GAO

United States General Accounting Office

Report to the Ranking Minority Member, 

Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and 

Forestry, U.S. Senate

February 2000 SCHOOL MEAL 

PROGRAMS

Few Outbreaks of 

Foodborne Illness 

Reported

GAO/RCED-00-53

Page 1 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs

Contents

Letter 3

Appendixes Appendix I: Comments From the U.S. Department of Agriculture 18

Appendix II: GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgements 23

Abbreviations

CDC Centers for Disease Control and Prevention

FNS Food and Nutrition Service

HACCP Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point

USDA U.S. Department of Agriculture
Page 2 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs
Page 3 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs

United States General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548

Resources, Community, and

Economic Development Division

B-284297 Letr

February 22, 2000

The Honorable Tom Harkin

Ranking Minority Member

Committee on Agriculture, 

Nutrition, and Forestry

United States Senate

Dear Senator Harkin:

The safety of food served in schools is a matter of concern because of 

children’s vulnerability to foodborne illness. More than 33 million meals are 

served daily to children through two federally assisted meal programs 

administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Food and 

Nutrition Service (FNS)—the National School Lunch and School Breakfast 

programs. In fiscal year 1998, the two programs cost a total of about $7.1 

billion for cash reimbursements to schools, USDA-donated foods, and 

program administration. Local school food authorities purchase about 83 

percent of the food served in the lunch program and all of the food served 

in the breakfast program. Food donated by USDA—such as beef, poultry, 

fruit, vegetable, grain, and dairy products—make up the remainder of the 

food served in the lunch program. USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service 

and Farm Service Agency acquire the donated foods by contracting with 

various suppliers; FNS’ Food Distribution Division distributes the foods to 

state agencies; and the state agencies distribute the foods to schools. 

To obtain information on the safety of foods served in the National School 

Lunch and School Breakfast programs, you asked us to determine the 

extent (1) of foodborne illness outbreaks related to meals served in 

schools; (2) to which USDA-donated foods in schools were removed, 

replaced, or disposed of because of the potential to cause foodborne 

illness; and (3) to which USDA has established procurement policies and 

procedures for ensuring the safety of foods it donates to the programs.
B-284297

Page 4 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs

Results in Brief Twenty outbreaks of foodborne illness in schools were reported to the 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention during calendar year 1997, the 

most recent year for which national data were available.1

 However, the 

health department records of the states that reported these outbreaks and 

other documentation indicate that only 8 of the 20 outbreaks were 

associated with food served in the school meal programs. The other 12 

outbreaks were related to foods that were consumed in schools but that 

were brought from home or obtained from other sources. Nationwide data 

were not available for 1998; however, the health department records of the 

states that reported outbreaks in schools to the Centers for Disease Control 

and Prevention in 1997 identified nine outbreaks associated with food 

served in school meal programs during 1998. These outbreaks in 1997 and 

1998 affected an estimated 1,609 individuals.

We identified five instances during the last 5 years in which USDA, in 

collaboration with others, removed, replaced, or disposed of USDAdonated foods because of the potential for the foods to cause foodborne 

illness. Two of the five actions were associated with the foodborne illness 

outbreaks involving USDA-donated foods during 1997 or 1998. The five 

actions involved approximately 1.7 million pounds of strawberries, 556,000 

pounds of beef patties, 400,000 pounds of poultry, 25,000 pounds of beefand-vegetable protein patties, and an unknown quantity of ground beef. 

However, these five actions may not represent all the food safety actions 

taken because USDA lacks a process to systematically identify and 

document such actions. A multiagency food distribution reengineering 

team has proposed that FNS’ Food Distribution Division establish a 

database to continuously track all food safety actions taken on donated 

foods.

