Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Every child
should start the school day with a balanced
breakfast, but a startling number of children
in New York State (NYS) do not.
Children who experience hunger are at a physical, academic and social
disadvantage.1 The School Breakfast Program (SBP) provides a vital nutritional
support to children who arrive at school hungry.2 School breakfast is a readily
available, federally-funded resource to address child hunger, yet it has been
consistently underutilized in NYS.
Hunger is a constant reality for 884,170 children throughout the state.3
Between 2008 and 2012, on average, 23.6% of all NYS households with
children experienced times when their family did not have enough money
to buy food that they needed.4 The majority of students attending NYS
public schools live in households with incomes near poverty level, with 62%
of students qualifying for free and reduced-priced (F/RP) school meals.5
School breakfasts role in reducing hunger, bolstering student success,
and improving health is critical. That is why, each year, Hunger Solutions
New York analyzes participation in the SBP using data from the New York
State Education Department (NYSED). Our findings demonstrate persistent
low participation among students from low-income households.
The SBP oers schools the opportunity to ensure students are well nourished
and prepared to learn. Inadequately leveraging the SBP to address child hunger
is a missed opportunity to fortify students health and nutrition, which are
vital to student success. Furthermore, when students who qualify for F/RP
school breakfast do not participate in the program, schools cannot leverage
the federal funding tied to each meal served.
Its just really important to make sure NYS can improve participation in the SBP by taking some key action steps.
Ensuring that all childrenespecially children from low-income households
the kids eat, because theres a lot of things eat school breakfast each day will help bolster the success of students in
in the world that make them worry, and our public schools, improve the health and wellbeing of children, while also
drawing down federal resources to address child hunger.
hunger shouldnt be one of them when
we have the ability to feed them.
Ebony Green, principal, Vails Gate High Tech Magnet School,
Newburgh Enlarged City School District
4 5
About this Report
This report measures the reach of the SBP in the 2015-2016 school yearstatewide and The findings in this report reflect NYS public schools (school districts, charter schools,
locallybased on a variety of metrics. First, we look at F/RP school breakfast participation and BOCES) that operate the federally-funded, state-administered breakfast program.
to determine how many F/RP-eligible students are being reached by the SBP. Since there is Schools that oer breakfast and lunch outside of that program, using their schools
broad participation in the lunch program, and since all students who qualify for F/RP lunch general fund, are not included. The findings also do not include the 326 public schools
also qualify for breakfast, it is a useful comparison by which to measure how many students that operate only the National School Lunch Program. At the end of this report is a chart
could and should be benefiting from school breakfast each day. that includes data for all public schools included in this analysis.
The Food Research and Action Center, a national, nonprofit anti-hunger organization, sets Throughout this report, participation refers to students actually eating meals.
an ambitious, but achievable, goal of reaching 70 free and reduced-price-eligible students
with breakfast for every 100 participating in lunch. For this report, we calculated the federal
dollars lost in NYS during the 2015-2016 school year as a result of our schools failing to
meet that goal.
Hunger Solutions New York has been tracking participation in breakfast through the
methods detailed above since the 2007-2008 school year. In addition to comparing
breakfast to lunch participation, for this report, we analyzed breakfast participation in
schools utilizing a federal provision, to ascertain the impact of oering universal school
breakfastproviding free breakfast to all students. (see below) While federal provisions
used to oer free breakfast are captured in NYSED data, a mechanism has yet to be put
into place to track schools that use non-pricing to provide free meals and those that oer
alternative breakfast service models. (see next page) This report highlights school districts
that are having great success with reaching low-income students with school breakfast, to
analyze the impact of widespread implementation of universal school breakfast coupled
with alternative service models and their impact on breakfast participation.
Oering Breakfast at No Charge Alternative Breakfast Service Models Who can participate in school breakfast?
