals/snacks to poor children get higher subsidies), and legislatively set and
inflation-indexed per-meal/snack subsidy rates. The major exception is the WIC
program, which is a “discretionary” grant program. WIC agencies serve as many
applicants as possible with the money available from federal grants (and, in some
cases state subsidies), but not necessarily all eligible applicants.
Extensive information about child nutrition programs, including the WIC
program, also may be found at the Agriculture Department’s Food and Nutrition
Service website: [http://www.fns.usda.gov].
Programs and Participation
School Lunch Program
Public and private nonprofit schools and residential child care institutions
(RCCIs) — including Defense Department overseas dependents’ schools — choosing
to participate in the School Lunch program receive per-meal federal cash subsidies
and federally donated commodities for all lunches they serve to schoolchildren.
Subsidized meals must meet federal nutrition standards based on Recommended
Dietary Allowances (RDAs) and the Dietary Guidelines for Americans and certain
food safety requirements. Participating schools/RCCIs also must guarantee to offer
free/reduced-price meals to lower-income children, adhere to certain federal
administrative standards, and follow “Buy American” rules.4
Cash subsidies are set by federal school lunch law (and indexed annually, each
July, for inflation), and the amount of federal aid is not dependent on providers’
costs. The cash subsidies (also called “reimbursement rates”) differ depending on
whether the lunch is served free, at a reduced price (no more than 40 cents), or at
“full price” (“paid” meals for which a participating school or RCCI may charge as
it sees fit). While similar aid (primarily, federally donated commodities) for school
meals was provided as early as the mid-1930s, the basic School Lunch program as
4 “Buy American” rules require that participating schools purchase U.S.-produced
agricultural commodities and food products processed in the U.S. “substantially” using U.S.-
produced commodities — to the maximum extent practicable. These rules apply to schools
located in the contiguous U.S. In addition, a special rule directs schools in Hawaii and
Puerto Rico to buy commodities or food products produced there, if they are produced in
sufficient quantities to meet schools’ needs.

CRS-4
it operates today dates to enactment of the 1946 National School Lunch Act and
major changes to the law in the early 1960s and early 1970s.
Free lunch cash subsidies are paid for meals served to those who apply and
claim annual family cash income below 130% of the inflation-indexed federal
poverty guidelines — e.g., $20,371 for a family of three or $24,505 for a four-person
family in the 2004-2005 school year. Free lunch eligibility also is extended
automatically to children who are “directly certified”eligible as public assistance
(e.g., food stamp) recipients, migrant and homeless children, and children served
under federal runaway and homeless youth grant programs. For the 2004-2005
school year, these free-lunch subsidies are $2.24 a lunch.
Reduced-price lunch subsidies are paid for meals served to those who apply
with family income between 130% and 185% of the inflation-indexed poverty
guidelines — e.g., between $20,371 and $28,990 for a family of three or between
$24,505 and $34,873 for a four-person family in the 2004-2005 school year. For the
2004-2005 school year, these reduced-price subsidies are $1.84 a lunch.
Subsidies for full-price (“paid”) lunches are paid for meals served to children
with family income above 185% of the poverty guidelines — e.g., above $28,990 for
a family of three or $34,873 for a four-person family in the 2004-2005 school year
— or whose families do not apply for free or reduced-price lunches. For the 2004-
2005 school year, these subsidies are 21 cents a lunch.
All of the above rates are increased by 2 cents a lunch for schools/RCCIs with
very high (60%+) free and reduced-price participation (almost half of all lunches are
subsidized with this added 2 cents).5 On top of cash subsidies, schools/RCCIs are
entitled to federal commodity assistance (discussed later in this report) for any lunch
served. Under this rule, schools/RCCIs will receive “entitlement” commodities
valued at a minimum of 15.75 cents a lunch in the 2003-2004 school year; this
amount is inflation indexed annually (each July).
5 Participating schools may offer all meals free and not make annual free/reduced-price
eligibility determinations for individual students or separately count free, reduced-price, and
full-price meals — if they pay any extra cost (i.e., claim from the federal government only
the estimated amount they would have received if they had operated a regular free, reduced-
price, full-price program). This choice generally is used by schools with very high
proportions of needy children. It reduces the burden of making individual eligibility
determinations and simplifies daily meal counts and procedures for claiming federal
subsidies, thereby saving schools administrative costs. Three options to accomplish this are
offered schools. The two most widely used are named “provision 2" and “provision 3.”
Under provision 2, schools make free/reduced-price eligibility determinations in the first
year of a four-year cycle; in the following three years, they count the total number of meals
served, and the percentages of free, reduced-price, and full-price meals served in the first
year are applied to the total meal count to calculate their federal subsidies. Under provision
3, schools can, for four years, receive federal subsidies equal to those received in the last
year in which they made free/reduced-price eligibility determinations, adjusted for
enrollment changes and inflation. For both provisions, schools may be approved for
four-year extensions if the composition of their school population remains stable.

CRS-5
In addition to the regular School Lunch program, schools/RCCIs may, under
provisions added by the 1998 reauthorization law, expand their program to cover
snacks served to children through age 18 in after-school programs (or other
programs operating outside regular school schedules). Federal subsidies are paid to
schools operating these programs at the free snack rate offered to child care centers,
if the snacks are served free to children in lower-income areas. In other cases,
subsidies vary by the child’s family income. (See the later discussion of the Child
and Adult Care Food program for the various federal subsidy rates for snacks, as well
as separate authority for public and private nonprofit organizations, including
schools, to get subsidies for snacks and, in some cases, meals served free in after-
school programs.)
In FY2003, well over 90% of schools and RCCIs got School Lunch program
subsidies — some 94,000 schools enrolling 48.8 million children and 6,000 RCCIs
with almost 300,000 children. Average daily participation in the regular lunch
program during the school year was about 28.3 million children (58% of enrollment
in participating schools/RCCIs). Children receiving free lunches averaged 13.7
million a day; those paying for reduced-price lunches averaged 2.7 million a day; and
those buying full-price lunches averaged 11.9 million a day.6 Average daily
participation in the after-school snack component of the School Lunch program
reached over 800,000 children in FY2003.
School Breakfast Program7
As with the School Lunch program, all breakfasts meeting federal nutrition
standards (and other rules applicable to the School Lunch program) are subsidized
in participating public and private nonprofit schools and RCCIs, including Defense
Department overseas dependents’ schools. Inflation-indexed subsidy rates set by
federal law vary depending on whether the breakfast is served free, at a reduced price
(no more than 30 cents), or at full price. The School Breakfast program dates back
to a two year pilot project established by the 1966 Child Nutrition Act and made
permanent in 1975.
Income eligibility standards for free and reduced-price breakfasts are the same
as in the School Lunch program (see earlier discussion), and, for the 2004-2005
school year, basic cash subsidies are $1.23 per free breakfast, 93 cents per reduced-
6 According to estimates from the 1999-2000 school year, about one-third of children
enrolled in public schools participating in the School Lunch program actually apply and are
certified eligible for free lunches, and some 7% apply and are certified eligible for reduced-
price lunches — for a total of 40% of enrolled children certified eligible for income-tested
subsidized meals. This proportion is noticeably higher than the proportion of enrolled
children who actually claim and receive free or reduced-price lunches (about one-third).
7 Additional useful information about the School Breakfast program may be found at the
website of the Food Research and Action Center (FRAC) — [http://www.frac.org] —
specifically, a FRAC publication entitled: School Breakfast Scorecard (2003, Thirteenth
Edition).

CRS-6
price breakfast, and 23 cents per full-price breakfast.8 Special “severe need” rates
(an extra 24 cents for each free or reduced-price breakfast) are paid to schools and
RCCIs with relatively high (40%+) free and reduced-price participation, and the
majority of breakfasts are subsidized at this higher rate. With the exception of
different subsidy rates and the lack of a specific entitlement to commodity support,
the School Breakfast program operates very much like the School Lunch program,
although in fewer schools and with a lower rate of participation among enrolled
children.9 As with the School Lunch program, participation in the School Breakfast
program by schools and RCCIs is voluntary — although a number of states have
enacted laws requiring some schools with lunch programs to join the breakfast
program.
In FY2003, 77% of School Lunch program schools and virtually all RCCIs in
the lunch program also operated a breakfast program — i.e., some 72,000 schools
enrolling 39 million children and about 6,000 RCCIs enrolling almost 300,000
children. Average daily participation in the breakfast program during the school year
was 8.4 million schoolchildren (about 21% of enrollment). Children receiving free
breakfasts formed the bulk of participants, averaging 6.2 million a day; those getting
reduced-price breakfasts averaged 700,000 a day; and those buying full-price
breakfasts averaged 1.5 million a day.
Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP)10
Public and private nonprofit nonresidential child care centers — typically
serving 40-60 children or more — choosing to participate in the CACFP receive cash
subsidies for each meal or snack they serve (up to two meals and one snack per child
a day, or three meals a day in emergency/homeless shelters). Eligible centers include
after-school and Head Start centers, as well as residential emergency/homeless
shelters. In order to qualify for subsidies, meals/snacks must meet federal nutrition
standards and be served to children age 12 or under (or migrant children age 15 or
under, or children with disabilities); in the case of emergency/homeless shelters, the
age limit is 18. In addition, participating centers may receive commodity assistance
based on the number of meals served (see later discussion of commodity
distribution).
Inflation-indexed federal cash subsidies to centers vary by the type of meal
served (breakfast, lunch/supper, snack). Similar to the school meal programs, these
8 As with the School Lunch program, schools may opt to offer all meals free and not make
free/reduced-price eligibility determinations (see footnote 5).
9 Child nutrition law also authorizes a limited number of demonstration projects offering
free breakfasts to all students in participating schools (regardless of family income) to test
the effects on participation and children’s school performance. In addition, recent
Agriculture Department appropriations laws (for FY2001, FY2002, and FY2003) have
provided money for a demonstration project for School Breakfast program start-up grants.
10 Under this program, a few adult day care centers — some 1,400 sponsors with about
2,200 sites serving 86,000 persons in FY2003 — receive subsidies for meals and snacks
served to elderly and chronically impaired disabled adults under the same basic terms as
child care centers.

CRS-7
subsidies vary by whether they are served to: (1) children with family income below
130% of the federal poverty income guidelines (those who would be eligible for a
free school meal, see the School Lunch program discussion), (2) children with family
income between 130% and 185% of the poverty guidelines (those who would be
eligible for a reduced-price school meal), or (3) children with family income above
185% of the poverty guidelines (those would not be eligible for either a free or
reduced-price school meal and pay full price).11 Subsidies for lunches (or suppers)
and breakfasts are the same as those noted above for the School Lunch and Breakfast
programs. For July 2004-June 2005, the subsidies for snacks are 61 cents for “free”
snacks, 30 cents for “reduced-price” snacks, and 5 cents for “full-price” snacks.
However, unlike the school meal programs, while federal cash subsidies differ
according to the family income of individual children in a center, there is no
requirement that “free” or “reduced-price” meals be served. Centers may adjust their
fees to account for the federal subsidies or charge (or not charge) separately for meals
to account for the subsidies; but the CACFP itself does not regulate the fees they
charge.
The CACFP dates to 1968 when federal assistance for programs serving
children outside of school (“special food service” programs) was first authorized. In
1975, the summer food service and child care components were first formally
separated as individual programs.
The CACFP generally operates in child care centers that are public or private
nonprofit entities. For-profit child care centers can participate in the CACFP if they
receive at least some payments derived from Title XX of the Social Security Act (the
federal Social Services Block Grant) for at least 25% of enrolled children.12 In
addition, under a pilot project that began operating in Iowa and Kentucky, a more
liberal test can be applied to for-profit centers: they may participate if at least 25%
of enrolled children meet the family income requirements for free/reduced-price
school meals; this pilot was expanded to Delaware in FY2002. Finally, under
provisions of law enacted in December 2000 (P.L. 106-554), the more liberal
Iowa/Kentucky/Delaware rule was made applicable nationwide. The nationwide
authority granted in the December 2000 law originally covered FY2001 only. But
a series of laws — P.L. 107-76, P.L. 108-134, and P.L. 108-211 — extended it
through June 30, 2004, and P.L. 108-265 made it permanent.13 As a result, there now
are three potential methods by which for-profit centers can qualify: the original Title
XX rule, the “pooling” variation of that rule (see footnote 12), and the (now
nationwide) Iowa/ Kentucky/Delaware rule.
11 At state option, subsidies for centers also may be calculated according to the family
income demographics of the center — granting a standard subsidy for each meal/snack that
is “weighted” (or “blended”) to reflect the family income make-up of the center’s children,
or weighting total payments to a center by its family income make-up.
12 Under FNS policies, any funding for-profit centers receive that includes some Title XX
contribution meets this requirement — including funding sources that “pool” Title XX
money with other funds (e.g., Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) funding).
This is a relatively recent rule and has encouraged increased enrollment of for-profit centers.
13 Also see CRS Report RL31578, Child Nutrition and WIC Legislation in the 106th and
107th Congresses, by Joe Richardson.

CRS-8
In addition to the regular CACFP, the law allows public and private nonprofit
organizations (including child care centers and schools) operating after-school
programs (or other programs operated outside regular school schedules) to get
federal CACFP subsidies for snacks served free in their programs to children
(through age 18) in lower-income areas — at the free snack rate noted above.
Moreover, in seven states — Delaware, Illinois, Michigan, Missouri, Pennsylvania,
New York, and Oregon — federal subsidies may be offered for free meals, typically
suppers, served in after-school programs (at the free lunch rate, $2.14 a supper).
Separately, the CACFP provides cash subsidies to family and group day care
homes, typically serving 4-6 children. This component operates differently than the
component for centers.
Day care homes receive cash subsidies that generally do not differ by individual
children’s family income — unlike the subsidy structure in programs for schools and
child care centers, which differs according the family income of the child to whom
the meal/snack is served.14 Instead, there are two distinct sets of subsidy rates that
generally depend on the location of the home or the provider’s income. “Tier I”
homes — those located in lower-income areas or operated by lower-income providers
— receive higher cash subsidies; for July 2004- June 2005, all lunches/suppers are
subsidized at $1.92 each, all breakfasts are subsidized at $1.04, and all snacks are
subsidized at 57 cents. The majority of participating homes are in Tier I. On the
other hand, “Tier II” homes — those not located in lower-income areas or without
a lower-income provider — receive much lower subsidies; for July 2004-June 2005,
all lunches/suppers are subsidized at $1.16 each, all breakfasts at 39 cents, and all
snacks at 15 cents. Tier II homes may seek the higher Tier I rates for individual
lower-income children, and, similar to centers, day care home sponsors may opt to
have subsidies calculated according to the family income demographics of the
children in their homes — if family income documentation is obtained.
Day care homes participate under the aegis of public or private nonprofit
“sponsoring organizations” that handle administrative tasks (e.g., overseeing
compliance with program requirements, making federal subsidy claims). These
sponsors receive separate inflation-indexed monthly payments for their
administrative/oversight costs, varying according to the number of homes the sponsor
oversees; for July 2004-June 2005, these per-home payments range from $46 to $88
a month. Centers may participate either directly as independent centers or through
a sponsoring organization; but center sponsors do not receive additional federal
administrative funds (although sponsors can assess centers for administration).
Participating day care homes and centers generally must meet state or local licensing
or other state-set approval requirements (or certain alternate federal standards if there
are no state or local rules applying to them).
14 However, like the child care component of the program, the CACFP does not regulate fees
charged parents. Provision of “free” or “reduced-price” meals/snacks is not required,
although day care homes may adjust their fees to take federal subsidies into account.

CRS-9
Finally, the CACFP funds state costs connected with auditing sponsors and
providers. States are provided an annual amount equal to 1.5% of their CACFP
subsidies (1% beginning in FY2005).
In FY2003, some 44,000 centers/sites (almost 18,000 sponsors) with an average
daily attendance of 1.9 million children participated — 30% (570,000) of the children
were in for-profit centers/sites; 6% (120,000) participated in outside-of-school-hour
centers/sites; and 28% (just over 500,000) were served in Head Start centers/sites.
In addition, 160,000 day care home sites (about 1,000 sponsors) received subsidies
for an average daily attendance of just over 900,000 children.
Summer Food Service Program15
Local public and private nonprofit “service institutions” running
youth/recreation programs, summer feeding projects, or camps receive cash subsidies
and some federally donated food commodities for free food service to children age
18 and younger (and older disabled children) during the summer. Participating
service institutions (also called sponsors) generally are entities that provide on-going
year-round service to the community and include schools, local government agencies,
camps, colleges and universities in the National Youth Sports program, and (with
some restrictions governing the number of sites and children served) private
nonprofit organizations.
Sponsors of three types of summer program sites can be approved: (1) “open”
sites operating in lower-income areas where 50% or more of the children have family
income below 185% of the federal poverty guidelines (i.e., more than half the
children are eligible for free or reduced-price school meals), (2) “enrolled” sites
where at least half of the children enrolled in a sponsor’s program (e.g., a summer
education or recreation activity) are eligible for free or reduced-price school meals,
and (3) summer camps. Summer meals/snacks are provided free to all children at
open or enrolled sites and to lower-income children in camps. Summer programs
date to 1968 when federal assistance for “special food service” programs serving
children outside of school was first authorized. In 1975, the summer and child care
food service components of the Special Food Service program were first formally
separated as individual programs.
Summer sponsors get operating cost subsidies for all meals/snacks served free;
these subsidies cover documented food service costs up to annually indexed per-
meal/snack maximums.16 For the summer of 2004, the maximum operating cost
subsidy rates were: $2.41 for each lunch/supper, $1.38 for breakfasts, and 56 cents
15 Additional useful information about the Summer Food Service program may be found at
the website of the Food Research and Action Center (FRAC) — [http://www.frac.org] —
specifically, a FRAC publication entitled: Hunger Doesn’t Take a Vacation: A Status Report
on the Summer Food Service Program for Children (2002, Tenth Edition).
16 Documentation requirements are not applied for programs sponsored by public entities
in a pilot project operating in 13 states and Puerto Rico. Effective January 2005, the
exemption from documentation requirements will include 6 additional states and will
include both public and private nonprofit sponsors in all covered areas.

