[Federal Register Volume 88, Number 249 (Friday, December 29, 2023)]
[Rules and Regulations]
[Pages 90230-90402]
From the Federal Register Online via the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[FR Doc No: 2023-28488]
[[Page 90229]]
Vol. 88
Friday,
No. 249
December 29, 2023
Part II
Department of Agriculture
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
Food and Nutrition Service
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
7 CFR Parts 210, 220, 225, et al.
Establishing the Summer EBT Program and Rural Non-Congregate Option in
the Summer Meal Programs; Interim Final Rule
Federal Register / Vol. 88 , No. 249 / Friday, December 29, 2023 /
Rules and Regulations
[[Page 90230]]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE
Food and Nutrition Service
7 CFR Parts 210, 220, 225, and 292
[FNS-2023-0029]
RIN 0584-AE96
Establishing the Summer EBT Program and Rural Non-Congregate
Option in the Summer Meal Programs
AGENCY: Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), Department of Agriculture
(USDA).
ACTION: Interim final rule.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
SUMMARY: The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 requires the
Secretary of Agriculture to make available an option to States to
provide summer meals for non-congregate meal service in rural areas
with no congregate meal service and to establish a permanent summer
electronic benefits transfer for children program (Summer EBT) for the
purpose of ensuring continued access to food when school is not in
session for the summer. This interim final rule amends the Summer Food
Service Program (SFSP) and the National School Lunch Program's Seamless
Summer Option (SSO) regulations to codify the flexibility for rural
program operators to provide non-congregate meal service in the SFSP
and SSO, collectively referred to as the summer meal programs. This
rule also establishes regulations and codifies the Summer EBT Program
in the Code of Federal Regulations.
DATES:
Effective date: This rule is effective December 29, 2023.
Comment date: To be considered, written comments on this interim
final rule must be received on or before April 29, 2024.
ADDRESSES: The Food and Nutrition Service, USDA, invites interested
persons to submit written comments on this interim final rule. Comments
may be submitted in writing by one of the following methods:
Federal eRulemaking Portal: Go to https://www.regulations.gov. Follow the online instructions for submitting
comments.
Mail: Send comments to Community Meals Policy Division,
USDA Food and Nutrition Service, 1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA
22314.
All written comments submitted in response to this interim
final rule will be included in the record and will be made available to
the public. Please be advised that the substance of the comments and
the identity of the individuals or entities submitting the comments
will be subject to public disclosure. USDA will make the written
comments publicly available on the internet via https://www.regulations.gov.
FOR FURTHER INFORMATION CONTACT: J. Kevin Maskornick, Division
Director, Community Meals Policy Division, USDA Food and Nutrition
Service, 1320 Braddock Place, Alexandria, VA 22314, telephone: 703-305-
2537.
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION:
I. Background
a. USDA's Vision for Complementary Summer Nutrition Programs
b. Non-Congregate Meal Service
c. Summer EBT
II. Discussion of the Interim Final Rule--SFSP and SSO Non-
Congregate Option
a. Subpart A--Definitions
i. Site, Congregate Meal Service, and Non-Congregate Meal
Service
ii. Rural
iii. Conditional Non-Congregate Site
iv. New Site
v. Site Supervisor and Operating Costs
vi. Good Standing
b. Subpart B--State Agencies Responsibilities
i. Department Notification
ii. Program Management and Administration Plan
iii. Priorities and Outreach Mandate
iv. Application Requirements--Content of Sponsor Applications
and Site Information Sheets
v. Approval of Sites and Determining No Congregate Meal Service
vi. Duration of Rural Designation
vii. Clarifications to Existing Requirements: Free Meal Policy
Statement, State-Sponsor Agreement, and Corrective Action Procedures
c. Subpart C--Requirements for Sponsor Participation
i. Sponsor Eligibility
ii. Clarifications to Existing Requirements: General
Requirements at 7 CFR 225.14(c)
d. Subpart D--Responsibilities of Sponsors
i. Identification and Determination of Eligible Children
ii. Meal Ordering and Second Meals
iii. Requirements Specific to Sponsors That Operate Conditional
Non-Congregate Sites
1. Certification To Collect Information on Participant
Eligibility
2. Notification to the Community
e. Subpart E--Non-Congregate Meal Service
i. Non-Congregate Meal Service Requirements
ii. Non-Congregate Meal Service Options
1. Multi-Day Meal Issuance
2. Parent or Guardian Meal Pick-Up
3. Bulk Meal Items
iii. Offer Versus Serve
iv. Clarifications to Existing Meal Service Requirements--Meal
Service Times and Offsite Consumption of Foods
f. Subpart F--Monitoring
i. State Agency Responsibilities
1. Pre-Approval Visits
2. Sponsor and Site Reviews
ii. Sponsor Responsibilities
1. Training
2. Site Reviews
g. Subpart G--Miscellaneous
i. Collection of Summer Meal Site Location Data
ii. Reimbursements
iii. SSO Non-Congregate Provisions
iv. Annual Update To Approved Rural Data Sources
h. Subpart H--Technical Amendments
i. Subpart I--Severability
III. Discussion of the Interim Final Rule--Summer EBT
a. Subpart A--General
i. General Purpose and Scope
ii. Definitions
1. Existing Definitions
2. Modified Definitions
3. New Definitions
iii. Administration
1. Delegation of Responsibilities
2. Authority To Waive Statute and Regulations
b. Subpart B--Eligibility Standards and Criteria
i. General Purpose and Scope
ii. Eligibility
iii. Period To Establish Eligibility
c. Subpart C--Requirements of Summer EBT Agencies
i. Plan for Operations and Management
ii. Coordination Between State-Administered and ITO-Administered
Summer EBT Programs
iii. Advance Planning Document (APD) Processes
iv. Enrolling Eligible Children
1. Streamlined Certification
2. Application Requirements
3. Verification Requirements
4. Notification of Eligibility, Denial, Appeal Rights, and the
Ability To Opt-Out
d. Subpart D--Issuance and Use of Program Benefits
i. General Standards
1. Benefit Issuance
2. Dual Participation
3. Benefit Amount
4. Participant Support
5. Expungement
ii. Issuance and Adjustment Requirements Specific to States,
Including Territories That Administer SNAP
iii. Retailer Integrity Requirements Specific to States,
Including Territories That Administer SNAP
iv. Requirements Specific to Territories That Administer
Nutrition Assistance Programs (NAP) Programs
v. Requirements Specific to ITOs Administering Summer EBT
e. Subpart E--General Administrative Requirements
i. Payments to Summer EBT Agencies and Use of Administrative
Program Funds
1. Benefit Funds
2. State Administrative Funds
ii. Methods of Payment
iii. Standards for Financial Management Systems
iv. Performance Criteria
v. Records and Reports
vi. Audits and Management Control Evaluations
[[Page 90231]]
1. Audits
2. Management Control Evaluations
vii. Investigations
viii. Hearing Procedures for Families and Summer EBT Agencies
ix. Claims
x. Procurement Standards
1. General
2. Contractual Responsibilities
3. Procedures
xi. Miscellaneous Administrative Provisions
1. Civil Rights
2. Program Evaluations
3. General Responsibilities
xii. Information Collection/Recordkeeping--OMB Assigned Control
Numbers
f. Subpart F--Severability
IV. Coordinated Services Plan
V. Procedural Matters
I. Background
Summer is frequently the most challenging time of the year for
children at risk of food insecurity when they no longer have access to
daily school meals. The Summer Food Service Program (SFSP), authorized
under section 13 of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act
(NSLA), 42 U.S.C. 1761, has been the primary source of nutritional
support for vulnerable children during the summer since its formal
inception in 1975. The purpose of the SFSP is to provide nutritious
meals to children in low-income areas when schools are not in session
during the summer months, as well as during long school breaks in
communities with year-round school calendars. Schools can also offer
meals through the Seamless Summer Option (SSO) of the National School
Lunch Program (NSLP), which allows school food authorities to provide
meals to children during the summer months, school breaks, and
unanticipated school closures using the procedures of the school lunch
and breakfast programs. The SFSP and SSO are collectively referred to
as USDA summer meal programs. Through the summer meal programs, program
operators provide meals and snacks to children at meal sites in their
communities; these meals are served at no cost to children and were
historically required to be consumed in a congregate setting on the
meal site premises.
Among the USDA Child Nutrition Programs (CNPs), the summer meal
programs are unique in many ways, including the seasonal nature of
their operations, the diversity of organizations that operate the
programs, and the range of sites at which meals are offered. Many sites
offer summer programming in addition to meals. Meals served as part of
the summer meal programs are served at a wide variety of sites,
including schools, recreation centers, parks, camps, and places of
worship. In July 2022, the summer meal programs served an average of
4.1 million children daily at more than 36,000 sites nationwide.
Although the summer meal programs are an important source of
nutrition for many children, program access remains inconsistent or out
of reach for some communities and families that cannot reliably access
summer meals. Children who may have difficulty accessing summer meals
include those:
living in rural areas who would have to travel long
distances to receive a meal,
living in communities without summer meal sites,
living in areas with limited safe and reliable
transportation options, and in families whose schedules do not allow
them to travel to a site daily.
USDA, State administering agencies, program operators, and other
nutrition security champions have worked hard to expand the reach of
summer meal programs over the years. Despite these efforts, only 1 in 6
children \1\ who eat free or reduced price school meals participate in
the summer meal programs in a typical year, leaving a large gap between
children in need of summer meals and those who receive them. This
ongoing summer nutrition gap indicates that the nutritional needs of
children throughout the U.S. during the summer months cannot be met
with a one-size-fits-all approach.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ Calculated from 2022 FNS administrative data.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In December 2022, Congress took action to address the summer
nutrition gap by providing new tools to serve low-income children
during the summer months. On December 29, 2022, President Biden signed
the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (the Act) (Pub. L. 117-328),
which amended section 13 of the NSLA to allow children in rural areas
to take their meals off-site beginning in 2023, and established a
permanent, nationwide Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer for Children
Program (Summer EBT) beginning in 2024. Regulations to amend the summer
meal programs and establish Summer EBT are being promulgated through
this interim final rule (IFR), as required by the Act.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ 42 U.S.C. 1761(a)(13)(F) (``Not later than 1 year after
December 29, 2022, the Secretary shall promulgate regulations (which
shall include interim final regulations) to carry out this section.
. . .'').
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
As mentioned above and pursuant to the requirements of the NSLA,
which authorizes the summer meal programs, summer meal program rules
previously required that children remain at a meal service site while
they consumed their meal or snack. This approach to program
implementation, known as congregate meal service, has many benefits
including providing the opportunity for children to socialize and
engage in supervised activities offered at the site. However, as
previously noted, some communities lack the resources or infrastructure
to operate meal sites and supervise a meal service, and some families
face significant barriers traveling to a site for each meal. The Act
addresses these challenges by providing flexibility for sites in rural
areas to provide a non-congregate meal service, which means allowing
children to take meals off-site, for example, to their homes.
The Act also authorized a new permanent method for offering
additional summer nutrition assistance for children. The new Summer EBT
program will provide benefits on EBT cards so that families can
purchase food for their children. Together, these changes will
revolutionize how our nation supports the nutritional needs of children
during the summer months, when school is not in session.
These two alternatives to connecting children to nutrition during
the summer may be new as permanent options, but both have been tested
extensively in recent years. Non-congregate meal service in the summer
meal programs has been tested through demonstration projects, program
waivers during the COVID-19 pandemic, and operational guidance in
summer 2023; Summer EBT has been piloted through demonstration projects
since 2011 and the Pandemic EBT program offered in response to COVID-19
was similar to Summer EBT in many ways.
A. USDA's Vision for Complementary Summer Nutrition Programs
USDA's goal across all summer nutrition programs is simple: to
connect children with nutritious food during the summer months. While
traditional congregate summer meal service remains a vital tool for
providing low-income children with nutritious meals at no cost, USDA
recognizes that not all children who would benefit from summer
nutrition assistance are currently being reached through existing
Programs. Due to numerous barriers to access that have already been
highlighted, including time, distance, and transportation, many
children who are eligible for free and reduced price school meals are
not well served by traditional congregate summer meal sites. In
particular, these challenges have been historically difficult to
overcome in rural areas. USDA's goal is
[[Page 90232]]
to leverage the provisions codified through this IFR, working
aggressively to close access gaps and ensure that children receive
critical nutrition assistance during the summer months.
The Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023, as implemented by this
rulemaking, expands the reach of USDA's summer nutrition programs by
establishing three distinct and essential pillars of summer nutrition
assistance that will work in tandem and in a complementary fashion. In
addition to the traditional congregate summer meal option provided
through the SFSP and the SSO, State agencies and Program operators can
now utilize two new methods of providing children with summer nutrition
assistance. Non-congregate meal service will address critical access
challenges in rural areas by allowing SFSP and SSO Program operators to
provide meals available for pick up or delivery that children can eat
at the time and place that is convenient for them. Summer EBT is a
nationwide, permanently authorized program that provides EBT benefits
to eligible children that can be used to buy groceries. Taken together,
these three pathways for providing summer nutrition assistance will
help to better support rural, suburban, and urban communities alike.
The complementary nature of these nutrition assistance options is
the foundation of their great potential to benefit children across the
nation. They are intended to be used simultaneously for the purposes of
delivering a more complete summer nutrition safety net. To illustrate,
SFSP and SSO meal sites have provided nutritious summer meals, as well
as recreational, educational, and other enrichment opportunities to
generations of children. However, in rural areas, where there may be a
lack of transportation, sites, funds, and staff to support traditional
congregate meal service, non-congregate meal service can be used to
help provide children in these areas with equitable access to
nutritious food. Significantly, the provisions established by the Act
and implemented under this rulemaking also allow for program operators
to use the non-congregate option to complement congregate meals at the
times when congregate meal service is not offered; for example, a rural
site serving congregate meals during the week may also offer
``wraparound'' service, providing take-home meals for the weekend. The
Summer EBT Program's addition of EBT benefits for children introduces a
new layer of nutrition assistance that is flexible and allows families
to supplement summer meals with foods of their choice that are
available anytime, including when meal sites are not open. The
combination of these three approaches for providing nutrition during
the summer months will help to ensure both equitable and more
comprehensive access for children, and USDA looks forward to continued
partnership with States, Tribes, and local stakeholders to use all the
tools that are now available to meet their communities' needs.
B. Non-Congregate Meal Service
Demonstration Projects
The Act instructed USDA to incorporate best practices and lessons
learned from demonstration projects carried out under section 749(g) of
the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Administration, and
Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010 (Pub. L. 111-80; 123 Stat.
2132), which provided $85 million to USDA beginning in 2010 to initiate
and implement the Summer Food for Children demonstration projects.\3\
One demonstration project was the Enhanced Summer Food Service Program
(eSFSP), which tested changes to the existing structure and delivery
mechanism of SFSP for the purpose of determining effects on program
participation. The eSFSP included the Meal Delivery demonstration which
offered breakfast and lunch delivery to homes of eligible children in
rural areas, as well as the Food Backpack demonstration which provided
weekend and holiday meals to SFSP participants for consumption when
SFSP sites were not open. In 2013, the demonstration project for Non-
Congregate Feeding for Outdoor Summer Feeding Sites Experiencing Excess
Heat was first implemented. Under this demonstration project, SFSP and
SSO sponsors who were operating approved outdoor meal sites without
temperature-controlled alternative sites could operate as non-
congregate sites on days when the area was experiencing excessive heat.
In addition to excessive heat, USDA approved four States to participate
in the demonstration due to smoke and air-quality concerns in summer
2019. In more recent years, USDA implemented Meals-to-You (MTY) under
the demonstration authority. MTY was developed in response to
stakeholder feedback about the challenges and difficulties of serving
summer meals in sparsely populated communities and remote areas.
Through MTY, food boxes were mailed directly to families of children
who were eligible for free or reduced price school meals. Each eligible
child received a weekly box, which contained five breakfast meals, five
snacks, and five lunch/supper meals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ Information and supporting materials on each of the Summer
Food for Children demonstration projects are available at: https://www.fns.usda.gov/ops/summer-food-children-demonstrations.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Historically, non-congregate meals were operated on a small scale
through the above mentioned demonstration projects. However, during the
COVID-19 public health emergency (PHE), non-congregate meals became
more widely available as an important part of USDA's response to the
pandemic. In March 2020, Federal, State, and local level efforts to
reduce the spread of COVID-19 resulted in the abrupt closure of schools
across the country, disrupting access to school meals for millions of
children. In response, State agencies and program operators requested
individual waivers under the authority of section 12(l) of the NSLA and
implemented program flexibilities, such as the flexibility to allow
non-congregate meal service through SFSP and SSO. To better address the
urgent need for resources and operational flexibilities required to
serve children throughout the pandemic, Congress provided USDA with
temporary authority to waive statute and regulations on a nationwide
basis for Child Nutrition Programs through the Families First
Coronavirus Response Act of 2020 (FFRCA) (Pub. L. 116-127), and later
through subsequent statutory extensions to help USDA continue to
respond to changing needs throughout the pandemic. Such efforts
included USDA issuing the Nationwide Waiver to Allow Non-Congregate
Feeding and other complementary non-congregate waivers under section
2202(a) of the FFCRA. These waivers ensured that children continued to
receive nutritious meals and helped to mitigate the impacts of the
COVID-19 PHE.
For summer 2023, USDA provided guidance on non-congregate meal
service operations in rural areas as required by the Act. Many of the
non-congregate flexibilities allowed for summer 2023 operations were
allowed through previous demonstrations, waivers, and guidance on non-
congregate meal service operations during the COVID-19 PHE. Through
this IFR, USDA is promulgating regulations for the summer meal programs
rural non-congregate option for program year 2024 and beyond. These
regulations are based on a combination of best practices from
demonstration projects, non-congregate flexibilities offered during the
COVID-19 pandemic, and prior guidance that was issued for operating
rural non-
[[Page 90233]]
congregate meal service in summer 2023.
Stakeholder Feedback
Between April 5, 2023, and June 15, 2023, USDA hosted 21 listening
sessions with external stakeholders on the topic of non-congregate
summer meals. Input was gathered from State agency program
administrators,\4\ school food authorities (SFAs) and other program
operators, advocacy groups, and program participants. Listening session
participants were asked a series of questions related to
implementation, service models, program integrity, challenges,
benefits, and definitions; each session also included open time where
participants could share additional thoughts of interest to them. USDA
also held consultations with Tribal leaders from Indian Tribal
Organizations (ITOs) to obtain their input on the topic of non-
congregate summer meals, as well as rural experts at Federal agencies
to obtain their input on defining and identifying rural areas. USDA
recorded and analyzed all comments shared during the listening sessions
and has taken all comments into careful consideration when developing
this rule.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ USDA invited all State agencies to provide input, and the
vast majority (47) of States actively participated in the listening
sessions.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Stakeholders were generally positive about non-congregate summer
meals, citing enhanced program access as the primary benefit. However,
14 State agencies voiced concerns with program integrity and five State
agencies expressed concern about nutritional quality and/or food safety
of meals served. Fifteen additional stakeholders voiced concern about
inadequate staff support to manage non-congregate meal service.
Stakeholders said that the existing (long-standing) definition of
``rural'' did not sufficiently encompass rural areas and offered ideas
for how the definition of ``rural'' could be expanded (see section II.
A. ii. for rural definition discussion). Finally, stakeholders
requested clear and timely guidance from USDA on a wide range of
topics, including best practices, eligibility, and program integrity
efforts; State agencies requested that guidance be issued anywhere from
6 to 18 months in advance of summer program operations.
C. Summer EBT
Section 13A of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, 42
U.S.C. 1762, authorizes the Secretary to establish a program under
which States, and Indian Tribal Organizations (ITOs) that administer
the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and
Children (WIC), electing to participate in the Summer EBT Program may,
beginning in Summer 2024 and annually thereafter, issue to each
eligible household Summer EBT benefits. For 2024, the value of the
benefit will be $40 per child for each month of the summer with amounts
adjusted for Alaska, Hawaii, and the U.S. Territories.
Summer EBT Demonstration Projects
Although Summer EBT is the newest, permanent Federal food
assistance entitlement program, it is not a new approach to addressing
food insecurity during the summer months. In fact, Summer EBT has been
tested through more than a decade of demonstration projects
administered by USDA in collaboration with States and Indian Tribal
Organizations. Prior to the publication of this interim final
rulemaking, and under the same authority as the SFSP demonstration
projects provided in 2010 (section 749(g) of the Agriculture, Rural
Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies
Appropriations Act, 2010 (Pub. L. 111-80; 123 Stat. 2132)), the Summer
Electronic Benefits Transfer for Children (SEBTC) demonstration project
was implemented to help reduce summer food insecurity among children.
Starting in 2011, the SEBTC demonstration distributed a monthly food
benefit during the summer months to children eligible for free or
reduced price school meals. Most States operating the demonstration
projects utilized a debit card (or Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program (SNAP)) model whereby eligible participants received benefits
on a debit card, which could be redeemed at any SNAP-authorized
retailer. Some States and several ITOs operated the Summer EBT program
using a WIC-like model whereby eligible participants could purchase
only foods prescribed in a defined food package at WIC-authorized
retailers using their Summer EBT cards.
Through rigorous evaluation, the SEBTC demonstration projects have
proven successful at mitigating food insecurity and improving diet
quality and variety. SEBTC benefits reduced the most severe category of
food insecurity among children during the summer by one-third when
compared to those receiving no benefits.\5\ Evaluations of USDA's
previous experience with SEBTC demonstration projects indicated that
this model could be effectively implemented in a wide variety of
communities. The SEBTC demonstration projects were an innovative
approach to meeting the nutritional needs of children during the summer
months as the model provides families with flexibility to purchase food
for their children at times and places that are convenient for them.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2013). SEBTC Demonstration:
Evaluation Findings for the Full Implementation Year 2012 Final
Report. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service.
https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/SEBTC2012.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Pandemic Electronic Benefit Transfer
The effectiveness of the SEBTC demonstration projects facilitated
the implementation of Pandemic Electronic Benefit Transfer (P-EBT).
From 2020 to 2023, P-EBT was part of the COVID-19 pandemic response to
prevent food insecurity among children while they did not have access
to school meals. The Families First Coronavirus Response Act, (Pub. L.
116-127), as amended by the Continuing Appropriations Act, 2021 and
Other Extensions Act (Pub. L. 116-159), the Consolidated Appropriations
Act, 2021 (Pub. L. 116-260), the American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 (Pub.
L. 117-2), and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117-
328) provided the Secretary authority to approve State agency plans to
administer P-EBT. Children were eligible to receive P-EBT benefits if
they would have received free or reduced price meals under the NSLA but
missed those meals due to COVID-19. For example, the child's school was
closed or operating at reduced hours or attendance due to COVID-19, or
the child did not attend school because they were sick with COVID-19.
Through P-EBT, eligible school children received temporary emergency
nutrition benefits through EBT cards that families could use to
purchase food at local retailers, allowing families with eligible
children to purchase healthy food more easily during the pandemic.
The American Rescue Plan Act (Pub. L. 117-2) specifically
authorized the extension of P-EBT for the covered summer period after
any school year in which there was a public health emergency
designation for all children who met P-EBT income eligibility
requirements under the schools component of P-EBT. In December 2023,
the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117-328) authorized
USDA to allow State agencies to implement P-EBT for summer 2023 without
the need for an approved P-EBT plan for the preceding school year,
limited P-EBT eligibility for school children to only those children
who attended NSLP-participating schools at the end of the preceding
school year,
[[Page 90234]]
and redefined the P-EBT benefit amount for summer 2023 to $120 for the
entire covered period, with amounts adjusted for Alaska, Hawaii, and
the U.S. Territories.
With the end of the COVID-19 PHE on May 11, 2023, FY 2023 was the
final fiscal year that children were eligible for P-EBT benefits. The
permanent Summer EBT program for school-aged children will begin in
summer 2024 ensuring eligible school-aged children will continue to
receive critical nutrition assistance.
Summer EBT as a Permanent Program
Beginning in summer 2024, the NSLA permanently establishes Summer
EBT benefits at $40 per month per eligible child and indexes the
benefit to the SNAP Thrifty Food Plan to account for inflation. Summer
EBT will provide EBT benefits to children from low-income households
during the summer months to ensure continued access to nutrition when
school is not in session. USDA anticipates that Summer EBT will help to
close the summer nutrition gap for more than 29 million children once
implemented nationwide. As amended, the NSLA allows States that
participate in SNAP and Territories participating in NAP (including
Puerto Rico, American Samoa and the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands) to issue benefits which are usable at SNAP or NAP
retailers. The NSLA also provides that ITOs administering WIC may
deliver Summer EBT benefits to be used at WIC authorized retailers.
Benefit redemptions are made through EBT cards or `other electronic
methods.' The permanent Summer EBT Program is separate and distinct
from the earlier SEBTC demonstration projects, which were limited in
scope and conducted for the purpose of gaining insight into the
effectiveness of the model. The permanent Summer EBT Program is also
separate and distinct from P-EBT, which was a specific Federal
Government response to COVID-19.
USDA published the following initial guidance for 2024 Summer EBT
implementation prior to publication of this rulemaking to assist States
with preparations:
1. SEBT 01-2023, Initial Guidance for State Implementation of
Summer EBT in 2024, June 7, 2023;
2. SEBT 02-2023, Initial Guidance for Implementation of Summer EBT
in 2024 by Indian Tribal Organizations Administering WIC, June 13,
2023;
3. SEBT 03-2023, Summer EBT Eligibility, Certification, and
Verification, July 31, 2023;
4. SEBT 01-2024, Summer EBT Administrative Funding Process for
FY2024, October 18, 2023.
Through this rulemaking, the Summer EBT Program will be codified in
a new part 292 of Title 7 of the Code of Federal Regulations, which
will supersede the memos listed above.
Summary of Stakeholder Feedback
Between April and June 2023, USDA hosted 24 listening sessions to
solicit input about Summer EBT from State agencies administering SNAP
and Child Nutrition Programs, school food authorities (SFAs) and other
program operators, advocacy groups, local elected officials, and
families. USDA also consulted with Tribal leaders on Summer EBT in May
2023, attended two conferences to meet with and gather feedback
directly from ITOs administering WIC, and met with Tribal WIC
administrators virtually. Listening session participants were asked for
input about approaches to program implementation, program integrity,
program costs, customer service, and technical aspects of Summer EBT
operations. Participants were offered the opportunity to raise other
issues of interest to them as well. USDA carefully considered this
input when developing this rule.
