Resource | Research | Payment Accuracy and Program Integrity
CACFP Assessment of Sponsor Tiering Determinations 2011

The Improper Payments Information Act of 2002 (IPIA) (Public Law 107-300) requires all Federal agencies to calculate the amount of erroneous payments in Federal programs and to periodically conduct detailed assessments of vulnerable program components. This is the seventh wave (2011) of a program assessment of the family daycare homes in the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP). The assessment provides a national estimate of the share of CACFP-participating family daycare homes that are approved for an incorrect level of per meal reimbursement, or reimbursement "tier," for their circumstances. Tiering errors result in improper payments because misclassified family day care homes do not receive the appropriate level of reimbursement for the meals and snacks provided to the children. The assessment also estimates the dollar amount of improper payments attributable to family daycare home tiering errors.

Resource | Research | Assessing/Improving Operations
Evaluation of the Summer Food Service Program Enhancement Demonstrations: 2011 Demonstration Evaluation Report

The 2010 Agricultural, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration and Related Agencies Appropriations Act enabled the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) to initiate and carry out the Summer Food for Children demonstration projects, aimed at preventing food insecurity and hunger among children during summer months. The projects include the Enhanced Summer Food Service Program or “eSFSP” demonstrations, which test the impact of a number of enhancements to the existing Summer Food Service Program (SFSP). The eSFSP demonstrations include four separate initiatives, two of which began in summer 2010 with the other two launching in summer 2011. This report presents exploratory findings from the evaluation of four types of demonstrations in eight States: The Extending Length of Operation Incentive demonstration (2010-2011) in Arkansas; The Activity Incentive demonstration (2010-2011) in Mississippi; The Meal Delivery demonstration (2011-2012) in Delaware, Massachusetts, and New York; and The Backpack demonstration (2011-2012) in Arizona, Kansas, and Ohio.

Resource | Research
Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer for Children (SEBTC) Demonstration Evaluation Findings of the Proof-of-Concept Year

The 2010 Agriculture Appropriations Act (P.L. 111‐80) authorized and provided funding for USDA to implement and rigorously evaluate the
Summer Food for Children Demonstration, one component of which is the Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer for Children (SEBTC).

Resource | Research | Assessing/Improving Operations
Evaluation of the Impact of Enhancement Demonstrations on Participation in the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP): FY 2011

This report examines administrative data obtained from the eight States that operated the 2011 eSFSP demonstrations to assess changes within demonstration sites compared to non-demonstration sites. Outcomes include the total number of meals served, the days of operation, and the total number of children served (as measured by average daily attendance or ADA). The influence of the 2011 demonstrations on food consumption and food security, as well as analyses of the implementation and costs of the demonstrations, are examined in a separate report.

Resource | Research | Assessing/Improving Operations
Evaluation of the 14 State Summer Food Service Program Pilot Project

In December 2000, the Secretary of Agriculture was authorized, through the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), to conduct a Pilot to increase SFSP participation in a number of States with low rates of feeding low-income children in the summer. States were eligible to participate in the Pilot if the proportion of low-income children they served in July 1999 through SFSP and the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) relative to March 1999 NSLP participation was below 50 percent of the national average. Fourteen States, including Alaska, Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Nebraska, New Hampshire, North Dakota, Oklahoma, Puerto Rico, Texas, and Wyoming, met the criteria and are participating in the Pilot. For the purpose of this Pilot, Puerto Rico is defined as a State. This 3-year Pilot began in fiscal year 2001 and has been extended until June 30, 2004. Under the Pilot, meals served by eligible sponsors in the 14 States are reimbursed at the maximum allowable rate. In addition, administrative record keeping for the Pilot sponsors was reduced since they were no longer required to record administrative and operating costs separately and they did not have to report costs to State Agencies.

Resource | Research | Demonstrations
Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer for Children (SEBTC): Evaluation Findings for Proof-of-Concept Year

The Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer for Children (SEBTC), conducted its initial proof-of-concept during the summer of 2011. The SEBTC demonstration aims to mitigate summer child food insecurity by leveraging existing electronic benefit transfer (EBT) technologies used by the WIC and SNAP programs.

Resource | Research | Demonstrations
Congressional Status Report on the 2012 Summer Food Service Program Enhancement Demonstrations

Final Congressional Status Report on the 2012 Summer Food Service Program Enhancement Demonstrations

Resource | Data
The School Day Just Got Healthier - School Meals Summary

The School Day Just Got Healthier - School Meals Summary

Resource | Research | Assessing/Improving Operations
School Food Purchase Study-III: Nutritional Characteristics of School Food Acquisitions

The most recent School Food Purchase Study provides national estimates of the types, amounts, and costs of foods acquired by public school districts participating in the National School Lunch Program during School Year (SY) 2009/10. It also includes a comprehensive analysis of the nutritional characteristics of foods acquired by these school districts. This report presents findings about the calories, nutrients, and food groups available for use in school meals and other school food programs, including a la carte foods, and the extent to which school food acquisitions are consistent with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans and associated
food guidance system.

Resource | Research, Analysis & Background
Letter to Gregory Walton, FNS Grants Officer