Schools can oer breakfast at no chargeuniversal school breakfastto all students through the following options: Alternative breakfast service models are used to address Any student attending a school that oers the program
low breakfast participation. Often referred to as break- can eat breakfast. What the federal government covers,
Community Eligibility Provision Reimbursement for meals is based Non-pricing fast after the bell, these models shift service time so that and what the student pays depends on family income.
on a claiming percentage based on a breakfast is served after the start of the school day. While
The Community Eligibility Provision The application and meal tracking models can be tailored to individual schools needs, the Children from families with incomes:
formula that uses the percentage of
(CEP) is a federal option that allows identified students. processes are consistent with the following are the most eective strategies: at or below 130% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL)
schools with a high percentage of SBP, however, no fees are collected
Breakfast in the Classroom are eligible for free school meals.
students from low-income households Provision 2 from students. Typically, schools
to oer breakfast and lunch at no have absorbed the cost dierential Students eat breakfast in their classroom after between 130% and 185% of the FPL qualify for
charge to all students. Any district, Provision 2 is a federal option that into district operational budgets. the ocial start of the school day. reduced-price meals and can be charged no more
group of schools in a district, or allows schools to serve breakfast, This is not a federal option and than 25 cents for breakfast.
Grab and Go
individual school eligible for CEP with lunch, or both to all students at no is not tracked by NYSED.
Students pick up conveniently packaged breakfasts from above 185% of the FPL pay charges (referred to
40% or more identified students charge. This option operates on a
mobile service carts or vending machines in high trac as paid meals), which are set by the school.
children eligible for free school meals four-year cycle, with the first year
areas when they arrive at school or between classes.
who are identified by other means determining reimbursement for See How children are certified for F/RP meals on page 9
than an individual household appli- the subsequent three years. Second Chance Breakfast for more information.
cationcan choose to participate. This modelalso referred to as breakfast after first period
or mid-morning nutrition breakextends breakfast service
in the cafeteria past first period in middle and high schools.
6 77
Key Findings
Students eligible for F/RP school breakfast Students participating in F/RP school breakfast
-$10,000,000
Severe-need schools received
an additional 33 cents for each
-$20,000,000 F/RP breakfast served. Schools are
-$30,000,000 considered severe need if at least
-$40,000,000 40% of the lunches served the
previous school year were free
-$50,000,000
or reduced-price.
-$60,000,000
New York states provides an
-$70,000,000
additional reimbursement:
-$80,000,000
$.1013 per free breakfast;
Over five years, the total funding lost $.1566 per reduced-price
Students eating F/RP lunch, on average, each day
amounts to over $383 million. breakfast; and
Students eating F/RP breakfast, on average, each day $.0023 per paid breakfast.
12 13
Action Steps
How can Hunger Solutions New York help with the following action steps?
The mission of Hunger Solutions New York is to alleviate We are committed to supporting this work by:
hunger for residents of New York State by expanding the
availability of, access to, and participation in federally Providing schools with technical assistance and
funded nutrition assistance programs. resources to implement universal breakfast and
alternative breakfast service models.
Within this context, we serve as a statewide child nutrition
program resource. Our work helps to ensure all children Providing agencies with outreach resources, sample
get the healthy food they need to succeed. Schools, federal policy guidance, and support in disseminating best
and state agencies, and federal and state elected ocials practices to expand program access.
play a vital role in the eort to alleviate child hunger Providing elected ocials with sample legislation,
through the nutrition assistance programs. case studies, and data analysis.
Learn more about the work that we do to promote
14 these programs at SchoolMealsHubNY.org. 15
15
Action Step: Protect school meal programs Ensure all schools, especially schools with concentrated Lessons learned
and CEP from federal cuts. populations of F/RP students, oer alternative breakfast from other states
service models.