USDA has established procurement policies and procedures that are 

intended to help ensure the safety of foods donated to schools. USDA’s 

provisions for the safety of donated foods are contained in procurement 

contracts used to purchase the foods from various suppliers. Some of these 

contract provisions are based on the same food safety regulations that are 

intended to protect food sold to the general public. For example, the 

1

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), an agency of the Department of 

Health and Human Services, is responsible for monitoring and investigating outbreaks of 

foodborne disease. CDC defines an outbreak as foodborne illness from a common source 

affecting two or more individuals. CDC notes that such outbreaks are underreported for a 

variety of reasons.
B-284297

Page 5 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs

contracts require suppliers to ensure that plants processing USDA-donated 

foods are operated and inspected in accordance with national food safety 

laws. Additionally, for certain foods with special safety concerns, such as 

eggs and diced chicken, USDA contracts require more stringent safety 

testing than is required by law for food sold to the general public. Finally, 

USDA contracts require that donated food be maintained at appropriate 

temperatures during processing, storage, and transportation. In addition to 

specific contract provisions, USDA officials told us that they consider 

potential suppliers’ food safety compliance records before awarding 

contracts. However, the food safety provisions in USDA’s procurement 

policies and procedures do not apply to schools, which purchase 83 

percent of the food served in the school lunch program and all of the food 

for the breakfast program. Furthermore, USDA provides schools with 

limited guidance on procuring safe foods. Therefore, the extent to which 

school food procurement contracts address safety may vary, depending on 

state and local laws and the procurement guidance that is available to 

schools.

This report recommends that the Secretary of Agriculture (1) expeditiously 

develop a database for continuously documenting all food safety actions 

taken on foods donated to the Department’s food assistance programs and 

(2) provide information to assist schools in developing food procurement 

contracts that further ensure food safety.

Background The goals of both the National School Lunch and School Breakfast 

programs are to improve children’s nutrition, increase lower-income 

children’s access to nutritious meals, and help support the agricultural 

economy. The school lunch program is available in almost all public 

schools and in many private schools. About 70 percent of those schools 

also participate in the breakfast program. FNS’ Child Nutrition Division 

administers both school meal programs. 

Schools that participate in the school lunch or breakfast programs receive 

a per-meal federal cash reimbursement for all meals they serve to children, 

as long as the meals meet federal nutrition standards. For 1998, the 

combined cash reimbursements for the two programs totaled about $6.3 

billion. In addition, schools participating in the lunch program are entitled 

to USDA-donated foods, at a value of 14.75 cents per meal served, which 

amounted to $643 million in fiscal year 1998. Overall, USDA provides about 

17 percent of the dollar value of food that goes on the table in school lunch 

programs. Schools purchase the remaining 83 percent of food served using 
B-284297

Page 6 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs

USDA’s cash reimbursement and their own funds. With 1998 federal 

administrative costs totaling about $100 million, the total cost in fiscal year 

1998 of the national lunch and breakfast programs—cash reimbursements, 

donated food purchases, and administration—was about $7.1 billion.

USDA’s Agricultural Marketing Service and Farm Service Agency are 

responsible for procuring USDA-donated foods. The Agricultural Marketing 

Service purchases meat, poultry, fish, and fruits and vegetables for 

donation, while the Farm Service Agency purchases grains, oils, peanut 

products, dairy products, and other foods. USDA contracts for the 

purchase of these products with suppliers who are selected through a 

formally advertised competitive bidding process. FNS’ Food Distribution 

Division administers the Food Distribution Program, which provides the 

donated foods to state agencies for distribution to schools and other 

eligible local outlets.

While no federal agency specifically monitors the safety of school meals, 

USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service and the U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Services’ Food and Drug Administration are responsible 

for enforcing regulations that ensure the safety of the nation’s food supply. 

The Food Safety and Inspection Service is responsible for the safety of 

meat, poultry, and some eggs and egg products, while the Food and Drug 

Administration is responsible for all other foods, including fish, fruit, 

vegetable, milk, and grain products. When unsafe foods are detected, 

neither agency has the authority to recall them from distribution, but the 

appropriate agency can request manufacturers to do so voluntarily.2

Additionally, each agency announces recalls to keep the public informed. 

