next challenge as you so well pointed out. and i also want to recognize that representatives carolyn malonely and carolyn mccarthy have introduced legislation to provide tax credits for workplaces providing lactation facilities. we do need to take this up as a nation that breastfeeding and working is not only compatible but it should be encouraged because as i told you all and i'm sure you knew. it's the duration of exclusive breastfeeding that will help us put the first line of defense against childhood obesity. thank you. >> did you also ask for ms. morrison to respond? if there's no objection -- >> do you want me to go ahead and answer the question. thank you for the question. what we're proposing is that we are allowed to have -- well, business 101, you don't plan a budget without having contingency funds or to try to have carry-over. and with a child/adult food care programs we aren't allowed to have carry-over. it's very difficult. is that enough of an answer for

you? okay. thank you. >> thank you. mr. scott? >> thank you. thank you, mr. chairman. do any -- have any of the panelists -- any of the panelists aware of any successful farm to school programs where you work with local farmers to sell food to the local school system? >> i know that across the country we have a number of successful farm to school programs. and we work through the united states department of agriculture through the commodity program to direct farm to schools to our school district in dallas. but there's a number of them across the country. >> and are they helpful? should they be encouraged? >> absolutely. we're able to get a greater variety of fruits and vegetables that students have not been exposed to. and so it's a very successful program.

and we would be glad to provide you with a list of some successful programs. >> thank you. >> would the gentleman yield? >> yeah. >> yes. representing the garden state, i would like to bring to the gentleman's attention, h.r. 4710 introduced by myself, mr. sestak, mr. boyd, and others to amend the school lunch program for improving farm to school programs. >> good. >> and mr. scott i think wants to be on that bill. >> that was my question. [laughter] >> i think so. i think so. i thought i was already on it, as a matter of fact. ms. rivas, is it any more expensive to provide healthy meals than unhealthy mills? >> yes. you know, we currently provide healthy meals. and so i kind of want to start with that because we currently meet the dietary guidelines.

>> it is more expensive to provide a healthy meal? >> it is. significantly more to offer more whole grains and more fresh fruits and vegetables. >> now, one of the curiosities about this program as i understand it, is the reimbursement rate is the same all over the country, low cost areas and high cost areas with the cost of food and personnel is different. the reimbursement rate for the school meals is exactly the same. is that right? >> that's correct. >> does that make sense? >> does that make sense? we all have different challenges. and school food service directors struggle with that. we all do have varying labor costs, food costs and fuel costs. but i think the overall problem is that it's currently totally underfunded. and so all of us are struggling with the tight budget. and in need increased rimsment.

we urged congress for 35 cents across-the-board for breakfast and for lunch. we're wanting to meet the institute of medicine new recommendations of offering more fresh fruits and vegetables. and in order to do that, we need higher rimsment. -- reimbursement. >> how much of your budget, ms. rivas, is used up in administration? and trying to find out who's eligible and who's not eligible? it seems in the schools are virtually everybody is eligible it makes no sense to waste money. you could serve everybody for the cost of fooling with the eligibility standards? >> and that is one of our recommendations. you do reach a certain threshold where at a certain point, you know, when you have certain districts that have certain levels of free and reduced lunch participation, it's more cost-effective to be able to eliminate the process of applications.

>> in virginia, we have a tough budget situation. and there's consideration being given to dispensing with school breakfast. can someone say how important the school breakfast program is. >> i can certainly do that. i have been involved in a number of districts where we have had programs that we have expanded breakfast through grab and go breakfast, breakfast in the classroom, and, you know, our teachers are our best advocates for it because what they see is that their students are more attentive in the classroom. there are less students going to the nurse's office because they're hungry and there's research to show especially when it comes to analytical skills

and math and science, they're able to mentally be able to accept all those concepts a lot easier when they have had breakfast. >> thank you. >> i thank you, mr. chairman. and i thank all of you for your testimony today. ms. rivas, the u.s. healthcare cost due to obesity is estimated to be about $150 billion a year. half of which is paid through medicare and medicaid. with nearly 1 of every 6 dollars of our economy spent on healthcare, we cannot afford to continue to sell junk food in schools. too many children in my district -- i represent one of the poorest districts in the country. depend on food served in schools, most of them. now, i'm talking about cleveland, ohio, which is a part of my district. and i'm certainly not willing to gamble with their health.