CRS-10
for snacks. Subsidies do not vary by individual children’s family income, and most
sponsors receive the maximum allowable rates. Summer program sponsors also
receive significant payments for administrative costs (e.g., up to about 25 cents a
lunch) according to the number of meals/snacks served and the type of program (e.g.,
urban vs. rural sites, self-preparation vs. contracted vendor preparation), and state
agencies receive special administrative cost payments for oversight (see later
discussion of state administrative expenses) and health inspections (see below).
Schools wishing to sponsor summer programs may effectively bypass most separate
Summer Food Service program rules and, under a “seamless summer waiver/option,”
operate a summer program using School Lunch and School Breakfast program rules
and subsidy rates.
In addition to subsidies to sponsors, states themselves receive direct subsidies
for health and meal quality inspection costs related to summer programs — an
amount equal to 1% of a state’s summer program subsidies.
In July 2003, 3,600 sponsors operating some 30,000 sites provided subsidized
meals and snacks to an average daily attendance of 2 million children. In addition,
at least 1.6 million children received summer meals subsidized through the School
Lunch program (1.4 million of these children received free or reduced-price meals).
Special Milk Program
Under this program, schools and institutions like summer camps and non-
residential child care facilities not otherwise participating in a federally subsidized
meal service program, along with schools with split (part-day) sessions for
kindergartners or pre-kindergartners where the children do not have access to regular
school meal programs, provide milk to all children at a reduced price or free. Each
half-pint served is federally subsidized at a different rate depending on whether it is
served free or not — but provision of free milk to needy children is up to the
participating school and is not required. Half-pints are subsidized at 17 cents a half-
pint for the 2004-2005 school year, or at their net cost (typically 2-3 cents higher) if
served free. Participating schools and other outlets must have a policy of lowering
any prices charged for milk they serve to the maximum extent possible and using
their federal payments to reduce the selling price of milk to children. Although
similar assistance existed in prior years, this program dates to 1954-1955.
In FY2003, almost 8,000 schools and other outlets served about 112 million
subsidized half-pints (7% free) to roughly 500,000 children.
Commodity Assistance17
The Agriculture Department provides commodity support for School Lunch
program schools, the CACFP, and the Summer Food Service program. Federal
donations of food commodities for child nutrition operations began in the mid-1930s
17 For important supplemental information, see CRS Report RS20235, Farm and Food
Support under USDA’s Section 32 Program, by Geoffrey Becker.

CRS-11
to support the agricultural economy (most prominently, following enactment of
Section 32 of the Agricultural Act of August 24, 1935).
In addition to cash subsidies, schools (which receive the bulk of federally
donated commodities) and other providers are “entitled” to a specific dollar value of
commodities based on the number of meals they serve.18 The inflation-indexed (each
July) commodity entitlement is set at 17.25 cents a meal for the 2004-2005 school
year. The Department purchases these commodities and pays for most processing
costs to fulfill this guarantee, with the goals of meeting the preferences of recipient
agencies, supporting agricultural prices, and removing agricultural surpluses.
Schools and other providers also receive “bonus” commodities donated from federal
stocks acquired, at the Department’s discretion, only for agricultural support reasons
(e.g., surplus commodities and excess Commodity Credit Corporation holdings).
These bonus commodities were valued at $100 million in FY2003. 19
State Administrative Expenses
Under authority in the Child Nutrition Act tracing back to 1966, states receive
grants to help cover general administrative and oversight/monitoring costs associated
with child nutrition programs (including commodity distribution costs, but not
including WIC program costs). The national amount each year is equal to 1.5% of
federal cash payments for the School Lunch, School Breakfast, Special Milk, and
Child and Adult Care Food programs. The majority of this money is allocated to
states based on their share of spending on the programs covered above; about 15%
is allocated under a “discretionary” formula granting each state additional amounts
for Child and Adult Care Food program, commodity distribution, and “coordinated
review efforts” (see later discussion of other child nutrition programs and activities
for a description of the coordinated review effort). In addition, states receive
administrative payments for their role in overseeing summer programs — equal to
approximately 2.5% of their summer program aid. States are free to apportion their
various federal administrative expense payments among child nutrition initiatives
(including the summer program) as they see fit.
18 One state (Kansas) receives cash in place of commodity assistance. In a limited number
of cases, schools, in lieu of commodities, receive cash payments or “commodity letters of
credit” to purchase commodities themselves.
19 Under a provision of law that expired September 30, 2003, the value of “entitlement”
commodities (i.e., 15.75 cents x the number of meals subsidized) had to equal 12% of the
total cash and commodity assistance provided under the School Lunch program. When this
“12% requirement” was not met, the Department was required to purchase additional
commodities to fulfill its full entitlement responsibility. Under current law, the value of
“bonus” commodities donated from Department stocks also is counted when judging
whether the 12% threshold is met. Moreover, for a brief period (FY1999 and FY2000), the
value of bonus commodities was counted when judging whether the 12% threshold
requirement was met. A requirement to count bonus commodities under the 12% rule
effectively decreases the extent to which the Department has to purchase additional
commodities to give to schools under the 12% rule; this means that at least $50 million a
year in commodities are not required to be supplied to schools. Also see CRS Report
RL31578, Child Nutrition and WIC Legislation in the 106th and 107th Congresses.

CRS-12
The WIC Program20
The Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children
(the WIC program) provides nutritious foods and other support to lower-income
pregnant, postpartum, and breastfeeding women, and to infants and children (up to
age 5).21 The program is operated through some 10,000 local health care clinics/sites
run by 2,000 local agencies and state health agencies (and over 30 Indian tribal
organizations participating as separate grantees treated like states). It also serves
overseas military personnel by way of a special extension run through the Defense
Department. Although the administering state and tribal WIC agencies have some
discretion, recipients’ household income can be no higher than 185% of the federal
poverty guidelines (the same standard used for determining eligibility for reduced-
price school meals — e.g., $23,107 for a family of two or 28,990 for a three-person
family, until the next annual inflation adjustment in July 2005). In addition to
meeting the income test, enrollees must be judged at “nutritional risk” by health
professionals in the health agencies and clinics that administer the program — e.g.,
based on clinical measurements, documented nutritionally related medical conditions,
dietary deficiencies. The WIC program originated as a two-year pilot project in
1972, and was converted to its present status in 1975.
Foods are provided (“prescribed”) through vouchers/checks, listing the specific
foods and amounts appropriate to the recipient’s status, that are redeemed at
approved retail outlets (or, much less commonly, supplied directly by the
administering agency itself).22 The specific foods prescribed (e.g., juice, infant
formula, cereal, eggs) are based on a set of federally established food packages that
differ by recipient type (e.g., infant, pregnant mother). However, WIC agencies have
considerable leeway in implementing the federally defined food packages. They
choose which infant formulas (or other items like juices or cereals) are offered to
meet the federal food package requirements and how to respond to recipients’ special
needs.
Participating retailers (46,000 are approved) then redeem the vouchers/checks
for cash through arrangements with their state WIC agency. The program also
provides financial support for state and local clinic Nutrition Services and
Administrative (NSA) costs — about 28% of total federal aid provided to states and
tribal organizations. These include costs associated with nutritional risk, health, and
20 The Commodity Supplemental Food program (CSFP) — the predecessor to the WIC
program — provides federally purchased commodity food packages to low-income elderly,
as well as women, infants, and children. It operates through over 100 projects in 28 states,
the District of Columbia, and 2 tribal areas. While the large majority of its recipients (over
80%) are now elderly persons, some 75,000 women, infants, and children were assisted in
FY2002.
21 Very useful additional information on the WIC program is available from a recent report
by the Agriculture Department’s Economic Research Service — The WIC Program:
Background, Trends, and Issues.
22 A pilot project provides WIC benefits through electronic benefit transfer debit cards rather
than paper vouchers, and the Agriculture Department and state WIC agencies are pursuing
this method of issuing WIC benefits.

CRS-13
immunization assessments, nutrition and substance abuse education and counseling,
health care and immunization referrals, breastfeeding promotion and support,
determining eligibility, and issuing and redeeming vouchers (or directly delivering
food items).23
Finally, a relatively small (in dollar terms) WIC farmers’ market nutrition
program is operated, and provided significant matching funding, by 36 states, the
District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam, and 5 Indian tribal organizations. It is run
by a variety of state and local agencies (typically, state agriculture offices) and offers
over 2 million WIC participants special vouchers (typically worth $10-$20) that are
used to buy fresh produce at 2,300 participating farmers’ markets.
Annual federal appropriations are granted to state and tribal WIC agencies under
a formula that reflects food and NSA caseload costs, inflation, and “need” (as
evidenced by poverty indices) — although small amounts are set aside and
distributed at the Agriculture Department’s discretion for infrastructure development
like building electronic benefit issuance systems and other (e.g., breastfeeding)
projects, and other funds have been used for small special initiatives (e.g.,
immunization and health care outreach efforts). These annual new appropriations are
supplemented by unused money carried over from year to year and reallocated among
state and tribal grantees or retained by the WIC agency for use in the next year. They
also are supplemented by substantial rebates (worth over $1.5 billion a year) from
infant formula manufacturers.24
In FY2003, average monthly WIC participation was just over 7.6 million
persons: 1.86 million women, 1.95 million infants, and 3.82 million children.
Average per-person federal costs were $35 a month for food and $14 a month for
NSA expenses. As has been the case in past years, approximately $1.6 billion in
rebates from WIC food suppliers — primarily infant formula companies that state
agencies contract with as sole providers — was largely responsible for holding down
the program’s net federal costs for food.25
23 Approximately two-thirds of NSA expenses are for nutrition-related service activities like
nutrition education, breastfeeding support, and nutrition risk evaluations. The remainder
(roughly 10% of total program costs) represents traditional administrative costs (e.g.,
income eligibility determinations, handling/redeeming vouchers).
24 States pursue a variety of cost containment strategies such as contracting to use a single
supplier, through a competitive bidding process, for items like infant formula (where WIC
spending forms a significant part of the market) in return for rebates for WIC purchases.
Other initiatives include contracts for juice products, used of “least-cost” brands and
“economic” package sizes.
25 States pursue a variety of cost containment strategies such as contracting to use a single
supplier through competitive bidding for items like infant formula and juices (where WIC
spending forms a significant part of the market) in return for rebates for WIC purchases.
Other initiatives include use of “least-cost” brands and economic package sizes.

CRS-14
Other Child Nutrition Programs and Activities
Under the coordinated review effort (CRE), the FNS, in cooperation with state
agencies, conducts periodic school evaluations to improve management and identify
administrative, subsidy claim, and meal quality problems. This $5 million-a-year
effort is the major initiative related to maintaining the integrity of child nutrition
programs. The Agriculture Department’s Economic Research Service (ERS) and the
FNS, conduct nutrition research, studies, surveys, and evaluations (typically totaling
$6-$7 million a year for child nutrition and WIC activities); this work was formerly
done exclusively by the FNS. A national Food Service Management Institute (FSMI)
provides technical assistance, instruction, materials in nutrition and food service
management (it is funded at $3 million a year, $4 million a year beginning with
FY2005). And an information clearinghouse provided information on community
and government food assistance initiatives (annual funding of about $200,000
expired September 30, 2003). Special FNS projects — e.g., “Team Nutrition”
nutrition education projects, a food safety project, technical assistance to program
operators, food service training grants, aid with electronic food service resource
systems, grants to help schools benefit from alternate (simpler) methods for claiming
federal subsidies, “program integrity” initiatives — are aimed at helping schools and
other providers with nutrition education materials, assisting them to improve their
meal service operations and the quality of meals, and ensuring federal support is
spent correctly; they are typically funded at about $10-$20 million a year. And,
recently, School Breakfast program demonstration projects have (1) tested the effects
of allowing all children in participating schools to obtain free breakfasts, regardless
of family income (funded at $13 million over two years) and (2) supported start-up
grants for new (or expanded) breakfast programs (funded at $500,000 a year in
FY2001 and FY2002, and $3.3 million in FY2003).
In addition to the above-noted activities, the Child Nutrition and WIC
Reauthorization Act of 2004 added new “mandatory” spending to assist states and
schools in improving their administration of the school meal programs — especially
determination of eligibility for free and reduced-price meals.
Funding for Child Nutrition and WIC Programs
Federal support for child nutrition and WIC programs is derived from funding
provided out of: (1) annual Agriculture Department appropriations, (2) permanent
appropriations not included in the annual appropriations laws (e.g., money directly
appropriated for the Food Service Management Institute under its authorizing law),
(3) unused money available (carried over) from prior years’ appropriations or
transferred from other Agriculture Department appropriations accounts, and (4) funds
paid for child nutrition initiatives from budget accounts separate from appropriations
to the child nutrition and WIC accounts (e.g., a large share of commodity assistance
and, in recent years, money for child nutrition and WIC nutrition research, studies,
surveys, and evaluations).
Actual spending for most child nutrition programs — but not the WIC program
— normally is dictated by the demand for federal dollars dictated by the number of

CRS-15
subsidized meals, snacks, or half-pints of milk served, not the funding made available
(annually appropriated or otherwise). WIC spending, on the other hand, generally is
dictated by the dollar amounts available from current and prior-year (carried-over)
appropriations. Individual programs within the child nutrition budget account (e.g.,
the School Lunch and Breakfast programs) do not receive individually specified
(“line-item”) appropriations, and, thus, funding may be shifted among the various
child nutrition programs as needed — so long as total spending stays within the
overall amount available from new appropriations and other sources.
As a result, readily identifiable annual congressional appropriations — typically
divided into two major accounts, a child nutrition account and a WIC program
account — do not provide a clear or complete picture of total federal support for (or
spending on) child nutrition and WIC programs in a given year. Rather, spending
figures shown in this report’s tables (typically, obligations) give a much better
overview than appropriations amounts.
For each fiscal year beginning with FY1996, this report presents both (1) annual
appropriations to the overall child nutrition and WIC budget accounts and (2) federal
spending figures by program/activity (including funding derived from new
appropriations and all other available sources). Care should be taken to review the
notes for each table because they describe the extent to which items have been
included or left out of the figures in the table.
FY1996-FY1998 Funding
Table 1A presents basic annual appropriation amounts for the child nutrition
and WIC program budget accounts, including supplemental appropriations. It does
not show (1) the portion of the FY1998 appropriation for the Economic Research
Service (ERS) attributable to funding for child nutrition and WIC studies and
evaluations (in earlier years, these studies and evaluations were funded out of
appropriations to the child nutrition and WIC budget accounts and conducted through
the FNS), (2) money available for child nutrition spending from permanent
appropriations and other budget accounts, and (3) carryover funds, recovered unspent
obligations from prior years, and transfers into the child nutrition account from other
food assistance appropriation accounts.
Table 1B presents actual spending amounts (obligations) from all available
federal funding sources. Spending figures in Table 1B are significantly different
than annual appropriations in Table 1A. They provide a better overall picture of
federal support, because, as noted earlier, they include spending derived from annual
appropriations, plus permanent mandatory appropriations, carryovers and other
unspent money from prior years, transfers from other accounts, and appropriations
for child nutrition and WIC activities from other budget accounts. Spending figures
also are adjusted to account for unused funding carried over to the next fiscal year.

CRS-16
Table 1A. Child Nutrition & WIC Appropriations:
FY1996-FY1998
($ in millions)
Annual
appropriations
account
FY1996
FY1997
FY1998
Child nutritiona
$ 7,946.0
$ 8,653.3
$ 7,767.8
WICb
3,729.8
3,805.8
3,924.0
Total
$ 11,675.8
$ 12,459.1
$ 11,691.8
Notes: The figures presented in this table are annual appropriation amounts for each fiscal year,
adjusted to include any supplemental appropriations: P.L. 104-37 (FY1996), P.L. 104-180 and P.L.
105-18 (FY1997), and P.L. 105-86 (FY1998). They are substantially lower than the total amount of
federal funding available — from all sources — to fund each fiscal year’s child nutrition and WIC
program spending shown in Table 1B (see notes below).
a. Child nutrition figures do not include: (1) money for nutrition studies and surveys (about $3
million) appropriated to the Economic Research Service in FY1998 (a similar amount was
included in the annual child nutrition appropriations for FY1996 and FY1997, and studies and
surveys were conducted through the FNS), (2) money available from permanent appropriations
— just over $400 million a year for commodities, the FSMI, nutrition education and training
(FY1996 only), and certain other activities (an information clearinghouse, homeless children
and “boarder baby” nutrition projects, school breakfast start-up grants), (3) unused money
carried over from the previous fiscal year ($141 million in FY1996, $384 million in FY1997,
and $605 million in FY1998) or recovered from the prior year’s obligations ($370 million in
FY1996 and $136 million in FY1997 and FY1998, respectively), (4) money transferred from
other food assistance budget accounts ($315 million from the food stamp account in FY1998),
and (5) money appropriated for general federal administration of food assistance programs (an
undifferentiated share of which is spent on child nutrition activities).
b. WIC figures include an FY1997 supplemental appropriation of $76 million (P.L. 105-18). They
do not include: (1) money for WIC research and evaluations (about $3.5 million a year)
appropriated to the Economic Research Service in FY1998 (a similar amount was included in
the WIC appropriations for FY1996 and FY1997, and research and evaluations were conducted
through the FNS), (2) unused money carried over from the previous year (well over $100
million a year), and (3) money appropriated for general federal administration of food assistance
programs (an undifferentiated share of which is spent on WIC activities). The appropriations
figures include money for the WIC farmers’ market nutrition program.

