School Meal Programs
Estimated Costs for Three Administrative Processes at Selected Locations Gao ID: GAO-02-944 September 25, 2002Each school day, millions of children receive meals and snacks provided through the National School Lunch and National School Breakfast Programs. Any child at a participating school may purchase a meal through these school meal programs, and children from households that apply and meet established income guidelines can receive these meals free or at a reduced price. The federal government reimburses the states, which in turn reimburse school food authorities for each meal served. During fiscal year 2001, the federal government spent $8 billion in reimbursements for school meals. The Department of Agriculture's Food and Nutrition Service, state agencies, and school food authorities all play a role in these school meal programs. GAO reported that costs for the application, verification, and meal counting and reimbursement processes for the school meal programs were incurred mainly at the local level. Estimated federal and state-level costs during school year 2000-2001 for these three processes were generally much less than 1 cent per program dollar administered. At the local level--selected schools and the related school food authorities--the median estimated cost for these processes was 8 cents per program dollar and ranged from 3 cents to 16 cents per program dollar. The largest costs at the local level were for counting meals and submitting claims for reimbursement. Estimated costs related to the application process were the next largest, and estimated verification process costs were the lowest of the three.
GAO-02-944, School Meal Programs: Estimated Costs for Three Administrative Processes at Selected Locations
This is the accessible text file for GAO report number GAO-02-944
entitled 'School Meal Programs: Estimated Costs for Three
Administrative Processes at Selected Locations' which was released on
September 25, 2002.
This text file was formatted by the U.S. General Accounting Office
(GAO) to be accessible to users with visual impairments, as part of a
longer term project to improve GAO products' accessibility. Every
attempt has been made to maintain the structural and data integrity of
the original printed product. Accessibility features, such as text
descriptions of tables, consecutively numbered footnotes placed at the
end of the file, and the text of agency comment letters, are provided
but may not exactly duplicate the presentation or format of the printed
version. The portable document format (PDF) file is an exact electronic
replica of the printed version. We welcome your feedback. Please E-mail
your comments regarding the contents or accessibility features of this
document to Webmaster@gao.gov.
This is a work of the U.S. government and is not subject to copyright
protection in the United States. It may be reproduced and distributed
in its entirety without further permission from GAO. Because this work
may contain copyrighted images or other material, permission from the
copyright holder may be necessary if you wish to reproduce this
material separately.
Report to Congressional Requesters:
United States General Accounting Office:
GAO:
September 2002:
School Meal Programs:
Estimated Costs for Three Administrative Processes at Selected
Locations:
GAO-02-944:
Contents:
Letter:
Results in Brief:
Background:
Costs for Providing, Accepting, and Reviewing Applications for Free and
Reduced-Price Meals:
Costs for Verifying Eligibility for Free and Reduced-Price Meals:
Costs for Counting All Reimbursable Meals and Claiming Federal
Reimbursement:
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:
Appendix II: Program Dollars at Selected School Food Authorities and
Schools for School Year 2000-01:
Appendix III: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contacts:
Staff Acknowledgments:
Tables:
Table 1: Estimated Application, Verification, and Meal Counting and
Reimbursement Claiming Costs at the Local Level for School Year 2000-01
at Selected Locations:
Table 2: School Meal Cash Reimbursement Rates for School Year 2002-03:
Table 3: Characteristics of Selected Districts and Schools for School
Year 2000-01:
Table 4: Estimated Application Costs for School Year 2000-01 at
Selected Locations:
Table 5: Estimated Application Process Costs at Selected School Food
Authorities and Schools for School Year 2000-01:
Table 6: Estimated Verification Costs for School Year 2000-01 at
Selected Locations:
Table 7: Estimated Verification Process Costs at Selected School Food
Authorities and Schools for School Year 2000-01:
Table 8: Estimated Meal Counting and Reimbursement Claiming Costs for
School Year 2000-01 at Selected Locations:
Table 9: Estimated Meal Counting and Reimbursement Claiming Process
Costs at Selected School Food Authorities and Schools for School Year
2000-01:
Table 10: Amounts and Sources of Program Dollars at Selected School
Food Authorities and Schools for School Year 2000-01:
Abbreviations:
FNS: Food and Nutrition Service:
USDA: U.S. Department of Agriculture:
[End of section]
United States General Accounting Office:
Washington, DC 20548:
September 25, 2002:
The Honorable George Miller:
Ranking Minority Member:
Committee on Education and the Workforce:
House of Representatives:
The Honorable Dale E. Kildee:
Ranking Minority Member:
Subcommittee on Education Reform:
Committee on Education and the Workforce:
House of Representatives:
Each school day, millions of children receive meals and snacks provided
through the National School Lunch and the School Breakfast Programs.
Any child at a participating school may purchase a meal through these
school meal programs, and children from households that apply and meet
established income guidelines can receive these meals free or at a
reduced price. The federal government reimburses the states, which in
turn reimburse school food authorities (offices responsible for the
administration of the school meals program in one or more schools) for
each meal served. In fiscal year 2001, the federal government spent
about $8 billion in reimbursements for school meals.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture‘s (USDA) Food and Nutrition Service
(FNS), state agencies (usually departments of education), and school
food authorities all play a role in administering these school meal
programs. To varying degrees, each of these entities performs tasks
associated with three of the administrative processes essential to the
current operation of the school meal programs: (1) processing
applications, (2) verifying income eligibility, and (3) counting the
total number of meals served and claiming reimbursement. Some local
program managers said that these administrative tasks are burdensome
and costly. However, data on the costs of these tasks are not gathered
or maintained. Because the Congress will consider reauthorizing the
National School Lunch and the School Breakfast Programs in 2003, you
asked us to develop cost estimates at the federal, state, and local
(school food authorities and schools) levels associated with processing
applications for free and reduced-price meals, verifying eligibility
for free and reduced-price meals, and counting all reimbursable meals
and snacks and claiming federal reimbursement.
To obtain data on the costs of administering these school meal programs,
we visited selected locations, including 5 state agencies, 10 school
food authorities in public school districts, [Footnote 1] and 2 schools
at each district. We chose sites that would provide a range of
characteristics, such as geographical location, size of student
enrollment, and type of meal counting system. We also obtained
information from officials at FNS headquarters and one regional office.
We interviewed program managers and staff at these locations to obtain
information on tasks associated with the application, verification, and
meal counting and reimbursement claiming processes for the 2000-01
school year. On the basis of this information, we calculated estimated
costs relative to program dollars. (See app. I for further details
about our scope and methodology and app. II for information on program
dollars.) We did not verify the information collected for this study;
however, we made follow-up calls in cases where data were missing or
appeared unusual. The results of our study cannot be generalized to
schools, school food authorities, or states nationwide because we
selected a limited number of sites, which was not a statistical sample.
We conducted our work between August 2001 and July 2002 in accordance
with generally accepted government auditing standards.
Results in Brief:
Cost for the application, verification, and meal counting and
reimbursement processes for the school meal programs were incurred
mainly at the local level. Estimated federal and state-level costs
during school year 2000-01 for these three processes were generally
much less than 1 cent per program dollar administered. At the local
level”selected schools and the related school food authorities”the
median estimated cost for these processes was about 8 cents per program
dollar and ranged from about 3 cents to 16 cents per program dollar.
(See table 1.) The largest costs at the local level were for counting
meals and submitting claims for reimbursement. Estimated costs related
to the application process were the next largest, and estimated
verification process costs were the lowest of the three.
Table 1: Estimated Application, Verification, and Meal Counting and
Reimbursement Claiming Costs at the Local Level for School Year 2000-01
at Selected Locations:
Process: Application: Range of estimated costs[B];
School food authorities: $3,056-$159,748;
Schools: 0-$3,735;
Combined median costs[A]: [Empty].
Process: Application: Median cost per program dollar;
School food authorities: $0.007;
Schools: $0.002;
Combined median costs[A]: $0.010.
Process: Verification: Range of estimated costs[B];
School food authorities: $429-$14,950;
Schools: 0-$967;
Combined median costs[A]: [Empty].
Process: Verification: Median cost per program dollar;
School food authorities: $0.001;
Schools: $0.000;
Combined median costs[A]: $0.001.
Process: Meal counting: Range of estimated costs[B];
School food authorities: $2,461-$318,436;
Schools: $1,892-$36,986;
Combined median costs[A]: [Empty].
Process: Meal counting: Median cost per program dollar;
School food authorities: $0.011;
Schools: $0.054;
Combined median costs[A]: $0.068.
Total median cost per program dollar: $0.079.
[A] Includes the school food authority cost prorated for each of the
two selected schools plus the costs at these schools. As a result,
adding the medians for school food authorities and schools may produce
an amount that is slightly different from the median produced when the
costs for the two categories are analyzed together.
[B] Based on information reported by the selected 10 school food
authorities and 20 schools.
Source: GAO‘s analysis of data collected.
[End of table]
For school year 2000-01, the estimated costs associated with processing
applications for free and reduced-price school meals were much less than
1 cent per program dollar administered at the federal and state levels
and about 1 cent per program dollar at the local level. At the federal
and state levels, these costs were primarily related to program
management and oversight tasks done throughout the year, such as
updating and revising regulations, issuing prototype forms and letters,
training managers, answering questions, and conducting or participating
in reviews of the process. At the local level, the costs varied from
less than half a cent to 3 cents, and the process tasks included
copying application forms and providing them to children, collecting
and reviewing submitted applications, determining if the children were
eligible for free or reduced-price meals, and sending applicants
notification of approval or disapproval. Most of the tasks related to
the process were performed at the beginning of the school year because
households must complete new applications each year. In addition,
officials at 8 of the 10 selected school food authorities performed
most of the tasks for their schools. However, a number of different
staff supported the application process at the local level. Two school
food authorities hired temporary staff to assist with the application
process, while other schools enlisted teachers, counselors,
secretaries, and/or bilingual staff to distribute and collect
applications, make eligibility determinations, and call families.
Although differences in the staff involved with the application process
may affect costs, other factors, such as size of enrollment, grade
span, locale, and percentage of children approved for free and reduced-
price lunches, could also affect costs. The number of factors involved
and the limited number of sites in our study made it difficult to
determine how each may have affected costs.
