Will Students reMARKably READ better if we have State not Federal Control of Education

A recent, heart tugging story of a single mom in Michigan paying for her son and 18 or more students who were in arrear of their subsidized public-school lunch funds is indicative of a well documented fact.  The Federal Programs labeled as reduced or free meal services for students is not only remiss of solving a possibly over-rated problem BUT  feeding children is not the focus or motive of the School Districts but rather labeling children as “poverty households” to qualify for Federal dollars.

Therefore, let me preface this detailed narrative, of the fallacy of Federal Intrusion in Public Education via reduced or free meal services, by saying.  EDUCATION NEEDS TO BE CONTROLLED BY THE STATES AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT. Federal Government intrusion needs to be de-codified.

The  Federal Government has created a log jam in the education of our next generation; they have burdened teachers with more time spent on reporting statistics than teaching.  Whether you call it Common Core, No Child Left Behind, or whatever the next fiasco is called,  the Federal Government needs to be removed from the process of education and return all powers and legislation to the States.

The “Breakfast in the Classroom”  (BIC)  program used by LAUSD is inadequately justified:   

·         “In LAUSD, over 553,000 of our students qualify for a free/reduced price breakfast but only 29% of our total school population participates.”     

So the conclusion drawn, curiously, is not about those that are getting breakfast   but rather: 

·         “This means that over 400,000 students may start their school days without breakfast, deprived of an important nutritious meal needed to succeed in class.”

650,000 meals are served daily by LAUSD   of which 160,370 are breakfast and 489,630 are lunch

 (Which in 2010-2011 according to the NCTQ website 63% (415,214) of the students receive free or reduced cost lunch

According to the LAUSD BIC website, in Los Angeles County, 1.7 million people live in poverty and in food insecure households – households where families face a constant struggle against hunger. Yet only 29% of the students enrolled at LAUSD are utilizing their meals.

Who funds “Breakfast in the Classroom” ?

The Los Angeles Unified School District (LAUSD), in partnership with the Los Angeles Fund for Public Education, California Food Policy Advocates, LA County Department of Public Health's Choose LA Initiative, and community partners,

So what is curious about this program?  LAUSD BIC defines the benefit of their program as follows

·         When breakfast is served in the classroom, all students have the opportunity to eat together in a family-like setting, promoting social skills, increasing responsibility, and developing other important life skills.

·         BIC’s additional revenue will help save hundreds of jobs for school employees.

·         A percentage of the BIC additional revenue will be allocated to schools

“The Grab ‘n Go service creates an area near the entrance of the school for students to pick up a “grab bag” with a breakfast to take to their class to eat during homeroom or right before class starts.  The California State Superintendent of Instruction and State Controller wrote a joint letter to school districts indicating that the time needed to serve breakfast in the classroom can be counted as instructional minutes.”

So out of a breakfast program which ONLY SERVES 29% of the students

·         We have a source for extra revenue for the school district

·         We have instructional minutes being designated for eating breakfast!!

How does one qualify for a program serving 29% of the students breakfast and 69% lunch? 

According to EducationNext.org

·         Parents report their yearly income on the application.

ü  Children living in households at or below 130 percent of the federal poverty level ($27,560 per year for a family of four) qualify for free meals at school;

ü  Those in households between 131 percent and 185 percent of the federal poverty level (up to $39,220 per year for a family of four) qualify for reduced-price meals.

ü  Children can also qualify automatically based on residential status in areas of concentrated poverty or participation in other means-tested government programs, including food stamps and Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF). 

·         No proof of income, such as a pay stub or W-2 form, is required when parents apply.

ü  That’s in contrast to other federal nutrition entitlements, including the food stamp program, now called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

ü  Each  application contains a certification statement that parents or guardians are required to sign in which they promise that their reported income level is accurate. The statement warns that adults “may be prosecuted” if they “purposefully give false information,” but the threat doesn’t have teeth, as few, if any, applicants have been held accountable for cheating. It isn’t even clear which level of government—federal, state, or local—would be responsible for prosecuting fraud.

WHAT IS THE BASIS FOR A School Lunch Program & Who Verifies Qualification?

·         The Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, as most recently amended by Congress in 2004.

·         The act requires school districts to try each year to verify the incomes of 3 percent (or 3,000, whichever is less) of participants considered “error prone,” meaning households whose reported earnings are within $100 monthly or $1,200 yearly of the income eligibility limitation.

·         School districts can also qualify for an alternate sample size of 1 percent if they meet certain requirements.

So local school districts are verifying the qualification BUT

·         The USDA reimburses districts for each free or discounted meal served.

·         We have instructional minutes being designated for eating breakfast!!

·         LAUSD, the nation’s second-largest district with an enrollment of about 700,000 students, had the highest rate of reduced or repealed benefits (93 percent) for the 2007–08 school year.

Of 3,401 program participants asked to verify their income

·         2,650 (78 percent) did not respond to the verification request;

·         215 (6 percent) provided evidence that reduced their benefits from free or reduced-price to paid;

·         291 (9 percent) provided income evidence that reduced their meal benefits from free to reduced-price;

·         233 (7 percent) provided evidence to justify their initial report of income; and

·         12 (less than 1 percent) provided evidence that increased their benefits.

THEN LETS GIVE DISTRICTS MORE INCENTIVES TO CRY POVERTY IN THE CLASSROOM

With millions of dollars available under the new finance formula  for schools with large numbers of low-income students, districts are pulling out all the stops to make sure they get an accurate count of their high-needs students.

Because the new system defines “low income” as students who are eligible for the federal free- and reduced-price meals program, some districts are offering free Raiders tickets, ice cream parties, tickets to the county fair and other perks to encourage families to sign up for the National School Lunch Program.

EdSource.org continues to detail the incentives: “Other districts have taken a more low-key approach toward spreading the word that schools can reap additional money based on how many students are eligible for subsidized meals.”

The sign-ups are important not only for the meal program, but also so that schools can qualify for federal poverty programs such as Title 1, which brings money for instructional assistance.

So, in conclusion let me state again what has been detailed in my opening paragraphs: the Federal Government needs to be removed from the process of education and return all powers and legislation to the States.

Mark Reed, American and willing to speak my opinion for the electorate.