U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Publishing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

95–135 PDF 2016

CHILD NUTRITION ASSISTANCE: LOOKING AT 

COST OF COMPLIANCE FOR 

STATES AND SCHOOLS 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EARLY CHILDHOOD, 

ELEMENTARY, AND SECONDARY EDUCATION 

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION 

AND THE WORKFORCE 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED FOURTEENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, JUNE 24, 2015 

Serial No. 114–22 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and the Workforce 

( 

Available via the World Wide Web: 

www.gpo.gov/fdsys/browse/committee.action?chamber=house&committee=education 

or 

Committee address: http://edworkforce.house.gov 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

(II) 

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND THE WORKFORCE 

JOHN KLINE, Minnesota, Chairman 

Joe Wilson, South Carolina 

Virginia Foxx, North Carolina 

Duncan Hunter, California 

David P. Roe, Tennessee 

Glenn Thompson, Pennsylvania 

Tim Walberg, Michigan 

Matt Salmon, Arizona 

Brett Guthrie, Kentucky 

Todd Rokita, Indiana 

Lou Barletta, Pennsylvania 

Joseph J. Heck, Nevada 

Luke Messer, Indiana 

Bradley Byrne, Alabama 

David Brat, Virginia 

Buddy Carter, Georgia 

Michael D. Bishop, Michigan 

Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin 

Steve Russell, Oklahoma 

Carlos Curbelo, Florida 

Elise Stefanik, New York 

Rick Allen, Georgia 

Robert C. ‘‘Bobby’’ Scott, Virginia 

Ranking Member 

Rube ́n Hinojosa, Texas 

Susan A. Davis, California 

Rau ́l M. Grijalva, Arizona 

Joe Courtney, Connecticut 

Marcia L. Fudge, Ohio 

Jared Polis, Colorado 

Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, 

Northern Mariana Islands 

Frederica S. Wilson, Florida 

Suzanne Bonamici, Oregon 

Mark Pocan, Wisconsin 

Mark Takano, California 

Hakeem S. Jeffries, New York 

Katherine M. Clark, Massachusetts 

Alma S. Adams, North Carolina 

Mark DeSaulnier, California 

Juliane Sullivan, Staff Director 

Denise Forte, Minority Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON EARLY CHILDHOOD, ELEMENTARY, AND 

SECONDARY EDUCATION 

TODD ROKITA, Indiana, Chairman 

Duncan Hunter, California 

Glenn Thompson, Pennsylvania 

Dave Brat, Virginia 

Buddy Carter, Georgia 

Michael D. Bishop, Michigan 

Glenn Grothman, Wisconsin 

Steve Russell, Oklahoma 

Carlos Curbelo, Florida 

Marcia L. Fudge, Ohio, 

Ranking Minority Member 

Susan A. Davis, California 

Rau ́l M. Grijalva, Arizona 

Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, 

Northern Mariana Islands 

Suzanne Bonamici, Oregon 

Mark Takano, California 

Katherine M. Clark, Massachusetts 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on June 24, 2015 ............................................................................... 1 

Statement of Members: 

Fudge, Hon. Marcia, L., Ranking Member, Subcommittee On Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education ............................................. 3 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 4 

Rokita, Hon. Todd, Chairman, Subcommittee On Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education ............................................................. 1 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 3 

Statement of Witnesses: 

Schopp, Dr. Melody, Secretary of Education, South Dakota Department 

of Education, Pierre, SD ............................................................................... 7 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 10 

Payne, Mr. John, President, President, Blackford County School Board 

of Trustees, Hartford City, IN ..................................................................... 12 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 14 

Martin, Ms. Donna, Director, School Nutrition Program, Burke County 

Public Schools, Waynesboro, GA .................................................................. 17 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 19 

Harvey, Dr. Lynn, Chief, School Nutrition Services, Safe and Healthy 

Schools Support Division, North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, Raleigh, NC .................................................................................. 21 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 23 

Additional Submissions: 

Letter dated June 22, 2015 from the Metropolitan School District of 

Wayne Township ........................................................................................... 46 

Letter dated June 22, 2015 from the Public Schools of North Carolina ...... 52 

Stories from School Districts Across the Country .......................................... 55 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

(1) 

CHILD NUTRITION ASSISTANCE: LOOKING AT 

COST OF COMPLIANCE FOR 

STATES AND SCHOOLS 

Wednesday, June 24, 2015 

House of Representatives, 

Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, 

and Secondary Education, 

Committee on Education and the Workforce, 

Washington, D.C. 

The subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:05 a.m., in Room 

2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. Todd Rokita [chairman 

of the subcommittee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Rokita, Brat, Carter, Bishop, 

Grothman, Curbelo, Fudge, Davis, Bonamici, Takano, and Clark. 

Also present: Representatives Kline, Noem, Allen, and Scott. 

Staff present: Lauren Aronson, Press Secretary; Janelle Belland, 

Coalitions and Members Services Coordinator; Kathlyn Ehl, Professional Staff Member; Matthew Frame, Legislative Assistant; Amy 

Raaf Jones, Director of Education and Human Resources Policy; 

Nancy Locke, Chief Clerk; Daniel Murner, Deputy Press Secretary; 

Krisann Pearce, General Counsel; Mandy Schaumburg, Education 

Deputy Director and Senior Counsel; Alissa Strawcutter, Deputy 

Clerk; Tylease Alli, Minority Clerk/Intern and Fellow Coordinator; 

Austin Barbera, Minority Staff Assistant; Jacque Chevalier, Minority Senior Education Policy Advisor; Denise Forte, Minority Staff 

Director; Tina Hone, Minority Education Policy Director and Associate General Counsel; Carolyn Hughes, Minority Senior Labor Policy Advisor; and Veronique Pluviose, Minority Civil Rights Counsel. 

Chairman Rokita: Good morning and welcome to today’s hearing. 

I would like to thank you, our witnesses, today for joining us to 

share your experiences implementing the Child nutrition programs 

at the state and local levels. Thank you for taking care of our kids. 

We all know the important role healthy food plays in a child’s 

education. We cannot expect children to learn or excel in the classroom if they are hungry or not properly nourished. That is why we 

on the Education and Workforce Committee have been examining 

child nutrition programs to ensure they are effectively and efficiently providing children access to nutritious meals. 

Now, it goes without saying that your commitment to serving 

students is vital to achieving that goal. But the question we want 

to answer today is, are federal policies really giving you the tools 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

2 

and flexibilities you need to succeed in implementing child nutrition programs so that your students can succeed in the classroom? 

Or is there a better way? 

Now, based on what we have heard from other stakeholders, the 

federal role in these programs may be doing more to hinder your 

success than to help it. Following the 2010 reauthorization of the 

National School Lunch and Breakfast Programs, the Department of 

Agriculture issued a number of regulations that expanded Washington’s influence over K–12 cafeterias. The department has narrowly defined what types of food can be served in schools and how 

often, the maximum number of calories students are allowed to eat 

per meal and the price a student must pay per meal. 

Now, while these regulations perhaps are well-intended, states 

and schools are struggling to comply with them. And the very children we aim to serve are paying the price. While program costs, 

administrative burdens and food waste are piling up, portion sizes, 

food offerings, and the number of students participating in the program are on the decline. 

In my home state of Indiana, for example, the number of lunches 

served each year has declined by more than 6 million since the regulation went into effect in 2012. I have heard these concerns from 

my colleagues and constituents, and I have read the reports from 

government watchdogs. But as the saying goes, I needed to see it 

to believe it. 

So, earlier this year I joined students and staff for lunch at 

Cloverdale Middle School in Indiana, among many other schools. 

But there particularly we found Food Service Director Billy Boyette 

describing the challenges he and his staff faced to provide meals 

that both comply with federal regulations, but also appeal to students. 

From firsthand experience I can verify that despite the increased 

federal involvement in the school meal programs, many students 

are still going to class hungry. Furthermore, reports from the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office raise concerns about 

whether or not the resources for these programs are going to students who really need it most. 

If our shared goal is to increase student success in the classroom, 

and if we know that nutritious meals play a part—important part 

in that success, wasting limited tax dollars hardly seems to yield 

a favorable outcome. So that is why we are here today, nothing 

more nothing less. 

As education leaders who have committed themselves to serving 

students, you four provide critical—and the folks you represent, 

provide critical insight into what is working and what isn’t, and 

what types of policies Congress should consider as we move forward with the reauthorization process. 

It is time to provide those responsible for implementing child nutrition programs with the flexibility they need to ensure taxpayer 

dollars are well spent and students are well served. I am confident, 

learning from your experiences, observations, and recommendations, we will inform our efforts to accomplish just that. 

So with that, I will now recognize my friend, the ranking member, Congresswoman Fudge, for her opening remarks. 

[The statement of Chairman Rokita follows:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

3 

Prepared Statement of Hon. Todd Rokita, Chairman, Subcommittee on 

Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education 

Good morning, and welcome to today’s hearing. I’d like to thank you, our witnesses, for joining us to share your experiences implementing the child nutrition 

programs at the state and local levels. 

We all know the important role healthy food plays in a child’s education. We cannot expect children to learn or excel in the classroom if they are hungry or are not 

properly nourished. 

That’s why we on the Education and the Workforce Committee have been examining child nutrition programs to ensure they are effectively and efficiently providing children access to nutritious meals. It goes without saying your commitment 

to serving students is vital to achieving that goal. 

The question we want to answer today is: are federal policies giving you the tools 

and flexibility you need to succeed in implementing child nutrition programs so that 

your students can succeed in the classroom? Based on what we have heard from 

other stakeholders, the federal role in these programs may be doing more to hinder 

your success than help it. 

Following the 2010 reauthorization of the national school lunch and breakfast programs, the Department of Agriculture issued a number regulations that expanded 

Washington’s influence over K–12 cafeterias. The department has narrowly defined 

what types of food can be served in schools and how often, the maximum number 

of calories students are allowed to eat per meal, and the price a student must pay 

per meal. 

While these regulations are well intended, states and schools are struggling to 

comply with them, and the very children we aim to serve are paying the price. 

While program costs, administrative burdens, and food waste are piling up, portion 

sizes, food offerings, and the number of students participating in the program are 

on the decline. In my home state of Indiana, for example, the number of lunches 

served each year has declined by more than six million since the regulations went 

into effect in 2012. 

I’ve heard these concerns from my colleagues and constituents, and I’ve read the 

reports from government watchdogs, but – as the saying goes – I needed to see it 

to believe it. Earlier this year, I joined students and staff for lunch at Cloverdale 

Middle School in Indiana, where food service director Billy Boyette described the 

challenges he and his staff face to provide meals that both comply with federal regulations and appeal to students. 

From firsthand experience, I can verify that despite the increased federal involvement in the school meals programs, many students are still going to class hungry. 

Furthermore, reports from the nonpartisan Government Accountability Office raise 

concerns about whether or not the resources for these programs are going to the students who need it most. 

