Articles in the Nutrition category

Urban board members meet around advocacy issues

Members of the Council of Urban Boards of Education (CUBE) gathered in Memphis this week to hone their skills in advocating for urban schools and their students.

CUBE’s annual issues seminar included workshops on National Common Core Standards, sessions on best practices in the Memphis and Nashville school districts, and updates on the current top federal advocacy issues.

“We are working well with NSBA and our state associate to put the faces of our children in the forefront,” said Sandra Jensen, CUBE chair and president of the board of the Omaha Public Schools.

NSBA Executive Director Anne L. Bryant outlined the successes that the organization has had recently with Congress and with getting regulatory relief from No Child Left Behind for school districts. “We’ve had victories, and victories feel good in this environment,” she said.

One of those victories was getting language added to the Child Nutrition Act, passed in the FY 2012 agriculture appropriations bill in June. NSBA warned that some of the demands of the act could cost school districts millions of dollars. “We were at the table advocating reasonableness,” Bryant said.

Another victory: NSBA, along with the American Association of School Administrators (AASA), asked Secretary of Education Arne Duncan for relief for school districts facing sanctions under the No Child Left Behind Act (NCLB). Duncan has indicated that he would consider this.

Both organizations had solicited support for a petition to remove the regulatory and reporting requirements of NCLB. “That’s the kind of power you have,” Bryant told attendees. “You are so articulate. You speak passionately about kids.”

Reginald Felton, NSBA’s director of Federal Relations, Advocacy, and Issues Management, gave attendees an overview of the current federal advocacy picture in Washington, D.C.

“Most of that stimulus money is gone,” said Felton. “It was important to get it, but we are approaching a funding cliff – you can’t sustain it.”

Congress’ intent is to cut money, and the education community will be affected. NSBA is concerned about the shift from formula-based funding to competitive grants, said Felton.

Felton also referenced the Child Nutrition Bill, saying that NSBA’s position was based on whether it was appropriate for federal government to create unfunded mandates instead of leaving those decisions to state and local officials. “It’s not about us wanting our kids to be healthy,” he said.

Attendees also heard about what they can and cannot do with student assignment plans after the U.S. Supreme Court’s landmark Seattle and Louisville, Ky., decisions in 2007.

NSBA General Counsel Francisco Negron and Jay Worona, general counsel of the New York State School Boards Association, told CUBE members about the implications for other districts of the two cases.

Racial balancing is “no longer permissible,” said Negron. “To the extent that you want to do student assignment, the only legally permissible reason is academic.”

Just using student assignment to avoid racial isolation will no longer stand up in the Supreme Court, said Worona.

“We are living in a post integration society,” said Negron. “Get rid of those words. You shouldn’t even think in those terms.”

For more information about CUBE, go to www.nsba.org/cube.  American School Board Journal will focus on how school board members can become better advocates in its September issue at www.asbj.com.

Kathleen Vail|June 25th, 2011|Categories: Educational Legislation, Elementary and Secondary Education Act, Nutrition, School Law, Urban Schools|

House approves funding bill with child nutrition report

NSBA is pleased that the House of Representatives has passed HR 2112, the FY 2012 Agriculture Appropriations bill, with the committee’s report language on child nutrition intact.  Although the report language is non-binding, NSBA’s legislative advocacy team feels it sends a powerful message regarding congressional intent to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The USDA is charged with writing regulations for the Child Nutrition Act reauthorization, which was approved late last year.

The report language states: “New Nutrition Requirements for the School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs.-The Committee notes that FNS [Food Nutrition Services] has responded to the actions required by the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, P.L. 111-296. The Committee urges restraint and practical timelines for implementing new national nutrition standards in the school breakfast and lunch programs. As many of the representatives in states and local school districts have cautioned, an overly aggressive implementation schedule and unrealistic demands on changes in nutrient content can lead to burdensome costs, estimated to be about $7 billion over 5 years. Therefore, the Committee directs FNS to issue a new proposed rule that would not require an increase in the cost of providing school meals.”

Read more about school nutrition issues at: www.nsba.org/Advocacy/Key-Issues/SchoolNutrition.

Joetta Sack-Min|June 17th, 2011|Categories: Educational Legislation, Food Service, Nutrition, Obesity, Wellness|

Unfunded mandates in Child Nutrition Act could be costly, says NSBA

The U.S. House of Representatives began debate on its agriculture appropriations bill yesterday. NSBA is supporting report language issued by the appropriations committee that directs the U. S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to propose new rules that do not create unfunded mandates for school districts.

Without the needed funding, the law’s goals of proving more nutritious foods to all schoolchildren — particularly those who don’t get a good meal at home — will be just a “hollow promise,” NSBA wrote in a June 14 letter to the House.

One of NSBA’s main complaints about the Child Nutrition Act reauthorization last year was the lack of federal funding to meet the new requirements for more nutritious foods. While there was an increase for the costs of school lunches, that only covered a portion of the increased costs — about six cents per meal.