getting unhealthy food out of schools is a no-cost way to address the high cost of obesity. my question is, from the perspective of the school nutrition association, do you think that a minimum nutrition standard for foods sold outside of school meals nationwide is needed to protect the integrity of the school lunch program and the health of all of our children in all states? >> absolutely. the school nutrition association totally urges congress to eliminate the time and place rule because we -- you know, absolutely believe that the health of our student -- that we are investing in our -- in the future of our country. when we have well nourished healthy students. and being able to teach that same message of healthy meals both inside and outside of the cafeteria is critical. to them developing healthy

eating habits in the future. and eliminating chronic illnesses as well. >> so there should be a minimum standard? >> absolutely. we're recommending that the standards be set by the secretary of agriculture following the recommended dietary allowances or guidelines for americans. >> thank you. ms. morrison, you recommend -- in your testimony, you recommended that congress reduce the child and adult care food program area eligibility test from 50% to 40%. to streamline access to healthy meals while this reduction will have a positive affect on all rural and suburban communities, will it also have a positive affect on urban areas? and if so, how? >> certainly. what do i want to say? the percentage of low-incomed children or families in urban

areas is no different than in the rural areas. i mean, if you have a district that has 50% -- in fact, it's going to impact them more in the urban areas. because you will have more children concentrated in an urban area that would be impacted by reducing that eligibility to 30% than you would in a rural area. the answer to your question, it would have a greater impact. -- in an urban area. >> ms. gettman, school vending machines. two-thirds of states have weak or no nutrition standards for foods sold outside of meals. one of your recommendations is that congress refrain from imposing additional regulations or mandates on schools outside of the federally subsidized school luncheon and breakfast programs. if congress adopts your

recommendation and does not work to create nationwide nutrition standards for food sold outside of meals, how you will we ensure that our children are only offered the healthiest food? >> thank you. a couple of responses that come to mind include that schools and school districts are moving in the right direction as the information you just shared demonstrates. you know, a fairly significant although certainly not all school districts are already moving in the direction of making that local determination of what's appropriate for students to have access to in their schools. i think -- one thing that we haven't talked about too much is that in light of the direction that many school districts and states are going to with regard to implementing standards for school nutrition, that -- i'm not sure we've asked the question whether national standards would necessarily

improve over those that already exist in schools. sometimes the flip side of uniformity maybe we haven't reached quite as high as we would like to. i think it's also important to honor the fact that long-term solutions are more effective when they're locally initiated and there's local engagement. and, you know, the innovation is coming from the local level. and so that's where i think we would recommend some attention and resources being devoted. i would also have some thought -- give some thought to any unintended consequences as to having national standards. and i already mentioned is it possible that national standards could be weaker than already exists in some states or in some

school districts? and also as mr. kline brought up, we want to make sure that our approach deals with all the environments and climates and contacts that children have. so it's not just in school. but it's also at home and in the community. so that students who are -- do not have access to low nutrition foods in vending machines, for example, aren't just bringing them in or buying them elsewhere or eating differently at home than they do in school. so i think it's important to take -- as comprehensive approach as possible and to recognize that successful solutions to these -- to these issues need to have strong engagement from the local level. >> thank you very much. thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> mr. polis? >> thank you, mr. chairman. i couldn't agree more that

nutritional education is essential for our country to tackle the obesity epidemic. my first question is for ms. rivas. numerous scientific statistics have show low fat high fiber plant-based options for several children. several organizations have promoted vegetarian meals with reduced meat as important options for chronic disease prevention. for example, the american heart association, the american diabetes association, the american institute of cancer research promote plant-based foods for chronic disease prevention. and the american medical association, the american public health association have called on federal food assistance programs to emphasize vegetables, fruits, legames and grains and nondairy feuds. it seems we could be making progress in improving our children's health and bringing down healthcare costs by expanding access to healthy vegetarian choices and reducing children's intake of fat, saturated fat. and some have allergic or other reasons.

