Anonymous wrote:

Just another step in the government indoctrination of children.

Families will be destroyed as the children learn to rely on the government for everything.

I've seen families that have been "destroyed", but it wasn't by a summer lunch program. Or by someone who cared about them. In fact, it was the opposite.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:First, FCPS sponsors the program-- that is, they provide the food service facilities because they are there and not in use. They do not spend FCPS funds. This is paid for by the USDA.

Second, they feed everyone, because the programs are only in very high FARMS areas. These are Title I schools that do not require paperwork and feed all kids for free during the school year to, brcause the administrative costs of dealing with all the paperwork outweigh the costs of feeding the kids who aren't eligible.

Third, SNAP benefits were slashed this year. The money is not there for many families to feed kids lunch when the normally get it for free during the school year.

And lastly, I bet some of ya'll call yourselves Christisn too?

I'm a Christian who believes school funds and sponsorships should go toward education. Do you feel nice and sanctimonious for bringing up Christianity? I bet you do.

I notice that you managed to miss the part where FCPS wasn't actually funding this.

This isn't anything new. The USDA offers summer meals to kids all over Fairfax County. The sites are usually concentrated in high FARMS areas but anyone can go eat there.

I'm pretty disgusted by people railing against this. You can think their parents should pull themselves up by their bootstraps all you want and you may be right, but it doesn't deny that there are hungry kids out there and they shouldn't have to suffer the consequences.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So by this premise should all kids receive "free" food throughout the school year? That way nobody is missed. What about schools where breakfast isn't served at all?

Who isn't serving breakfasts in FCPS?

As an aside, there is a federal program where all students in a district, regardless of need, can receive free breakfasts and lunches, but those are very high poverty communities. This is a great idea for a number of reasons.

There are schools in FCPS that don't serve breakfast. My DS's school doesn't.

The vast majority do. Only 20 in the entire county don't (and I highly doubt those are in high FARMS areas.)

Right. So it is accurate to say that there are schools that don't serve breakfast.

So if the idea is to make sure that all students receive a healthy meal, why not serve breakfast at all schools? Our elementary has ~6% FARMS. Why do they have to go without?

I agree with you, and I think all FARMS kids at the very least should have access to free breakfast, but I'm not sure exactly what that has to do with the FEEDS program. Breakfast should absolutely be offered at all schools, but just because it isn't, doesn't mean the lunch program is a sham. Six percent FARMS is incredibly low.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So by this premise should all kids receive "free" food throughout the school year? That way nobody is missed. What about schools where breakfast isn't served at all?

Who isn't serving breakfasts in FCPS?

As an aside, there is a federal program where all students in a district, regardless of need, can receive free breakfasts and lunches, but those are very high poverty communities. This is a great idea for a number of reasons.

There are schools in FCPS that don't serve breakfast. My DS's school doesn't.

The vast majority do. Only 20 in the entire county don't (and I highly doubt those are in high FARMS areas.)

Right. So it is accurate to say that there are schools that don't serve breakfast.

So if the idea is to make sure that all students receive a healthy meal, why not serve breakfast at all schools? Our elementary has ~6% FARMS. Why do they have to go without?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So by this premise should all kids receive "free" food throughout the school year? That way nobody is missed. What about schools where breakfast isn't served at all?

Who isn't serving breakfasts in FCPS?

As an aside, there is a federal program where all students in a district, regardless of need, can receive free breakfasts and lunches, but those are very high poverty communities. This is a great idea for a number of reasons.

There are schools in FCPS that don't serve breakfast. My DS's school doesn't.

The vast majority do. Only 20 in the entire county don't (and I highly doubt those are in high FARMS areas.)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So by this premise should all kids receive "free" food throughout the school year? That way nobody is missed. What about schools where breakfast isn't served at all?

Who isn't serving breakfasts in FCPS?

As an aside, there is a federal program where all students in a district, regardless of need, can receive free breakfasts and lunches, but those are very high poverty communities. This is a great idea for a number of reasons.

There are schools in FCPS that don't serve breakfast. My DS's school doesn't.

Just another step in the government indoctrination of children.

Families will be destroyed as the children learn to rely on the government for everything.

I've seen families that have been "destroyed", but it wasn't by a summer lunch program. Or by someone who cared about them. In fact, it was the opposite.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Am I the only one who thinks this is ridiculous and a huge waste of FCPS funds?