Across listening sessions, State agencies, school food authorities,
program participants and external organizations consistently expressed
a desire for the Summer EBT program to run seamlessly and
automatically, particularly around eligibility determinations and
enrollment. State agencies, SFAs, and advocates expressed that data
sharing and collection between State agencies [and between State
agencies and local education agencies (LEAs)] must be streamlined and
automated, and noted that centralized databases could help simplify the
data-sharing process. Relatedly, many State agencies, school food
authorities, and external organizations identified the need for States
to provide Statewide applications for children who must apply using a
Summer EBT application to avoid placing the responsibility of
collecting and processing applications on LEAs, especially those
participating in the Community Eligibility Provision (CEP) who do not
collect school meals applications. Some State agency staff asked that
USDA provide and maintain a nationwide Summer EBT application. There
was universal concern about the impacts for both LEAs and households of
requiring students at special provision schools (e.g., CEP schools) who
are not ``identified'' to apply for Summer EBT. Households with
children enrolled in provision schools are not accustomed to completing
annual income applications for school meal benefits and may not know if
their child is ``identified'' through participation in other means
tested programs or if an income application must be completed. Without
effective processes to communicate with families and to collect
applications, this could cause confusion and negatively impact program
participation. Likewise, many CEP schools do not collect income
applications even on a periodic basis as eligibility because the level
of Federal reimbursement for the NSLP/SBP is solely based on the number
of identified students. These schools do not currently have resources
and staffing to support this effort. Additionally, a number of external
organizations and States urged USDA to allow the use of ``alternative''
income applications to confer Summer EBT eligibility.
Additionally, FNS received numerous inquiries from States regarding
which State Agency should lead the Summer EBT Program. Although SNAP
and Child Nutrition Programs are generally administered by separate
agencies at the State level, these agencies have historically teamed up
to improve children's nutrition. For example, SNAP and Child Nutrition
agencies successfully stood up and implemented direct certification, a
process that streamlines enrollment and reduces burden for millions of
children every year, and they jointly provided P-EBT benefits at a time
when many children were vulnerable to food insecurity. Similarly, State
agencies should work together in a collaborative way to determine how
they can best use their resources and expertise to support Summer EBT,
and jointly decide the appropriate roles and responsibilities of each
agency.
State agencies, ITOs, and external organizations expressed
significant concerns about the 50 percent match funding required for
Summer EBT administrative costs, particularly given the fact that, in
many States, the window to request or allocate State funding for Summer
EBT through the regular budgetary process was closing or had already
closed. Some States shared that this may prevent them from standing up
the program in Summer 2024. ITOs similarly expressed concerns about the
required match, and specifically asked for a ``planning year'' in which
benefits are not issued, but administrative funding can be received to
set up the program. States and ITOs also requested clearer guidance
from
[[Page 90235]]
USDA related to administrative funding and financial management.
States, school food authorities, and advocates also discussed
lessons learned from operating P-EBT, and ways to improve operations
when delivering the Summer EBT Program. Specifically, USDA heard the
importance of delivering benefits timely, developing clear lines of
communication on customer service (e.g., clear points of contact for
households), and increased participant education, such as better
messaging to households. States and advocates also noted the need to
improve data quality, primarily ensuring that addresses for
participants are accurate and current at the time benefits are issued.
Finally, ITOs shared robust feedback on three specific topics: the
benefit delivery model for ITOs, enrolling eligible children, and de-
duplication of benefits.
ITOs shared that they would appreciate flexibility in the benefit
delivery model, meaning the ability to operate using a cash value
benefit (CVB), a food package, a combination of the two, or an
alternative approach. ITOs also shared concerns about communicating
with families about the option to participate in the ITO-administered
program and coordinating with States to ensure that children do not
receive benefits from both State and ITO-operated Summer EBT programs.
ITOs thus asked USDA to issue strong regulatory language requiring
States to cooperate with ITOs on general program operations and data
sharing. Additionally, ITOs recommended that ITOs administering the
Program serve their entire jurisdictions to streamline program
implementation and minimize de-duplication.
II. Discussion of the Interim Final Rule--SFSP and SSO Non-Congregate
Option
This section of the preamble discusses the actions USDA is taking
to implement the statutory provisions for non-congregate meal service
in the SFSP in 7 CFR part 225 and the SSO in 7 CFR parts 210 and 220.
All Program regulations and guidance, instructions, and handbooks
issued by the USDA Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) apply to both
congregate and non-congregate operations except as otherwise specified
through this rulemaking.
A. Definitions
i. Site, Congregate Meal Service, and Non-Congregate Meal Service
SFSP regulations under 7 CFR part 225 have historically been framed
in the context of the long-standing congregate meal service model under
the NSLA. Prior to amendments made in the Act, provisions under the
NSLA at 42 U.S.C. 1753(b)(1)(A), 42 U.S.C. 1761(a)(1)(D) and Program
regulations at Sec. 225.6(i)(15) required Program meals to be served
in a congregate setting and consumed by participants on site in order
to be eligible for reimbursement. Therefore, under current regulations
at Sec. 225.2, ``site'' means a physical location at which a sponsor
provides a food service for children and at which children consume
meals in a supervised setting. Currently, there is no separate
statutory or regulatory definition of congregate meal service. However,
the establishment of the non-congregate meal service option underscores
the need to explicitly define and distinguish congregate and non-
congregate meal service for Program purposes.
For Summer 2023, the NSLA was amended to allow Program operators to
operate a non-congregate meal service in rural areas consistent with
implementation models previously used in USDA summer demonstration
projects, as discussed in section I. B. of this IFR. The two models
available for both SFSP and SSO during summer 2023 were home delivery
and meal pick-up. Under the home delivery model, meals are delivered
directly to homes in eligible areas with eligible children. In the
context of this model, FNS advised State agencies and sponsors through
summer 2023 guidance to consider the non-congregate meal service
operation overall as the site (for example, a delivery route or courier
distribution process), instead of the individual residences to which
the meals were delivered. Therefore, the inclusion of the phrases
``physical location'' and ``supervised setting'' in the definition of
site at 7 CFR 225.2 is inconsistent with providing different models of
non-congregate meal service, as non-congregate meals can be consumed
anywhere, and do not have to be consumed under supervision.
Therefore, this rulemaking revises the existing definition of
``site'' and adds new definitions of ``congregate meal service'' and
``non-congregate meal service'' to provide clarity and applicability to
new and existing Program requirements. USDA is codifying these working
definitions as established in summer 2023 guidance into part 225.
Accordingly, this IFR makes the following amendments in Sec.
225.2:
Amends the definition of ``site'' to mean the place where
a child receives a Program meal. A site may be the indoor or outdoor
location where congregate meals are served, a stop on a delivery route
of a mobile congregate meal service, or the distribution location or
route for a non-congregate meal service. However, a child's residence
is not considered a non-congregate meal site for Program monitoring
purposes.
Adds a definition of ``congregate meal service'' to mean a
food service at which meals that are provided to children are consumed
on site in a supervised setting; and
Adds a definition of ``non-congregate meal service'' to
mean a food service at which meals are provided for children to consume
all the components off-site. The definition further clarifies that non-
congregate meal service must only be operated at sites designated as
``rural'' and with no ``congregate meal service,'' as determined in
Sec. 225.6(h)(3) and (4).
ii. Rural
Newly added section 13(a)(13)(A) of the NSLA makes available to
States the option to provide Program meals for non-congregate
consumption in a rural area with no congregate meal service. This
expansion of summer meal service prompted renewed interest in
reviewing, revising, and modernizing the SFSP's long-standing
definition of ``rural.''
In 1978, the Department proposed a definition of ``rural'' (44 FR
8) in response to the provisions of the NSLA and Child Nutrition
Amendments of 1977 (Pub. L. 95-166), which amended section 13(a)(4) of
the NSLA, 42 U.S.C. 1761(a)(4), to include a rural outreach mandate.
Public Law 95-166 also instructed USDA to conduct a study of the food
service operations to include: (i) an evaluation of meal quality as
related to costs; and (ii) a determination whether adjustments in the
maximum reimbursement levels for food service operation costs
prescribed in the NSLA should be made, including whether different
reimbursement levels should be established for self-prepared meals and
vended meals and which site-related costs, if any, should be considered
administrative costs. Through this study, USDA confirmed sponsors that
prepare their own meals and sponsors that operate in rural areas may
incur higher costs than other types of sponsors [44 FR 36365, January
2, 1979]. As a result, USDA provided additional reimbursement to rural
sites and self-preparation sites in the final rulemaking, which still
stands today under regulations at Sec. 225.9(d)(7). Because of the
fiscal implications under that final rulemaking, USDA also codified the
definition of ``rural'' as proposed (Rural means any county
[[Page 90236]]
which is not a part of a Standard Metropolitan Statistical Area as
defined by the Office of Management and Budget). USDA had considered
revising the definition of rural to include ``pockets'' of rurality
within Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs); however, USDA was not
able to develop a universally applicable definition based on the varied
data collected at the time of the rulemaking and said it would re-
consider the definition after evaluating implementation of the
provisions in the 1979 program year. In 1980, based on experience
gained during the 1979 Program year, the Department revised the
definition of ``rural'' to include an option for States, with
concurrence from USDA, to establish ``pockets'' of rurality within MSAs
(45 FR 1844). The rural definition has not been further updated since
1980.
SFSP regulations at Sec. 225.2 define ``rural'' as: (a) any area
in a county which is not a part of a MSA or (b) any ``pocket'' within a
MSA which, at the option of the State agency and with Food and
Nutrition Service Regional Office (FNSRO) concurrence, is determined to
be geographically isolated from urban areas. The current definition is
based on the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Standards for
delineating core-based statistical areas (CBSA), specifically MSAs.
Delineations are the result of the application of published standards
to Census Bureau data on population estimates and commuting ties. USDA
has released guidance over the years to provide technical assistance to
States in this area. On April 21, 2015, USDA published memorandum SFSP
17-2015, Rural Designations in the Summer Food Service Program--
Revised, available at: Rural Designations in the Summer Food Service
Program--Revised [bond] Food and Nutrition Service (usda.gov), to
clarify rural designations in SFSP and to promote the use of FNS' Rural
Designation Map, which was designed to help State agencies and sponsors
more easily identify rural areas according to paragraph (a) of the
regulatory definition.
After the release of initial summer 2023 rural non-congregate
guidance, USDA heard concerns from stakeholders that the current
definition of ``rural'' was too generalized geographically to identify
rural areas and pockets effectively. MSAs are comprised of a central
county or counties containing the core area (i.e., the central urban
area with a population of 50,000 or more) plus adjacent outlying
counties having a high degree of social and economic integration with
that core as measured through commuting. Because MSAs can include a
cluster of counties surrounding one county with an urban center and
because counties can be geographically expansive, MSAs often encompass
areas that are considered rural based on additional information such as
data at the census tract level. For example, a census tract within an
outlying county may be sparsely populated and could be considered
rural, but the county contains other census tracts or areas that have a
high degree of social and economic integration with the population
core, which results in the county being classified as part of the MSA.
Therefore, after consultation with Federal partners, USDA provided
further guidance allowing States to use the following classification
schemes to designate rural areas and pockets in summer 2023: (1) USDA
Economic Research Service's (USDA-ERS) Rural Urban Commuting Area
(RUCA) codes 4-10, and in some isolated cases, RUCA codes 2-3; (2)
USDA-ERS' Rural-Urban Continuum Codes (RUCC) 4-9; (3) USDA-ERS' Urban
Influence Codes (UIC) 3-12; and (4) the National Center for Education
Statistics (NCES) Locale Classifications and Criteria, codes 41-43. The
guidance also allowed for the use of other data sources on a case-by-
case basis with FNS approval.
In the listening sessions held to inform this rule, stakeholders
confirmed that the current definition of rural in Sec. 225.2 does not
adequately capture all rural areas. Stakeholders shared that the
limitations of the existing definition were largely addressed by the
addition of the classification schemes allowed in summer 2023 and noted
that the use of these schemes seemed to satisfy most site location
requests. However, some stakeholders still encouraged USDA to consider
other factors in the definition of rural such as: access to public
transportation, food deserts, physical barriers, and characteristics of
rurality. One stakeholder encouraged USDA avoid overly rigid criteria
or reliance on physical characteristics as many of these elements are
influenced by community and State resources and priorities rather than
inherent qualities, and that defining features of rural communities may
vary by region. State agencies also reported a need for a streamlined
process for identifying and approving rural areas and pockets, and
requested one comprehensive mapping tool to determine rural
designation. Therefore, based on feedback received from stakeholders
and Federal partners, USDA is revising the current definition of
``rural'' to include the classification systems allowed for summer 2023
implementation. These classification schemes were used in summer 2023
to identify rural ``pockets,'' but now will be incorporated into the
regulatory definition to define what rural is under the Program. In
addition, this IFR will amend the current definition to provide
discretion for the Department to accommodate updates to these
classification schemes and to consider other classification schemes
that were not identified through summer 2023 operations. Finally, USDA
agrees with comments that potential community characteristics such as
the presence of food deserts and physical barriers are not inherently
rural or objective measures of rurality, nor may they be necessarily
applied consistently across States and communities. However, to
accommodate possible alternative standards that may be developed or
identified, the revised definition will allow State agencies and USDA
to consider requests to designate areas that may be rural in character
based on other data sources on a case-by-case basis. Under this
rulemaking, the definition of rural will mean:
Any area in a county not a part of an MSA based on the
OMB's delineation of MSAs. This criterion will allow for non-MSA
counties to be designated as rural under the Program.
Any area in a county classified as a non-metropolitan area
based on RUCC and UIC. This criterion will allow for counties
classified as rural according to USDA-ERS' RUCC and UIC codes to be
designated as rural under the Program.
Any census tract classified as a non-metropolitan area
based on RUCA codes. This criterion will allow census tract areas
classified as rural according to USDA-ERS' RUCA codes to be designated
as rural under the Program.
Any area of an MSA not part of a Census Bureau-defined
urban area. This criterion will allow for areas located within MSAs
that are classified as rural according to NCES' Locale Classifications
and Criteria, which is based on the Census Bureau's urban and rural
areas, to be designated as rural under the Program.
Any area of a State, which is not part of an urban area as
determined by the Secretary; or,
Any ``pocket'' within an MSA which, at the option of the
State agency and with FNSRO approval, is determined to be rural in
character based on other data sources. These last two criteria provide
discretion for the Department and the State agency to consider other
areas that may not be identified through this new definition.
Any subsequent substitution or update of the
aforementioned
[[Page 90237]]
classification schemes that Federal governing bodies create. This
criterion is intended to accommodate updates or substitutions to the
classification schemes that will be incorporated into the definition
under this rule.
This framework more accurately represents rural populations and
territories and is responsive to stakeholder feedback, while upholding
established standard measures of rurality. Expanding the definition to
allow the use of multiple recognized Federal classification schemes to
designate areas as rural (without having to seek prior USDA approval)
will also ease administrative burden and streamline the site
identification and approval process for State agencies and Program
operators. It also acknowledges the frequent stakeholder concern that
any one objective measure cannot capture all rural pockets, and
therefore, allows discretion for State agencies to identify rural
pockets based on other data sources if needed with approval from USDA.
Accordingly, this rule expands the definition of ``rural'' in Sec.
225.2 to include rural populations and territories within MSAs based on
the summer 2023 approved sources, and to provide flexibility for
``pockets'' based on other data sources on a case-by-case basis. The
amended definition of ``rural'' in Sec. 225.2 will also provide
discretion to USDA for any potential updates or changes to
classification schemes at a future date. Following the publication of
this rule, USDA will also release an updated FNS Rural Designation Map
to reflect the new, comprehensive framework, which will provide one
comprehensive mapping tool to assist State agencies in determining
rural designations. In addition, this rule adds a new provision to
establish an annual effective date by which USDA will issue updates to
the approved rural data sources to be used for rural designations in
that program year. The IFR also adds an effective period to the rural
designation to establish the frequency at which sponsors must re-
establish rural designation for non-congregate meal service sites. See
section II. G. iv. and section II. B. vi., respectively, for a
discussion of those provisions.
iii. Conditional Non-Congregate Site
Prior to the Act, sites were required to be located in areas which
meet the definition of ``areas in which poor economic conditions
exist'' or qualify as camps. Specific to non-congregate meals, the Act
amended the NSLA to allow meal service in rural areas that are not
areas in which poor economic conditions exist for children who are
determined to be eligible for free or reduced price school meals. The
current regulations under Sec. 225.2 do not include a definition for a
site which qualifies for Program participation on the basis that the
site conducts a non-congregate meal service for eligible children in an
area that does not meet the definitions of ``areas in which poor
economic conditions exist,'' and which does not qualify as a camp.
Under statutory and regulatory requirements, for Program purposes
``areas in which poor economic conditions exist'' is defined as: (1)
The attendance area of a school in which at least 50 percent of the
enrolled children have been determined eligible for free or reduced
price school meals under the NSLP and the School Breakfast Program
(SBP); (2) A geographic area where, based on the most recent census
data available or information provided from a department of welfare or
zoning commission, at least 50 percent of the children residing in that
area are eligible for free or reduced price school meals under the NSLP
and the SBP; (3) A geographic area where a site demonstrates, based on
other approved sources, that at least 50 percent of the children
enrolled at the site are eligible for free or reduced price school
meals under the NSLP and the SBP; or (4) A closed enrolled site in
which at least 50 percent of the enrolled children at the site are
eligible for free or reduced price school meals under the NSLP and the
SBP, as determined by approval of applications in accordance with Sec.
225.15(f). See, 42 U.S.C. 1761(a)(1)(A) and Sec. 225.2. The definition
of ``camps'' included in Sec. 225.2 ``means residential summer camps
and nonresidential day camps which offer a regularly scheduled food
service as part of an organized program for enrolled children.
Nonresidential camp sites shall offer a continuous schedule of
organized cultural or recreational programs for enrolled children
between meal services.''
FNS clarified in its implementation guidance for summer 2023 that
sponsors may claim meals served to children who are eligible for free
or reduced price school meals even if the rural area does not meet the
definition of ``areas in which poor economic conditions exist.'' Non-
congregate meals may be served to children who are not eligible for
free or reduced price meals in rural areas, but they may not be claimed
for reimbursement. Therefore, this rule adds a definition for
``conditional non-congregate site'' to codify this new site type and
clarify applicable Program requirements.
Accordingly, this rule adds the following definition in Sec. 225.2
for ``conditional non-congregate site'' as a site which qualifies for
Program participation because it conducts a non-congregate meal service
for children eligible for free or reduced price meals in an area that
does not meet the definition of ``areas in which poor economic
conditions exist'' and is not a ``Camp'' as defined in Sec. 225.2.
iv. New Site
FNS provides administrative and operational flexibilities for
experienced sponsors and sites that have already operated the SFSP
without significant operational problems. For example, when applying to
participate in the Program, experienced sponsors are not required to
submit the same level of detail regarding organizational and
operational information required of new sponsors and those with
previous operational problems. For new sponsors, and sponsors that
experienced significant operational problems in the previous year,
detailed information is required including, but not limited to, site
information, arrangements for meeting health and safety standards, and
budgets. This information is necessary for State agencies to determine
if new sponsors and sites, or those with previous operational problems,
are capable of administering the SFSP efficiently and effectively, and
complying with all program requirements. Likewise, new sponsors and
sites, and sponsors and sites that have experienced significant
operational problems in the previous year, may be held to more rigorous
levels of training and monitoring, at the State's discretion. To help
clarify requirements for sponsors and sites with varying degrees of
experience and/or success in operating the Program, Sec. 225.2
contains definitions of ``new sponsor'', ``new site'', ``experienced
sponsor'', and ``experienced site''.
For summer 2023, USDA determined and communicated through guidance
that experienced sites which proposed to operate non-congregate meal
service for the first time, including those sites switching from a
congregate meal service model to a non-congregate model or to operating
a hybrid of both congregate and non-congregate models, were ``new''
sites. These sites were required to follow monitoring procedures for
new sites. Through this rulemaking, USDA is codifying the summer 2023
guidance, and requiring that all sites proposing to operate non-
congregate meal service for the first time to use procedures for new
sites (see sections II. B. and F. for application and
[[Page 90238]]
monitoring procedures). Therefore, this rule revises the current
definition of ``new site'' to reflect these changes. This rulemaking
does not affect the experience determination for sponsors.
Accordingly, this rule amends the definition of ``new site'' in
Sec. 225.2 to clarify that experienced sites operating a non-
congregate meal service for the first time are considered new under the
Program.
v. Site Supervisor and Operating Costs
Under this rulemaking, USDA is also modifying existing definitions
of ``site supervisor'' and ``operating costs'' in Sec. 225.2 to
reflect the provision of non-congregate meal service under the Program.
USDA published the final rule, Streamlining Program Requirements
and Improving Integrity in the Summer Food Service Program (87 FR
79213), on September 19, 2022, which added a definition in Sec. 225.2
for ``site supervisor'' stating that the individual on site for the
duration of the meal service, who has been trained by the sponsor, and
is responsible for all administrative and management activities at a
site including but not limited to: ordering meals, maintaining
documentation of meal deliveries, ensuring that all meals served are
safe, and maintaining accurate point of service meal counts.
Therefore, with the new requirements established by the Act for
non-congregate meal service, this rule amends the definition for ``site
supervisor'' to mean the individual who has been trained by the sponsor
and is responsible for all administrative and management activities at
the site, including, but not limited to: maintaining documentation of
meal deliveries, ensuring that all meals served are safe, and
maintaining accurate point of service meal counts. Except for non-
congregate meal service sites using delivery services, the individual
is on site for the duration of the food service.
Program regulations in Sec. 225.2 define the term ``operating
costs'' to mean the cost of operating a food service under the Program,
including the: cost of obtaining food, labor directly involved in the
preparation and service of food, cost of nonfood supplies, rental and
use allowances for equipment and space, and cost of transporting
children in rural areas to meal service sites in rural areas. This rule
amends the definition for ``operating costs'' to include the costs to
deliver non-congregate meals in rural areas under the Program as an
allowable cost.
Accordingly, this rule revises the definition of ``site
supervisor'' and ``operating costs'' in Sec. 225.2 to reflect the
provision of non-congregate meal service under the Program.
vi. Good Standing
Under current Program regulations, there is no definition for good
standing. The final rule, Streamlining Program Requirements and
Improving Integrity in the Summer Food Service Program, 87 FR 57304,
September 19, 2022, reflected on the qualities that contribute to a
Program operator's successful performance. USDA indicated that an SFSP
Program operator would be considered in ``good standing'' if it was
reviewed by the State agency with no major Program findings or it had
completed and implemented all corrective actions from the last
compliance review. In addition, FNS intends to publish the proposed
rule, Serious Deficiency Process in the Child and Adult Care Food
Program (CACFP) and the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP), RIN # 0584-
AE83, which will propose changes to the existing serious deficiency
process in the CACFP for unaffiliated centers and establishes a serious
deficiency process for the SFSP. As part of the rule, USDA will propose
a new definition of ``good standing'' for SFSP. USDA recognizes that
providing further clarification to determine what good standing means
will benefit State agencies and program operators.
USDA has determined that many of the requirements and allowable
options codified at Sec. 225.16(i) for non-congregate meal service
will only be allowed for sponsors in good standing, as discussed in
section II. E. of this rule. However, good standing is not currently
defined under Program regulations at Sec. 225.2. Therefore, in order
to support State agency ability to determine if a sponsor is in good
standing, this rule will codify ``good standing'' to mean the status of
a program operator that meets its Program responsibilities, is current
with its financial obligations, and, if applicable, has fully
implemented all corrective actions within the required period of time.
This definition mirrors the definition that will be proposed in Serious
Deficiency Process in the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) and
the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP), RIN # 0584-AE83. USDA will
review comments received on this definition both through the proposed
rule, as well as through this rulemaking, and may further revise this
definition as needed in future rulemaking.
Accordingly, this rule adds a definition of ``good standing'' at
Sec. 225.2.
B. State Agency Responsibilities
i. Department Notification
Consistent with provisions under the NSLA at 42 U.S.C.
1753(b)(1)(A) and 1761(a)(1)(D) and Program regulations at Sec.
225.3(b), by November 1 each fiscal year each State agency must notify
USDA regarding the State's intention to administer the Program in that
fiscal year. Each State agency desiring to take part in the Program
must enter into a written agreement with FNS for the administration of
the Program. The Act amended section 13(n)(1) of the NSLA to require,
for summer 2023 only, that each State desiring to participate in the
Program must notify the USDA of its intent to administer the Program
and must submit a management and administration plan (MAP) for the
Program by April 1, 2023. In addition, the Act amended section 13(n)(2)
of the NSLA to include that beginning in 2024, each State agency
desiring to participate in the Program must notify the Department by
January 1 of each year.
Accordingly, this rule amends the regulatory deadline at Sec.
225.3(b) for a State to notify the Department of its intent to
administer the SFSP from November 1 to January 1 of each fiscal year.
This rule also makes changes to the MAP requirements in Sec. 225.4,
which are described in this section of the preamble. Finally, this rule
establishes a requirement at Sec. 225.3(e) for State agencies
administering the summer meal programs and Summer EBT Program to
develop and implement a coordinated services plan for the programs in
their State. This plan is a separate requirement from the MAP and is
meant to coordinate the statewide availability of services offered
through the Summer Food Service Program. See section IV. for discussion
of those requirements.
ii. Program Management and Administration Plan
Prior to the Act, provisions under the NSLA at 42 U.S.C.
1753(b)(1)(A) and 1761(a)(1)(D) and Program regulations at Sec. 225.4
required State agencies to submit a MAP for approval by February 15 for
the current fiscal year (i.e., a plan that will cover program
operations during the following summer). The State agency must include
the State's administrative budget, an estimate of need for monies to
pay for the cost of conducting health inspections, and the State's
plans for use of Program funds (including providing technical
assistance, monitoring, corrective action, fiscal integrity, and to
ensure compliance with food service
[[Page 90239]]
management company procurement monitoring) in the MAP.
The Act amended section 13(n)(1) of the NSLA to require that, for
summer 2023, each State agency will have until April 1, 2023, to submit
their MAP, which must include the State's plan for using non-congregate
meal service, if applicable, including plans to provide a reasonable
opportunity to access meals across all areas of the State, in addition
to the MAP requirements previously required under the NSLA (i.e., the
State's administrative budget for the fiscal year, an estimate of need
for monies to pay for the cost of conducting health inspections, and
the State's plan for the use of program funds, providing technical
assistance, monitoring, taking timely action against program violators,
certifying fiscal integrity, and to ensuring compliance with food
service management company procurement monitoring). The summer 2023
Program guidance provided State agencies additional information
detailing the plans for implementation of non-congregate meal service
in their MAP. This information included participation projections,
sponsor information, plans for targeting and outreach, how State
Administrative Funds (SAF) would be used to support non-congregate meal
service for summer 2023, and strategies for providing technical
assistance to ensure integrity requirements are met. Guidance also
allowed State agency discretion to establish statewide policies
regarding aspects of rural non-congregate meal service, based on past
experiences gained during the COVID-19 pandemic. State agencies were
required to include statewide details related to the non-congregate
meal service option in the MAP. Summer 2023 MAP submissions indicated
that two State agencies used statewide discretion to prohibit the use
of the non-congregate meal service for summer 2023 operations to allow
them to evaluate non-congregate processes in order to safeguard Program
integrity.
