School Lunch Programs

Not one parent wants to see their child go hungry. Several students do not eat during their lunch period because they cannot afford it, or unable to bring food from home for many reasons. Most schools offer free and reduced lunch programs. Not every family may be eligible for these programs. In today’s economy, even middle-class families sometimes cannot provide their children with money for school lunches. A child missing a meal, and going hungry is one too many. Funding to provide all students with two meals per day during school is imperative. Free lunch in public school should be available to all students, despite the level of income.

The obesity epidemic in America is getting worse to the point that it spread into our children’s school lunches. In Alice Waters’ and Katrina Heron’s article “No Lunch Left Behind” explains that the government is investing a lot of funds into the schools lunches and it is being wasted to buy unhealthy junk foods. Even though with just a little more money, the food can be of better quality, healthier, and safer for the students. Waters and Heron back up their explanation by describing some of the aggravations that some Americans have for this issue through ethos, adding reliable sources to strengthen the piece, and using an informative and serious tone in attempts to be heard and understood by the government and Americans who care about the health and safety of the student.

A public school in Washington DC require 1,25 dollar per meal for the student, but the prize would increase significantly if the government would have delivered the food. Even though the buy and deliver thousand of tons of food around the coutriy the meal choices reflect federal nutritional recommendations, regional culinary preferences, and local district economics. What's a "good school lunch" consist of, still remains a hot debate.

This article by Great Schools is addressed to parents considered about the current school lunches provided to the children in their district. Unlike any other source, this one focuses solely on 3 organizations that advocate. The diversity of the listed projects gives an opportunity to expand on different approaches to solve the various problems of the lunch program. However, there is no attempt to address the current issues of our system, requiring a previous understanding of how the school lunch system currently operates.

Everyone loves the idea of a government that truly cares about him or her. Especially a government that would go so far as to layout a healthy diet plan to insure the health of your children and to battle childhood obesity. It is great that the government is concerned about adolescent obesity and the nutrition students receive at school. However, the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) Food and Nutrition Guidelines provide more problems for schools and they need to be eradicated, as well as repealing the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act.

Nationwide students waist over 70% of fruits and vegetables,while others are sitting around without food at all in other places(Public brief). Some students only get the 2 meals they are provided with at school ,but they often are not provided with enough to eat. Its import for low income and less fortunate families to be provided enough time to eat to make sure they are receiving there energy and daily nutrients(Godoy& Allison). Increasing the school lunch time will also save the schools a great amount of money(Public brief). School lunch food wasted to cost $1.2 billion dollars each year,which is enough for a person to buy a new car everyday of there life(Public brief). A simple increase in time could save schools a bunch of money needed to improve the school building and faculty. Many cafeteria staff and teachers have reported complaints about how students aren't eating all their food and they have to throw it away(EHHI). Most of the time in high schools foods are sold à la carte instead of a full meal to avoid having to throw away or make more food(EHHI). As a result of the food waste cafeterias started using foods with more fats and less nutritious items to get students to eat( EHHI). Cafeteria are selling french fries and not the healthy food to make there money because students aren't eating enough of the

In order to maximize our program’s ability to provide nutritious meals and snacks, we participate in the federal school nutrition programs, which includes the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs. According to the Department of Agriculture, the National School Lunch Program is a federally assisted meal program for public and nonprofit private schools and residential child care institutions (2015). It provides nutritionally balanced, low-cost or free lunches to children each school day. On the same note, our program participates in School Breakfast Program. The department of Agriculture specifies that this program provides cash assistance to states to operate nonprofit breakfast programs in schools and residential childcare institutions. Both the National School Lunch Program, and the School Breakfast Program, ensures that the children receive the adequate nutrition while the our

The National School Lunch Program is an enormous federal program that has grown to become the second largest U.S. food and nutrition assistance program in both numbers of children served. In 2009, over 31 million children participated in the NSLP each school day at a cost of 9.3 billion to the Federal government. The SBP reached 11 million children at an additional cost of 2.4 billion. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) administers the program on the federal level and provides oversight of the states agencies that are responsible for the program, in Georgia, the department of education manages the statewide program. Ultimately, the success of the program resides with the local school district or each individual school food authority who implement the program to the students. The laws establishing the National School Lunch Program and School Breakfast Program stated that schools had to run their nutrition programs profit free and set the monetary per meal rates to reimburse the individual school. Rates for school year 2009 were $2.72 for free lunches, $2.32 for reduced cost lunches and $.26 for paid lunches. Today, almost half of all lunches served are provided free to students, with an additional 10 percent provided at reduced prices. Although schools are not required to offer NSLP meals, 94 percent of schools, both public and private, choose to participate in the program. Little

Children in America are faced with different choices every day. Some of these choices can be either good or bad for them. But these children don't really know the consequences of their actions, but the school does. Schools are serving unhealthy and un properly cooked meals to children every single day. These food companies make big money from these schools because the schools just buy the lunches so the kids will eat something. The schools don't really care what goes into the students stomachs, but as long as the school meets the requirements it's okay. Then the students just eat it because it looks and taste good, but they don't have an idea of what their eating is made out of or where it has been before. The government needs to start making school lunches more healthy for these students, if not then then unfortunately the number of obese children will rise.

“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 author’s intention is to inform the reader that the healthy lunch programs are failing. The author provides plentiful information and research on the failing school lunch programs in the U.S. “In the war to get America’s children to eat healthier, things are not going well.” Kids are not eating their vegetables. This has become a big problem in America and steps need to be taken to stop unhealthy eating. Like The Agriculture Department mandating that students in the federal lunch program choose a fruit or vegetable with their meals. This solution didn’t work and actually worsened the problem. “Their consumption of fruits and vegetables actually went down 13 percent after the mandate took effect.”

The National School Lunch Program (NSLP) is one of the largest food and nutrition assistance programs in the United States. (Moore, Gothro, Conway, Kyler, 2014). The NSLP provides nutritionally balanced lunches free or reduced- prices meals to income-eligible children each school day. The program is federally funded but administered through State and individual school districts. Federal government establishes the program rules and guidelines. States monitor funding and compliance of the federal guidelines.

Obesity is crucial in this country, in order for there to be a change we need to start serving healthy foods at schools. The First Lady Michelle Obama brought this healthy lunch concern to the educational system. California’s Department of Education Nutrition Services provides fresh fruit and vegetables to students as a supplement throughout the day. California’s schools have moved ahead to support Hunger-Free Kids policy. The local government regulates school districts including Los Angeles Unified School District to serve whole grains, fruits and vegetables versus foods high in calories. The Hunger-Free Kids policy allowed public schools to serve healthy lunches preventing obesity.

Schools in high-poverty areas with most children in need of free or reduced lunch, tend to do well with these new regulations. However, schools will less kids eligible for free or reduced lunch do not do so well, and a lot of districts in this category have dropped the program. Theory is that schools with more children than not eligible for free or reduced lunch, are more likely to eat what is served to them. “Some of our students show up for breakfast and haven’t had anything to eat since lunch the day before” (Hill). The Executive Director of Nutritional services points out a harsh fact, and the good these lunch programs bring to table.

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.