some children are allergic to milk and are lactose intolerant like i am and they miss out to other nutrients. so my question is twofold should we encourage healthful vegetarian options by making them more affordable and providing incentives for schools especially low-incomed schools to provide them? and secondly, do you believe that schools should offer nondairy milk alternatives that meet standards with usda for kids who can't drink milk or won't drink milk? >> currently, and we can make an operations -- the school nutrition association did an operations report on trends in many planning in the last year. and the majority of school districts are currently offering vegetarian options as a choice in their menu planning.

in many cases, some of the vegetarian options, because they're not very popular are more expensive. when we have special diets for our students, some of those substitutions are also higher and so they're more expensive. and all the more reason that additional reimbursement is very helpful in being able to expand those menu options. >> and the second part with regard to milk? >> currently, we offer a variety of milk. and school districts can choose to offer as well milk alternate substitutions. the cost of a comparable milk substitute is probably about 4 or 5 times the price of an

8-ounce carton of milk. and so again, it is more expensive to be able to do that. but many school districts are absorbing that cost in doing that. >> what can we do of bringing down the price such as soy milk and almond milk. >> more students are accepting that choice. because when we put the soy milk option on the line, milk cart might cost us 20 cents. a soy alternate is about like 75 cents. and so when we put that on the line, very few take that choice. i'm not really sure how to -- how to get industry to be able to reduce those costs. but obviously the more students that are exposed to it and learn to accept that, then that also lowers that cost.

but it's basically because it's not a high volume item, it's going to cost us more. >> and finally, can you share with us your recommendation on how we can strengthen nutrition education and in particular what role the tram nutrition role can play to promote and support healthy physical activity in children. >> a number years ago there used to be funds that were designated for nutrition education at the rate of about 50 cents per students and those funds were eliminated. certainly more funding for nutrition education would be necessary to be able to expand nutrition education. we're also working with a coordinated school health programs in the school to work on incorporating nutrition education into the curriculum. >> and one final question you mentioned a majority schools have vegetarian options by majority did you mean perhaps a slight majority, 50, 60, 70% or a vast majority?

>> no, i think it's closer to the 90%. i don't know the exact figure. but i would -- from what i recall, it was between 90 and 96%. >> thank you. i yield back. >> thank you, mr. chairman. ms. rivas, i understand that school districts bear significant administrative school budgets in administering the school program and one of them has to do with what they pay the school district itself for the cost of just being there. i understand that there isn't any standardization with regard to what the school district can charge. one of my school districts just told me about an example where they are charged for the full cost of using the multipurpose room all day long when in reality the children only use it half an hour each day.

so what can be done about this? i know that you talked about eliminating the administrative costs entirely. but could there be some standardization that could be done across states? >> well, usda currently allows some costs to producing or indirect costs that go to producing the meal as an allowable cost. but currently there are no specific guidelines to be able to determine what those indirect costs are. and so we urge you to have the secretary of agriculture define those guidelines more clearly so that nationally we're able to have more consistent guidance in what districts are able to charge school districts. so to prevent some of the school districts for charging like the

example you used for the multipurpose room that's only used minimally. >> should it be done by the secretary or should it be done state-by-state? i'm wondering what's the best ways about going about this? >> the best way is to set some general guidelines. this is a national program. it's funded nationally. the guidelines for the menu planning all come from the secretary of agriculture. and they, i think, would be the best body to be able to determine what those guidelines -- because they know what those expectations are for producing that meal. they established the guidelines for producing that meal. so what would be allowable, i think, would be best determined by the secretary of agriculture. >> and there are also the administrative costs of verification. i know that you talked about one way streamlining would be to have whole communities qualify for free lunch programs.

but not all communities would be able to qualify in that manner. so what are other ways that there could be to streamline the verification? >> i'm not familiar with all the variety of the ways that that can be done. but i know that there is a certain threshold that a school district begins to achieve. that after a certain level of percentage of free and reduced -- it gets to where it is more cost-effective to eliminate the whole application processing. there's a big amount of expense that goes to processing applications and verification. and so there is a threshold. and we just urge you to consider that because it would be a more cost-effective way for those communities to be able to reduce the cost to the students as well as expand participation.