The federally funded, state-administered SBP, National School Lunch Program and CEP Many of the states with the most
must be protected from funding cuts and structural changes at the federal level so that The best way to boost participation in the SBP is to oer universal successful school breakfast programs
states can maximize their impact locally. Given the millions of children who rely on school breakfast in conjunction with alternative service models like breakfast have adopted breakfast after the bell
meals, access cannot be restricted. It is more important than ever to recognize those in the classroom or grab and go. See the School District Profiles section legislation, which has been the key
programs importance, eciency and eectiveness in reducing childhood hunger and on page 21 for success stories from districts throughout NYS. catalyst for growth and maintaining
improving learning and health outcomes. Any school can implement alternative service models to help boost high breakfast participation rates.
participation. However, schools with concentrated populations of States have structured these
F/RP-eligible students (40% or more) should definitely implement them, policies in dierent ways, but all
Action Step: Establish an action plan to reach 70% since they are strategically positioned to reach the most utilize alternative breakfast models
of F/RP school lunch participants with breakfast. low-income students. and universal breakfast as key strategies
to increase participation. Some states
This goal is most eciently achieved by targeting the highest-need schools in the state, Ensure schools, especially those with 60% or more
require all schools to implement an
which have the highest concentration of F/RP-eligible students, and thus are most strategi- F/RP-eligible students, oer universal breakfast. after-the-bell model, while others
cally positioned to reach the eligible population. Therefore, it is essential to ensure those target schools by grade level or level
CEP is the preferred method to oer universal breakfast because it
schools increase accessibility to breakfast through universal breakfast and alternative service of need. Policies can include funding
facilitates the implementation of alternative breakfast service models
models. The following techniques outline steps to create systemic changes to breakfast in to help schools comply with a require-
the other key strategy for increasing breakfast participation.
our states neediest public schools: ment, but many successful examples
The majority of schools potentially eligible for CEP and not utilizing exist without this funding.
Ensure all CEP schools oer an alternative breakfast service model. the option are falling below the state average in reaching F/RP-eligible
students with school breakfast. Hunger Solutions New York strongly Examples of states with breakfast after
This goal is especially achievable for CEP schools, since one eective tool for the bell legislation include Colorado,
recommends CEP-eligible schools adopt the option.
increasing access to school breakfastuniversal breakfastis already in place. District of Columbia, New Mexico,
Furthermore, CEP facilitates the implementation of alternative breakfast service Following is the recommended order of priority for CEP implementation: Texas, Washington, West Virginia, and
models. CEP schools are not required to collect fees or count each meal served Illinois. A list of states school breakfast
by fee category. This simplifies implementation of breakfast in the classroom 1. Ensure all schools with 80% or more
F/RP-eligible students implement CEP. legislation can be found at: frac.org/
and grab and go service models. state-school-breakfast-legislation
IMPACT: 785 NYS public schools in 57 districts
Only half (54%) of CEP schools are succeeding 2. Encourage use of CEP by schools with 60-80%
F/RP-eligible students.
in reaching 70% of the students who participate
IMPACT: 712 NYS public schools in 208 districts.
in F/RP lunch with breakfast.
3. Encourage schools with 40% to 60% F/RP rates to explore options
to provide universal breakfast. Some may qualify for CEP, depending
Adding alternative breakfast service models in every CEP school can address barriers on their direct certification data, while others can explore non-pricing.
to breakfast participation and further boost participation. Increasing breakfast More information on this option can be found in our SBP factsheet.10
participation in these schools can leverage a significant amount of federal funding
in the highest-poverty areas in NYS. Analysis:
The 1,497 schools included in this analysis, with F/RP rates at
Potential Reach: or above 60%, should be utilizing CEP. Many schools across NYS
If CEP schools were to reach 70% of the students who participate in
with similar F/RP rates have implemented CEP successfully.
F/RP lunch with breakfast, this action would expand the reach of the
SBP to an additional 42,258 students in CEP schools, generating
nearly $12.8 million in additional federal revenue.
18 19
School District Profiles
2014-15 11 2015-16 12
Total schools 2,486 2,546
Schools oering breakfast 2,443 2,510
In the cafeteria before school 2,402 2,222
School Breakfast
In the classroom 218 321
Service Models
Grab and go to the classroom 110 162
As a result, in the 2015-16 school year, an additional 24,697 students, on average, each
school day participated in school breakfast. This is the most significant increase in school
breakfast participation Hunger Solutions New York has seen since our organization began
tracking this information. NYC public schools accounted for half of the statewide growth
in school breakfast participation during the 2015-16 school year.