However, the announcements do not include detailed information, such as 

whether the recalled food was delivered to a USDA food assistance 

program or was USDA-donated food.

2

The Food Safety and Inspection Service also has the authority to temporarily detain 

potentially contaminated products for up to 20 days while it seeks a court order for seizure. 

The Food and Drug Administration may seize adulterated products, but such action 

generally requires a court order.
B-284297

Page 7 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs

Few Outbreaks of 

Foodborne Illness Are 

Linked to Schools 

For 1997, the most recent year for which nationwide data were available, 20 

outbreaks of foodborne illness in schools were reported to the Centers for 

Disease Control and Prevention (CDC).3

 According to CDC’s 

documentation and the health department records from the 10 states that 

reported outbreaks to CDC’s database, only 8 of the 20 outbreaks were 

actually associated with food served in the school meal programs. The 

other 12 outbreaks were not linked to foods served in the school meal 

programs but with foods brought to schools from home or other sources. 

Among the eight outbreaks associated with school meals, USDA-donated 

strawberries were the suspected source for four, while the other four were 

not linked to USDA-donated foods. The 1997 outbreaks associated with the 

school meal programs affected an estimated 688 individuals.

For 1998, nationwide data on outbreaks of foodborne illness in schools 

were not available from CDC. However, the health department records 

from the 10 states reporting outbreaks of foodborne illness in schools to 

CDC in 1997 showed nine additional outbreaks associated with food served 

in the school meal programs during 1998. USDA-donated ground beef and 

potato rounds served in school meals were the suspected sources for two 

outbreaks, while the other seven were not linked to USDA-donated foods. 

The 1998 outbreaks associated with the school meal programs affected an 

estimated 921 individuals.

USDA Records of 

Actions to Prevent the 

Consumption of 

Potentially Unsafe 

USDA-Donated Foods 

in Schools Are 

Incomplete

We identified five instances during the last 5 years in which USDA, in 

collaboration with others, took actions to remove, replace, or dispose of 

USDA-donated foods that had the potential to cause foodborne illness. Two 

of these actions—involving strawberries and ground beef—were 

associated with five of the outbreaks of foodborne illness involving USDAdonated foods that were reported in schools during 1997 or 1998.

• In April 1997, the Food and Drug Administration announced the recall of 

about 1.7 million pounds of frozen strawberries purchased by USDA for 

the school lunch program. The supplier initiated the recall after the 

3

According to CDC, foodborne illnesses are underreported because (1) milder cases are 

often undetected; (2) pathogens that are transmitted through food may also be spread 

through water or from person to person, obscuring the role of foodborne transmission; and 

(3) some proportion of foodborne illness is caused by pathogens or agents that have not yet 

been identified and thus cannot be diagnosed. Furthermore, CDC relies on states to 

voluntarily report outbreak information.
B-284297

Page 8 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs

product was determined to be associated with a March 1997 outbreak of 

infectious hepatitis A among schoolchildren in Michigan. The 

strawberries were subsequently associated with outbreaks in schools in 

Arizona, Maine, and Wisconsin, and affected 254 individuals in the four 

states.

• In May 1997, the Food Safety and Inspection Service and the Food and 

Drug Administration participated in an investigation of dioxincontaminated products after the Environmental Protection Agency 

detected elevated levels of dioxin in poultry. USDA had purchased some 

potentially tainted poultry for donation to the school lunch program. 

The agencies subsequently determined that the levels of dioxin detected 

did not warrant a recall; however, as a precautionary measure, USDA 

requested that the supplier stop distributing the product to schools. The 

supplier replaced about 400,000 pounds of potentially tainted poultry; 

no illnesses in schools were identified.