At the federal, state, and local levels, the costs associated with
verifying eligibility for free and reduced-price school meals were much
less than 1 cent per program dollar for school year 2000-01. The costs
at the federal and state levels were primarily related to oversight
tasks performed throughout the year. At the local level, duties
associated with the verification process were done primarily by the 10
selected school food authorities in the fall of the school year, with
only 1 school food authority significantly involving its schools in the
verification process. At these sites, the verification process resulted
in some children being moved to other meal categories. For example, 1
school food authority‘s verification of 65 applications resulted in 24
children being moved to either reduced-price or full-priced meals
categories, while 1 child was moved from the reduced-price to the free
category. An accurate count of the number of children eligible for free
and reduced-price meals is important because it ensures the federal
reimbursement is proper. Additionally, an accurate count of the number
of eligible children is important because funding for some other
programs that serve poor children is allocated based on free and
reduced-price meal data. FNS has implemented several pilot projects to
improve the application and verification processes and plans to complete
these projects in 2003.
Costs for counting all reimbursable meals” free, reduced-price, and
full-price” and claiming reimbursement for them in the 2000-01 school
year were significantly less than 1 cent per program dollar
administered at the federal and state levels, but at the local level,
the median cost for these tasks was about 7 cents per program dollar.
The federal level costs were related primarily to distributing funds to
state agencies prior to the beginning of the year and reconciling the
claims at the end of the year. Also, FNS issued guidance, trained
staff, and responded to questions. State agencies were primarily
responsible for operating a system to reimburse school food authorities
for meals served. State agencies also reviewed the meal counting and
reimbursement claiming processes at the school food authorities. At the
local level, costs for counting meals and submitting claims for
reimbursement were the highest of the three processes, and schools had
a higher share of the cost. Out of 20 schools, 14 incurred more than 75
percent of the local cost, with school food authorities incurring the
remainder. The costs for this process at the local level were higher
primarily because some key tasks, such as meal counting, were performed
every day at the schools and some were performed at regular intervals by
the school food authorities. Furthermore, these costs varied the most
from location to location, from 2 cents to 14 cents. A variety of
factors may have affected costs”such as size of school enrollment and
differing administrative systems and procedures. For example, larger
enrollments may allow economies of scale that lower the costs of food
service operations. However, with our limited number of selected sites
we did not see a distinct relationship between costs and these factors,
except in a few instances.
We provided a draft of this report to the Department of Agriculture‘s
Food and Nutrition Service. The department did not provide written
comments, but provided technical comments, which have been incorporated
as appropriate.
Background:
Various child nutrition programs have been established to provide
nutritionally balanced, low-cost or free meals and snacks to children
throughout the United States. The school lunch and school breakfast
programs are among the largest of these programs. The National School
Lunch Program was established in 1946; a 1998 expansion added snacks
served in after-school and enrichment programs. In fiscal year 2000,
more than 27 million children at over 97,000 public and nonprofit
private schools and residential child care institutions received
lunches through this program. The School Breakfast Program began as a
pilot project in 1966 and was made permanent in 1975. The program had
an average daily participation of more than 7.5 million children in
about 74,000 public and private schools and residential child care
institutions in fiscal year 2000. According to program regulations,
states can designate schools as severe need schools if 40 percent or
more of lunches are served free or at a reduced price, and if
reimbursement rates do not cover the costs of the school‘s breakfast
program. Severe need schools were generally reimbursed 21 cents more
for free and reduced-price breakfasts in school year 2000-01.
The National School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs provide
federally subsidized meals for all children; with the size of the
subsidy dependent on the income level of participating households. Any
child at a participating school may purchase a meal through the school
meals programs. However, children from households with incomes at or
below 130 percent of the federal poverty level are eligible for free
meals, and those from households with incomes between 130 percent and
185 percent of the poverty level are eligible for reduced-price meals.
[Footnote 2] Similarly, children from households that participate in
three federal programs” Food Stamps, Temporary Assistant for Needy
Families, or Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations”are
eligible to receive free or reduced-price meals. School districts
participating in the programs receive cash assistance and commodity
foods from USDA for all reimbursable meals they serve. Meals are
required to meet specific nutrition standards. For example, school
lunches must provide one-third of the recommended dietary allowances of
protein, vitamins A and C, iron, calcium, and calories. [Footnote 3]
Schools have a great deal of flexibility in deciding which menu
planning approach will enable them to comply with these standards.
Schools receive different cash reimbursement amounts depending on the
category of meals served. For example, a free lunch receives a higher
cash reimbursement amount than a reduced-price lunch, and a lunch for
which a child pays full price receives the smallest reimbursement. (See
table 2.) Children can be charged no more than 40 cents for reduced-
price meals, but there are no restrictions on the prices that schools
can charge for full-price meals.
Table 2: School Meal Cash Reimbursement Rates for School Year 2002-03:
Reimbursement categories: Free;
Cash reimbursement rates: Lunch: $2.14;
Cash reimbursement rates: Breakfast, Nonsevere need: $1.17;
Cash reimbursement rates: Breakfast, Severe need: $1.40;
Cash reimbursement rates: Snack: $0.58.
Reimbursement categories: Reduced-price;
Cash reimbursement rates: Lunch: $1.74;
Cash reimbursement rates: Breakfast, Nonsevere need: $0.87;
Cash reimbursement rates: Breakfast, Severe need: $1.10;
Cash reimbursement rates: Snack: $0.29.
Reimbursement categories: Full-price/paid;
Cash reimbursement rates: Lunch: $0.20;
Cash reimbursement rates: Breakfast, Nonsevere need: $0.22;
Cash reimbursement rates: Breakfast, Severe need: $0.22;
Cash reimbursement rates: Snack: $0.05.
Note: The rates are the minimum cash amounts reimbursed. USDA also
provides higher amounts for districts with 60 percent or more children
approved for free and reduced-price meals, districts in Hawaii and
Alaska, and districts identified by states as having critical needs in
order to ensure equitable distribution.
Source: USDA.
[End of table]
Various agencies and entities at the federal, state, and local levels
have administrative responsibilities under these programs. FNS
administers the school meal programs at the federal level. In general,
FNS headquarters staff carry out policy decisions, such as updating
regulations, providing guidance and monitoring, and reporting program
review results. Regional staff interact with state and school food
authorities, and provide technical assistance and oversight. State
agencies, usually departments of education, are responsible for the
statewide administration of the program, including disbursing federal
funds and monitoring the program. At the local level, two entities are
involved”the individual school and organizations called school food
authorities, which manage school food services for one or more schools.
School food authorities have flexibility in how they carry out their
administrative responsibilities and can decide whether to delegate some
tasks to the schools.
To receive program reimbursement, schools and school food authorities
must follow federal guidelines for processing applications for free and
reduced-price meals, verifying eligibility for free or reduced-price
meals, and counting and reporting all reimbursable meals served,
whether fullprice, reduced-price, or free. This means processing an
application for most participants in the free and reduced-price
programs, [Footnote 4] verifying eligibility for at least a sample of
approved applications, and keeping daily track of meals provided. These
processes comprise only a small part of the federal school meal
programs‘ administrative requirements. According to a USDA report,
school food authorities spend the majority of their time on other
administrative processes, including daily meal production records and
maintaining records documenting that the program is nonprofit as
required by regulations. [Footnote 5] The data we were asked to obtain
focus on the participant eligibility and meal counting and
reimbursement processes and do not include estimates for other
administrative tasks, which are outside the scope of the request.
The federal budget provides funds separate from program dollars to pay
for administrative processes at the federal and state level. In
contrast, officials at the local level pay for administrative costs
from program dollars that include federal and state funding and student
meal payments.
Districts and schools that participate in the school meal programs vary
in terms of locale, size of enrollment, percent of children approved
for free and reduced-price meals, and types of meal counting systems
used. We selected 10 districts and 20 schools located in rural areas,
small towns, mid-size central cities, urban fringe areas of mid-size
and large cities, and large central cities. At the districts,
enrollment ranged from 1,265 to 158,150 children, while at the 20
schools, it ranged from 291 to 2,661 children. The rate of children
approved for free and reduced-price meals ranged from 16.7 to 74.5
percent at the districts and from 10.5 to 96.5 percent at the schools.
Nine of these schools used electronic meal counting systems. Table 3
summarizes the characteristics of selected districts and schools.
Table 3: Characteristics of Selected Districts and Schools for School
Year 2000-01:
District (State) school: Alta Loma Elementary District (Calif.);
Locale[A]: Urban fringe of large city;
Enrollment: 7,705;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 16.7;
Type of meal counting system: [C];
Type of meals served[B]: [C].
District (State) school: Alta Loma Elementary District (Calif.), Jasper
Elementary;
Locale[A]: Urban fringe of large city;
Enrollment: 593;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 17.5;
Type of meal counting system: Manual;
Type of meals served[B]: B, L.
District (State) school: Alta Loma Elementary District (Calif.),
Vineyard Jr. High;
Locale[A]: Urban fringe of large city;
Enrollment: 1,061;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 11.8;
Type of meal counting system: Manual;
Type of meals served[B]: B,L.
District (State) school: San Bernardino City Unified District (Calif.);
Locale[A]: Mid-size central city;
Enrollment: 53,266;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 74.5;
Type of meal counting system: [C];
Type of meals served[B]: [C].
District (State) school: San Bernardino City Unified District (Calif.),
Lincoln Elementary;
Locale[A]: Mid-size central city;
Enrollment: 1,132;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 96.5;
Type of meal counting system: Electronic;
Type of meals served[B]: SB,L,S.
District (State) school: San Bernardino City Unified District (Calif.),
Pacific High;
Locale[A]: Mid-size central city;
Enrollment: 2,661;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 72.1;
Type of meal counting system: Electronic;
Type of meals served[B]: SB,L.
District (State) school: Lake County District (Fla.);
Locale[A]: Urban fringe of mid-size city;
Enrollment: 28,000;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 38.7;
Type of meal counting system: [C];
Type of meals served[B]: [C].
District (State) school: Lake County District (Fla.), Cypress Ridge
Elementary;
Locale[A]: Urban fringe of mid-size city;
Enrollment: 636;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 14.3;
Type of meal counting system: Manual;
Type of meals served[B]: B,L.
District (State) school: Lake County District (Fla.), Umatilla High;
Locale[A]: Urban fringe of mid-size city;
Enrollment: 798;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 33.8;
Type of meal counting system: Manual;
Type of meals served[B]: L.
District (State) school: Suwannee County District (Fla.);
Locale[A]: Small town;
Enrollment: 5,782;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 47.2;
Type of meal counting system: [C];
Type of meals served[B]: [C].
District (State) school: Suwannee County District (Fla.), Suwannee
Elementary East;
Locale[A]: Small town;
Enrollment: 1,106;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 66.7;
Type of meal counting system: Electronic;
Type of meals served[B]: SB,B,L,S.
District (State) school: Suwannee County District (Fla.), Suwannee
High;
Locale[A]: Small town;
Enrollment: 1,350;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 24.2;
Type of meal counting system: Manual;
Type of meals served[B]: SB,B,L.
