The number of students receiving subsidized lunches rose to 21 million last school year from 18 million in 2006-7, a 17 percent increase, according to an analysis by The New York Times of data from the Department of Agriculture, which administers the meals program. Eleven states, including Florida, Nevada, New Jersey and Tennessee, had four-year increases of 25 percent or more, huge shifts in a vast program long characterized by incremental growth.
That is the 2nd paragraph of this NY Times article by Sam Dillon. It is chock full of facts, including data on the explosion of those being served in various locations, including things like unemployed engineers and technicians in Rochester NY where downsizing at Kodak and other companies has cost them their jobs.
The basic framework is this - you qualify for free lunch at up to 130% of the poverty level, which is $29,055 for a family of four. You get a reduced price lunch (at $.40) with income of up to $41,348 for a family of four.
The Dept. of Education uses the lunch program for an indicator of poverty in Federal Testing (National Assessment of Educational Progress, or NAEP), and noted that percentage of 4th graders receiving either subsidized or free lunches is now 52%, up from 49% 2 years ago.
More below the squiggle.
Please note the following paragraph:
Although the troubled economy is the main factor in the increases, experts said, some growth at the margins has resulted from a new way of qualifying students for the subsidized meals, known as direct certification. In 2004, Congress required the nation’s 17,000 school districts to match student enrollment lists against records of local food-stamp agencies, directly enrolling those who receive food stamps for the meals program. The number of districts doing so has been rising — as have the number of school-age children in families eligible for food stamps, to 14 million in 2010-11 from 12 million in 2009-10.
So it is not clear how much of the increase is due directly to economic conditions having worsened, and how much is because we are now requiring districts to provide the services that such children should have been receiving all along.
You will see data from places like TN, where the number of children served has increased 37% since 2007.
Las Vegas prepares those lunches for its students at a central kitchen. The district also has unemployment of 13.7%. It has had to add an extra shift at the kitchen to prepare the additional free and subsidized lunches it is now providing.
You can read about many localities in the article. I won't quote more.
Let me comment as a teacher and as an educational policy wonk.
Hungry kids don't learn.
The rate of poverty in American schools explains ALL of the difference in performance on international tests like PISA - OECD has demonstrated that when we address our scores for the degree of poverty, we perform as high as any nation in the world, but we have higher rates of childhood poverty than all except two other nations in OECD.
Kids who qualify for free lunches often don't eat much outside of school. That means on Monday they are very hungry, and not that focused on learning.
If our economy does not improve much more quickly than we are seeing, we will see the numbers of students being served continue to grow. The impact upon learning will likely undermine any improvement we might otherwise expect from improved instruction.
Stop and consider those national figures for 4th graders again, and realize what a shameful indicator that is for the richest nation in the world. Recognize that you have a real-life indication of what we should already know about the economic inequity as demonstrated by our horrid score on the CIA's GINI index.
We are talking about children.
Ask yourself this - are we as a nation willing to continue to see children suffer, be handicapped for the future, so billionaires and millionaires can continue to receive tax breaks they do not need?
IF so, then one thing is clear - as a society we have demonstrated that we are not only uncaring, we are immoral.
Now excuse me, while I head to school to teach children, an increasing number of whom have had their families have to turn to the subsidized school lunch program as a primary means of making sure their kids get enough nutrition.