• In May 1998, the Food Safety and Inspection Service announced the 

recall of beef-and-vegetable protein patties, of which about 25,000 

pounds had been donated by USDA to the school lunch programs in 

North Carolina and Georgia. A single illness prompted testing of the 

product. After testing showed the presence of E. coli O157:H7, USDA 

recovered and replaced the tainted product.

• In September 1998, a meat processor recalled over 2 million pounds of 

products contaminated with salmonella, of which approximately 

556,000 pounds were beef patties destined for the school lunch program. 

The processor picked up and replaced all of the tainted products in 11 

states. No illnesses in schools were associated with the tainted meat.

• In October 1998, USDA-donated ground beef was suspected in an 

outbreak of E. coli O157:H7 that infected 11 school children in 

Washington State. However, when the Food Safety and Inspection 

Service and the state tested samples of the meat that was the suspected 

source, they found no contamination. Most of the meat suspected in the 

outbreak had already been consumed, and no other illnesses had been 

reported; USDA took no further action.

We cannot be certain that these five incidents represent all of the safety 

actions taken for USDA-donated foods suspected of contamination. USDA 

lacks comprehensive documentation of safety actions taken for donated 

food because the Food Distribution Division’s Food Hold and Recall 

Coordinator did not start to record such actions until October 1998. As a 

result, we had to rely on USDA procurement officials to identify some of 

the actions mentioned above. USDA is considering establishing a database 

to continuously track all safety actions associated with USDA-donated 
B-284297

Page 9 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs

foods, as recommended in the final report of a USDA-led multiagency team 

charged with reengineering the process for handling potentially unsafe 

foods. According to the current Food Hold and Recall Coordinator, the 

database would include all safety-related actions from October 1998 

forward. However, USDA has not yet approved the reengineering 

proposals; therefore, it is not certain that actions will be taken to develop 

this food safety database.

USDA Contracts 

Contain Provisions 

Intended to Ensure 

Safety, but USDA 

Provides Little 

Guidance to Help 

Schools Procure Safe 

Food

USDA has established procurement policies and procedures intended to 

ensure the safety of the food it donates to schools. However, the agency 

provides limited guidance to help ensure the safety of foods procured by 

school food authorities, who purchase 83 percent of the food served in the 

school lunch program and all of the food served in the school breakfast 

program.

USDA Has Established 

Policies and Procedures 

Intended to Ensure the 

Safety of Foods Purchased 

for Donation to Schools

USDA procurement officials rely on many of the same food safety 

regulations that are intended to protect food sold to the general public to 

help ensure the safety of foods they purchase to donate to schools. For 

example, USDA’s contract provisions require plants that process USDAdonated foods to be operated under and inspected in accordance with 

applicable federal food safety laws and regulations. Specifically, USDA’s 

contracts require meat suppliers to adhere to the Federal Meat Inspection 

Act and poultry suppliers to the Poultry Products Inspection Act. Under 

these laws, suppliers must adhere to the Food Safety and Inspection 

Service’s regulations, including a requirement that meat and poultry plants 

operate Hazard Analysis and Critical Control Point (HACCP) systems.4

 The 

Service’s inspectors monitor these plants daily. In November 1999, a Food 

Safety and Inspection Service enforcement action against a beef processor 

4

HACCP systems are designed to actively monitor and control contamination throughout 

the food production process by identifying places where the greatest food safety risks exist, 

implementing methods to control the risks at those points, and then monitoring the efficacy 

of the controls.
B-284297

Page 10 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs

that was not complying with HACCP standards prompted USDA to 

terminate its school food contracts with the processor the following day. 

Foods not subject to daily USDA inspection—such as dairy products and 

processed fruits and vegetables, including juices—must be produced in 

plants that operate under the Federal Food, Drug and Cosmetic Act. These 

products are subject to periodic inspections by the Food and Drug 

Administration to ensure that they are produced in accordance with its 

regulations on good manufacturing practices. According to USDA officials, 

annual plant surveys, which cover good manufacturing practices, among 

other things, are required of all successful bidders of processed fruit and 

vegetable products. In addition, USDA contracts require that USDA graders 

inspect most finished products to ensure compliance with contract 

specifications. While the graders are not specifically monitoring safety 

issues, they are in a position to identify evidence of potential food safety 

problems, such as swollen cans or discolored meat.