This rule codifies the amendments made to section 13(n)(2) of the
NSLA, which provides that the MAP must include all provisions
previously required under the NSLA, the new additional requirement
under section 13(n)(1), and the State agency's plan for Program
delivery in areas that could benefit the most from the provision of
non-congregate meals. This includes the State's plan to identify rural
areas with no congregate meal service, and plan to target priority
areas for non-congregate meal service. A discussion of the provisions
and an ``area with no congregate meal service'' is described further
below. USDA understands that State agencies are best positioned to
determine how non-congregate meal service may be conducted through
sponsors to provide Program access to eligible children while
maintaining Program accountability. Apart from the case-by-case
determinations outlined in section II. E. of this rulemaking, State
agencies should include any additional proposed statewide requirements
or restrictions and operational safeguards as part of the State's plan
to use non-congregate meal service in their MAP.
Accordingly, this rule codifies non-congregate meal service
requirements in the MAP by adding a new Sec. 225.4(d)(9) and (10). SAF
as outlined in Sec. 225.5, may be requested based on projected program
growth with the additional meals that will be served as a part of both
congregate and non-congregate meal service. The SAF can be used to
support outreach to service institutions and encourage participation in
both congregate and non-congregate meal service, as well as
implementation of program accountability and integrity efforts.
iii. Priorities and Outreach Mandate
Program regulations at Sec. 225.6(a)(2) require that, by February
1 of each fiscal year, each State agency must announce the purpose,
eligibility criteria, and availability of the Program throughout the
State, through appropriate means of communication. As a part of this
effort, each State agency must identify rural areas, Indian Tribal
territories, and areas with a concentration of migrant farm workers
which qualify for the Program and actively seek eligible applicant
sponsors to serve such areas. State agencies must identify priority
outreach areas in accordance with USDA guidance and prioritize outreach
efforts in these areas.
The Act amended section 13(a)(13)(D) of the NSLA to require State
agencies to identify areas with no congregate meal service that could
benefit the most from the provision of non-congregate meals and
encourage participating service institutions in those areas to provide
non-congregate meals as appropriate. Accordingly, this rule amends
program requirements at Sec. 225.6(a)(2) to reflect this new priority
area for State agencies as required by statute. In addition, the rule
revises the paragraph structure at Sec. 225.6(a)(2) to improve the
clarity of the regulations.
iv. Application Requirements--Content of Sponsor Applications and Site
Information Sheets
Annually, each State agency must inform all the previous year's
sponsors which meet current eligibility requirements, as well as all
other potential sponsors, of the application deadline for Program
participation. Program regulations at Sec. 225.6 outline State agency
responsibilities when approving Program sponsors and sites. When
reviewing applications, the State agency should consider the resources
and capabilities of each applicant to sufficiently operate all proposed
sites. This rule clarifies the State agency review requirements for the
content of sponsor application and site application approval, which are
discussed in this section.
Program regulations at Sec. 225.6(g)(1) and (2) require that State
agencies develop site information sheets for new or experienced sites
where a food service is proposed. The site information sheets provide
State agencies with the documentation needed to determine if the site
can demonstrate administrative capability and financial viability to
effectively operate a meal service. The site information sheet
completed by the sponsor must demonstrate or describe the estimated
number and types of meals to be served and times of service;
documentation of eligibility; and, if the site qualifies as a camp,
documentation of the number of children enrolled in the Program who
meet the Program's income standards. New sites are also required to
demonstrate or describe an organized and supervised system for serving
meals to children; arrangements for delivery and holding of meals and
storing leftovers for next day meal service to ensure food safety;
arrangements for food service during periods of inclement weather;
access to means of communication for making necessary adjustments for
number of meals to be served at each site; whether the site is rural or
non-rural; and whether the site's food service will be self-prepared or
vended.
Program regulations do not include site information specific to
non-congregate meal service. Therefore, this rule modifies the minimum
information that must be demonstrated or described on the site
information sheets to reflect the provision of non-congregate meal
service under the Program. This information provided in the site
information sheet for new sponsors must describe an organized and
supervised system for serving meals to children; whether the site is
rural and the documentation supporting the rural designation as
discussed later in this section; whether the meal service is congregate
or non-congregate; and, if the site qualifies as a conditional non-
congregate site, documentation of the number of children enrolled in
the
[[Page 90240]]
Program who meet the Program's income standards. For experienced sites,
the site information sheets must include whether the meal service to be
provided is congregate or non-congregate; whether the site is rural and
documentation supporting the rural designation which is discussed later
in this section; and, if the site qualifies as a conditional non-
congregate site, documentation of the number of children enrolled in
the Program who meet the Program's income standards.
As noted above, this rule is adding a documentation requirement for
experienced sites to demonstrate that they are rural. Current
regulations do not require that the site information sheet demonstrate
or describe whether the site is rural for experienced sites, as
required for new sites or sites with operational problems. This
application requirement was removed for experienced sites under the
Final Rule, Summer Food Service Program: Program Meal Service During
the School Year, Paperwork Reduction, and Targeted State Monitoring (64
FR 72889), to eliminate duplicative and unnecessary requirements for
experienced sponsors, with the intent of reducing the paperwork
associated with the application process for these sponsors. However,
USDA has concluded that determining rurality is necessary for all
Program sponsors due to the effect of a rural designation and non-
congregate participation. This rule also adds an effective period to
the rural designation to establish the frequency at which sponsors must
re-establish rural designation for non-congregate meal service sites,
which is discussed in later in this section of the rule.
In addition, USDA is codifying non-congregate meal service options
under this IFR, as discussed in section II. E. ii. As part of those
options, USDA will require integrity safeguards to prevent unallowable
or duplicate meal distribution. Under this rule, sponsors opting to
distribute multiple days' worth of meals must have procedures in place
that document, to a reasonable extent, that the proper number of meals
are distributed to each eligible child. In addition, sponsors opting to
distribute meals to parents or guardians on behalf of children must
have procedures in place to document that meals are only distributed to
parents or guardians of eligible children and that duplicate meals are
not distributed to any child. Therefore, this rule will require this
information to be included in the applications for new sponsors,
sponsors that have experienced significant operational problems in the
prior year, and experienced sponsors.
Accordingly, this rule adds a new Sec. 225.6(c)(2)(xi) and
(3)(viii) to require that the application for new sponsors, sponsors
that have experienced significant operational problems in the prior
year, and experienced sponsors include procedures to document that
meals are only distributed, to a reasonable extent, to eligible
children and that duplicate meals are not distributed to any child, if
the applicant sponsor is electing to use the non-congregate meal
service options of multi-day meal issuance and parent or guardian meal
pick-up. In addition, this rule amends Program regulations at Sec.
225.6(g)(1)(iv) and(g)(2)(iii) to require sponsors to identify whether
each meal service will be congregate or non-congregate. This rule also
adds new Sec. 225.6(g)(1)(xiv) and (g)(2)(viii) to require Program
sponsors who are operating conditional non-congregate sites to specify
the number of children enrolled who meet the Program's income
standards. In addition, this rule amends requirements at Sec.
225.6(g)(1)(iii) and 225.6(g)(2)(ii) to establish whether a site is
rural, and that documentation supporting the rural designation is
required. This rule also establishes the frequency at which the site
must re-establish rural designation, which is described later in this
section of this rule. Due to the addition of the new requirements, the
rule revises the subordinate paragraph numbering at Sec. 225.6(g)(1)
and (2). Furthermore, this rule amends Sec. 225.6(b)(6) to include
State agency requirements for sponsor application approval related to
site reviews, as discussed in section II. F. of this rulemaking.
Lastly, this rule clarifies the requirement at Sec. 225.6(g)(1)(v)
with terms consistent with those defined in Sec. 225.2.
v. Approval of Sites and Determining No Congregate Meal Service
Program regulations at Sec. 225.6(h) provide the site requirements
that must be evaluated by the State agency before site approval is
granted. Program regulations at Sec. 225.6(h)(1) require State
agencies to ensure the proposed food service site is located in an
``area in which poor economic conditions exist,'' or will serve
specific groups of eligible children; the area which the site proposes
to serve will not be served in whole or in part by another site, unless
it can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the State agency that
each site will serve children not served by any other site in the same
area for the same meal; the site is approved to serve no more than the
number of children for which its facilities are adequate and; if it is
a site proposed to operate during any unanticipated school closure, it
is a non-school site. Regulations at Sec. 225.6(h)(2)(i), (ii), (iii),
and (v) are specific to congregate meal service operations and require
that each vended site must have an approved level for the maximum
number of children's meals which may be served under the Program, which
is commonly known as a ``site cap.''
Summer 2023 Program guidance provided specific requirements that
the State agency must follow when approving Program sites to operate
non-congregate meal service. Those requirements included:
The proposed non-congregate meal service site must be in a
rural area;
The area proposing to be served will not be served by a
congregate meal service; and
Safeguards must be implemented to ensure children will not
receive more than the maximum allowance of summer meals per day.
All existing application and approval requirements, including the
priority system when approving applicants to operate sites that propose
to serve the same area or the same enrolled children (7 CFR
225.6(b)(5)) and site cap requirements, continued to apply for both
congregate and non-congregate meal service. In addition, summer 2023
guidance also included considerations when determining if an area was
already being served by a congregate site. This guidance allowed for
State agency discretion when approving sites for non-congregate meal
service, if they ensured adherence to the requirements provided above,
but with the caveat that State agencies may not deny a site based
solely on the sponsor's intent to provide a non-congregate meal
service. Sites that served the same children on different days,
different weeks, or for different meals on the same day could provide a
combination of congregate and non-congregate meal service if the State
agency could ensure that the congregate and non-congregate sites would
not serve the same population of children for the same meal service on
the same day. Summer 2023 guidance also allowed congregate sites that
existed prior to that time to switch from congregate to non-congregate
meal service. However, the Department encouraged State agencies and
sponsors to work to identify and prioritize those rural areas that the
congregate Program cannot reliably reach.
USDA received mixed feedback from stakeholders related to defining
an area with no congregate meal service. Some stakeholders suggested
setting parameters for an ``area with no congregate meal service,''
such as a
[[Page 90241]]
specified distance from congregate sites. Other stakeholders suggested
that an ``area with no congregate meal service'' should be left to
State agency discretion, since Program operations vary across States.
One stakeholder suggested requiring sponsors to provide an integrity
plan prior to site approval to avoid meal duplication.
This final rule incorporates new statutory requirements and summer
2023 Program guidance with additional regulatory clarifications as to
how to determine areas with no congregate meal service.
First, in accordance with summer 2023 guidance which stated that
State agencies may not deny a site based solely on the sponsor's intent
to provide a non-congregate meal service, USDA is adding a new Sec.
225.6(b)(12) to require that the State agency must not deny a sponsor's
application based solely on the sponsor's intent to provide a non-
congregate meal service.
Second, this rule amends Program regulations at Sec.
225.6(h)(1)(i) to require that the proposed site will serve an ``area
in which poor economic conditions exist,'' unless it is a conditional
non-congregate site, as discussed in this rulemaking. This rule also
amends Sec. 225.6(h)(2) to clarify that each vended site must have an
approved level for the maximum number of children's meals which may be
served under the Program as they relate to congregate and non-
congregate meal service.
Third, this rule adds a new Sec. 225.6(h)(3) to address the
elements of the proposed site operations that the State agency must
ensure when approving the application of sites to provide non-
congregate meal service. Under this rulemaking, the State agency must
ensure that the proposed site: is rural; will only distribute the
allowable number of reimbursable meals that would be provided over a
10-calendar day period, although the State agency may establish a
shorter calendar day period on a case-by-case basis and without regard
to sponsor type (as described in section II. E.); serves an area in
which poor economic conditions exist or is approved for reimbursement
only for meals served free to enrolled children who meet the Program's
income standards; and will not serve an area where children would
receive the same meal at an approved congregate meal site, unless it
can be demonstrated to the satisfaction of the State agency that the
site will serve a different group of children who may not be otherwise
served. Also, as discussed in sections II. A. and F., this rule
clarifies that all sites proposing to operate non-congregate meal
service for the first time must use procedures for new sites. The rule
reflects this regulatory change by adding a requirement that the State
agency must ensure that the sponsor follows the site information sheet
requirements at Sec. 225.6(g)(1) for new sites, where a non-congregate
food service operation is proposed for the first time.
Fourth, this rule adds a new Sec. 225.6(h)(4) to address the
elements of the proposed site operations that the State agency must
ensure when approving the application of a site which will provide both
a congregate meal service and a non-congregate meal service,
effectively allowing State agencies to approve sites which will operate
both meal services, with some restrictions to ensure the non-congregate
meal service does not compete with or duplicate the congregate meal
service. This includes regulations to require the State agency to
ensure that the proposed site will only conduct a non-congregate meal
service when the site is not providing a congregate meal service, and
that the sponsor has a system in place to prevent meal service overlap
when providing a congregate and non-congregate meal service at the same
site to reasonably ensure children are not receiving more than the
daily maximum allowance of meals. Note that for sites that operate both
congregate and non-congregate service, it is not considered a meal
service overlap if the site provides a congregate breakfast and then a
non-congregate lunch intended to be consumed at a later time offsite
(for example). Finally, the new requirements for approving sites
operating a non-congregate meal service are in addition to the existing
program requirements at Sec. 225.6(h)(1) and (2).
Some stakeholders requested that USDA establish more specific
criteria or standards to define ``an area with no congregate meal
service.'' However, USDA agrees with the majority of stakeholders who
suggested that USDA allow some discretion for State agencies to
consider operational and environmental factors, which may vary by
location. USDA also determined that providing discretion would avoid
introducing complexity into the regulations and allow necessary
flexibility to support successful implementation. USDA intends to
provide additional guidance and technical assistance to support
implementation of this provision.
Accordingly, this IFR adds a new Sec. 225.6(b)(12) to require that
the State agency must not deny a sponsor's application based solely on
the sponsor's intent to provide a non-congregate meal service. The IFR
also makes the following amendments to Sec. 225.6(h):
Amends Program regulations at Sec. 225.6(h)(1)(i) to
include conditional non-congregate sites.
Adds a new Sec. 225.6(h)(3) and (4) to include site
application approval requirements that State agencies must ensure when
evaluating the proposed site which will provide a non-congregate meal
service and determining an ``area with no congregate meal service.''
Revises terminology used in Sec. 225.6(h)(2) to clarify
the applicability of regulations to both congregate and non-congregate
meal services.
vi. Duration of Rural Designation
The Act authorized non-congregate meal service in ``rural areas
where no congregate meal service is available.'' Currently, no
effective period is established in statute, regulations, or guidance
for rural designations. As discussed in section II. B. iv. of this
rule, current Federal regulations do not require an experienced site to
demonstrate it is rural as part of the site information sheets.
However, USDA concluded that determining rurality is a necessary
documentation submission, regardless of the level of site or sponsor
experience, due to the significant effect of a rural designation under
the non-congregate provision added by the Act. Therefore, this rule
adds a new documentation requirement for experienced sites (discussed
at section II. B. iv.) and establishes the frequency at which the site
must re-establish its rural designation.
This rule codifies the requirement that Program sponsors re-
determine their sites' rural designations every 5 years. Once a site is
established as rural based on the rural definition in Program
regulations at Sec. 225.2, the rural status is effective for a period
of 5 years from the date of determination. At the discretion of the
State agency, redetermination prior to the 5-year period may be
required, if the State agency determines that an area's rural status
has changed significantly since the previous determination.
USDA evaluated the effective period for similar application
documentation requirements (such as area eligibility) as well as the
frequency in which the allowable rural data sources are updated. Using
this information, USDA determined a streamlined approach to minimize
administrative burden. Standards, classifications, and delineations of
rural data sources allowed under summer 2023 and moving forward (see
section II.A.ii.) are updated with each decennial census
[[Page 90242]]
and periodically based on annual census surveys. Although more frequent
redeterminations may more accurately and timely capture changes to an
area's rural status, particularly during periods that overlap with
census years, USDA concludes that shorter effective periods for rural
designation may be too burdensome and are unnecessary for State
agencies and Program operators.
Accordingly, this rule adds language at Sec. 225.6(g)(1)(iii) and
(g)(2)(ii) to require new documentation of rural designation every 5
years, or earlier, if the State agency believes that an area's rural
status has changed significantly since the previous determination.
vii. Clarifications to Existing Requirements: Free Meal Policy
Statement, State-Sponsor Agreement, and Corrective Action Procedures
This rule clarifies existing requirements in Sec. Sec. 225.6 and
225.11, which fall under the purview of the State agency. These
clarifications reflect the provision of non-congregate meal service
under the Program, specifically in response to the addition of the new
site type, conditional non-congregate site, as defined under this
rulemaking.
Program regulations at Sec. 225.6 require that State agencies
provide and obtain specific information regarding a sponsor's meal
service sites. Regulations at Sec. 225.6(f) require that as part of
the free meal policy statement, sponsors must submit a
nondiscrimination statement of their policy for serving meals to
children. This rule clarifies that sponsors operating conditional non-
congregate sites are exempt from including a statement that meals
served are free at all sites. In addition, the rule clarifies that
sponsors operating conditional non-congregate sites that charge
separately for meals must also include specific eligibility information
in the policy statement, and that each sponsor of a conditional non-
congregate site must submit a copy of its hearing procedures with its
application.
Furthermore, Program regulations at Sec. 225.6(i) require that a
sponsor approved for Program participation must enter into a written
agreement with the State agency. Under the requirements in which all
sponsors must agree to in writing, the rule clarifies that a sponsor of
sites operating as conditional non-congregate sites are excepted from
serving meals without cost to all children and may charge for meals
served to children who do not meet the Program's income standards.
These sponsors may claim reimbursement only for meals served to
children who meet the Program's income standards. In addition, the rule
clarifies that the requirement to maintain children on site while meals
are consumed only applies for sponsors providing a congregate meal
service. Finally, this rule revises the language at Sec. 225.6(i) to
reflect the definition of ``termination for convenience'' that will be
proposed in Serious Deficiency Process in the Child and Adult Care Food
Program (CACFP) and the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP), RIN # 0584-
AE83. Program regulations at Sec. 225.6(i) allow the State agency or
sponsor to terminate the agreement at its convenience, for
considerations unrelated to the sponsor's performance of Program
responsibilities under the agreement. USDA is revising this language to
clarify that the State agency or sponsor may terminate the agreement at
its convenience, upon mutual agreement, due to considerations unrelated
to either party's performance of Program responsibilities under the
agreement. USDA will review comments received on this definition both
through the proposed rule, as well as through this rulemaking, and may
further revise this terminology as needed in future rulemaking.
Program regulations at Sec. 225.11 require the State agency to use
corrective action procedures to improve Program performance, such as
investigations, denial of applications and termination of sponsors,
meal service restrictions, meal disallowances, corrective action and
termination of sites, and technical assistance for improved meal
service. This rule clarifies that the serious deficiencies of the
simultaneous service of more than one meal to any child and excessive
instances of off-site meal consumption outlined in Program regulations
at Sec. 225.11 (c)(4)(iv) and (viii), respectively, are specific to
congregate meal service operations. Also, as discussed in section II.
B. v. and section II. E. i. of this rule, non-congregate meals must be
served according to the number and type of meals allowed for the site
type at 7 CFR 225.16(b)(3), and sponsors must implement an organized
and supervised system which prevents overlap between meal services to
reasonably ensure children are not receiving more than the daily
maximum allowance of meals. Therefore, USDA is adding a new Program
violation that is specific to non-congregate meal service to the list
outlined at Sec. 225.11(c)(4). Under this IFR, for non-congregate meal
service operations, distributing more than the daily meal limit when
multi-day service is used is considered a serious deficiency which is
grounds for disapproval of applications and for termination when the
violation is recorded at a significant proportion of the sponsor's
sites.
In addition, Program regulations at Sec. 225.11(d) require that,
with the exception of residential camps, the State agency must restrict
to one meal service per day any site determined to be in violation of
the time restrictions for meal service set forth at Sec. 225.16(c)
when corrective action is not taken within a reasonable time, and all
sites under a sponsor if more than 20 percent of the sponsor's sites
are determined to be in violation of the time restrictions set. The
regulations also require the State agency to make a reasonable effort
to locate another source of meal service for these children if this
action results in children not receiving meals under the Program. Given
the exceptions to the meal service time requirements for non-congregate
meal service provided through this rulemaking (see section II. E.), and
that restricting non-congregate sites to one meal service per day could
impact children served by that site, this rule clarifies that non-
congregate meal service sites are also excepted from the meal service
restrictions at Sec. 225.11(d).
Accordingly, this rule amends Sec. 225.6(f) to clarify
nondiscrimination and hearing procedures statement requirements for
non-congregate meal service. Additionally, this rule amends Sec.
225.6(i) introductory text, (i)(4), (i)(7)(i) and (ii), and (i)(15) to
clarify State-sponsor agreement requirements for sites that provide
non-congregate meal service. Lastly, this rule amends Sec.
225.11(c)(4) and (d) to clarify corrective action procedures as they
relate to congregate and non-congregate meal service.
C. Requirements for Sponsor Participation
i. Sponsor Eligibility
Program regulations at Sec. 225.14 outline requirements for
sponsor participation. The requirements include application procedures,
sponsor eligibility, and demonstration of administrative and financial
ability to manage a food service effectively. Sponsor eligibility is
limited to public or private nonprofit SFAs; public or private
nonprofit residential summer camps; units of local, municipal, county,
Tribal, or State governments; public or private nonprofit colleges or
universities which are currently participating in the National Youth
Sports Program; and private nonprofit organizations as defined in Sec.
225.2 and outlined at Sec. 225.14(b). Additionally, Program
regulations at Sec. 225.14(d) provide requirements that are specific
to
[[Page 90243]]
sponsor types, such as camps. The Act requires State agencies to
encourage participating service institutions in rural areas with no
congregate meal service to provide non-congregate meals as appropriate.
Summer 2023 guidance allowed any service institution that met the
definition of sponsor in Program regulations at Sec. 225.2 to
participate in the non-congregate meal service option with State agency
approval, including sponsors new to the Program. Camps were also
allowed to participate, though guidance acknowledged that regulations
require camps to provide a regularly scheduled food service as part of
an organized program for enrolled children, and such programming is
generally understood to be congregate in nature. Furthermore, Summer
2023 guidance instructed that to participate, experienced sponsors must
be considered in ``good standing.'' However, sponsors that have
experienced serious deficiencies in prior years may be approved to
operate non-congregate meal service if, to the satisfaction of the
State agency, all appropriate corrective actions to prevent recurrence
of the deficiencies were taken as outlined in Program regulations at
Sec. 225.6(b)(9).
USDA received stakeholder feedback that expressed integrity
concerns related to non-congregate meal service provided by community
sponsors in recent years, most notably during non-congregate meal
service operations provided during the COVID-19 pandemic. Several State
agencies expressed more confidence in SFAs' ability to operate non-
congregate meal service as compared to other program sponsors due to
their familiarity with NSLP and SBP meal service operations, as well as
potential greater logistical capacity. One stakeholder commented that
in their State only SFA sponsors were allowed to operate non-congregate
meal service. However, three State agencies and four additional
stakeholders emphasized the need to maintain access when considering
important integrity measures. Finally, USDA did not receive direct
feedback on camp (as defined at Sec. 225.2) participation from
stakeholders. A limited number of State agencies reported that they did
not include camps in non-congregate service this summer due to their
interpretation that such sites are inherently congregate in nature.
Program sponsors who provide year-round meal service have
consistent program operations and thus are more readily able to
demonstrate administrative capabilities than sponsors who only operate
during the summer period. Although several stakeholders expressed
concern for certain sponsor types operating a non-congregate meal
service, USDA concludes that all service institutions listed under
requirements at Sec. 225.14(b) are eligible to sponsor the Program,
including providing congregate and non-congregate meal services, and
thus, this rulemaking establishes no restrictions on providing non-
congregate meal service based on sponsor type. This decision is based
on the need to maintain program access and support the stipulation that
all sponsors considered in good standing and who meet all other program
requirements should have the opportunity to provide non-congregate meal
service. This decision also pertains to public or nonprofit private
residential summer camps. As defined in 7 CFR 225.2, camps must provide
a regularly scheduled food service as part of an organized program for
enrolled children, and as mentioned above, such programming is
generally understood to be congregate in nature. However, USDA
recognizes that there may be situations where it makes sense to allow a
camp to operate a non-congregate meal service for their enrolled
children, such as service of the third meal if a congregate meal
service is not provided, or meals provided to be consumed over the
weekend while an enrolled child is in an active camp session, but
during which there are no congregate meals provided. USDA encourages
State agencies to work with potential sponsors of all types to
determine how their proposed site(s) and operations can best serve
communities in identified rural areas that could benefit the most from
the provision of non-congregate meals and fill in gaps in service.
Accordingly, this rule makes no regulatory changes to existing
sponsor eligibility requirements Sec. 225.14(b), effectively allowing
all service institutions listed under requirements at Sec. 225.14(b)
to be eligible to sponsor the Program, including operating both
congregate and non-congregate meal services. Although USDA is not
making changes to sponsor eligibility, this rule limits some meal
service options to sponsors in good standing and retains the meal
service option of offer versus serve to SFAs, as discussed in section
II. E. of this rule.
i. Clarifications to Existing Requirements: General Requirements at
Sec. 225.14(c)
Program regulations at Sec. 225.14(c)(3) require that, to be
eligible to participate in the SFSP, applicant sponsors must conduct a
regularly scheduled food service for children in areas in which poor
economic conditions exist or must qualify as a camp. With the
establishment of the non-congregate option in eligible rural areas,
conditional non-congregate sites, as defined under this rulemaking, can
also provide a regularly scheduled food service for children in non-
area eligible locations.
Accordingly, this rule amends Sec. 225.14(c)(3) to clarify this
qualification for applicant sponsors which will operate a conditional
non-congregate site.