i had experience with a provision 2 program where we had about 84% free and reduced. and when we went to that program, we were able to eliminate the stigma that students had about the program. and we were able to increase breakfast from 30% to 50%. we were able to increase middle school and high schools over 10 to 15 to 20% at varying schools. so it's a very good option especially in those communities that have -- where the threshold is to where it cost -- you're putting more money in file cabinets as opposed to on the plate of children. >> and there are relatively high participation rates of fully subsidized students and fully paying students. but i understand that there is a shockingly low rate of students that are at the subsidized level. in, you know, my districts were saying it's only 7%.

versus those who are subsidized being from 60 to 90%. what would be the cost and benefits of allowing students at the reduced lunch level to be fully subsidized? >> and, you know, that is another area that our recommendation priority that the school nutrition program has. there's a small percent in that reduced category that are having to pay 40 cents. and frankly when you get some of those students and you have families of four or five children in that household, it gets very unaffordable for families. and very often our own cafeteria supervisors -- even though, you know, many of them are struggling with their own personal budgets take out of money out of their own pockets to be able to make sure that the children, you know, have a neil. -- meal.

and so our recommendation is that over time, we have that scale adjusted to where we begin incorporating the guidelines to include the reduced student and expand to where they eventually are also fully subsidized like the free students are. >> thank you. i yield back. >> thank you, mr. chairman. ms. rivas, several years ago when bill and i put a program in for fresh fruits and vegetables being made available throughout the day in the classroom, various places. i visited one of the programs in my district. it was very, very successful, very popular with the teachers. and the students. could you comment on that program? >> that is a wonderful program.

i personally have that experience with the dallas school district. and we have over 20 or 30 programs right now where we receive funding for fresh fruits and vegetables. and we have volunteers. they come in. they help distribute a variety of fresh fruits and vegetables. again, many of these children are not exposed to some of these fresh fruits and vegetables. and never seen what a kiwi or a star fruit is because they can't afford it at home. volunteers deliver it to the classroom for a midmorning or midafternoon snack. and it's a very successful program. >> what i noticed in two or three schools that i visited, it cuts across social economic lines, too. >> absolutely. it's available to all students. and so it's part of a new tradition education program. >> uh-huh. uh-huh.

>> and part of that program requires that you provide nutrition education as part of that program. >> uh-huh. >> i remember i went to a rather wealthy -- probably the wealthiest school district in my district. and nothing was being wasted. very little. you could see very little waste. it was an extremely popular program. so we had a study on a poverty area and a study in an area that was not at all. it was the opposite of poverty. let me ask you this question, too. i started the first school breakfast program when i was a teacher in flint central high school for a small number of students. the school breakfast programmed any affect on attendance at the school? >> and i was mentioning -- as i was mentioning the benefits of all of the breakfast program,

attendance was one that i forgot to mention. along with, you know, improved attention in the classroom, behavior in the classroom. you know, being able to learn math and analytical schools. attendance going less often to the nurse's office. all of those are great benefits of the breakfast program. >> and especially among the poor, very often they left home in the morning without any breakfast. so quite anxious to get to school to get their breakfast. and generally once they got there, they stayed there. not always. but they stayed there. so you do see an -- >> i have had some students having been involved with the breakfast program where i had breakfast in a classroom at one school. and the student happened to be rezoned to another school where they did not have breakfast in the classroom.

he wanted to go back to the other school because they had breakfast in the classroom there. because, you know, they really needed that breakfast in the morning. >> thank you very much. i thank all of you very much. >> thank you. mr. holt? >> thank you, chairman, miller. and i want to acknowledge the subcommittee chair carolyn mccarthy for working on the child nutrition programs. and it's really more important now than ever. i'm finding in schools in my district in these tough economic times that the number of children who need the lunches and the breakfasts are -- the numbers are greater than ever. as you may have gathered from my interchange with mr. scott, i have a real interest in the farm to school programs. and you probably know it is a key priority of agriculture secretary vilsack and first lady

mr. obama has planted a garden and so forth. and it not only -- this program not only provides the fresh -- the fresher food but it also has an important educational component that i think lasts into adulthood. so i'm pleased that some of us have introduced the farm to school improvements act. which provides competitive grant and technical assistance. for the use of local foods that improves the relationship between schools and the local providers. and provides mandatory funding each year for the program. so it does provide local economic benefit. but i think -- and it provides an important educational component as i say. ms. rivas, as president of the school nutrition association, i'd like to ask you about a couple of things. first starting w