USDA’s procurement contracts also address safety concerns associated 

with certain foods by including provisions that specify more stringent 

testing than is required by the Food Safety and Inspection Service or the 

Food and Drug Administration. For example, the Agricultural Marketing 

Service’s contracts for diced chicken specify pathogen testing for every lot 

because this product is highly susceptible to contamination. Procurement 

contracts for egg products specify that every lot of eggs be tested after 

pasteurization to ensure that they have not been recontaminated with 

salmonella. After contamination occurred several years ago, USDA 

specified that peanut products, such as peanut butter, be tested for arsenic. 

While the problem has not recurred, USDA has retained the specification to 

ensure the product’s safety.

Finally, USDA’s procurement contracts have provisions that are intended to 

ensure that suppliers maintain USDA-donated food products at appropriate 

temperatures during processing, storage, and transportation. For example, 

USDA’s contracts establish standards for suppliers that indicate how 

quickly frozen meat and poultry products must reach zero degrees 

Fahrenheit for safe storage. Other contract specifications establish specific 

temperature requirements for chilled and frozen products during 

processing and storage at the plant, transportation between processing 

plants, upon shipment from the plant, and upon arrival at the final 

destination. According to USDA procurement officials, the trucks or 

railcars used to transport meat or poultry products and frozen or chilled 

fruit and vegetable products from the plant to their final destination must 
B-284297

Page 11 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs

have refrigeration units capable of maintaining the required temperatures 

for delivery.

Besides including contract provisions that are intended to address food 

safety, USDA takes steps to address safety before contracting. USDA 

procurement officials said they consider the potential suppliers’ records for 

compliance with food safety regulations in their reviews of bids before 

contracting. The officials said that through their continual contact with a 

relatively small pool of potential suppliers, contacts with various agency 

inspectors and graders, and knowledge of the industry, they are aware of a 

potential supplier’s record of compliance with food safety regulations and 

take this record into account when determining whether this potential 

supplier is responsible.

Furthermore, because of quality concerns, the Farm Service Agency has 

developed a precontracting procedure for a few of the foods that it 

purchases, such as peanut butter, that indirectly helps to ensure foods’ 

safety. The agency formally rates suppliers’ food quality and safety 

programs before allowing them to bid on a contract. Bidding companies are 

required to establish food safety controls, which USDA reviewers assess 

for specific criteria in several categories, such as the use of good 

manufacturing practices, appropriate inspection and testing of products, 

and appropriate storage and handling procedures. Suppliers are ineligible 

to bid if they fail to achieve the minimum score established by agency 

contracting officials. Agency officials anticipate that over the next 5 years 

this procedure will become effective for all foods purchased by the Farm 

Service Agency for USDA’s food assistance programs.
B-284297

Page 12 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs

USDA Provides Little 

Guidance to Promote Safety 

in School Food 

Procurements

While USDA has established procurement policies and procedures that are 

intended to ensure the safety of foods donated to schools, these policies 

and procedures do not apply to foods purchased by local schools, which 

account for 83 percent of the food served in the school lunch program and 

all of the food served in the school breakfast program. According to USDA’s 

regulations for schools participating in the school meal programs, the 

responsible “school food authority may use its own procurement 

procedures which reflect applicable State and local laws and regulations,” 

provided that the procedures comply with applicable federal standards for 

economy and efficiency in contracting, including free competition and 

access to contractors’ records.5

 Therefore, the extent to which schools 

address safety in their food procurement contracts may vary, depending on 

state and local laws and procurement guidance that is available to them.