District (State) school: Jefferson Local District (Ohio);
Locale[A]: Urban fringe of large city;
Enrollment: 1,265;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 17.3;
Type of meal counting system: [C];
Type of meals served[B]: [C].
District (State) school: Jefferson Local District (Ohio), Jefferson
Memorial Middle;
Locale[A]: Urban fringe of large city;
Enrollment: 291;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 20.3;
Type of meal counting system: Manual;
Type of meals served[B]: L.
District (State) school: Jefferson Local District (Ohio), West
Jefferson High;
Locale[A]: Urban fringe of large city;
Enrollment: 333;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 10.5;
Type of meal counting system: Manual;
Type of meals served[B]: L.
District (State) school: Whitehall City District (Ohio);
Locale[A]: Urban fringe of large city;
Enrollment: 2,831;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 39.9;
Type of meal counting system: [C];
Type of meals served[B]: [C].
District (State) school: Whitehall City District (Ohio), Beechwood
Elementary;
Locale[A]: Urban fringe of large city;
Enrollment: 514;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 35.4;
Type of meal counting system: Electronic;
Type of meals served[B]: B,L.
District (State) school: Whitehall City District (Ohio), Whitehall
Yearling High;
Locale[A]: Urban fringe of large city;
Enrollment: 838;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 19.6;
Type of meal counting system: Manual;
Type of meals served[B]: L.
District (State) school: Caroline District (Va.);
Locale[A]: Rural, outside MSA[D];
Enrollment: 3,788;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 39.9;
Type of meal counting system: [C];
Type of meals served[B]: [C].
District (State) school: Caroline District (Va.), Bowling Green
Primary;
Locale[A]: Rural, outside MSA[D];
Enrollment: 411;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 50.9;
Type of meal counting system: Manual;
Type of meals served[B]: B,L.
District (State) school: Caroline District (Va.), Caroline Middle;
Locale[A]: Rural, outside MSA[D];
Enrollment: 862;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 42.1;
Type of meal counting system: Manual;
Type of meals served[B]: B,L.
District (State) school: Fairfax District (Va.);
Locale[A]: Urban fringe of large city;
Enrollment: 158,150;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 18.3;
Type of meal counting system: [C];
Type of meals served[B]: [C].
District (State) school: Fairfax District (Va.), Baileys Elementary;
Locale[A]: Urban fringe of large city;
Enrollment: 897;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 58.1;
Type of meal counting system: Electronic;
Type of meals served[B]: SB,B,L.
District (State) school: Fairfax District (Va.), Holmes Middle;
Locale[A]: Urban fringe of large city;
Enrollment: 808;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 44.1;
Type of meal counting system: Electronic;
Type of meals served[B]: SB,B,L.
District (State) school: Mount Vernon District (Wash.);
Locale[A]: Small town;
Enrollment: 5,562;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 50.7;
Type of meal counting system: [C];
Type of meals served[B]: [C].
District (State) school: Mount Vernon District (Wash.), Jefferson
Elementary;
Locale[A]: Small town;
Enrollment: 545;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 44.4;
Type of meal counting system: Electronic;
Type of meals served[B]: SB,B,L,S.
District (State) school: Mount Vernon District (Wash.), Lincoln
Elementary;
Locale[A]: Small town;
Enrollment: 372;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 56.5;
Type of meal counting system: Manual;
Type of meals served[B]: SB,B,L,S.
District (State) school: Seattle District (Wash.);
Locale[A]: Large central city;
Enrollment: 45,566;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 41.6;
Type of meal counting system: [C];
Type of meals served[B]: [C].
District (State) school: Seattle District (Wash.), Mercer Middle;
Locale[A]: Large central city;
Enrollment: 822;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 62.0;
Type of meal counting system: Electronic;
Type of meals served[B]: SB,B,L.
District (State) school: Seattle District (Wash.), Whitworth
Elementary;
Locale[A]: Large central city;
Enrollment: 425;
Percent approved for free & reduced-price meals: 74.1;
Type of meal counting system: Electronic;
Type of meals served[B]: SB,B,L,S.
[A] According to the National Center for Educational Statistics, Common
Core of Data for school year 2000-01.
[B] SB = Severe Need Breakfast, B = Breakfast, L = Lunch, S = Snack.
[C] Since, in many cases, type of meals served and types of meal
counting systems varied at schools within districts, we did not
determine these characteristics for districts.
[D] Metropolitan Statistical Area.
Source: GAO‘s analysis of data collected, and the National Center for
Educational Statistics, Common Core of Data, for district and school
names.
[End of table]
Costs for Providing, Accepting, and Reviewing Applications for Free and
Reduced-Price Meals:
For school year 2000-01, the estimated application process costs at the
federal and state levels were much less than 1 cent per program dollar,
and the median cost at the local level was 1 cent per program dollar.
(See table 4.) At the federal and state levels, costs related to the
application process were primarily for tasks associated with providing
oversight, issuing guidance, and training throughout the year. At the
local level, the costs varied, the tasks were primarily done at the
beginning of the school year by the school food authorities, and
different staff performed the tasks. Our limited number of selected
schools differed in many aspects, making it difficult to determine
reasons for most cost differences, except in a few instances.
Table 4: Estimated Application Costs for School Year 2000-01 at
Selected Locations:
Level: Federal;
Entities: Headquarters;
Estimated costs (total or range): $358,121;
Median costs per program dollar[A]: Much less than 1 cent[B].
Level: Federal;
Entities: 1 region;
Estimated costs (total or range): $71,519;
Median costs per program dollar[A]: [Empty].
Level: State;
Entities: 5 education agencies;
Estimated costs (total or range): $52,762-$798,246;
Median costs per program dollar[A]: Much less than 1 cent.
Level: Local;
Entities: 10 school food authorities;
Estimated costs (total or range): $3,056-$159,748;
Median costs per program dollar[A]: $0.007.
Level: Local;
Entities: 20 schools;
Estimated costs (total or range): 0-$3,735;
Median costs per program dollar[A]: 0.002.
Local total:
Median costs per program dollar[A]: $0.010.
[A] Includes the school food authority cost prorated for each of the
two selected schools plus the costs at these schools. As a result,
adding the medians for school food authorities and schools may produce
an amount that is slightly different from the median produced when the
costs for the two categories are analyzed together.
[B] Federal costs per program dollar are not median costs because only
one entity at each of the headquarters and regional levels was used in
the calculations.
Source: GAO‘s analysis of data collected.
[End of table]
Federal and State Level Costs Were Primarily for Oversight, Guidance,
and Training Tasks Done throughout the Year:
The estimated federal costs for performing the duties associated with
the application process were small in relation to the program dollars.
FNS headquarters estimated its costs6 were about $358,000. When compared
with the almost $8 billion in program dollars7 that FNS administered
throughout the 2000-01 school year, these costs were much less than
1 cent per program dollar. However, these costs did not include costs
for FNS‘s seven regional offices. At the one region we reviewed, which
administered about $881 million program dollars, estimated costs were
about $72,000 for this time period.
FNS‘s costs were related to its overall program management and oversight
duties. FNS officials said that they performed duties and tasks related
to the application process throughout the year. The primary tasks and
duties performed by FNS headquarters and/or regional staff included the
following:
* Updating and implementing regulations related to the application
process.
* Revising eligibility criteria.
* Reviewing state application materials and eligibility data.
* Providing training to states.
* Responding to questions from states.
* Conducting or assisting in reviews of the application process at the
state and school food authority levels, and monitoring and reporting
review results.
Estimated costs incurred by the five selected states ranged from
$53,000 to $798,000 for performing tasks related to the application
process, while the total program dollars administered ranged from $122
million to $1.1 billion. For four of the five states we reviewed, total
application costs were generally in proportion to the program dollars
administered. However, the estimated application costs for one state
were higher than for other selected states with significantly larger
programs. Officials from this state attributed these higher costs to
the large number of districts in that state compared with most other
states.
At the state level, costs were incurred primarily for providing guidance
and training to school food authority staff and for monitoring the
process. Just as at the federal level, state level officials said that
they performed their application process duties throughout the year.
These tasks included updating agreements with school food authorities
to operate school meal programs, preparing prototype application forms
and letters of instruction to households and providing these documents
to the school food authorities, and training managers from the school
food authorities. State officials also reviewed the application process
as part of required reviews performed at each school food authority
every 5 years.
Local Level Costs Varied and Most Were for Tasks Done at the Start of
the School Year at the School Food Authorities:
For the sites we reviewed, the estimated median cost at the local level
to perform application process tasks was 1 cent per program dollar and
ranged from less than half a cent to about 3 cents. The school food
authorities incurred most of the application process costs”from about
$3,000 to nearly $160,000, and administered program dollars ranging from
about $315,000 to nearly $18 million. Not all schools incurred
application process costs, but for those that did, these costs ranged
from over $100 to as much as $3,735. The schools reviewed were
responsible for $65,000 to $545,000 in program dollars. Table 5 lists
the estimated application process costs, program dollars, and cost per
program dollar for each of the school food authorities and schools
included in our review.
Table 5: Estimated Application Process Costs at Selected School Food
Authorities and Schools for School Year 2000-01:
School food authority (State) school: Alta Loma Elementary District
(Calif.);
Estimated costs[A]: $10,096;
Program dollars[B]: $1,269,961;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.008;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Alta Loma Elementary District
(Calif.), Jasper Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: 0;
Program dollars[B]: $94,605;
Cost per program dollar[C]: 0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.008.
School food authority (State) school: Alta Loma Elementary District
(Calif.), Vineyard Jr. High;
Estimated costs[A]: 0;
Program dollars[B]: $187,240;
Cost per program dollar[C]: 0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.008.
School food authority (State) school: San Bernardino City Unified
District (Calif.);
Estimated costs[A]: $60,349;
Program dollars[B]: $17,568,787;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.003;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: San Bernardino City Unified
District (Calif.), Lincoln Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: $2,968;
Program dollars[B]: $545,041;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.005;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.009.
School food authority (State) school: San Bernardino City Unified
District (Calif.), Pacific High;
Estimated costs[A]: $836;
Program dollars[B]: $424,372;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.002;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.005.
School food authority (State) school: Lake County District (Fla.);
Estimated costs[A]: $3,498;
Program dollars[B]: $8,233,540;
Cost per program dollar[C]: 0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Lake County District (Fla.),
Cypress Ridge Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: $609;
Program dollars[B]: $107,015;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.006;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.006.
School food authority (State) school: Lake County District (Fla.),
Umatilla High;
Estimated costs[A]: $704;
Program dollars[B]: $107,919;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.007;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.007.