255,000 251,788
245,000
237,722
235,000 227,109
220,899 226,647
225,000
215,000
205,000
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
20 21
While NYC has experienced growth over the past school year, the district has yet to meet Hempstead Students Participating
the goal of reaching 70 F/RP-eligible students with breakfast for every 100 who are receiving
in School Breakfast, on Average, Each Day
lunch. If NYC public schools had reached that goal during the 2015-2016 school year, an
additional 156,913 low-income students would have received school breakfast each day,
4,000 3,535
and NYC would have drawn down an additional $45,822,288 in federal funding.13
3,000
The reward is so worth it, when you see how many kids are eating that werent eating
before, said Sharon Gardner, the districts food service director. The numbers dont lie.
Hempstead UFSD And you just see the results. You see these kids. Theyre eating. Its not just somebody
Hempstead began oering free school meals to all students throwing a breakfast out. Theyre eating the food.
through CEP beginning in the 2012-2013 school year, which In the 2016-2017 school year, Hempstead added two vending machines in the less central
allowed some growth in average daily breakfast participation. branches of the middle school, which serve a complete breakfast and stay open after the
However, program growth did not continue past that initial bell. The district plans to continue expanding its program, thanks to the additional revenue
year of implementation. Serving breakfast solely before school generated by robust breakfast participation. Broken and outdated kitchen equipment is
started was a significant barrier to breakfast access. being replaced, and the district is discussing plans to put in a coeehouse-style smoothie
Hempstead is a school without any bussing. Students were bar with pub tables and chairs in a common area, which will provide a full, compliant break-
expected to arrive at school early to eat, and if they did arrive fast. The coeehouse theme is a creative marketing approach to increase participation
early, they then had to choose between socializing with friends among high school students, an especially hard-to-reach population.
before class and eating breakfast. In the high school, which is Hempsteads eorts to expand the reach of school breakfast have nearly reached the
made up of three buildings, the cafeteria is not readily accessible. national standard of reaching 70% of lunch participants with breakfast. While the district
falls just below the benchmark, with 68% of lunch participants eating breakfast, breakfast
participation has continued to grow in the 2016-2017 school year.
Recognizing those significant barriers to universal school breakfast,
Hempstead undertook an initiative to increase accessibility by imple-
menting alternative breakfast service. Over the course of the 2015- Hempstead UFSD
2016 school year, the district rolled out breakfast in the classroom Breakfast vs. Lunch Participation
in eight elementary schools. In their middle school, a grab and go
station was installed. The high school now has two vending machines
located at the entrances, which serve complete breakfasts beyond 6,000 5,200
the start of the school day. Both the middle and high schools also 4,685 4,413
continue to serve breakfast in the cafeteria, although the majority 4,000 3,535
of breakfasts are not served there. Cafeteria service is extended 1,643
for an additional two hours each morning so all children have an
2,000 1,428 68%
opportunity to eat breakfast. 35% 32%
2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
As a result of breakfast after the bell, an additional 2,107 students
participated in breakfast, on average, each day during the 2015-2016 Students Eating F/RP Breakfast Students Eating F/RP Lunch
school yearan increase of 133% since the previous school year.
22 23
Newburgh Enlarged City School District
Newburgh made breakfast after the bell available in all making it free for everybody, noted Caitlin Lazarski, the
of its schools starting on the first day of the 2015-2016 districts director of food service. For the high school, Newburgh is unique in comparison to the other districts
school year. This included all nine elementary schools the vending machinesthe tech around itthey think its featured, due to its rollout of CEP. The district piloted CEP
serving breakfast in the classroom in all pre-kindergarten cool. Even if the same thing is being oered in the cafeteria, in the 2014-2015 school year in one elementary school.
to fifth-grade classrooms. For grades six to eight, grab theyd rather get it out of the vending machine. That school then saw breakfast participation increase by
and go breakfast became available through kiosks, in the 39%, with breakfast served solely in the cafeteria before
cafeteria and in other designated areas. The high schools Implementation of breakfast after the bell resulted in an the start of the school day. Once breakfast was moved into
also added grab and go options; Second Chance Breakfast, additional 2,709 Newburgh students eating breakfast, on the classroom in the 2015-2016 school year, participation
by extending breakfast service through third period; and average, each school dayan increase of 67% compared increased another 24%.
vending machines in two of the three high schools. to the previous school year.