Although USDA provides general guidance to school food authorities on 

food procurement, this guidance is not specific or complete with regard to 

ensuring the safety of purchased food. For example, some procurement 

guidance appears in USDA’s food safety technical assistance publication, 

Serving It Safe: A Manager’s Tool Kit, which was published and distributed 

to all school food authorities in 1996 and updated in 1999. This tool kit is 

one of USDA’s major efforts to provide school food service personnel with 

guidance on safe food handling practices. However, the discussion of 

purchasing in the tool kit is limited and provides only general information. 

For example, it suggests that school officials “put food safety standards in 

your purchase specification agreement” but offers no examples or 

guidance on appropriate standards or specifications. The guidance states 

“suppliers must meet federal and state health standards” but does not 

identify these standards or attempt to explain what they might entail.

USDA has distributed two guidance manuals on food purchasing to all 

school food authorities and conducts procurement-related training. In 

1995, USDA distributed First Choice: A Purchasing Systems Manual for 

School Food Service, which provides a step-by-step overview of the 

procurement process for schools. In 1996, USDA distributed Choice Plus: A 

Reference Guide for Foods and Ingredients as complementary guidance to 

First Choice, explaining how to describe specific foods in developing 

purchase specifications, along with purchasing tips for each food. While 

these manuals discuss in detail the development of product descriptions 

5

A school food authority is responsible for the administration of the program in one or more 

schools.
B-284297

Page 13 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs

and contract specifications that ensure food quality and nutrition, neither 

one specifically addresses the topic of ensuring the safety of food in 

procurement, with one exception—the First Choice manual directly 

addresses safety in the procurement of pre-cut fresh produce. Without 

recommending contract provisions to ensure the safety of such produce, 

the manual suggests visiting the vendor’s plant before contracting and 

suggests evaluating key areas, such as processing procedures and food 

safety measures. However, the manual contains no specific guidance for 

ensuring safety in the procurement of other types of food, such as meat, 

poultry, and dairy products or processed fruits, vegetables, and juices.

Information is readily available from USDA that, if made available to school 

food authorities, could help ensure the safety of foods that they procure. 

Such information appears in (1) USDA’s contract specifications for 

inspecting, storing, and transporting donated food products, as well as for 

addressing special safety concerns presented by certain foods and (2) the 

Farm Service Agency’s methodology for formally examining the quality and 

safety practices of suppliers before accepting their bids. In addition, the 

Agricultural Marketing Service’s Food Quality Assurance staff, which has 

provided presentations to some school food service professionals on 

procurement practices that promote the safety of purchased food, has 

developed a list of about 140 “commercial item descriptions,” which 

specify the prominent characteristics of each product. While USDA’s First 

Choice manual refers to these descriptions as a source of information 

about food products, the descriptions also include useful information on 

other topics, such as microbiological testing and other safety-related 

standards, as well as the sources for governmental and nongovernmental 

standards and other guidance documentation.

Although USDA has provided little guidance to help schools ensure the 

safety of the foods they procure for the school meal programs, it is 

currently participating in a group that provides a potential mechanism for 

disseminating such guidance. USDA officials are participating in the CDCinitiated National School Food Safety Working Group, which is composed 

of government agencies, industry, and other interested groups to assist the 

nation’s schools in preventing foodborne illness. The group meets 

bimonthly to share information about school food safety, disseminate 

relevant information, explore opportunities for interagency collaboration 

and coordination, and conduct strategic planning toward reducing 

foodborne illness in schools. Formed in mid-1999, the group is gathering 

information and identifying issues to address. Furthermore, according to 

FNS officials, the need for additional educational materials and 
B-284297

Page 14 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs

information on safety-related procurement practices will be discussed 

when the National Food Service Management Institute, under a 

cooperative agreement with FNS, convenes an advisory group of school 

lunch program professionals in January 2000.

Conclusions Few outbreaks of foodborne illness have been reported in connection with 

USDA’s school meal programs. Furthermore, USDA may have prevented or 

mitigated such outbreaks by collaborating with others to remove, replace, 

or dispose of USDA-donated foods that posed possible safety concerns. 