CRS-17
Table 1B. Child Nutrition & WIC Spending: FY1996-FY1998
($ in millions)
Programs/activities
FY1996 (actual)
FY1997 (actual)
FY1998 (actual)
School luncha
$ 4,761.0
$ 5,032.1
$ 5,130.3
School breakfasta
1,124.2
1,212.7
1,299.6
Child & adult care
fooda
1,556.7
1,613.0
1,562.4
Summer food servicea
258.2
258.5
251.6
Special milk
18.9
18.0
18.3
Commoditiesb
680.0
697.7
741.8
State administrative
expenses
99.9
104.1
110.4
Nutrition education &
trainingc
10.0
3.7
3.7
Homeless children
nutrition 1.7
2.1
1.9
Coordinated review
effort
3.9
4.1
4.2
Nutrition studies &
surveysd
2.6
2.3
3.2
Food service
management inst.
2.0
2.0
2.0
Special projectse
13.5
10.5
9.4
Child nutrition total
$ 8,532.6
$ 8,960.8
$ 9,138.8
WIC program totalf
3,695.3
3,844.1
3,893.4
(WIC farmers’ market
(6.9)
(6.6)
(10.4)
nutrition program)
Overall total
$ 12,227.9
$ 12,804.9
$ 13,032.2
Notes: The figures shown are spending (obligation) numbers from documents accompanying the
Administration’s FY1998, FY1999, and FY2000 budgets, and, in the case of the WIC program,
derived from the Agriculture Department’s FNS WIC website and National Data Bank. They differ
from appropriations (Table 1A) and include: spending from previous-year carryovers/recoveries of
unspent obligations, a $315 million FY1998 transfer from the food stamp account, permanent
appropriations, and commodity assistance and other spending drawn from separate Agriculture
Department budget accounts. The amounts shown do not reflect most federal-only child nutrition/WIC
administrative costs (roughly $40-$50 million a year), which are funded from a separate
undifferentiated general food program administration account, or the value of “bonus” commodities
not required to be provided by law. The FY1996 amounts do not reflect a reduction for an “accounts
payable writedown” adjustment of $68 million.

CRS-18
a. Figures include cash assistance only, not the value of commodities or cash-in-lieu of commodities.
The FY1996 amount for the School Breakfast program includes spending of $2.1 million on
start-up and expansion grants (ended until limited new grants were required in FY2001).
Amounts for the Child and Adult Care Food program include funding for a demonstration
project operating in Iowa and Kentucky that applied a more liberal test to participation by for-
profit day care centers and cost approximately $4 million a year.
b. Figures include cash-in-lieu of commodities (about $50-$60 million a year), some commodity
donation administrative/distribution/computer costs (approximately $6 million a year), and
about $400 million a year in commodities purchased and donated at no charge to the child
nutrition account in order to meet the commodity entitlements of schools and other providers.
The overwhelming majority (more than 90%) of commodity assistance is for the School Lunch
program. Not shown are about $50-$100 million a year in “bonus” commodities donated,
beyond commodity entitlements mandated in law by the Agriculture Department when excess
federal commodity holdings permit.
c. The FY1997 figure represents funding for the NET program that the Agriculture Department
redirected from other child nutrition activities. No specific FY1997 appropriation was made,
and a requested supplemental appropriation of $6.25 million was not approved. The FY1998
figure reflects spending from amounts explicitly appropriated for the NET program.
d. The FY1998 appropriations law for the child nutrition account did not include a specific
appropriation/spending level for nutrition studies and surveys. Instead, it consolidated virtually
all funding (at the dollar level of the Administration’s request) for nutrition program research
and evaluation — child nutrition, WIC, and food stamps — in the Agriculture Department’s
Economic Research Service (ERS) budget. Prior to FY1998, child nutrition research was
conducted through the FNS and funded under the child nutrition account. The figure shown for
FY1998 reflects spending on child nutrition studies and surveys, by the ERS, at the
Administration’s requested level.
e. Figures include money for a school meals initiative and other projects to improve food service and
meal quality (the bulk of the funds), along with support for a “boarder babies” project (now
ended) and an information clearinghouse (both funded at less than $500,000 a year).
f. The WIC program totals include spending on the WIC farmers’ market nutrition program (as shown
in parentheses) and special (e.g., immunization) projects. They also include spending on WIC
research and evaluation activities (typically, about $3.5 million a year). The FY1998 WIC
appropriation itself did not include an amount for WIC research and evaluation; this also is true
for the Agriculture Department’s FNS WIC website data beginning with FY1998. Instead, the
FY1998 Agriculture Department appropriation consolidated virtually all funding (at the level
of the Administration’s request) for nutrition program research and evaluation — child nutrition,
WIC, food stamps — in the Agriculture Department’s Economic Research Service budget. The
FY1998 total in the table includes spending, through the Economic Research Service, on WIC
research and evaluation at the Administration’s requested level ($3.5 million). Prior to FY1998,
WIC research and evaluation was conducted through the FNS and funded under the WIC
account.

CRS-19
FY1999 Funding
The FY1999 appropriations for the child nutrition and WIC programs were
enacted October 21, 1998, as part of the omnibus appropriations measure for FY1999
(P.L. 105-277; H.Rept. 105-825; see Table 2A). The appropriation for the child
nutrition budget account was $9.177 billion. In addition, $3.924 billion was
appropriated for the WIC account.
The FY1999 child nutrition amount generally followed the Clinton
Administration’s request.26 Overall, the child nutrition appropriation of $9.177
billion was $53 million less than requested by the Administration, largely because of
a reduction in mandated commodity purchases (estimated at $33 million), no
appropriation for the Nutrition Education and Training (NET) program ($10 million
had been requested), and assignment of funding for child nutrition studies and
surveys ($3 million) to the Economic Research Service appropriation account (the
Administration had asked that this amount be assigned to the Food and Nutrition
Service and the child nutrition budget account). The WIC appropriation — $3.924
billion (including up to $15 million for the WIC farmers’ market nutrition program)
— was $172 million less than the requested $4.096 billion (including a separate
request for $15 million for the farmers’ market program) — and $3.5 million was
separately appropriated to the Economic Research Service for WIC research (rather
than to the Food and Nutrition Service, under the WIC account, as requested).
Actual FY1999 spending amounts for child nutrition and WIC programs were
significantly higher than provided in the appropriations noted above (and in Table
2A). As shown in Table 2B, they reflect spending in FY1999 given funding
available from all sources — including the annual appropriation in P.L. 105-277,
permanent appropriations, money carried over and otherwise available from FY1998,
and funds (and commodities) from budget accounts separate from the regular child
nutrition and WIC accounts. Child nutrition spending totaled $9.654 billion, and
money spent on WIC program activities (including the WIC farmers’ market
nutrition program) amounted to $3.956 billion.
FY2000 Funding
The FY2000 appropriations for the child nutrition and WIC programs were
enacted on October 22, 1999, as part of the Agriculture Department appropriations
measure for FY2000 (P.L. 106-78; H.Rept. 106-354; see Table 2A). The
appropriation for the child nutrition budget account was $9.554 billion. The amount
appropriated for the WIC account was $4.032 billion.
As with FY1999, the FY2000 child nutrition amount generally followed the
Clinton Administration’s request. Overall, the child nutrition appropriation of
26 The FY1999 appropriation level for the child nutrition account was some $1.4 billion
more than the appropriation for FY1998. However, this did not translate to a spending
increase of the same magnitude because about $1 billion was available for FY1998 spending
from sources outside the normal appropriations — i.e., unspent carryover funds from
FY1997 and about $300 million transferred from the food stamp budget account.

CRS-20
$9.554 billion was $11 million less than asked for. It included no appropriation for
the NET program ($2 million was requested), assigned money for child nutrition
studies and surveys ($3 million) to the Economic Research Service (not the Food and
Nutrition Service as requested), and reduced the amount requested for a school
breakfast pilot project (under which all children in the participating elementary
schools receive free breakfasts) from $13 million to $7 million.27 The $4.032 billion
appropriation for the WIC program (including up to $15 million for the farmers’
market program) was noticeably smaller than the Clinton Administration’s request
of $4.125 billion (including a separate request for $20 million for the farmers’ market
program), and, as in FY1999, a separate $3.5 million was appropriated to the
Economic Research Service for WIC research (rather than to the Food and Nutrition
Service, under the WIC account, as requested).
After the FY2000 Agriculture appropriations law, the FY2000 Consolidated
Appropriations Act (P.L. 106-113) was enacted. It directed reduction of agencies’
discretionary funds — set at .38% — the allocation of which was to be decided by
the Administration. The appropriations noted above (and in Table 2A) and the
FY2000 spending shown in Table 2B do not reflect any effect of this directive on
child nutrition discretionary activities — e.g., special projects, nutrition studies and
surveys — or the WIC program (which is wholly discretionary). In its FY2001
budget, the Administration announced that there would be no child nutrition or WIC
program cuts as a result of the .38% reduction directive.
In addition to the FY2000 appropriation for child nutrition programs, Section
241 of the Agriculture Risk Protection Act (P.L. 106-224; enacted June 20, 2000, and
discussed later in this report) directed increased commodity purchases for distribution
through the School Lunch program. The Agriculture Department was effectively
required to purchase $34 million worth of food commodities for the School Lunch
program, over and above already planned commodity acquisitions. This $34 million
in mandated commodity purchases is included in the FY2000 commodity spending
figure shown in Table 2B.
Actual FY2000 spending amounts for child nutrition and WIC programs, shown
in Table 2B, were higher than provided in the annual appropriations law. They
reflect spending given funding available from all sources — including the annual
appropriation in P.L. 106-78, permanent appropriations, money carried over and
otherwise available from FY1999, funds from budget accounts separate from the
child nutrition and WIC accounts, and commodity purchases mandated in P.L. 106-
224 (noted above).
The enacted appropriation and other funding sources supported FY2000
spending for child nutrition programs, including studies and surveys financed through
the Economic Research Service, at $9.894 billion. The enacted WIC appropriation
27 Funding for the NET program stopped after FY1998. The school breakfast demonstration
was authorized (but not funded) by the 1998 William F. Goodling Child Nutrition
Reauthorization Act (P.L. 105-336). For more information on the NET program and the
demonstration, see CRS Report 97-108, Child Nutrition Issues in the 105th Congress, by Joe
Richardson.

CRS-21
for FY2001, money provided for WIC research through the Economic Research
Service (an estimated $3.5 million), and unused money carried over from FY1999
(about $120 million) supported WIC spending that totaled $3.976 billion —
including funding for the farmers’ market nutrition program, research, infrastructure
grants, and technical assistance.
Table 2A. Child Nutrition & WIC Appropriations:
FY1999 & FY2000
($ in millions)
Annual appropriations
account
FY1999 (P.L. 105-277)
FY2000 (P.L. 106-78)
Child nutritiona
$ 9,176.9
$ 9,554.0
WICb
3,924.0
4,032.0
Total
13,100.9
13,586.0
Notes: The figures presented in this table are annual appropriation amounts: P.L. 105-277 (FY1999)
and P.L. 106-78 (FY2000). They are substantially lower than the total amount of federal funding
available — from all sources — to fund each year’s child nutrition and WIC program spending shown
in Table 2B (see notes below).
a. Child nutrition figures do not include: (1) money for nutrition studies and surveys, (2) money
available from permanent appropriations — just over $400 million for commodities, the FSMI,
homeless children projects (FY1999 only), and an information clearinghouse — and other
budget accounts (e.g., funds for “alternative meal count” project grants), (3) unused money
carried over or recovered from the previous year ($157 million in FY1999 and $330 million in
FY2000), (4) money appropriated for general federal administration of food assistance programs
(an undifferentiated share of which is spent on child nutrition activities), and (5) $34 million in
commodity purchases mandated for FY2000 by P.L. 106-224.
b. WIC figures do not include: (1) money for WIC research and evaluations (appropriated to the
Economic Research Service budget account), (2) unused money carried over from the previous
year ($155 million in FY1999 and $121 million in FY2000), and (3) money appropriated for
general federal administration of food assistance programs (an undifferentiated share of which
is spent on WIC activities). The appropriation figures include money for the WIC farmers’
market nutrition program.

CRS-22
Table 2B. Child Nutrition & WIC Spending: FY1999 & FY2000
($ in millions)
FY1999: Actual
FY2000: Actual
Programs/Activities
spending
spending a
School lunchb
$ 5,516.6
$ 5,564.3
School breakfastb
1,354.8
1,422.9
Child and adult care foodb
1,598.6
1,690.5
Summer food serviceb
295.6
283.7
Special milk
18.1
16.2
Commoditiesc
733.2
767.8
State administrative expenses
114.0
120.2
d
d
Nutrition education & training
Homeless children nutrition
1.4
*.*e
Coordinated review effort
4.3
4.3
Nutrition studies and surveysf
3.0
3.0
Food service management institute
3.0
3.0
Special projectsg
11.2
17.8
Child nutrition total
$ 9,653.8
$ 9,893.7
WIC program totalh
3,955.6
3,976.4
(WIC farmers’ market nutrition program)
(15.0)
(19.3)
Overall total
$ 13,609.4
$ 13,870.1
Notes: The figures shown generally are spending (obligation) estimates from documents
accompanying the Administration’s FY2001 and FY2002 budgets. They differ significantly from
appropriations (shown in Table 2A) and include: spending from previous-year carryovers/ recoveries
of unspent obligations, permanent appropriations, commodity assistance and other spending drawn
from separate Agriculture Department budget accounts, and required commodity purchases under the
Agriculture Risk Protection Act (P.L. 106-224). WIC figures show spending that reflects inter-year
carryovers (see note h on the following page). The amounts shown do not reflect most federal-only
child nutrition administrative costs (roughly $55-$65 million a year), which are funded from a separate
undifferentiated general food program administration account, or the value of “bonus” commodities
supplied to child nutrition programs at the Secretary of Agriculture’s discretion.
a. Includes spending under the enacted FY2000 appropriation and the commodity purchase provisions
of P.L. 106-224, plus spending from other sources noted above.
b. Figures include cash assistance only, not the value of commodities or cash-lieu-of commodities.
For the Child and Adult Care Food program, they include funding for a $4 million a year
demonstration project operating in Iowa and Kentucky that applied a more liberal test to
participation by for-profit day care centers.
c. Includes cash subsidies provided in lieu of commodities (e.g., $64 million in FY2000), some
commodity donation administrative/distribution/computer costs (e.g., $7 million for FY2000),
some $400 million in commodities purchased and donated at no charge to the child nutrition
account in order to meet the commodity entitlements of schools and other providers, and $34

CRS-23
million (for FY2000) directed to be spent to purchase commodities by P.L. 106-224. The
overwhelming majority of commodity assistance (more than 90%) is for the School Lunch
program. Not shown specifically is the value of any “bonus” commodities that the Agriculture
Department donates if excess federal commodity holdings permit (e.g., $73 million in FY2000).
d. Although the Clinton Administration requested funding for the Nutrition Education and Training
(NET) program for these years, no appropriation was forthcoming.
e. As required by a 1998 change in child nutrition law, full funding for the homeless children nutrition
program is included in the figures shown for the child and adult care food program, beginning
with FY2000.
f. In FY1999, as in FY1998, nutrition studies and surveys were funded through the appropriation for
the Economic Research Service (not the child nutrition appropriation). At the direction of the
appropriations law, all funding for nutrition program research and evaluation — child nutrition,
WIC, and food stamps — was consolidated in the Agriculture Department’s Economic Research
Service (ERS), at the dollar level requested by the Administration. For FY2000, the
Administration asked that $3 million be provided for nutrition studies and surveys through the
child nutrition appropriation account (and spent by the FNS). The FY2000 spending figure
shown assumes spending on child nutrition studies/surveys, through the ERS appropriation, at
the Administration’s requested $3 million level — out of a total $12.2 million for all nutrition
program research and evaluation (child nutrition, WIC, and food stamps).
g. For FY1999, the amount shown for special projects includes funding for a school meals initiative
and other initiatives to improve food service and food safety (e.g., “Team Nutrition,” food
service training grants, food safety education), as well as an information clearinghouse. For
FY2000, the special projects amount also includes money for a school breakfast pilot project
offering free meals to all elementary school children in the pilot schools ($4.8 million), and $2.3
million for special grants to test alternative methods for claiming federal subsidies (“alternative
meal count” projects) directed by P.L. 105-336.
h. Total WIC program figures include spending for the WIC farmers’ market nutrition program. In
FY1999, an amount equal to the full $15 million farmers’ market program appropriation was
spent. In FY2000, some $4.3 million more than the minimum $15 million explicitly
appropriated was spent. The WIC program total also includes $3.5 million a year appropriated
through the ERS for WIC research (also see note f above). The WIC spending figure for
FY1999 reflects $155 million in unused FY1998 funds available in FY1999. For FY2000, WIC
spending figures reflect $121 million in unused FY1999 funds available in FY2000, and
approximately $180 million in unused money carried out into FY2001.