I'm sure you are not. Lots of people don't realize that the only real food some kids in FCPS get is school lunch. That's why they send backpacks with food for them home on weekends. It's not like this is a social event at a Langley feeder. These are very high FARMS rate schools In places like Bailey's where many kids are on their own all day while their single parent mom works. It's hard for me to begrudge any kid 5 solid meals a week. This may be being done through the federal FARMS program. But even if it's my property tax dollars at work, I'm fine with it. People talk about not sending American money overseas when there are hungry people at home. Well, these are hungry kids who love a few mile from you. I imagine if you actually went to one of these schools at lunchtime and saw the kids, you'd grow some compassion. Or maybe not.

Meh, I have never seen any true stats that show there are any kids truly going without food (which is a good thing) and I seriously doubt that any local jurisdiction could provide them. What they could provide would be stats that show some kids are "food insecure" which is not the same thing as going without food. Besides breakfast and lunch at school 10 months out of the year keep in mind these families also received food stamps and many will also receive WIC.

After the R Congress slashed SNAP benefits, they now work out to about $1.44 per person/per meal. Come back to us when you can find a way to give a kid, let alone a teen boy, a semi-nutritious, filling meal for $1.44 (and no-- growing kids can't survive and be healthy on a small surfing of rice and beans 3 times a day, all summer).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Am I the only one who thinks this is ridiculous and a huge waste of FCPS funds?

I'm sure you are not. Lots of people don't realize that the only real food some kids in FCPS get is school lunch. That's why they send backpacks with food for them home on weekends. It's not like this is a social event at a Langley feeder. These are very high FARMS rate schools In places like Bailey's where many kids are on their own all day while their single parent mom works. It's hard for me to begrudge any kid 5 solid meals a week. This may be being done through the federal FARMS program. But even if it's my property tax dollars at work, I'm fine with it. People talk about not sending American money overseas when there are hungry people at home. Well, these are hungry kids who love a few mile from you. I imagine if you actually went to one of these schools at lunchtime and saw the kids, you'd grow some compassion. Or maybe not.

Meh, I have never seen any true stats that show there are any kids truly going without food (which is a good thing) and I seriously doubt that any local jurisdiction could provide them. What they could provide would be stats that show some kids are "food insecure" which is not the same thing as going without food. Besides breakfast and lunch at school 10 months out of the year keep in mind these families also received food stamps and many will also receive WIC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So by this premise should all kids receive "free" food throughout the school year? That way nobody is missed. What about schools where breakfast isn't served at all?

Who isn't serving breakfasts in FCPS?

As an aside, there is a federal program where all students in a district, regardless of need, can receive free breakfasts and lunches, but those are very high poverty communities. This is a great idea for a number of reasons.

It is grant funded by the people that administer the federal school lunch program. Summer lunches have been around for a long while - this is just a different delivery method. The schools chosen all have VERY high FRM populations, so a majority of the kids that are benefitting are those that are in need. In addition their parents, or any other adults, can eat for $2. It's a nice addition to the FCPS summer nutrition program.

And, oh yeah-- HV ES, which PP discussed? More than 92% FARMS. PS PP- thanks for that info-- when my kids are looking for places to mentor, tutor and volunteer, I plan to contact HV to see if they have any needs.

Anonymous wrote:So by this premise should all kids receive "free" food throughout the school year? That way nobody is missed. What about schools where breakfast isn't served at all?

Once again-- this is not a new thing. If a Title I school has an incredibly high FARMS rate (like Bailey's at 75% or MV Woods at 86%) it is cheaper for the government to feed all the kids from school of free (and many non- FARMS kids bring lunch, because school lunch is gross, at least according to my kids) than deal with the paperwork and reporting requirements for 80% of the school. Based on a study that was done that determined the break even point, that number was determined, but I agree with PP that it is much greater than 50%. But look up the school profiles of the participating schools, incredibly high FARMS rate. If you want to send your kid to a public ES where 80% of the kids are at or near the poverty line, they will get a free lunch too (if they will eat it-- mine won't). But this is not a matter of having a policy of feeding all kids for free. It's a decision not to spend $75,000 to save $50,000.

Anonymous wrote:So by this premise should all kids receive "free" food throughout the school year? That way nobody is missed. What about schools where breakfast isn't served at all?

Only kids at those schools.