The 2015-2016 Newburgh breakfast initiative launch included
The trick in high school is oering multiple venues for the implementation of universal breakfast districtwide.
breakfast, allowing them to take it to the classroom, All students were able to eat for free regardless of their
households income. Individual schools that started
breakfast in the classroom and universal breakfast saw a
Newburgh Students Participating dramatic increase in breakfast participation. The highest
in School Breakfast, On Average, Each Day increase was 261%, followed by increases of 163% and 120%.
7,000 6,774
5,000
4,064
3,493 3,440 3,620
3,000
1,000
BIC Implemented
BIC Implemented
BIC Implemented
2015-16
CEP Implemented
BIC Implemented
BIC Implemented
BIC Implemented
BIC Implemented
Universal Breakfast implemented
in all schools in 2015-16
BIC= Breakfast in the Classroom
24 25
Over the past two years, we have seen our
attendance for students improve, weve seen
While all students experienced a shift to free breakfast, behind the scenes, the district [bad] behavior go down. Our suspension
was working toward districtwide implementation of CEP. CEP was expanded to six rates are going down. Our numbers are
additional schools in the 2015-2106 school year. The remaining six schools oered
free breakfast, but the meal expense for reduced-price-eligible students and those looking really good.
who did not qualify for reduced-price meals was covered by the cafeteria fund.
Meanwhile, the district carefully inspected its direct certification data to identify all Dr. Roberto Padilla, Superintendent,
students eligible for free school meals without an application. Eective implementation Newburgh Enlarged City School District
of CEP is dependent on that information. The percentage of those students in individual
schools and/or the district is what determines reimbursement under CEP. In order for
Newburgh to maximize the districts reimbursements under CEP, their food service direc-
tor needed to compare their enrollment list to the direct certification database
export, line-for-line, to ensure each eligible student was accounted for. Thanks to the
due diligence of the district, districtwide CEP was instituted in the 2016-2017 school year.
While Newburgh has had tremendous success with increasing breakfast participation,
the district plans to continue to implement innovative ways to increase breakfast access,
especially in their middle and high schools. The growth in participation during the 2015-
2016 school year resulted in excess revenue, after years of having a program that ended
each year with a negative budget. The additional funds allowed the district to further
improve its breakfast program in the 2016-2017 school year by adding more vending
machines in the high schools. The district plans to redesign a student lounge to include
a coee-shop-style grab and go area, to provide high-school students with a reimbursable
breakfast that includes a hot drink and baked goods made from scratch.
Newburghs approach to expanding breakfast participation has allowed the district to
exceed the national benchmark for reaching at least 70% of F/RP lunch participants with Other areas of growth in school breakfast:
breakfast. In the 2015-2016 school year, 90% of F/RP lunch participants ate breakfast.
School districts that newly implemented CEP in the 2015-2016 school year and had the
greatest increases in breakfast participation include: Beekmantown Central School District
(175%), Central Valley Central School District at Ilion-Mohawk (148%), Lyons Central
Newburgh Enlarged City School District School District (145%), and Clyde-Savannah Central School District (107%). Each of
Breakfast vs. Lunch Participation these school districts simultaneously implemented universal breakfast with alternative
breakfast programssuch as breakfast in the classroom and grab and go and are now
8,000 all exceeding the goal of reaching 70% of lunch participants with breakfast.
6,677
5,556 6,077 6,029
6,000
2015-16 School Breakfast vs. Lunch Participation
4,000 3,198 3,616 90% in Other NYS School Districts
2,000 59%
58% 1,326 1,412
1,217
1,139
2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
716
Students Eating F/RP Breakfast Students Eating F/RP Lunch 582
92% 81% 463
526
81% 88%
Hunger remains an unacceptable reality for one in four NYS households with children.
