Suggestions for the Child Nutrition Reauthorization Act

by Greg Plotkin

categories: Children, Federal, Government, Guest Bloggers, Health & Healthcare, Hunger, News, Nonprofits, Policy, States

Published July 23, 2009 @ 06:00AM PT

When Congress finally gets around to discussing the Child Nutrition Reauthorization Act this fall (if they ever get this pesky health care reform thing out of the way), I'll have a few suggestions for how to make school nutrition programs more effective at providing healthy meals to the nation's children.

Before I go into the specifics, here's a little background on the importance of this legislation:

Every five years the window of opportunity opens on Capitol Hill as lawmakers and their staff work together to improve, tweak and reauthorize the federal Child Nutrition Programs....The School Breakfast Program and the National School Lunch Program are permanently authorized. However the other child nutrition programs that affect school nutrition operators must be reauthorized every five years. The Summer Food Service Program (SFSP), the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP), State Administrative Expenses (SAE), the Special Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) and other smaller pieces of the complete package of child nutrition programs must be renewed because they have actual expiration dates.

As you can see, proper attention must be paid to this reauthorization because it includes provisions for some of the most important supplemental nutrition programs we have in this country. With the economy still sputtering and demand at food pantries and soup kitchens continuing to climb, it is of the utmost importance to strengthen these programs and provide them with adequate funding.

One suggestion that has already been made (and one that I support) by Senator Tom Harkin is to cede control of all food offered in the nation's schools to the USDA.  Introduced this past spring by Sen. Harkin, the Child Nutrition Promotion and School Lunch Protection Act of 2009 (pdf)--a piece of the larger reauthorization bill--would give the USDA the authority to determine what kind of food could be sold in vending machines, at school stores and most importantly, in lunch lines.

This would mainly affect the non-government funded food being sold at schools, not meals provided by the National School Lunch program or other programs that already have stringent requirements for what can be fed to students.

Many have argued, and I believe rightly, that the vast availability of junk food in school stores and vending machines undermines the effectiveness of school nutrition programs.  I mean, c'mon, if you're a 13-year-old middle school student, wouldn't you rather eat a bag of chips and drink a can of soda than hit the salad bar? At 13, I certainly would have made that choice.  Charging the USDA with controlling all food in schools would take these unhealthy options away.

Another, and ever so important, suggestion is to provide school districts with the funding needed to offer more healthy meal options.  I recently had the opportunity to speak with a representative of the School Nutrition Association (SNA) and was told that the single greatest barrier to offering more healthy school lunches is an inadequate amount of funding allocated for nutrition programs.

This assertion is echoed in this Columbus Dispatch article that argues cost constraints in schools often force administrators to serve frozen, high-fat, high-sodium foods to students, even though they'd prefer to offer more nutritious options.

Here are two suggestions (among many others) for how to increase the money school have available to spend on healthy food:

1) Increase the reimbursement rate schools receive from the government for providing free or reduced price school lunches.  Currently the government pays schools $2.57 for free lunches and $2.17 for reduced price lunches.  From what I learned from my SNA pal, the cost of production is closer to $3.00 per meal.  Government reimbursement rates should be increased to not only cover the cost of production, but also to allow schools to offer healthier food; and

2) Give schools (and school districts) incentives to get rid of junk food.  In my home state of Connecticut, a pilot program has been launched that pays schools for offering only healthy options in cafeterias and vending machines.

There is still a few months before this legislation is up for debate in Congress, but that doesn't mean we can't all be ready to tell our representatives that we want a bill that will adequately fund school nutrition programs throughout the country.

(Photo credit: Mike Licht on Flickr)