Perceived impact of a state-level universal free school meal policy on households with varying income levels: An analysis of parental perspectives

Juliana FW. Cohen,Leah E. Chapman,Deborah A. Olarte,Christina A. Hecht,Kenneth Hecht,Leran Minc,Punam Ohri-Vachaspati,Dania Orta-Aleman,Anisha I. Patel,Michele Polacsek,Lorrene D. Ritchie,Monica D. Zuercher,Wendi Gosliner

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2024.10.001

IF: 5.234

2024-10-12

Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics

Abstract:Background In the U.S., a means-tested approach is often used to provide free or reduced-price meals (FRPM) to students from lower-income households. However, federal income thresholds do not account for regional cost of living variations. Thus, many ineligible households may be at risk for food insecurity. Universal free school meal (UFSM) policies may help address this issue, especially in states with a higher cost of living. Objective To evaluate parent perceptions of the impact of Massachusetts' statewide UFSM policy on households eligible and ineligible for FRPM. Design Cross-sectional survey of parents across income categories conducted during the 2022-23 school year. Participants/setting Massachusetts parents (n=403) with children in grades kindergarten-12 with incomes ranging from 300% of the FPL. Main outcome measures Parents' perceived impact of Massachusetts' UFSM policy on their child and household. Statistical analyses performed Analysis of variance examined differences in the perceived impact of UFSM by FRPM eligibility, adjusting for demographic characteristics. Results Households that were FRPM eligible or near eligible were significantly more likely to report that their ability to have enough food for their family would be harder without UFSM (p<0.0001) compared to those in the highest income category. Across all income categories, approximately 75% of parents reported that school meals should be free for all children, and UFSM saved their family money and time and reduced stress, with no significant differences by FRPM eligibility. Roughly half (52%) reported their household finances would be hurt and 42% of parents from households eligible for FRPM reported their child would be less likely to eat school meals if the UFSM policy ended. Conclusions This study found strong parent support of UFSM policies regardless of income level. Additionally, parents perceived that discontinuing UFSM may adversely impact school meal participation, including among students from lower income households, as well as food security among households ineligible for FRPM, particularly in areas with higher costs of living. Policies to expand UFSM should be considered among additional states and at the national level.

nutrition & dietetics