School food authority (State) school: Suwannee County District (Fla.);
Estimated costs[A]: $15,795;
Program dollars[B]: $1,422,624;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.011;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Suwannee County District (Fla.),
Suwannee Elementary East;
Estimated costs[A]: $214;
Program dollars[B]: $423,129;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.001;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.012.
School food authority (State) school: Suwannee County District (Fla.),
Suwannee High;
Estimated costs[A]: $316;
Program dollars[B]: $221,517;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.001;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.013.
School food authority (State) school: Jefferson Local District (Ohio);
Estimated costs[A]: $3,210;
Program dollars[B]: $314,220;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.010;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Jefferson Local District (Ohio),
Jefferson Memorial Middle;
Estimated costs[A]: $120;
Program dollars[B]: $78,075;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.002;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.012.
School food authority (State) school: Jefferson Local District (Ohio),
West Jefferson High;
Estimated costs[A]: $480;
Program dollars[B]: $64,501;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.007;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.018.
School food authority (State) school: Whitehall City District (Ohio):
Estimated costs[A]: $3,056;
Program dollars[B]: $1,022,507;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.003;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Whitehall City District (Ohio),
Beechwood Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: 0;
Program dollars[B]: $119,117;
Cost per program dollar[C]: 0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.003.
School food authority (State) school: Whitehall City District (Ohio),
Whitehall Yearling High;
Estimated costs[A]: 0;
Program dollars[B]: $106,404;
Cost per program dollar[C]: 0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.003.
School food authority (State) school: Caroline District (Va.);
Estimated costs[A]: $12,546;
Program dollars[B]: $954,961;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.013;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Caroline District (Va.), Bowling
Green Primary;
Estimated costs[A]: $384;
Program dollars[B]: $155,334;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.002;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.016.
School food authority (State) school: Caroline District (Va.), Caroline
Middle;
Estimated costs[A]: $3,735;
Program dollars[B]: $230,542;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.016;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.029.
School food authority (State) school: Fairfax District (Va.);
Estimated costs[A]: $159,748;
Program dollars[B]: $28,319,007;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.006;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Fairfax District (Va.), Baileys
Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: 0;
Program dollars[B]: $270,614;
Cost per program dollar[C]: 0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.006.
School food authority (State) school: Fairfax District (Va.), Holmes
Middle;
Estimated costs[A]: 0;
Program dollars[B]: $216,073;
Cost per program dollar[C]: 0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.006.
School food authority (State) school: Mount Vernon District (Wash.);
Estimated costs[A]: $7,719;
Program dollars[B]: $1,512,649;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.005;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Mount Vernon District (Wash.),
Jefferson Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: $850;
Program dollars[B]: $136,990;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.006;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.011.
School food authority (State) school: Mount Vernon District (Wash.),
Lincoln Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: $650;
Program dollars[B]: $116,755;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.006;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.011.
School food authority (State) school: Seattle District (Wash.);
Estimated costs[A]: $146,065;
Program dollars[B]: $9,067,270;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.016;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Seattle District (Wash.), Mercer
Middle;
Estimated costs[A]: $1,436;
Program dollars[B]: $154,512;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.009;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.025.
School food authority (State) school: Seattle District (Wash.),
Whitworth Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: $1,382;
Program dollars[B]: $160,879;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.009;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.025.
[A] Based on estimates provided by school food authority and school
officials.
[B] Program dollars include federal funding for the National School
Lunch and the School Breakfast Programs, state funding provided to
school food authorities to support these programs and student payments
for reimbursable meals.
[C] Estimated costs divided by program dollars.
[D] Includes the school food authority cost prorated for each of the
two selected schools plus the costs at these schools.
Source: GAO‘s analysis of data collected.
[End of table]
At the local level, the costs associated with conducting the application
process for free and reduced-price meals were primarily related to the
following tasks:
* Downloading the prototype application and household instruction
letter from the state‘s Web site and making copies of it before the
school year begins.
* Sending the applications and household instruction letters home with
children at the beginning of the school year or mailing them to the
children‘s homes.
* Collecting completed applications that were either returned to school
or mailed to the district office.
* Reviewing applications and returning those with unclear or missing
information, or calling applicants for the information.
* Making eligibility determinations for free or reduced-price meals.
* Sending letters to applicants with the results of eligibility
determinations for free or reduced-price meals.
* Preparing rosters of eligible children.
Most of the application process tasks were performed at the beginning of
the school year because parents must complete a new application each
year in order for their children to receive free or reduced-price
meals. [Footnote 8] Some applications are submitted throughout the
school year for newly enrolled or transferred children or children
whose families have changes to their household financial status.
Program regulations direct parents to notify school officials when
there is a decrease in household size or an increase in household
income of more than $50 per month or $600 per year.
Staff at 8 of the 10 school food authorities performed most of the
application tasks for all schools that they managed. For the 2 other
school food authorities, the schools reviewed performed most of the
application tasks. Sixteen of 20 schools distributed and collected the
applications. However, 4 schools did not distribute applications
because their school food authorities mailed applications to households
instead.
Various staff supported the application process at the school food
authorities and the schools. Two school food authorities hired temporary
workers to help process the applications at the start of the school
year, and the costs at these locations were below the median. Several
schools involved various nonfood service staff in the process. At one
school guidance counselors and teachers helped distribute and collect
applications. At another school, a bilingual community resource staff
person made telephone calls to families to help them apply for free and
reduced-price meals. Clerical workers copied and pre-approved
applications at two schools, and at another school, the school secretary
collected the applications and made eligibility determinations.
While the variation in the staff assigned to perform application duties
may account for some cost differences, the limited number of selected
schools and their related school food authorities differed in many
aspects, making it difficult to determine reasons for most cost
differences, except in a few instances. In one case, we were able to
compare two schools and their related school food authorities because
the two schools had some similar characteristics, including size of
school enrollment, grade span, and percentage of children approved for
free and reduced-price school meals. However, the school food
authorities differed in size and locale. At these two schools, the
combined costs”costs for the school and its share of the related school
food authority‘s costs for processing applications”differed. The
combined costs at one school were almost 3 cents per program dollar,
while the combined costs at the other school were less than 1 cent per
program dollar. The school with the higher costs enlisted teachers and
guidance counselors to help hand out and collect applications and was
part of a smaller school food authority that used a manual process to
prepare a roster of eligible children. The other school did not perform
any application process tasks, since these tasks were done centrally at
the school food authority. This school was part of a district that had
a much higher enrollment and an electronic system to prepare a roster
of eligible children. For the remaining 18 schools, we were generally
not able to identify reasons for cost differences.
Costs for Verifying Eligibility for Free and Reduced-Price Meals:
For the 2000-01 school year, the estimated costs per program dollar for
the verification process were much less than 1 cent at the federal,
state, and local levels. (See table 6.) At the federal and state
levels, the costs of verifying eligibility for free and reduced-price
meals were primarily related to oversight tasks performed throughout
the year. At the local level, duties associated with the verification
process were done in the fall of the school year. Only one school food
authority significantly involved its schools in the verification
process. At the 10 selected school food authorities, the verification
process resulted in some children being moved to other meal categories,
because households did not confirm the information on the application
or did not respond to the request for verification documentation. FNS
has implemented several pilot projects for improving the application
and verification processes and plans to complete these projects in
2003.
Table 6: Estimated Verification Costs for School Year 2000-01 at
Selected Locations:
Level: Federal;
Entities: Headquarters;
Estimated costs (total or range): $301,426;
Median costs per program dollar[A]: Much less than 1 cent[B].
Level: Federal;
Entities: 1 region;
Estimated costs (total or range): $28,317;
Median costs per program dollar[A]: Much less than 1 cent[B].
Level: State;
Entities: 5 education agencies;
Estimated costs (total or range): $5,124-$783,481;
Median costs per program dollar[A]: Much less than 1 cent.
Level: Local;
Entities: 10 school food authorities;
Estimated costs (total or range): $429-$14,950;
Median costs per program dollar[A]: $0.001.
Level: Local;
Entities: 20 schools;
Estimated costs (total or range): 0-$967;
Median costs per program dollar[A]: 0.000.
Local total:
Median costs per program dollar[A]: $0.001.
[A] Includes the school food authority cost prorated for each of the
two selected schools plus the costs at these schools. As a result,
adding the medians for school food authorities and schools may produce
an amount that is slightly different from the median produced when the
costs for the two categories are analyzed together.
[B] Federal costs per program dollar are not median costs because only
one entity at each of the headquarters and regional levels was used in
the calculations.
Source: GAO‘s analysis of data collected.
[End of table]
Federal and State Level Costs Were Primarily for Oversight, Guidance,
and Training Tasks Done throughout the Year:
For school year 2000-01, the estimated costs at the federal and state
levels for performing duties associated with the verification process
were much less than 1 cent per program dollar. The estimated costs at
FNS headquarters of about $301,000 and the estimated costs at the
selected FNS region of about $28,000 were small in relation to the
program dollars administered”about $8 billion and $881 million,
respectively. FNS performed a number of tasks to support the
verification process. FNS officials said that during the year the
primary tasks that staff at headquarters and/or regions performed
included the following:
* Updating regulations and guidance related to the verification
process.
* Holding training sessions.
* Responding to questions from states and parents.
* Clarifying verification issues.
* Reviewing state verification materials and data.
* Conducting or assisting in reviews of the process at the state and
school food authority levels.
* Monitoring and reporting review results.
Costs incurred by the selected states ranged from about $5,000 to
$783,000 for performing tasks related to the verification process.
During this period, these states administered $122 million to $1.1
billion program dollars. States incurred costs associated with
overseeing and monitoring the verification process and performed many
tasks throughout the year. The primary state task involved reviews of
the verification process, where states determined whether the school
food authorities appropriately selected and verified a sample of their
approved free and reduced-price applications by the deadline, confirmed
that the verification process was completed, and ensured that
verification records were maintained. In addition to the review tasks,
state officials provided guidance and training to school food authority
staff.
Local Level Costs Were Incurred Mainly at School Food Authorities in the
Fall:
The selected school food authorities‘ costs ranged from $429 to $14,950
for the verification process tasks, while costs at selected schools, if
any, ranged from $23 to as much as $967. Schools reported few, if any,
costs because they had little or no involvement in the verification
process. During school year 2000-01, the school food authorities
administered program dollars ranging from about $315,000 to over $28
million, and the schools were responsible for program dollars ranging
from about $65,000 to $545,000. The estimated median cost at the local
level”school food authorities and schools combined”was much less than 1
cent per program dollar. Table 7 lists the estimated verification
process costs, program dollars, and cost per program dollar for each of
the school food authorities and schools included in our review.