D. Responsibilities of Sponsors
i. Identification and Determination of Eligible Children
As discussed in the background section of this rule, for summer
2023 non-congregate meal service operations, the Act allowed State
agencies to use service models developed for demonstration projects
carried out under section 749(g) of the Agriculture, Rural Development,
Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act,
2010 (Pub. L. 111-80; 123 Stat. 2132). Summer 2023 guidance allowed
home delivery and meal pick-up options as provided in past
demonstrations. The home delivery model allowed for non-congregate
meals to be delivered directly to homes of participants. Program
guidance required that sponsors approved to provide non-congregate meal
service through home delivery must be able to identify and invite
households of eligible children to participate in the meal delivery
service. The guidance also required that sponsors obtain written
consent from the eligible child's parent or guardian that the household
wants to receive delivered meals. Written consent could include hard
copy, email, or other electronic means of communication. Furthermore,
sponsors were required to confirm the household's current contact
information and the number of eligible children in the household to
ensure the correct number of meals were delivered to the correct
location.
In addition, Summer 2023 Program guidance required non-SFA sponsors
that planned to obtain individual children's program eligibility
information through free and reduced price school meal eligibility data
to enter into a written agreement or Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
with an SFA. However, non-SFA sponsors could also use the household
application procedures outlined in Program regulations at Sec.
225.15(f) to identify eligible children in non-area eligible areas
instead of entering into a
[[Page 90244]]
written agreement or MOU with the local SFA. Lastly, sponsors were
required to protect the confidentiality of participants and their
households throughout the process in accordance with confidentiality
and disclosure provisions in the NSLA and Program regulations at Sec.
225.15(f) through (l). These home delivery requirements were also
implemented during non-congregate meal service during COVID-19
operations.
In the listening sessions held to inform this rule, stakeholders
shared challenges with the home delivery model when providing non-
congregate meal service, particularly, concerns with delivering Program
meals when participants are not home. USDA heard from stakeholders that
communication with participating families was imperative to home
delivery operations. Several stakeholders explained that obtaining
delivery signatures or asking parents to provide delivery instructions
worked well in their State. Another stakeholder suggested text
notifications or reminders to participating families about meal
deliveries would be helpful to confirm someone was home to receive the
meals, and thus ensure a smoother delivery and reduced food waste. In
addition, several stakeholders reported the importance of protecting
student data by requiring a MOU to receive student eligibility data
from a local SFA. One stakeholder requested USDA allow non-profit
sponsors to provide home delivery without requiring an MOU with an SFA,
and that limiting home delivery to students identified through an MOU
with an SFA excludes students who are homeschooled or in virtual school
as well as families with children not yet in school. Finally,
stakeholders also reported concerns with overt identification of those
children who are eligible to receive free and reduced price meals when
providing home delivered meals in non-area eligible areas.
USDA agrees with stakeholders that communication with participating
families and protecting participants' right to confidentiality is
imperative to Program integrity and operations. Therefore, through this
rulemaking, USDA is codifying summer 2023 guidance for obtaining
written parental consent for home delivery. This rule requires sponsors
that provide meals directly to children's homes to obtain written
parental consent prior to providing home delivered meals to children.
While USDA sought to minimize burden on program operators and
participants wherever feasible, the Agency determined that obtaining
written consent prior to delivering meals to private residences is the
only reasonable approach for setting up delivery service with basic
integrity safeguards. Establishing both the presence of children in
each household as well as the household's consent to receive meals is
critical to ensuring Program integrity, and preventing any unnecessary
financial burden, time burden, and potential for food waste, as well as
possible convenience for households. However, USDA appreciates that up-
front time and resource investment associated with obtaining consent
and up-to-date information from households, and seeks comments on
effective strategies to streamline this process and ensure validity of
household information.
USDA is also codifying the requirement that non-SFA sponsors must
enter into a written agreement or MOU with the State agency or local
SFA to receive student data for identification and eligibility
determinations. Program regulations at Sec. 225.15(k) require that the
State agency or sponsor, as appropriate, should have a written
agreement or MOU with programs or individuals receiving eligibility
information, prior to disclosing children's free and reduced price meal
eligibility information. The agreement or MOU should include
information like that required for disclosures to Medicaid and the
Children's Health Insurance Program (CHIP) specified in Program
regulations at Sec. 225.15(k)(2). Sponsors are responsible for the
proper handling and storage of student data with applicable SFAs in
accordance with confidentiality and disclosure provisions in the NSLA
and SFSP regulations (Sec. 225.15(f) through (l)). Program sponsors
should consider safeguards to protect participant confidentiality prior
to implementation of the non-congregate meal service option. USDA
reiterates that sponsors are not limited to using school data or
providing meals to students identified through school data. Both
congregate and non-congregate Program sponsors may use household
applications or other means, such as household's receipt of SNAP,
TANIF, and FDPIR benefits (as described in 7 CFR 225.15(f)(3)) to
identify and notify children in the area of the option to receive meal
deliveries, including students who are homeschooled or in virtual
school as well as families with children not yet in school.
Requirements regarding applications for free Program meals outlined at
Sec. 225.15(f) must be followed when using household applications to
determine the eligibility of children.
Accordingly, this rule adds new Sec. Sec. 225.14(d)(6) and
225.16(b)(5)(i) to require sponsors operating a non-congregate meal
service which delivers meals directly to children's homes to obtain
written parental consent prior to providing meals to the children. In
addition, this rule adds a new Sec. 225.14(d)(8) to establish the
requirement that non-SFA sponsors must enter into a written agreement
or MOU with the State agency or local SFA if they wish to receive
student data for identification and eligibility determination purposes.
i. Meal Ordering and Second Meals
Program regulations at Sec. 225.15(b)(4) allow sponsors to claim
reimbursement for several second meals which does not exceed 2 percent
of the number of first meals served to children for each meal type
(i.e., breakfasts, lunches, snacks, or suppers) during the claiming
period. This option is provided in recognition of the fluctuation in
participation during summer operations which makes forecasting
difficult. The State agency must disallow all claims for second meals
if it determines that the sponsor failed to plan and prepare or order
meals with the objective of providing only one meal per child at each
meal service. Second meals must be served only after all participating
children at the site's meal service have been served a meal. Summer
2023 Program policy only allowed second meals to be claimed at
congregate meal sites. In this rule, USDA maintains its determination
that the purpose and design of the non-congregate meal service option
does not support the basis for claiming second meals at non-congregate
meal service sites.
Accordingly, this rule amends Program regulations at Sec.
225.15(b)(4) to limit reimbursement of second meals to congregate meal
service. State agencies must disallow claims if it determines sponsors
served second meals as part of a non-congregate meal service.
i. Requirements Specific to Sponsors Operating Conditional Non-
Congregate Sites
As stated in the section II. A. of this rule, USDA is defining
conditional non-congregate sites under this rulemaking and clarifying
applicable program requirements. This section describes the changes and
clarifications USDA is making for this new site type as it relates to
Sponsor responsibilities.
[[Page 90245]]
1. Certification To Collect Information on Participant Eligibility
As is discussed throughout this section of the rule, sponsors of
conditional non-congregate sites may only claim meals served to
children who meet the Program's income standards. Program regulations
at Sec. 225.14(d) provide requirements for specific sponsor types,
such as sponsors that operate camp sites, and States that those sponsor
types must certify that they will collect information on children's
Program eligibility to support their claim for reimbursement.
Accordingly, this IFR adds a new Sec. 225.14(d)(7) to clarify that if
the sponsor operates a conditional non-congregate site, it must certify
that it will collect information on participants' eligibility to
support its claim for reimbursement.
2. Notification to the Community
Summer 2023 guidance required sponsors of non-congregate meal
service sites to announce the availability of free meals in the local
media as outlined in Program regulations at Sec. 225.15(e). Program
regulations at Sec. 225.15(e) require sponsors operating the SFSP,
including sponsors of open sites, camps, and closed enrolled sites, to
annually announce the availability of free meals in the media serving
the area from which the sponsor draws its attendance. Sponsors of camps
and closed enrolled sites must notify participants of the availability
of free meals and if a free meal application is needed. The regulations
specify that for sites that use free meal applications to determine
individual eligibility, the notification to the community must include
the Program's income eligibility standards, a statement explaining that
certain children (such as children in households that receive SNAP) are
automatically eligible to receive free meal benefits at eligible
Program sites, and a statement that meals are available without regard
to race, color, national origin, sex, age, or disability. USDA reminds
State agencies and program operators that, despite the introduction of
new SFSP regulations in this IFR, the requirement to provide reasonable
modifications to accommodate participants with disabilities remains
unchanged. With the addition of the new conditional non-congregate site
type to Program regulations, USDA is amending Program requirements at
Sec. 225.15(e) to clarify that sponsors of conditional non-congregate
sites must notify participants of the availability of free meals and if
a free meal application is needed, as with sponsors of camps and closed
enrolled sites. Program regulations at Sec. 225.15(e) continue to
apply to sponsors regardless of the meal service type provided.
Accordingly, this rule amends Sec. 225.15(e) to clarify
notification requirements for sponsors of conditional non-congregate
sites. This IFR also revises the language at Sec. 225.15(e) to reflect
the current federally protected bases for the CNPs, as discussed in
section II. H. of this rule.
E. Non-Congregate Meal Service
i. Non-Congregate Meal Service Requirements
Under the SFSP, meals which may be served to children are
breakfast, lunch, supper, and snacks. A sponsor may claim reimbursement
only for the types of meals the sponsor is approved to serve under its
agreement with the State agency. Sponsors' food service sites may be
approved to serve any combination of two meals or one meal and one
snack during each day of operation, except that lunch and supper cannot
be served on the same day. In addition, sites that serve meals
primarily to migrant children (commonly referred to as ``migrant
sites'' under the Program) or camps may serve up to three meals
(breakfast, lunch, and supper), or two meals and one snack, during each
day of operation. A sponsor may only be reimbursed for meals that meet
the meal pattern requirements, adhere to State and local health,
safety, and sanitation requirements, and which are served during the
approved meal service times, among other meal service requirements at
Sec. 225.16. The Act added additional provisions specific to non-
congregate feeding, which USDA is codifying into regulations through
this rulemaking.
The NSLA was amended to allow States to provide program meals under
the SFSP for non-congregate consumption in a rural area with no
congregate meal service, as determined by the Secretary. In addition,
under the new non-congregate provision, meals may only be claimed when
served to children in an area in which poor economic conditions exist,
or, in an area that is not an area in which poor economic conditions
exist, if the child is determined to be eligible for free or reduced
price school meals under the NSLP or the SBP. Finally, as with any meal
served for congregate consumption, non-congregate meals must be served
according to the number and type of meals allowed for the site type,
and must meet all applicable State, Tribal, and local health, safety,
and sanitation standards, and the nutritional standards prescribed
under the Program meal pattern.
Accordingly, this rule adds a new Sec. 225.16(b)(5) to codify the
additional meal service requirements for non-congregate meals, in
accordance with the statute. In addition, the rule reiterates pertinent
existing requirements that continue to apply to non-congregate meal
service, including restrictions on the number and type of meals served
per operational day, and provisions that sponsors must only be approved
to operate if they have the administrative and operational capability
to do so. This rule makes further changes to the meal service
requirements in Sec. 225.16, which are described in this section of
the preamble.
ii. Non-Congregate Meal Service Options
Under summer 2023 guidance, USDA allowed meal service options
specific to non-congregate feeding including, but not limited to:
multi-day meal issuance; parent or guardian meal pick-up; and bulk meal
components. Based on stakeholder feedback, experience gained under
COVID-19 operations, and summer 2023 implementation, USDA is codifying
the use of these three specified options. The rule also includes
several integrity safeguards, as well as parameters around State agency
approval to use these options through this rulemaking. First, these
meal service options may only be used by sponsors in good standing
(good standing is discussed in section II. A. vi. of this rule), as
determined by the State agency. Furthermore, a State agency may
prohibit sponsors from using these options only on a case-by-case basis
and without regard to sponsor type if the State agency determines that
a sponsor does not have the capability to operate or oversee non-
congregate meal services at their sites. Finally, a State agency's
decision to prohibit a sponsor from using an option is not an
appealable action.
This flexible approach promotes integrity while ensuring that
sponsors who have demonstrated the administrative capability to carry
out these options, are able to use these options as part of a non-
congregate meal service to meet the needs of the children in their
area. Maintaining such access is critical for rural areas which may
benefit from the use of these options where children would otherwise
have to travel long distances to receive a meal.
USDA understands that State agencies are best positioned to
determine how sponsors may conduct non-congregate meal service to
provide Program access
[[Page 90246]]
for eligible children while maintaining Program accountability. USDA
encourages State agencies and sponsors to implement safeguards to
ensure food safety and Program integrity. State agencies should include
any additional statewide requirements and operational safeguards as
part of the State's plan to use non-congregate meal service, as
required for MAPs under this rulemaking (see section II. B. ii. of this
rule).
Accordingly, this IFR adds a new Sec. 225.16(i) to establish the
use of these options for non-congregate meal service. A discussion of
each of the provisions, stakeholder feedback, and USDA's actions and
rationale for each of these options is included below.
1. Multi-Day Meal Issuance
Program regulations under part 225 reflect the long-standing
congregate meal service requirements of the NSLA. Provisions of the
NSLA at 42 U.S.C. 1753(b)(1)(A) and 1761(a)(1)(D) and Program
regulations at Sec. 225.6(i)(15) require Program meals to be served in
a congregate setting and consumed by participants on site in order to
be eligible for reimbursement. The NSLA further requires at 42 U.S.C.
1761(b)(2) that a service institution may only serve up to two meals
(or one snack and one meal) per day, per child (except for camps and
migrant sites which may serve up to three meals (or two meals and one
snack) per day, per child). However, the Act added section 13(a)(13)(E)
[42 U.S.C. 1761(a)(13)(E)] to the NSLA which provides the option to
provide multi-day meal distribution at rural non-congregate sites.
Specifically, it allows that over a 10-calendar day period, the number
of reimbursable non-congregate meals provided to a child does not
exceed the number of meals that could be provided over a 10-calendar
day period under congregate feeding. Under summer 2023 guidance, USDA
did not establish further Federal limitations and allowed State
agencies, at their discretion, to approve sponsors for multi-day
distribution of meals that could be provided over a 10-calendar day
period, consistent with the statute.
During COVID-19 operations, about 30 percent of State agencies
reported that more than half of Program sponsors provided 2 to 3 days'
worth of meals at one time. In addition, about one fourth of State
agencies reported that more than half of these local Program sponsors
provided a full week of meals at one time.\6\ Through the listening
sessions, USDA received varied feedback from stakeholders regarding the
multi-day meal issuance option when used for non-congregate meal
service during the COVID-19 pandemic. Many of the comments focused on
the difficulty of balancing Program integrity with Program access. Some
stakeholders, including a few State agencies, stated that multi-day
meal issuance is an essential method of providing non-congregate meals
in rural areas and praised the benefits to the community, such as the
ability to provide children meals for the weekend. Though, stakeholders
expressed concerns about food safety or food quality when multiple days
of meals are provided at one time, as well as providers' and
households' storage capabilities. Many State agencies reported limiting
multi-day meal issuance to no more than 5- or 7-days during summer
2023, while other State agencies reported prohibiting multi-day meal
issuance for all sponsors due to operational challenges experienced
during the COVID-19 pandemic. Some State agencies noted that they
permitted the maximum number of days' worth of meals allowed (i.e., 10
calendar days) when sponsors provided a valid rationale or a food
safety plan. Acknowledging some State agencies' concerns with multi-day
meal issuance, one stakeholder suggested USDA provide State agencies a
tiered system based on a risk assessment to determine the number of
days' worth of meals that a sponsor or site can distribute at one time.
This tiered system could include years of operation (total and
utilizing non-congregate service), prior review findings, degree of
remoteness of the service area, and presence of other sites in the
vicinity.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ Severn, Veronica, Liana Washburn, Rachel Frisk, and Kevin
Conway. (2023). Child Nutrition Program Operations During the COVID-
19 Pandemic, March through September 2020: School Meals Operations
Study (SMO) Year 1 Report. Prepared by Mathematica, Contract No.
12319819A0009/12319819F0162. Alexandria, VA: U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, Office of Policy Support.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This rule codifies into regulations the provision at section
13(a)(13)(E) of the NSLA, as amended by the Act, which requires that
the number of reimbursable meals provided to a child does not exceed
the number of meals that could be provided over a 10-calendar day
period. However, the State agency may establish a shorter calendar day
period on a case-by-case basis for an individual sponsor, considering
possible concerns regarding a sponsor's ability to ensure Program
integrity, food safety, and meal quality. For State agency approval to
operate sites that provide multi-day meal service, sponsors opting to
distribute multi-day meals must have procedures in place that document,
to a reasonable extent, that the proper number of meals are distributed
to each eligible child, these procedures must be included in the
sponsor's application to participate in the Program (as discussed in
section II.B.iv.) and may also impose additional requirements, at the
State's discretion. As noted above, this rule further requires that
multi-day meal issuance may only be used by Program sponsors in good
standing, and that State agencies may only prohibit sponsors from using
these options on a case-by-case basis without regard to sponsor type,
if the State agency determines that a sponsor does not have the
capability to effectively operate or oversee non-congregate meal
services at their sites. USDA encourages State agencies, when
considering the imposition of additional multi-day meal issuance
requirements, to also consider the potential challenges for
participants to access sites (which could include the effort required
for families who reside in remote areas to travel to pick-up sites more
than once per week).
Accordingly, this rule codifies the option for multi-day meal
issuance by adding a new Sec. 225.16(i)(1) to allow State agency
approved sponsors to operate multi-day meal service. Sponsors opting to
distribute multi-day meals must ensure through documented procedures,
approved by their State agency, that the proper number of meals are
distributed to each eligible child.
2. Parent or Guardian Meal Pick-Up
Prior to the Act, provisions under the NSLA at 42 U.S.C. 1761(f)(3)
and Program regulations at Sec. 225.9(d)(7) required that meals must
be served to eligible children. These requirements ensured that Program
sponsors provided meals directly to children who participate in the
SFSP. As previously mentioned, the Act authorized USDA to issue
guidance for summer 2023 rural non-congregate meal service. Through
that guidance, USDA allowed the option for Program meals to be
distributed to parents or guardians to take home to children and for
non-congregate meals to be delivered to participants' homes. During the
COVID-19 PHE, USDA used temporary legislative authority to grant a
nationwide waiver, allowing sponsors to set up meal service in which
parents or guardians could pick up meals for their children, without
requiring the child to be present. This option proved to be a useful
tool for ensuring children's access to Program meals in a non-
congregate setting. USDA established guidance that required Program
sponsors opting to distribute
[[Page 90247]]
meals to parents or guardians to maintain accountability and Program
integrity through processes that ensured meals were only distributed to
parents or guardians of eligible children and that duplicate meals were
not provided.
During COVID-19 meal service operations, Program sponsors that used
the parent and guardian pick-up waiver were required to ensure that
duplicate meals were not provided to any child and that meals were
distributed only to parents and guardians of children. To ensure this
requirement was met, Program sponsors requested that parents and
guardians provide their children's names or other identifying
information when picking up meals.\2\ Similar to multi-day meal
issuance, during the listening sessions, stakeholders provided mixed
feedback on this aspect of operations. While some stakeholders raised
integrity concerns with the possibility of serving meals to non-
participants and cited operational challenges during the pandemic,
others expressed strong support for the option to allow a parent or
guardian to pick up meals without children present. These respondents
in support of the provision stated that the flexibility to provide or
deliver a meal when children are not present is essential to both the
purpose and efficacy of non-congregate service and found that this
option was successfully implemented during the COVID-19 PHE. For
example, multiple stakeholders reported the difficulty that many
families in rural communities experience when required to commute long
distances between work and home, noting that it is often more
convenient for parents to pick up meals on their commute. On the other
hand, some stakeholders reported concerns with oversight of unallowable
or duplicate meal distribution to individuals on behalf of children.
However, 13 non-State agency stakeholders suggested that sponsors know
their rural communities (e.g., who has children and who does not) well
enough to prevent individuals with the intent to defraud from receiving
Program meals. USDA appreciates the attention paid by Program operators
to this aspect of operations during the implementation of non-
congregate meal service and recognizes the importance of ensuring
Program integrity while providing Program access to children who reside
in rural areas.
This rule codifies the option for sponsors in good standing to
allow parents or guardians to pick up Program meals on behalf of
eligible children. As noted above, State agencies have the discretion
on a case-by-case basis to prohibit sponsors, regardless of sponsor
type, from using this option if the State agency determines that the
sponsor cannot adequately ensure these requirements are met. Program
integrity is vital to the success of non-congregate meal service;
therefore, for State agency approval to operate sites that provide meal
pick-up, sponsors opting to distribute meals to parents or guardians
must have procedures in place that document, to a reasonable extent,
that meals are only distributed to parents or guardians of eligible
children, and that duplicate meals are not distributed to any child.
These procedures must be included in the sponsor's application to
participate in the Program. Examples of documented procedures may
include, but are not limited to, using sign-in sheets (including the
use of technology-based solutions which may streamline program
participation and monitoring), or with State agency approval, other
methods which result in accurate recording completed by Program
sponsors that want to implement parent or guardian meal pick-up for
children. State agencies may establish specific criteria or standards
for what should be included in these procedures.
Although State agencies reported the prior use of these integrity
measures among some sponsors during COVID-19 operations, USDA
acknowledges that this type of meal duplication prevention effort may
be new to some Program operators with the addition of the permanent
non-congregate meal service option. USDA seeks to ensure that non-
congregate meals are accessible to all eligible children while
maintaining Program accountability and integrity. Permanent non-
congregate meal service is a distinct approach to providing summer
meals to children compared to the congregate meal service model, and
thus, presents its own set of risks that Program sponsors must take
reasonable steps to mitigate in order to maintain Program
accountability and integrity.
USDA seeks public comments on effective approaches for balancing
integrity and access priorities, while offering parent or guardian meal
pick-up flexibility during summer non-congregate service. Commenters
are specifically encouraged to provide input on:
Successful and recommended procedures (ideally those
informed by pandemic or summer 2023 implementation experience), for
ensuring to a reasonable extent that meals are only distributed to
parents or guardians of eligible children;
Criteria, standards, or other requirements that may be
established by State agencies to ensure consistency in the approval of
documented procedures to be implemented by sponsors;
Minimizing burden on States, sponsors, and families while
maintaining the integrity standards of the Program;
The frequency and type of program integrity incidents
witnessed during unannounced reviews, technical assistance visits, and
scheduled reviews; and
The desirability or appropriateness of USDA to establish
further integrity controls in relation to parent or guardian meal pick-
up through future guidance and/or rulemaking (including but not limited
to restrictions based on sponsor experience, sponsor type, or site
type).
Accordingly, this rule adds Sec. 225.16(i)(2) to allow State
agency approved sponsors to distribute meals to parents or guardians to
provide to their children. Sponsors opting to distribute meals to
parents or guardians must ensure through documented procedures,
approved by their State agency, that meals are only distributed to
parents or guardians of eligible children, and that duplicate meals are
not distributed to any child.
3. Bulk Meal Items
Summer 2023 implementation guidance permitted State agencies to
approve self-preparation sites to distribute bulk foods to eligible
children to provide multiple days' worth of meals for multi-day meal
issuance, if the foods provided met the component and quantity
requirements for each meal service type (i.e., breakfast, lunch/supper,
snack). Additionally, the guidance required:
Foods to be in the proper amounts for each reimbursable
meal being served;
Foods to be clearly identifiable as making up reimbursable
meals;
Menus to be provided with directions indicating which
items are to be used for each meal as well as the correct portion
sizes; and
Minimal preparation is needed, including a prohibition on
foods provided as ingredients for recipes that require chopping,
mixing, or baking.
Through additional guidance, USDA also encouraged sponsors to
consider several factors such as food safety risks, access to kitchen
appliances and cooking tools, and availability of the parent or
guardian to assist with meal preparation. USDA received varied feedback
from stakeholders regarding bulk meal item issuance during the
listening sessions. Similar to multi-day meal issuance, many comments
focused on the difficulty of balancing Program
[[Page 90248]]
integrity with Program access. Stakeholders also expressed concerns
about food safety or food quality, providers' and households' storage
capabilities, the usability of bulk food items, and the challenges
families experience putting the items together to make the meal. Many
State agencies reported limiting the use of bulk meal items, while some
State agencies reported prohibiting bulk foods entirely due to
operational challenges experienced during the COVID-19 pandemic, such
as the difficulty of food usage before spoilage when multiple days'
worth of meals were provided at one time. Some State agencies noted
that they allowed bulk meal item distribution only when provided with a
food safety plan. Though several stakeholders expressed support for
this flexibility, citing reasons including that it gives parents an
opportunity to prepare and serve meals directly to their children,
reduces packing waste, and potentially supports local economies and
farmers.
This rule codifies the option for self-preparation sponsors
approved to operate non-congregate meal service to provide bulk foods
that meet the meal pattern requirements for each meal service type with
added safeguards to ensure Program integrity and the health and safety
of children while promoting access for rural areas. As discussed in
section II. E. ii. 1. of this rulemaking, about 30 percent of State
agencies reported that more than half of Program sponsors provided 2 to
3 days' worth of meals at one time. In addition, about one fourth of
State agencies reported that more than half of these local Program
sponsors provided a full week of meals at a time during COVID-19
operations. Since multi-day meal issuance and bulk food distribution
flexibilities work collectively additional restrictions around this
pairing will be codified through this rulemaking. State agencies must
determine whether a sponsor's proposed distribution of bulk food items
meets State and local health, safety, and sanitation standards. In
addition, when a sponsor is approved to use this option, the sponsor
must ensure that:
Required food components for each reimbursable meal served
meet the meal pattern requirements at Sec. 225.16(d);
All food items that contribute to a reimbursable meal are
clearly identifiable;
Menus are provided and clearly indicate the food items and
portion sizes for each reimbursable meal;
Food preparation, such as heating or warming, is minimal.
With State agency and FNSRO approval, sponsors may offer food items
that would require further preparation in circumstances where
distribution of such food items is justified and appropriate; and
The maximum number of reimbursable meals provided to a
child does not exceed the number of meals that could be provided over a
5-calendar day period (or less if the State agency established a
shorter calendar day period on a case-by-case basis). However, a State
agency can approve sponsors to provide up to 10 days' worth of bulk
meals, also on a case-by-case basis, in appropriate circumstances such
as extremely remote areas where more frequent distribution is
impracticable. The approved time period may not exceed the time period
for which the sponsor is approved for multi-day meal issuance.
As noted above, under this rule, USDA further codifies that bulk
meal service may only be used by sponsors in good standing. State
agencies have the discretion to limit bulk meal service for Program
sponsors on a case-by-case basis. Additionally, State agencies can
prohibit Program sponsors from using this flexibility, on a case-by-
case basis without regard to sponsor type, if the State agency
determines that a sponsor does not have the capability to operate or
oversee non-congregate meal services at their sites, such as if the
State agency determines that the Program sponsor cannot adequately
ensure the proper number of meals are distributed to each eligible
child.
