It is fair to say we all get hangry. Maybe all you’ve had today was a yogurt at 8am and by 4pm you’re on the train wanting to yell at the guy next to you for talking on the phone. I remember a particular irrational afternoon where I found myself ripping up my math homework as a rumble echoed from my empty stomach.
Imagine having that feeling every day sitting at your desk trying to work and learn. With 83,000 children in Connecticut suffering from hunger, hangry kids are the reality in many classrooms.
This issue must have been on Gov. Ned Lamont’s mind when he decided to expand the free and reduced meal program in CT with a $16 million investment for the 2023-2024 school year. While it’s a welcome step, this investment doesn’t even begin to fix the issues inherent in Connecticut’s free and reduced lunch system. It doesn’t address strict eligibility standards that shut out many families in need.
As lawmakers remain undecided on what to do for school years to come, now is an optimal time to urge the legislature to commit to a more comprehensive policy of universal free meals for all Connecticut public school students.
Universal free school meal programs ensure that all students have access to nutritious meals, support a positive school environment, aid academic attainment, and help offset grocery bills for working families. A universal free meal program is the best alternative to the School Breakfast Program and the National School Lunch Program Connecticut currently uses, where strict eligibility requirements limit the state’s ability to aid all students equally.
I know what you are thinking. Sixteen million dollars is a lot of money. Isn’t the current policy enough? It sounds like all the students who need these meals are getting them, right? In fact, national research shows that many children who do not qualify for free and reduced lunch are still in need.
Estimates show that 15% of students who are marginally food insecure and 10% of food insecure students do not qualify for free and reduced lunch programs.
The combined price for full-price breakfast and lunch in public schools in Connecticut is $4.50 per day. In a 180-day school year, that is a whopping $810 a year. For some, this may not seem like a big expense, but for many who live paycheck-to-paycheck, $810 a year can make the difference between financial stability and poverty.
The household monthly income cut off for a family of three to receive free school meals from Lamont’s new program is $3,833. This income cut off excludes many students who are suffering from hunger. The struggling families who make just minimally more than the cut off could end up spending $810 a year on school-offered breakfast and lunch. For every additional family member, eligibility expands by allowing just an additional $792 to the cut-off monthly income. As the number of children increases, the cut off line does so only marginally.
In contrast, peer-reviewed research shows that universal free lunch programs can help working families stay above water by cutting grocery bills.
The benefits of a free universal meal program are not just monetary. An in-depth case study of a universal free meal program in a NYC public school showed compelling evidence the program had a positive impact on “food security, disciplinary referrals, and on-time grade promotion.” An effective policy that gives all students the ability to receive free meals changes the climate of school, leading to a more conducive environment for learning and ameliorating some of the most pressing issues in public schools.
Moreover, national research shows that students who have access to school lunches have better nutrition as federal standards require a selection of fruits, vegetables, as well as other healthy options. Further investigation showed that many lunches students brought from home did not meet USDA nutrition standards. Most of us can agree that providing nutritious meals is in the best interests of schools and students.
However, the $90 million price tag of a universal free meal program creates concerns. Some argue that funding a universal program is wasteful. Critics complain that students who come from affluent households should not be eligible for free lunch. But under the current system, many children who need access to nutritious lunch and breakfast are not eligible, based on income, to receive free and reduced school meals. Even students from middle income households may not be receiving the nutrition they need to thrive and out-of-pocket food costs can cripple a financially stressed household.
How could giving food to hungry kids and taking the burden off hardworking families be wasteful?
The benefits of school lunch and breakfast are well demonstrated and have been for years. We also know that there are major gaps in eligibility. So, the question becomes: do you want struggling families to pay $810 a year per child? Or do you want your tax dollars to have a direct and measurable impact on your child and all children, schools, and families across the state? This is a unique opportunity to see your tax dollars at work. Universal free meal programs ensure equal access to nutritious meals. This investment can change the fabric of our schools.
With full bellies at every desk, all students can excel.
Lily Ryan is a senior at Trinity College studying Public Policy and Sociology.