If our shared goal is to increase student success in the classroom, and if we know 

that nutritious meals play an important role in that success, wasting limited taxpayer dollars hardly seems like a favorable outcome. 

That’s why we are here today. As education leaders who have committed themselves to serving students, you provide critical insight into what’s working and what 

isn’t and what types of policies Congress should consider as we move forward with 

reauthorization. 

It’s time to provide those responsible for implementing child nutrition programs 

with the flexibility they need to ensure taxpayer dollars are well spent and students 

are well served. I am confident learning from your experiences, observations, and 

recommendations will inform our efforts to accomplish just that. 

With that, I will now recognize the ranking member, Congresswoman Fudge, for 

her opening remarks. 

Ms. FUDGE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you all so much for being here today. As this is, I 

think, maybe our fourth or fifth hearing on nutrition, I don’t know 

what we will hear different today. But certainly I am looking forward to what you are going to say today. 

And today we are going to be examining school nutrition programs, as we have many times, from the eyes of schools and states, 

which both play an important role in providing school meals. While 

I am looking forward to hearing the testimony of our witnesses, I 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

4 

want to ensure we examine these programs from the eyes of those 

they are intended to serve, which is our children. 

Today almost one in three children is obese. Nearly 16 million 

children, one in five, live with food insecurity. While it may not be 

intuitive, children can be simultaneously obese and hungry because 

many low-income families lack access to high-quality food. 

Just as there is a federal role in ensuring every child has access 

to a quality education, no matter where they live, what they look 

like or their family’s income, there is a federal role ensuring every 

child has access to healthy and nutritious food, and is able to learn 

without the burden of hunger. 

Child obesity affects all aspects of children’s lives from their 

physical well-being to their academic success and self-confidence. 

That is why the health of our children should be a top national priority. 

For over 40 years, child nutrition programs have helped families 

who have struggled with the choices of putting food on the table 

or paying a bill. Our work to reauthorize our child nutrition programs presents a great opportunity to change the way children eat, 

to expand their access to nutritious meals, and to end the child 

hunger crisis in this country. 

We must ensure that schools have the support they need to provide high-quality meals so kids can make healthy choices. We must 

also ensure all eligible children can actually access the programs 

by removing barriers families face when enrolling in school meal 

programs. 

Today we will learn more about the work that lies ahead to provide all children with healthy, nutritious meals and to lead healthy 

and successful lives. Thanks to the reforms in the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, students across the country are experiencing a 

healthier school environment with more nutritious meal options. 

Studies show that kids are now eating up to 16 percent more 

vegetables and 23 percent more fruit at lunch. Over 90 percent of 

school systems report they are in compliance with the new federal 

standards. 

Maintaining quality standards for child nutrition programs is not 

only the right thing to do, but it is what American families overwhelmingly want. According to a recent poll by the Pew Charitable 

Trust, 90 percent, that is 9–0 percent of parents favor school meal 

standards. 

While it is important to hear from schools and states about challenges they may face in their programs, I am certain these challenges can be addressed. I thank you, and understand clearly that 

there are things that we need to fix. And we want to fix them. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

[The statement of Ms. Fudge follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Hon. Marcia L. Fudge, Ranking Member, 

Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and Secondary Education 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Today we will be examining school nutrition programs 

from the eyes of schools and states, which both play an important role in the provision of school meals. While I am looking forward to hearing the testimony of our 

witnesses, I want to ensure we examine these programs from the eyes of those they 

are intended to serve as well; our children. 

Today, almost one in three children is obese. Nearly 16 million children—one in 

five— live with food insecurity. While it may not be intuitive, children can simultaCEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

5 

neously be both obese and hungry because many low-income families lack access to 

high-quality healthy food. 

Just as there is a federal role in ensuring every child has access to a quality education regardless of where they live, what they look like, or their family’s income, 

there is a federal role in ensuring every child has access to healthy and nutritious 

food, and is able to learn without the burden of hunger. Child obesity affects all aspects of children’s lives from their physical wellbeing, to their academic success and 

self-confidence. 

That is why the health of our children should be a top national priority. For over 

forty years, child nutrition programs have helped families who have struggled with 

the choices of putting food on the table or paying a bill. Our work to reauthorize 

our child nutrition programs presents a great opportunity to change the way children eat, to expand their access to nutritious meals and to end the child hunger 

crisis in our country. 

We must ensure that schools have the support they need to provide high-quality 

meals so kids can make healthy choices. We must also ensure all eligible children 

can actually access these programs by removing barriers families face when enrolling in the school meal programs. 

Today we will learn more about the work that lies ahead to provide all children 

with healthy, nutritious and meals they need to lead healthy and successful lives. 

Thanks to the reforms in the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, students across the 

country are experiencing a healthier school environment with more nutritious meal 

options. Studies show that kids are now eating up to 16 percent more vegetables 

and 23 percent more fruit at lunch. Over 90 percent of school systems report they 

are in compliance with the new federal standards. 

Maintaining quality standards for child nutrition programs is not only the right 

thing to do, but it is what American families overwhelmingly want. According to a 

recent poll by the Pew Charitable Trusts, 90 percent of parents favor school meal 

standards. 

While it’s important to hear from schools and states about challenges they may 

have in their programs, I’m certain these challenges can be addressed. Thank you 

to our witnesses for joining us today. I look forward to hearing your testimony. 

Chairman ROKITA. I thank the gentlelady. 

First let me note that a quorum is present. Pursuant to committee rule 7(c), all members will be permitted to submit written 

statements to be included in the permanent hearing record. And 

without objection, the hearing record will remain open for the 14 

days pursuant to this hearing to allow such statements and other 

extraneous material referenced during the hearing to be submitted 

for the official hearing record. 

I will now like to turn to the introduction of our distinguished 

witnesses. And first in that regard, I welcome Representative 

Noem back to the committee to recognize her witness. 

Mrs. NOEM. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And I want to let you 

know that I certainly appreciate you allowing me to come back to 

the committee today to introduce Dr. Melody Schopp. She is our 

state secretary of education, and has been truly a good witness to 

some of the effects that we have seen across our great state. 

Dr. Schopp is a lifelong educator with 23 years of classroom 

teaching experience. She has also served as a school board member 

for 9 years. And her passion for students and preparing them for 

their postsecondary education is remarkable. 

In her role as the secretary of education, she has led South Dakota in implementation of new standards and evaluation practices 

and systems utilized throughout our state. She has a long service 

history in education. 

And I am excited to have her here today to testify on school nutrition. It is something that I have worked on the last several 

years. And she will give us a unique perspective as well as to the 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

6 

impacts this has in rural America, in smaller schools that have— 

are isolated from many more urban areas, and the challenges that 

students, teachers, school nutritionists, and parents face because of 

these new school lunch regulations, and their unique impact. 

So thank you, Dr. Schopp, for taking the time to make the long 

journey into Washington. It is not easy to get here from South Dakota. And it is not easy to get back home either. But I appreciate 

you making the trip to give us the South Dakota perspective today 

to this committee. 

With that, I yield back. 

Chairman ROKITA. I thank you, Representative Noem. 

We will now turn to Representative Allen, another valuable 

member of this committee, to introduce our next witness. 

Mr. ALLEN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And I am very pleased to introduce my friend Donna Martin. 

Donna and Stan have been—and their family have been longtime 

friends of our family. And Donna, it is so good to see you here this 

morning. 

There is nobody that knows more about nutrition in the 12th district of Georgia than Donna Martin. And Donna, thank you for 

your help over the years, particularly with our family. 

But Donna is a registered dietitian nutritionist, and is currently 

the director of the Burke County School Nutrition Program in 

Waynesboro, Georgia. She is also the past treasurer for the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics. She also sits on the School Nutrition Association Foundation board. She has worked in the area of 

school nutrition for over 23 years in both large systems with over 

38,000 students and currently in a small system with 4,500 students. 

Donna’s school system operates the National School Breakfast 

Program, the National School Lunch Program, the Afterschool AtRisk Snack Program, the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Grant Program, and the Supper Program and the Summer Feeding Program. 

Donna has long been dedicated to improving the health of her students at school by offering nutritionally balanced meals that also 

teach the students about good nutrition. 

Donna has a master’s degree in clinical nutrition from the University of Alabama in Birmingham, and a specialist’s degree in administration and supervision from Georgia Regents University in 

Augusta, Georgia. In 2006, Donna received the Summer Sunshine 

Award for the Southeastern Region of the United States from 

USDA for innovation in implementing the Summer School Nutrition Program. 

Burke County is the largest landmass county in the 12th district 

and serving meals there can be a challenge due to the distance that 

you travel in that county. And believe me I have been to every 

square inch of that county. So, Donna, I don’t know how you do it. 

Donna decided the best way to serve children was out of school 

buses that made stops throughout the county so that the kids 

would have access to summer meals. Donna has led four schools 

that receive the U.S. Healthier School Challenge Award at the Gold 

level. Congratulations on that, by the way. 

As both the representative from Georgia’s 12th district and a 

member of this committee, it is indeed my privilege to welcome you 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

7 

here today. Thank you for traveling here and offering your expert 

testimony. Thanks, Donna. Good to see you. 

Chairman ROKITA. Gentleman yields back. Thank you, Representative Allen. I will take the honor of representing the last two 

witnesses. 

First, from the great State of Indiana, Mr. John Payne is president of the Blackford School Board of Trustees in Hartford City. He 

currently serves as director for the Central Region on the National 

School Board Association’s board of directors, and has also served 

on the board of directors for the Indiana School Board Association. 

Welcome. 

And finally, Dr. Lynn Harvey is the chief for Safe and Healthy 

Schools Support Division of the School Nutrition Services for the 

North Carolina Department of Public Instruction. Dr. Harvey is responsible for the administration of the federally funded school nutrition program. She is a registered dietitian, a licensed dietitian 

and nutritionist, a fellow of the American Academy of Nutrition 

and Dietetics, and is the incoming vice president of the School Nutrition Association. 

Welcome all of you. 

I will now ask our witnesses to stand and raise your right hand 

so that you can be sworn in. 

[Witnesses sworn.] 

Let the record reflect that each witness answered in the affirmative. 

And you may be seated. And before I recognize each of you to 

provide your testimony, let me briefly explain our lighting system. 

You will each have 5 minutes to present your oral testimony. For 

the first 4 minutes the light will be green. Then that last minute 

the yellow light will switch on. And red means you are past due. 

That is more of a reminder for us than it is for you. But we try 

to stick to it. 

So I will recognize our witnesses for testimony, starting with Dr. 

Schopp. You are recognized for 5 minutes. 

TESTIMONY OF DR. MELODY SCHOPP, SECRETARY OF EDUCATION, SOUTH DAKOTA DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, 

PIERRE, SOUTH DAKOTA 

Ms. SCHOPP. Well, good morning, Chairman Rokita, Ranking 

Member Fudge, and members of the subcommittee. I am Melody 

Schopp, secretary of education for the state of South Dakota. 

It is really an honor to be here today. In particular because I am 

really passionate about this issue and something that I really care 

about deeply. 