Table 7: Estimated Verification Process Costs at Selected School Food
Authorities and Schools for School Year 2000-01:
School food authority (State) school: Alta Loma Elementary District
(Calif.);
Estimated costs[A]: $429;
Program dollars[B]: $1,269,961;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Alta Loma Elementary District
(Calif.), Jasper Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: 0;
Program dollars[B]: $94,605;
Cost per program dollar[C]: 0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.008.
School food authority (State) school: Alta Loma Elementary District
(Calif.), Vineyard Jr. High;
Estimated costs[A]: 0;
Program dollars[B]: $187,240;
Cost per program dollar[C]: 0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.008.
School food authority (State) school: San Bernardino City Unified
District (Calif.);
Estimated costs[A]: $1,366;
Program dollars[B]: $17,568,787;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: San Bernardino City Unified
District (Calif.), Lincoln Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: $2,968;
Program dollars[B]: $545,041;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.009.
School food authority (State) school: San Bernardino City Unified
District (Calif.), Pacific High;
Estimated costs[A]: 0;
Program dollars[B]: $424,372;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.000.
School food authority (State) school: Lake County District (Fla.);
Estimated costs[A]: $5,056;
Program dollars[B]: $8,233,540;
Cost per program dollar[C]: 0.001;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Lake County District (Fla.),
Cypress Ridge Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: $967;
Program dollars[B]: $107,015;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.009;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.009.
School food authority (State) school: Lake County District (Fla.),
Umatilla High;
Estimated costs[A]: $62;
Program dollars[B]: $107,919;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.001;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.001.
School food authority (State) school: Suwannee County District (Fla.);
Estimated costs[A]: $4,767;
Program dollars[B]: $1,422,624;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.003;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Suwannee County District (Fla.),
Suwannee Elementary East;
Estimated costs[A]: 0;
Program dollars[B]: $423,129;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.003.
School food authority (State) school: Suwannee County District (Fla.),
Suwannee High;
Estimated costs[A]: 0;
Program dollars[B]: $221,517;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.003.
School food authority (State) school: Jefferson Local District (Ohio);
Estimated costs[A]: $720;
Program dollars[B]: $314,220;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.002;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Jefferson Local District (Ohio),
Jefferson Memorial Middle;
Estimated costs[A]: 0;
Program dollars[B]: $78,075;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.002.
School food authority (State) school: Jefferson Local District (Ohio),
West Jefferson High;
Estimated costs[A]: 0;
Program dollars[B]: $64,501;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.002.
School food authority (State) school: Whitehall City District (Ohio):
Estimated costs[A]: $597;
Program dollars[B]: $1,022,507;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.001;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Whitehall City District (Ohio),
Beechwood Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: 0;
Program dollars[B]: $119,117;
Cost per program dollar[C]: 0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.001.
School food authority (State) school: Whitehall City District (Ohio),
Whitehall Yearling High;
Estimated costs[A]: 0;
Program dollars[B]: $106,404;
Cost per program dollar[C]: 0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.001.
School food authority (State) school: Caroline District (Va.);
Estimated costs[A]: $438;
Program dollars[B]: $954,961;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Caroline District (Va.), Bowling
Green Primary;
Estimated costs[A]: $23;
Program dollars[B]: $155,334;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.001.
School food authority (State) school: Caroline District (Va.), Caroline
Middle;
Estimated costs[A]: $21;
Program dollars[B]: $230,542;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.001.
School food authority (State) school: Fairfax District (Va.);
Estimated costs[A]: $14,950;
Program dollars[B]: $28,319,007;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.001;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Fairfax District (Va.), Baileys
Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: 0;
Program dollars[B]: $270,614;
Cost per program dollar[C]: 0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.001.
School food authority (State) school: Fairfax District (Va.), Holmes
Middle;
Estimated costs[A]: 0;
Program dollars[B]: $216,073;
Cost per program dollar[C]: 0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.001.
School food authority (State) school: Mount Vernon District (Wash.);
Estimated costs[A]: $1,557;
Program dollars[B]: $1,512,649;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.001;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Mount Vernon District (Wash.),
Jefferson Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: 0;
Program dollars[B]: $136,990;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.001.
School food authority (State) school: Mount Vernon District (Wash.),
Lincoln Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: $23;
Program dollars[B]: $116,755;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.011.
School food authority (State) school: Seattle District (Wash.);
Estimated costs[A]: $4,736;
Program dollars[B]: $9,067,270;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.001;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Seattle District (Wash.), Mercer
Middle;
Estimated costs[A]: $27;
Program dollars[B]: $154,512;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.001.
School food authority (State) school: Seattle District (Wash.),
Whitworth Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: 0;
Program dollars[B]: $160,879;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.000;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.001.
[A] Based on estimates provided by school food authority and school
officials.
[B] Program dollars include federal funding for the National School
Lunch and the School Breakfast Programs, state funding provided to
school food authorities to support these programs and student
payments for reimbursable meals.
[C] Estimated costs divided by program dollars.
[D] Includes the school food authority cost prorated for each of the
two selected schools plus the costs at these schools.
Source: GAO‘s analysis of data collected.
[End of table]
At the local level, costs associated with verifying approved
applications for free and reduced-price school meals were for duties
performed primarily in the fall of the school year. Each year school
food authority staff must select a sample from the approved
applications on file as of October 31 and complete the verification
process by December 15. According to USDA regulations, the sample may
be either a random sample or a focused sample. [Footnote 9]
Additionally, the school food authority has an obligation to verify all
questionable applications, referred to as verification ’for cause.“
However, any verification that is done for cause is in addition to the
required sample. Furthermore, instead of verifying a sample of
applications, school food authorities may choose to verify all approved
applications. Also, school food authorities can require households to
provide information to verify eligibility for free and reduced-price
meals at the time of application. This information is to be used to
verify applications only after eligibility has been determined based on
the completed application alone. In this way, eligible children can
receive free or reduced-price school meals without being delayed by the
verification process. Of the 10 selected school food authorities, 7
used a random sample method and 3 used a focused sample method.
At the local level, the costs associated with verifying approved
applications for free and reduced-price meals were primarily related to
the following tasks:
* Selecting a sample from the approved applications on file as of
October 31.
* Providing the selected households with written notice that their
applications have been selected for verification and that they are
required to submit written evidence of eligibility [Footnote 10] within
a specified period of time.
* Sending follow-up letters to households that do not respond.
* Comparing documentation provided by the household, such as pay stubs,
with information on the application to determine whether the school
food authority‘s original eligibility determination is correct.
* Locating the files of all the siblings of a child whose eligibility
status has changed if a school district uses individual applications
instead of family applications. [Footnote 11]
* Notifying the households of any changes in eligibility status.
Generally, the selected school food authorities performed most of the
verification tasks, while the schools had little or no involvement in
the process. However, the schools in one school food authority did most
of the verification tasks, and the tasks performed by the school food
authority were limited to selecting the applications to be verified and
sending copies of parent notification letters and verification forms to
the schools for the schools to distribute. The costs at these two
schools were less than 1 cent per program dollar.
Verification Helps Ensure Accurate Eligibility Status for Some
Children:
The verification process is intended to help ensure that only eligible
children receive the benefit of free or reduced-price meals, and at the
locations we visited, the verification process resulted in changes to
the eligibility status for a number of children. During the
verification process, generally, household income information on the
application is compared with related documents, such as pay stubs or
social security payment information. When the income information in the
application cannot be confirmed or when households do not respond to
the request for verification documentation, the eligibility status of
children in the program is changed. That is, children are switched to
other meal categories, such as from free to full price. Children can
also be determined to be eligible for higher benefits, such as for free
meals, rather than reduced-price meals. At the locations we visited,
the verification process resulted in changes to the eligibility status
for a number of children. For example, at one school food authority in
a small town with about half of its children approved for free and
reduced-price school meals, 65 of 2,728 approved applications were
selected for verification, and 24 children were moved from the free
meals category to either the reduced-price or full-priced meals
categories, while 1 child was moved to the free category. At another
school food authority in the urban fringe of a large city, with about
40 percent of its children approved for free and reduced-price school
meals, 40 of about 1,100 approved applications were selected for
verification and 8 children were moved to higher-priced meal
categories. According to program officials, some children initially
determined to be ineligible for free or reduced-price meals are later
found to be eligible when they reapply and provide the needed
documents. We did not determine whether any of the children were
subsequently reinstated to their pre-verification status.
The accuracy of the numbers of children who are approved for free and
reduced-price meals affects not only the school meals program but also
other federal and state programs. A USDA report, based on the agency‘s
data on the number of children approved for free meals and data from the
U. S. Bureau of Census, indicates that about 27 percent more children
are approved for free meals than are income-eligible. As such, the
federal reimbursements for the school meals program may not be proper.
Furthermore, some other programs that serve children in poverty
distribute funds or resources based on the number of children approved
to receive free or reduced-price meals. For example, in school year
1999-2000 nine states used free and reduced-price meals data to
distribute Title I funds to their small districts (those serving areas
with fewer than 20,000 total residents). In addition, districts
typically use free and reduced-price meals data to distribute Title I
funds among schools. [Footnote 12] At the state level, some state
programs also rely on free and reduced-price lunch data. For example,
Minnesota distributed about $7 million in 2002 for a first grade
preparedness program based on these data.
FNS Pilot Projects Examine Verification Alternatives:
As of July 2002, FNS had three pilot projects underway for improving the
application and verification processes. These projects are designed to
assess the value of (1) requesting income documentation and performing
verification at the time of application, (2) verifying additional
sampled applications if a specified rate of ineligible children are
identified in the original verification sample, and (3) verifying the
eligibility of children who were approved for free school meals based
on information provided by program officials on household participation
in the Food Stamp, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, or Food
Distribution on Indian Reservations programs, a process known as direct
certification. FNS plans to report on these projects in 2003. According
to officials from three organizations that track food and nutrition
issues, the American School Food Service Association, the Center on
Budget and Policy Priorities, and the Food Research and Action Center,
requesting income documentation at the time of application would likely
add to application process costs and may create a barrier for eligible
households. Having to provide such additional information can
complicate the school meals application process and may cause some
eligible households not to apply. In 1986, we reported this method as
an option for reducing participation of ineligible children in free and
reduced-price meal programs, but recognized that it could increase
schools‘ administrative costs, place an administrative burden on some
applicants, or pose a barrier to potential applicants. [Footnote 13]
Costs for Counting All Reimbursable Meals and Claiming Federal
Reimbursement:
For the 2000-01 school year, costs for meal counting and claiming
reimbursement at the federal and state levels were much less than 1 cent
per program dollar. The median cost was nearly 7 cents at the local
level and was the highest cost. (See table 8.) The federal and state
level costs were incurred for providing oversight and administering
funds for reimbursement throughout the school year. Similarly, costs at
the local level were incurred throughout the school year because the
related duties, which apply to all reimbursable meals, were performed
regularly. A number of factors come into play at the local level that
could affect costs; however, except in a few instances, we could not
identify any clear pattern as to how these factors affected meal
counting and reimbursement claiming costs.
