1 U.S. per capita income ($1,847) divided by State per capita income, except for Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands which are assigned the same per capita income index as Mississippi in accordance with the amendment to sec. 4 of the National School Lunch Act. This amendment provides that the apportionment to Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands shall not exceed 3 percent of the funds appropriated except that in the case of the first apportionment from any annual or supplemental appropriation, the apportionment to Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands shall not be less than that amount which will result in an allotment per child of school age equal to the allotment per child of school age in the State (other than Guam, Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands) having the lowest per capita income among the States participating in such first apportionments. 2 Per capita income index multiplied by population of ages 5-17, inclusive. 3 Total of funds apportioned multiplied by State quotients. Under the National School 76,000 80, 075. 12 38, 242, 400 42, 017, 813. 76 Lunch Act, as amended, not less than 75 percent of the total funds available must be apportioned to the States and Territories. Breakdown between State agency and private schools is based on relative enrollment in public and nonprofit private schools as provided in sec. 10 of the National School Lunch Act for any State in which the State educational agency by law is not permitted to disburse funds paid to it under this act to nonprofit private schools. 4 According to sec. 7 of the National School Lunch Act, during fiscal year 1958 each State must match $3 for each dollar of the Federal Government's apportionment to the State, except that, in the case of a State in which the per capita income is below that of the United States, the matching ratio required is decreased by the percentage which the State's per capita income is below the per capita income of the United States. The actual amount of funds required for matching is then determined by taking this percentage of the amount of the total Federal apportionment to the State. 33913-59-pt. 33 Mr. SANTANGELO. Last year you had this in the justification sheets. Do you have it this year? Mr. WELLS. Yes, the apportionment formula for the current year is in the justification. I was wondering if we could give you a consolidated table, which would show, first of all, the cash allotment to the State, which they proportion out to the schools themselves, and the formula which it is based on. COMPARISON OF FEDERAL AND STATE CONTRIBUTIONS TO THE PROGRAM Mr. MICHEL. To go one step further, what I am really trying to get at, in addition, is how the States are comparing relative to their own State contribution. We talk here in terms of some States doing more. And this is a problem which I know Mr. Horan and I are particularly interested in. Mr. WELLS. We can show first the Federal contribution. That we can break down into the cash contribution and the so-called section 6 commodities. These come out of the school lunch appropriation at the rate of about $15 million a year. If the other data can be shown by State for the current year, we can also for this year, take the estimated distribution of the $35 million of section 32 transferred to section 6 for the general purposes of section 32. Then, we can take the CCC commodities, and then if there is any free section 32 commodities, we can put them in also. Then we can show the total Federal contribution. And then we can show the total contribution of States, municipalities, children, and parents. And you would like the Federal or the State as a proportion of the total. I think we could do it in one table, if you don't ask us to spell it out commodity by commodity. Mr. MICHEL. Right. Make it a composite. Mr. WELLS. This will give you the dollar values. (The information referred to follows:) Comparison of Federal and State financing of the school lunch program for the fiscal year 1958 1 Georgia. $5, 353, 818 $13, 828, 000 $19, 181, 818 258, 573 295, 357 $452, 144 $2,238, 109 $2, 663. 565 6,765 38.232 Arkansas 127,981 699,468 58,945 582,965 1,703, 507 California. Colorado Connecticut.. 103, 942 1, 410, 414 3,496, 279 9, 945, 413 1,572, 926 1. 820, 641 District of Columbia. Florida. Guam. Hawaii. Idaho. 4, 172, 396 9.665 437, 453 304, 185 7,830 291, 932 409, 110 Indiana.. Iowa. Kansas Kentucky. Louisiana.. 2, 338, 128] Maine Maryland.. Massachusetts. Michigan.. 393, 887 2,645, 121 2,901, 423! Minnesota. Mississippi. Missouri. Montana.. Nebraska. 