However, the full extent of these actions is unknown because USDA has 

not maintained comprehensive records of the actions it has taken to 

address possible safety concerns associated with donated food. Without 

such records, USDA lacks a reliable basis for identifying safety trends and 

for documenting the agency’s responsiveness to concerns over the safety of 

USDA-donated foods. 

USDA has established procurement policies and procedures that are 

intended to ensure the safety of foods it purchases and donates to school 

meal programs. However, most of the food served in these programs is 

purchased by schools. Despite the volume of food that schools purchase, 

USDA has provided little guidance on procurement practices that could 

help ensure the safety of these purchases. As a result, schools lack a 

valuable source of information that could bolster the safety of food served 

in school meal programs. USDA could use existing communication 

channels to provide such guidance at minimal expense.

Recommendations to 

the Secretary of 

Agriculture

To better ensure that donated food safety actions are documented and that 

school contract provisions help ensure the safety of foods purchased for 

the school lunch and school breakfast programs, we recommend that the 

Secretary of Agriculture direct the Administrator of the Food and Nutrition 

Service to 

• expeditiously develop the proposed Food Distribution Division’s food 

safety action database and 

• provide information to state or local authorities on safety provisions 

that could be included in school food procurement contracts.
B-284297

Page 15 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs

Agency Comments We provided USDA with a copy of this report for review and comment. 

USDA generally concurred with the accuracy of the information presented 

in the report. However, USDA was concerned that the report did not 

address its efforts and resources devoted to providing school food service 

personnel with guidance on safe food handling practices. USDA said it 

considers food handling and preparation to be the most significant areas 

affecting the safety of food served to schoolchildren because foods 

purchased by schools, like food purchased by the general public, are 

already protected by federal, state, and local food safety regulations. We 

agree that such food handling practices are important in ensuring the safety 

of school meals. However, evaluating this particular aspect of USDA’s food 

safety activities was beyond the scope of the work we had been requested 

to conduct. Accordingly, we did not highlight a discussion of these 

activities in the report.

In commenting on the draft report’s recommendations, USDA agreed to 

take action on the recommendation to provide schools with information on 

safety provisions that could be included in school food procurement 

contracts. In response to a USDA concern regarding the implementation of 

this recommendation, we clarified the final recommendation to give the 

agency more flexibility in implementing it. USDA did not address our 

recommendation to expeditiously implement the Food Distribution 

Division’s proposed database for food safety action in its written 

comments. However, the director of this division advised us that the agency 

concurred with the recommendation and stated that USDA would develop 

the database.

USDA provided a number of technical comments, which we incorporated 

into the report as appropriate. USDA’s comments and our responses are 

included as appendix I.

Scope and 

Methodology

To determine the extent of foodborne illness in schools that participate in 

the school meal programs, we obtained the CDC’s state-reported 

nationwide information on outbreaks of foodborne illnesses for schools for 

calendar year 1997, the most recent year for which data were available, and 

reviewed CDC’s published outbreak investigation reports. We contacted 

state health department officials and obtained information regarding the 

outbreaks reported to CDC for 1997, as well as for 1998 school outbreaks in 

the state. We used the state health department information to determine 

whether the illness at the school was associated with a meal prepared and 
B-284297

Page 16 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs

served at the school. We contacted the school where the outbreak occurred 

to determine whether the meal was served as part of the National School 

Lunch or School Breakfast programs. If necessary, we contacted the county 

health department where the outbreak occurred for additional information.

To determine the extent to which USDA-donated foods in schools were 

removed, replaced, or disposed of because of the potential to cause 

foodborne illness, we interviewed USDA procurement officials of the 

Agricultural Marketing Service and the Farm Service Agency. We also 

interviewed FNS’ Food Distribution Division Food Hold and Recall 

Coordinator and reviewed documentation of safety-related actions.