USDA encourages State agencies to place reasonable limits on the
food items provided or types of food items provided as part of bulk
meal service, dependent on sponsor experience. For this reason, USDA is
seeking comments on best practices for providing bulk food menu items
to inform future rulemaking.
Accordingly, this rule codifies the option to provide bulk meal
items by adding a new Sec. 225.16(i)(3).
iii. Offer Versus Serve
The NSLA in section 13(f)(7) [42 U.S.C. 1761(f)(7)] and Program
regulations at Sec. 225.16(f)(1)(ii) provide that an SFA participating
as a service institution may permit a child to refuse one or more items
of a meal that the child does not intend to eat, under rules that the
school uses for school meals under Program regulations in parts 210 and
220 (7 CFR 210.10(e) and 220.8(e), respectively). Since section
13(f)(7) of the NSLA only authorizes SFAs to use OVS, non-SFA
sponsoring organizations are not permitted to use OVS.
For summer 2023, USDA issued guidance that allowed SFA sponsors
operating non-congregate meal service to utilize OVS with State agency
approval, as long as all meal components or food items were offered,
and all participants had the opportunity to select a complete
reimbursable meal. While OVS is potentially a useful tool for reducing
food waste, many stakeholders expressed concerns about program
integrity and meal quality associated with OVS when meals were mostly
pre-packaged. Several State agencies reported observing improper
implementation of OVS during COVID, stating that some Program sponsors
used OVS exclusively for the milk component instead of offering any
meal components or items as required in SFSP regulations Sec.
225.16(f)(1)(ii). However, the goals of OVS are to simplify Program
administration and reduce food waste and costs while maintaining the
nutritional integrity of the SFSP meal that is served. Therefore, USDA
reminds State agencies and SFA sponsors that when implementing OVS, a
child or parent must be able to decline to accept any component
offered.
Therefore, under this rulemaking, State agencies may only permit
SFAs to operate OVS for non-congregate meal service as outlined in
section 13(f)(7) of the NSLA and at Program regulations Sec.
225.16(f)(1(ii). USDA continues to limit OVS to SFA sponsors, who are
experienced with OVS in the NSLP, to remain consistent with the
statutory requirements of the NSLA and to promote Program integrity.
USDA encourages SFAs that intend to use OVS to carefully consider how
to best implement this flexibility while ensuring that all meal service
requirements are met as outlined in Sec. 225.16(f)(1)(2), and under
parts 210 and 220 at Sec. Sec. 210.10(e) and 220.8(e), respectively.
Some possible strategies for ensuring Program integrity include
providing a buffet style meal pick-up service or utilizing an online
ordering system where children can choose their SFSP meal items prior
to meal pick-up or delivery.
Accordingly, this rule does not make further changes to existing
regulations Sec. 225.16(f)(1)(ii), effectively allowing SFAs to use
OVS when providing non-congregate meal service.
iv. Clarifications To Existing Meal Service Requirements--Meal Service
Times and Offsite Consumption of Food Items
Meal Service Times
Program regulations at Sec. 225.16(c) require meals served in the
SFSP to
[[Page 90249]]
follow specific time requirements. Meal service times must be
established by sponsors for each site, included in the sponsor's
application, and approved by the State agency. Meal service time
requirements also specify that breakfast meals be served at or close to
the beginning of a child's day; all sites except residential camps must
start the next meal service at least one hour after the end of the
previous meal or snack; and meals served outside of the approved meal
service times are not eligible for reimbursement. In addition, meal
service requirements at Sec. 225.16(c) provide instructions for meals
not prepared on site. Specifically, meal deliveries must arrive before
the approved meal service time and meals must be delivered within one
hour of the start of the meal service if the site does not have
adequate storage to hold hot or cold meals at the temperatures required
by State or local health regulations.
USDA determined that some meal service time requirements continued
to apply under the summer 2023 guidance. The guidance instructed that
meal service times must be:
Established for each site;
Included in the sponsor's application and approved by the
State agency; and
Supported through State agency approved pick-up schedules
or delivery plans with designated times for distribution.
The guidance also required that the State agency must approve any
changes in meal service times. Finally, sponsors offering a non-
congregate meal service were not required to serve breakfast in the
morning or provide one hour between the end of one meal service and the
start of the next.
Stakeholders did not provide feedback on meal service time
requirements during listening sessions. However, USDA maintains that
some meal service time requirements are necessary to provide sufficient
control at the State agency and sponsor levels to allow for planned
meal services that meet the needs of the community, consistent with the
summer 2023 guidance. Therefore, through this rulemaking, USDA is
codifying the summer 2023 guidance on meal service time restrictions
for non-congregate meal service.
Accordingly, this rule adds a new Sec. 225.16(b)(5)(iii) to
establish that non-congregate meal service is subject to the time
restrictions for meal service at Sec. 225.16(c)(1), (4), and (5). This
rule also amends Sec. 225.16(c)(2), (3) and (6) to clarify that non-
congregate meal service is exempt from requiring that breakfast must be
served at or close to the beginning of the child's day, that one hour
must elapse between meal services, and that meals not prepared on site
must be delivered within one hour of the approved meal service time for
congregate meal service. Lastly, the rule makes further changes to the
requirements under meal service times in accordance with monitoring
requirements, as discussed in section II.F.i.b. of this rulemaking.
Offsite Consumption of Food Items
Program regulations at Sec. 225.16(h) allow sponsors to permit a
child to take one fruit, vegetable, or grain item off-site for later
consumption without prior State agency approval if all applicable State
and local health, safety, and sanitation standards are met. Sponsors
should only allow an item to be taken off-site if the site has adequate
staffing to properly administer and monitor the site. A State agency
may prohibit individual sponsors on a case-by-case basis from using
this option if the State agency determines that the sponsor's ability
to provide adequate oversight is in question. The State agency's
decision to prohibit a sponsor from utilizing this option is not an
appealable action. With the establishment of the non-congregate option
in eligible rural areas and for meals served to eligible children in
non-rural areas, this option only applies for congregate meal service.
Accordingly, this rule amends Sec. 225.16(h) to clarify that the
provisional flexibility to allow children to take specific food items
for off-site consumption only applies to congregate meal service.
F. Monitoring
Under the Act, the authorization of rural non-congregate meal
service in SFSP expanded meal service options for participating
sponsors and sites. This action changes meal service operations at
sites that will provide non-congregate meals and thus requires
compliance with new regulatory requirements. By conducting reviews of
sponsors and sites, State agencies maintain oversight of Program
compliance; sponsors are also responsible for ensuring that their sites
correctly adhere to Program requirements.
Summer 2023 guidance provided that all existing monitoring
requirements for State agencies and sponsors apply to non-congregate
sponsors and sites. This included pre-approval visits, sponsor and site
reviews, follow-up reviews, meal preparation facility review by State
agencies as required in Program regulations at Sec. 225.7, and site
visits and reviews conducted by sponsors as required in Program
regulations at Sec. 225.15.
USDA received significant feedback from stakeholders regarding
monitoring and general Program integrity related to non-congregate meal
service operations. Stakeholders reported isolated incidents of
improper benefit distribution that occurred during the COVID-19
pandemic at non-congregate meal service operations, which were in place
under temporary waiver authority. States reported incidents of meal
duplication and inaccurate use of meal service flexibilities that
resulted in improper benefit distribution during the pandemic.
Additionally, a few stakeholders noted the delicate balance between
ensuring Program integrity and ensuring Program access.
USDA understands that State agencies are best positioned to
evaluate applicant sponsors and sites for non-congregate meal service
operations. Under this rule, with two exceptions discussed below in
section i. 2., the basic monitoring requirements for type, number, and
frequency of reviews will not change. However, to ensure all Program
operations, both congregate and non-congregate, are properly adhering
to Program requirements, USDA is amending the regulations to
incorporate operational changes concerning pre-approval visits and
sponsor and site review that reflect the introduction of non-congregate
meal service.
USDA seeks to improve Program integrity by assessing how State
agencies, sponsors and sites can use data analysis to detect potential
Program mismanagement in the SFSP. USDA will create guidance materials
and technical assistance tools to leverage Program data to detect
potential Program mismanagement. USDA is seeking comments on best
practices for utilizing data analysis and trends to ascertain Program
irregularities which may be indicative of potential Program
mismanagement to inform future rulemaking.
i. State Agency Responsibilities
1. Pre-Approval Visits
Program regulations at Sec. 225.7(d) require State agencies to
conduct pre-approval visits of sponsors and sites to assess the
applicant sponsor's or site's potential for successful Program
operations. That includes all applicant sponsors that did not
participate in the Program in the prior year, those that had
operational problems noted in the prior year, and any sites that the
State agency has determined need a pre-approval visit. Current
regulations allow pre-
[[Page 90250]]
approval visits of SFA sponsors that had a review with no significant
deficiencies in the preceding 12 months to be conducted at the
discretion of the State agency. Under this rule, that regulation will
be amended to include CACFP institutions. The addition of this
flexibility will ease administrative burden at the State agency while
allowing the State to provide oversight on sponsors with operational
problems and those needing additional technical assistance.
Additionally, this rule will add a requirement that State agencies
must establish a process to determine which sites need pre-approval
visits. This process must consider characteristics of sites including
sites that did not participate in the Program in the prior year,
existing sites that are new to non-congregate meal service, and
existing sites that exhibited operational problems. This requirement
will ensure that applicant sites have the capacity to operate the
Program, including existing sites new to non-congregate meal service
and existing sites that exhibited operational problems in the prior
year. The importance of pre-approval visits was highlighted in the USDA
Summer Food Service Program Integrity Study, which found that a
majority of State directors believed the pre-approval visits were
effective in spotting potential problems.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Giesen, L., Gola, A.A, Gearing, M., Gabay, M., Baier, K.,
Bozzolo, C., and Mwombela, B. (2023). Summer Food Service Program
Integrity Study Final Report. Prepared by Westat, Contract No.
12319818A0021; Order No. 12319818F0134. Alexandria, VA: U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, Office of
Policy Support, Project Officer: Chan Chanhatasilpa. Available
online at: www.fns.usda.gov/research-and-analysis.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Accordingly, this rule amends Sec. 225.7(d) to allow pre-approval
visits of sponsors which are a CACFP institution that had a review
within the preceding 12 months and had no significant deficiencies to
be conducted by the State agency at their discretion at paragraph
(d)(2). Furthermore, this rule amends the State agency pre-approval
site visit requirement at Sec. 225.7(d) to include that State agencies
must develop a site selection process that considers site
characteristics, including whether an existing site is new to non-
congregate meal service operations, by adding a new regulation at Sec.
225.7(d)(4) and listing site characteristics at paragraph (d)(4)(i),
(d)(4)(ii), and (d)(4)(iii). Lastly, the rule revises the paragraph
structure at Sec. 225.7(d) to improve the clarity of the regulations.
2. Sponsor and Site Reviews
Program regulations at Sec. 225.7(e) require State agencies to
review SFSP sponsors and sites to ensure compliance with Program
regulations by determining an appropriate sample selection of sponsors
and sites to review. In determining which sponsors and sites to review,
the State agency must, at a minimum, consider the sponsors' and sites'
previous participation in the Program, their current and previous
Program performance, and the results of previous reviews. Additionally,
Program regulations at Sec. 210.18(e)(3)(ii) require State agencies
during a school meals administrative review to review a minimum of one
site if the SFA selected for review operates the SSO. Under this rule,
USDA is requiring State agencies to include in the sample selection
SFSP sponsors who operate either congregate or non-congregate sites, or
both, per Sec. 225.7(e)(2). This is to ensure that all meal service
options are included in the sample selection. USDA is also requiring
State agencies to review a minimum of one congregate and one non-
congregate site during a school meals administrative review if the SFA
operates both meal service models. If the SFA has one site that
operates both congregate and non-congregate meal services, the State
agency may review a minimum of one site and must observe both a
congregate and non-congregate meal service at that one site.
Furthermore, regulations at Sec. 225.7(e)(4) require State
agencies to conduct a review of every new sponsor at least once during
the first year of operations, annually review every sponsor that
experienced operational problems in the prior year, review each sponsor
at least once every 3 years, and conduct reviews of at least 10 percent
of each reviewed sponsor's sites. This rule does not change any of
these requirements, which require State agencies to provide adequate
oversight of all SFSP sponsors, including those that are new or exhibit
problems, and conduct site level reviews.
In addition to the above requirements, per current Sec.
225.7(e)(4)(ii), State agencies must also ensure that they annually
review several sponsors whose Program reimbursements, in the aggregate,
account for at least one half of the total Program meal reimbursements
in the State in the prior year. This provision requires States to
review larger sponsors to meet the total reimbursement threshold. These
sponsors are solely selected based on size, which means, in many
States, that larger sponsors must be reviewed every year to meet this
requirement. These large sponsors, such as SFAs who operate CNPs on a
year-round basis, are typically more familiar with Program
requirements. Focusing critical oversight resources on these
experienced sponsors limits the number of reviews that State agencies
can conduct of sponsors who are small to mid-size and may be at risk
for more serious operational challenges.
To provide State agencies the ability to target their resources on
sponsors of all sizes and operational capacity, this IFR removes the
requirement at Sec. 225.7(e)(4)(ii). This will allow State agencies to
adjust to any potential changes in the number of meals served due to
new and existing sponsors operating the non-congregate meal service
option. It will also facilitate the timely identification of issues
that pose a risk to Program integrity. The elimination of this
requirement provides State agencies the ability to review sponsors of
various operational capacities who are not currently being reviewed
with the same frequency as larger sponsors. This will allow State
agencies to target resources on sponsors of all sizes who may pose a
greater risk to Program integrity or need additional monitoring and
technical assistance, by identifying a wider variety of issues based on
criteria such as spikes and anomalies in meal claiming. This will
ensure Program integrity across all SFSP Program operators.
In addition to providing State agencies the ability to focus
resources on sponsor reviews that are not just related to the amount of
Program reimbursements, USDA is also adding under Sec. 225.7(e)(4) a
provision that allows State agencies to more frequently review sponsors
who require additional technical assistance. The addition of this
provision at Sec. 225.7(e)(4)(iv) further ensures integrity in the
Program by allowing State agencies to review sponsors of all sizes more
frequently than the current 3-year review cycle, if the State agency
determines the sponsor needs additional oversight and technical
assistance.
Additionally, USDA is including meal service models, both
congregate and non-congregate, and meal distribution methods in the
review sample under Sec. 225.7(e)(4). The addition of this provision
at Sec. 225.7(e)(4)(v) ensures all types of meal service models and
meal distribution methods are included in the 10 percent of sponsor's
sites required to be reviewed. In terms of the number of sites each
sponsor can be approved to operate, the State agency, per Sec.
225.6(b)(6), must not approve any sponsor to operate more than 200
sites
[[Page 90251]]
or to serve more than an average of 50,000 children per day. However,
if the sponsor can demonstrate that it has the capacity to manage and
operate the Program larger than these limits, the State agency may
approve exceptions. Regardless of the size of the sponsor's operation,
the State agency must have the capacity to conduct reviews of at least
10 percent of the sponsor's sites per Sec. 225.6(b)(6).
Accordingly, this rule amends Sec. 225.7(e)(4) to remove Sec.
225.7(e)(4)(ii), the one-half aggregate review requirement. The rule
will also add a new Sec. 225.7(e)(4)(iv) to include review of
additional sponsors at the State agencies discretion and amend Sec.
225.7(e)(4)(v) for the inclusion of all meal types in the 10 percent
review sample. Additionally, this rule amends Sec. 225.6(b)(6) to
include the requirement that the State agency must have the capacity to
conduct reviews of at least 10 percent of the sponsor's sites when the
State agency approves a sponsor to operate more than 200 sites or to
serve more than an average of 50,000 children per day. The rule also
revises the paragraph structure at Sec. 225.6(b)(6) to improve the
readability of the regulations. Lastly, this rule amends Sec.
210.18(e)(3)(ii) to include the review of a non-congregate site for
SFAs operating non-congregate meal service in the SSO.
Program regulations at Sec. 225.7(e)(5) direct State agencies to
develop criteria for site selection when selecting sites to meet the
minimum number of sites required under paragraph (e)(4)(v). This rule
will include at Sec. 225.7(e)(5)(i)(G) and (H) the type of meal
service (e.g., congregate or non-congregate); if non-congregate, the
type of meal distribution method, in the characteristics used to
determine sites selected as part of the sponsor's review. This
provision will ensure the new meal service model type and meal
distribution method is considered when selecting sites for review.
Accordingly, this rule amends Sec. 225.7(e)(5) to include new non-
congregate meal services at paragraph (e)(5)(i)(G) and (H).
Program regulations at Sec. 225.7(j) require State agencies to
develop and provide monitor review forms to all approved sponsors. The
monitor review form must include, at a minimum, the time of the
reviewer's arrival and departure, the site supervisor's printed name
and signature, a certification statement to be signed by the monitor,
the number of meals prepared or delivered, the number of meals served
to children, the deficiencies noted, the corrective actions taken by
the sponsor, and the date of such actions. This rule will include
whether the meal service is congregate or non-congregate on the monitor
review form, which must be completed by sponsor monitors per Sec.
225.7(j). This ensures that there is a differentiation between the
congregate and non-congregate meal service at each site for each
review.
Accordingly, this rule amends Sec. 225.7(j) to include whether the
meal service is congregate or non-congregate on the monitoring review
form.
Program regulations at Sec. 225.16(c)(1)(iii) require meal service
times to be approved by the State agency. Under this rule, all meal
service times approved by the State agency must be in accordance with
the State agency or sponsor's capacity to monitor the full meal service
during a review. This provision will ensure that the sponsor and State
agency have enough resources and the capacity to review the full meal
service.
Accordingly, this rule amends Sec. 225.16(c)(1)(iii) to clarify
that the approval of meal service times must be in accordance with the
State agency or sponsor's capacity to monitor the full meal service
during a review.
i. Sponsor Responsibilities
1. Training
Program regulations at Sec. 225.15(d)(1) require sponsors to hold
Program training sessions for its administrative and site personnel.
These trainings must, at a minimum, include: the purpose of the
Program, site eligibility, recordkeeping, site operations, meal pattern
requirements, and the duties of a monitor. This rule will include both
congregate and non-congregate meal service in the required training
conducted by the sponsor. This is to ensure that the proper meal
service is operated and monitored by the sponsor's administrative and
site personnel at each site.
Accordingly, this rule amends Sec. 225.15(d)(1) to include the
addition of congregate and non-congregate meal service in the sponsor
Program training sessions for its administrative and site personnel
prior to the operation of a site's first meal service.
2. Site Reviews
Through guidance, sponsors were required to conduct pre-operational
visits for new sites and those that experienced operational problems in
the previous year before a site operates the SFSP. This rule codifies
the requirement for sponsors to conduct pre-operational visits for new
sites and those that experienced operational problems in the previous
year before a site operates the Program per Sec. 225.15(d). Similar to
pre-approval visits conducted by the State agency, pre-operational
visits conducted by the sponsor assist the sponsor in detecting
potential operational issues prior to operation of the Program. USDA
also supports the use of virtual monitoring as a tool to supplement the
required on-site monitoring reviews. Providing technical assistance and
training through virtual technologies may also allow them to be offered
more frequently and increase access to trainings, thereby supporting
Program integrity. In addition, this rule will codify that existing
sites that are new to non-congregate meal service are considered new
sites; and as such are also required to have a pre-operational visit.
This is to ensure that a site has the facilities to provide meal
service for the anticipated number of children that will receive non-
congregate meals and the capability to conduct the proposed meal
service.
Accordingly, this rule amends Sec. 225.15(d) to include pre-
operational site visits for new sites and those that experienced
operational problems in the previous year, including existing sites
switching to non-congregate meal service, to be conducted by the
sponsor prior to a site operating the Program at paragraph (d)(2).
In this rule, current regulations at Sec. 225.15(d)(2), which
require sponsors to visit each of their sites at least once during the
first two weeks of Program operations for all new sites and sites
determined by the sponsor to need a visit based on criteria established
by the State agency, is now moved to paragraph (d)(3); additionally,
paragraph (d)(3) will include the requirement for sponsors to conduct
site visits for all existing sites that are new to non-congregate meal
service within the first two weeks of operation. This ensures that the
food service operation is operating smoothly and to verify information
such as the site address, storage, holding and preparation facilities,
meal distribution method, and service capacity of non-congregate meal
services.
Accordingly, this rule amends Sec. 225.15(d) to include all
existing sites that are new to non-congregate meal service as sites
needing a site visit conducted by the sponsor within the first two
weeks of Program operations at paragraph (d)(3).
Current regulations at Sec. 225.15(d)(3) require sponsors must
conduct a full review of food service operations at each site at least
once during the first four weeks of Program operations. This rule will
move this provision from
[[Page 90252]]
paragraph (d)(3) to paragraph (d)(4). There are no changes to this
provision; however, a full review of food service operations at each
site includes non-congregate rural meal services.
Accordingly, this rule amends the requirement at Sec. 225.15(d)
that sponsors must conduct a full review of food service operations at
each site at least once during the first four weeks of Program
operations and will be located at paragraph (d)(4).
G. Miscellaneous
i. Collection of Summer Meal Site Location Data
Section 26(d) of the NSLA (42 U.S.C. 1769g(d)) mandates that the
USDA enter into a contract with a non-governmental organization to
establish and maintain an information clearinghouse (named ``USDA
National Hunger Clearinghouse'' or ``Clearinghouse'') of groups that
assist low-income individuals or communities regarding nutrition
assistance programs or other assistance. The Clearinghouse includes a
database of non-governmental, grassroots organizations in the areas of
hunger and nutrition, along with a mailing list to communicate with
these organizations. The Clearinghouse also operates the USDA National
Hunger Hotline, through which assistance is provided via phone or text
message. Local level antihunger organizations enter their information
into the database, and Clearinghouse staff use that information to
provide the public with information about where they can get food
assistance. SFSP and SSO meal sites are a component of this assistance.
USDA works closely with State agencies to ensure that children who
receive free or reduced price school meals continue to receive the
nutrition they need when schools are closed--whether during summer
break or unexpected closures during the school year. Through USDA's
summer meal programs, approved sites in communities across the country
can serve meals to children up to age 18 at no cost. During the summer
operational period (May through September), USDA collects summer meal
site information from State agencies via the Summer Food Site Locator
form (FNS-905). Unlike other resources in the Clearinghouse, this form
is specific to the summer meals programs and may only be completed by
State agencies. The data collected populates the Clearinghouse database
with summer meals site information and locations. Data are also
integrated into public-facing web tools. One such tool is the Summer
Meals Site Finder (Site Finder). This mapping tool was developed by
USDA to help children, parents, and others quickly and easily find
summer meal sites near them. The Site Finder, available for use at no
charge, is a web-based application that also works on tablets,
smartphones, and other mobile devices without the need to download
software or other data. The mapping tool allows users to enter an
address, city, State, or zip code to find up to 50 nearby site
locations, along with their addresses, hours of operation, and contact
information, and directions. State agencies provide data to FNS to be
mapped on the tool and update the data throughout the summer to include
operational changes and new site locations.
The form FNS-905, which may only be completed by State agencies,
collects details about each site such as times, days, and dates of
operation, location, types of meals served, contact information, and if
the site is open to the public. Sponsors provide this information to
their State agencies during the sponsor and site application process as
required by Program regulations at Sec. 225.6. Currently, completing
the FNS-905 is voluntary, though USDA requests those State agencies
that choose to participate to complete the form at least once per the
summer operational period, and submit weekly updates, as needed, during
summer operations. As of summer 2022, most State agencies submitted
FNS-905 forms at least once per summer.
Other interested parties have used the data collected on the FNS-
905 in the creation of mobile applications and texting services. The
data has also been used by State agencies to plan summer site visits,
by Program sponsors to strategically plan for future years' summer
feeding operations, and by researchers in academic institutions. In
addition to members of the general public, other interested parties may
include nutrition or health education professionals, State or local
government health officials, nutrition councils, public interest
advocates, private foundations, and corporate officials.
USDA has also used these data collected from the FNS-905 to improve
integrity and to analyze policy proposals, as well as to report to
executive agency officials and Congress real-time results that cannot
be ascertained through other reporting methods. The Clearinghouse also
supports the USDA National Hunger Hotline and texting service, which
refers people in need anywhere in the U.S. to food pantries, soup
kitchens, grassroots organizations and, in this case specifically,
approved open summer meal sites. The data collected using the FNS-905
is updated by USDA once per week during the summer meal programs'
operating period and posted on an open data platform that is always
accessible to the public.
The introduction of the rural non-congregate meal service option
provides USDA and Program operators with a new opportunity to expand
access to the summer meal programs. The value and far-ranging use of
summer meal site data demonstrates the need for timely, accurate, and
complete data to be available for the public. In addition, this is the
only public resource that provides detailed meal site information
across all States and territories, which emphasizes the need to collect
this data and share it with families searching for summer meal sites in
their area. In line with these changes, USDA will require State
agencies to submit summer meal site data to FNS via the FNS-905.
As stated previously, nearly all States and territories already
provide this data to USDA on a voluntary basis during the summer
season, though USDA recognizes the potential administrative burden and
systems changes associated with introducing a new, mandatory reporting
requirement for State agencies. Further, USDA understands the need to
provide sufficient time to update current systems to accommodate this
change. Therefore, USDA will delay implementation of the reporting
requirement until one year after the publication of this IFR. USDA is
also seeking to modernize data submission and processing, and the Site
Finder tool. As such, USDA seeks comments from State agencies on the
implementation of mandatory reporting requirements, including form and
procedural changes:
When is the earliest that your State submits the initial
site information to USDA? Are there factors that impact when you are
ready to submit this information to USDA, such as application deadline
and processing?
How frequently does your State submit to USDA updates on
summer meal sites during the Site Finder operational period?
How often do operations (e.g., hours/locations, type of
site) of existing sites change, or how often during the summer are new
sites added?
What would be the optimal reporting schedule for summer
meal site data submissions?
How does your State agency assess the accuracy of summer
meal site data at the State level, and ensure accuracy of site
information at the sponsor and site level?
What are best practices to solicit from sponsors timely
and accurate
[[Page 90253]]
updates to site information such as meal service type, times, days, and
meal types, and to ensure operational changes are reflected in the
State's system and the site data that is reported to FNS?
USDA also welcomes comments from stakeholders and the general
public on how summer meal site data and USDA's Site Finder mapping tool
can be made more usable and useful.