As indicated before, I come with a lot of education experience. I 

spent a lifetime with 23 years of teaching, 9 years as a school 

board member, and 15 years within the Department of Education 

in South Dakota. And I work every single day to ensure one thing: 

that all students are ready to graduate from high school college-, 

career-, as well as life-ready. 

And I believe I know what goes into that environment to make 

that happen so that they can thrive and they can be successful. 

And that does include ensuring that students aren’t hungry or malnourished. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

8 

I want to make it very clear that I fully support the intent of the 

Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act. Giving students access to a 

healthy meal, it feeds the body, it feeds the mind and it makes 

them ready to learn. And that is supported by research as well. 

It also addresses the concerns that we all have about obesity that 

is pervasive in our country as well as in the State of South Dakota. 

I believe that one of the most valuable things we can do when a 

student walks across the stage at graduation time is not just to 

hand them the diploma, but a healthy lifestyle. 

The intentions of this act are noble. But the implementation is 

what I am here to talk about today, which is difficult, which I believe is undoing the good intentions. So I have three concerns I am 

going to share with you today. And these are very specific from the 

aspect of what a state education agency is required to do. 

Number one, the act is complex and has time-consuming review 

requirements. And as you know, the requirements have changed 

from 5 years to a 3-year review cycle. This has not resulted in identifying more problems or issues throughout the state and South 

Dakota. But instead, it has been unwieldy and overwhelming for 

my small staff. 

The paperwork burden results in excessive overtime and truly 

the inability for us to catch up and be on track. We have tried to 

address this a number of different ways. We have brought in additional help. We have used general funds to support the program. 

We have audited our work flow. And finally, we just simply aren’t 

able to dig out of the paperwork. 

Second point and equally concerning is a lack of time that we 

have in providing training on the intricacies of the act within our 

school districts. We spend instead our resources on completing administrative reviews. There is an inordinate amount of time that 

we spend in preparing for monitoring for both districts and state 

staff. Our department staff are just too busy checking the boxes 

rather than providing the technical support to the districts that 

need it the most. 

My third concern is specific to the complexity of the program for 

both state and for local agencies. In addition to the 300-page guidance manuals, just this last year there were 68 policy memos that 

were issued. While the flexibility is offered in the form of waivers, 

granting and approving waivers is intricate and very time-consuming and oftentimes difficult. 

I oversee a system of 130,000 students. I have 151 school districts. I have four technical institutes, a $630 million budget and 

many difficult issues that I deal with daily. But I spend an onerous 

amount of my time supporting my staff in this one issue, in grappling with the implementation of the school meals program. And 

that is why I am here today. 

And I don’t think these concerns are specific to South Dakota. 

My fear is of districts opting out, and already that is happening in 

South Dakota with 10 to 15 of our small, rural districts and some 

of our private school districts choosing to drop the program due to 

a number of different issues. And my greater concern is that others 

will soon follow. 

I care deeply. I want to make that very clear about making sure 

we provide nutritious meals and giving kids every opportunity to 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

9 

learn. I also care about ensuring that we are good stewards of taxpayer money. And that does mean that we need to comply with federal and with state laws. 

But instead of celebrating compliance, I really believe we should 

turn our focus to ensuring that students are hunger-free and that 

they are healthy. My hope is that Congress can reduce the amount 

of time and effort that we are spending on compliance and instead 

letting us focus on making sure that kids are well fed, which leads 

them to be well-educated and healthy, contributing adults. Thank 

you very much. 

[The testimony of Ms. Schopp follows:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

10 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 1 here 95135.001
11 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 2 here 95135.002
12 

Chairman ROKITA. Thank you for your testimony. 

Mr. Payne, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

TESTIMONY OF MR. JOHN PAYNE, PRESIDENT, BLACKFORD 

COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD OF TRUSTEES, HARTFORD CITY, 

INDIANA 

Mr. PAYNE. Chairman Kline, Senior Democratic Member Scott, 

Chairman Rokita, and Ranking Member Fudge and members of the 

subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity to testify on child nutrition, a critical issue that affects students’ health, well-being, and 

ability to learn. 

I am an elected official on the Blackford County School Board of 

Trustees in Indiana, where I have served for 22 years. I also serve 

on the Indiana School Board Association board of directors and on 

the board of the directors of the National School Board Association. 

I care very much about child nutrition, and advocate for school districts to have the flexibility needed to provide each school-aged 

child a healthy and nutritious meal. 

We know that healthy students learn better. Children and youth 

who eat nutritious food are active, stay healthier, perform better in 

school and learn behaviors that will keep them healthier throughout their lifetimes. Yet, the 2010 federal law, which aimed to improve the critical nutrition and hunger safety net for children has 

resulted in unintended consequences that challenge school districts’ 

ability to deliver on its promise. 

In my school district, students are slipping through a one-sizefits-all net, either opting out or declining to eat food that lacks appeal. Blackford County Schools is a public school corporation in 

east central Indiana located about 45 miles south of Fort Wayne 

and 90 miles northeast of Indianapolis. Blackford County is a mostly rural, heavy in agriculture and some light industry. Our board 

approves a $17.8 million budget, which includes personnel, debt 

service for buildings, capital projects, transportation, instruction, 

and school nutrition programs. 

In Blackford County, 55 percent of our 1,750 students are eligible 

for free and reduced-priced meals. For students from low-income 

families, school meals may be the best or even the only food they 

eat each day. So when students who need a proper meal are not 

eating, I am concerned. 

I would like to point out some unintended consequences and 

challenges experienced for the last few years for Blackford County 

Schools. Perhaps the most colorful example in my district is that 

students have been caught bringing in and even selling salt, pepper, and sugar in school to add taste to a perceived bland and 

tasteless cafeteria food. This contraband economy is just one example of many that reinforce the call for flexibility. 

Further, since 2012, student participation in free and reduced 

priced meals has decreased from 56 to 54 percent in my district, 

with a rise in food waste. Students are avoiding cafeteria food. 

More students bring their lunch. And a few parents even check out 

their child from campus, taking them to a local fast food restaurant 

or home for lunch. 

It is clear now with the new restrictions which students are from 

low-income households and which are not because the free and reCEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

13 

duced priced meal has no additions or extra portions, whereas the 

students able to purchase from the a-la-carte menu can obtain 

more food. 

Some kids cannot drink or dislike milk. Our district tried to provide needed calcium to those students with juice, but was cited by 

the School Nutrition Department within our state education agency 

and was forced to discontinue the practice. 

The one-size-fits-all portions may be too small for students who 

rely primarily on school meals, or active and athletic students who 

need more and resist being told to eat more broccoli to fill the void. 

Children who do not typically eat or recognize certain foods avoid 

and dispose of them. In my district, whole grain items, most of the 

broccoli, end up in the trash. 

Some food-based in-school fundraisers have been eliminated. 

The clear solution to these problems is local leadership and flexibility. When local school districts have the authority and the flexibility to make adjustments honoring the spirit and intent of the 

law, they can provide students with healthy, nutritious and appetizing meals. 

NSBA’s 2014 pulse poll on school meal requirements corroborates 

the call for flexibility with responses from nearly 650 districts in 

at least 36 states. Sixty percent said that local flexibility would 

help them provide good nutrition without harm to instruction, personnel, and other school district operations. 

In conclusion, improving the quality and expanding access to 

school meals is vital to America’s school-aged children and our nation. School districts are critical partners in the effort to assure a 

healthy and positive learning environment for the children to receive their full potential. 

The Child Nutrition Act reauthorization is an opportunity to 

firmly support local leadership. Our bottom-line objective should be 

that each school-aged child, through effective local governments, receives healthy, nutritious, and appetizing meals. 

I again thank you for your time, and am happy to respond to any 

questions. And, Mr. Chairman, if I could, I do have a written document from Wayne Township Schools in Indianapolis if I could submit it for the record. 

[The testimony of Mr. Payne follows:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

14 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 3 here 95135.003
15 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 4 here 95135.004
16 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 5 here 95135.005
17 

Chairman ROKITA. Without objection we will take that submission. Thank you for your testimony. 

Ms. Martin, you are recognized for 5 minutes. 

TESTIMONY OF MS. DONNA MARTIN, DIRECTOR, SCHOOL NUTRITION PROGRAM, BURKE COUNTY PUBLIC SCHOOLS, 

WAYNESBORO, GEORGIA 

Ms. MARTIN. Thank you. Chairman Rokita, Ranking Member 

Fudge, committee members, and my fellow distinguished panelists, 

I am honored to have the opportunity to speak before you today. 

My name is Donna Martin and I am the director of the school nutrition program for Burke County Public Schools in Georgia. 

Our program serves five schools and offers breakfast in the classroom, grab-n-go breakfast, lunch and afterschool snacks, supper, 

the fresh fruit and vegetable grant, and the summer feeding program. Our district, located near Augusta, is mostly rural and has 

a free and reduced percentage rate of 100 percent. We operate 

under the Community Eligibility Provision. 

I first entered the school nutrition field nearly 25 years ago after 

becoming a registered dietitian and working in pediatrics. It is not 

simply serving meals and counting money. 

It is conducting nutrition education with students, faculty and 

parents, planning menus that meet federal nutrition guidelines, 

working with computer systems to master your point-of-sale programs, production records, training and supervising of staff, managing a $4 million budget, writing specifications for equipment, and 

placing bids for foods. 

It means essentially running a restaurant, a PR agency, and a 

classroom all while under a tight budget with minimal time and resources. Being a food service director today is a ton of work, and 

I think it is the best job on earth. 

Burke County Schools serves nearly 4,000 meals a day and has 

a lunch participation rate of 89 percent, and a breakfast participation rate of 78 percent. We have not seen a decrease in our participation rates based on the new standards. 

We started moving to healthier foods in our district even before 

the new standards were required. And you can bet that I was nervous. But we did it gradually by introducing rolls for 25 percent 

whole wheat flour. 

You have ever been to Georgia, you know we take our fried 

chicken, biscuits, and grits incredibly seriously. So we went to work 

and developed a delicious baked herb chicken and featured locallygrown, whole-grain grits that are absolutely awesome. And yes, we 

have whole-grain biscuits, and yes our kids eat them. 

I am also incredibly proud of our Farm-to-School program that 

provides farm-fresh produce to our students, including delicious 

Georgia peaches and blueberries, that hopefully you have the opportunity to enjoy today. 

Taste those and tell me if you think a student would throw any 

of these away. Instead, they are always wishing they were getting 

more than a half-cup serving of them. We found that when we 

started offering local fresh fruits and vegetables like collards, cabbage, corn on the cob, broccoli, carrots, berries, melons, peaches, 

our consumption rates doubled. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

18 

I am also proud of how we have met the needs of our community. 

When our high school football coach came to me with concerns 

about his players not getting the fuel they needed to be successful, 

we worked together to provide dinner after practices to make sure 

they were well-nourished. As a registered dietitian, it brought me 

great joy to know they weren’t just filling up on empty calories, but 

nutritious foods that were good for them. 