18.034 855.031 788, 015 6,632, 586 4,316, 383 3,036, 433 2, 412, 475 4, 500, 370 6, 376,068 994.084 1,773, 026 3,974, 676 5.940, 431 3,392, 326 3,870, 025 3,675, 106 621, 356 1,415, 616 Nevada.. New Hampshire. New Jersey. New Mexico.. 1, 715, 838 New York. North Carolina. North Dakota.. Ohio... 749, 556 631, 671 Puerto Rico.. 169, 535 2,943, 982 Rhode Island. South Carolina.. South Dakota. 50, 877 514, 737 4, 565, 605 Tennessee.. Ters 2, 548, 605) 4, 754, 226 Trust territories.. 26, 388 Utah.. Vermont. Virgin Islands. Virginis.. Washington. West Virginia. Pennsylvania.. Wisconsin.. Total.. 150, 898 3, 350, 040 549, 803 4, 411, 855 1,057, 893 5, 354, 148 9, 125, 581 26, 388 1,304, 699 354, 667 77,451 4,470, 534 2,642, 849 3, 180, 768 3, 398, 952 300, 813 8,795,000 10, 615, 641) 1,318,000 37.000 5, 701, 000 2. 368,000 30, 615,000 15, 092, 000 11, 657,000 6,500,000 12. 590, 000 29, 230,000 2,918, 000 13,092, 000 20, 047, 000 21,832,000 12, 885, 000 7,960, 000 17, 205, 000 1,881, 000 4,005, 000! 570,000 1,874,000 11, 238, 000 2,780, 000 56, 972, 000 20,779,000 2,095, 000 31, 315, 000 7,582,000 6, 454,000 31, 540, 000 6, 111, 000 1,947,000 11, 654, 000 1,438, 000 15, 198, 000 26, 372, 000 3, 834, 000 1,026, 000 142,000 18. 139,000 10, 562, 000 6,726,000 9, 867,000 1. 192, 000 2, 168, 573 1,613, 357 26, 907, 396 25, 537, 253 55, 034 37, 247, 586 2,502, 356 5, 138, 699 1,380, 667 219, 451 22, 609, 534 13, 204, 849 9,906, 768 13, 265, 952 1,492, 813 14, 802, 256 75, 961, 833 83, 830, 000 174, 594, 089 634, 868,000 809, 462, 089 1 This is the latest year for which complete data are available. cent of total Commodities procured from the $100,000,000 school lunch appropriation are distributed pursuant to Sec. 6 of the National School Lunch Act. These include commodities acquired under price support programs by the Commodity Credit Corporation and donated to schools pursuant to sec. 416 of the Agricultural Act of 1949, as amended, and commodities acquired and donated under authority of sec. 32 of the Agricultural Adjustment Act of Aug. 24, 1935, as amended. Does not include cash payments under the special milk program. Includes contributions from the several sources within the States-State and local government contributions, other local contributions, and payments by children. Mr. MICHEL. My next question, then, concerns prices of lunches. The figure of 10 cents per lunch, or 1014 cents per lunch, was mentioned earlier, I believe. Mr. WELLS. Yes, sir. PRICES CHARGED FOR LUNCHES Mr. MICHEL. Have you got an average figure throughout the country of what the schoolchildren are being charged for a lunch? Mr. DAVIS. 25 cents per lunch is the average. Mr. MICHEL. In other words, in schools participating, the Federal Government is picking up the tab for roughly 40 percent? Mr. WELLS. Oh, no. Mr. MICHEL. 10 cents out of 25 cents. Mr. DAVIS. No; the Federal contribution helps reduce the price down to 25 cents. Mr. MICHEL. Do you have any kind of tables or figures that would show how that cost per lunch varies throughout the country? Mr. WELLS. I think we can get it by States. Mr. MICHEL. Would you furnish that list for the record by States as to what schoolchildren are being charged? Mr. DAVIS. I might just caution on that one. The charge varies by school. You might get averages by States. I don't know how significant it would be. But each school system runs its own school lunch program the best way it knows how, including determining what they have to charge the student, so that the price will vary from community to community. In Arlington, it is 39 cents, and in the District of Columbia it is 27; down in the southern part of Virginia it might be as low in some communities as 20 cents. Mr. MICHEL. Well, maybe I better amend that request. Mr. HOLMAAS. Could I suggest this? On page 69 of the justification notes, we have a breakdown which, in addition to showing the Federal cash payments, section 6, and the donated commodities, and also shows separately the totals of the State and local Government contributions, the other local contributions, and the estimated payment by children. Now, as I understood your request, if this were broken down for each State in this same general pattern, and the number of participating children shown, it would answer your question. I believe we can take the various parts of the program and break it down by State. Can we do that, Mr. Davis? This would answer the basic question of comparisons by State of the payments by children—which should reflect the pattern of State by State variances in average prices charged for lunches. |