Table 8: Estimated Meal Counting and Reimbursement Claiming Costs for
School Year 2000-01 at Selected Locations:
Level: Federal;
Entities: Headquarters;
Estimated costs (total or range): $254,213;
Median costs per program dollar[A]: Much less than 1 cent[B].
Level: Federal;
Entities: 1 region;
Estimated costs (total or range): $93,548;
Median costs per program dollar[A]: Much less than 1 cent[B].
Level: State;
Entities: 5 education agencies;
Estimated costs (total or range): $50,584-$1,090,183;
Median costs per program dollar[A]: Much less than 1 cent.
Level: Local;
Entities: 10 school food authorities;
Estimated costs (total or range): $2,461-$318,436;
Median costs per program dollar[A]: $0.011.
Level: Local;
Entities: 20 schools;
Estimated costs (total or range): $1,892-$36,986;
Median costs per program dollar[A]: 0.054.
Local total:
Median costs per program dollar[A]: $0.068.
[A] Includes the school food authority cost prorated for each of the
two selected schools plus the costs at these schools. As a result,
adding the medians for school food authorities and schools may produce
an amount that is slightly different from the median produced when the
costs for the two categories are analyzed together.
[B] Federal costs per program dollar are not median costs because only
one entity at each of the headquarters and regional levels was used in
the calculations.
Source: GAO‘s analysis of data collected.
[End of table]
Federal and State Costs Mainly for Requesting Funding, Processing
Payments, and Providing Oversight:
At the federal and state levels, the costs associated with the meal
counting and reimbursement claiming processes were much less than 1
cent per program dollar. FNS headquarters estimated that the costs
associated with its meal counting and reimbursement claiming tasks were
$254,000, [Footnote 14] and the costs of one FNS region were estimated
at $93,000 in school year 2000-01. In comparison, FNS administered $8
billion and the region administered $881 million in the school meals
program. FNS‘s costs for meal counting and claiming reimbursement were
less than their costs for application processing and verification
tasks.
FNS‘s meal counting and reimbursement costs were primarily incurred for
providing technical assistance, guidance, monitoring, and distributing
federal funds to state agencies that administer school food programs.
FNS distributes these funds through the regional offices, with the
regions overseeing state and local agencies and providing guidance and
training. Prior to the beginning of the fiscal year, FNS reviewed meal
reimbursement requests from the prior year to project funding needs for
each state. FNS awarded grants and provided letters of credit to states.
Each month, states obtained reimbursement payments via the letters-
ofcredit, and FNS reviewed reports from states showing the claims
submitted. At the end of the year, FNS closed out the grants and
reconciled claims submitted with letter-of-credit payments. In addition
to these tasks, FNS issued guidance, provided training, and responded to
inquiries. Also, FNS regional staff conducted financial reviews of state
agencies, such as reviews of reimbursement claim management, and
assisted state agencies during reviews of school food authorities.
For the five states, the cost per program dollar was also considerably
less than 1 cent for the 2000-01 school year. The state agencies‘ cost
estimates ranged from $51,000 to $1 million, with the size of their
programs ranging from $122 million to $1.1 billion. In all five states,
the costs for meal counting and reimbursement tasks exceeded the costs
for verification activities. In four of the five states, these costs
were less than the costs for application activities.
State agencies are responsible for operating a system to reimburse
school food authorities for the meals served to children. Of the five
state agencies in our sample, four had systems that allowed school food
authorities to submit their monthly claims electronically, although one
state agency‘s system began operating in the middle of the 2000-01
school year. The other state agency received claims from its school
food authorities through conventional mail services. The state agencies
reviewed claims and approved payments as appropriate and conducted
periodic reviews of school food authority meal counting and
reimbursement activities.
Local Level Costs Were the Highest Primarily Due to the Frequency of
the Tasks:
The median cost for meal counting and reimbursement claiming at the
local level”school food authorities and schools”was about 7 cents per
program dollar and ranged from 2 cents to 14 cents. The estimated meal
counting and reimbursement claiming costs at the 10 selected school food
authorities ranged from $2,461 to $318,436, and ranged from $1,892 to
$36,986 for the 20 schools. Schools usually had a higher share of the
cost per program dollar than their respective school food authorities;
18 of the 20 schools reviewed incurred more than half the cost per
program dollar, with 14 schools incurring more than 75 percent. For
example, one school‘s costs were $19,000--about 90 percent of the
combined school and school food authority costs. Table 9 lists the
estimated costs for meal counting and obtaining reimbursement, program
dollars, and cost per program dollar for each of the school food
authorities and schools included in our review.
Table 9: Estimated Meal Counting and Reimbursement Claiming Process
Costs at Selected School Food Authorities and Schools for School Year
2000-01:
School food authority (State) school: Alta Loma Elementary District
(Calif.);
Estimated costs[A]: $3,711;
Program dollars[B]: $1,269,961;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.003;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Alta Loma Elementary District
(Calif.), Jasper Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: $5,992;
Program dollars[B]: $94,605;
Cost per program dollar[C]: 0.063;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.065.
School food authority (State) school: Alta Loma Elementary District
(Calif.), Vineyard Jr. High;
Estimated costs[A]: $14,934;
Program dollars[B]: $187,240;
Cost per program dollar[C]: 0.080;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.081.
School food authority (State) school: San Bernardino City Unified
District (Calif.);
Estimated costs[A]: $81,496;
Program dollars[B]: $17,568,787;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.005;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: San Bernardino City Unified
District (Calif.), Lincoln Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: $9,660;
Program dollars[B]: $545,041;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.018;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.022.
School food authority (State) school: San Bernardino City Unified
District (Calif.), Pacific High;
Estimated costs[A]: $19,260;
Program dollars[B]: $424,372;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.045;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.050.
School food authority (State) school: Lake County District (Fla.);
Estimated costs[A]: $235,915;
Program dollars[B]: $8,233,540;
Cost per program dollar[C]: 0.029;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Lake County District (Fla.),
Cypress Ridge Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: $11,928;
Program dollars[B]: $107,015;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.111;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.140.
School food authority (State) school: Lake County District (Fla.),
Umatilla High;
Estimated costs[A]: $2,872;
Program dollars[B]: $107,919;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.027;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.050.
School food authority (State) school: Suwannee County District (Fla.);
Estimated costs[A]: $21,463;
Program dollars[B]: $1,422,624;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.015;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Suwannee County District (Fla.),
Suwannee Elementary East;
Estimated costs[A]: $36,986;
Program dollars[B]: $423,129;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.087;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.103.
School food authority (State) school: Suwannee County District (Fla.),
Suwannee High;
Estimated costs[A]: $11,871;
Program dollars[B]: $221,517;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.054;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.069.
School food authority (State) school: Jefferson Local District (Ohio);
Estimated costs[A]: $2,461;
Program dollars[B]: $314,220;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.008;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Jefferson Local District (Ohio),
Jefferson Memorial Middle;
Estimated costs[A]: $1,892;
Program dollars[B]: $78,075;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.024;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.032.
School food authority (State) school: Jefferson Local District (Ohio),
West Jefferson High;
Estimated costs[A]: $4,825;
Program dollars[B]: $64,501;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.075;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.082.
School food authority (State) school: Whitehall City District (Ohio):
Estimated costs[A]: $29,057;
Program dollars[B]: $1,022,507;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.028;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Whitehall City District (Ohio),
Beechwood Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: $11,000;
Program dollars[B]: $119,117;
Cost per program dollar[C]: 0.092;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.121.
School food authority (State) school: Whitehall City District (Ohio),
Whitehall Yearling High;
Estimated costs[A]: $6,433;
Program dollars[B]: $106,404;
Cost per program dollar[C]: 0.060;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.089.
School food authority (State) school: Caroline District (Va.);
Estimated costs[A]: $10,412;
Program dollars[B]: $954,961;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.011;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Caroline District (Va.), Bowling
Green Primary;
Estimated costs[A]: $14,649;
Program dollars[B]: $155,334;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.094;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.105.
School food authority (State) school: Caroline District (Va.), Caroline
Middle;
Estimated costs[A]: $9,658;
Program dollars[B]: $230,542;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.042;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.053.
School food authority (State) school: Fairfax District (Va.);
Estimated costs[A]: $291,2660;
Program dollars[B]: $28,319,007;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.010;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Fairfax District (Va.), Baileys
Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: #13,463;
Program dollars[B]: $270,614;
Cost per program dollar[C]: 0.050;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.060.
School food authority (State) school: Fairfax District (Va.), Holmes
Middle;
Estimated costs[A]: $19,306;
Program dollars[B]: $216,073;
Cost per program dollar[C]: 0.089;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.100.
School food authority (State) school: Mount Vernon District (Wash.);
Estimated costs[A]: $8,794;
Program dollars[B]: $1,512,649;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.006;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Mount Vernon District (Wash.),
Jefferson Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: $6,900;
Program dollars[B]: $136,990;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.050;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.056.
School food authority (State) school: Mount Vernon District (Wash.),
Lincoln Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: $6,300;
Program dollars[B]: $116,755;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.054;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.060.
School food authority (State) school: Seattle District (Wash.);
Estimated costs[A]: $318,436;
Program dollars[B]: $9,067,270;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.035;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: [Empty].
School food authority (State) school: Seattle District (Wash.), Mercer
Middle;
Estimated costs[A]: $5,743;
Program dollars[B]: $154,512;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.037;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.072.
School food authority (State) school: Seattle District (Wash.),
Whitworth Elementary;
Estimated costs[A]: $2,962;
Program dollars[B]: $160,879;
Cost per program dollar[C]: $0.018;
Local cost per program dollar[D]: $0.054.
[A] Based on estimates provided by school food authority and school
officials.
[B] Program dollars include federal funding for the National School
Lunch and the School Breakfast Programs, state funding provided to
school food authorities to support these programs and student
payments for reimbursable meals.
[C] Estimated costs divided by program dollars.
[D] Includes the school food authority cost prorated for each of the
two selected schools plus the costs at these schools.
Source: GAO‘s analysis of data collected.