I also think it is important to note that we started this program 

in 2010. The notion that high school athletes only started to get 

hungry after updated nutrition standards went into effect in 2012 

is false. They were hungry because they did not have access to food 

after school. And that was the case before and after the standards. 

When it comes to access to summer meals for kids, our rural 

community faces challenges in delivering the meals, like many 

communities do around the country. Burke County is 836 square 

miles of land, but only has 22,000 residents. Traditional feeding 

sites simply did not meet the needs of our community. 

I worked with my district and community to find solutions and 

now we run 15 bus routes and over 100 stops all over the county, 

feeding 2,500 children for 8 weeks during the summer. We are getting healthy foods to kids when they need it, and also providing 

employment for my staff during the summer. In communities like 

ours, that matters. 

Now that I have shared some of the highlights of our program, 

you are probably wondering, what is the cost of running a successful program? We are a fiscally sound program because we offer 

fresh fruits and vegetables that are in season. 

We work with our farmers to provide local fruits and vegetables 

at very competitive prices and coupled with the long shelf life of 

these products, we have very little spoilage. We use our commodity 

dollars very wisely to purchase food that helps stretch our food dollars. We also do a lot of scratch cooking, which controls the cost 

of the food and the sodium content of the food. 

I am not here to tell you that it is easy. But I am here to tell 

you that it is possible to meet nutrition standards and be financially solvent. 

We could do better for our students if reimbursement rates were 

increased to accommodate rising food costs; and if there were supplemental funding for equipment and training needs. But we would 

do worse for them if we lowered the bar to accommodate the cost 

by not serving them what they need to grow and achieve. 

In closing, I thank each of you for taking the time to listen to 

our story from Burke County Schools and for your commitment to 

students around the country through child nutrition programs. 

I respectfully ask each of you to keep our children’s best interests 

in mind as you move forward with the reauthorization of child nutrition programs that impact so many children across the country. 

We demand the best of our schools, and for our students in every 

other part of the campus. And our cafeteria should be no different. 

Thank you once again, Chairman Rokita, Ranking Member 

Fudge, and committee members. I would be happy to respond to 

any questions that you may have. 

[The testimony of Ms. Martin follows:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

19 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 6 here 95135.006
20 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 7 here 95135.007
21 

Chairman ROKITA. Thank you very much, Ms. Martin. And we 

will now recognize Dr. Harvey for 5 minutes. 

TESTIMONY OF DR. LYNN HARVEY, CHIEF, SCHOOL NUTRITION SERVICES, SAFE AND HEALTHY SCHOOLS SUPPORT DIVISION, NORTH CAROLINA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC INSTRUCTION, RALEIGH, NORTH CAROLINA 

Ms. HARVEY. Thank you, Chairman Rokita, Ranking Fudge, 

other members of the committee. We appreciate the opportunity to 

discuss the cost of meeting nutrition standards for school meals 

and snacks. I have submitted more extensive written comments 

and examples from across the country to support my remarks 

today. 

It is an honor to represent the North Carolina Department of 

Public Instruction. The department oversees the school nutrition 

programs in all 115 school districts. And we have the privilege of 

serving nearly 1.5 million students. 

North Carolina’s public schools were among the first to comply 

with the nutrition standards, meeting the USDA’s target date of 

June 30, 2013. Despite the robust level of compliance, school officials are concerned about the impact of new regulations that, while 

well intended, have increased the complexity of the programs and 

created unintended consequences. 

Compliance provides schools an additional 6 cents per reimbursable lunch. However, 6 cents is not sufficient to support the lunch 

requirements, let alone the cost of serving more whole grains and 

fruit at breakfast, for which no additional funds have been provided. 

Compliance has come at a significant cost for schools in North 

Carolina, and more important, for students. Student participation 

in school meals has declined by 5 percent under the new rules. 

Over 90 percent of school nutrition directors report the requirement for all grains to be whole-grain rich, is the leading cause of 

student dissatisfaction. While student acceptance of some wholegrain products like breads and rolls has been encouraging, student 

acceptance of other products, like biscuits and crackers, has been 

dismal. 

For 2 years, school nutrition directors have offered these items 

under ideal conditions, and have encouraged students to try them. 

Yet, students continue to reject them because their taste, texture, 

and appearance are quite different from that to which they are accustomed. Students refer to these foods as ‘‘imitation foods’’ and tell 

us they are unpalatable, and therefore unacceptable. 

Biscuits, as you have heard are popular breakfast items in our 

state. Student satisfaction with whole-grain rich biscuits has led to 

a decline in breakfast participation in 60 percent of our school districts. No amount of training or technical assistance for schools can 

change students’ distaste for foods that look and taste unappealing 

to them. 

Thanks to the whole-grain waivers provided by Congress in the 

omnibus appropriations bill, North Carolina has granted 110 waivers, covering over 2,300 schools. The waivers allow the districts to 

balance the requirement for whole-grain rich and enriched grain 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

22 

products. Districts that have implemented the waivers are reporting a rebound in student participation, especially at breakfast. 

Another source of student dissatisfaction is the lack of flavor as 

a result of the sodium requirements. Schools have made tremendous efforts to make meals more flavorful. Yet students tell us lowsodium foods simply do not taste good. And as a result, many are 

choosing to skip school meals altogether. 

We have also seen an increase in food waste, as students are 

forced to take items they do not like and do not intend to eat. The 

level of waste is disturbing in a state where nearly 60 percent of 

students are economically disadvantaged, and 27 percent of students experience hunger on a regular basis. 

Another unintended consequence has been the loss of a-la-carte 

revenues under the Smart Snacks requirement. The Smart Snacks 

compliance has been staggering in North Carolina with over $20 

million in lost revenues this year. Nutritious, appealing a-la-carte 

menus should be a convenient part of the school dining experience, 

while simultaneously providing a critical revenue source for school 

nutrition programs in the absence of other funding. 

These and other conditions are emerging to create significant financial challenges. Over half the school nutrition programs in 

North Carolina are operating at a revenue loss. The average loss 

is nearly $2.5 million. Since implementation of the new standards, 

the average month’s operating balance for school nutrition programs has been steadily declining. 

Twenty school districts have negative operating balances in their 

school nutrition programs, such that local education funds must be 

used to keep the programs financially solvent. Another 21 have less 

than 1 month’s operating balance, and will be unable to pay their 

monthly obligations at the beginning of the school year without 

support from the district’s General Education Fund. 

As you begin the process of reauthorizing the child nutrition programs, we would respectfully request the following flexibilities as 

a means of enabling local school nutrition directors to operate programs that promote optimum student participation that includes, 

of course, the consumption of nutritious, appealing foods while ensuring the financial self-sufficiency and sustainability of these programs. 

First, please make the current waivers for whole-grain rich products permanent, thus requiring half of all grains to be whole-grain 

rich. Second, maintain the current Target 1 sodium levels until 

such time as scientific evidence is clear about the role of sodium 

in the diets of children and adolescents. Third, require schools to 

offer as many fruits and vegetables as possible, and allow students 

to select as much as they will eat. But do not force students to take 

a fruit or vegetable. And finally, modify the Smart Snack standards 

to allow any food or beverage served as part of the reimbursable 

meal to be served as an a-la-carte item. 

Our goal in North Carolina is to operate the school nutrition programs in a manner that reflects our commitment to nutritional, 

operational, and financial integrity. Thank you for your consideration of our requests. 

[The testimony of Dr. Harvey follows:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

23 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 8 here 95135.008
24 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 9 here 95135.009
25 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 10 here 95135.010
26 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 11 here 95135.011
27 

Chairman ROKITA. Thank you, Dr. Harvey. 

We will now recognize members for 5 minutes worth of questioning. I appreciate that Chairman Kline was able to be here for 

this hearing. I am going to hold my question to the end in order 

to accommodate as many fellow members as I can. That brings us 

to the gentleman from Florida, who is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. CURBELO. And I thank the chairman for his leadership on 

this issue, and for giving us so many opportunities to explore these 

programs as we prepare for potential reauthorization. And I would 

like to thank all of you for your time here today. 

I spent a little over 4 years on the Miami-Dade County Public 

School Board, so I am familiar with the challenges that school districts and local communities face. And what I wanted to ask is, I 

am looking here. We have six federal child nutrition programs, 

each with their own rules, eligibility criteria, requirements, compliance requirements. 

In my mind, a more simply system, perhaps fewer programs, less 

regulation, would help school districts and really schools—we are 

talking about principals better manage their schools and do everything in their power to make sure that kids aren’t hungry and that 

they are getting you know a healthy diet. 

What are some of your ideas for how we could reform this system, perhaps collapsing some of these programs, consolidating 

them, and giving our school districts, our states the opportunity to 

figure out what the best way to address this obesity crisis that we 

have, the fact that some kids are hungry, which we cannot ignore? 

If you all could kind of give me your—in 30 seconds or in 1 

minute, your ideal framework for these federal nutrition programs? 

We can start here. 

Ms. SCHOPP. I would be happy to begin. 

I think you said it well in your opening statement about the 

number of different programs and the regulations that need to be 

more succinct and put together. So one of those things that we are 

seeing is that the multitude of regulations that we have to interpret and help school districts interpret takes away time from really 

implementing the program with fidelity. So definitely, number one 

would be that piece of it is really reducing those amount of oversight. 

The second thing, from a state agency perspective, but I think 

the school districts feel the same. The requirements for the 3-year 

cycle for reviews really is overwhelming for the amount of time 

that we spend preparing rather than just implementing the program. 

And I made a—I think the best example I have of that, one of 

my tiny districts stated that they spent more time, more hours preparing for the review than they have students in their district 

spent 100 hours preparing. They have 90 kids in their district. So 

we need to be thinking about ways in which we can address that 

and be more logical in our approach to the reauthorization. 

Mr. CURBELO. Thank you. 

Mr. PAYNE. Yes, sir. And echoes through our local school board 

members and other districts in Indiana is just some flexibility, and 

whether that means a consolidation of some programs or just some 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

28 

flexibility at the local level to make these meals appealing, not ignoring the nutrition and healthy part of that. 

We want to provide healthy, nutritious meals, and that is important, but some local flexibility to increase the appeal so that these 

children are eating their lunches and not throwing them away, or 

parts of it. 

Ms. MARTIN. I think what I would like to see is some seamless 

integration between the Child and Adult Care Food Programs that 

operate the supper and afterschool snack programs with school districts, making it much easier for them to operate both programs 

and not have to go through two different agencies, two different accrediting bodies. 

And the same thing like we did with the seamless summer programs, combining those together, making it easier, if you have a 

school nutrition program that you can already operate all those 

programs, because it takes a lot of time and effort to apply for all 

those things and go through all the different auditing things. 

The other thing we are seeing is school nutrition directors working with lots of different smaller systems, helping them be successful in their programs. So they are mentoring them. And SNA and 

USDA has got a lot of great training programs out there, and the 

National School Food Service Management Institute is doing these 

mentoring programs. 