CRS-24
FY2001 Funding
The FY2001 appropriations for the child nutrition and WIC programs were
enacted on October 28, 2000, as part of the Agriculture Department appropriations
measure for FY2001 (P.L. 106-387; H.Rept. 106-948); see Table 3A). The
appropriation for the child nutrition budget account was $9.451 billion. The amount
appropriated for the WIC account was $4.052 billion.
The child nutrition amount for FY2001 was slightly ($5 million) less than the
Clinton Administration’s request. It included money to fully fund child nutrition
activities under existing law, the requested $6 million to complete funding for a
school breakfast demonstration offering meals free to all children in participating
schools ($7 million was appropriated and just under $5 million was spent for this in
FY2000), and $500,000 for a Wisconsin project providing grants to start up school
breakfast programs. The Administration’s request to reinstitute funding ($2 million)
for the Nutrition Education and Training (NET) program was not approved, but its
request for $3 million to pay for child nutrition studies and evaluations was adopted
(although it was provided through the separate Economic Research Service
appropriation).
The WIC amount for FY2001 was significantly lower than requested by the
Clinton Administration. The appropriation of $4.052 billion included $4.032 billion
for the regular WIC program (about $113 million less than requested) and the
Administration’s proposed $20 million for the WIC farmers’ market program (as part
of the WIC appropriation, rather than as a separate appropriation). Requested
funding for WIC research ($3.5 million) was approved — but as part of the
appropriation for the Economic Research Service, not the WIC account as requested.
After enactment of the FY2001 Agriculture Department appropriations law, P.L.
106-554 directed an across-the-board .22% reduction (rescission) in the
appropriations for discretionary programs operated by many agencies. The effect on
child nutrition programs was minuscule (a $29,000 reduction) — because very little
of the account is considered discretionary spending and it is almost entirely
composed of entitlement (“mandatory”) programs. However, the WIC program
appropriation was significantly reduced — by $8.9 million — because it is a wholly
discretionary program. This rescission is not reflected in the FY2001 enacted
appropriation amount shown in Table 3A, but its effect is accounted for in the
spending figures shown in Table 3B.
As with FY2000, Section 241 of P.L. 106-224, the Agriculture Risk Protection
Act directed the Agriculture Department to purchase additional food commodities for
distribution through the School Lunch program. For FY2001, the Department was
effectively mandated to buy an estimated $76 million worth of commodities, over
and above acquisitions scheduled in the FY2001 budget. This amount is included in
the estimated spending amounts shown in Table 3B, but not in the appropriations
amounts shown in Table 3A.
Actual spending for child nutrition and WIC programs was higher than the
annual appropriations noted above (and in Table 3A). As shown in Table 3B, they

CRS-25
reflect the FY2001 rescission and spending drawing on funding from all sources —
the annual appropriation, permanent appropriations, money available from FY2000,
funds from other budget accounts, and commodity buys mandated by P.L. 106-224.
The FY2001 appropriation and other sources supported spending for child
nutrition programs, including studies and surveys financed through the Economic
Research Service appropriation, of about $10.264 billion. FY2001 WIC spending —
including the regular WIC program, farmers’ market program, research,
infrastructure grants, and technical assistance — totaled $4.147 billion. This was
supported by the enacted WIC appropriation (as reduced by the rescission), money
provided for WIC research through the Economic Research Service (an estimated
$3.5 million), and money carried over from FY2000 (more than $170 million).
Table 3A. Child Nutrition & WIC Appropriations:
FY2000 & FY2001
($ in millions)
FY2001:
Annual
FY2000: Enacted
Administration’s
FY2001: Enacted
appropriations
appropriations
requested
appropriations
account
(P.L. 106-78)
appropriations
(P.L. 106-387)
Child nutritiona
$ 9,554.0
$ 9,546.1
$ 9,541.5
WICb
4,032.0
4,148.1
4,052.0
Total
$ 13,586.0
$ 13,694.2
$ 13,593.5
Notes: The figures presented in this table are annual appropriation amounts from P.L. 106-78
(FY2000), the Administration’s FY2001 budget request and H.Rept. 106-948 (the House-Senate
agreement on the FY2001 appropriations), and P.L. 106-387 (FY2001). They are substantially lower
than the total amount of federal funding available — from all sources — to fund child nutrition and
WIC program spending shown in Table 3B (see notes below). They are not adjusted to reflect the
$8.9 million WIC rescission in FY2001 directed by P.L. 106-554 or additional commodity purchases
mandated by P.L. 106-224.
a. Child nutrition figures do not include: (1) money for nutrition studies and surveys (except for $3
million in the Administration’s FY2001 request), (2) money available from permanent
appropriations — just over $400 million for commodities, the FSMI, and an information
clearinghouse — and other budget accounts (e.g., “alternative meal count” grants), (3) unused
money carried over or recovered from the previous year (estimated at $330 million in FY2000
and $636 million in FY2001), (4) money appropriated for general federal administration of food
assistance programs (an undifferentiated share of which is spent on child nutrition activities),
and (5) additional commodity purchases mandated by the Agriculture Risk Protection Act, P.L.
106-224 ($34 million in FY2000 and $76 million in FY2001).
b. WIC figures are not adjusted for a mandated FY2001 $8.9 million rescission and do not include:
(1) money for WIC research and evaluations (except for $3.5 million in the Administration’s
FY2001 request), (2) unused money carried over from the previous year ($121 million in
FY2000 and $180 million in FY2001), and (3) money appropriated for general federal
administration of food assistance programs (an undifferentiated share of which is spent on WIC
activities). Funding for the WIC farmers market nutrition program is included in all figures
except the Administration’s FY2001 request (the Administration asked for $20 million in a
separate appropriation account).

CRS-26
Table 3B. Child Nutrition & WIC Spending:
FY2000 & FY2001
($ in millions)
FY2000: Actual
FY2001: Actual
Programs/Activities
spending a
spending a
School lunchb
$ 5,564.3
$ 5,734.7
School breakfastb
1,422.9
1,468.2
Child and adult care foodb
1,690.5
1,741.8
Summer food serviceb
283.7
292.3
Special milk
16.2
16.7
Commoditiesc
767.8
847.5
State administrative expenses
120.2
126.8
d
d
Nutrition education and training
Homeless children nutritione
*.*e
*.*e
Coordinated review effort
4.3
4.5
Nutrition studies and surveysf
3.0
3.0
Food service management institute (FSMI)
3.0
3.0
Special projectsg
17.8
24.8
Child nutrition total
$ 9,893.7
$ 10,263.3
WIC program totalh
3,976.4
4,147.3
(WIC farmers’ market nutrition program)
(19.3)
(21.0)
Overall total
$ 13,870.1
$ 14,410.6
Notes: The figures shown in this table are spending (obligation) amounts from documents
accompanying the Administration’s FY2001 and FY2002 budgets and are adjusted, where necessary,
based on the committee reports accompanying the House and Senate FY2001 Agriculture Department
appropriations measures and the House-Senate FY2001 conference agreement. They differ from
annual appropriations (shown in Table 3A) and include spending from previous-year carryovers and
permanent appropriations, commodity assistance and other spending supported by separate Agriculture
Department budget accounts, and required commodity purchases under P.L. 106-224. WIC figures
reflect estimated spending assuming some unused money will be carried over from year to year (see
note h on the following page). The amounts shown do not reflect most federal-only child nutrition
administrative costs (roughly $55-$65 million a year), which are funded from a separate
undifferentiated general food program administration account, or the value of “bonus” commodities.
a. Includes spending under the enacted FY2000 and FY2001 appropriations and the commodity
purchase provisions of P.L. 106-224, plus spending from other sources noted above.
b. Figures include cash assistance only, not the value of commodities or cash in lieu of commodities.
For the Child and Adult Care Food program, they include funding for a demonstration project
in several states that applies a more liberal test to participation by for-profit day care centers.
c. Includes cash subsidies provided in lieu of commodities (e.g., $68 million in FY2001), commodity
donation administrative/distribution/computer spending (e.g., $8 million in FY2001), and some

CRS-27
$400 million in commodities purchased and donated at no charge to the child nutrition account
in order to meet the commodity entitlements of schools and other providers. The overwhelming
majority (more than 90%) of commodity assistance is for the School Lunch program. Not
shown is the value of “bonus” commodities that the Agriculture Department donates if excess
federal commodity holdings permit (e.g., $76 million in FY2001). However, special additional
commodity purchases of $34 million in FY2000 and $76 million in FY2001 required by the
Agriculture Risk Protection Act (P.L. 106-224; enacted June 20, 2000) are included.
d. Although the Clinton Administration requested funding for the Nutrition Education and Training
(NET) program for these years, no appropriation was forthcoming.
e. As required by a 1998 change in child nutrition law, full funding for the homeless children nutrition
program is included in the figures shown for the child and adult care food program.
f. In FY2000, nutrition studies and surveys were funded through the appropriation for the Economic
Research Service (ERS), as they were in FY1998 and FY1999. This was in contrast to the
Clinton Administration’s request that they be funded through the child nutrition appropriation
and conducted by the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS). At the direction of the appropriations
law, all funding for nutrition program research and evaluation — child nutrition, WIC, and food
stamps — was consolidated in the Agriculture Department’s ERS, at the dollar level requested
by the Administration. The FY2000 funding level figure shown assumes spending on child
nutrition studies and surveys, through the ERS, at the Administration’s requested $3 million
level — out of a total $12.2 million for all nutrition program research and evaluation (child
nutrition, WIC, and food stamps). For FY2001, the Administration again requested that $3
million be provided for nutrition studies and surveys through the child nutrition appropriation
account and spent by the FNS. But the enacted FY2001 appropriations law provides the $3
million through the ERS appropriation.
g. The amounts shown for special projects include: funding for various projects to improve food
service and food safety covering “Team Nutrition” and food service training grants and food
safety education (e.g., approximately $15 million in FY2001), a small $200,000 grant for an
information clearinghouse, a school breakfast pilot project offering free meals to all elementary
school children in the pilot schools ($4.8 million in FY2000 and $8.2 million for FY2001), $1-2
million for special grants to test alternative methods for claiming federal subsidies (“alternative
meal count grants”) directed by P.L. 105-336. Funding ($500,000 in FY2001) for a special
school breakfast start-up grant project in Wisconsin is included in the overall school breakfast
program figure.
h. Total WIC program figures include spending for the WIC farmers’ market nutrition program
(shown in parentheses). WIC totals also include $3.5 million a year for research and evaluation.
Funding for research and evaluation was provided through the ERS appropriation in FY2000
and again in FY2001 under the terms of the enacted appropriations law, although the Clinton
Administration sought to fund and operate WIC research and evaluation through the FNS (also
see note f above). The WIC spending figure for FY2000 reflects $121 million in unused
FY1999 funds available in FY2000. The FY2001 spending figure reflects about $176 million
in unused FY2000 funding available in FY2001. These carryover estimates are derived from
the Administration’s FY2002 and FY2003 budget submissions. The WIC spending amount for
FY2001 does not include $1 million provided for a related Health Program Demonstration
Project called for in P.L. 106-224.

CRS-28
FY2002 Funding
FY2002 Appropriations. Table 4A shows the Bush Administration’s
requested FY2002 annual appropriation amounts for the child nutrition and WIC
budget accounts, compared to the amounts provided for these accounts in: (1) the
enacted FY2002 Agriculture Department appropriations law (P.L. 107-76), plus (2)
for the WIC program, two additional FY2002 appropriations measures (P.L. 107-
117; and P.L. 107-206). For further comparison, the table also includes the FY2001
appropriations for the child nutrition and WIC accounts.
Administration Request. The Bush Administration’s FY2002 budget asked
for an annual appropriation for the child nutrition account totaling $10.089 billion,
$547 million more than the FY2001 appropriation. Only one new initiative was
contained in this request: $2 million to fund new School Lunch “program integrity”
activities for developing alternatives to the processes now used to determine
eligibility for free and reduced-price school meals. With this exception, the request
simply continued funding for current-law activities, with the increase reflecting
inflation indexing of federal subsidies and expected enrollment changes.28 In
addition, funding for child nutrition evaluations and studies was requested in the
Economic Research Service budget and the Food Program Administration account.
As to the WIC budget account, the Administration called for an appropriation
of $4.137 billion for FY2002, $94 million above the amount appropriated for
FY2001 (after reduction by $8.9 million under the terms of the FY2001 across-the-
board rescission noted earlier in this report). The proposed increase was to offset
expected costs due to inflation, without allowance for an increased caseload. With
regard to the other components of the WIC appropriations request, the
Administration asked for: (1) $14 million for infrastructure development grants,
including $6 million for developing electronic benefit transfer systems, and (2) $20
million for the WIC farmers’ market nutrition program.29 The infrastructure amount
was the same as FY2001, but the farmers’ market request was $1 million below
spending in FY2001. Additional funding for WIC research was requested through
the Economic Research Service budget.
House Appropriations Action. On July 11, 2001, the House approved its
version of the FY2002 Agriculture Department appropriations measure (H.R. 2330;
H.Rept. 107-116).
The House bill appropriated the full $10.089 billion for the child nutrition
account requested by the Administration, with no changes. As requested, separate
funding for child nutrition evaluations and studies was provided through the budget
accounts for the Economic Research Service and Food Program Administration. In
28 Unlike previous requests under the Clinton Administration, the FY2002 request called for
funding of child nutrition studies and surveys through the appropriation to the Economic
Research Service.
29 Of the $20 million for the farmers’ market program, $10 million was to be made available
immediately, and up to $10 million was to be released if not needed to maintain regular WIC
program caseload levels.

CRS-29
addition, language in the House Appropriations Committee’s report (1) called for a
report on enforcement of “Buy America” provisions of law that apply to school food
purchase, (2) called on the Agriculture Department to review recommendations for
change in policies affecting the sale of “competitive foods” in schools and seek
authority for any needed changes from the appropriate authorizing committees, (3)
encouraged continued efforts to resolve issues connected with application of certain
requirements of federal meat and poultry inspection laws to school meals in Ohio, (4)
asked for a report on implementation of efforts to increase and coordinate nutrition
education activities, (5) requested a report on the effect of rising food and labor costs
on school meal programs, (6) urged the Department to consider a milk vending
machine pilot project in schools (potentially located in Iowa), and (7) called for a
report on the availability of fruit and vegetables in schools (comparing schools with
and without salad bars).
For the WIC account, the House appropriated the requested $4.137 billion, but
included stipulations as to its spending that differed from the Administration’s. It
provided a total of $10 million for infrastructure development ($4 million less than
requested), but then set aside $6 million (as requested) of this amount for electronic
benefit transfer (EBT) systems. On the other hand, it increased the amount available
for the WIC farmers’ market program to $25 million ($5 million more than
requested)30 and created a new $15 million set-aside for a seniors farmers’ market
program.31 As requested, funding for WIC research was provided through the
Economic Research Service appropriation. Finally, the committee’s report (1)
directed the Department to make funding available to support state initiatives for
innovative solutions providing benefits in WIC (and seniors) farmers’ markets
through electronic benefit transfer (EBT) systems, (2) urged the Department to study
the feasibility of a pilot program to increase fresh produce consumption in WIC (and
food stamp) programs, (3) noted the committee’s concern that WIC participation in
FY2002 might be higher than expected and promised to monitor the need for
additional funds, and (4) called for a report on the status of policies regarding food
substitutions in WIC food packages to accommodate food preferences and
ethnic/cultural eating patterns.
Senate Appropriations Action. On July 18, 2001, the Senate
Appropriations Committee reported its version of the FY2002 Agriculture
Department appropriations measure (S. 1191; S.Rept. 107-41). The Senate approved
the committee’s recommendation as its version of H.R. 2330 on October 25, 2001,
with no changes to child nutrition or WIC figures.
30 The $25 million for the WIC farmers market program was made available to the extent not
needed to maintain the regular WIC caseload.
31 The seniors farmers’ market nutrition program makes grants to states and Indian tribal
organizations to provide vouchers/coupons to low-income elderly persons that can be
exchanged for food at farmers’ markets, roadside stands, and community supported
agriculture programs. It was initiated under the Clinton Administration in January 2001
using $15 million in funding available from the Agriculture Department’s Commodity
Credit Corporation. Money under the House bill was to be available for the seniors farmers’
market program to the extent not needed to maintain the regular WIC caseload. Information
about it can be found at the Agriculture Department’s website: [http://www.fns.usda.gov].