The USDA recently estimated that the federal government’s contribution for the free and reduced-price lunch program will come eight cents short of the increased cost (about 14 cents) of a more nutritious meal.

NSBA’s advocacy department is also concerned that rising food costs will exacerbate the problem. Currently, if a school district has 5,000 students who qualify for free or reduced-price lunch, that’s $400 a day in extra expenses. Over the course of a typical 180-day school year, that’s $72,000 — more than an average teacher’s salary.

The letter states, “School districts have already closed buildings, terminated programs, and laid off teachers due to eroding local, state, and federal resources. Every dollar in unfunded mandates in the child nutrition reauthorization must come from somewhere else in the educational system and result in more layoffs, larger class sizes, narrowing of the curriculum, elimination of after-school programs, and cuts to other program areas, including school food services.” 

Read the letter here.

Joetta Sack-Min|June 15th, 2011|Categories: Educational Legislation, Nutrition|

Child nutrition remains a hot legislative topic

The Child Nutrition Act reauthorization passed in December. So why was it a hot topic at a session on legislative priorities at the Federal Relations Network conference?

The U.S. Department of Agriculture is proposing regulations that could dramatically impact the implementation of the new law, and school leaders need to let their Congressional representatives know the issues they will be facing if some of the regulations do not blunt the impact of the law.

NSBA and several other groups opposed the passage of the “Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act” because it created many vague mandates with minimal or no funding increases. However, the bill was pushed by First Lady Michelle Obama and others who want to help children living in poverty have access to healthier foods.

“Sometimes what looks good on paper doesn’t work on the ground,” noted NSBA legislative analyst Katherine Shek.

Some of the more problematic provisions include new “voluntary” meal standards that will set new nutritional standards for all school meals, including foods sold in vending machines and during fundraisers; plus more reporting, training, and certification requirements.

NSBA is also concerned about the indirect costs for program operations, maintaining buildings and equipment, and the possibility of increased administrative salaries due to the new requirements.

One school board member said her small, rural district only paid its food service director $11 an hour — not enough to attract someone who has a college education or higher career prospects.

The new law also will regulate the amount charged for unsubsidized cafeteria meals. The federal government will require school districts to raise any “artificially low” prices or cover the difference with non-federal funds.

“Sometimes you might want to make [school lunches] affordable for other kids who might be low income but not qualify for free and reduced-price lunches,” said Shek.

Overall, NSBA wants school boards to share their stories of successful programs with Congress. “Improving health and wellness of kids really is a local effort.”

The deadline to comment on the proposed regulations is April 13. For more information, go to www.gpo.gov/fdsys/pkg/FR-2011-01-13/pdf/2011-485.pdf.

Joetta Sack-Min|February 7th, 2011|Categories: Educational Legislation, Food Service, FRN Conference 2011, Governance, Nutrition, Obesity, School Board News, School Boards, Student Achievement, Wellness|

USDA issues draft regulations on school nutrition

The U.S. Department of Agriculture released its draft regulations for the Child Nutrition Act this week. After many concerns about the costs and requirements of the new law, NSBA’s advocacy department is carefully reading the proposal and will issue a response in coming weeks.

The proposed regulations require schools to serve more whole grains, fresh fruits and vegetables, and low-fat dairy products. One of the biggest changes, though, is the limit on sodium content—meals would have to have at most only half of what is currently allowed. Those guidelines are based on 2009 recommendations by the Institute of Medicine.

The USDA provided a sample before-and after school lunch menu to show the proposed changes in the works. For Monday through Wednesday, the main entrees would change from a bean and cheese burrito, pizza sticks, and hot dog, all served with sides such as applesauce, canned pears, and celery and carrot sticks with ranch dressing, to a submarine sandwich on wheat bread, whole wheat spaghetti with meat sauce, and chef salad, accompanied by items like jicama, green pepper strips, and kiwi slices.

NSBA had many concerns, particularly related to the lack of full funding and implementation of the new law. More information about the law is available on the school nutrition resource page.

The proposed regulations are available in the Jan. 13 Federal Register. School officials and the public may also give responses and recommendations to the USDA. All responses are due by April 13.


Joetta Sack-Min|January 14th, 2011|Categories: Announcements, Nutrition, School Board News|

Report: More children receiving school breakfast, but numbers still lag

Though more low-income children than ever are benefitting from school meals, breakfast participation continues to lag behind its midday counterpart, according to the Food Research and Action Center (FRAC), a national anti-hunger organization.

On Thursday, FRAC released its an annual School Breakfast Scorecard, which analyzes student participation in the first meal of the day and found that, although the number of children who ate breakfast increased by 663,000 to 9.4 million students nationally in 2009-2010–the largest single jump since FRAC began tracking the data in 1991–it was still far less than the nearly 20 million low-income students who receive lunch every day.

