1. USDA/State Agency Biennial Conference Williamsburg, VA November 29, 2011 John R. Endahl Office of Research and Analysis Food and Nutrition Service

2.  Evaluation of the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program: Interim Report (September 2011)  Direct Certification in the NSLP – State Implementation Progress SY 2010-11 Report to Congress (October 2011)

3.  Study Objectives: ◦ Determine whether children increase consumption of fruits & vegetables & experience other dietary changes as a result of participation in the FFVP ◦ Describe program implementation ◦ Assess the role of other factors (e.g., nutrition education)  Study Methodology: ◦ National sample of over 4,500 students dietary recalls; web- based surveys/interviews of parents, teachers, school food managers, principals, SFA directors and State CN Directors ◦ Regression discontinuity design comparing eligible participating schools with non-participating schools  Study Status: ◦ Interim Report delivered to Congress in September 2011 ◦ Final Report available in 2012

5.  Study Objectives: ◦ Assess the progress made by States in directly certifying children for free school meals ◦ Describe best practices in States with successful direct certification systems or systems that showed the most improvement from the previous year.  Study Methodology: ◦ Develop State-level estimates of the number of school-age children that received SNAP benefits at any time in July, August, or September (just before or at the start of the current school year) ◦ Develop estimates of the number of SNAP-participant children who were directly certified for free school meals as of October 1  Study Status: ◦ Report delivered to Congress in September 2011

6. National Average Direct Certification Rate SY 2007-2008 to SY 2010-2

7.  School Nutrition Dietary Assessment Study –IV (SNDA-IV)  School Food Purchase Study-III  Estimating Eligibility for School Meals Using the American Community Survey (ACS)  Special Nutrition Program Operations Study  Regional Office Review of Applications

8. Study Objectives: o Determine the food/nutrient content of the NSLP/SBP meals offered and served to students o Analyze competitive food offerings in the context of healthy school initiatives and wellness policies and programs o Examine school environment, food service operations, student participation and other characteristics of NSLP/SBP schools/SFAs o Compare findings to previous SNDA studies  Study Methodology: o National sample of 900 public schools in 300 SFAs o Survey data was collected from SFA Directors, School Principals, and Food Service Managers  Study Status: o Final report expected to be released in January 2012

9.  Study Objectives: ◦ Develop national estimates of the type, volume, and dollar value of food acquired (purchased/donated) by public NSLP SFAs; ◦ Describe current school food purchase practices and examine relationships to food costs.  Study Methodology ◦ Nationally representative sample of about 400 public SFAs participating in NSLP with about 100 SFAs each quarter providing source documents of foods acquired ◦ Mail survey describing food purchase practices.  Study Status: ◦ Final Report expected in January 2012

10.  Study Objectives: ◦ Examine strengths and limitations of using ACS to establish small area estimates of percentage of households with school-aged children below the eligibility thresholds for free/reduced-price meals.  Study Methodology ◦ 5 Case Studies – ACS estimates compared to school-level and district-level data in (1) Austin, TX; (2) Chatham, GA; (3) Norfolk, VA; (4) Omaha, NE; (5) Pajaro Valley, CA  Study Status ◦ Year 1 Report – Technical Approach (May 2010) ◦ Year 2 Report – Empirical Analyses & Recommendations (March 2012)

11.  Study Objectives: ◦ Obtain general descriptive data on the characteristics of schools/districts operating the NSLP/SBP. ◦ Collect data to assist in the preparation of program budget and development of program policy and regulations. ◦ Identify areas in need of training and technical assistance.  Study Methodology: ◦ Conduct web-based survey of a nationally representative sample of about 1,500 SFA Directors for 3 consecutive years ◦ Conduct a paper survey of all State CN Directors for 3 consecutive years ◦ Optional tasks to conduct on-site data collection in the last 2 years of the study  Study Status: ◦ First year data collection occurring in Fall 2011 ◦ First Year Report expected in Spring 2012.

12.  Study Objectives: ◦ Determine annual estimate of the rate of administrative error in LEA eligibility determinations for f/rp meals and school meal benefit status  Study Methodology: ◦ National representative sample of 56 SFAs ◦ Random sample of 50 applications per SFA collected by Regional staff and analyzed by independent contractor  Study Status: ◦ The 6 th annual report is now on the FNS website ◦ Selection of the SFA sample for SY 2011/12 occurred in September and data collection is underway

13.  Sec. 103: Direct Certification for Children Receiving Medicaid Benefits  Sec. 104(a): Eliminating Individual Applications through Community Eligibility – Universal Meal Service in High Poverty Areas  Sec. 307 Indirect Costs

14.  Evaluation of the demonstrations looking at:  Effectiveness of directly certification with Medicaid  Potential to identify children eligible for free meals not directly certified using SNAP  Potential to identify children eligible for free meals based on a household application  Effect on Federal costs and participation in NSLP  Interim Report – Oct. 1, 2014; Final Report – Oct. 1, 2015  $5 million available until expended

15.  For eligible schools/LEAs not electing provision  Estimate of the number of schools/LEAs  Barriers to participation  Changes needed to make option more appealing  For eligible schools/LEAs electing provision  Estimate of the number of schools/LEAs  Comparison of the percent of enrolled students directly certified or categorically eligible previous year to 1.6 X number of “identified students”  Estimate of number/percent of schools/LEAS with more than 80% F/RP students electing provision

16.  Impact of electing to receive special assistance payments on:  Program integrity  Availability and type of breakfast program  Nutritional quality of school meals  Program participation  Interim Report – January 31, 2013  Final Report – December 31, 2013  $5 million available until expended

17.  Nationally representative study of SFAs and their indirect costs:  Allocation methods to establish indirect cost rates  Impact of indirect costs charged to SFA account  Types and amounts of indirect costs charged & recovered and if consistent with allocation plan  Types and amounts of allowable indirect costs not charged or recovered  Report due Oct. 1, 2013  $2 million available until expended

18.  Nationally representative study of SFAs to produce national estimates of erroneous payments due to:  Certification error  Meal counting and claiming error  Develop econometric models to update erroneous payment estimates using NSLP/SBP administrative data and other extant data  Option tasks to examine alternatives to develop State-level estimates of erroneous payments in NSLP and SBP

19.  Enhanced SFSP Demonstrations:  State-wide demos in Arkansas & Mississippi  Rural meal delivery and backpack demos  Household-Based Alternative Demos:  SNAP & WIC EBT-based approaches  Small scale “proof-of-concept” demos launched in 5 States in Summer 2011 will expand in 2012

20. StudyNo. of SitesYearFinal Report Special Nutrition Program Ops Study 1,500 SFAs 50 SAs SY 2011-12 SY 2012-13 SY 2013-14 July 2012 July 2013 July 2014 NSLP Indirect Cost Study 2,000 SFAs 50 SAs SY 2012-13Oct. 2013 Community Eligibility Option Evaluation All SFAs with schools eligible for the option SY 2012-13Jan. 2013 (Interim) Dec. 2013 (Final) NSLP/SBP Erroneous Payments Study 100 SFAsSY 2012-13Dec. 2013

21.  Cooperation with Program Research and Evaluation: ◦ “States, State education agencies, local educational agencies, schools, institutions, facilities, and contractors participating in programs authorized by this act and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 shall cooperate with officials and contractors acting on behalf of the Secretary, in the conduct of evaluations and studies under those Acts.”

22.  Published reports and annual study and evaluation plans are available on the Food and Nutrition Service website: http://www.fns.usda.gov/ora