Accordingly, this rule adds a new Sec. 225.8(e) to require States
agencies submit to FNS a list of open site locations and their
operational details via the Summer Food Site Locator form (FNS-905) by
June 30 of each year, or a later date approved by the FNSRO, and
provide a minimum of two updates during the summer operational period.
However, State agencies are encouraged to submit weekly updates if
there are any changes to the State agency's data, to ensure families
have the most up-to-date site information. These amendments are
effective December 30, 2024.
ii. Reimbursements
The NSLA was amended to establish the non-congregate meal service
option for rural areas with no congregate meal service for sites that
are located in areas in which poor economic conditions exist. It also
establishes an option for meals served to children certified as being
eligible for free or reduced price meals under the NSLP and the SBP who
reside in rural areas that are not documented as areas in which poor
economic conditions exist, which is codified as a ``conditional non-
congregate site'' under this rule at Sec. 225.2. For this reason, all
meals served at an approved rural site implementing non-congregate
service are eligible for SFSP or SSO reimbursement. SFSP sponsors are
eligible to receive the rural or self-preparation site reimbursement
rate for each meal served to participating children at rural sites (7
CFR 225.9(d)(7)). However, as previously discussed in this rulemaking,
sponsors of conditional non-congregate sites may only claim meals
served to children who meet the Program's income standards. Section
II.D.iii. (Responsibilities of Sponsors) of this IFR also discusses a
change to Sec. 225.14(d)(7) clarifying that if the sponsor operates a
conditional non-congregate site, it must certify that it will collect
information to determine children's Program eligibility to support its
claim for reimbursement. Furthermore, section II.D.ii.
(Responsibilities of Sponsors) of this IFR discusses the change at
Sec. 225.15(b)(4) to limit reimbursement of second meals to congregate
meal service. Therefore, this rule also makes changes in Sec. 225.9
regarding Program assistance to sponsors reflecting these
clarifications.
Accordingly, this rule adds a new Sec. 225.9(d)(11) to require
that sponsors of conditional non-congregate sites are reimbursed only
for meals served to children whose eligibility for Program meals is
documented. In addition, this rule amends Sec. 225.9(f) to clarify the
State agency must ensure that reimbursements for second meals are
limited to the percentage tolerance established when reviewing a
sponsor's claim for congregate meals served.
iii. SSO Non-Congregate Provisions
The Act amends the NSLA and instructs USDA to promulgate
regulations to carry out the new provisions under section 13 of the
NSLA, establishing an option to provide non-congregate summer meal
service in rural areas with no congregate meal service. Consistent with
long-standing summer meal service program administration, USDA
interpreted this statutory authority as extending to the SSO, which is
similarly authorized under section 13 of the NSLA. Therefore, through
this IFR, USDA is codifying the availability of rural non-congregate
meal service through the SSO. Under this rulemaking, an SSO site in a
rural area may be approved to offer a non-congregate meal service
consistent with the requirements under part 225. SFAs approved to offer
a non-congregate meal service must comply with the non-congregate meal
service provisions set forth at Sec. 225.16(b)(5)(i) and (iv) by this
IFR (section II.E.i.) and may use the non-congregate meal service
options described in Sec. 225.16(i) under this IFR (section II.E.ii.).
In addition, this rule defines the SSO under parts 210 and 220 to mean
that the meal service alternative authorized by section 13(a)(8) of the
Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, 42 U.S.C. 1761(a)(8),
under which public or nonprofit school food authorities participating
in the National School Lunch Program or School Breakfast Program offer
meals at no cost to children during the traditional summer vacation
periods and, for year-round schools, vacation periods longer than 10
school days.
As part of this IFR, USDA invites public comments on these new
provisions affecting SSO, specifically whether additional requirements
should be codified to facilitate and provide clarity on the provision
of rural non-congregate service through the SSO.
Accordingly, this IFR adds a new definition of the SSO in
Sec. Sec. 210.2 and 220.2 and adds new Sec. Sec. 210.34 and 220.23
which will set forth the rural non-congregate provisions for the SSO.
iv. Annual Update To Approved Rural Data Sources
As discussed in section II. A. ii., under this IFR, USDA is
expanding the definition of ``rural'' in Sec. 225.2 to allow the use
of multiple recognized Federal classification schemes to designate
areas as rural. The amended definition of ``rural'' will also provide
discretion to USDA for any potential updates or changes to
classification schemes at a future date. Although these recognized
Federal classification schemes are updated with each decennial census
and periodically based on annual census surveys, though this
rulemaking, USDA is making a commitment to issue updates by January 1
of each year, or as soon as is practicable, in order to have an
established effective date for new data or updates to be used by State
agencies and program operators for rural designations in that Program
year. USDA will also make this data available and update the FNS Rural
Designation Map to provide this information in a simplified format.
Accordingly, this IFR adds a new Sec. 225.18(l) to establish an annual
effective date by which USDA will issue updates to the approved rural
data sources to be used for designations in that program year. USDA
will make this information available and referenceable in a simplified
format.
H. Technical Amendments
USDA is removing obsolete provisions from the Code of Federal
Regulations (CFR) in 7 CFR part 225. Section 225.14(d)(4) references
requirements specific to sponsors that administer homeless feeding
sites. The Child Nutrition Reauthorization Act of 1998 eliminated
homeless sites in SFSP. Accordingly, these requirements are removed
from the regulations.
This rule also includes amendments to correct several technical
errors found in 7 CFR part 225. USDA will make technical changes to the
designation of paragraphs to comply with current paragraph structure
requirements for the CFR, where errors appear in the subsections of
part 225 that are amended by this rule. This rule also makes several
additional technical changes to fix a small number of obsolete terms of
usage and punctuation. Finally, the Department will also make non-
substantive technical changes to existing language to provide
consistency and improve readability of regulations in subsections of
part 225 that are amended by this rule. None of the technical changes
will effect a substantive change in the Program.
[[Page 90254]]
Accordingly, this rule amends Program regulations to:
Replace the term ``handicapped'' with the term
``disabled'' in the definition of ``children'' at Sec. 225.2;
Correct the numbering of the subordinate paragraphs in the
definitions of ``Children,'' ``Operating Costs,'' and ``Rural,'' and in
paragraphs (d) and (j) in Sec. 225.7, and paragraph (d) in Sec.
225.11;
Correct the punctuation in Sec. Sec. 225.6(i) and
225.7(j);
Replace reference to the Food Stamp benefit, renamed the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefit, that appears
under Sec. 225.15(f)(3);
Improve the readability of regulations at Sec. Sec.
225.6(a)(2), (b)(6), 225.9(d)(9), and 225.15(b)(3);
Replace the word ``believes'' with the word ``determines''
in Sec. Sec. 225.6(g)(1)(vii)(C), (g)(1)(ix)(C), (g)(2)(iv)(C),
(g)(2)(v)(C), and 225.16(e)(4);
Replace the term ``shall'' with the term ``must'' where it
appears in the subsections of part 225 that are amended by this rule;
and
Revise the language that appears under Sec. Sec.
225.6(f)(1)(iii)(F), 225.7(n)(1), and 225.15(e) to reflect the current
federally protected bases for the CNPs.
I. Severability
The statutory enhancement of the USDA SFSP and SSO to include the
option for rural operators to use alternate service models, including
the non-congregate rural option, that are tailored to the needs of the
communities they serve is essential for ensuring that all children
receive nutritious meals during the summer months when school is not in
session. As directed by statute, USDA implemented the SFSP and SSO
rural non-congregate option in Summer 2023, with careful attention to
meeting the needs of rural communities, while protecting program
integrity. Based on the statutory requirement to expand the SFSP and
SSO for Summer 2024, USDA has determined that its authority to
implement the regulation through this interim final rule is well-
supported in law and practice and should be upheld in any legal
challenge. Further, USDA has determined that its exercise of its
authority reflects sound policy. However, in the event that any portion
of the rule is declared invalid, USDA intends that the various aspects
of the use of alternate service models be severable. For example, if a
court were to find any provision unlawful, such as (1) the definition
of ``rural'' for program purposes, (2) the State agency's authority to
approve a sponsor's request for a rural designation, (3) the provision
of both congregate and non-congregate meals at a single site, or (4)
some other aspect of this rule, USDA intends that all other provisions
in the rule will remain in effect to ensure effective implementation of
the rural non-congregate option. USDA has concluded that it is in the
interests of both rural communities and the children who reside in them
for nutritious meals to be provided using alternate service models
during the summer months when school is not in session. Furthermore, in
the event any part or the entirety of the non-congregate rural option
established by this rulemaking were declared invalid, such option is
severable and does not prevent the Summer EBT program, discussed below,
from proceeding since the non-congregate rural option and Summer EBT
program function independently.
III. Discussion of the Interim Final Rule--Summer EBT
Subpart A--General
i. General Purpose and Scope
This rulemaking establishes the regulations through which the
Secretary of Agriculture will administer the Summer EBT Program.
Section 13A of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (NSLA),
42 U.S.C. 1762, authorizes the Secretary to establish a program under
which States, as well as Indian Tribal Organizations that administer
the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and
Children (WIC), electing to participate in the Summer EBT Program must,
beginning in Summer 2024 and annually thereafter, issue to each
eligible household Summer EBT benefits. As provided for in section
13A(a), the Summer EBT Program was established ``for the purpose of
providing nutrition assistance. . .during the summer months for each
eligible child, to ensure continued access to food when school is not
in session for the summer.''
Accordingly, this program's purpose and scope are codified in a new
7 CFR 292.1.
i. Definitions
Implementation of the Summer EBT Program will necessitate new
systems and processes, and with them, new definitions. Some of the
definitions in this rulemaking are identical to, or adapted from,
definitions in Child Nutrition Program, SNAP, or WIC regulations. Other
definitions have been created in this rulemaking to clarify specific
functions and terms essential to the Summer EBT Program and are
entirely new.
1. Existing Definitions
The following existing definitions from elsewhere in USDA
regulations are codified in this rule without change:
Act; Acquisition; Advance Planning Document for project planning or
Planning APD (APD or PAPD) Advance Planning Document Update (APDU);
Commercial Off-the-Shelf (COTS); Continuous school calendar; Current
income; Department; Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) account;
Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) card; Electronic Benefit Transfer
(EBT) contractor or vendor; Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) system;
Enhancement; FNS; FNSRO; Firm; Information System (IS); LEA;OIG;
Project; Request for Proposal (RFP); SNAP; Secretary; State;
Territories; and WIC.
2. Modified Definitions
The following definitions from elsewhere in USDA regulations were
adapted to reflect the unique needs of the Summer EBT Program.
2 CFR part 200. Minor modification from 7 CFR part 210, which
includes the following: (NOTE: Pre-Federal Award Requirements and
Contents of Federal Awards (subpart C) does not apply to the NSLP).
Administrative costs. This definition was modified from 7 CFR 225.2
to refer to the Summer EBT program instead of the Summer Food Service
Program.
Adult. Modified from 7 CFR 245.2 to clarify that the need for the
definition itself is for application purposes, and to change from 21 to
18.
Categorically eligible. Modified from 7 CFR 245.2 to refer to
Summer EBT rather than free meals or milk.
Disclosure. Modified from 7 CFR 245.2 to refer to Summer EBT
eligibility rather than free and reduced price meal eligibility.
Enrolled students. Modified from 7 CFR 245.9 to refer to students
who are enrolled in and attending NSLP/SBP schools who have access to a
meal service (breakfast or lunch) on a regular basis.
Household. At 7 CFR 245.2 ``Household'' means ``family.'' And at 7
CFR 245.2 ``Family'' means a group of related or nonrelated
individuals, who are not residents of an institution or boarding house,
but who are living as one economic unit.'' Summer EBT does not use the
term family, so household is defined and used throughout.
Implementation Advance Planning Document or Implementation APD
(IAPD). Modified from 7 CFR 277.18 to
[[Page 90255]]
conform with Summer EBT requirements and processes.
Income eligibility guidelines. Modified to specify the programs for
which the Income Eligibility Guidelines apply.
Indian Tribal Organization (ITO). Adapted from other definitions of
ITO used by USDA programs and modified to reflect that only ITOs that
administer WIC are eligible to administer Summer EBT.
SNAP Eligible foods. This definition is the same as the definition
of ``Eligible foods'' at 7 CFR 271.2. It is modified here to specify
that these are SNAP eligible foods.
SNAP Retail food store. This definition is the same as the
definition of ``Retail food store'' at 7 CFR 271.2. It is modified here
to specify that these are SNAP retail food stores.
Vendor. Modified from 7 CFR 271.2 to reference Summer EBT instead
of SNAP.
Verification. Modified from 7 CFR 245.2 to reference Summer EBT
instead of NSLP/SBP and to state that direct verification is required
rather than optional.
Verification for cause. Modified from 7 CFR 245.6a(c)(7) to
reference Summer EBT agencies.
3. New Definitions
The following new definitions were developed specifically for the
Summer EBT Program.
Cash-Value Benefit (CVB) this term relates to the type of benefit
that is a fixed-dollar amount used to obtain supplemental foods by
participants served by an ITO for purposes of the Summer EBT program.
It is an option for ITO benefit delivery.
Dual participation. This term was developed to describe a
prohibited situation in which a child is receiving multiple Summer EBT
benefits simultaneously.
Eligible child. This definition was developed to describe the
unique population of children who are eligible for the newly created
Summer EBT Program.
Eligible household. This definition was created in the Consolidated
Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117-328) for the purposes of Summer
EBT.
Expungement. This term describes removal of Summer-EBT benefits and
was not previously defined in regulations at 7 CFR 274.2 or other USDA
regulations.
Direct verification. Direct verification is conducted in the NSLP/
SBP; however, this term was not previously defined in regulations at 7
CFR 245.6a.
Food instrument. This term is applicable to ITOs administering the
Summer EBT program, with the same meaning as the definition set forth
in regulations at 7 CFR 246.2.
Instructional year. This definition is included to reflect language
introduced in the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117-
328).
ITO Service Area. This definition was developed to describe the
geographic area served by an ITO Summer EBT agency.
NSLP/SBP. This term was not previously defined in 7 CFR 245.2 or
other USDA regulations.
NSLP/SBP application. Distinct from the definition at 7 CFR 245.2
for ``Household application,'' this term specifically refers to NSLP/
SBP household income applications.
Period of eligibility. This definition was created to describe the
time period in which a child may be deemed eligible for Summer EBT
benefits.
Program. This definition was created to reference the new Summer
EBT program that is codified in 7 CFR part 292.
Rolling verification. This definition was created to describe the
process by which verification may be conducted for Summer EBT
applications on a rolling basis.
School aged. This definition was created to describe a subset of
the population which is the appropriate age to be in school in a State
or ITO.
Special Provision school. This definition was created to
efficiently describe a school that elects Provision 1, Provision 2,
Provision 3, or the Community Eligibility Provision to operate the
National School Lunch and/or School Breakfast Programs and that does
not conduct annual, individual eligibility determinations for all
students.
Streamlined certification. This definition describes a process
specific to the Summer EBT program where eligible children may be
issued benefits without needing to submit a Summer EBT application, and
benefits may be issued without confirmation of school enrollment data.
Summer EBT application. This definition describes an application
that can be used to establish eligibility for Summer EBT benefits.
Summer EBT agency. This definition describes the entities which
enter into a written agreement with FNS to administer Summer EBT
including State agencies and ITOs.
Summer operational period. This definition was created to describe
the period for which Summer EBT benefits will be issued.
Supplemental foods. This definition was created in section
13A(h)(4) of the NSLA. The definition is applicable to ITOs
administering the Summer EBT program.
Accordingly, these definitions are codified in a new 7 CFR 292.2.
i. Administration
1. Delegation of Responsibilities
Since 2010, USDA, States, and ITOs have worked together to
implement and evaluate the provision of EBT benefits in the summer to
ensure kids can get the nutrition they need when school is not in
session, including through SEBTC demonstration projects and, more
recently, P-EBT. Thanks to the dedication and perseverance of our State
and ITO partners, USDA has been able to overcome many obstacles and
challenges to standing up these programs and have also learned valuable
lessons about successful Program implementation. In establishing P-EBT,
Child Nutrition and SNAP State agencies collaborated and committed to
helping children and their families in times of need. This same level
of commitment and collaboration will be critical to the success of the
Summer EBT Program as well. It is important for State agencies
administering SNAP and/or Child Nutrition Programs to work together in
a collaborative way to determine the appropriate roles and
responsibilities of each to ensure successful program implementation
and a positive customer experience. While USDA expects that most ITOs
administering WIC will administer Summer EBT through just the WIC
agency, ITOs might also find that an agency partnership is appropriate.
USDA also urges States and ITOs to work with their legislatures and/or
Tribal leadership to determine any changes in State or Tribal law
needed to support effective Program implementation, and to identify
State or Tribal funds to cover the State or ITO portion of Summer EBT
administrative costs.
USDA has delegated administration of the Summer EBT Program to FNS
and FNS will act on behalf of the Department to administer the Program.
See 7 CFR part 2, subpart I (Delegations of Authority by the Under
Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services). In turn, FNS
will delegate administration of Summer EBT to States and ITOs approved
to operate the Program pursuant to a written agreement. The Governor or
other appropriate executive or legislative authority of each State or
ITO will designate one or more Summer EBT agencies to be responsible
for the administration of the Summer EBT
[[Page 90256]]
program within the State or ITO. Each administering agency will enter
into a written Federal-State agreement with USDA for the administration
of the Program and will be known as a ``Summer EBT agency.'' If more
than one Summer EBT agency is named within a State or ITO, a
coordinating Summer EBT agency must also be named and all other
agencies with an agreement with USDA will be partnering Summer EBT
agencies. Although USDA expects that agencies within a State or ITO
will partner effectively in the administration of the Program, USDA has
determined that it will be beneficial for each State or ITO with more
than one Summer EBT agency to designate a coordinating agency. If only
one agency within the State or ITO will be responsible for
administering the Program, designation of partnering agencies is not
applicable. USDA will work with States to ensure it is appropriate to
designate only one agency while still meeting all Summer EBT
regulations and requirements. Each State or ITO will decide how Summer
EBT responsibilities will be delegated across their administering
agencies. To ensure clear roles and responsibilities, the Summer EBT
agencies within a State or ITO must enter into an inter-agency written
agreement that defines the roles and responsibilities of each, as well
as the administrative structure and lines of authority. USDA suggests
that States and ITOs evaluate their resources and capabilities, and
consider administrative and cost efficiency, the customer experience,
program integrity, and their previous Summer EBT and/or P-EBT
experiences when determining how to structure their program's
administration. For the purpose of this interim final rule and Summer
EBT regulations codified at 7 CFR part 292, the term `Summer EBT
agency' refers to all agencies within the State or ITO that have an
agreement with USDA to administer the program unless the coordinating
or partnering agency is specified. For example, Sec. 292.13(a)
requires the Summer EBT agency to make a Summer EBT application
available to households with children enrolled in NSLP or SBP-
participating schools. The regulations require that this activity is
completed, and the coordinating and partnering Summer EBT agencies will
determine how the responsibility is delegated within the State or ITO.
Coordinating Summer EBT agencies will be the primary point of
contact for the State or ITO's Summer EBT program. There may be
situations in which USDA communicates directly with designated contacts
at the partnering agency on issues more relevant to that agency.
Nevertheless, the coordinating agency will be USDA's first point of
contact for most issues and should be included on all communications
between USDA and the partnering agency. It is the State or ITO's
discretion whether the partnering agency must be included on
communications between USDA and the coordinating agency. The
coordinating agency will also be responsible for the complete and
timely submission of any required plans, forms, or reports for the
Program as a whole including, but not limited to, interim and final
plans for operations and management, notices of intent, and routine
reporting to FNS. The coordinating agency does not need to complete or
submit all required submissions directly to USDA. In some cases, it may
be more efficient for the partnering agency to send a report it
generates directly to USDA, and such an arrangement would be
acceptable. The role of the coordinating agency with regard to
reporting is to track the State or ITO's progress to ensure plans,
forms, and reports are submitted timely and accurately, or communicate
with USDA to request technical assistance or negotiate an alternative
timeline for submission. The coordinating and partnering Summer EBT
agency are each responsible for their respective activities as outlined
in the written agreement with FNS, as well as the effective and
efficient administration of the Program in accordance with all program
requirements.
Accordingly, this delegation of responsibilities is codified at 7
CFR 292.3
2. Authority To Waive Statute and Regulations
Section 12(l) of the NSLA, 42 U.S.C 1760(l), provides the Secretary
with the authority to waive program requirements for States or eligible
service providers if it is determined that the waiver would facilitate
the ability of the States or eligible service provider to carry out the
purpose of the Program, and the waiver will not increase the overall
cost of the Program to the Federal Government. This waiver authority
applies to statutory requirements under the NSLA or the Child Nutrition
Act of 1966 (CNA) (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.) and any regulations issued
under either Act. The Secretary does not have the authority to waive
certain requirements including, but not limited to, the nutritional
content of the meals served, Federal reimbursement rates, or the
enforcement of any statutory right of any individual. In addition, the
Secretary may not waive program requirements that originate in other
laws such as the Civil Rights Act of 1964.
The waiver authority at section 12(l) of the NSLA, 42 U.S.C
1760(l), does not provide the Secretary with the authority to waive
program requirements for ITOs. To provide flexibility for ITO Summer
EBT Agencies, this rule establishes that the Secretary may waive or
modify specific regulatory provisions for the ITO Summer EBT Agency.
Accordingly, this rulemaking codifies USDA's authority to waive
statutory and regulatory requirements for State Summer EBT Agencies at
7 CFR 292.3(f) and regulatory requirements for ITO Summer EBT Agencies
at 7 CFR 292.3(g).
Subpart B--Participant Eligibility
i. General Purpose and Scope
Summer EBT is intended to reduce hunger and food insecurity among
eligible children who lose access to meals during the summer when
school is not in session. Eligibility is addressed in the NSLA at
sections 13A(c)(1), 13A(h)(2), and 13A(f)(4), but in general, children
are eligible for Summer EBT benefits if they are determined to be
income-eligible for free or reduced price meals based on annual income
eligibility guidelines for school meal programs published in the
Federal Register and are enrolled at an NSLP/SBP school, or if they are
categorically eligible, as defined in this IFR, and school aged, as
defined by State law.
This IFR establishes a new subpart B in 7 CFR part 292 that
codifies eligibility requirements for participants. The provisions in
this subpart apply to States and ITOs unless otherwise noted.
ii. Eligibility
Children eligible for Summer EBT include those who, at any point
during the period of eligibility, are:
School aged as defined by State or ITO law and
categorically eligible; or
Enrolled in an NSLP/SBP-participating school, other than a
special provision school, and
[cir] Categorically eligible;
[cir] Meet the requirements to receive free or reduced price meals,
as determined through an NSLP/SBP application;
[cir] Otherwise determined eligible to receive a free or reduced
price meal; or
[cir] Determined eligible through a Summer EBT application.
Enrolled in a special provision school, and
[cir] Categorically eligible;
[cir] Meet the requirements to receive free or reduced price meals,
as
[[Page 90257]]
determined through an NSLP/SBP application; or
[cir] Determined eligible through a Summer EBT application.
Accordingly, this rulemaking codifies 7 CFR 292.6 which establishes
the requirements for eligibility for children for Summer EBT.
iii. Period To Establish Eligibility
Broadly, eligibility for Summer EBT is based on the income
eligibility guidelines for free or reduced price meals. Local education
agency (LEAs) that operate the NSLP/SBP can begin the process of
certifying student eligibility for free or reduced price school meals
on or after July 1 of each school year. Therefore, Summer EBT
eligibility can also be established from July 1 of the prior
instructional year through the last day of the summer operational
period. The income eligibility guidelines are updated annually on July
1 and income guidelines applicable at the time the application is
submitted will be used to determine eligibility. NSLP and SBP
regulations also stipulate that eligibility determinations for free or
reduced price school meals are effective from the date the eligibility
is established through the last day of the school year. Once a child is
deemed eligible for school meals through direct certification or an
application, they may receive free or reduced price meals for the
entire school year. Children that had an individual eligibility
determination for school meal benefits during the immediately preceding
instructional year will have their eligibility automatically carried
forward into the summer operational period and no further action is
required for families to receive Summer EBT benefits. In other words,
for Summer 2024, a child who meets the eligibility criteria anytime
from July 1, 2023, through the end of a State or ITO's Summer
operational period in 2024, is eligible for benefits. For example, if a
child was enrolled in SNAP early in the instructional year (e.g., in
October 2023), that child would be eligible for Summer EBT during the
summer of 2024. Another example is if a household is deemed eligible by
application in August, the child may receive full benefits for that
summer. This reduces paperwork for families and ensures children are
offered critical nutrition assistance year-round.
Eligibility determinations made during the immediately preceding
instructional year for school meals result in Summer EBT eligibility
and no further action is required for families. This reduces paperwork
for families and ensures children are offered critical nutrition
assistance year-round. Consistent with policy for the NSLP and SBP,
households are not required to report changes in circumstances during
the instructional year or summer operational period, but a household
may voluntarily contact the Summer EBT agency or LEA to report any
changes in income, household composition, or program participation that
would change eligibility for Summer EBT.
Accordingly, this rulemaking codifies 7 CFR 292.7 which establishes
the period to establish eligibility for the Summer EBT Program.
Subpart C--Requirements of Summer EBT Agencies
This IFR establishes a new subpart C in 7 CFR part 292 that
codifies requirements for Summer EBT agencies. These requirements apply
to State and ITO Summer EBT agencies unless otherwise specified.
i. Program Plan for Operations and Management
The NSLA requires each State or ITO desiring to participate in
Summer EBT to notify USDA through the appropriate regional office by
January 1 of each year of its intent to administer the Program and, by
February 15, to submit for approval a management and administration
plan for Summer EBT. ITOs will follow the same requirements as States,
except when differences in program administration require different
planning for operations and management. For example, as explained
below, ITO Summer EBT agencies will need to include information about
supplemental foods in their plans.
The statute requiring management and administration plans applies
to Summer EBT and the SFSP. In the SFSP, this plan is commonly referred
to by the acronym MAP. For the purposes of Summer EBT, this plan will
be called a Plan for Operations and Management (POM). The POM must
address the State or ITO's Summer EBT Program as a whole, even if more
than one agency participates in program administration. Although POM
requirements for Summer EBT are codified in the same provision of the
NSLA as SFSP MAP requirements, Summer EBT plans require coordination
between administering agencies, which could make it difficult to also
coordinate development of a single plan with the SFSP-administering
agency. To ease plan development, States are not obligated to
coordinate their POM and MAP submissions and may submit a POM that is
specific to Summer EBT.