To be exact, only 47 percent of students who took advantage of free and reduced priced lunches also took advantage of the schools’ breakfast offerings. FRAC determined that if for every 100 students who ate lunch, 60 ate breakfast, 2.5 million more children would have started the day off right and states would have recouped an additional $611 million in federal child nutrition funding. Participation rates ranged from a high of nearly 61 percent in New Mexico to Utah’s dismal 34 percent.

One of the most promising strategies to emerge in recent years to address the disparity is universal breakfast–the practice of providing a free meal to every student regardless of income level. Indeed, each of 10 districts with the highest participation levels profiled in a separate analysis, School Breakfast in America’s Big Cities, report employ universal breakfast programs.

To increase breakfast participation, FRAC recommends school districts and states serve breakfast in the classroom, offer grab-and-go options, streamline the free and reduced meal application process, and conduct frequent campaigns and outreach.

Naomi Dillon|January 13th, 2011|Categories: Food Service, Nutrition, School Board News, Wellness|

President Obama signs child nutrition reauthorization

President Obama signed the Child Nutrition Act reauthorization on Dec. 13, at a Washington elementary school flanked by students, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan, and First Lady Michelle Obama, who has advocated for healthier school meals.

The new law, however, could be problematic for school districts because the amount of new federal funding, estimated at about 6 cents per meal, will not cover the estimated 11 to 25 cent cost to comply with the new standards, and does not increase the allotment for the school breakfast program at all, according to NSBA. Further, the bill requires new training for school cafeteria workers and other requirements that could be problematic for school districts to implement. (read a more detailed summary of NSBA’s concerns, here).

NSBA Executive Director Anne L. Bryant has issued this statement:

“NSBA applauds President Obama’s recognition that schools are a vital partner in child nutrition; however, it is disappointing that the child nutrition act does not provide adequate funding for local school districts to comply with the new requirements. This new law will challenge schools’ ability to provide school nutrition by adding a new funding burden for schools at a time when there are critical budget shortfalls.  It is imperative that the Obama administration work closely with school district representatives to implement the new child nutrition regulations to mitigate the negative consequences for students and schools.”

NSBA’s advocacy team plans to work with the Secretary of Agriculture to help develop regulations for the new law.

Joetta Sack-Min|December 13th, 2010|Categories: Food Service, Nutrition, School Board News, Wellness|

House passes Child Nutrition Act, NSBA concerns cited

This afternoon the U.S. House of Representatives approved a bill to reauthorize the Child Nutrition Act by a final vote of 264-157, mainly on party lines. The bill will now be sent to the White House, and President Obama has indicated he will sign it.

NSBA has many concerns about the financial and operational impact of this legislation, known as the “Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act” (S. 3307).

“Despite the good intentions to improve child nutrition, it is disappointing that the U.S. House of Representatives would pass such an important bill without providing adequate funding for local school districts to comply with the new requirements,” said NSBA Executive Director Anne L. Bryant. “This will just add a new burden for schools to pay for another unfunded mandate at a time when there are critical budget shortfalls.  It is imperative that the Obama administration, once this bill is signed into law, work closely with school district representatives to implement S. 3307 to mitigate the negative consequences for students and schools.”

The bill seeks to increase the nutritional content of foods sold not only in school cafeterias but also vending machines and other school venues but also increase the number of students eligible for free or reduced price lunches. The measure also would set new standards and would require new training for school food service workers.

One of NSBA’s major concerns is that the federal reimbursement for school meals is inadequate for most districts to cover the full cost of providing them. The U. S. Department of Agriculture reports the full cost of providing free lunches exceeds the federal reimbursement currently by more than thirty cents per meal. While S. 3307 authorizes a six-cent increase per school lunch for districts that voluntarily adopt updated federal standards for school meals, NSBA estimates the actual increased cost of compliance ranges from about 11 to 25 cents per meal, thus increasing the reimbursement gap that already exists.  Therefore, a school district serving subsidized lunches to 5,000 students has a potential shortfall of $270,000 under the current reimbursement rate. With the increase from S. 3307, an additional $54,000 could be added to a district’s shortfall.

During a preliminary debate on the bill on Dec. 1, several members of the House cited NSBA’s concerns, which were outlined in a letter sent to members on Nov. 30.

The final approval of S. 3307 came after a series of procedural votes that included a motion to send the bill back to the Education and Labor Committee.  NSBA issued a statement in support of  that action “as a means to enable the Congress to give more thorough review of the entire bill and to address several objections NSBA has” to the legislation, which was referred to during debate by Rep. John Kline (R-Minn.), incoming chair of the House Education & Labor Committee for the 112th Congress.  However, those efforts failed.

Joetta Sack-Min|December 2nd, 2010|Categories: Educational Legislation, Food Service, Nutrition, School Board News, Wellness|
Page 2 of 2«12