And I think it will help these people be successful, because there 

are a lot of us that are successful. We just need to bring up those 

people that are not successful. 

Ms. HARVEY. Thank you. And I would echo Dr. Schopp’s comments about the administrative review process. Integrity is important to the program. But a process that would enable us to identify 

those school districts or those school food authorities at greatest 

risk, and review those more frequently would be more helpful, instead of reviewing everyone every 3 years because it is part of the 

review cycle. 

I would also echo Ms. Martin’s comments that a seamless transition between the school nutrition programs and the Child and 

Adult Care Food Program would be important. For example, in 

North Carolina, two distinct agencies operate these programs, for 

important reasons. If a school district is authorized by one agency 

to participate in the federally funded programs, it should be a simple transition to operate the program operated from another state 

agency. 

Mr. CURBELO. Thank you— 

Chairman ROKITA. The gentleman’s time is expired. 

Mr. CURBELO. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman ROKITA. I thank the gentleman. 

Ranking member of the full committee, Mr. Scott is recognized 

for 5 minutes. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Ms. Martin, it is my understanding that 90 to 95 percent of 

school divisions report that they are in compliance with the new 

standards. What would happen if we reduced the standards? 

Ms. MARTIN. Well, I don’t think there is any parent out there 

that doesn’t want the best nutrition for their child. And I also don’t 

think there is any taxpayer out there that doesn’t want their fedCEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

29 

eral dollars going to the best nutrition that we can provide for 

these kids. 

I think the future health of our kids is one of our most important 

commodities. And I think that it is so important. We know that scientific evidence says that kids need more fruits and vegetables, and 

need more whole grains. 

We know that. And so to turn around and say that we are not 

going to require the kids to pick up a fruit or vegetable, I just know 

when kids are encouraged to pick it up, they have a much better 

chance of eating it when it is on their plate than when they are 

sitting down and somebody else is eating delicious blueberries, and 

they go oh I wish I would have gotten those, it is too late. 

So I think you do things by cutting up the fruit, making it appealing, offering fresh local things and working with your farmers. 

And our farmers are so excited about this Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program that we have going and that kids are eating more 

fruits and vegetables. 

We need to help our farmers. And this is such a great way to 

help them by getting and increasing the consumption like Representative Fudge said. So, I think it would be a disservice for us 

to go back. 

Mr. SCOTT. And if we did go back, would you think most of the 

school divisions would in fact lower their standards? 

Ms. MARTIN. Well, I think there are a lot of great people out 

there like these school districts. We are going to—I am going to 

continue to do what we have been doing no matter what because 

I think it is the best thing for the children. 

I think there are a lot of school nutrition directors that are also 

the maintenance director and the transportation director and they 

are over several different programs. And their heart is not necessarily in school nutrition. 

Sometimes it is a principal that didn’t do a good job. So they said 

let him be the school nutrition director or her be the school nutrition director. And so they would be happy to serve the kids pizza 

and french fries. Nobody would complain and it would be cheap 

and easy. 

So I think that we need to ensure that does not happen. 

Mr. SCOTT. And are there some long-term costs that are incurred 

when you do not provide good nutrition? 

Ms. MARTIN. Oh my gosh. We are all dealing with health care 

costs right now. That is one of the biggest risks that this country 

is facing. And we have the opportunity here to change a generation. 

We have an opportunity to raise kids that when they go into 

McDonalds, they want a whole wheat hamburger bun. And I was 

just at the Subway at the airport. Everybody was buying whole 

wheat bread. And I said, wouldn’t this be great if this was what 

everybody was like? 

So we have such a tremendous opportunity to make a difference 

in the long-term healthcare costs of this nation, just by teaching 

our kids to be lifelong good eaters. So yes, it is a financial—I say 

put the money in up front instead of later on when they are overweight, diabetics, hypertensive, heart disease, and needing gastric 

bypass. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

30 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you. 

Now, the need for good nutrition doesn’t stop when the summer 

starts. What can we do to encourage more programs to participate 

in the summer program? 

Ms. MARTIN. Well, we need to be creative. And that is what we 

did in Burke County. And I am seeing more and more school systems being creative by getting buses and transforming them into 

food trucks. 

They are going to libraries. They are going to rec departments. 

We have considered putting a bus in our local Walmart so that the 

kids when they come to Walmart can have lunch. 

Our kids start asking about summer feeding at the end of the 

year. They start asking the bus drivers, when is it going to start? 

They get so excited about it. 

It also helps our little kids get ready to come to school because 

they like the bus drivers and it is a very positive experience for 

them. And our local farmers are so thrilled because we are serving 

their blueberries and their peaches. And our schools—when we do 

our school lunch, we are doing corn on the cob and other fresh 

fruits and vegetables. 

So our farmers are benefiting and our staff is working. And it is 

just a fabulous program in our county. We are also offering educational opportunities for the kids, getting them caught up. 

They will come to summer school because of breakfast and lunch. 

And our graduation rates, like every other school system, are important to us. And when we can get them there to learn, and if 

they are coming for breakfast and lunch, I am okay with that, and 

so are the teachers okay with that. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you. 

Dr. Schopp, you mentioned the administrative expenses. Can you 

say a word about what community eligibility does for reducing administrative expenses? 

Ms. SCHOPP. The Community Eligibility Program has been great 

for South Dakota. But what I want to really emphasize here is that 

this is—my solution to this entire thing is I need to clone Ms. Martin. I need 151 of her in the State of South Dakota, which is not 

possible. 

And so I think the issue is not about—I am all about the whole— 

I am all about the healthy meals. I am all about promoting that 

within the state. The issue is that the technical assistance we can 

provide, and I am going to take you to South Dakota, I want to give 

you this picture of a reservation school that is not only isolated, but 

is 150 miles from the nearest Walmart, when I don’t have those opportunities to provide bussing services for those children in the 

most remote areas. So I would love to speak more about that piece. 

Chairman ROKITA. Gentleman’s time is expired. I thank the gentleman. 

The gentleman from Wisconsin is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Thank you much. Thanks much. I am kind of 

new on the job here. When I ran I kind of ran on the idea that 

Washington wasn’t necessarily good at doing a lot of things. And 

I will tell you, this committee has taught me that more than anything. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

31 

I mean you know we hear about the VA and how the government 

can’t run a hospital, and TSA and how they can’t find the gun that 

is being snuck on board. But not—to force you to serve food that 

hungry kids throw out maybe tops the list of things the Federal 

Government—evidence that the Federal Government shouldn’t be 

doing things. 

I have a question. I will start with you, Dr. Schopp. If we got rid 

of these rules and just gave money to South Dakota, say the average amount of dollars they got the last 3 years, to serve lunch, do 

you think you would be able to come up with a way to serve 

healthy, tasteful lunches to your children? 

Ms. SCHOPP. I want to emphasize again that I don’t believe that 

the money is going to solve the issue of where our concerns are 

with requirements to the program. So, I don’t know. A person who 

is in the food service—as a food service director feels passionately 

about making sure the kids are fed well, have healthy meals, et 

cetera. That is bottom line for all of this. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Great— 

Ms. SCHOPP. The message that we have is that we just really 

need to make sure that we are being logical in our approach to 

make an effort— 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Right. I will maybe restate the question. I don’t 

know how much South Dakota got last year toward their breakfast 

and lunch programs. What do you think $10 million? I don’t know. 

Just take a number out of the year. 

Ms. SCHOPP. Probably less. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Okay. Would you think it would be an improvement for you or easier for you if rather than having all these requirements and paperwork, if we just cut the State of South Dakota a check for $10 million or $5 million or whatever and let you 

serve the kids with whatever you felt was appropriate for lunch. 

I mean people have been serving lunch to hungry children for 

thousands of years. It is not rocket science. You know in elementary school we learned you know fruits, vegetables, dairy, grain, 

meats, I mean that sort of thing. Do you think you would be able 

to handle it if we just wrote you a check? 

Ms. SCHOPP. Thank you. I believe that the concern is exactly 

what you are saying, is that this is not a one-size fits all program 

that we have across. And so I believe that individual states are 

able to make those decisions based on good practice, et cetera. So 

giving the state the dollars it would need, I believe that they could 

manage the program effectively, but still focusing on the fact that 

we need to serve the healthy meals to our children. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Thank you. 

Same thing for you, Mr. Payne. 

Mr. PAYNE. I think that the biggest thing in that would be that 

local flexibility in our states. Yes, the money is nice. I actually have 

our cafeteria fund in our local districts—in my local district is 

healthy. It is not a money issue for us personally. But the local 

flexibility is the biggest thing that they would need to do that. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Right. And I don’t think we are going to reduce 

the amount of money for school lunches. I am just saying, if instead 

of giving you all this paperwork, all these mandates, we just said 

here, State of Indiana, here is a check, would that make it easier 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

32 

for you to operate and your children more likely get food that they 

eat rather than throwing out? 

Mr. PAYNE. Yes. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Thank you. 

And Ms. Harvey, or Dr. Harvey, same question for you. 

Ms. HARVEY. Thank you. I think it is important to have a uniform system of accountability so that there is accountability for our 

taxpayer dollars. As you have heard, what we need are modest 

modifications in the rules to enable us to provide foods that children like and will accept. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. So you don’t think in North—you think North 

Carolina does need federal bureaucrats to tell your kids what to 

eat? 

Ms. HARVEY. We certainly would appreciate the flexibility from 

this body to make those modifications that we see are pertinent for 

those cultural food habits particularly. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Okay. I will follow up with Congressman Scott’s 

question. So in other words, you feel without these mandates the 

people who run the North Carolina schools would wind up serving 

unhealthy, fattening foods to the kids? 

Ms. HARVEY. Not at all. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. They need our assistance to tell them what to 

do? 

Ms. HARVEY. They are extremely committed to nutritional integrity in their programs. I think that people do look forward to the 

opportunity to operate consistently. This affects the marketplace so 

that there are products in the school nutrition procurement pipeline, if you will, that every state can choose to utilize. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Doesn’t the North Carolina Department of Public Instruction, couldn’t they provide for that uniformity on their 

own without the federal government telling them how to be uniform? 

Ms. HARVEY. We—again, we appreciate the partnership among 

the federal, state, and local as we look at the preamble to the National School Lunch Act. It is intended to be a partnership among 

federal, state, and local governments. And perhaps we all need to 

revisit our commitment to that initial promise from 1946. 

Mr. GROTHMAN. Okay, one final comment for you all. When you 

go back home you can also talk to your government teachers in the 

high schools—you can make sure that for the next generation of 

congressmen they do a good job of educating the children as to 

what would be the federal role or the state role or our local school 

district role in our government. 

Chairman ROKITA. Thank the gentleman. The gentleman’s time 

is expired. 

Gentleman from California is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. TAKANO. Good morning, everyone. And I get a sense from all 

of you that you have really the health of our children and young 

people. And I sense that from every single one of you at the table 

there. 

Dr. Harvey, can you tell me—thank you for your testimony. 