CRS-30
For the child nutrition account, the Senate bill appropriated $1.5 million less
than requested by the Administration and appropriated in the House bill. It differed
by: (1) not appropriating the $2 million asked for by the Administration for School
Lunch “program integrity” activities (instead, this amount was appropriated through
the Food Program Administration account) and (2) appropriating $500,000 to
continue a pilot project in Wisconsin making start-up grants for School Breakfast
programs.32 As with the House bill, the Senate also provided funding for child
nutrition studies and evaluations through the appropriations for the Economic
Research Service and Food Program Administration. In addition, language in the
Senate Appropriations Committee’s report (1) urged the Department to examine the
merits of experiments (in Iowa and Wisconsin) with milk vending machines and
expand them as pilot projects if found to be beneficial, (2) urged the Department to
put an increased emphasis on nutrition education and training (particularly in light
of concerns about child obesity), (3) called for a report on “Buy America” provisions
covering school food purchases, and (4) requested a report on the costs of providing
meals and snacks under child nutrition programs (expressing a concern that subsidy
rate indexes may be lagging).
For the WIC budget account, the Senate bill appropriated $110 million more
than requested by the Administration and appropriated in the House bill. As in the
House bill, funding for WIC research was provided through the Economic Research
Service appropriation. With regard to components of the WIC appropriation, the
Senate bill: (1) followed the Administration’s proposal as to infrastructure funding,
(2) increased potential funding available for the WIC farmers’ market nutrition
program to $25 million ($20 million available immediately, and $5 million available
if not needed to maintain the regular WIC program caseload), (3) did not make any
provision for seniors farmers’ nutrition market programs, and (4) stipulated that any
carryover funds from FY2001 to FY2002 in excess of $110 million could be
transferred from the WIC program to the Rural Community Advancement program.
The Senate Committee’s report also (1) asked the Department to assess the effect of
arrangements between infant formula manufacturers and hospitals on state infant
formula rebate contracts and breast-feeding rates among WIC recipients, (2) restated
a policy against having WIC agencies perform aggressive health care screening,
referral, and assessment functions that interfere with providing core WIC benefits
and services, (3) directed the Secretaries of Agriculture and Health and Human
Services to delineate responsibilities related to immunization, and (4) called for a
report on the status of policies regarding food substitutions in WIC food packages to
accommodate food preferences and ethnic/cultural eating patterns.
Enacted Appropriations. On November 9, 2001, the House-Senate
conference agreement on the FY2002 Agriculture Department appropriations bill was
filed (H.R. 2330; H.Rept. 107-275). It was approved by the House on November 13
and by the Senate on November 15. On November 28, 2001, the congressional
agreement on the FY2002 appropriations law was enacted as P.L. 107-76.
32 This Wisconsin pilot project was initiated under provisions in the FY2001 Agriculture
Department appropriations law. FY2001 funding was $500,000.

CRS-31
The FY2002 Agriculture Department appropriations law generally followed the
Senate measure and appropriated $10.087 billion for the child nutrition budget
account. This was intended to fully fund child nutrition activities. The
Administration’s requested funding for School Lunch “program integrity” activities
was funded through the Food Program Administration budget account; $500,000 was
provided for a Wisconsin School Breakfast expansion pilot project (as in FY2001);
and money for child nutrition studies and evaluations was provided through the
appropriations for the Economic Research Service and Food Program
Administration. The House-Senate conference report also (1) directed the
Agriculture Department to ensure that all guidance and other material related to “Buy
America” requirements be coordinated to ensure that these requirements do not
distinguish among sources of funds used to make purchases, (2) requested a report
on rising food and labor costs for school meals, (3) called for an increased emphasis
on nutrition education and training because of the rising incidence of childhood
obesity and diabetes, and (3) asked the Department to analyze current levels of fresh
produce available to children in school meal programs (and otherwise), review
methods of distributing fresh produce to schools, and undertake outreach efforts to
increase produce purchases through school meal programs.
For the WIC budget account, the FY2002 appropriations law provided more than
either the House or Senate bills: $4.348 billion. As in those bills, money for WIC
research was appropriated through the Economic Research Service budget. With
regard to the components of the WIC appropriation, the enacted law: (1) provided
$10 million for infrastructure development (plus $4 million if not needed to support
the regular WIC program’s caseload) and set aside $6 million for electronic benefit
transfer (EBT) systems and (2) included a potential total of $25 million for the WIC
farmers’ market nutrition program ($10 million available immediately, plus $15
million if not needed to maintain the regular WIC program’s caseload). It did not
include set-asides for the seniors farmers’ market nutrition program (as in the House)
or the Rural Community Advancement program (as in the Senate). The House-
Senate conference report also supported an infant formula study (as in the Senate),
but specifically did not include language regarding support of state EBT/farmers’
market initiatives (as in the House), although $100,000 was set aside for a New York
EBT project dealing with the use of food stamps in farmers’ markets.
Added FY2002 Funding for the WIC Program. In passing the regular
FY2002 appropriation for the WIC program, both the House and Senate
Appropriations Committees noted that there was a significant potential that the
demand for WIC services would expand beyond the level covered by the
appropriation enacted in November 2001 (P.L. 107-76). As reports of increased
pressure on WIC providers were received — showing the caseload “demand” rising
well above the 7.25 million persons originally projected by the Administration in
early 2001 or the 7.4 million persons expected to be covered by the added money
provided in the regular appropriation for FY2002 — Congress (with the
Administration’s support) acted to appropriate an additional $114 million for the
FY2002 WIC program. This was done in two appropriations measures: (1) the
FY2002 Defense Department appropriations law, P.L. 107-117 (enacted January 10,
2002) and (2) an FY2002 emergency supplemental appropriations law, P.L. 107-206
(enacted August 2, 2002).

CRS-32
Funding the FY2002 WIC Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program. The
regular FY2002 appropriation for the WIC program set aside an immediate $10
million for the WIC farmers’ market nutrition program. It also provided up to $15
million extra, if the money was not needed to meet the regular WIC program’s
caseload requirements. Because of substantial caseload pressures on the regular WIC
program, the Agriculture Department announced, early in 2002 (as part of its FY2003
budget presentation), that it would not release the additional $15 million for the
farmers’ market program. This would have meant a substantial drop in support for
the farmers’ market program — from $20 million appropriated for FY2001 (and $21
million spent, including carryover funds from FY2000). Instead, Congress stepped
in and provided the $15 million as part of the 2002 “farm bill” (the Farm Security
and Rural Investment Act; P.L. 107-171; enacted May 13, 2002). As a result, $26
million is available for the WIC farmers’ market nutrition program in FY2002: (1)
$10 million from the regular FY2002 appropriation, (2) $15 million from the “farm
bill,” and (3) $1 million carried over from FY2001.33
Additional Commodity Support in FY2002 (and FY2003). The 2002
“farm bill” (the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act; P.L. 107-171) also included
a provision that has the effect of increasing Agriculture Department commodity
purchases in support of child nutrition programs by an estimated $50 million in
FY2002 (and FY2003). It extends provisions of child nutrition law that remove a
mandate that any “bonus” commodities — already acquired by the Department for
agricultural support purposes (and then donated to schools) — be counted toward a
legal minimum requirement that 12% of all school lunch assistance be in the form
of commodities.34
FY2002 Spending. FY2002 spending for child nutrition and WIC programs
was significantly higher than provided in the appropriations laws noted above. Table
4B shows actual spending for child nutrition and WIC activities in FY2002 given the
total amount of child nutrition and WIC funding available from the regular FY2002
appropriations law and other sources — including additional appropriations, funding
carried over from FY2001, permanent appropriations, money from different budget
accounts (e.g., the Economic Research Service, Food Program Administration), and
the 2002 “farm bill.” For comparison, it also includes actual spending figures for
FY2001.
33 For details on the amount of FY2002 WIC farmers’ market nutrition program funding
granted by state (including the new money under the “farm bill”), see the Agriculture
Department’s Food and Nutrition Service website: [http://www.fns.usda.gov] .
34 Also see CRS Report RL31578, Child Nutrition and WIC Legislation in the 106th and
107th Congresses.

CRS-33
Table 4A. Child Nutrition & WIC Appropriations:
FY2001 & FY2002
(in millions)
FY2002: Enacted
FY2002:
appropriations
Administration’s
and other funding
requested
laws (P.L. 107-76,
FY2001: Enacted
appropriations
P.L. 107-117, P.L.
Annual appropriations
appropriations
(original FY2002
107-171, and P.L.
account
(P.L. 106-387)
request)
107-206)
Child nutritiona
$9,541.5
$ 10,088.7
$10,087.2
WICb
4,052.0
4,137.1
4,477.0
Total
$ 13,593.5
$ 14,225.8
$ 14,564.2
Notes: The FY2001 figures presented in this table are annual appropriation amounts from P.L. 106-
387. They do not include: (1) an estimated $76 million in additional commodity purchases mandated
by P.L. 106-224 and (2) the rescission of $8.9 million in WIC funding directed by P.L. 106-554. The
figures for the FY2002 Administration request are taken from the FY2002 Agriculture Department
budget documents. They do not include the Administration’s two requests for additional WIC funding,
totaling $114 million and enacted in P.L. 107-117 and P.L. 107-206. The figures for FY2002 enacted
appropriations include the regular appropriations law (P.L. 107-76), additional appropriations totaling
$114 million for the WIC program enacted in two laws (P.L. 107-117 and P.L. 107-206), and
additional mandatory funding for the WIC farmers’ market nutrition program ($15 million) enacted
in P.L. 107-171. They do not include an estimated $50 million in additional commodity purchases
for child nutrition programs resulting from provisions in P.L. 107-171. These appropriations figures
are substantially lower than the total amount of federal funding available — from all sources — to
fund spending for child nutrition and WIC programs, shown in Table 4B (see notes below).
a. Child nutrition figures do not include: (1) money for nutrition studies and surveys (appropriated to
the Economic Research Service and the Food Program Administration budget account), (2)
money available from permanent appropriations — just over $400 million for commodities, the
FSMI, and an information clearinghouse — and other budget accounts, (3) unused money
carried over or recovered from FY2001 (estimated at $344 million), and (4) money appropriated
for general federal administration of food assistance programs (an undifferentiated share of
which is spent on child nutrition activities).
b. WIC figures do not include: (1) money for WIC research and evaluations (appropriated to the
Economic Research Service), (2) unused money carried over from the previous year (estimated
at $136 million), and (3) money appropriated for general federal administration of food
assistance programs (an undifferentiated share of which is spent on WIC activities). Funding
for the WIC farmers’ market nutrition program is included in all WIC figures. WIC figures for
the enacted FY2002 appropriations include the regular appropriation, $114 million in additional
appropriations (P.L. 107-117 and P.L. 107-206), and $15 million in mandatory funding for the
farmers’ market program provided in P.L. 107-171.

CRS-34
Table 4B. Child Nutrition & WIC Spending:
FY2001 & FY2002
($ in millions)
FY2001:
FY2002:
Programs/Activities
Actual spendinga
Actual spendinga
School lunchb
$ 5,734.7
$ 6,026.0
School breakfastb
1,468.2
1,541.0
Child and adult care foodb
1,741.8
1,830.7
Summer food serviceb
292.3
307.2
Special milk
16.7
17.5
Commoditiesc
847.5
866.1
State administrative expenses
126.8
132.3
d
d
Nutrition education and training
Homeless children nutritione
*.*d
*.*d
Coordinated review effort
4.5
4.7
Nutrition studies and surveysf
3.0
NA
Food service management institute (FSMI)
3.0
3.0
Special projectsg
24.8
14.4
Child nutrition total
$ 10,263.3
$ 10,742.9
WIC program totalh
4,147.3
4,372.3
(WIC farmers’ market nutrition program)
(21.0)
(21.3)
Overall total
$ 14,410.6
15,115.2
Notes: The figures shown in this table are spending (obligation) amounts from documents
accompanying the Administration’s FY2002, FY2003, and FY2004 budgets and are adjusted, where
necessary, based on the congressional reports accompanying the FY2001 and FY2002 Agriculture
Department appropriations measures. They differ from appropriations (shown in Table 4A) and
include spending from previous-year carryovers and permanent appropriations, commodity assistance
and other spending drawn from separate Agriculture Department budget accounts, and required
commodity purchases and WIC funding under P.L. 106-224, P.L. 107-117, P.L. 107-171, and P.L.
107-206. WIC figures reflect spending assuming some unused money will be carried over from year
to year (see note h on the following page). The amounts shown do not reflect most federal-only child
nutrition administrative costs (roughly $60-$70 million a year), which are funded from a separate
undifferentiated general food program administration account, or the value of “bonus” commodities.
a. Includes spending under the enacted FY2001 and FY2002 appropriations measures, the additional
funding provisions of P.L. 106-224, P.L. 107-117, P.L. 107-171, and P.L. 107-206, plus
spending from other sources noted above.
b. Figures include cash assistance only, not the value of commodities or cash in lieu of commodities.
For the child and adult care food program, they include funding for a demonstration project
in several states that applies a more liberal test to participation by for-profit day care centers.
c. Includes cash subsidies provided in lieu of commodities (e.g., $73 million in FY2002), certain
federal commodity donation administrative/distribution/computer spending (e.g., $11 million

CRS-35
in FY2002), and some $400 million in commodities purchased and donated at no charge to the
child nutrition account in order to meet the commodity entitlements. The overwhelming
majority (more than 90%) of commodity assistance is for the school lunch program. Not shown
is the value of “bonus” commodities donated if excess federal commodity holdings permit (e.g.,
$70 million in FY2002). However, special commodity purchases of $76 million in FY2001
required by the Agriculture Risk Protection Act (P.L. 106-224; enacted June 20, 2000) are
included, as are FY2002 commodity purchases required by provisions P.L. 107-171.
d. Although the Clinton Administration requested funding for the Nutrition Education and Training
(NET) program through FY2001, no appropriation was forthcoming. This item is included for
purposes of historical comparison.
e. As required by a 1998 change in child nutrition law, full funding for the Homeless Children
Nutrition program is included in the figures shown for the Child and Adult Care Food program.
This item is included for purposes of historical comparison.
f. In FY2001, nutrition studies and surveys were funded through the appropriation for the Economic
Research Service (ERS), as in FY1998-FY2000 — in contrast to the Clinton Administration’s
request that they be funded through the child nutrition appropriation and conducted by the FNS.
At the direction of the appropriations law, all funding for nutrition program research and
evaluation — child nutrition, WIC, and food stamps — was consolidated in the Agriculture
Department’s ERS, at the dollar level requested by the Administration. The FY2001 funding
level figure shown assumes spending on child nutrition studies and surveys, through the ERS,
at the Administration’s requested $3 million level — out of a total $12.2 million for all ERS
nutrition program research and evaluation (child nutrition, WIC, and food stamps). For
FY2002, the appropriations law again earmarked $12.2 million for all nutrition program
research and evaluation. However, this was divided: $9.2 million through the ERS and $3
million through the FNS, and no comprehensive breakdown showing the child nutrition studies
and surveys portion of this total is available.
g. The amounts shown for special projects include: funding for various projects to improve food
service and food safety covering “Team Nutrition” and food service training grants and food
safety education (funded at about $12 million in FY2002), a small $200,000 grant for an
information clearinghouse, a school breakfast pilot project offering free meals to all elementary
school children in the pilot schools ($8.2 million for FY2001), $1 million (FY2001) for special
grants to test alternative methods for claiming federal subsidies (“alternative meal count grants”)
directed by P.L. 105-336, and $2 million (FY2002) for a school lunch “integrity” project.
Funding ($500,000 annually) for a special School Breakfast start-up grant project in Wisconsin
is included in the overall school breakfast program figure.
h. Total WIC program figures include spending for the WIC farmers’ market nutrition program
(shown in parentheses). The WIC total for FY2001 includes $3.5 million for research and
evaluation. Funding for research and evaluation was provided through the ERS appropriation
in FY2001 under the terms of the appropriations law, although the Clinton Administration
sought to fund and operate WIC research and evaluation through the FNS (also see note f
above). The WIC spending figure for FY2001 also reflects $176 million in unused FY2000
available in FY2001, but does not include $1 million provided separately for a related Health
Program Demonstration Project called for in P.L. 106-224.. The FY2002 amount does not
include funding for research and evaluation. For FY2002, the appropriations law earmarked
$12.2 million for all nutrition program research and evaluation. However, this was divided: $9.2
million through the ERS and $3 million through the FNS, and no comprehensive breakdown
showing the WIC research and evaluation portion of this total is available. The FY2002
spending estimate reflects about $76 million in unused FY2001 funding available in FY2002.
The FY2002 estimate also includes spending derived from additional WIC (and farmers’
market) funding provided in P.L. 107-117 and P.L. 107-206 ($129 million) and reflects $108
million not used in FY2002 and carried over into FY2003.

