Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act 2010

Since the implementation of the Healthy Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010, many school nutrition programs have had challenges in meeting the new standards. Several districts across the nation have indicated a decline in lunch meal participation and financial viability as a result. However, during this time, SLA Management experienced the majority of its growth in the number of schools under contract and, more importantly, the number of meals served. Our meals have always been both tasty and nutritious. Fact is, kids love them!

Will The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act recently signed into law on December 13, 2010 by President Barack Obama be able to deliver healthier meals in the schools nutrition programs or will the bill overwhelm struggling school districts with additional unfunded mandates? Schools confront difficult issues on a daily basis that affect the learning ability of their students: struggling economic conditions, students from poor families, increased food insecurity across the country, and constant pressures to increase student performance. Providing healthy meals for children, who otherwise would eat poorly or not at all, is a necessity that our country has recognized and planned for many decades. Two measures authorized

“The National School Lunch Program, or NSLP, is a federally assisted meal program operating in over 101,000 public and non‐profit private schools and residential childcare institutions.” ("National school lunch," 2011) This government-run program is headed by the department of Food and Nutrition standards, a subgroup of the United States Department of Agriculture. “It provides nutritionally balanced, low‐cost or free lunches to more than 31 million children each school day in 2009.”

        The Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act (Public Law 108-265) was passed by Congress in 2004 (Corbin & McKenzie, 2008). The act requires all public schools, or schools with federal funding, to develop a wellness plan for the students (Corbin & McKenzie, 2008).  The policy is attached to increase opportunities for nutrition, physical education and encouragement of better food choices outside of school boundaries (Virgilio, 2009). While the sentiment is clearly positive, whether or not it works or favors certain populations is unclear. The Child Nutrition Act guidelines are a model, since some schools are not adequately funded, other vendors come into play that do not have the best interests of our children at

The Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 was passed in order to reauthorize child nutrition programs. It provides funding and sets policy for nutrition programs such as the National School Lunch Program, the School Breakfast Program, and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC). Each local agency that participates in the National School Lunch Program or other federal child nutrition program is required by law to establish a local school wellness policy for all schools under its jurisdiction.

Ring. Ring. Ring. The twelve o’clock bell sounds for lunch. Hundreds of thousands of students around the United States of America rush from their classes to the school cafeteria. Children and teenagers ranging from grades K-12 grab a lunch tray and jump in line. The food that these students get to choose from has changed over the past years because of the new National School Lunch Program regulations, which limit the different foods that can be offered in schools. The passing of the National School Lunch Program has led to the implementation of new nutritional standards when deciding what foods can be served, changed the type of foods that are required to be served, established new rules on how the regulations are monitored, and

In 2010, the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act (HHFKA) reauthorization was passed by a Democratic-controlled congress, adding the CEP (which allows schools to provide free meals to all students if 40% or more are eligible for FRP

Ever since Obama has come into office school lunches have become healthier and more satisfying for the students of the country. The Obama administration has worked very hard to make school lunches both healthy and appealing. The, Healthy Hunger Kids Act of 2010 required the USDA to make significant nutrition improvements in school meals, as well as to improve the overall excellence of foods at schools. Proponents of the program, such as, Michelle Obama say that the 524 schools that have withdrawn amount to a drop in a bucket compared to the other 100,000 schools nationwide that are participating in the program.

This project focuses on the analysis and comparison of the two policies on the criteria. It provides information on likelihood of decreasing rate of childhood obesity as well as alternative policy. Reinforcing NSLP in every school in our nation to adhere to dietary guidelines set forth by USDA. In addition, focusing on education and raising awareness among children and their parents even if our nation is on financial crisis especially budgetary and spending issues.

