More Strapped Families Relying on School Cafeterias
The number of students getting free and reduced-price meals nationwide is on the rise, presenting a dilemma for state and local school officials struggling to plug budget shortfalls. In California, for example, the state superintendent of public instruction recently warned that the state will run out of lunch money a month before the school year ends. If that happens, local school districts will have to absorb the extra costs of feeding students even if it means cutting academic programs and jobs, the San Diego Union-Tribunte reports.
The School Nutrition Association reports that 425,000 more students are receiving free or discounted meals this academic year. The increase reflects a possible shift in family incomes. Free and reduced-price lunch is a main indicator of poverty among families. "High unemployment rates and families' proactive efforts to save money have resulted in significantly more students eating lunch at school," says the School Nutrition Association. These findings are included in a report issued by the nonprofit group this month titled Saved by the Lunch Bell: As Economy Sinks, School Nutrition Program Participation Rises.
The group recently surveyed 137 school nutrition directors from 38 states whose districts participate in the federal lunch program. Eighty percent of those districts reported serving more free lunches to students while 65 percent said they served more reduced-price meals. Nearly half of the districts surveyed saw a drop in students paying the full price for a school meal. Last year, the federal government spent nearly $9 billion to subsidize the cost of school meals. Children from families of four that earn $27,560 or less are eligible for free meals.
Tags: public schools | education
Tools: 
Share
|
| Comments (8) | Print
Reader Comments
We are from the same"old school" ethics.
I could not agree with you more.How can we spread the word regarding this ethic? Perhaps we should forward this blog to our newly elected president. Community farms are not new ideas to California and New York inner city communities.We should all put in a family garden at this time-if you are fortunate enough to own a small plot of land-of course large clay pots can serve the same purpose.
Thanks so much for your entry/comment to this blog.
A community nurse coming from the old school.
In response to Hank
The boy was going to use his cash to buy a can of boiled peanuts. That was until he realized that the same item could be purchased with food stamps. Point being that this is just another example of a government program run wrong. Why are items such as snack foods, cold drinks, etc eligible to be purchased using food stamps? I could understand canned vegetables, meats, dried beans, milk and eggs.
I have a problem with people purchasing "junk food" with tax payer money. Also please do not tell me that a can of boiled peanuts is a staple. Not being smug. I can be judgmental because it is my tax money which is being wasted while I am working hard keeping my own household in the black.
I would love to have the community farms. In fact it has been tried already. A group of "Katricians" (New Orleans evacuees from the storm) were relocated in a mid-Louisiana community. An individual provided the acreage and prepared the soil for them to be able to do some farming to help supplement their food supply. He even provided the seeds and hand tools. All that was required was the labor which should not have been a problem since most of them were not working.
The end result? A field full of weeds and an increased required presence by the local law enforcement agency.
Poor Statistics
This is a very speculative report that is alarmingly short on any substantive facts to make the assumptions that it makes.
People taking advantage of a free lunch is no big surprise even in a small economic downturn.
I understand that there are qualifiers to getting on the free lunch program, but since having more students on the program means more money for the school and/or district overall, it is highly doubtful that they are stringent on the qualifying standards.
Also, using a CA school district as a national indicator is egregiously flawed for obvious reasons, if not down right dishonest.
advertisement