Thank you for your hard work in bringing North Carolina schools 

into compliance with the meal standards. I sense that you are not 

saying that you are against federal rules and federal standards. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

33 

You want to fine tune them. You want to refine them so that you 

can work with them. 

But you—I saw you nodding your head a lot during the comments of Ms. Martin. Have you been able to make use of the buying power of these districts? Or have your districts made use of the 

buying power to support your local farmers for these fresh fruits 

and vegetables in the way that Ms. Martin has in her area? Do you 

have stories like that to tell us? 

Ms. HARVEY. We do indeed. We have a very successful Farm-toSchool program. One of our concerns, however, as state participation has declined, you are perhaps aware that student participation 

is tied to our commodity entitlement. 

As that student participation has declined, our commodity entitlement, which gives us purchasing power for both national commodities, but to purchase locally grown fresh produce as well, has 

declined by $3.4 million. So our ability to purchase in the marketplace has been somewhat limited— 

Mr. TAKANO. It is because of student participation and not eating 

the things that you are putting before them? 

Ms. HARVEY. Well, that—it is because they are choosing not to 

eat— 

Mr. TAKANO. Choosing not to eat? 

Ms. HARVEY.—meals at school. 

Mr. TAKANO. Have you tried—you know, have you system wide 

tried things like salad bars, and position those salad bars first, the 

way that my school district has, so that the students are encouraged to choose the healthy choices first? And that is not—those 

sorts of strategies aren’t working? 

Ms. HARVEY. They are working quite well. 

Mr. TAKANO. Okay. 

Ms. HARVEY. We have always, being an agricultural state, offered 

an abundance of fresh fruits and vegetables. Our students continue 

to select those. 

Where we are challenged is at the point of service where we have 

to force a student to take a food that he or she does not intend to 

eat. That becomes our issue. We want to continue to offer an abundance of fresh fruits and vegetables, and encourage students to select as much as they will eat. We just don’t want to force children 

to take a food that they will not eat. 

Mr. TAKANO. I understand. 

There is a question I wanted to ask about—well, Ms. Martin, I 

want to kind of turn to you a little bit about this. 

We have heard a lot about—in the testimony today about broccoli. And it is kind of related to this question. I mean I think 

George Bush doesn’t like broccoli, right? I forgot which of our Presidents spoke—disparaged broccoli. 

But we all want to know—we all know broccoli is good for us. 

You talk about your consumption rates of broccoli doubling. And 

while we heard others say they throw it away. Can you answer for 

us? It is a familiar question to all parents. How do you get kids 

to eat broccoli? 

Ms. MARTIN. Oh my gosh. That is not that hard. If you give them 

ranch dressing, they will eat anything. 

[Laughter.] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

34 

And we make the most delicious fat-free ranch dressing with our 

nonfat dry milk and our low-fat mayonnaise. So they love broccoli. 

We also put it in our stir fry. And so they come in the next day. 

If there is any stir fry left, they eat it there. 

And what we do to encourage fruits and vegetables is we do 

packaged salads every day. We don’t do salad bars. We do packaged salads every day, which have romaine lettuce and spinach in 

it, which means they get their dark green vegetable. 

And when they take that entree salad, they have already got 

their vegetable, they have got their meat and they have got their 

crackers in there. And so they are ready to go. 

We also do red beans and rice. We do fruit and cheese plates. So 

sometimes they pick up the entree and they already have their 

fruit or vegetable. And so we are not having to encourage them. 

What we do have a problem with sometimes is they have loaded 

up so many fruits and vegetables on their tray that they cannot 

balance their trays— 

[Laughter.] 

Because we do so many choices. So, instead of doing 1,000 

servings of cantaloupe, we do 400 servings of strawberries and 400 

servings of oranges and 400 servings of cantaloupe— 

Ms. MARTIN.—and all those different things. 

Mr. TAKANO. Let me just get to the—my signal light—my time 

is slipping away here. But you talk about a lot more scratch cooking. 

Ms. MARTIN. Right. 

Mr. TAKANO. And I know Dr. Schopp talked about I could use a 

lot of Dr. Martins or Ms. Martins in her state. 

Ms. MARTIN. Right. 

Mr. TAKANO. I am wondering if there is a human resource challenge. Because my food service director of my largest school district 

talks about employing people more full time because we are doing 

more scratch cooking, all the fresh purchasing. I imagine trying to 

get that personnel is a challenge. 

Dr. Martin, you are kind of—Dr. Schopp, you are nodding your 

head about that. I mean? 

Ms. SCHOPP. Definite challenge in our state just due to geographic challenges, number one. The individuals who I just, you 

know, serving on a school board for a number of years and being 

in a school, a lot of times the people who have stepped into those 

positions as food service directors don’t have the experience and 

don’t have the background. 

And even with the amount of training that we try to provide, it 

is exactly where I go back to. As a state agency we are spending 

all of our time in compliance— 

Mr. TAKANO. My time is running out. But I would love to explore 

this challenge a little more about how we help states like yours— 

Chairman ROKITA. Gentleman is correct. Gentleman’s time has 

expired. I thank the gentleman. 

Gentleman from Virginia is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Mr. BRAT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Let me get this over here a little bit. I kind of give the same preamble to all my remarks. Even if the press says I ask long-winded 

questions. But I will try to make the preamble very short. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

35 

In 16 years we run out of all federal revenues for all discretionary programs, under current law. And it is nothing the budget 

committee can change. 

So the budget committee currently has discretion over about onethird of the budget. In 16 years it is zero. So, all federal revenues 

will be taken up by about four programs, plus interest costs coming 

up. 

So that is the window we are operating within. And part of that 

is due to the entitlement issues. And you can go to the Medicare 

Board of Trustees and look it up and they will say we are insolvent, a federal program, major federal program, by 2032. Social Security Board of Trustees, insolvent. 

So the federal program, great intentions, but bad at math. Right? 

Great intentions setting up all these programs. It is pretty simple 

if you look at the years what our solutions have to be on those programs. 

Now, let me just—I will just read you a paragraph related to this 

program. And it will take a minute. And then I will be done, and 

if each of you want to give 30 seconds kind of response to this. But 

it fits within the broader context of us going south on the finances. 

Since the implementation of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act 

in 2010, federal costs and involvement in the school meals program 

have increased. In 2010 the National School Lunch Program cost 

$10.6 billion. In 2014 it cost $12.6 billion, so from $10.6 billion to 

$12.6 billion in a couple years. 

And since the feds issued their final regulation nutrition standards in the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs 

in 2012, compliance costs and burdens on schools and states have 

dramatically increased, with food nutrition service estimating compliance costs of $3.2 billion by 2016. 

At the same time, a GAO report found that participation in the 

National School Lunch Program declined, participation declined by 

1.2 million students from 2010–2011, to 2012–2013, while the costs 

are going up by over $1 billion. 

So costs to the taxpayers are going up by the billions. Cost to the 

states have gone up. Compliance cost to the schools have gone up 

by the billions. And participation of students has gone down. Cost 

more, does less. 

Can any of you relate to these numbers in terms of federal logic 

coming down to the state level? Do these numbers make sense to 

you? Just give me your input in 30 seconds each. Start with Dr. 

Schopp— 

Ms. SCHOPP. Mr. Brat, quickly; this was just timely the other 

day. One of my school districts, my largest school district’s headline 

was ‘‘Mitchell School District lunch prices could see an increase.’’ 

Costs of the lunch went up $0.15 per meal. 

The federal regulations quote from the superintendent, ‘‘dampened participation rates in the National School Lunch Program,’’ 

and down by 79 percentage points in five of the largest schools in 

his district. And he attributed to federal mandates, ongoing deficits 

in the meal program. So it is a very specific example for my state. 

Mr. BRAT. Thank you. Thank you. 

Mr. PAYNE. Yes, sir. From my state I see that the one thing that 

our district is focusing on right now is more professional developCEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

36 

ment for those food service workers. So those costs are going to increase. Even though we are healthy now, we see that increasing, 

and also with the fresh fruits and vegetables, which we want to 

bring in, and will. 

Those are—that is all going to cost more money. So and then if 

the federal funding is decreased, now you are going to be increasing lunch costs to those students. And where it is going to affect 

is the low income or students in poverty. That is who it is going 

to affect. 

Mr. BRAT. And so you are saying some of the cost increase is due 

to professional development, training and personnel? 

Mr. PAYNE. Yes. 

Mr. BRAT. That is a driver of—I mean we just want some hints 

as to how to get more money to the kids. 

Mr. PAYNE. Sure. 

Mr. BRAT. And Ms. Martin? 

Ms. MARTIN. Representative Brat, I would probably suggest that 

probably you don’t go to the grocery story very often. And if any 

of you in here do go to the grocery store, you realize food costs have 

increased. 

Mr. BRAT. Oh yes. I am a Walmart shopper. My constituents 

know me in aisle three. 

Ms. MARTIN. Okay. Okay. So that has been what we have seen 

been one of the biggest drivers in our costs is just—and I go to the 

grocery store, too. 

But we are also seeing health care costs for our—I have all fulltime employees, and it costs me $9,000 a year per employee for 

their health care. And that is one of the reasons they choose to 

work for school nutrition is for health care. So that is a huge, huge 

driver. 

And I think that some of the participation rates come from the 

fact that parents are struggling financially. And if they have to pay 

$2.50 for a lunch they will say, I will do a Lunchable for $1.00 and 

be to the good. 

Mr. BRAT. Thank you. Thank you. These are all helpful. These 

are—thank you. 

Ms. HARVEY. Investing in the health and wellbeing of our nation’s children is one of the most important investments we can 

make. We know that hungry children cannot learn. They don’t perform their best in the classroom. They don’t grow up to graduate 

from high school and go on to be responsible citizens and ultimately taxpayers. 

We all benefit when we nourish children the best we can. 

Chairman ROKITA. Gentleman’s time is expired. I thank the gentleman. 

Gentlelady from Massachusetts recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. CLARK. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And thank you to all the 

panelists. 

And Dr. Harvey, appreciate the comments you just made because 

I really see all of you as partners in education. It is more than just 

feeding kids who happen to be at a school building. It is really 

about how do we have healthy students ready to learn. And you are 

an integral part of that. So I appreciate it. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

37 

And I also want to congratulate you, Dr. Harvey. Coming from 

a state where 89 percent of the school districts are fully compliant 

with school nutritional standards, you are really setting a high bar 

in North Carolina. And we appreciate it. 

I am also a huge consumer in my family with three teenage boys, 

of school lunches. And I have a devout and strict pizzatarian in my 

middle son. 

[Laughter.] 

And so I wanted to talk to you a little bit and explore with you 

a little bit more about the a-la-carte menu. 

One of my concerns is that we have done all this work in trying 

to make sure that there are good choices available. And I know 

that my son, if he could get pizza with a side of tater tots, will do 

that. And I do also want to express the power of ranch dressing as 

an amazing, amazing vehicle. 