CRS-36
FY2003 Funding
FY2003 Appropriations. Table 5A shows the Administration’s requested
FY2003 appropriations for the child nutrition and WIC budget accounts compared
to: (1) the amounts provided for these accounts in the FY2003 Agriculture
Department appropriations bills reported by the House Appropriations Committee
(H.R. 5263; H.Rept. 107-623) and the Senate Appropriations Committee (S. 2801;
S.Rept. 107-223), (2) the omnibus FY2003 appropriations measure approved by the
Senate on January 23, 2003 (H.J.Res. 2), and (3) the FY2003 Consolidated
Appropriations Resolution (P.L. 108-7; H.Rept. 108-10; enacted February 20, 2003).
Beginning February 21, 2003, spending for child nutrition and WIC programs
was provided for by the FY2003 Consolidated Appropriations Resolution; Division
A of this resolution covered the Agriculture Department. For October 1, 2002,
through February 20, 2003, spending for child nutrition and WIC programs was
governed by the terms of a series of temporary continuing resolutions. These terms
and actual spending under the FY2003 Consolidated Appropriations Resolution are
described in the following section of this report — FY2003 Spending — and Table
5B. In addition, the Administration revised its original request for the WIC program
downward in January 2003 — see discussion of the Administration Request below.
Administration Request. The Administration’s FY2003 budget asked for
an appropriation for the child nutrition account totaling $10.576 billion, $489 million
more than appropriated for FY2002. No new initiatives were contained in the request
for funding under the child nutrition account. By and large, the request simply
continued funding for current-law activities, with an increase reflecting inflation
indexing of federal subsidies and expected enrollment changes. However, money for
food safety education projects was reduced by half (from $2 million in FY2002 to $1
million in FY2003), funds for the coordinated review effort were increased
noticeably (from $4.5 million in FY2002 to $5.1 million in FY2003), and the
$500,000 provided in FY2002 for a Wisconsin school breakfast expansion pilot
initiative was not renewed. Moreover, in the separate Food Program Administration
account, the Administration asked for a substantial increase in money for “program
integrity” activities affecting all FNS programs — up from $6.5 million in FY2002
to $11 million in FY2003. Funding for child nutrition evaluations and studies was
requested separately in the Economic Research Service budget.
As to the WIC budget, the Administration originally called for an appropriation
of $4.751 billion for FY2003, $274 million above total FY2002 funding level
provided through the regular appropriation and other, later funding laws. The
proposed increase was to provide money for an increased number of applicants and
slightly higher food costs, and to create a $150 million contingency fund should
costs/participation exceed budget projections. With regard to the other components
of the WIC appropriations request, the Administration asked for: (1) $14 million for
infrastructure development grants ($4 million more than FY2002), including $6
million for developing electronic benefit transfer systems, (2) no funds for the WIC
farmers’ market nutrition program, and (3) $2 million for a new study of the
management of approved WIC vendors. Additional funding for WIC research was
requested as part of the Economic Research Service budget.

CRS-37
On January 3, 2003, the Administration submitted amendments to its original
FY2003 requests. They did not affect child nutrition account, but did propose a
smaller FY2003 appropriation for the WIC account — a $25 million reduction. This
was characterized as a $25 million decrease in the $150 million contingency fund
contained in the original budget, and the Administration stated that it was possible
because of lower-than-anticipated WIC food costs in FY2003. It went on to contend
that, even after this reduction, the remaining $4.726 billion (including a $125 million
contingency amount) would be “sufficient to ensure that WIC can serve all eligible
persons seeking services” (i.e., 7.8 million persons, up from 7.5 million in FY2002,
according to the original FY2003 budget). The funds derived from this reduction in
the WIC appropriation would, according to the Administration, be used to offset
accompanying proposals for a new “Farm Bill Technical Assistance” account and for
funding for the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
House Appropriations Action. On July 26, 2002, the House
Appropriations Committee reported its version of the FY2003 Agriculture
Department appropriations measure (H.R. 5263; H.Rept. 107-623).
The House committee bill appropriated the $10.576 billion for the child
nutrition account requested by the Administration. In doing so, it accepted the
Administration’s proposed changes in funding for food safety education, the
coordinated review effort, and Wisconsin’s school breakfast pilot (as noted above).
Separately (in the Food Program Administration budget account), the House bill
provided $2 million of the Administration’s request for a $4.5 million increase in
money for FNS program integrity initiatives. As requested, funding for child
nutrition evaluations and studies was provided through the Economic Research
Service budget. Finally, language in the House Appropriations Committee’s report,
supported establishment of a “Youth Nutrition Education Media” campaign.
For the WIC account, the House committee bill appropriated $4.776 billion, $25
million more than requested. In doing so, it accepted the Administration’s original
$150 million contingency fund, as well as proposals for infrastructure development
funding, a study of WIC vendor management, and funding of other WIC research
through the Economic Research Service (as noted above). However, unlike the
Administration’s request, it specifically included $25 million for the WIC farmers’
market nutrition program (and, in Committee report language, noted that several
million dollars of FY2002 money also would be available to support farmers’
markets in FY2003). In the Committee’s report, it: (1) called for the Department’s
recommendation as to providing state WIC agencies with the flexibility to deal with
infant formula can-size issue so that recipients may receive the full authorized
amount of formula, (2) expressed concern over the delay in updating the rules
governing the content of WIC food packages and asked for quarterly reports on the
status of the updating regulations, and (3) directed the Department to clarify that
blended 100% fruit juices are eligible WIC food products and should be objectively
evaluated by state WIC agencies for inclusion on their list of approved WIC foods.
Senate Appropriations Action. On July 25, 2002, the Senate
Appropriations Committee reported its version of the FY2003 Agriculture
Department appropriations measure (S. 2801; S.Rept. 107-223). On January 23,
2003, the Senate approved its version of an omnibus FY2003 appropriations bill

CRS-38
(H.J.Res. 2). For the child nutrition account, the Senate-passed omnibus bill included
virtually the same amount as the Senate Appropriations Committee bill. However,
for the WIC account, less was provided because the full WIC program appropriation
was subject to an across-the-board cut in funding for discretionary programs (see the
discussion below for more detail).
The Senate committee bill appropriated $10.58 billion for the child nutrition
account, $4 million more than requested by the Administration and included in the
House bill. In doing so, it accepted the Administration’s proposed changes in
funding for food safety education and the coordinated review effort (noted above).
However, in a number of relatively small funding provisions, it differed from the
Administration and the House bill — (1) it included $3.3 million for a school
breakfast startup grant program building on a Wisconsin initiative begun in FY2001
(at least $1 million was to go to Wisconsin’s effort, and the remainder to at least five
additional states with low participation in the School Breakfast program); (2) it
provided $200,000 to Food Works of Vermont to fund a “Common Roots” program;
(3) it made $500,000 available for two years to establish a Child Nutrition Archive
Resource Center at the National Food Service Management Institute, and (4) it set
aside $3.2 million for child nutrition evaluations and studies through the FNS (from
the child nutrition account), rather than the Economic Research Service (as requested
by the Administration and included in the House bill). Separately (in the Food
Program Administration budget account), the Senate bill also provided the full $4.5
million increase in funding requested for FNS program integrity activities.
The Senate-approved omnibus FY2003 appropriations measure provided an
appropriation for the child nutrition account equal to the amount appropriated in the
Senate Committee bill. However, a very small amount of this appropriation was
subject to an across-the-board cut mandated for discretionary programs. The cut
would be at least 1.6%, and some rough estimates placed the total required reduction
at 2.9%. Depending on how this directive for a discretionary program reduction was
interpreted, it could have affected between $4 million and $15 million of the total
$10.58 billion child nutrition appropriation — i.e., a cut of under $500,000.
For the WIC account, the Senate committee bill appropriated the
Administration’s original request of $4.751 billion, and, in doing so, accepted the
Administration’s proposals for infrastructure development and a study of WIC
vendor management. While the Senate committee’s total appropriation was $25
million less than the House bill, it reduced the $150 million contingency fund to $125
million and specifically provided $25 million for the WIC farmers’ market nutrition
program. In another difference with the Administration (and the House bill), the
Senate committee measure assumed funding of WIC research through the FNS (from
the WIC account), as with child nutrition evaluations and studies; no specific figure
is noted. The Committee’s report also included language on infant formula can-size
requirements and the updating of rules governing the content of WIC food packages
that is comparable to that in the House report.
As regards the WIC account, the Senate-approved omnibus FY2003
appropriations measure followed the Senate committee bill, with one major
difference. The full WIC appropriation was subject to an across-the-board cut in
appropriations for discretionary programs. This would be at least 1.6%, and some

CRS-39
rough estimates of the total required reduction placed it at 2.9%. This translated into
at least a $76 million reduction in the overall WIC appropriation of $4.751 billion
(using the 1.6% minimum figure). However, while the total WIC appropriation was
effectively lowered by this cut, the $25 million set-aside for the WIC farmers’ market
nutrition program was unaffected.
Consolidated Appropriations Resolution.35 On February 20,2003, the
President signed the FY2003 Consolidated Appropriations Resolution approved by
the House and Senate February 13, 2003 (P.L. 108-7; H.J.Res. 2; H.Rept. 108-10).
Division A of this law covers appropriations for the Agriculture Department,
including child nutrition and WIC programs.
The FY2003 appropriation for the child nutrition account provided $10.58
billion — effectively the same as in the two Senate measures and some $4 million
more than requested and recommended by the House Appropriations Committee. In
doing so, it accepted the Administration’s proposed changes in funding for food
safety education and the coordinated review effort (noted earlier). As with the two
Senate measures, the FY2003 appropriation also: (1) included $3.3 million for a
school breakfast startup grant program ($1 million for Wisconsin); (2) provided
$200,000 for a Vermont “Common Roots” program; and (3) made $500,000
available for a Child Nutrition Archive Resource Center. It did not set aside money
from the child nutrition account for child nutrition research (instead appropriating
funds through the Economic Research Service, as requested and recommended by the
House Appropriations Committee) and provided only $1 million of the requested
$4.5 million increase in money for program integrity activities. Finally, an across-
the-board .65% reduction to be applied to “discretionary” activities affected less than
$15 million of the total $10.58 billion child nutrition appropriation — i.e., a cut of
less than $100,000.
As regards the WIC account, the FY2003 appropriation provided a total of
$4.696 billion — significantly less than requested by the Administration. However:
(1) it accepted the Administration’s proposals for infrastructure development funding
and a study of WIC vendor practices; (2) included a $125 million contingency fund,
(3) earmarked $25 million for the WIC farmers’ market nutrition program; and (4)
accepted the Administration’s request (and House recommendation) to fund WIC
research from the Economic Research Service appropriation. The WIC appropriation
was specifically exempted from the law’s across-the-board reduction in spending for
discretionary programs.
FY2003 Spending. Actual FY2003 spending for child nutrition and WIC
programs was significantly different than the amounts provided in the FY2003
Consolidated Appropriations Resolution. Table 5B shows estimated spending for
child nutrition and WIC activities in FY2003 under the Administration’s request and
35 Drawing on a recommendation in the Senate appropriations measures, the enacted
Consolidated Appropriations Resolution also included a provision changing child nutrition
law. This amendment extended a rule liberalizing the conditions under which for-profit
child care centers may participate in the Child and Adult Care Food program — through the
end of FY2003.

CRS-40
the FY2003 Consolidated Appropriations Resolution (when enacted) compared to
actual FY2003 spending — given the total amount of child nutrition and WIC
funding available from all sources (regular appropriations, funding carried over from
FY2002, permanent appropriations, money from different budget accounts, and the
2002 “farm bill”). Child nutrition spending was $11.2 billion and WIC spending at
$4.6 billion.
Until February 21, 2003, spending on child nutrition and WIC programs was
governed by the terms of a series of continuing resolutions. These resolutions
provided different spending rules for child nutrition and WIC programs, depending
on the type of program or activity, as follows.
In general, the overwhelming majority of child nutrition spending — for those
programs that are considered entitlements or mandatory programs or have
permanent appropriations (the school meal programs, the Child and Adult Care
Food program, the Summer Food Service program, the Special Milk program,
funding for state administrative expenses, commodity assistance, and funding for the
Food Service Management Institute and an information clearinghouse) — was
continued at a rate that would maintain whatever assistance levels were dictated
under the terms of the underlying laws, even if higher than comparable FY2002
amounts.
The regular WIC program and the WIC Farmers’ Market Nutrition program are
treated as discretionary, and normally would have been limited to spending no more
than their FY2002 amount. But, under the terms of the continuing resolutions and
special WIC provisions, they were treated somewhat differently than other
discretionary programs/activities.
The regular WIC program was effectively supported at a level very close to what
would have been the case under the final appropriation during the period covered by
the continuing resolutions because, by law, WIC funding must be “front-loaded” (i.e.,
half the year’s funding was made available in the first four months of the year) and
an additional $60 million in money carried over from FY2002 was made available.

In the case of the WIC Farmers’ Market Nutrition program, significantly less
was provided during the period covered by the continuing resolutions — when
compared to the final appropriation. In FY2002, the farmers’ market program spent
an estimated $21 million; this included money derived from the regular WIC
appropriation ($10 million), funding added from a non-WIC budget account by the
2002 “farm bill” (P.L. 107-171), and a small amount of carryover funding from
FY2001. Under the continuing resolutions, the WIC Farmers’ Market Nutrition
program was funded at its FY2002 level, but this FY2002 level was interpreted to
mean only the amount appropriated in the regular appropriation ($10 million), not the
higher spending amount including derived from the “farm bill” add-on or the
carryover.

CRS-41
Table 5A. Child Nutrition & WIC Appropriations: FY2003
(in millions)
FY2003: House
P.L. 108-7:
Appropriations
FY2003: Senate-
Enacted FY2003
Annual
FY2003:
Committee bill
approved omnibus
Consolidated
appropriations
Admin.
(H.R. 5263;
appropriations bill
Appropriations
account
request
H.Rept. 107-623)
(H.J.Res. 2)
Resolution
Child nutritiona
$10,576.2
$ 10,576.2
$10,580.1
$10,580.2
(Senate
Appropriations
Committee bill;
(10,580.2)
S. 2801)
WICb
4,726.0 c
4,776.0
4,675.0
4,696.0
(Senate
Appropriations
Committee bill;
(4,751.0)
S. 2801)
Total
$15,302.2
$15,352.2
$15,255.1
$15,276.2
Notes: The figures presented in this table are annual appropriation amounts for these accounts. They
are taken from the FY2003 and FY2004 Agriculture Department budget documents, amendments to
the FY2003 budget request submitted by the Administration on January 3, 2003, the appropriate
House and Senate measures, and the enacted law. These appropriations figures differ substantially
from the total amount of federal funding available — from all sources — to fund spending for child
nutrition and WIC programs, shown in Table 5B (also see notes below).
a. Child nutrition figures do not include money for child nutrition research (nutrition studies and
surveys) under the Administration’s request, the House bill, and the enacted law (where they
were appropriated to the Economic Research Service). They also do not include: (1) money
available from permanent appropriations — just over $400 million for commodities, the FSMI,
and an information clearinghouse — and other budget accounts, (2) additional commodity
purchases under P.L. 107-171, (3) unused money carried over or recovered from FY2002
(estimated at $356 million), and (4) money appropriated for general federal administration of
food assistance programs (an undifferentiated share of which is spent on child nutrition
activities). The figure for the Senate’s omnibus appropriations bill includes a very small
reduction reflecting the across-the-board cut for discretionary appropriations included in the
Senate measure.
b. The WIC figure shown for the Senate’s omnibus appropriations bill reflects a 1.6% across-the-
board reduction mandated for discretionary programs. This was the minimum cut directed by
the Senate measure. All WIC appropriations figures include contingency funds of varying sizes.
WIC figures do not include (1) money for WIC research under the Administration’s request, the
House bill, and the enacted law (where they were appropriated to the Economic Research
Service), (2) unused money carried over from the previous year ($123 million), and (3) money
appropriated for general federal administration of food assistance programs (an undifferentiated
share of which is spent on WIC activities). Funding for the WIC farmers’ market nutrition
program is not included in the Administration’s request for the WIC program, but is included
under the House and Senate bills and the enacted law.
c. The Administration’s original FY2003 budget requested a total of $4.751 billion for the WIC
account. In an amendment to its request submitted to Congress on January 3, 2003, it reduced
its request by $25 million, to $4.726 billion.

CRS-42
Table 5B. Child Nutrition & WIC Spending: FY2003
(in millions)
FY2003 estimated
spending: P.L.
108-7 Enacted
Consolidated
FY2003: P.L.
FY2003 estimated
Appropriations
108-7
spending:
Resolutiona
Administration
ACTUAL
Programs/Activities
requesta
WHEN ENACTED
SPENDING
School lunchb
$ 6,389.0
$ 6,389.0
$ 6,380.6
School breakfastb
1,680.6
1,680.6
1,674.2
Child & adult care foodb
1,925.1
1,925.1
1,915.5
Summer food serviceb
288.2c
288.2c
266.8
Special milk
15.4
15.4
14.3
Commoditiesd
855.7
855.7
855.6
State administrative expenses
134.0
134.0
133.1
Coordinated review effort
5.1
5.1
5.0
Food service management
3.0
3.0
3.0
institute (FSMI)
Special projectse
11.2
15.2
15.5
Child nutrition total
11,307.3
11,311.3
11,233.6
WIC programf
4,538.7
4,563.7
4,553.2
(WIC farmers’ market prog.)
(0.0)
(25.0)
(25.0)
Overall total
$ 15,846.0
$ 15,875.0
$ 15,786.8
Notes: All figures have been adjusted to reflect newer estimates contained in the FY2004 and FY2005
budgets. Care should be taken in using this table because, in some cases, it is not comparable with
earlier tables in this report. Earlier tables include specific items for nutrition education and training
a homeless children nutrition program, and nutrition studies and surveys. But funding requests are no
longer made for nutrition education and training, the program for homeless children is now
encompassed in the child and adult care food program, and money for nutrition research is typically
appropriated through the Economic Research Service. The figures shown in this table are spending
(obligation) amounts from documents accompanying the Administration’s budgets and congressional
documents accompanying the Agriculture Department appropriations bills and enacted appropriations.
They differ from appropriations (shown in Table 5A) and include spending from previous-year
carryovers and permanent appropriations, as well as commodity assistance and other spending drawn
from separate Agriculture Department budget accounts. WIC figures reflect estimated spending
assuming some unused money will be carried over from year to year (see note f below) and not include
spending on WIC research (typically appropriated to the Economic Research Service). The amounts
shown also do not reflect most federal-only child nutrition administrative costs (roughly $60-$70
million a year), which are funded from a separate undifferentiated general food program administration
account, or the value of “bonus” commodities.