[End of table]
The local level costs were much higher than the costs for application
processing and verification because the duties were performed
frequently throughout the school year, and costs were incurred for all
reimbursable meals served under the program. As such, these costs do
not reflect separate costs by type of meal served. At the schools, each
meal was counted when served, the number of meals served were tallied
each day, and a summary of the meals served was sent periodically to
the school food authority. The school food authorities received and
reviewed reports from its schools at regular intervals, including
ensuring that meal counts were within limits based on enrollment,
attendance, and the number of children eligible for free, reduced price
and paid lunches. On the basis of these data, the school food
authorities submitted claims for reimbursement to the state agency each
month of the school year. Program officials noted that even without the
federal requirement for meal counting by reimbursement category,
schools would still incur some meal counting costs in order to account
for the meals served. Most of the costs at the local level were for the
labor to complete meal counting and claiming tasks. Those school food
authorities with electronic meal counting systems reported substantial
costs related to purchasing, maintaining, and operating meal counting
computer systems and software. In addition to the frequency, another
reason for the higher cost is that, unlike application and
verification, meal counting and claiming reimbursement pertains to all
reimbursable meals served”free, reduced-price and full price. For
example, during school year 2000-01, FNS provided reimbursement for
over 2 billion free lunches, about 400 million reduced-price lunches
and about 2 billion full-price lunches.
Local Costs Varied Considerably and Many Factors May Affect Costs:
Costs for meal counting and reimbursement claiming varied considerably
at the local level”school food authorities and schools combined. The
costs per program dollar ranged from 2 cents to 14 cents, compared with
the costs per program dollar for the other processes, which were much
more consistent”from about half a cent to 3 cents for the application
process and from less than 1 cent to 1 cent for the verification
process.
Various factors may contribute to this range of costs at the local
level. For example, larger enrollments may allow economies of scale
that lower the cost of food service operations. Use of an electronic
meal counting system, as opposed to a manual system, has the potential
to affect meal counting costs, since electronic systems require the
purchase of equipment, software, and ongoing maintenance. Food service
procedures may also have a bearing on costs, such as the number and pay
levels of cashiers and other staff performing meal counting and
reimbursement claiming tasks.
The interaction of these factors and our limited number of selected
sites prevents a clear explanation for the differences in estimated
costs per program dollar incurred at the selected locations reviewed,
except in a few instances. For example, at the local level, the school
with the highest combined meal counting cost per program dollar for the
school and its share of the school food authority costs (14 cents) had
an enrollment of 636 children, relatively few of its children approved
for free and reduced-price meals (14 percent), and a manual meal
counting system. The school with the lowest combined meal counting cost
(2 cents per program dollar) had about twice the enrollment, 96 percent
of its children approved for free and reduced-price meals, and an
electronic meal counting system. Both schools were elementary schools
in mid-size city locales. For the remaining 18 schools in the sample,
we saw no distinct relationship between cost and these factors.
Agency Comments and Our Evaluation:
We provided a draft of this report to USDA‘s Food and Nutrition Service
for review and comment. We met with agency officials to discuss the
report. These officials stated that written comments would not be
provided. However, they provided technical comments that we
incorporated where appropriate.
We are sending copies of this report to the Secretary of Agriculture,
appropriate congressional committees, and other interested parties. We
will also make copies available to others upon request. In addition, the
report will be available at no charge on the GAO Web site at
[Hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov].
If you or your staff have questions concerning this report, please call
me on (202) 512-7215. Key contacts and staff acknowledgments are listed
in appendix III.
Singed by:
Marnie S. Shaul:
Director, Education, Workforce, and Income Security Issues:
[End of section]
Appendix I: Scope and Methodology:
This appendix discusses cost estimates for the application,
verification, and meal counting and reimbursement claiming processes.
The scope of our review included the National School Lunch Program and
the School Breakfast Program as they relate to public schools. To the
extent that we could, we excluded from our analyses other federal child
nutrition programs and nonprofit private schools and residential child
care institutions, which also participate in the school meals programs.
Our review included the paper application process and did not include
the direct certification of children for free and reduced-price school
meals. Our focus was school year 2000-01, the most recent year for
which data were available. The data we collected relate to that year.
National data on the costs of the application, verification, and meal
counting and reimbursement claiming processes are not available for the
federal, state, or local levels, since these costs are not tracked
separately. Therefore, we developed estimates of these costs on the
basis of cost information provided by program managers and staff.
To obtain data on the costs related to applying for free and reduced-
price school meals, verifying approved applications, and counting meals
and claiming reimbursements, we visited selected locations, including 5
state agencies, 10 school food authorities in public school districts,
and 2 schools at each district. We chose sites that would provide a
range of characteristics, such as geographical location, the size of
student enrollment, the rate of children approved for free and reduced-
price meals, and the type of meal counting system. We selected
districts with schools that were located in rural areas, small towns,
mid-size central cities, urban fringe areas of mid-size and large
cities, and large central cities based on locale categories assigned to
their respective districts by the National Center for Education
Statistics. To include districts of various sizes in our study, we
selected 2 districts in each selected state”1 with enrollment over
10,000 and 1 with enrollment under 10,000, except in Ohio. In Ohio, we
selected 2 districts with enrollments of less than 5,000, since almost
90 percent of the public school districts nationwide have enrollments
under that amount. We also selected districts with rates of children
approved for free and reduced-price meals that ranged from 16.7 to 74.5
percent and schools with rates that ranged from 10.5 to 96.5 percent.
We worked with state and school food authority officials at our selected
districts to select a mix of schools that had either manual or
electronic meal counting systems. Electronic meal counting systems were
used at 9 selected schools.
We also obtained information from officials at the Food and Nutrition
Service‘s (FNS) headquarters and one regional office. We selected one
regional office that, according to FNS officials, had the best data
available to develop estimates for the application, verification, and
meal counting processes.
We developed interview guides to use at selected sites. We also met with
FNS and professional association officials to obtain their comments on
these interview guides, and we revised them where appropriate. Using
these guides, we interviewed program managers and staff at the selected
locations to obtain information on tasks associated with the
application, verification, and meal counting and reimbursement claiming
processes for the 2000-01 school year. We obtained estimated labor and
benefit costs associated with these tasks. We also obtained other
estimated nonlabor costs such as those for translating, copying,
printing, mailing, data processing, travel, hardware, software, and
automated systems development costs. On the basis of this information,
we calculated estimated costs associated with each process, that is,
application, verification, and meal counting and reimbursement
claiming.
Using our cost estimates, we calculated costs relative to program
dollars. Program dollars at the federal level for both FNS headquarters
and the one region included the value of reimbursements for school
meals and commodities, both entitlement and bonus, for public and
nonprofit private schools and residential child care institutions
because FNS was not able to provide program dollars specific to public
schools. However, according to FNS officials, reimbursements and
commodities provided to public schools make up the vast majority of
these dollars. Program dollars at the state level included this federal
funding specific to public school districts for school meals and state
school meal funding. Information specific to public school districts is
available at the state level because claims are made separately by each
school food authority. At the local level, program dollars included the
amounts children paid for the meals as well as federal and state
funding. Since some school food authorities could not provide the
dollar value of commodities used at selected schools, we assigned a
dollar value of commodities to each of these schools based on their
proportion of federal reimbursements. We included federal and state
program funding and the amounts children paid for the meals because
these are the revenues related to the sale of reimbursable meals.
Because the definition of program dollars differed by level, we were
unable to total the costs for the three levels”federal, state, and
local. However, since the definition of program dollars was the same
for school food authorities and schools, we were able to calculate the
cost per program dollar at the local level for each school. To
calculate these costs we: (1) divided the school program dollars by the
school food authority program dollars; (2) multiplied the resulting
amount by the total school food authority costs for each
process”application, verification, and meal counting and reimbursement
claiming”to determine the portion of the costs for each process at the
school food authority that was attributable to each selected school;
(3) added these costs to the total costs for each of the schools; and
(4) divided the resulting total amount by the program dollars for each
selected school to arrive at the cost per program dollar at the local
level for each school.
We calculated a median cost per program dollar for school food
authorities and schools separately for each process”application,
verification, and meal counting and reimbursement claiming. We also
calculated a median cost for each process for school food authorities
and schools combined to arrive at local level medians for each process.
The cost estimates do not include indirect costs. For 2 of the 10 school
food authorities, indirect rates were not available and in other cases,
the rates varied significantly due to differing financial management and
accounting policies. Also, for 2 of the 10 school food authorities,
including indirect rate calculations could have resulted in some costs
being double counted because during our interviews with staff, they
provided estimates for many of the tasks that would have been included
in the indirect rates.
Depreciation costs for equipment, such as computer hardware and
software, were generally not calculated nor maintained by states and
school food authorities. Therefore, we obtained the costs for equipment
purchased in the year under review. We did not obtain costs for
equipment at the federal level because these costs could not be
reasonably estimated, since equipment was used for purposes beyond the
processes under review.
We obtained information on the verification pilot projects from FNS
officials. We also obtained information from the American School Food
Service Association, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, and the
Food Research and Action Center on several options related to the
program, one of which was the same as one of the pilot projects.
We did not verify the information collected for this study. However, we
made follow-up calls in cases where data were missing or appeared
unusual. The results of our study cannot be generalized to schools,
school food authorities, or states nationwide.
[End of section]
Appendix II: Program Dollars at Selected School Food Authorities and
Schools for School Year 2000-01:
Program dollars include cash reimbursements and commodities (bonus
and entitlement) at the federal level, the amounts provided to school
food authorities for these programs at the state level, and the amounts
students paid for their meals at the local level.
Table 10: Amounts and Sources of Program Dollars at Selected School
Food Authorities and Schools for School Year 2000-01:
School food authority (State) school: Alta Loma Elementary District
(Calif.);
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $433,682;
Federal commodities: $73,583;
State Funds: $25,615;
Student payments: $737,081;
Total: $1,269,961.
School food authority (State) school: Alta Loma Elementary District
(Calif.), Jasper Elementary;
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $35,815;
Federal commodities: $5,643;
State Funds: $2,124;
Student payments: $51,023;
Total: $94,605.
School food authority (State) school: Alta Loma Elementary District
(Calif.), Vineyard Jr. High;
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $48,529;
Federal commodities: $10,574;
State Funds: $2,581;
Student payments: $125,556;
Total: $187,240.
School food authority (State) school: San Bernardino City Unified
District (Calif.);
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $14,483,178;
Federal commodities: $1,170,001;
State Funds: $1,334,719;
Student payments: $580,889;
Total: $17,568,787.
School food authority (State) school: San Bernardino City Unified
District (Calif.), Lincoln Elementary;
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $474,150;
Federal commodities: $36,840;
State Funds: $32,278;
Student payments: $1,773;
Total: $545,041.