But I—so I am concerned that we would be inadvertently creating a loophole in trying to expand a-la-carte items that are offered when we are—you know we would be getting around looking 

at that balanced meal all together, which is so much of the work 

that you are doing. And we want to work around flexibility to make 

that happen. 

But you know, I think the issue really does come down to being 

able to keep this program, keeping up with food prices and commodities, and also making sure that we can keep the price something that our low-income families can afford so they don’t choose 

the $1.00 Lunchable, that they come and take part. 

Do you see the a-la-carte? Has it really come down to reimbursement? Is that where this issue is? 

Ms. HARVEY. We certainly agree with you. And any option, the 

reimbursable meal or the a-la-carte meal, we want to offer the students the most nutritious options available to them. 

So a serving of a pizza that is made according to school nutrition 

specifications that is a very nutrient dense product with a side 

salad would be quite appealing to many students. One day they 

may not like the item on the reimbursable menu. This gives them 

another option. 

We hear from students as well who have greater calorie needs, 

athletes for example, who participate in the reimbursable meal program, but then would like a little something else to tide them over 

because their energy needs are much greater, given that point in 

their lives. So I think work with our menu planners to help them 

understand that we want to continue to offer a wide variety in both 

the reimbursable meal and the a-la-carte meal would be very helpful. 

We do depend upon the revenues from a-la-carte meal sales in 

North Carolina. There are no state funds to support the program. 

So we have essentially the paying price and we have federal reimbursement. It is just not possible to make the program financially 

solvent with those two revenue sources. 

So we want to combine our commitment to children’s health and 

well-being with the ability to generate additional revenues so as to 

prevent these programs from having become dependent upon those 

general education funds. 

Ms. MARTIN. And could I add something along those lines? 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

38 

Ms. CLARK. Sure. 

Ms. MARTIN. We have the issue with the athletes that were always saying they were hungry. So we developed a program where 

we actually give all of our athletes little menus. And it tells them 

every day which items are highest in calories so they can maximize 

their calories. 

And we also have athletes who need to lose weight. And so they 

also know which ones are the lowest in calories. So they carry their 

menus around at breakfast and lunch so they know what to eat. 

And we have offered the afterschool snack program for them, trying to give them extra calories. So we give them these peanut butter and jelly bars that they call crack bars. They love them so 

much, 290 calories, and a carton of chocolate milk. So they get over 

400 calories just for a snack that helps them get through to practice. 

So we have put point-of-sale nutrition labeling on everything so 

that our teachers love that and our kids know what they are getting, if they want more calories, if they want less calories, they are 

informed about how to do it. 

Ms. CLARK. You know, you have brought up your snack program. 

I have been very impressed with what you have been able to do 

with weekend meals, summer meals, snack programs. 

You know our food insecurity issues among children in this country, the richest country in the world, are shocking and deplorable. 

What do you feel, of any of those programs—is there one that 

stands out to you as one of the best ways to get at food insecurity? 

Chairman ROKITA. Gentlelady’s time is expired. If you want to 

take 5 seconds you can go ahead. 

Ms. MARTIN. Okay. I think supper for getting our kids to come 

after school and increase their graduation rates. And then I think 

summer, the food insecurity issue is huge. So it is a tossup between 

those two, sorry. 

Chairman ROKITA. I thank the gentlelady. Gentlelady’s time is 

expired. 

I will recognize myself for 5 minutes for some questioning. Before 

I get to some specific ones, I just want to—sometimes I find myself 

having to clear up the record. I just want to be certain of this. 

Each one of you supports serving healthy meals to kids, correct? 

Chairman ROKITA. Okay. Let the record reflect each answered in 

the affirmative. 

And the concerns you raised today in the flexibility that I understand all, if not most of you are asking for, is simply to make the 

program work in your schools and for students, right? 

Chairman ROKITA. Correct? And the answer to—all answered 

again in the affirmative. 

Okay. Appreciate everyone’s testimony. 

Ms. Martin, you talked about changing a generation. I appreciate 

that very much. I think it is—while we are all hearing the benefits, 

the preventative medicine, so to speak, of doing this early in life. 

I can believe in those things. In fact we are trying to reform other 

programs in those same regards, whether it is Medicaid, Medicare, 

or Social Security. 

You also talked about—or you worried about lowering the bar. 

These others have talked about flexibility. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

39 

And it seems to me the way I interpret the testimony, not just 

yours but others’ piece of testimony that I have heard in other 

hearings, is that if we don’t have these federal regulations, if we 

don’t have this oversight that Dr. Harvey alludes to or talks directly about from the federal level, then we are going to automatically lower the bar. And I just don’t know if that is accurate. It 

seems to—you know you are saying that if you give flexibility we 

are lowering the bar. 

Dr. Schopp, you are nodding your head. 

Ms. SCHOPP. I— 

Chairman ROKITA. What do you think? I mean— 

Ms. SCHOPP. I truly don’t believe that—I don’t think that—specific to where I am here today is not to take away the fact that we 

want to feed healthy meals. And not lowering the bar, but simply 

to be logical in the way that we are requiring compliance with the 

requirements that are currently within the act. And I truly don’t 

believe that there would be an intention to go back to serving chili 

and caramel rolls on Fridays in our school district, as we used to 

do. 

So I believe that federal oversight does not drive what good practices are now being implemented. And I don’t think that is the concern about the healthy requirements. My concern, again, is very 

specific to the amount of paperwork, compliance regulations that 

are making it very difficult for us to really support our districts in 

implementing good practices within their schools, and making sure 

that our students in all of our school districts, which are again so 

varied across the nation. 

I don’t have the fresh fruits and vegetables available to me in 

some of my very— 

Chairman ROKITA. There was another question. Yes, I appreciate 

that. Some of us wish we lived in Georgia, I guess. 

Ms. SCHOPP. Yes— 

Chairman ROKITA. And North Carolina for these peaches and 

whatnot. 

Ms. SCHOPP. Right. 

Chairman ROKITA. But, Mr. Payne, you mentioned leadership 

when you summed up your testimony. I think my question goes to 

this as well. I mean what do you think about lowering the bar 

versus flexibility— 

Mr. PAYNE. Yes, I— 

Chairman ROKITA.—versus 150 more of the Ms. Martins that Dr. 

Schopp needs, et cetera? 

Mr. PAYNE. Oh yes, that is fascinating there what Ms. Martin is 

doing. And no, I don’t believe it would be lowering the bar because 

the importance for me as a school board member, and as a parent 

of six children, four adult, two still in school. And I can share with 

the ma’am there that has the teenage sons. I have one that is 13 

that is constantly grazing. 

So I think that it is important, that flexibility, and to bring those 

kids along, and such as an offering of these fresh fruits and vegetables instead of forcing them to take them. For instance, a colleague 

in Mishawaka, Indiana just shared with me that they had two-anda-half trash bags of whole apples in an elementary school that were 

thrown away. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

40 

Chairman ROKITA. Yes. I have stuck my head in a lot of garbage 

cans lately at school cafeteria, and I have seen some of that as 

well. 

The specific question, again for Dr. Schopp in the less than a 

minute that I have, can you discuss some of the unique challenges 

you have in a very rural state, including many Indian reservations, 

tribal communities, and that kind of thing? And what does—what 

do these federal laws and regulations, how do they impact that? 

Ms. SCHOPP. Number one, the issue with not having qualified 

food service directors that no matter what sort of technical support 

we give, it is a huge challenge in our state to find that. The other 

fact is just the distance in being able to get the fresh fruits and 

vegetables to be able to sustain those programs with fidelity. 

And I think that also in offering some of the things that we have 

for students, whether they are afterschool programs or summer 

school programs, are very difficult and different that we can’t even 

explain within that setting of whether it is rural. Also the number 

of what we call colony schools with Hutterites that there are 

unique challenges with them as well. 

Again, the one-size-fits-all, good intentions, but does not always 

work within a rural state. 

Chairman ROKITA. Thank you. I thank you all again. My time is 

expired. 

I recognize the gentlelady from California for 5 minutes. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thanks to all of you. I am sorry that I missed some of your 

early comments. But hopefully if I repeat those questions you can 

respond. 

One of the things that I know we are all concerned about, accuracy, streamlining the process, making it easier for you all to do 

your job, and certainly for young people to benefit and to be able 

to achieve. So I wonder if you could just talk about the community 

eligibility option, whether that proves useful in what you do in 

making sure that the programs are well utilized. 

And also the community eligibility option and making sure that, 

really this attempt to be sure that families are not creating all the 

errors by some of the difficult hoops that they have to go through 

in order to be part of the program. 

Ms. MARTIN. I would like to respond to that if I can, since we 

operate under the Community Eligibility Provision. 

I think it is the best thing since ice cream and sliced bread. It 

is so fabulous that my parents don’t have to fill out applications. 

They don’t—everything is going on behind the scenes. I don’t 

have to worry about error rates. I don’t have to worry about when 

Dr. Harvey comes in to audit me that everything is not right because everything has already been standardized and checked, and 

all that has been done on the front end. 

And what is great about it when you operate under that program 

is every kid comes through the lunch line and nobody feels like 

they are eating the free lunch and nobody is stigmatized. Everybody is eating a no-cost lunch. And everybody is equal in the lunchroom. And I think that is a very important thing. Some kids that 

is the only time they are on equal ground is in the lunchroom. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Do you wonder why it is not better used? 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

41 

Ms. MARTIN. I think a lot of states don’t understand it. And I 

think the Title I programs get very, very nervous about it, thinking 

it is going to change their funding. And I had to do a lot of educating with our Title I people and our school board people and our 

superintendent to make them understand. But they love it now. 

And I think it is one of the best things you all have ever done. And 

I want to thank you from the bottom of my heart for it. 

Mrs. DAVIS. And I don’t know whether others want to respond 

to that. 

Ms. HARVEY. I would very much like to. The Community Eligibility Provision has been a wonderful provision. It has de-stigmatized the school nutrition environment. The walk to the school 

cafeteria should never be a walk of shame for any child. And so it 

has been a great relief to see children who are all enjoying their 

meals together. 

I would say that one of our concerns is that when we offer meals 

to students at no cost, and unfortunately many still choose not to 

consume the meal, we have our work cut out for us to make sure 

that our standards are set in a manner that encourages children 

to eat them. Therefore I continue to echo the need for the waiver 

for whole-grain-rich products and the limitation on sodium so we 

can encourage students to consume the meals that they are offered 

at no cost. 

Agreed, great program. 

Mrs. DAVIS. I am wondering in those schools where you have 

more participation whether everybody is involved, whether the 

teachers there or the superintendent, the librarian, the custodians. 

I mean whether there is kind of a buy-in so that people have ways 

of chatting with kids informally about what they ate today. 

You know, do you see programs—and I know, Ms. Martin, you 

certainly spoke highly of your programs—where that really does 

become a much more engaged community at the school site, not 

just out in the community itself? 

Ms. MARTIN. When we started breakfast in the classroom program, the teachers did not want it. But once we started it, after 

2 weeks the principal said I will never get rid of this program because it is allowing our teachers to have time to interact with the 

students, to get to know them, to know what is going on in their 

home lives. They never have that time during the day. So that has 

been a huge thing to bring the community together. 