To determine USDA’s procurement policies and procedures for ensuring 

the safety of foods served in the programs, we examined and discussed 

relevant regulations, policies, and procedures with USDA officials and 

reviewed selected USDA procurement contracts. We also examined the 

USDA procurement guidance provided to states and school districts.

We conducted our work from July 1999 through December 1999 in 

accordance with generally accepted government auditing standards. 

As agreed with your office, unless you publicly announce its contents 

earlier, we plan no further distribution of this report for 30 days. At that 

time, copies of this report will be sent to the Honorable Dan Glickman, 

Secretary of Agriculture; the Honorable Jacob J. Lew, Director, Office of 

Management and Budget; and other interested parties. We will make copies 

available to others on request. 
B-284297

Page 17 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs

If you have any questions about this report, please contact me at 

(202) 512-5138. Major contributors to this report are listed in appendix II.

Sincerely yours,

Robert E. Robertson

Associate Director, Food and

Agriculture Issues
Page 18 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs

Appendix I

Comments From the U.S. Department of Apendxies

Agriculture ApendxiI

Note: GAO comments 

supplementing those in 

the report text appear at 

the end of this appendix.
Appendix I

Comments From the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture

Page 19 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs

See comment 1.
Appendix I

Comments From the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture

Page 20 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs

See comment 2.
Appendix I

Comments From the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture

Page 21 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs
Appendix I

Comments From the U.S. Department of 

Agriculture

Page 22 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs

GAO Comments 1. We do not agree that the report is incomplete because it does not 

enumerate the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) efforts to 

provide guidance to schools regarding safe food storage, handling, and 

serving practices. While we agree that such practices are important in 

ensuring the safety of school meals, an evaluation of USDA’s actions in 

this area is beyond the scope of work that we were requested to 

conduct. Therefore, we did not highlight these actions in the report. 

Rather, our report addresses the requester’s concerns regarding 

procurement policies and procedures to ensure the safety of foods 

served in the federally supported school meal programs.

2. We revised the report to include USDA’s authority to detain products.
Page 23 GAO/RCED-00-53 School Meal Programs

Appendix II

GAO Contacts and Staff Acknowledgements ApendxiI

GAO Contacts Robert E. Robertson (202) 512-5138

Keith Oleson (415) 904-2218

Acknowledgements In addition to those named above, Leo Acosta, Kathy Colgrove-Stone, Brad 

Dobbins, Oliver Easterwood, and Jonathan Silverman made key 

contributions to this report.

(150148) Letr
Ordering Information

The first copy of each GAO report and testimony is free.

Additional copies are $2 each. Orders should be sent to the 

following address, accompanied by a check or money order made 

out to the Superintendent of Documents, when necessary, VISA and 

MasterCard credit cards are accepted, also.

Orders for 100 or more copies to be mailed to a single address are 

discounted 25 percent.

Orders by mail:

U.S. General Accounting Office

P.O. Box 37050

Washington, DC 20013

or visit:

Room 1100

700 4th St. NW (corner of 4th and G Sts. NW)

U.S. General Accounting Office

Washington, DC

Orders may also be placed by calling (202) 512-6000

or by using fax number (202) 512-6061, or TDD (202) 512-2537.

Each day, GAO issues a list of newly available reports and 

testimony. To receive facsimile copies of the daily list or any list 

from the past 30 days, please call (202) 512-6000 using a touchtone 

phone. A recorded menu will provide information on how to obtain 

these lists.

For information on how to access GAO reports on the INTERNET, 

send an e-mail message with “info” in the body to:

info@www.gao.gov

or visit GAO’s World Wide Web Home Page at: 

http://www.gao.gov

United States

General Accounting Office

Washington, D.C. 20548-0001

Official Business

Penalty for Private Use $300

Address Correction Requested

Bulk Rate

Postage & Fees Paid

GAO

Permit No. GI00