CRS-43
a. Figures have been adjusted from those originally presented in the Administration’s FY2003 budget
— using more current amounts from the FY2004 and FY2005 budgets.
b. Figures include cash assistance only, not the value of commodities or cash-in-lieu of commodities.
For the child and adult care food program and the summer Food Service program, they include
some of the funding required for pilot projects expanding participation.
c. When compared to FY2002, these estimates for FY2003 appear to show a decrease in spending on
summer programs. However, this may be due to the estimating methodology used by the
Agriculture Department and a shift of payments for summer meals from the summer program
to the school lunch program. Separately calculated program indicators point to a 7% increase
in meals served and a rise in subsidy rates under the summer program from FY2002 and
FY2003.
d. Includes cash subsidies provided in lieu of commodities ($83 million in FY2003), certain federal
commodity donation administrative/distribution/computer spending ($9 million for FY2003),
some $200 million in commodities purchased for and donated at no charge to the child nutrition
account in order to meet commodity entitlements, and additional commodity purchases required
by P.L. 107-171. The overwhelming majority (more than 90%) of commodity assistance is for
the school lunch program. Not shown is the value of any “bonus” commodities that the
Agriculture Department may donate if excess federal commodity holdings permit ($100 million
in FY2003).
e. The amounts shown for shown for special projects include funding for school meals initiatives
including projects to improve food service (Team Nutrition) and food safety (totaling about $11
million) and a small $200,000 grant for an information clearinghouse. In addition, the figures
for the enacted law and actual spending include a total of $4 million for: (1) an expanded $3.3
million school breakfast startup grant program and (2) $700,000 for 2 small special projects
noted earlier in the description of Senate appropriations action. Funding for initiatives to
improve the child nutrition program integrity (e.g., of free and reduced-price meal eligibility
determinations in school meal programs) is not included in these figures. It was specifically
funded at $2 million in FY2002. For FY2003, the enacted law provided a total of $7.5 million
for program integrity initiatives in all FNS programs, up from a total of $6.5 million in FY2002
(including the $2 million for child nutrition activities); but no specific amount for child nutrition
activities was noted. Funds for program integrity are provided through the Food Program
Administration budget account.
f. Total WIC program figures include spending for the WIC farmers’ market nutrition program
(shown in parentheses). WIC totals do not include money for research and evaluations. Under
the Administration’s request and the enacted law, money for research related to FNS programs
is largely appropriated to the Economic Research Service account; no specific figure is indicated
for WIC activities. All spending figures assume significant unused FY2002 funding carried
into FY2003 ($123 million), as well as a major amount carried out of FY2003 into FY2004
($133 million) — and an unused $125 million contingency fund.

CRS-44
FY2004 Funding
FY2004 Appropriations. On July 14, 2003, the House approved its version
of the FY2004 Agriculture Department appropriations measure — H.R. 2673
(H.Rept. 108-193) — including appropriations for the child nutrition and WIC
budget accounts. On November 6, 2003, the Senate passed its version of the FY2004
appropriations bill — S. 1427 (S.Rept. 108-107). However, the FY2004 Agriculture
Department appropriations bill (and six other appropriations bills) were then folded
into an omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act (H.Rept. 108-401, also numbered
H.R. 2673). A House-Senate conference agreement on this measure was reported on
November 25, 2003, and approved by the House (December 8, 2003) and the Senate
(January 22, 2004). The consolidated appropriations law for FY2004 was enacted
on January 23, 2004, as P.L 108-199. Until it was enacted on January 23, 2004,
funding authority for child nutrition and WIC programs was provided by a series of
“continuing resolutions” (the last of which was P.L. 108-135).
Table 6A shows the Administration’s requested FY2004 appropriations for the
child nutrition and WIC budget accounts compared to: (1) the House-passed FY2004
appropriations bill, (2) the Senate-passed bill, and (3) the FY2004 Consolidated
Appropriations Act (P.L. 108-199).
Administration Request. The Administration’s FY2004 budget included
increased appropriations for both the child nutrition and WIC accounts.
For the child nutrition account, the budget asked for a total appropriation of
$11,418,441,000, $838 million more than was appropriated for FY2003. The
increase was primarily due to inflation adjustments to federal subsidies and projected
changes in enrollment. The only new initiative proposed (other than legislative
initiatives that were advanced when Congress began considering child nutrition
reauthorization proposals in the spring of 2003) was a one-time appropriation,
totaling $6 million, to be used to fund a study of eligibility certification errors in
school meal programs.
For the WIC account, the budget requested a total appropriation of
$4,769,232,000, a $73 million increase over the FY2003 appropriation. Included in
the request was $25 million in contingency funds (in addition to $125 million already
in the contingency fund from FY2003) and several new initiatives: (1) $5 million for
evaluation of the WIC program’s effectiveness, (2) $30 million for support for state
management information systems, (3) $20 million for breastfeeding peer counselors,
and (4) $5 million for childhood obesity prevention projects. Money for the WIC
farmers’ market nutrition program ($20 million, down from $25 million provided in
FY2003) was included a separate budget account — the Commodity Assistance
Program.
House Appropriations Action. On July 9, 2003, the House Appropriations
Committee reported its version of the FY2004 Agriculture Department
appropriations measure (H.R. 2673; H.Rept. 108-193). On July 14, 2003, the full
House approved the measure, with no changes to the Committee’s recommendations
for child nutrition and WIC programs.

CRS-45
The House bill appropriated $11.418 billion for the child nutrition account, as
requested by the Administration — including $6 million for a study of eligibility
certification errors.
On the other hand, the House measure appropriated $4.588 billion for the WIC
account — $181 million less than asked for by the Administration and $108 million
less than the FY2003 level. In explaining this lower WIC appropriation, the House
Appropriations Committee stated that it believed that the new amount appropriated
for FY2004 would provide sufficient resources to serve approximately 7.8 million
participants (the Administration’s participation goal) and fund the special initiatives
sought by the Administration — i.e., enough resources to spend at the level
anticipated by the Administration — especially since estimates of food costs had
been reduced since the submission of the budget and FY2003 participation was
projected to be lower than originally thought. It appears that these resources would
be drawn from: (1) the FY2004 appropriation amount, (2) a significant carryover
balance (over $200 million) from FY2003, (3) a smaller carryover of FY2004 money
into FY2005 ($100 million vs $198 million in the Administration’s budget), and (4)
the backup availability of the contingency fund. The House measure also included
the Administration’s requested add-on of $25 million for the contingency fund.
As to the Administration’s special WIC initiatives and the WIC Farmers’
Market Nutrition program, the House bill: (1) fully funded the state management
information system and breastfeeding counselor projects at their requested levels; (2)
funded the obesity prevention effort at $4 million (vs. $5 million asked for); and (3)
adopted the Administration’s proposal for $20 million for the farmers’ market
program as part of Commodity Assistance Program budget account. The $5 million
requested for evaluation of the WIC program’s effectiveness was not provided for
specifically.
Senate Appropriations Action. On July 17, 2003, the Senate
Appropriations Committee reported its version of the FY2004 Agriculture
Department appropriations measure (S. 1427; S.Rept. 108-107). On November 6,
2003, the full Senate approved the bill, with no changes to the Committee’s
recommendations for child nutrition and WIC programs.
Like the House bill and the Administration’s request, the Senate measure
appropriated $11.418 billion for the child nutrition account — including the
requested $6 million a study of eligibility certification errors.
For the WIC account, the Senate bill recommended $4.639 billion — $130
million less than the Administration’s request, $57 million less than the FY2003
appropriation, and $51 million more than the level proposed in the House bill.
Similar to the House, the Senate Appropriations Committee stated that it believed
that the level of new appropriations it recommended, although lower than requested,
would be sufficient to serve approximately 7.8 million participants (the
Administration’s goal) because of changes in food cost estimates and the availability
of other funds (e.g., carryover money). However, its appropriation level was higher
than the House bill because it included $25 million for the WIC farmers’ market
nutrition program (the House bill appropriated $20 million for this program in a
different budget account), and it took some account of the potential for increased

CRS-46
costs deriving from smaller rebates offered under recent infant formula contracts —
even though it did not adopt the Administration’s requested extra $25 million for a
contingency fund and adopted lower-than-requested levels for some Administration
proposals (see below).
With regard to the Administration’s special WIC initiatives, the Senate bill: (1)
fully funded the state management information system project at $30 million, (2)
provided $10 million for the breastfeeding counselor project (not the $20 million
requested), and (3) fully funded the proposed obesity prevention effort at $5 million.
As with the House bill, no money was specifically provided for an evaluation of the
WIC program’s effectiveness.
Consolidated Appropriations Act. The FY2004 Agriculture Department
appropriations bill was folded into an omnibus Consolidated Appropriations Act
(H.R. 2673; H.Rept. 108-401). A House-Senate conference agreement on this
measure was reported on November 25, 2003, and approved by the House (December
8, 2003) and the Senate ( January 22, 2004). It was enacted into law (P.L. 108-199)
on January 23, 2004, and takes the place of funding authority contained in a series
of “continuing resolutions” (see the discussion of FY2004 Spending below).
The FY2004 appropriation for the child nutrition account included in the
consolidated appropriations law is $11.417 billion — $1 million less than requested
by the Administration and approved by the House and Senate. This results from a
decision by House-Senate conferees to reduce the amount of funding provided for a
study of eligibility certification errors in school meal programs from $6 million to $5
million.
The FY2004 appropriation for the WIC account is $4.639 billion, the amount
proposed by the Senate, higher than the House recommendation but lower than the
Administration’s request. With regard to the Administration’s special WIC
initiatives, the final appropriations law provides: (1) $25 million for the management
information system project ($5 million less than requested and approved by the
House and Senate), (2) $15 million for the breastfeeding counselor project ($5
million less than requested and approved by the House, but $5 million more than
approved by the Senate), and (3) $4 million for obesity prevention efforts ($1 million
less than requested and approved by the Senate). The WIC Farmers’ Market
Nutrition program is funded at $23 million ($3 million more than requested and
approved by the House, but $2 million less than approved by the Senate). No new
money is earmarked for a contingency fund (House-Senate conferees noted that the
entire $125 million FY2003 continency fund remains available) or a study of the
WIC program’s effectiveness.
The final FY2004 appropriations measure also includes an across-the-board
directive reducing appropriations for “discretionary” programs like the WIC program
by 0.59 percent. This effectively shrinks the actual WIC appropriation amount by
$27.4 million — to $4.612 billion.
Since the enactment of the FY2004 appropriations law, WIC program food costs
and participation have grown to levels significantly higher than projected when the
budget was put together and the appropriations law was enacted. In order to maintain

CRS-47
support for all eligible applicants in FY2004, the Administration has taken steps to
increase funding available for the WIC program (see the discussion of Adjustments
to FY2004 WIC Funding below); these added dollars are not reflected in Tables 6A
and 6B (which are based on estimates available on enactment of the FY2004
appropriations law), but are reflected in Table 7B.
Table 6A. Child Nutrition & WIC Appropriations:
FY2004
(in millions)
FY2004:
FY2004:
Consolidated
Annual
FY2004:
FY2004: House
Senate
Appropriations
appropriations
Administration
appropriations
appropriations
Act (P.L. 108-
account
request
bill
bill
199)
Child nutritiona
$11,418.4
$ 11,418.4
$ 11,418.4
$ 11,417.4
WICb
4,769.2 4,588.3
4,639.2
4,611.9
Total
$ 16,187.6
$ 16,006.7
$ 16,057.6
$ 16,029.3
Notes: The figures presented in this table are annual appropriation amounts for these accounts. They
are taken from the FY2004 Agriculture Department budget documents, H.Rept. 108-193, S.Rept. 108-
107, and H.Rept. 108-401. These appropriations are substantially different than the total amount of
federal money available — from all sources — to fund spending for child nutrition and WIC
programs, shown in Tables 6B and 7B (also see notes below).
a. Child nutrition figures do not include money for nutrition studies and surveys; they are covered
under the budget account for the Economic Research Service or under appropriations to the
Program Administration account. They also do not include: (1) money available from
permanent appropriations — just over $400 million for commodities and the FSMI — and other
budget accounts, (2) unused funding carried over from FY2003, and (3) money appropriated for
general federal administration of food assistance programs (an undifferentiated share of which
is spent on child nutrition activities).
b. The WIC figure for the Consolidated Appropriations Act has been adjusted downward by $27.4
million to account for the measure’s directive for 0.59 percent across-the-board cut in
appropriations for discretionary programs. WIC amounts for the Administration request and the
House bill include money for the contingency fund. For FY2004, the Administration asked that
$20 million be appropriated for the WIC farmers’ market nutrition program in a separate budget
account, and this money is not included in the Administration’s WIC budget request. The House
bill adopted this approach, while the Senate bill and the Consolidated Appropriations Act do
not. The Senate bill included $25 million for the WIC farmers’ market nutrition program as
part of the WIC appropriation, and the Consolidated Appropriations Act includes $23 million.
Unused funding carried over from FY2003 to FY2004, the $125 million contingency fund, and
money transferred from the Food Stamp program account are not included. Money appropriated
for general federal administration of food assistance programs (a share of which is spent on WIC
activities) also is not reflected in this table.
FY2004 Spending. Actual FY2004 spending for child nutrition and WIC
programs is expected to be significantly different than the amounts provided in the
FY2004 Consolidated Appropriations Act. Table 6B presents Administration
estimates of FY2004 spending on child nutrition programs/activities and the WIC
program under its budget request, the House and Senate Appropriations measures,
and the Consolidated Appropriations Act for FY2004 when enacted (see Table 7B

CRS-48
for more recent projections of FY2004 spending, especially revised estimates for
spending in the WIC program). All funding sources are included: regular FY2004
appropriations, funding carried over or otherwise available from FY2003, permanent
appropriations, and money from different budget accounts. On enactment, FY2004
child nutrition spending was projected to total $11.8 billion, and WIC spending was
estimated at $4.8 billion.
Spending under Interim Appropriations Measures. No final
appropriation for FY2004 was enacted until January 23, 2004. As a result, spending
for child nutrition and WIC programs was, for a period, governed by the terms of a
series of “continuing resolutions”(the last being P.L. 108-135). Until enactment of
the FY2004 consolidated appropriations law (noted above), the continuing
resolutions — along with special provisions in WIC law (discussed below) and the
availability of unused funds recovered and carried over from FY2003 and unused
contingency funds from FY2003 — effectively provided funding at levels that closely
tracked those envisioned in the Consolidated Appropriations Act. As a result,
operating under the continuing resolutions had no noticeable constricting effect on
child nutrition and WIC spending. Overall, the short-term situation was very similar
to that faced at the beginning of FY2003.
In general, the overwhelming majority of child nutrition spending — for those
programs that are considered entitlements or mandatory programs or have
permanent appropriations (the school meal programs, the Child and Adult Care
Food program, the Summer Food Service program, the Special Milk program,
funding for state administrative expenses, commodity assistance, and funding for the
Food Service Management Institute and an information clearinghouse) — was
continued a rate that would maintain whatever assistance levels were dictated under
the terms of the underlying laws, even if higher than comparable FY2003 amounts.
The regular WIC program is treated as discretionary, and normally would have
been limited to spending no more than their FY2003 amount. But, under the terms
of the continuing resolutions and special WIC provisions, it was treated somewhat
differently than other discretionary programs/activities. The regular WIC program
was effectively supported at a level very close to what would have been the case
under the final appropriation during the period covered by the continuing resolutions
because, by law, WIC funding must be “front-loaded” (i.e., half the year’s funding
was made available in the first four months of the year) and additional sums were
available from unused funds carried over from FY2003.
Other programs classified as discretionary were funded at their FY2003
spending/obligation level. Typically, these programs also must allocate their funding
at the FY2003 rate — in equal monthly or quarterly shares of the total amount
available. In the case of the continuing resolutions, they could allocate the portion
of the FY2003 spending/obligation amount equal to the percentage of the fiscal year
covered by the continuing resolution — e.g., one-third (four months’ worth) could
be allocated through January 31, 2004. The few programs and activities covered by
this rule included: the WIC Farmers’ Market Nutrition program, funding for the child
nutrition coordinated review effort, the “Team Nutrition” and food safety initiatives,
and research and direct federal administrative costs linked to child nutrition and WIC
programs. The effect of operating under the continuing resolutions, rather than a

CRS-49
regular appropriation, was negligible for these programs. For all but the farmers’
market program, the regular FY2004 appropriations measure (the Consolidated
Appropriations Act noted above) provides funding levels that are the same as
FY2003 or only very slightly higher. For the farmers’ market program, the regular
appropriations measure actually appropriates slightly less than FY2003.
Adjustments to FY2004 WIC Funding. It is now clear that WIC program
food costs for FY2004 will be significantly higher than projected by the
Administration in it budget request (or assumed by the Congress in the FY2004
appropriation). Moreover, participation may exceed anticipated levels. As a result,
the Administration has (1) released the $125 million contingency fund, (2)
transferred $50 million from the Food Stamp program budget account to the WIC
account, and (3) made an additional $29 million available for spending on food costs
(taken from funds that would have been used for management information systems
and childhood obesity prevention efforts). The spending derived from this extra
money for FY2004 is reflected in Table 7B (spending figures in Table 6B are
derived from estimates available at the time the FY2004 appropriation was enacted).