But I think there are lots of other things that we do. We get the 

kids involved in developing salads that they want. So then they 

have their own school salad. So we get them involved. We survey 

them. We have them on committees. We say what can we do to improve the program? 

We even let the teachers make suggestions. The teachers came 

up with this carrot souffle idea, and we did it. So getting all of 

them involved, but our teachers love the fact that they don’t have 

to count money in the morning. They don’t have to worry about 

Johnny forgetting his lunch, and they don’t have to worry about 

taking a meal away— 

Mrs. DAVIS. And the lack of flexibility that I know is an issue for 

folks. You don’t think this gets in the way of those kinds of initiatives— 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

42 

Ms. MARTIN. No. Absolutely. And I am teaching my parent—my 

adults to eat better too, not just my kids. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Yes. Real quickly, are we—do we have a baseline so 

that now that we have the nutrition program that we really have 

volunteers throughout the country and school districts that are trying to see, okay, did it make any difference? Are kids feeling that 

they have more energy in the day, that they feel like they are able 

to apply themselves? What is different? 

Chairman ROKITA. In 5 seconds, please. 

Mrs. DAVIS. Do you know? Anybody studying it? 

Ms. MARTIN. I think we need research in that area. 

Chairman ROKITA. Thank the gentlelady. The gentlelady’s time 

is expired. 

The gentlelady from Oregon is recognized for 5 minutes. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you very much, Chairman Rokita. And 

thank you to chairman and ranking member for holding this hearing. And thank you to all the witnesses. 

Like Congresswoman Davis I was in another hearing, but I have 

read through your testimony. And I am really encouraged that we 

are having this hearing today about the importance of child nutrition. And I hope that we can pursue a bipartisan reauthorization 

of the child nutrition program, including the school meals program. 

So, Ms. Martin, I appreciate that you see your job as more than 

serving meals. And you are so enthusiastic. It is wonderful. The 

nutrition education that you provide not only to the students, but 

also to the parents and communities seems to be one of the reasons 

why your program is so successful. 

You know we have heard some stories about students refusing to 

eat certain foods or skipping meals. I think that is a complex issue 

with probably a lot of different reasons, including sometimes lack 

of time. Oftentimes the schedule is so short that students don’t 

have time to eat. And if they don’t eat really quickly, they miss 

play time or recess time. So scheduling is part of it. 

I have done a lot of tours like the chairman. I, however, do not 

stick my head into the garbage cans. But I have had a lot of really 

interesting experiences, sitting down, having meals with students. 

Some of our schools have wonderful Farm-to-School programs, 

salad bars, gardens in the classroom, and the education where you 

know they grow a broccoli plant and then talk about—watch it 

grow and talk about how it grows. Well, then of course they are 

really interested in finding out what it tastes like. So those things 

really make a difference. 

So can you expand just a little bit on how important nutrition 

education is in really getting the students to try new things and 

to passing that message along to their families, as well? 

Ms. MARTIN. Well, you bring up a very important thing, and that 

is we need more time at lunch for the kids to eat. Because we are 

offering and serving them more fruits and vegetables, it takes more 

time for them to eat those fruits and vegetables. So they need more 

time. And lots of times that is the reason they are throwing the 

food away. 

Also, all of us have gone to lunch and our eyes were bigger than 

our stomachs were and we have got more food on our tray. But I 

think a key thing is you have got to cut up the fruit. We never 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

43 

serve a whole apple. We always cut it up. And they will eat it a 

lot better that way. We always cut up our oranges. They don’t have 

time to peel an orange and eat it. 

We also do recess before lunch. If you put a kid in there for lunch 

and they know they are going to recess, they are not going to eat 

anything that you do. 

So we also do nutrition education things on the table so when the 

kids come to lunch, they read about what they are getting through 

their fresh fruit and vegetable that afternoon, snack, and you can 

see all the little sticky fingerprints all over it. So we know that 

they are reading it. 

And we know that they—we send information home with them. 

But it is a long process. But we are making tremendous strides. 

And we have got to stay the course. 

It takes time to change those taste buds from liking high sodium 

to low sodium. And when they go home, one last thing, and they 

have high-calorie, high fast food that is high in sodium and they 

are eating a bag of potato chips, it is hard to get them to come to 

school and want low-sodium foods. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Right. Well, you anticipated my next question because you mention that your school district really started introducing healthier foods before they were required— 

Ms. MARTIN. Right. 

Ms. BONAMICI. And your testimony suggests that one reason has 

been—it has been successful is because you made the changes 

gradually. So can you talk about the importance of schools implementing nutrition standards incrementally? 

For example, the final sodium targets are scheduled to take effect in the 2022–2023 school year when today’s fourth graders are 

high school seniors. So what are you doing now to help those students be accepting of healthier foods, and seen that phase-in— 

Ms. MARTIN. Well, I think we are working with manufacturers. 

And they are going to be the key in trying to help us lower the sodium in our foods because a lot of the foods that a lot of districts 

that don’t have kitchens rely on foods that are already produced. 

And so they are incrementally lowering their sodium amounts. And 

I think that is going to be awesome. 

So but I think we need to educate the parents at home to be lowering the sodium in their foods at home in order to accomplish 

those goals. But I think—I am concerned about deregulating things 

and every state doing different things because the manufacturers 

could never produce one chicken nugget for Georgia and one for 

North Carolina and one for Oregon. So it would create mass chaos 

if everybody did their own thing. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Thank you very much. And I mentioned this before, but I was in our state legislature when we passed legislation 

to take the junk food out of the vending machines. And the most 

persuasive testimony came from the students. 

Ms. MARTIN. Right. 

Ms. BONAMICI.—in high school. They came in and testified that 

they were really conflicted because they would be in a health class 

learning about nutrition and then they would walk down the hallway and see these vending machines full of junk food. 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

44 

And the manufacturers really did a great job of stepping up and 

coming up with healthy snacks that are available now to those students. So we are making progress— 

Ms. MARTIN. Some parents want stricter standards than we are 

doing, people. They want stricter standards. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Right. Well, thank you very much for all of you— 

Ms. HARVEY. May I respond, as well? 

Ms. BONAMICI. Of course, Dr. Harvey. 

Ms. HARVEY. You are so correct. Nutrition education is a vital 

portion of the program. Engaging teachers to make sure that nutrition education is part of every classroom in the country is important. 

But one of the great successes we have is the Fresh Fruit and 

Vegetable Program where fresh fruits and vegetables are available 

to, largely elementary schools. Children can taste these foods as 

snacks. They learn about them. It creates a pathway to encouraging children to try new fruits and vegetables in the future. 

Ms. BONAMICI. Absolutely. 

Chairman ROKITA. Gentlelady’s time is expired. 

Ms. BONAMICI. My time is expired, but I— 

Chairman ROKITA. I thank the gentlelady. 

Ms. BONAMICI.—but I am concerned that, Dr. Schopp said that 

you didn’t have access to them. But we will follow up. 

Chairman ROKITA. I thank the gentlelady. Perhaps the ranking 

member would like to follow up on that. She is recognized for 5 

minutes. 

Ms. FUDGE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. And I thank 

you all. It has been a very interesting group today. And I appreciate all of your testimony. 

I do want to just correct one thing that my colleague Mr. Brat 

said about not being able to change the law. That is what we do. 

We are legislators. We make laws and we change laws. 

It was this body that created the sequester which most of us believe today was not a smart thing, whether we admit it publicly or 

not. And I certainly hope at some point we will have the courage 

to change it. 

I certainly agree with you that $0.06 reimbursement is not 

enough. I agree with you as well that we need to streamline all of 

the paperwork. 

We had the secretary of agriculture here just a week or so ago 

to discuss this same topic. We asked him about trying to find a way 

to streamline it to make it easier for us to do evening programs, 

summer programs, et cetera. So it is something that we all agree 

on. 

Just a question: Did any of your schools have deficits in your cafeteria or school programs before 2013? If you did could you just 

raise— 

[Nonverbal response.] 

Okay. So it is not all necessarily just because of the changes in 

the law. I just want to be clear about that. 

Also I just still want to be clear on the fact that though we believe that there is much, much too much paperwork, on the one 

hand we have people constantly talking about waste, fraud, and 

abuse. And so maybe we have gone too far. But we also have to 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

45 

be good stewards of tax dollars. And so maybe as we do too often, 

go too far. But we want to be sure that we can say we have verified 

that these resources are going to where they need to go. 

And so, I agree that we have some work to do. But what I appreciate is that each and every one of you understands the importance 

of feeding young people, making sure that they have a good start. 

And so I thank you. And we will do all we can to try to make 

it better. And trust that we have the ability to do it. We just don’t 

have the will. 

I thank you. And I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman ROKITA. I thank the ranking member. Seeing no other 

members wanting to ask questions, I will move—you are yielding 

your closing, or that was your closing. I appreciate your efficiency. 

I will try to— 

Ms. FUDGE. I stayed within my time. 

Chairman ROKITA. Yes. That is wonderful. I will try to match 

you and just say thank you. 

Thank you for each of you for being here. Thank you for who you 

represent. I happen to think, if it wasn’t clear from my questioning, 

that folks on the ground at the local level do wonderful work. I 

happen to believe there are many of you out there, many more of 

you out there, including you, Ms. Martin. 

Ms. MARTIN. There are many, many of us— 

Chairman ROKITA. And there are thousands of others that are 

out there. 

I don’t think anyone wants to—you know let’s say these regulations go away tomorrow. I don’t know anyone in your profession 

wants to then take a bunch of frozen french fries and stick them 

in a deep fryer and that is going to be the end of it. I just don’t 

believe that because it is not what I have seen. 

So thank you. Thank you for the leadership you provide this 

country because you are growing our best—helping grow—helping 

grow because the primary responsibility still is the family. And 

that is a whole different hearing, but helping grow our best asset, 

our children. 

Also, what I took away today was that this was not about just 

the money and how much or how little there is. This is about leadership, as Mr. Payne so rightly suggested. And it is about creativity. And it is about flexibility. So that wherever these rules 

come from, that there should be standards and allow us to work 

within them so that we can best supply, you know, our constituents—your constituency, which again are these kids. 

So thank you very much. Seeing no more business before the 

committee, this hearing is adjourned. 

[Additional submissions follow:] 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER

46 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 12 here 95135.012
47 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 13 here 95135.013
48 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 14 here 95135.014
49 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 15 here 95135.015
50 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 16 here 95135.016
51 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 17 here 95135.017
52 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 18 here 95135.018
53 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 19 here 95135.019
54 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 20 here 95135.020
55 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 21 here 95135.021
56 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 22 here 95135.022
57 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 23 here 95135.023
58 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 24 here 95135.024
59 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER


Insert offset folio 25 here 95135.025
60 

[Whereupon, at 11:32 a.m., the subcommittee was adjourned.] 

Æ 

CEWDOCROOM with DISTILLER