The bill Early Childhood Nutrition Improvement Act was introduced to the house on March 2, 2017 by Representative Suzanna Bonamici from the state of Oregon. This bill is part of a larger legislation called the Child Nutrition Reauthorization, which is trying to amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act signed in 1946 and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966. These two child nutrition laws are believed to be outdated, thus the need to introduce different bills which will amend target areas of need. The Child Nutrition Reauthorization includes to improve the 6 main child nutrition programs which are- School Meals, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), Farm to School, Child and Adult Care Food

In 2010, the Healthy and Hunger-free kids act was signed by President Obama. The United States Department of Agriculture are to carry out the act. The HHKA was designed to improve the accessibility of nutritious food to children. More specifically, the HHKA will be giving money back to school that follow the new nutritional standards set. Foods of all forms will be overseen in their nutritional quality. This includes the food in cafeterias, vending machines, and school stores. The act makes food more accessible for students by gauging their eligibility based on Medicaid information and census data.

States, the Healthy, Hunger­Free Kids Act began in 2012. The Healthy, Hunger­Free Kids Act is a federal law enforced by President Barack Obama. The law no longer provides children with unhealthy foods such as pizza or French fries for their lunches at school. Meals are now required to be lower in fat, calories, and sodium, and must consist of more fruits and vegetables.

Think back; is there a school lunch that comes to mind? There may have been at least one school lunch that the lunch ladies would dish up that made a majority of the students excited to eat. Kids that routinely brought their super-hero lunch-box and thermos would leave it at home and jump in line for pizza or burgers and fries. Kids were also allowed to go back for “seconds” and for some students, it was the greatest meal of the week, including what their family served at home. The federal government has been involved in the NSLP (National School Lunch Program) since 1946, with the implementation of the National School Lunch Act. These initial programs developed the commodity distribution program for schools, institutions, needy households, summer camp, and other eligible outlets (USDA Food and Nutrition Service). Since this initial deployment, there have been various changes, the most recent being “Healthy Kids Hunger-Free Act” passed in 2010. This was an initiative of the First Lady Michelle Obama. The act was part of her plight against child obesity and also part of her “Let’s Move” action. The impact of the government controlling what is chosen for the school lunch menu has decreased student participation, increased waste, and decreased healthy eating among the students.

However, despite the successes, the NSLP is also known for inducing blame and stigmatization to its students. According to the SNDA, only 35% of schools meet with the SMI recommended calories. However, the NSLP instead of recognizing that schools are not meeting with the recommended intake because of its overconsumption of commodities, they blame the students and the schools for the lack of healthful practices. For example, Allen and Guttmann (2002) in Neoliberalization from the ground up states how the introduction of the wellness policy under the NSLP recognizes that schools are faulty for nutritional goals and that it should be their role to prevent childhood obesity and other health problems (Allen& Guttmann, 2002) Finally, in his article Competitive Foods, Discrimination and Participating in the National School Lunch Program, Rajiv Bhatia(2011) mentions how the NSLP fails to provide neutral quality services by making the program inaccessible to low income students. According to a 2009 national survey, despite that many schools are eligible for free lunches, only 30% of US schools had participation rates under 25% and only 10% have participates rates of 14% (Bhatia, 2011). In other words, according to Bhatia (2011), despite that many students are eligible for free meals, many are refusing to eat because of their fear of being stigmatized. Having said this, the NSLP fails to meet with the goals of the welfare state. Even though, the NSLP meets with certain goals such as

Federally-funded school meal programs, including the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and the School Breakfast Program (SBP), serve an average of 31.3 million lunches and 11.1 million breakfasts per day at a cost to the country of $11.1 billion in 2011 (Food & Nutrition Services, 2012). These federally-funded meals are an excellent opportunity for regulation of nutrition as well as education regarding healthy choices. Obesity is clearly a great threat to the health of our nation, and the federal government must step in to defend its citizens against this growing threat. Children are at the mercy of their families, their social conditions, and their schools, predisposing them to obesity through poor nutritional options and a lack of education; the federal government must intervene through regulation of school meals and snacks to protect children from the abundance of unhealthy options while also educating them and reducing childhood obesity.