CRS-50
Table 6B. Estimated Child Nutrition & WIC Spending:
FY2004
(in millions)
FY2004:
FY2004:
FY2004:
FY2004:
Estimated
Estimated
Estimated
Estimated
spending under
spending under
spending
spending under
the
the House bill
under the
the FY2004
Administration’s
Senate bill
Consolidated
request
Appropriations
Act
Programs/
WHEN
Activities
ENACTED
School luncha
$ 6,683.7
$ 6,683.7
$ 6,683.7
$6,683.7
School breakfasta
1,797.9
1,797.9
1,797.9
1,797.9
Child & adult care
2,019.0
2,019.0
2,019.0
2,019.0
fooda
Summer food
308.7
308.7
308.7
308.7
servicea
Special milk
15.3
15.3
15.3
15.3
Commoditiesb
831.3
831.3
831.3
831.3
State admin.
140.2
140.2
140.2
140.2
expenses
Coordinated
5.2
5.2
5.2
5.2
review effort
Nutrition studies
*.*
*.*
*.*
*.*
and surveysc
Food service
3.0
3.0
3.0
3.0
management
institute (FSMI)
Special projectsd
17.0
17.0
17.0
16.0
Child nutrition
11,821.3
11,821.3
11,821.3
11,820.3
total
WIC programe
4,793.2
4,792.2
4,788.2
4,785.2
(WIC farmers’
(20.0)
(20.0)
(25.0)
(23.0)
market program)
Overall total
$ 16,614.5
$ 16,613.5
$ 16,609.5
$ 16,605.5
Notes: Care should be taken in using this table; in some cases, it is not comparable with earlier tables
in this report. Earlier tables include specific items for nutrition education and training and a homeless
children nutrition program, but no funding request has been made for nutrition education and training
and the program for homeless children is now encompassed in the child and adult care food program.

CRS-51
The figures shown in this table are spending (obligation) amounts from documents accompanying the
Administration’s FY2004 budget, H.Rept. 108-193, S.Rept. 108-107, and H.Rept. 108-401. They
differ from annual appropriations (shown in Table 6A) and include spending from previous-year
carryover funds and permanent appropriations, as well as commodity assistance and other spending
supported by separate Agriculture Department budget accounts. WIC figures reflect estimated
spending assuming some unused money will be carried over from year to year (see note e below). The
amounts shown also do not reflect most federal-only child nutrition administrative costs (roughly $60-
$70 million a year), which are funded from a separate undifferentiated general food program
administration account, or the value of “bonus” commodities.
a. Figures include cash assistance only, not the value of commodities or cash-in-lieu of commodities.
For the child and adult care food program and the summer food service program, they include
some of the funding for pilot projects expanding participation.
b. Includes cash subsidies provided in lieu of commodities (e.g., $73 million in FY2002), certain
federal commodity donation administrative/distribution/computer spending (e.g., $9 million
estimated for FY2003), some $400 million in commodities purchased for and donated at no
charge to the child nutrition account in order to meet the commodity entitlements of schools and
other providers. The overwhelming majority (more than 90%) of commodity assistance is for
the school lunch program. Not shown is the value of any “bonus” commodities that the
Agriculture Department may donate if excess federal commodity holdings permit (e.g., $70
million in FY2002).
c. Funds for research related to FNS programs are now largely appropriated to the Economic Research
Service account; no specific figure is indicated for child nutrition activities.
d. The amounts shown for special projects include funding for a school meals initiative including
“Team Nutrition” nutrition education and projects to improve food service and food safety
(about $11 million in total). The figure for the Administration’s request includes an additional
$6 million for a study of eligibility certification errors in school meal programs, while the
appropriations act figure includes a lesser amount ($5 million). Unlike earlier years, FY2004
amounts for special projects do not include a $200,000-a-year grant for an information
clearinghouse; the permanent appropriation for this expired September 30, 2003.
f. Total WIC program figures include estimated spending for the WIC farmers’ market nutrition
program (shown in parentheses). It should be noted that the FY2004 totals shown for the
Administration’s request and the House bill differ only by the $1 million the House bill chose
not to recommend for an obesity prevention project. The Senate bill amount differs from the
Administration’s request in that it reflects $10 million less spent on breastfeeding counselor
projects and $5 million more spent on the farmers’ market program. The figures for the WIC
program effectively assume that, although the new WIC appropriation in these bills is less than
the Administration requested for FY2004, total resources (including carryover funds and a
contingency fund) will be sufficient to support the Administration’s targeted spending level.
WIC totals do not include what typically has been approximately $3.5 million for WIC research
and evaluations now supported from the Economic Research Service appropriation. However,
the Administration’s request and the House bill include a total of $7 million for WIC research
through the FNS (including $5 million for a special WIC evaluation project and a continuation
of the $2 million for other WIC research through the FNS that was provided in FY2003).
Spending figures assume $227 million will be carried from FY2003 to FY2004, and that $198
million (or $100 million under the House bill’s assumptions) will be carried from FY2004 to
FY2005. The figure for the Consolidated Appropriations Act includes: no new contingency
funds, $25 million for a management information system support project, $15 million for a
breastfeeding counselor project, and $4 million for an obesity prevention project.

CRS-52
FY2005 Funding
FY2005 Appropriations. The Administration’s original FY2005 budget
asked for $11.381 billion for child nutrition programs and an additional $4.787
billion for the WIC program (not including $20 million requested for the WIC
farmers’ market nutrition program through a separate budget account). However, on
July 13, 2004, the Administration revised its request for the WIC program upward
by $300 million. Table 7A compares the Administration’s revised request with
FY2004 appropriations levels. It does not take into account the adjustments to
FY2004 WIC funding noted above.
Administration Request. For FY2005, the Administration’s requested
appropriations level for the child nutrition budget account is slightly less than
appropriated for FY2004, although spending is projected to increase. On the other
hand, the amount requested for the WIC budget account was originally slightly higher
than the FY2004 appropriation, and, as revised on July 13, 2004, the
Administration’s request for the WIC program is significantly bigger than the
FY2004 appropriation.
For the child nutrition account, the budget asks for a total appropriation of
$11,380,557,000, some $37 million less than was appropriated for FY2004. This
decrease, however, does not indicate reduced support for programs under the child
nutrition account (e.g., the school meal programs). Because over $250 million in
unused FY2004 funding and funding from other budget accounts is expected to be
available to finance FY2005 expenses, the actual spending level supported by the
$11.381 billion appropriation is estimated at more than $12 billion (see the
discussion of spending levels below and Table 7B). The only new initiative
proposed is a $4 million appropriation to help implement a system to improve the
accuracy of eligibility determinations in school meal programs.36
For the WIC account, the original budget requested a total appropriation of
$4,787,250,000, a $175 million increase over the FY2004 appropriation. However,
the FY2005 requested appropriation for the WIC account did not include any funding
for the WIC farmers’ market nutrition program, while the FY2004 appropriation
incorporated $23 million for the farmers’ market program. Instead, the FY2005
budget asked for $20 million for the farmers’ market program in a separate budget
account (the Commodity Assistance Program account). As a result, a more “correct”
comparison of the two years’ appropriations levels would show a $195 million
increase — the $175 million proposed for the regular WIC program plus the separate
$20 million for the farmers’ market program.
In addition, the originally requested FY2005 appropriation for the WIC program
included a number of proposed set-asides for specific WIC-related activities: (1) $14
million for infrastructure grants to states (the same as FY2003 and FY2004), (2)
$7.25 million for evaluations of the WIC program’s effectiveness (no money was
36 This follows on a $5 million program integrity project funded in FY2004 and is
supplemented by another $7 million requested for program integrity initiatives (including
the Food Stamp program) in the budget for FNS administration.

CRS-53
included for this in FY2004, but $2 million was provided in FY2003), (3) $400,000
for technical assistance (the same as provided in FY2003 and FY2004), (4) $20
million for assisting in upgrading state management information systems (down from
$25 million in FY2004), (5) $20 million for a breastfeeding peer counselor project
(up from $15 million in FY2004), and (6) $5 million for continuation of childhood
obesity prevention projects (up from $4 million in FY2004).
On July 13, 2004, the Administration revised its FY2005 request for the WIC
program because of projections of rising food costs and participation. In order to
“ensure that resources are adequate to meet State agencies’ requirements to fulfill
demand in FY2005,” the Administration asked for an additional $300 million. This
request was accompanied by proposed reductions in other Agriculture Department
program areas to fully offset the increase for the WIC program.
House Appropriations Action. On July 7, 2004, the House Appropriations
Committee reported its version of the FY2005 Agriculture Department approprations
measure (H.R. 4766; H.Rept. 108-584). On July 13, 2004, the full House passed the
bill, with no changes to the Committee’s recommendations for the child nutrition
components. The House’s action does not directly take cognizance of the
Administration’s revised request for the WIC program (noted above).
The House bill would appropriate $11.381 billion for the child nutrition
account, as requested by the Administration. In addition, the House bill would
appropriate $4.907 billion for WIC program operations — an increase of $120
million above the Administration’s original request, nearly $300 million higher than
the 2004 amount, and $180 million below the Administration’s revised request.. In
doing so, the bill accepts the Administration’s call to separately appropriate $20
million for the WIC farmers’ market nutrition program under the Commodity
Assistance Program account. It should be noted that estimates for WIC program food
costs have risen noticeably since the original budget was submitted, and
Appropriations Committee stated in its report that it would continue to monitor food
costs and take additional action to ensure that funding is sufficient to serve all
eligible applicants.
Table 7A. Child Nutrition & WIC Appropriations:
FY2004 & FY2005
(in millions)
FY2004:
FY2005:
FY2005:
Consolidated
Administration’s
House
Annual appropriations
Appropriations Act
request (as
appropriations
account
(P.L. 108-199)
revised)
bill (H.R. 4766)
Child nutritiona
$ 11,417.4
$ 11,380.6
$ 11,380.6
WICb
4,611.9
5,087.2
4,907.3
Total
$ 16,029.3
$ 16,467.8
16,287.9

CRS-54
Notes: The figures presented in this table are annual appropriation amounts. They are taken from
the FY2005 Agriculture Department budget documents and the House appropriations bill (H.R. 4766).
They are substantially different than the total amount of federal money available — from all sources
— to fund spending for child nutrition and WIC programs, shown in Table 7B (also see notes below).
a. Child nutrition figures do not include money for nutrition studies/surveys (covered under the budget
accounts for the Economic Research Service or Program Administration. They also do not
include: (1) money available from permanent appropriations — just over $400 million for
commodities and the FSMI — and other budget accounts, (2) unused funding carried over from
FY2004, and (3) money appropriated for general federal administration of food assistance
programs (an undifferentiated share of which is spent on child nutrition activities).
b. The WIC figure for the Consolidated Appropriations Act has been adjusted downward by $27.4
million to account for the measure’s directive for 0.59 percent across-the-board cut in
appropriations for discretionary programs. The Administration’s request includes an upward
revision of $300 million (submitted July 13, 2004). WIC amounts include no contingency
funding. Most funding for WIC-related research is not included; this is covered under the
budget account for the Economic Research Service. Money appropriated for general federal
administration of food assistance programs (a share of which is spent on WIC activities) also
is not reflected in this table.
FY2005 Estimated Spending. Table 7B presents estimated spending
levels under the Administration’s FY2005 budget request (as revised for the WIC
program on July 13, 2004) and the House Appropriations bill (H.R. 4766), compared
to the most current estimates of FY2004 spending (taken from the Administration’s
FY2005 budget submission and including added funding for the WIC program
obtained from the contingency fund and the Food Stamp program account).37 The
spending levels shown are funded from regular annual appropriations and other
sources — unused funds carried over from the previous year, permanent
appropriations, money from budget accounts other than the child nutrition and WIC
accounts, contingency funds. Estimates indicate overall spending increasing from
$16.58 billion in FY2004 to $17.15 billion (or $16.97 billion under the House
appropriations measure) in FY2005. The child nutrition spending rise is due
primarily to inflation indexing of subsidies and enrollment and participation changes;
the WIC increase derives from new appropriations made available because of the
pressure of rising food costs and participation.
37 Note: FY2004 spending levels in Table 7B differ from those shown in Table 6B. Most
important, they include extra funding for the WIC program drawn from the contingency fund
($125 million) and the Food Stamp program budget account ($50 million).

CRS-55
Table 7B. Estimated Child Nutrition & WIC Spending:
FY2004 & FY2005
(in millions)
FY2004:
FY2005:
FY2005:
Estimated spending
Estimated spending
Estimated
under the FY2004
under the
spending under the
Consolidated
Administration’s
House
Appropriations Act
request (as revised
appropriations bill
July 13, 2004)
(H.R. 4766; passed
AS REVISED IN
July 13, 2004)
THE FY2005
BUDGET
SUBMISSION AND
LATER
ADJUSTMENTS
Programs/
TO THE WIC
Activities
BUDGET
School luncha
$ 6,623.0
$ 6,786.5
$ 6,786.5
School breakfasta
1,752.4
1,825.6
1,825.6
Child & adult care
1,989.8
2,064.7
2,064.7
fooda
Summer food servicea
281.9
295.3
295.3
Special milk
14.1
14.9
14.9
Commoditiesb
850.9
879.1
879.1
State administrative
140.0
148.2
148.2
expenses
Coordinated review
5.2
5.2
5.2
effort
Food service
3.0
3.0
3.0
management institute
(FSMI)
Special projectsc
16.0
15.0
15.0
Child nutrition total
11,676.3
12,037.5
12,037.5
WIC programd
4,903.3
5,114.0
4,934.0
(WIC farmers’ market
(26.6)
(20.0)
(20.0)
program)
Overall total
$ 16,579.6
$ 17,151.5
$ 16,971.5
Notes: Care should be taken in using this table because, in some cases, it is not comparable with
earlier tables in this report. Earlier tables include specific entries for nutrition education and training,
homeless children nutrition programs, and nutrition studies and surveys. But no funding for nutrition
education/training or nutrition studies/surveys has been provided (or requested) for a number of years,
and the program for homeless children is now encompassed in the child and adult care food program.

CRS-56
The figures shown in this table are spending (obligation) amounts from documents accompanying the
Administration’s FY2005 budget (as revised July 13, 2004) and the House appropriations bill. They
differ from annual appropriations (shown in Table 7A) and, in the case of FY2004 spending, differ
significantly from figures shown in Table 6B. They include spending from previous-year carryover
funds and permanent appropriations, as well as commodity assistance and other spending supported
by separate Agriculture Department budget accounts. WIC figures reflect estimated spending
assuming some unused money will be carried over from year to year (see note d below), contingency
funds, and amounts transferred from the Food Stamp program budget account. The amounts shown
do not reflect most federal-only child nutrition and WIC-related administrative costs (about $65-$70
million a year), which are funded from a separate undifferentiated general food program administration
account, or the value of “bonus” commodities.
a. Figures include cash assistance only, not the value of commodities or cash-in-lieu of commodities.
For the child and adult care food program and the summer food service program, they include
some of the funding for pilot projects expanding participation.
b. Includes cash subsidies provided in lieu of commodities (e.g., $83 million in FY2003), certain
federal commodity donation administrative/distribution/computer spending (e.g., $9 million
estimated for FY2004), some $400 million in commodities purchased for and donated at no
charge to the child nutrition account in order to meet the commodity entitlements of schools and
other providers. The overwhelming majority (more than 90%) of commodity assistance is for
the school lunch program. Not shown is the value of any “bonus” commodities that the
Agriculture Department may donate if excess federal commodity holdings permit (e.g., $100
million in FY2003).
c. The amounts shown for special projects include funding for a school meals initiative including
“Team Nutrition” nutrition education and projects to improve food service and food safety
(about $11 million in total). For FY2004, the figure incorporates $5 million for a child nutrition
program integrity project; for FY2005, the figure includes an Administration request for $4
million to fund a project to improve the accuracy of school meal program eligibility
determinations. Unlike earlier years, the amounts for special projects do not include a
$200,000-a-year grant for an information clearinghouse; the permanent appropriation for this
expired September 30, 2003.
d. Total WIC program figures include estimated spending for the WIC farmers’ market nutrition
program (shown in parentheses). However, it should be noted that, given historical spending
patterns in the farmers’ market program, the spending estimate shown for FY2004 is most
probably about $2 million high, and the actual FY2005 figure is likely to be about $2 million
higher (because unused FY2004 money can be tapped). The FY2004 figure for the WIC
program includes $175 million available from the WIC contingency fund and the Food Stamp
program budget account. WIC totals do not include funds for WIC research and evaluations
now supported from the Economic Research Service appropriation. Spending figures assume
$133 million will be carried from FY2003 to FY2004, that $81 million will be carried from
FY2004 to FY2005, and that $75 million will be carried from FY2005 to FY2006.