A POM is a planning tool that provides the opportunity for USDA to
work with Summer EBT agencies on planning, funding training, technical
assistance, and monitoring. The POM is also an opportunity for State
Summer EBT agencies and ITO Summer EBT agencies to solidify their plans
for coordination regarding benefit issuance and the detection and
prevention of dual participation, as further described in 7 CFR 292.9
and 292.15(d). POMs detail how the State or ITO will structure its
program to make the best use of State, ITO, or local-level resources.
The POM also broadly describes a State or ITO's administration of the
program including: an administrative budget; a copy of the written
agreement detailing the roles and responsibilities of each partnering
agency, if applicable; plans for cooperation between State-administered
and ITO-administered programs, if applicable; participation estimates;
details on enrollment processes and the issuance process and cycle;
program integrity controls; and plans for customer service support. For
both States and ITOs, the POM will serve as an essential tool to lay
out plans and procedures to enroll eligible children and to detect and
prevent dual participation, including children receiving multiple
allotments from the same State or ITO-administered program, and
children receiving benefits from more than one State or ITO-
administered program.
Some States and ITOs have indicated that January 1 and February 15
are too late in the Summer EBT planning and implementation process for
these activities to occur without negatively impacting Program
operations. Summer EBT agencies may need to begin planning for Summer
EBT as early as the preceding summer and would benefit from early POM
approval. In addition, USDA will use POMs to forecast the amount of
funding needed to cover benefit and administrative costs for the
program year. Accordingly, USDA is modifying the timing of plan
submissions to facilitate the Summer EBT agency's ability to enact its
plans in a timely manner and support USDA's budgeting process.
Therefore, this rule requires Summer EBT agencies, working
cooperatively when more than one agency will administer the Program
within a State, to provide notification and submit an interim POM to
their respective regional office by August 15 of each year for the
following program year. The interim POM must include the Summer EBT
agency's forecasted program participation, anticipated administrative
funding needs as part of an expenditure plan and other
[[Page 90258]]
programmatic information required in the POM to the extent that such
information has been determined at the time of submission. USDA is
aware that Summer EBT agencies may not yet have final participation
numbers or budget estimates at that time; therefore, the information
included in the interim POM should be the Summer EBT agency's best
estimates and are subject to revision as more information becomes
available. Approval of an interim POM is prerequisite for a Summer EBT
agency to draw down Federal funds to cover USDA's fifty percent share
of administrative costs. An approved interim POM also provides
information to aid USDA's budget process and offers an opportunity for
the regional office to provide technical assistance on the development
of a final POM, if needed.
Summer EBT agencies must submit a final POM to their respective
regional offices by February 15 of each year. The final POM must
address all POM requirements, as detailed in Sec. 292.8(e) and (f), if
applicable, and described above, and should reflect the State or ITO's
final plans for that summer's operations. Approval of a final POM is
prerequisite for a Summer EBT agency to draw down Federal food benefit
funds. USDA understands that some Summer EBT agencies may want to
submit and receive approval for their final POM earlier than February
15. A final POM may be submitted in lieu of an interim POM by the
August 15 deadline for interim POM submissions.
USDA will provide a response to each interim or final POM within 30
calendar days of receipt. If the POM submitted is not approved, the
Summer EBT agency and USDA will collaborate to ensure changes to the
POM, in the form of revisions or amendments, are submitted so the
interim or final POM can be approved as expeditiously as possible
following the initial submission. At any time after approval, the
Summer EBT agency may amend an initial or final POM to reflect changes
in its program operations. To do this, the Summer EBT agency must
submit to USDA for approval revisions or amendments signed by the State
or ITO-designated official responsible for ensuring the Program is
operated in accordance with the POM. USDA recognizes that it will take
time for States and ITOs to develop and refine their POMs in the
initial years of implementation. The Department will work with Summer
EBT agencies to develop plans that meet the respective submission dates
and finalize those plans after those dates, if necessary.
The POM is the avenue through which Summer EBT agencies will
annually submit their administrative budget and information sufficient
for USDA to estimate benefit costs for the coming year. This
administrative budget will identify all costs that will be allocated
among the Summer EBT agencies, as appropriate. The coordinating Summer
EBT agency and any partnering Summer EBT agencies may submit separate
requests for 50 percent funding for administrative expenses, as
described in 7 CFR 292.20, for the convenience of receiving funds
without the need to transfer money between Summer EBT agencies.
However, the budget submissions must be coordinated and submitted
together in a single interim and final POM (with one expenditure plan
for each agency that requests administrative funds from USDA) to ensure
the budgets are consistent with overall program operations and the
required cost allocations are maintained. Summer EBT agencies will
submit an expenditure plan along with the POM for State expenditure
planning. Once the POM is approved, Summer EBT agencies will report
their incurred administrative expenses on a financial status report and
draw 50 percent of Federal administrative funding accordingly, on a
quarterly basis.
Because Summer EBT benefit funds will be provided as a grant, USDA
will need to know the amount each Summer EBT agency expects to spend in
order to provide sufficient funds on a letter of credit for the Summer
EBT agency that will receive the benefit funds. USDA will use the
projected participation included in the interim POM to calculate the
amount of benefit funding needed. USDA anticipates that more accurate
participation estimates will be included in the final POM. However,
participation estimates in the initial years of implementation may
differ from actual participation as Summer EBT agencies hone their
programs. In the event that participation exceeds estimates, Summer EBT
agencies may work with their respective regional offices to request an
increase in their grants to cover all benefit expenses.
The POM is also the vehicle for Summer EBT agencies to tell USDA
about their plans for benefit issuance. In the POM, Summer EBT agencies
must provide the start and end dates of their summer operational
periods, the dates on which benefits will be issued and when benefits
will be expunged, and other information about the timing and process
for providing benefits to eligible households.
Summer EBT agencies will also use the POM to describe their
customer service plans. Although Summer EBT Program implementation will
be a partnership between agencies in most cases, Summer EBT must be a
unified program from the perspective of participants. USDA heard from
stakeholders that households participating in P-EBT lacked a clear
understanding of how the program was administered and where to turn for
assistance, which was frustrating for households and a barrier to
access for eligible children. To correct this problem, all Summer EBT
customer service plans must include a single point of contact for all
customer service information and inquiries, including a telephone
hotline and website. In addition, the customer service plan must
communicate how households can opt out of participating in the Program.
The Summer EBT demonstration projects provide insight on how States
and ITOs may meet this customer service requirement. All grantees that
administered the Summer EBT demonstrations provided households with a
help desk phone number to call with questions about Summer EBT. Some
grantees hired temporary staff for their help desk, whiles others
contracted out their help desk services. Grantees often made changes to
their help desk operations to better suit the needs of participants.
For example, some grantees had Community Based Organizations or
familiar local liaisons run their help desks. Other grantees expanded
the hours of availability for their help desk.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Abt Associates, (2020). Summer Electronic Benefit Transfer
for Children, 2015-2018 (expected in early 2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ITO Summer EBT agencies will be required to provide information in
their POMs about program administration that is specific to their model
of operating the Program and issuing benefits. Each ITO Summer EBT
agency must include their service area, including a map or other visual
reference aid in their POM. For purposes of Summer EBT, ITO Service
Area refers to the geographic area served by an ITO Summer EBT agency.
In WIC and the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations
(FDPIR), ITO service areas have typically included reservations, or
specific Tribal lands in Oklahoma. FNS expects that ITOs will continue
to use existing Tribal service areas for the purposes of Summer EBT.
However, if an ITO wishes to serve children in areas beyond typical WIC
or FDPIR service areas, potentially including other Tribal areas, FNS
will work with the ITO to modify the service area, as appropriate and
only applicable to Summer EBT. The POM will also
[[Page 90259]]
address the ITO's plans and procedure for identifying and enrolling
eligible children.
An ITO Summer EBT agency's POM must also include a description of
the benefit delivery model to be used (i.e., a cash-value benefit (CVB)
model, a food package model, a combination of the two, or an alternate
model) and must also provide the list of supplemental foods which
participants can purchase upon enrollment in the Summer EBT Program.
Specifications for supplemental foods are included in 7 CFR
292.19(a)(3). Because WIC vendors are authorized by WIC agencies, the
POM must also address how the ITO Summer EBT agency will support and
monitor WIC vendors, so they are able to support Summer EBT purchases.
USDA's intent is for the POM to be an operational blueprint to
secure funding, document programmatic administrative decisions, provide
participation and funding projections, and strategize for how to
strengthen program integrity. It will also be an opportunity for Summer
EBT agencies and USDA to collaborate to identify innovations and
address programmatic challenges or improvements. USDA invites comments
on the extent to which the POM requirements codified in this rulemaking
are meaningful and useful, and if there are other operational aspects
that should be addressed in the POM. USDA also requests comments on the
deadline for submitting the POM to USDA, recognizing that early POM
submission is needed for Federal financial planning, but the submission
date must also be practical for Summer EBT agencies.
Accordingly, this rulemaking codifies 7 CFR 292.8 which establishes
the requirements for Summer EBT agency submission of the plan for
operations and management (POM) for Summer EBT.
ii. Coordination Between State-Administered and ITO-Administered Summer
EBT Programs
While State and ITO-operated Summer EBT programs will differ
operationally, the programs may operate in close geographic proximity.
Accordingly, this IFR details how State and ITO-operated Summer EBT
programs must coordinate and communicate to ensure efficient and timely
service to eligible individuals, and prevent duplicative issuance of
benefits.
The ITO Summer EBT agency must receive priority consideration to
serve eligible children within its service area, as identified in its
FNS-approved POM. This means that children from the ITO's service area
who can be enrolled through streamlined certification (as described in
section C iv of this preamble) will automatically be enrolled in the
ITO-administered Summer EBT Program, to the maximum extent practicable.
However, children from ITO service areas may opt to participate in the
State-operated program and opt out of the ITO-operated program if they
so choose. This approach ensures that ITO-administered Summer EBT
Programs are the default choice for households in their communities.
Because the majority of children will be enrolled though streamlined
certification as described in 7 CFR 292.12(d) and no action will be
required on the part of the household, ITOs would have a significant
disadvantage if children in their service areas were automatically
enrolled in the State-administered Summer EBT Program. ITOs would need
to expend significant time and resources educating households about
their benefit and how to opt into the ITO's Program. This burden runs
contrary to the simplified implementation achieved through streamlined
certification. Providing priority consideration to ITO Summer EBT
agencies will allow them to serve their communities with minimal burden
while also providing households the choice to opt into the State-
administered Program if that is their preference.
An ITO and a State Summer EBT agency serving proximate geographic
areas must generally ensure the coordination of Summer EBT program
services, and this coordination may include a written agreement between
both parties. In the event that the geographic State is not yet
operating a Summer EBT Program, the ITO will coordinate with the
State's designee. If an ITO's service area crosses geographic State
boundaries, the ITO and each applicable Summer EBT agency, or designee
of a State covering the geographic area(s) served by the ITO, must
coordinate services. A key part of State and ITO coordination relates
to the timely transfer of student eligibility information from the
State Summer EBT agency to the ITO Summer EBT agency. The State Summer
EBT agency must share student data with the ITO, including student
eligibility status and contact information of children deemed eligible
within the ITO's service area. The State Summer EBT agency must provide
this information in a manner and timeframe that will allow the ITO
Summer EBT agency to issue benefits timely. The Summer EBT agency must
ensure the confidentiality of all student data exchanged that is
applicable to Summer EBT program eligibility and dual participation;
and data must only be used for program purposes consistent with 7 CFR
292.12(c)(2).
Another key part of State and ITO coordination relates to program
choice for eligible children in ITO service areas. While the ITO Summer
EBT agency will receive priority consideration to serve eligible
children within its service area, eligible households may choose the
Summer EBT program (ITO or State-operated) in which they will
participate. To facilitate choice, the ITO Summer EBT agency and the
State Summer EBT agency must notify eligible children or households
that they may choose to receive Summer EBT program benefits from either
the State or the ITO Summer EBT agency. Both agencies must also provide
referral information to the alternative program upon a child or
household's request, thereby facilitating household choice. Households
in the ITO's service area must be informed of the different ITO and
geographic State programs and should be encouraged to fill out a Summer
EBT application either through the ITO or geographic State, depending
on their choice, or a jointly-offered application that allows the
household to indicate which program is preferred. Regardless of which
program an eligible household opts into (State-administered or ITO-
administered), the household must opt into that program for the entire
summer operational period and may not switch programs mid-summer.
With individual and household choice in place, children living in
or near an ITO service area could erroneously receive benefits from the
State and ITO-administered program, which would constitute dual
participation and is prohibited. Thus, State and ITO Summer EBT
agencies must coordinate to detect and prevent dual participation in
the same summer operational period where service areas overlap.
Additional information on dual participation is located in 7 CFR
292.15(d).
USDA seeks public comments on how the Department can facilitate the
coordination and agreement process with ITOs and State agencies.
iii. State Systems Advance Planning Document Process
The Handbook 901 Advance Planning Document (APD) process is a
series of successive steps through which SNAP and WIC State agencies
obtain prior Federal approval of and Federal financial participation
(FFP) in automation projects supporting FNS programs. This generally
includes all
[[Page 90260]]
eligibility system and Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) projects. FNS'
primary focus in its oversight of State systems is to ensure the
responsible stewardship of Federal funds used to carry out the mission
of increasing food security through its domestic nutrition assistance
programs.
For the purposes of Summer EBT, this rulemaking requires States and
ITOs to adhere to the APD process for EBT projects. To implement Summer
EBT, States and ITOs will likely need to build new or modify existing
eligibility systems. Although SNAP agencies and WIC ITOs may need to
make some modifications to their eligibility systems to support Summer
EBT, it is expected Child Nutrition Program (CNP) agencies will need to
make more significant system changes in order to collect and manage
data not currently collected at the State level in Child Nutrition
Programs. FNS has not historically used the APD process for CNP
eligibility systems and the Agency has determined that adding APD
requirements for CNP agencies would take more time and planning than is
available. Therefore, the APD process for Summer EBT will only apply to
EBT systems development, and Summer EBT eligibility systems that are
part of existing SNAP or WIC eligibility systems currently subject to
the APD process. USDA will consider extending the APD process to CNP
systems if it is determined that the APD process will support effective
and efficient CNP systems development. USDA invites comments on the APD
process for Summer EBT and the benefits and challenges of adding APD
requirements for CNP agencies.
As noted in the definitions section of this preamble [subpart A of
this rulemaking], this rulemaking codifies several definitions related
to the APD process including: Advance Planning Document for project
planning or Planning APD (APD or PAPD), Advance Planning Document
Update (APDU), Enhancement, and Implementation Advance Planning
Document or Implementation APD (IAPD). These definitions largely match
how these terms are defined in SNAP regulations with the exception that
they are modified to limit the applicability of Summer EBT APD
requirements to EBT systems. Recognizing that ITOs are more familiar
with the APD process that exists for WIC EBT and Management Information
systems (MIS), the APD section includes language for ITOs that is more
aligned with the WIC regulations.
In accordance with these new requirements, Summer EBT agencies must
adhere to the APD process as prescribed by appropriate FNS directives
and guidance (e.g., FNS Handbook 901) and in this Part as a condition
for initial and continuing authority to claim Federal financial
participation (FFP) for the costs of the planning, development,
acquisition, installation and implementation of Information System (IS)
equipment and services used in the administration of the Summer EBT
Program. APD requirements for Summer EBT may be included in existing
APDs developed for SNAP or WIC EBT services or may be a separate APD
specific to Summer EBT services.
Accordingly, this rulemaking establishes 7 CFR 292.11 which extends
the APD process to Summer EBT agencies to for the development of EBT
and eligibility systems operated by SNAP agencies and WIC ITOs.
iv. Enrolling Eligible Children
Broadly speaking, children eligible for Summer EBT are those who
are eligible for free or reduced price school meals. See subpart B of
this preamble for the definition and a discussion of Summer EBT
eligibility. The statute includes specific requirements related to how
State Summer EBT agencies must enroll children who are eligible for
Summer EBT benefits, which are codified in subpart C of this
rulemaking. Consistent with the statute, USDA can work with ITO Summer
EBT agencies to modify enrollment requirements, if needed, to enable an
ITO to meet the requirements to the maximum extent practicable, as
indicated in 7 CFR 292.12. USDA has identified elements of the
enrollment process that could pose challenges for ITOs and, as
necessary, USDA will work with ITOs on a case-by-case basis to approve
alternative implementation approaches that will achieve the same or
similar outcome as the corresponding regulation. These elements are
noted in their respective sections below.
The statute specifies that Summer EBT agencies must enroll children
automatically, without further application when they are able to be
directly certified, are an identified student, or otherwise determined
by the SFA to be eligible for free or reduced price meals. This type of
automatic enrollment (i.e., enrollment that does not require a
household to actively apply for benefits) will reduce burden on
households of children who may be identified as eligible using existing
administrative data. For the purposes of Summer EBT, means-tested
program data for streamlined certification does not need to be matched
with school records so long as the child was of school-age during the
period of eligibility, as defined in 7 CFR 292.2. The result is a
simplified process that allows the Summer EBT agency to issue benefits
to children based on their individual certification for free or reduced
price school meals from the immediately preceding school year, or
income eligibility and age, without the need for matching with school
records. This process is detailed below in Subsection 2, Streamlined
certification. The following text of subpart C applies to State and
ITO-administered Programs. Eligibility for Programs administered by a
Territory is discussed in subpart B.
v. Database for NSLP/SBP Enrollment
During USDA-hosted listening sessions with State SNAP and Child
Nutrition agencies, and at the School Nutrition Association's Annual
National Conference, agencies and stakeholders provided feedback that a
State or ITO-level database with school meal enrollment data would help
to facilitate the data sharing and enrollment processes. In addition, a
State or ITO-level database could be used to detect and prevent
duplicate benefit issuance and increase data integrity across the
Summer EBT program. However, without a Federal requirement, Summer EBT
agencies may have difficulty implementing such a database on their own.
Therefore, by 2025, Summer EBT agencies will be required to establish
and maintain a State- or ITO-wide database of children who are enrolled
in NSLP- or SBP-participating schools within the State or ITO service
area, as applicable, for the purposes of enrolling eligible children
for Summer EBT efficiently and with integrity. This delay in
implementation until 2025 gives Summer EBT agencies time to acquire the
funding and for database development; however, USDA welcomes comments
on the implementation timeline. Also, USDA recognizes that many States
already have statewide databases that they can repurpose. For States
that will need to build one, FNS is exploring possible funding sources
to help cover the costs of these initial investments. USDA is also
prepared to provide technical assistance and support, as needed, and
help States and ITOs develop low-tech and/or low-cost solutions that
work within the State or ITO's budget and capabilities. ITOs may have
different resources or needs that prevent them from establishing an
ITO-wide database or that make a database impracticable or not needed
for effective program administration. If an ITO, in consultation with
USDA, determines
[[Page 90261]]
that establishing and maintaining a database meeting the requirements
of this section is not feasible or is unnecessary based on their method
of enrolling children, the ITO may submit for USDA approval alternate
plans for how to enroll children for Summer EBT benefits and detect and
prevent duplicate benefit issuance.
The database will include, at a minimum, a child's name, date of
birth, school or district where they are enrolled, mailing address,
their individual free or reduced price eligibility status (as
applicable),\9\ and any other information needed to issue benefits
timely. Summer EBT agencies must ensure the confidentiality of all such
data, and the data must be used only for the purposes of the Summer EBT
Program, or for the purpose of use or disclosure to provide other
social service benefits to eligible children. Additionally, State
Summer EBT agencies must make the data available to any applicable ITO
Summer EBT agencies for children within an ITO's service area in a
timeframe that allows the ITO Summer EBT agency to issue timely
benefits.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ The free or reduced price status must be for the
instructional year immediately preceding the summer operational
period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA invites comments on the minimum data elements that are
necessary to confirm NSLP/SBP enrollment, and to detect and prevent
duplicate benefit issuance within and across States and ITOs.
Additionally, USDA invites comments on the timing of database updates
and file transfer to the EBT processors in order to issue benefits on
time.
Accordingly, the requirement for Summer EBT agencies to establish
and maintain a State or ITO-wide database is codified in 7 CFR
292.12(c).
vi. Streamlined Certification
To support efficient enrollment of eligible children, the statute
establishes a process that requires Summer EBT agencies to provide
benefits to children who already have an individual eligibility
determination for the school meal programs under the procedures at 7
CFR 245.6 or who can be identified as income-eligible through
administrative data at the State level without the need for further
data matching. The statute refers to the latter group as children who
are ``able to be directly certified.'' In the school meal programs,
under 7 CFR 245.2, direct certification means determining a child is
eligible for free meals or free milk, as applicable, based on
documentation obtained directly from the appropriate State or local
agency or individuals authorized to certify that the child is a member
of a household receiving assistance under SNAP, as defined in this
section; is a member of a household receiving assistance under FDPIR or
under the TANF program, as defined in Sec. 245.2 is a Foster child,
Homeless child, a Migrant child, a Head Start child and a Runaway
child, as defined in Sec. 245.2.
The process used to certify these children as eligible for free or
reduced price school meals involves data sharing between State and/or
local agencies administering those assistance programs with the State
and/or local agencies administering the school meal programs. This
information is then matched against NSLP-participating school
enrollment lists. Positive matches confer student-level eligibility for
free or reduced price school meals.
For Summer EBT, a similar process will be used and will be referred
to as ``streamlined certification'' or ``SC''. Each State's SC process
will look different based on their unique operations. The following
steps describe one possible method by which SC may be implemented.
1. State or local agencies that administer the school meal programs
will share a list of all students who have an individual eligibility
determination \10\ for free or reduced price meals with the Summer EBT
agency that will issue the EBT benefits. Sources of this data include
applications for free or reduced price meals that were processed by the
LEA, direct certification, or categorical eligibility determinations
made at the LEA level. The eligibility database discussed in the
previous section will help facilitate the sharing of information for
purposes of Summer EBT participation only.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ The free or reduced price status must be for the
instructional year immediately preceding the summer operational
period.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
2. The EBT issuing agency will then take participation lists from
SNAP and other programs used for directly certifying children for
school meals, such as TANF and FDPIR, as well as other means-tested
programs that are approved by the Secretary for use in Summer EBT,\11\
and remove children who are not school aged. School aged is defined as
the compulsory age of school attendance in that State and will be
discussed further below.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ Summer EBT agencies that would like to use additional
programs, such as Medicaid, to identify and issue benefits to
eligible children through SC must include them in the POM, along
with a detailed justification for how the program's eligibility
standards and certification processes provide assurance that
participating children also meet the school meal eligibility
standards.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
3. Those lists from Step 2, along with the list of students that
have an individual eligibility determination for free or reduced price
meals from Step 1 will then be merged, and duplicate entries will be
removed.
4. This list of streamlined certified children will be issued
Summer EBT benefits without the need to apply.
Consistent with the statute, children who are identified through
streamlined certification do not need to be matched against an NSLP/SBP
enrollment list prior to issuance if they are school age or already
certified for free or reduced price meals in the NSLP/SBP. As a result,
some children who are school-age and categorically eligible, as defined
in this IFR, but are not enrolled in a school that participates in the
NSLP or SBP, will be issued Summer EBT benefits. These children are
eligible for Summer EBT benefits as long as they are school-aged during
the period of eligibility. USDA anticipates that this will be a very
small percentage of eligible children.\12\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\12\ Ranalli, Dennis, Templin, Joe, & Applebaum, Maggie, (2021).
Direct Certification in the National School Lunch Program, State
Implementation Progress Report to Congress, School Year 2017-2018 &
School Year 2018-2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The compulsory age of school attendance aligns with individual
State or ITO requirements for school enrollment. Issuing benefits to
all children of compulsory school age who can be streamline certified
aims to simplify the identification of students who are school aged.
However, eligible children younger or older than the compulsory age of
attendance who attend an NSLP/SBP school will still be enrolled in
Summer EBT through school-level data or, if their eligibility for
Summer EBT has not already been established, using a Summer EBT
application. USDA recognizes that there may be other effective methods
of identifying eligible children through streamlined certification
using means-tested program data available at the State or ITO-level.
USDA invites comments on other approaches to define the age range for
children who can be streamline certified using State or ITO-level data.
Specifically, how many eligible children attend NSLP/SBP schools who
are below or above the compulsory age of school attendance? Are there
specific technical barriers that prevent these children from being
enrolled in Summer EBT using school-level data or Summer EBT
applications? What is the actual age range for NSLP/SBP school
attendance in a State or ITO? How many children in that range
[[Page 90262]]
do not attend an NSLP/SBP school? Do these children attend other
institutions operating year-round, such as year-round childcare
programs?
In summary, through the SC process, States and ITOs will be able to
issue benefits to a significant portion of eligible children using only
data that are already available at the LEA, State, or ITO level. USDA
anticipates the SC process will reduce burden on States and ITOs and
make the process of enrolling children more efficient.
As noted above, ITOs participating in Summer EBT must, to the
maximum extent practicable, meet the requirements of this section. If
an ITO, in consultation with USDA, determines that any element of
automatic enrollment with streamlined certification is not feasible or
is unnecessary based on available resources, the ITO may submit for
USDA approval alternate plans for how to efficiently enroll children
with minimal burden for households.
Accordingly, this subsection codifies requirements for the
streamlined certification process at Sec. 292.12(d).
2. Applications
The statute requires Summer EBT agencies to make an application
available to children enrolled in NSLP and/or SBP-participating schools
who have not been certified through the SC process. In other words,
children enrolled in an NSLP/SBP school who do not have individual
eligibility determinations during the period of eligibility for Summer
EBT must submit a Summer EBT application and be determined eligible in
order to participate in the Program.
Summer EBT applications are ultimately the Summer EBT agency's
responsibility. Recognizing that Summer EBT agencies may need
operational flexibilities as they launch their programs, in Summer 2024
only, Summer EBT agencies may compel LEAs to process Summer EBT
applications; however, any costs incurred by LEAs attributable
specifically to processing Summer EBT applications must be fully
reimbursed by the Summer EBT agency. Starting in 2025, Summer EBT
agencies may not delegate to LEAs the responsibility of making a Summer
EBT application available. However, a Summer EBT agency may contract
with another entity into order to fulfill this requirement, including
with LEAs. USDA recognizes that States and ITOs do not currently handle
school meal applications and will not immediately have the systems and
processes needed to process Summer EBT applications. Therefore, the
State or ITO-level application will not be required until 2025,
allowing time for States and ITOs to develop an application. To also
provide relief in the initial year of Summer EBT implementation, USDA
is allowing flexibility in the contents of the application for Summer
EBT, which is discussed in detail below. Additionally, the Summer EBT
agency may establish a system for executing household applications
electronically and using electronic signatures provided that the
electronic application meets the same requirements as paper
applications. If the application is made available electronically, a
paper version must also be available.
