Sentences with phrase «on free lunch programs»

Just 32 percent of Carmel's high school graduates in 2011 on free lunch programs (and 20 percent of those on reduced - lunch programs) took an Advanced Placement exam, versus 55.3 percent of middle class peers did so; a mere 26.5 percent of Hamilton Southeastern's high school graduates on free lunch (and 32 percent of reduced - lunch graduates) took AP exams, versus 73.5 percent of middle - class peers.

(Especially those dependant on the free lunch program.)

Less privileged kids like those on the Free Lunch Program are being segregated into a group with a stigma, like they do nt deserve to eat what the other kids who can pay for lunch choose to have for lunch.

Two hundred and ten early adolescents attending middle school (age M = 12.5 years; SD = 0.5; 21 % Hispanic, 18 % mixed / bi-racial, 47 % white, and 9 % other / missing; 37.1 % on free lunch program) self - reported levels of dispositional mindfulness (Mindful Attention Awareness Scale (MAAS)-RRB-, self - compassion (Self - Compassion Scale (SCS); self - judgment and self - kindness domains), and EF proficiency (Behavior Rating Inventory of Executive Function — Self - Report (BRIEF - SR)-RRB-.

Not exact matches

Having taught for some years in the public school system of MS, I can say that in many of the rural schools in this state (likely the same in nearby states as well for rural schools) have many football players on free or reduced price school lunch programs and very poor training and weight room facilities.

Our reduced price and free lunch programs have become a scam on the taxpayer.

But most of them — about 265,000 — are on the free - lunch program and will not be affected by the price increases.

I'm guessing, from watching the show, that a large number of these students at West Adams are on free / reduced lunch program.

Responding to a Tribune article on fraud risks in the federal free - lunch program, Sen. Dick Durbin on Friday sent a letter to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack asking what his department will do to «bolster eligibility verification measures» in the program.

The Healthy Hunger - Free Kids Act (HHFKA), the law that governs the National School Lunch Program and other federally subsidized child nutrition programs, is set to expire on September 30, 2015, at which point lawmakers must decide... Read more

CEO allows schools to serve free breakfast and free lunch to all students when 40 percent or more of students are certified for free meals without a paper application, which includes students who are directly certified (through data matching) for free meals because they live in households that participate in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), or the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR), as well as children who are automatically eligible for free school meals because of their status in foster care or Head Start, homeless, or migrant.

Anyway, one surprising outcome was that the kids on the free / reduced price lunch program had an advantage in this «competition.»

I'm only just starting this one, but I can already see that it's more social - history - driven than Free for All, including some fascinating insights on how such seemingly far - flung issues as race, desegregation and gender have played into the development of the current school lunch program.

I have read this article twice in this past day, deciding to share it with my child who is on the free - lunch program.

But a lesser - noticed story published that same day on the Times School Book blog reported that New York City is being forced to cut its Universal Meals Program, which had previously insured that all children at some predominantly low - income schools received free lunches, without demonstrating economic need — and therefore without risking social stigma by taking the school meal.

Consider it a more realistic «Super Size Me» (while many individuals consciously choose to eat McDonald's thirty days in a row, these school children — many of whom are on cost - reduced or free - lunch programs, have little to no say when it comes to their lunch options).

But my point is, the school lunch program rests on subsidies, free commodity food, and governmental reimbursement.

This is certainly the intent of the National School Lunch and Breakfast programs, which offer free and reduced meals to children, based on their families» income, as well as full - price meals to any student.

I've been vocal in support of the program because in a district with over 80 % of kids on free / reduced lunch, there's clearly a need.

But given that the National School Lunch Program already IS the ultimate nanny state program — a daily, free or reduced price hand - out of food, administered by the federal government — why is merely improving the food served so controversial on theProgram already IS the ultimate nanny state program — a daily, free or reduced price hand - out of food, administered by the federal government — why is merely improving the food served so controversial on theprogram — a daily, free or reduced price hand - out of food, administered by the federal government — why is merely improving the food served so controversial on the right?

The program, which are funded by the US Department of Agriculture (USDA), provided low - cost or free lunches to more than 31 million children each day in 2012 — according to a fact sheet on the department's website.

This interactive map provides state - by - state data on participation in the free and reduced - price School Breakfast Program, as compared to participation in the free and reduced - price National School Lunch Program.

With districts that have lower percentages of kids on the free and reduced lunch program (like mine at 22 %), it's harder because you have less volume in purchasing and less funds for developing the program.

«The cost of universal free school lunch programs are modest and their positive impacts on kids and families are well documented.

While I feel bad that there is a divide, I do not believe that the answer to put the tator tots back on the free and reduced lunch program.

Obama administration goals for the legislation include: (1) improving nutrition standards for school meals; (2) increasing participation in school meal programs; (3) increasing parent and student education about healthy eating; (4) establishing nutrition standards for the so called «a la carte» foods (see my School Lunch FAQs for more information on these); (5) promoting increased consumption of whole grains, fruits, vegetables, and low - and fat - free dairy products; (6) strengthening school wellness policies and promoting physical activity in schools; (7) training people who provide school meals and providing them with better equipment; and (8) enhancing food safety.

But one or two speakers offered more novel arguments, such as increased stigma for children on free and reduced price lunch (when paying students leave the program) and attempting to draw a connection between California's drought and wasted fruits and vegetables.

When I asked at a Parent Advisory Committee meeting this summer how this price increase would likely impact participation in the program, I was told that the increase affects only about 8 % of the students in our district, because the vast majority of kids here — almost 90 % — are on free / reduced lunch.

On the heels of those headlines, Congress passed the Healthy, Hunger - Free Kids Act of 2010 in December to improve school nutrition in the National School Lunch Program.

The 1969 White House Conference on Food, Nutrition and Health leads to the expansion of child nutrition programs and the enactment of the free and reduced - price school lunch program for low - income students.

On Thursday, September 7, the city rolled out a new program that will provide free lunch to all 1.1 million public - school students in the five boroughs.

De Blasio has pushed back on that proposal, arguing that the pilot program his administration funded last year that provided free lunch to all middle schoolers has yielded «mixed results.»

«Many schools base participation fee waivers on eligibility for income - based programs like Medicaid or free and reduced lunch.

The contractor then extracts information on each student's demographic characteristics, enrollment, test scores, and certification for and participation in various programs such as free and reduced - price lunch, special education, and English - language services.

English - language learners make up 17 percent of the student body, and 87 percent of kids are on the free - lunch program.

It is for all these reasons and more that President Barack Obama signed the Healthy, Hunger - Free Kids Act of 2010 on December 13, 2010, a law that will not only change the nutritional guidelines of the 65 - year - old National School Lunch Program, but will also provide the program's first noninflationary budget increase in more than three decades; a total of $ 4.5 billion over 10 years, which includes an additional 6 cents per meal, perProgram, but will also provide the program's first noninflationary budget increase in more than three decades; a total of $ 4.5 billion over 10 years, which includes an additional 6 cents per meal, perprogram's first noninflationary budget increase in more than three decades; a total of $ 4.5 billion over 10 years, which includes an additional 6 cents per meal, per child.

Some programs, such as Connect to Compete and Internet Essentials, have already started on this work, offering low cost computers and Internet access to families of students that receive free or reduced price lunch.

Even with a sparse growth model such as SGPs, a student who is eligible for the free lunch program is likely to have a lower growth «target» than a non-eligible student because, on average, students who are eligible for the free lunch program also have lower prior exam scores.

Because the administrative files provide only a very coarse measure of family socioeconomic status — eligibility for the federal free or reduced - price lunch program — we constructed an additional proxy for family income by matching each student's residential address to U.S. Census data on the median household income in the student's neighborhood.

In a school where one in ten students is a native English speaker, and 95 percent receive free or reduced lunch, the AP Calculus program has grown from 15 students to 150 in three years and boosts the highest pass rate in the district on the AP exam.

Three out of four are on the federal free - and reduced - lunch program, and half are not native English speakers.

But if Tong's class is any indication, the digital divide may be narrowing: Even in a school where 50 percent of kids are on the free - lunch program, he says, almost everyone has a computer at home.

To eliminate the effects of any chance differences in performance caused by other observable characteristics, our analysis takes into account students» age, gender, race, and eligibility for the free lunch program; whether they had been assigned to a small class; and whether they were assigned to a teacher of the same race — which earlier research using these same data found to have a large positive effect on student performance (see «The Race Connection,» Spring 2004).

In my time as chancellor at D.C. Public Schools, we worked with the U.S. Department of Agriculture on community eligibility programs so that all students could have access to free breakfast and lunch programs.

The system participates in a federally - backed program that provides free lunch to all students in 79 of its most low - income schools, meaning it no longer tracks system - wide data on free and reduced lunch, a spokesman said last week.

Since then, despite a shift to a Democratic majority on the school board, the number of Wake County schools serving a majority of low - income children on the free and reduced lunch program has more than doubled, surging from 18 in 2008 to 48 this school year.

The National School Boards Association (NSBA) has issued a press release calling for flexibility and relief from the U.S. Congress and the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to address the unintended consequences of onerous requirements for federal school meal programs in the Healthy, Hunger - Free Kids Act with the start of National School Lunch Week on Oct. 13.

Spend portion of expenditures on scholarships for students who qualify for the free or reduced - price lunch program ($ 45,510 for family of four in 2017 — 18) in an amount equal or greater to the percentage of eligible low - income students in the state

Less than 30 percent of students are Caucasian, more than 70 percent are on the Free / Reduced Lunch program, and many are English Language Learners.

According to Kate Baker, the president of NEO, the reimbursement model has been «a significant burden» for many families.25 Since NEO prioritizes based on need, 98 percent of homeschooling scholarship families in the first year of the program had a total household income that would have qualified them for the federal free or reduced - price lunch program (185 percent of the federal poverty line, or $ 43,568 for a family of four in 2012 - 13), including 77 percent who would have qualified for a «free lunch» (130 percent of the federal poverty line, or $ 30,615 for a family of four in 2012 - 13).26