Children who experience hunger lack a fundamental building block to health and academic
success. The SBP oers a way to ensure childrenespecially those from low-income
householdseat a healthy breakfast each day. However, the key findings of this report
demonstrate that the program is consistently underutilized and that NYS is failing to
reach our most vulnerable children with school breakfast.
Fewer than one in three students who qualified to eat F/RP breakfast participated in the
SBP during the 2015-2016 school year. In addition, low breakfast participation among
F/RP-eligible students led NYS to forfeit millions of dollars in federal reimbursements.
NYS must make increasing SBP participation a priority. That can be accomplished in a
variety of ways: through the eorts of school leaders, through the implementation of
federal- and state-level policy and legislative solutions, and through incentivizing the
best practices discussed in this report.
The action steps in this report detail initiatives schools, federal and state agencies,
and legislative ocials can take to improve statewide school breakfast participation.
Our report findings show there was an increase in breakfast participation during the 2015-
2016 school year, in comparison to the previous school year. That growth was concentrated
in schools that oered universal school breakfast through CEPa federal option that allows
high-poverty schools to oer free school meals to all students. Notable growth also occurred
in schools that oered universal breakfast in conjunction with alternative breakfast service
models. The combination of those strategies is recognized as the most eective way to
increase school breakfast participation. All schools, especially those eligible for CEP, are
urged to implement both.
Hunger Solutions New York works to ensure every public school student has access to
school breakfast. Our organization provides school districts with tools, resources and one-
on-one support to help maximize the SBPs reach and to help ensure every student starts
the school day free from hunger, properly nourished and prepared for a day of learning.
Special notes: This analysis only captures public schools that operated the federal
SBP during the school years specified above. Private schools are not included. Also,
Authority or SFA) utilized a federal provision to provide free breakfast to all students
in certain cases, school districts may not have oered the SBP in all of their buildings,
This analysis provides an overview of students eligible for F/RP school breakfast within
therefore, while the district may be represented in this data set, the individual buildings
each district/charter school. In addition, it provides an overview of participation among
This table gives a local-level overview of SBP participation at school districts and charter
Furthermore, the table reveals whether or not a school (also referred to as School Food
during the 2015-2016 school year. It also indicates the number of individual schools within
11. Food Research and Action Center (2016). School Breakfast: Making it Work
PRESIDENT Dana Boniewski Irene Lurie
in Large School Districts - SY 2014-2015. Available at: http://frac.org/wp-content/ Emereti professor, University at Albany
Bridget Walsh Conway & Kirby, PLLC
uploads/2016/10/School_Breakfast_Large_School_Districts_SY2014_2015.pdf Schuyler Center
for Analysis and Advocacy Bernadette Cole Slaughter, Ph.D., Anne Rogan, Ph.D., RD, CDN
12. Food Research and Action Center (2017) School Breakfast: Making it Work in Professor, SUNY Cobleskill, School
Emeriti university professor and former
Large Districts. Available at: http://frac.org/wp-content/uploads/school-breakfast- of Agriculture and Natural Resources;
VICE PRESIDENT dean, SUNY Cobleskill
large-school-districts-sy-2015-2016.pdf consultant, Schoharie County Head Start
William Shapiro
Public Policy Research and Consulting Christine Deska
13. ibid. Michael Sattinger
Columbus Citizens Foundation
SECRETARY Associate professor, SUNY Albany,
Robert Frawley Department of Economics
Maureen Murphy
Early Childhood Policy Associates
Price Chopper Supermarkets
TREASURER
Don Friedman
Empire Justice Center
Mark Quandt
Regional Food Bank
of Northeastern New York
54 55
FoodHelpNY.org
SummerMealsNY.org
ChildcareMealsNY.org
SchoolMealsHubNY.org
Afte rschoolM ea l sNY.o rg
HungerSolut ionsN Y.org