School food authority (State) school: San Bernardino City Unified
District (Calif.), Pacific High;
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $363,699;
Federal commodities: $30,140;
State Funds: $25,344;
Student payments: $5,189;
Total: $424,372.
School food authority (State) school: Lake County District (Fla.);
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $5,722,906;
Federal commodities: $436,799;
State Funds: $158,083;
Student payments: $1,915,752;
Total: $8,233,540.
School food authority (State) school: Lake County District (Fla.),
Cypress Ridge Elementary;
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $35,157;
Federal commodities: $6,437;
State Funds: $2,698;
Student payments: $62,723;
Total: $107,015.
School food authority (State) school: Lake County District (Fla.),
Umatilla High;
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $58,661;
Federal commodities: $5,051;
State Funds: $1,919;
Student payments: $42,288;
Total: $107,919.
School food authority (State) school: Suwannee County District (Fla.);
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $983,649;
Federal commodities: $102,163;
State Funds: $39,706;
Student payments: $297,106;
Total: $1,422,624.
School food authority (State) school: Suwannee County District (Fla.),
Suwannee Elementary East;
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $309,720;
Federal commodities: $26,213;
State Funds: $15,216;
Student payments: $71,980;
Total: $423,129.
School food authority (State) school: Suwannee County District (Fla.),
Suwannee High;
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $123,537;
Federal commodities: $12,427;
State Funds: $4,764;
Student payments: $80,789;
Total: $221,517.
School food authority (State) school: Jefferson Local District (Ohio);
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $73,369;
Federal commodities: $145,105;
State Funds: $3,553;
Student payments: $92,193;
Total: $314,220.
School food authority (State) school: Jefferson Local District (Ohio),
Jefferson Memorial Middle;
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $18,426;
Federal commodities: $36,862;
State Funds: $902;
Student payments: $21,885;
Total: $78,075.
School food authority (State) school: Jefferson Local District (Ohio),
West Jefferson High;
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $14,661;
Federal commodities: $29,320;
State Funds: $718;
Student payments: $19,802;
Total: $64,501.
School food authority (State) school: Whitehall City District (Ohio):
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $358,854;
Federal commodities: $52,439;
State Funds: $361,214;
Student payments: $254,216;
Total: $1,026,723.
School food authority (State) school: Whitehall City District (Ohio),
Beechwood Elementary;
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $64,668;
Federal commodities: $8,847;
State Funds: $3,094;
Student payments: $42,508;
Total: $119,117.
School food authority (State) school: Whitehall City District (Ohio),
Whitehall Yearling High;
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $37,910;
Federal commodities: $9,002;
State Funds: $1,959;
Student payments: $57,533;
Total: $106,404.
School food authority (State) school: Caroline District (Va.);
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $549,836;
Federal commodities: $76,077;
State Funds: $23,746;
Student payments: $305,302;
Total: $954,961.
School food authority (State) school: Caroline District (Va.), Bowling
Green Primary;
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $102,971;
Federal commodities: $9,129;
State Funds: $2,576;
Student payments: $40,658;
Total: $155,334.
School food authority (State) school: Caroline District (Va.), Caroline
Middle;
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $124,482;
Federal commodities: $20,541;
State Funds: $5,404;
Student payments: $80,115;
Total: $230,542.
School food authority (State) school: Fairfax District (Va.);
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $11,044,817;
Federal commodities: $352,012;
State Funds: $575,673;
Student payments: $16,346,505;
Total: $28,319,007.
School food authority (State) school: Fairfax District (Va.), Baileys
Elementary;
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $198,261;
Federal commodities: $3,090;
State Funds: $6,369;
Student payments: $62,894;
Total: $270,614.
School food authority (State) school: Fairfax District (Va.), Holmes
Middle;
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $134,082;
Federal commodities: $2,480;
State Funds: $5,175;
Student payments: $74,336;
Total: $216,073.
School food authority (State) school: Mount Vernon District (Wash.);
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $979,168;
Federal commodities: $100,973;
State Funds: $67,640;
Student payments: $364,868;
Total: $1,512,649.
School food authority (State) school: Mount Vernon District (Wash.),
Jefferson Elementary;
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $81,652;
Federal commodities: $8,078;
State Funds: $3,571;
Student payments: $43,689;
Total: $136,990.
School food authority (State) school: Mount Vernon District (Wash.),
Lincoln Elementary;
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $82,975;
Federal commodities: $7,068;
State Funds: $3,097;
Student payments: $23,615;
Total: $116,755.
School food authority (State) school: Seattle District (Wash.);
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $6,110,456;
Federal commodities: $704,267;
State Funds: $296,604;
Student payments: $1,955,943;
Total: $9,067,270.
School food authority (State) school: Seattle District (Wash.), Mercer
Middle;
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $116,598;
Federal commodities: $11,495;
State Funds: $4,961;
Student payments: $21,458;
Total: $154,512.
School food authority (State) school: Seattle District (Wash.),
Whitworth Elementary;
Federal Cash Reimbursements: $119,526;
Federal commodities: $11,572;
State Funds: $6,025;
Student payments: $23,756;
Total: $160,879.
Note: Based on data provided by school food authority and school
officials.
[End of table]
[End of section]
Appendix III: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgments:
GAO Contacts:
Carolyn M. Taylor (202) 512-2974:
Julianne Hartman Cutts (206) 287-4803:
Staff Acknowledgments:
In addition to the individuals named above, Peter M. Bramble, Robert
Miller, Sheila Nicholson, Thomas E. Slomba, Luann Moy, and Stanley G.
Stenersen made key contributions to this report.
[End of section]
Footnotes:
[1] In most cases, a school food authority is a part of a school
district. All school food authorities in this review were part of
selected districts.
[2] For the period July 1, 2002, through July 30, 2003, 130 percent of
the poverty level is $23,530 annually for a family of four; 185 percent
is $33,485.
[3] The recommended dietary allowances are the levels of essential
nutrients that are adequate to meet nutritional needs of practically
all healthy people, according to the Food and Nutrition Board of the
Institute of Medicine, National Academy of Sciences.
[$] Under federal regulations, school districts may permit children
whose households participate in the Food Stamp, Temporary Assistance
for Needy Families, or Food Distribution on Indian Reservations
Programs to receive benefits based on information these programs
provide. This process is known as direct certification.
[5] Office of Analysis and Evaluation, Universal-Type School Meal
Programs, Report to Congress, Food and Nutrition Service, USDA:
Alexandria, VA, June 1994.
[6] Throughout this report, estimated FNS costs do not include the cost
of hardware and software used to support these efforts because there
was no reasonable method of estimating these costs.
[7] Throughout this report, program dollars reported as administered by
FNS at both the headquarters and the one selected region include the
value of reimbursements and commodities for public and nonprofit
private schools and residential child care institutions because FNS was
not able to provide program dollars specific to public schools. However,
FNS‘s data indicate that reimbursements and commodities provided to
public schools make up the vast majority of these dollars.
[8] Children may continue to receive free and reduced-price meals for
up to 30 days at the beginning of the school year, based on their
eligibility in the prior school year, while applications are processed.
[9] According to USDA regulations, a random sample is the lesser of 3
percent of approved applications or 3,000, and a focused sample is (1)
the lesser of 1 percent or 1,000 of the total approved applications
selected from those within $100 of monthly income eligibility limits
and (2) the lesser of one-half of 1 percent or 500 applications
selected from those currently certified for the Food Stamps, Temporary
Assistance for Needy Families, or Food Distribution on Indian
Reservations programs.
[10] Written evidence is often pay stubs from employers or
documentation of receipt of welfare or other benefits submitted by the
household to the verifying officials as confirmation of eligibility.
[11] If verification results in a change in benefit level or
termination of benefits, the change must be extended to all children in
the household who were determined eligible based on information that no
longer supports the benefit level.
[12] Title I Part A of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act is
referred to as ’Title I.“ The federal Title I program is designed to
help educate disadvantaged children”those with low academic achievement
attending schools serving high-poverty areas. The program had
appropriated funding of over $10 billion in fiscal year 2002 and
distributed funds to states based on Census data.
[13] U. S. General Accounting Office, School Meal Programs: Options for
Improving the Verification of Student Eligibility, GAO/RCED-86-122BR
(Washington D.C.: Mar. 17, 1986).
[14] In some cases, estimated FNS headquarters costs for meal counting
and claiming reimbursement were for Child Nutrition Programs (provides
nutrition assistance to children in schools, child care settings, and
in after school and summer programs), since FNS was not able to provide
estimates specifically for the National School Lunch and School
Breakfast programs.
[End of section]
GAO‘s Mission:
The General Accounting Office, the investigative arm of Congress,
exists to support Congress in meeting its constitutional
responsibilities and to help improve the performance and accountability
of the federal government for the American people. GAO examines the use
of public funds; evaluates federal programs and policies; and provides
analyses, recommendations, and other assistance to help Congress make
informed oversight, policy, and funding decisions. GAO‘s commitment to
good government is reflected in its core values of accountability,
integrity, and reliability.
Obtaining Copies of GAO Reports and Testimony:
The fastest and easiest way to obtain copies of GAO documents at no
cost is through the Internet. GAO‘s Web site [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov]
contains abstracts and full-text files of current reports and testimony and
an expanding archive of older products. The Web site features a search
engine to help you locate documents using key words and phrases. You
can print these documents in their entirety, including charts and other
graphics.
Each day, GAO issues a list of newly released reports, testimony, and
correspondence. GAO posts this list, known as ’Today‘s Reports,“ on its
Web site daily. The list contains links to the full-text document
files. To have GAO e-mail this list to you every afternoon, go to
[hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov] and select ’Subscribe to daily E-mail
alert for newly released products“ under the GAO Reports heading.
Order by Mail or Phone:
The first copy of each printed report is free. Additional copies are $2
each. A check or money order should be made out to the Superintendent
of Documents. GAO also accepts VISA and Mastercard. Orders for 100 or
more copies mailed to a single address are discounted 25 percent.
Orders should be sent to:
U.S. General Accounting Office:
441 G Street NW, Room LM:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
To order by Phone:
Voice: (202) 512-6000:
TDD: (202) 512-2537:
Fax: (202) 512-6061:
To Report Fraud, Waste, and Abuse in Federal Programs:
Contact:
Web site: [hyperlink, http://www.gao.gov/fraudnet/fraudnet.htm]:
E-mail: fraudnet@gao.gov]:
Automated answering system: (800) 424-5454 or (202) 512-7470:
Public Affairs:
Jeff Nelligan, managing director, NelliganJ@gao.gov:
(202) 512-4800:
U.S. General Accounting Office:
441 G Street NW, Room 7149:
Washington, D.C. 20548:
