1

Running Head: Policy Analysis Paper

Karlene Muxlow
SW 3710
Dr. Bowers
Policy Analysis Paper

2
Policy Analysis Paper

Social Problem
Child hunger is not just a problem in underdeveloped countries; it is relevant in every
country in the world including America. As indicated by Raphels (2014) Children, Hunger and
Poverty, Fifty million Americans lived in food-insecure homes, 16.7 million being children
(p.45). Raphel also discusses that every county in America has problems with food insecurity
with counties such as Slope County in North Dakota on the lower end while counties such as
Holmes County in Mississippi are on the higher end of food insecurity (p. 45). According to
Feeding America, the top five states with the highest rate of food-insecure children in 2013 were
Washington D.C, Mississippi, Arkansas, New Mexico and Georgia. With the top five states with
the lowest rate of food-insecure children being North Dakota, New Hampshire, Minnesota,
Massachusetts, and Virginia (Feeding America, 2015).
Food insecurity means not having access to enough affordable and nutritious food.
America being such a rich country compared with other nations, having so many people without
enough food shows how big of a problem food insecurity is. In the richest country in the world
by gross domestic product, children live in households where they are unable to consistently
access enough nutritious food necessary for a healthy life (Raphel, 2014, p.45).
When looking into child hunger, poverty must be examined also because those who go
hungry are also living in poverty. In America, one in five children is living in poverty (Raphel,
p.45). For children under the age of six, the poverty rate is 25.3 percent or 6,343,000 children.
In 2007, more than 7 percent of U.S children lived in extreme povertycompared to poverty in
later childhood, research indicates that extreme poverty during a childs first five years is
especially deleterious to their future life chances (Howard Karger, David Stoesz, 2014, p.102).

3
Policy Analysis Paper

According to Joseph Sharkey, Wesley Dean and Courtney Nalty, Child hunger, as both a
poor outcome and risk factor for adverse health and development, is a serious challenge facing
children. A direct link has been established between inadequate food quality and quantity and
poor mental and physical health, psychosocial, behavioral, learning, family stress, and academic
outcomes (p.2). If food insecurity affects a child, it can cause damage even before birth.
Pregnant women who experience food insecurity have a higher risk of complications at birth,
low birth weight, delayed development, learning difficulties and less ability of attachment in the
first two years of life (FeedingAmerica.org). According to Feeding America, other health
concerns for food insecure children could include higher risk of hospitalization, higher risk for
chronic health conditions like asthma or anemia, more oral health problems, and an overall
poorer quality of life. Feeding America also discusses behavioral challenges faced by children
who live in food insecure environments. Such behavioral challenges include a greater risk of
truancy or tardiness, fighting, hyperactivity, aggression, anxiety, mood swings and bullying
(FeedingAmerica.org).
Howard Karger and David Stoesz (2014), also discuss the demographics of children
living in poverty in the United States stating that children of minorities often experience more
instances of poverty. In 2010, 40 percent of African American children and 35 percent of
Hispanic children lived below the poverty line compared to 12.4 percent of non-Hispanic white
children (p.102). For example, the second largest number of foreign-born residents from
Mexico live in Texas. Texas also has over 1.8 million children living in homes that are food
insecure. This is the second largest area of children living in food insecure homes in the United
States (Sharke, Dean, Nalty, 2013, p.1).

4
Policy Analysis Paper

Current Policy in Place

There are a number of policies in place to offset child hunger in America. Two of these
policies include the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and the Healthy,
Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010. The SNAP program is commonly known as food stamps. SNAP
is the largest federally funded food assistance program in the United States (Blumenthal,
Hoffnagle, Leung, Lofink, Jensen, Foerster, Cheung, Nestle, Willett, 2014). In this article, SNAP
is described as a program that attempts to alleviate food insecurity among those who are low
income by receiving benefits through an electron benefit transfer or EBT (Blumenthal, et. al.).
This article also states that the SNAP program served about 46 million Americans in 2012 and
had a budget of 78 million dollars. Of the 46 million Americans served by SNAP, nearly half are
children (Blumenthal, et.al.).
The Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act was signed into Law by President Obama on
December 13th 2010 and instituted in July of 2012 (Wootan, 2010, p. 18). According to Wootan,
the Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act is the most significant investment in to the school nutrition
programs in more than 30 years. This act discusses improved nutrition for all food sold and
distributed in schools, stronger school nutrition, stronger physical activity policies, greater
accountability for schools to have their meals meet nutrition standards, and improved financing
to support healthier school lunches (p. 18). The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA)
also stated that this was the first time in 30 years that an opportunity was given to make changing
reforms to school breakfast and lunch programs (USDA, 2014). In other words, this act would
mean healthier school meals and policies for the nation.

5
Policy Analysis Paper

The National School Lunch Program offers services to over 31 million children (Wootan,
p. 18). The funding that the Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act provides for programs like the
National School Lunch Program, increases the access to healthy food for low-income children.
This can help reduce the amount of children go hungry daily in America. The Healthy, Hunger
Free Kids Act reauthorizes child nutrition programs for five years and includes 4.5 billion dollars
to fund these programs for over 10 years (Lets Move, n.d.). Many programs featured in the act
do not have a specific expiration date but Congress is required to reauthorize funding every so
often. The reauthorization of the Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act was due by September 30, 2015
(FRAC.org). Although what the bill entails is mentioned above, there is great detail in the act.
The Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act also gives the USDA authority to set nutritional standards for
food sold in schools. This act helps communities establish local farm to school networks and
helps create school gardens which helps keep food local in schools. The act expands access to
water in schools, emphasizing on water drinking during meals. The reauthorization of the act
also includes the federally-subsidized Child and Adult Care Food Program that helps promote
nutrition in child care. It also expands breast feeding support through the WIC program (Lets
Move, n.d.).
The reauthorization of the Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act also includes new requirements
to help monitor progress. Schools are now required to be audited every three years. They are
audited to improved cooperation with the nutritional standards. Schools are required to make the
information regarding nutritional quality of the meals given out at school readily available to
parents. The reauthorization of the act also includes the improvement of recall procedures and
safety requirements of the food given to students while at school. It also requires more training
for the food service workers at the schools (Lets Move, n.d.). The Healthy Hunger Free Kids Act

6
Policy Analysis Paper

has inspired the Lets Move campaign that is trying to fight childhood obesity. The collaboration
between the two helps bring healthier foods into the schools while training up children to be
physically healthier and the reasons why it is so important.
Who Dictates Policy
The Federal Government dictates the Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act. This act was signed
by President Obama and enforced by the United States Department of Agriculture or the USDA.
The USDA celebrated its 150th anniversary in 2012. It was founded in 1862, when President
Abraham Lincoln signed into law establishing the United States Department of Agriculture.
About two years after signing the USDA into law, Lincoln called the USDA the Peoples
Department. At the time President Lincoln made that announcement about half of all Americans
lived on farms compared with only two percent today. But through our work on food,
agriculture, economic development, science, natural resource conservation and a host of issues,
USDA still fulfills Lincolns vision of touching the lives of every American, every day
(USDA.gov, n.d.).
The USDA provides leadership on food, agriculture, natural resources, rural
development, nutrition, and related issues based on public policy, the best available science, and
effective management (USDA.gov, n.d.). The USDA is made up of 29 agencies and offices with
almost 100,000 employees. There are over 4,500 USDA locations across the country (USDA.gov
n.d.). According to the USDA website, the USDA has multiple programs including those in
assisting Rural Communities, conservation, education and research, food and nutrition, and
marketing and trade programs. The Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act falls under the Food and
Nutrition programs and also in the subcategory of Child Nutrition Programs. Other food and

7
Policy Analysis Paper

nutrition programs supported by the USDA include Expanded Food and Nutrition Education
Program (EFNEP), Organic Program, SNAP, and WIC (USDA.gov).
What Is and Isnt Working Concerning the Policy
According to the Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics and The Effects of
the Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act on School Lunch, digital photographs were taken of national
school lunches in the spring of 2012. After the Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act was implemented
in July of 2012, another set of pictures was taken the following spring of 2013. These pictures
were compared to determine the effects of the Act on school lunches. The comparisons between
the two showed significant differences between the mean nutrient content selected and
consumed for energy, total fat, carbohydrates, protein, calcium, fiber, cholesterol, sodium, and
vitamin C (Bergman, Englund, Cashman, Watkins, Taylor, Shaw, Saade, Schepman, 2014, p. A60).
According to the USDA, more kids are eating a school breakfast. Total breakfast
participation increased by almost 3 percent in 2013 and has increased by almost 25 percent since
2008 (USDA.gov n.d.). The healthier meals have grown on the students. Kids are eating more
fruits and vegetables because of the new standards of school lunches. Because of the new
standards, kids are now eating 16 percent more vegetables and 23 percent more fruit at lunch
(USDA.gov, n.d.). Over 90 percent of schools report successfully meeting new standards and
revenue from school lunches is increasing (USDA.gov, n.d.). The Healthy Hunger Free Kids Act
must be successfully meeting standards across the country to continue the progress and funding it
has. In 2013 over 5.6 million dollars in grants was provided to training for food service
professionals at schools, up to 5 million dollars through the Farm to School grant, and 25 million

8
Policy Analysis Paper

dollars in grants to help schools purchase new kitchen equipment to help provide healthier meals
(USDA.gov, n.d.).
Although there are many benefits of the Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act, there are also
downfalls. Schools are faced with higher expenses for meal preparations due to the new
standards required by the act. This makes the price of lunches go up and in return students who
do not get reduced lunches do not participate in buying lunch from school as often (Craig
Gundersen, 2014). In response to this, some schools are choosing to opt out of the National
School Lunch Program. When schools opt out of the National School Lunch Program (NSLP),
those children who are eligible for the NSLP who attend the schools do not have access to
reduced prices or free meals (Gundersen). When these children do not have access to the reduced
or free meals, it can put them at a risk for food insecurity which is what the Healthy, Hunger Free
Kids Act is trying to help avoid. The total cost for the NSLP in 2012 was about 11 billion dollars,
but if the program is not decreasing food insecurity because of so many schools opting out of the
program, is that 11 billion dollars really worth it?
Supporters of Policy
The Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010, was originally signed into law by
President Obama on December 13th 2010. It was not instituted until July of 2012, however. In
2010 when the Act was passed, it had bipartisan support or support of both major democratic
parties (USDA.gov, n.d.). According to the USDA in the article Support for Healthy Meals
Standards Continues to Grow, now that childhood obesity is starting to level off, House
Republicans are trying to rollback healthy meal standards and undermine efforts to provide kids
with more nutritious food (USDA.gov, n.d.). Even with the Republicans attempting to withdraw

9
Policy Analysis Paper

support, more leaders are strongly supporting keeping healthy meals in schools. Some of these
leaders include the American Medical Association, The American Academy of Pediatrics, The
Parent Teacher Association, Teachers Organizations and many others are voicing strong opinions
to keep the healthy meals in schools (USDA.gov, n.d.).
First Lady Michelle Obama is an avid supporter of the Lets Move program and the
Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act. In 2010 Michelle Obama started the Lets Move program to help
fight against childhood obesity. This program both aimed to increase physical activity among
children and also provide healthier food in schools and communities (Janice Hopkins, 2010, p.
387).
Tom Vilsack, the Secretary of Agriculture and former Bush Administration Secretary Ann
Veneman also support the Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010. In a jointly authored opinion
column, Dont Play Politics With Childrens Health, The Hill, May 29, 2014, both reportedly
discussed the bipartisan support of the act in 2010 but the decrease in republican support. Now
is not the time to backpedal on a healthier future for our kids. Two-thirds of adults and one-third
of American children are overweight or obese. The cost of treating obesity-related illnesses is
190.2 billion dollars per year If nothing changed, this generation of children will be the first to
live shorter lives than their parents (USDA.gov, n.d.). These statements are crucial to the
support of the program and the investments in the future of todays youth.
Interview with Legislature
It was stated between an interview with Congresswoman Candice Miller that because she
is a mother and grandmother, she understands the importance of nutritious meals for the growth
of children. Congresswoman Miller stated that she believes society can be measured from the

10
Policy Analysis Paper

way it treats its most vulnerable members, including children. It was interesting to see things
from this point of view.
During her time in Congress, Candice Miller has a strong record of supporting child
nutrition programs such as the HR 1324, the Child Nutrition Promotion and School Lunch
Protection Act and HR 2, and the Childrens Health Insurance Program Reauthorization Act. She
has also supported programs such as the federal Head Start Program, which provides early
childhood development services to low income children. This program includes services
including educational, health, nutritional, and social services.
Mrs. Miller discussed child hunger in Michigan as well. She stated that about 300,000
children in Michigan receive free or reduce priced lunches in school. This shows that child
hunger is a real problem and a problem in our own state. She emphasized that no child should go
to bed hungry, especially in America.
During the interview, Mrs. Miller voiced her concern with the Healthy, Hunger Free Kids
Act of 2010. She said that unfortunately the federal standards imposed from this act have
resulted in required calorie counts, colors, and portion sizes. These standards often create food
that children do not want to eat. She voiced that nutritional outcomes do not improve when
children refuse meals provided in schools.
Congresswoman Miller discussed recommendations that have been done to make it easier
for schools to comply with the law and also help decrease the financial cost for paying families.
In 2014, the U.S Government Accountability Office (GAO) completed a report discussing the
regulation of the Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act. This report concluded that the USDA needed to

11
Policy Analysis Paper

clarify the federal standards associated with the act so it wasnt so confusing to both the schools
and the parents.
Congresswoman Millers final comments discussed her personal belief of the Healthy,
Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010. She believes that the Act imposed additional unnecessary and
unfunded programs that actually increased the prices for paying families instead of assisting in
costs. The act also forced mandates on local schools that gave control to federal bureaucrats over
state government and local school systems. She has also personally heard from schools
throughout Michigan, including her district that have had issues implementing the legislation
involved in this act.
Conclusion
Child Hunger in America is a serious problem that is being addressed in todays society.
The federal government has attempted to implement programs such as SNAP and the Healthy,
Hunger Free Kids Act to compensate for populations facing hunger in America. These programs
are in place to help alleviate hunger and child hunger.
The Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010 works with schools in America to create
healthier, cheaper meals for students. This act has multiple positive outcomes including having
healthier meal options to choose from in schools and having higher numbers of children
participating in meals at school. There are also downfalls however, in respect to the regulations
and rules placed on schools to implement this act. Ultimatley, the majority of America supports
this act, including First Lady, Michelle Obama who created the Lets Move campaign alongside
the Healthy Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010. Nevertheless, Child Hunger continues to be a
problem in America, especially with minority children. When statistics are displayed, it is

12
Policy Analysis Paper

difficult not to assume that race plays a large role in poverty and child hunger in America.
Although people may say it does not, statistics do not lie.

13
Policy Analysis Paper

Resources
Bergman, E., Englund, T., Cashman, L., Watkins, T., Taylor, K., Shaw, E., . . . Schepman, S.
(2014). The Effects of the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act on School Lunch. Journal of the
Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics.
Blumenthal, S., Hoffnagle, E., Leung, C., Lofink, H., Jensen, H., Foerster, S., . . . Willett, W.
(2013). Strategies to improve the dietary quality of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program (SNAP) beneficiaries: An assessment of stakeholder opinions. Public Health
Nutr. Public Health Nutrition, 2824-2833.
Child Development. (2015). Retrieved October 22, 2015.
Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Food Research & Action Center. (n.d.). Retrieved
October 22, 2015.
Food and Nutrition Service. (n.d.). Retrieved October 22, 2015.
Gundersen, C. (2014, August 12). The Potentially Negative Consequences Associated with the
Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act. Retrieved October 22, 2015.
Karger, H., & Stoesz, D. (1998). American social welfare policy: A pluralist approach (3rd ed.).
New York: Longman.
Let's Move. (n.d.). Retrieved October 22, 2015.
Miller, C. (2015, October 21). Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010 [E-mail interview].
Raphel, S. (2013). Children, Hunger, and Poverty. J Child Adolesc Psychiatr Nurs Journal of
Child and Adolescent Psychiatric Nursing, 45-47.

14
Policy Analysis Paper

Wootan, M. (2012, January 27). The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act One Year Later. Retrieved
October 22, 2015.

15
Policy Analysis Paper
Karlene:
Attached are responses to your four questions from Congresswoman Miller.
Best,

Anthony Giannetti
Office of U.S. Representative Candice S. Miller (MI-10)
320 Cannon House Office Building, Washington, DC 20515
Office: 202-225-2106 | Fax: 202-226-1169
http://candicemiller.house.gov/
This electronic communication, along with any attachments, is covered by federal and state laws
governing electronic communications and may contain legally privileged information, legally
confidential information, or other attorney work product. If the reader of this message is not the
intended recipient, the reader is hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution, use, or copying of
this message is strictly prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please reply
immediately to the sender and delete this message. Thank you.

As a mother and grandmother, I understand how important nutritious meals are for growing
children. School lunches are an integral part of the development of Americas youth.
Providing nutritious meals in school is of great importance. I believe that a society can be
measured in part by the way it cares for and treats its most vulnerable members, especially
children. During my time in Congress, I have a strong record of supporting child nutrition
programs including my support of the H.R. 1324, the Child Nutrition Promotion and School
Lunch Protection Act and H.R. 2, the Children's Health Insurance Program Reauthorization
Act. In addition, I have supported the federal Head Start Program, which provides
comprehensive early childhood development services to low-income children and their
families. The program covers a broad range of services including educational, health,
nutritional, and social services. These services are intended to prepare children for
kindergarten and to improve the conditions necessary for success in later school and life.
Current reports indicate that there are about 300,000 children in Michigan who receive free
or reduce-price lunches in school. This illustrates that child hunger is a very real problem; no
child should go to bed hungry in America.

Unfortunately, the federal standards imposed by the Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010
has resulted in school breakfast and lunch programs becoming a maze of required calorie
counts, colors, and portion sizes. These regulations and mandates often produce food that
children do not want to eat. Nutritional outcomes do not improve when children shun the
meals provided.

In 2014, the U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) completed a report that made
common-sense recommendations to the problems associated with the regulation. The report

16
Policy Analysis Paper

concluded that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) should clarify the federal
standards in order to streamline the process so that it is not so confusing for parents and
schools. In addition, the regulatory process should be more lenient so local and state
authorities have more flexibility in the menu-decision process. This would make it easier for
schools to comply with the law, while lessening the financial burden for paying families.
4

Ultimately, I believe this Act imposed additional unnecessary and unfunded programs that
increased prices for paying families along with forced mandates on local schools, giving
control to federal bureaucrats over state government and local school systems. I have also
heard from school boards in my district and throughout Michigan that they have had serious
problems implementing this legislation. Local officials should be deciding menu choices so
that local parents can have some level of input in the decision process. Throughout my career
it has been one of my top priorities to support children and their families, and I will continue
to work with my colleagues to ensure that all children have the opportunity to succeed.