Since Summer EBT applications could be accepted and processed by an
entity other than the LEA where the child is enrolled, they must be
matched against an NSLP/SBP enrollment list prior to benefits being
issued to ensure the child is eligible as defined in 7 CFR 292.5 and
292.6. Matching against NSLP/SBP enrollment lists is not required for
children who were approved for school meal benefits with an NSLP/SBP
application. These children are streamline certified for Summer EBT
benefits and do not need to be matched against an NSLP/SBP enrollment
list prior to issuance, as their eligibility determination originated
from the NSLP/SBP participating school where they are enrolled. In the
case of households that move mid-summer, those children may have
already been issued benefits in their previous State through
streamlined certification. If they are a household that needs to apply
through a Summer EBT application, they should apply in the State where
they finished the prior school year because Summer EBT agencies are
required to match against prior school year NSLP/SBP enrollment lists
before issuing benefits. An application submitted in a State where the
household recently moved would come up negative in a school enrollment
check. SNAP benefits are interoperable, which means they can be used in
any SNAP-authorized retailer in the United States regardless of where
they were issued, so households can use the benefits issued by their
previous State of residence. States must communicate to households in
their Program materials informing them that, if they plan to move or
have recently moved, they will be issued benefits in the State where
their child(ren) completed the most recent school year. In order to
minimize duplicate participation, the self-attestation statement on the
Summer EBT application must include language affirming that the
applicant is not already receiving Summer EBT benefits in another State
or ITO. FNS will work with ITOs to determine the best way to convey
eligibility and use of benefits for children enrolled in an ITO program
who move during the summer.
The statutory requirement to provide an application for children
who are not otherwise certified is in reference to children enrolled in
an NSLP/SBP school, e.g., children enrolled at standard counting and
claiming NSLP/SBP schools who have not completed an NSLP application
and are not directly certified, and children enrolled at special
provision schools who are not directly certified. Therefore,
applications are limited to children enrolled in NSLP/SBP schools.
Summer EBT applications cannot be used as a means of establishing
Summer EBT eligibility for children not enrolled in an NSLP/SBP school.
Further, Summer EBT applications must be available to households of
children enrolled in NSLP/SBP schools during the entire summer
operational period. Children enrolled in an NSLP/SBP school who become
eligible during the summer or failed to apply before the end of the
school year, must have an opportunity to establish their eligibility by
completing an application. Summer EBT agencies are permitted to
encourage applications to be submitted before the last day of the
summer operational period. For example, in communications to
households, Summer EBT agencies would be permitted to say, ``In order
to receive Summer EBT benefits for this summer, please submit your
application no later than August 1st.'' However, eligible households
that submit applications on or before the last day of the summer
operational period, must be issued Summer EBT benefits no later than 15
operational days after submission. USDA recognizes that, in these
limited cases, benefits will be issued after the summer operational
period has ended. Households will not be permitted to apply, and
therefore will not be approved for benefits, after the last day of the
summer operational period.
Given that the income eligibility criteria for Summer EBT is the
same as for school meal programs, applications for Summer EBT will
largely need to collect the same information as applications for those
programs. Summer EBT applications should be clear and simple in design,
but must meet a minimum set of standards, as outlined below.
Per 7 CFR 292.13(i), all Summer EBT applications must:
[[Page 90263]]
Be in an understandable and uniform format and to the
maximum extent practicable, in a language that parents and guardians
can understand;
Require the income received by each household member
identified by source of income;
Require applicants to provide the names of all household
members for whom application is made, including children;
Contain space for applicants to indicate a categorical
eligibility status or provide existing case numbers associated with
participation in other Federal programs (SNAP, TANF, FDPIR, etc.):
Be signed by an adult member of the household;
Require the name of the school where the child(ren) is/are
enrolled;
Contain space for the household's mailing address;
Contain the use of information statement, categorical
eligibility statement, and information disclosure statement;
Contain space for the adult household member signing the
form to attest that the information is true and accurate;
Contain the USDA nondiscrimination statement; and
Contain space for optional collection of information on
race and ethnicity of applicants.
The requirements above reflect most of the basic requirements for
NSLP/SBP applications at 7 CFR 245.6(a)(6), with the exception of the
Social Security Number requirement. Per section 9(d)(1) of the NSLA,
households that complete NSLP/SBP applications are required to provide
the last four digits of the Social Security Number of an adult member
of the household or an indication that the adult does not have one.
However, the statutory provision at 9(d)(1) does not apply to Summer
EBT applications. Therefore, it will not be required for Summer EBT
applications. An application must also be accepted and processed as
complete even if the address field was not completed by the applicant.
In the event that no address or an incomplete address is provided, the
Summer EBT agency should work with the LEA or other relevant agencies
to obtain current contact information for the child and place the card
in the mail or arrange another method of delivering the card (e.g.,
through a school social worker). In addition, Summer EBT agencies are
prohibited from requiring documentation from households at the time of
application. Documentation of income is only required during the
verification process, which is detailed in the next section.
USDA recognizes that many LEAs with special provision schools have
identified the need for the type of income information that was
formerly collected through NSLP/SBP applications. To meet this need,
some LEAs collect alternative income applications. Data collected
through alternative income applications serves the same function as
NSLP/SBP application data in many special provision schools and is used
for purposes not related to the school meal programs, such as
determining education funding allocations, and other student benefits.
These applications are familiar to households and, in many cases,
collect enough information to determine whether the household is at or
below the NSLP/SBP reduced price income threshold. States and LEAs that
utilize alternative income applications may have already started the
application preparation and distribution process for school year 2023-
2024, and there may not be sufficient time to modify alternative income
applications to accommodate the Summer EBT applications requirements
listed above or create a new Summer EBT-compliant application.
Therefore, to provide administrative flexibility, in Summer 2024 only,
alternative income applications that are currently used in some special
provision schools may be used to confer eligibility for Summer EBT if
the application allows a Summer EBT agency or LEA to determine whether
the household is income eligible. USDA provided early implementation
guidance on the use of alternative income applications in 2024 in SEBT
03-2023, Summer EBT Eligibility, Certification, and Verification, July
31, 2023. States and LEAs are not required to use their alternative
income applications for Summer EBT in 2024 and may utilize existing
NSLP/SBP applications, including the USDA Prototype Application for
Free and Reduced Price School Meals.\13\ USDA anticipates that
providing this flexibility for 2024 will ease implementation burden for
those LEAs that have already issued alternative income applications and
would otherwise need to ask households to submit an additional
application for 2024 Summer EBT benefits. In many cases, LEAs developed
and used alternative income applications for purposes other than Summer
EBT and the data from those already-collected forms may be used to
establish eligibility for Summer EBT in 2024. Therefore, Summer EBT
agencies are not required to reimburse LEAs for expenses routinely
incurred in the processing of alternative income forms; the Summer EBT
agency is only responsible for new administrative costs that were
incurred for the purposes of Summer EBT eligibility. USDA recognizes
that the application requirement for children attending CEP schools for
children who are not streamlined certified may be challenging for
Summer EBT agencies. USDA stands ready to support Summer EBT agencies
in the implementation of this requirement, as CEP expansion has
continued to be pursued through recent rulemaking.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\13\ Applying for Free and Reduced Price School Meals [verbar]
Food and Nutrition Service (usda.gov)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
USDA invites comments on the application requirements of this IFR.
Specifically, what challenges will there be with administering the
Summer EBT application at the Summer EBT agency level? What are the
benefits of processing Summer EBT applications at the Summer EBT agency
level?
Consistent with current regulations for the school meal programs,
Summer EBT agencies must comply with requirements for the handling of
child data including who is authorized to receive eligibility
information, and disclosure of eligibility information for Program
purposes. This rulemaking also establishes penalties for unauthorized
disclosure or misuse of such information.
Accordingly, this rulemaking established requirements for the
provision and use of Summer EBT applications at 7 CFR 292.13.
3. Verification
In order to ensure program quality and integrity, Summer EBT
agencies must have adequate processes in place to correctly determine
the eligibility of children for Summer EBT benefits. Verification of
Summer EBT applications will be required as a method to maximize
program integrity.
For the purpose of Summer EBT, verification is the process through
which applicants using a Summer EBT application are confirmed eligible
for Summer EBT benefits by first matching against administrative data,
and if not able to be confirmed, by then examining information provided
by the applicant. However, as discussed above, the majority of Summer
EBT participants will be enrolled through the streamlined certification
process and will not be subject to the Summer EBT application
verification requirements.
For Summer EBT applications, the verification process will align
with the NLSP/SBP approach to verification, which is conducted after
the initial eligibility determination of a self-
[[Page 90264]]
attested income application. USDA heard from stakeholder engagement and
listening sessions with Child Nutrition and SNAP State Agencies that
implemented P-EBT that the requirement to verify all applications
before P-EBT benefits could be issued (often referred to as up-front
verification or documentation at time of application) was burdensome
for both program administrators and households. Up-front verification
requiring household contact and documentation is time-consuming and may
delay the issuance of benefits which may result in children not
receiving benefits during the Summer. Child Nutrition Programs, like
NSLP/SBP and the Child and Adult Care Food Program, do not require up-
front household income verification. Rather they require verification
of a subset of applications after certification. For Summer EBT, Summer
EBT agencies will be required to verify three percent of applications,
chosen at random after an initial eligibility determination is made. A
three-percent sample size for Summer EBT aligns with the sample size
required for NSLP/SBP. Although applications that are subject to
verification will be processed and an eligibility determination will be
made before verification occurs, households selected for verification
may not be issued Summer EBT benefits until the verification process is
complete and household eligibility is confirmed. This approach strikes
a balance by not requiring up-front verification, while also promoting
Program integrity by reviewing a sample of applications and delaying
release of Program benefits until eligibility is confirmed. If, as a
result of verification for cause, a child who has already been issued
benefits is determined ineligible for the Program, the Summer EBT
agency must stop further benefit issuances, in cases where the Summer
EBT agency has chosen to issue benefits in multiple issuances.
For the random, three-percent sample, Summer EBT agencies must base
the calculation on the number of approved applications on file as of
April 1 during the instructional year immediately preceding the summer
operational period. However, Summer EBT agencies are allowed, and
encouraged, to conduct verification on a rolling basis. Rolling
verification, as defined in Sec. 292.14(c), is an operational
flexibility also used by LEAs to conduct verification for school meal
applications. Rolling verification involves selecting more than one
sample, however the last sample must still be selected on April 1, and
be equal to 3% of total approved applications received up to April 1.
Applications submitted after April 1 will still be subject to
verification for cause, as applicable, but will not be subject to
random selection. Summer EBT agencies are strongly encouraged to
communicate an application deadline prior to April 1 in order to
maximize program integrity, while also limiting administrative burden
during the summer months, however as described above, households must
not be prevented from applying at any point during the period of
eligibility. A letter communicating this to households could say, ``In
order to receive Summer EBT benefits prior to the start of summer,
please submit your application no later than March 1.''
Rolling verification is encouraged for Summer EBT because of the
longer period of time between when households will likely complete a
Summer EBT application (late summer or fall) and when the benefits will
be issued (the following summer). Summer EBT agencies that reach out to
households selected for verification may be more likely to reach them
if the contact is made closer to the date of application when the
household's contact information or mailing address is more recent.
Additionally, rolling verification may ease the administrative burden
associated with the verification process by distributing tasks and
responsibilities over a longer period of time. In practice, conducting
verification on a rolling basis (e.g., weekly or monthly) helps
mitigate a possible rush of document processing and follow-up
communications that may occur when sampling and household outreach
occur at a single point in time.
In lieu of selecting a three-percent random verification sample,
Summer EBT agencies may propose alternative methods for verification
that strengthen program integrity and preserve participant access.
Alternative approaches must still comply with all other provisions
related to applications and verification, including the provisions at 7
CFR 292.14(f) related to procedures and assistance to households, and
the restriction at 7 CFR 292.12(e)(4) that prohibits Summer EBT
agencies from requiring up front documentation. Summer EBT agencies
that intend to propose alternative procedures must include a detailed
description of their plan in their POM submission, and proposals are
subject to USDA approval.
Additionally, Summer EBT applications (or alternative income
applications for Summer 2024) will be subject to verification for
cause, a process through which questionable applications are verified
on a case-by-case basis. Questionable applications might include those
with conflicting or inconsistent information. For example, if a
household submits two separate applications with different information,
a Summer EBT agency may choose to verify that application for cause on
the basis that the household submitted inconsistent or conflicting
information. Also, applications may be verified for cause after the
initial application processing, such as when a Summer EBT agency
becomes aware of a questionable application after the application is
certified. Summer EBT agencies must ensure that verification efforts
are applied without regard to race, sex (including gender identity and
sexual orientation), color, national origin, age, or disability.
Verification for cause is defined in 7 CFR 292.2 and is described in
detail in 7 CFR 292.14.
USDA recognizes that getting households to respond to verification
requests will be challenging for Summer EBT staff. If households do not
respond, they lose their benefits regardless of their true eligibility,
and, in subsequent years non-respondents will also need to submit
documentation at the time of application in order to be approved for
Summer EBT benefits. The Summer EBT agency may, on a case-by-case
basis, replace up to ten percent of applications that are randomly
selected as part of the verification sample if the Summer EBT agency
has knowledge of the applicant that they would be unlikely or unable to
satisfactorily respond to the verification request. For example, if a
Summer EBT agency has current, reliable data confirming that a
household that was selected for verification is experiencing
homelessness, they may randomly select a different application to
verify instead.
Further, to better capture eligible children and reduce burden
associated with verification, Summer EBT agencies must conduct direct
verification, as defined in 7 CFR 292.2, prior to contacting the
households that are selected as part of the random three (3) percent
verification sample. Summer EBT agencies must conduct direct
verification activities with the eligible programs defined for the
purposes of streamlined certification at 7 CFR 292.12(d) and must also
use other sources of administrative data such as State Income and
Eligibility Verification Systems (IEVS) data, tax records, wage
databases, or other sources available to the Summer EBT agency if
approved by the Secretary. Depending on the data source, records may be
used to verify income and/or program participation. Data sources that
the Summer EBT
[[Page 90265]]
agency intends to use for direct verification, along with the
description of the process, must be included in the annual POM
submission. Applications that are confirmed through the direct
verification process should not be contacted for verification.
If an application cannot be confirmed through direct verification,
households selected for verification must be notified in writing that
their applications were selected for verification. The written
statement must include a telephone number to contact for assistance,
and any communications with households concerning verification must be
in an understandable and uniform format and, to the maximum extent
practicable, in a language that parents and guardians can understand.
The notice must include a description the type of acceptable
information or documents, as well as the date by which they need to
respond, and that they may instead request that the Summer EBT agency
contact the appropriate officials to confirm that their children are
foster, homeless, migrant, or runaway. Households must also be informed
that failure to cooperate with verification efforts will result in the
termination of benefits.
During the verification process, the Summer EBT agency must make at
least two attempts, at least one week apart, to contact any household
that does not respond to a verification request. The attempt may be
through a telephone call, email, or mail, and must be documented. A
household will be considered a non-respondent if there was no response,
or an incomplete or ambiguous response that does not permit the Summer
EBT agency to resolve the child's eligibility for Summer EBT benefits.
Households must also be notified if as a result of verification,
they are determined to be ineligible. The notice must include the
reason(s) for the determination, notification of the right to appeal
and when the appeal must be filed, instructions for how to appeal, and
notification of the right to reapply at any time.
For the purposes of both regular verification and direct
verification, documentation may indicate participation in an applicable
program or income at any point during the period of eligibility. The
information provided only needs to indicate eligibility at a single
point in time during the period of eligibility, not that the child was
eligible at the time of application or verification. Such documentation
may include written evidence, information from individuals outside of
the child's household who can verify the child's circumstances, and
systems of records. Written evidence includes written confirmation of a
household's circumstances, such as wage stubs, award letters, and
letters from employers. Whenever written evidence is insufficient to
confirm income information on the application or current eligibility,
the Summer EBT agency may use individuals outside of the child's
household who can verify the child's circumstances including but not
limited to: employers, social service agencies, school officials, and
migrant agencies. The Summer EBT agency may also accept a statement
from an adult member of the child's household when other forms of
documentation are not available. In such a situation, the Summer EBT
agency shall annotate the application for such child documenting the
basis of verifying the child's eligibility.
USDA stands ready to support Summer EBT agencies in implementing
verification procedures so as to limit the number of eligible families
that might not receive a Summer EBT benefit as a result of the
verification process. Additionally, USDA developed a Verification
Toolkit for use by LEAs in the NSLP that may also be useful to Summer
EBT agencies conducting verification of Summer EBT applications. The
Toolkit contains a collection of resources that LEAs can use in their
efforts to improve verification response rates and the overall
efficiency of the process. Information on direct verification,
including a description of types of direct verification, timing, and
guidance on follow up activities is included the Eligibility Manual for
School Meals Determining and Verifying Eligibility.
States and ITOs must establish procedures to carry out verification
as described in this section and include those procedures in their
annual POM submission, as described in 7 CFR 292.8(d)(8). Although ITOs
do not currently conduct verification unless they also operate NSLP/SBP
schools, USDA has determined that it is appropriate for ITOs to
complete the full verification process for Summer EBT. Verification
plays a critical role in promoting program integrity and provides
information that can help program operators improve their certification
process. Many of the steps in the verification process are designed to
prevent eligible participants from being denied benefits. As such, ITO-
operated Summer EBT programs and program participants will benefit from
the ITO Summer EBT agency completing the verification process as
prescribed in these regulations. However, USDA recognizes that ITO
Summer EBT agencies will need support conducting verification,
particularly in the early years of implementation. The Department will
work with ITO Summer EBT agencies to train staff on the verification
process, provide guidance materials that are clear and easy to follow,
resources to help explain the process to families, and provide ongoing
technical assistance to ITO Summer EBT agencies as they develop their
verification processes. NSLP schools in the Territories that conduct
NSLP verification should continue to do so; there will not be a
separate or additional verification requirement for NSLP applications
used for eligibility for Summer EBT.
USDA invites comments on the verification requirements of this IFR.
Specifically:
What are the considerations around staffing that USDA
should be aware of?
Is April 1 the best time to select a sample and start
verification, both in terms of the timing of when most applications are
received, and the process of preparing to issue benefits?
Are there additional data sources that could be used to
conduct direct verification that could limit outreach to households and
limit administrative burden?
Are there alternative approaches to verification that
appropriately balance burden and program integrity?
Does rolling verification increase household response
rates?
Does rolling verification help alleviate administrative
burden?
Should there be different timeframes or requirements for
verification, the follow-up activities, and benefit issuance?
What are the specific criteria that should be used for
targeting high-risk applications, and should Summer EBT agencies be
required to verify certain high-risk applications for cause?
How can Summer EBT agencies ensure verification efforts
are applied without regard to race, sex (including gender identity and
sexual orientation), color, national origin, age, or disability.
What are the challenges and benefits of verifying
applications at the Summer EBT agency level?
4. Notification of Eligibility, Denial, Appeal Rights, and the Ability
to Opt-Out
The Summer EBT agency must notify the household of a child's
eligibility status. Households with children whose eligibility is
established through SC must be notified, in writing, that their
children are eligible for Summer EBT and that no application is
required. For agencies that administer the school meal
[[Page 90266]]
programs, this will be similar to the Notice of Direct Certification.
Households that establish eligibility through an application must be
notified of the child's eligibility determination (or notification must
be placed in the mail) by the Summer EBT agency within 15 operational
days of receiving a complete application. Summer EBT agencies must also
develop a process to enable anyone who has been determined to be
eligible for Summer EBT benefits to see that they are eligible and
unenroll, or opt-out, of the Program if they prefer. Therefore, the
notice of eligibility and enrollment must inform the household how to
opt-out if they do not want their child(ren) to receive Summer EBT
benefits. Children from households that notify the Summer EBT agency
that they do not want Summer EBT benefits should not be issued benefits
or must have their benefits discontinued as soon as possible if already
issued. Any notification from the household declining benefits must be
documented and maintained on file, as required under 7 CFR 292.23, to
substantiate any change in benefits. Households that opt out of the
Program may contact their Summer EBT agency at any time before the end
of the summer operational period to request reenrollment.
The Summer EBT agency must provide written notification to a
household denied because their application is not complete or does not
meet the eligibility criteria for Summer EBT benefits within 15
operational days of receiving a complete application. At a minimum, the
notice to families must include the reason for the denial of benefits,
notification of the household's right to appeal the decision,
instructions on how to appeal, and a statement reminding households
that they may reapply for benefits at any time. The Summer EBT agency
must document and retain the reasons for ineligibility and must retain
the denied application.
A household wanting to appeal a denied application may do so in
accordance with the procedures established by the Summer EBT agency as
required by 7 CFR 292.26. Prior to initiating the hearing procedure,
the household may request a conference to provide the opportunity for
the household to discuss the situation, present information, and obtain
an explanation of the data submitted in the application or the decision
rendered. The request for a conference must not in any way prejudice or
diminish the right to a fair hearing. The Summer EBT agency must
promptly schedule a fair hearing, if requested.
Lastly, Summer EBT agencies must also comply with minimum
information requirements for applicants and recipients by informing
them of their Program rights and responsibilities. This can be
accomplished through whatever means the Summer EBT agencies deem
appropriate. All Program informational material must be available in
languages other than English, as necessary, including the USDA
nondiscrimination statement, and should be provided in alternate
formats for individuals with disabilities, as practicable.
Accordingly, this rulemaking establishes 7 CFR 292.12 which
outlines the Summer EBT agency's responsibilities for enrolling
eligible children, maintaining an enrollment database, certification,
applications, verification, notification to households, and appeal
rights for households denied benefits.
Subpart D--Issuance and Use of Program Benefits
In this subpart, USDA addresses issuance of Summer EBT benefits by
Summer EBT agencies and the use of Program benefits by Program
participants. In developing requirements for the issuance and use of
Summer EBT benefits, USDA's overall objective is to leverage existing
systems and processes, to the greatest extent possible, in order to
streamline implementation for Summer EBT agencies and take advantage of
proven implementation strategies. However, Summer EBT is different from
SNAP, WIC, and school meal programs, and requires unique approaches to
implementation, as described below. Sections that specifically apply to
ITOs or do not apply to ITOs are so indicated.
i. General Standards
Consistent with section 13A(b)(4)(A), this IFR establishes that
Summer EBT benefits may only be issued for use during the summer
months, when school is not in session. Summer EBT agencies must receive
approval from USDA for any alternative plans for the periods during
which Summer EBT benefits may be issued and used by children who are
attending a school operating on a continuous school calendar. Summer
EBT agencies must include their plans to serve schools operating on a
continuous calendar as part of their POM. Timeliness of benefit
issuance is addressed in more detail in Sec. 292.15(c)(1)(i) of this
rulemaking.
Accordingly, this program's standards for the timing of benefit
issuance are codified at 7 CFR 292.15(a) through (c).
1. Benefit Issuance
Summer EBT is a seasonal program that is designed to provide
benefits to eligible children during a specific window of time
annually. In order to meet the nutritional needs of children when they
are out of school, Summer EBT agencies must be able to provide benefits
prior to the summer operational period. If a State or ITO chooses to
provide all benefits for the summer in a single issuance, the benefits
must be available for households to spend before the first day of the
summer operational period; when a State or ITO opts for multiple
benefit issuances (e.g., monthly), the first issuance must occur before
the start of the summer operational period. More information on benefit
issuance schedules is included in the benefit amount section of this
preamble. This is different from P-EBT, where benefits were issued
retroactively at the end of eligible periods. The Summer EBT
authorizing statute is a part of USDA's permanent operating authority,
and USDA and Summer EBT agencies have the opportunity to build this
Program from the ground up, allowing time to establish systems and
processes that will support timely issuance of summer benefits to
children annually. Therefore, USDA expects that Summer EBT agencies
will be able to implement Summer EBT timely and with integrity,
delivering benefits to children before the first day of the summer
operational period so that benefits are available to spend during the
summer months when the recipients are not in school and are unable to
access school meals. However, if a child's Summer EBT application is
selected for verification, that child may not be issued benefits until
after verification is complete and eligibility is confirmed.
The Summer EBT agency must establish the date on which benefits
will be issued to households within the State or ITO and inform
households of this date. Recognizing that students may face food
insecurity as soon as school lets out, benefits must be issued and
available for participants to spend at least seven calendar days and
not more than 14 calendar days before the start of the summer
operational period. In other words, Summer EBT agencies should issue
and activate cards so benefits are available to spend at least one week
before the start of the summer operational period, allowing households
sufficient time to purchase food for their children so it will be
available to eat on the first day of the summer operational period.
Accordingly, this rulemaking includes a requirement that benefits be
[[Page 90267]]
issued before the start of the summer operational period. If the Summer
EBT agency issues benefits after the summer operational period, a
corrective action plan outlining the reasons benefits were not issued
in a timely manner and steps the Summer EBT agency will take to ensure
timely issuance in the future will need to be submitted to FNS.
USDA understands that some participants will be difficult to reach
for a variety of reasons including, but not limited to, outdated
contact information, mail to the household is returned as
undeliverable, or changes in the child's custody during the summer
operational period. Summer EBT agencies should plan their issuance
activities to allow enough time to resolved difficult cases and issue
benefits to these children timely, to the maximum extent practicable,
and work to resolve outstanding cases and issue participant benefits as
expeditiously as possible. If the Summer EBT agency issues benefits
after the summer operational period, the Summer EBT agency must submit
to FNS a corrective action plan outlining the reasons benefits were not
issued in a timely manner, and steps the Summer EBT agency will take to
ensure timely issuance in the future. However, consistent with Sec.
292.7(a) households have until the last day of the summer operational
period to apply for benefits. The Summer EBT agency must process
applications and issue benefits within 15 operational days of receipt
of the application, as detailed in Sec. 292.12(f)(1). Therefore,
Summer EBT agencies are not subject to corrective actions for benefits
issued after the end of the summer operational period but within the 15
day window in these instances.
For eligible children who apply too late to be included in the
Summer EBT agency's initial benefit issuance, the agency must issue
benefits as quickly as possible but not later than 15 operational days
after a complete application is received by the Summer EBT agency so
that recipients have the opportunity to use their benefits to purchase
food in the summer. This means EBT cards and PINs, if applicable, must
be placed in the mail before the end of the 15th operational day. USDA
recognizes that this is a shorter timeline than the 30 day issuance
requirement in SNAP; however, Summer EBT benefits have a shorter period
during which they can be spent, and Summer EBT applications do not
require income verification before issuance which means they can be
processed faster than SNAP applications. USDA will work with Summer EBT
agencies to develop and implement systems and processes that will
reliably deliver benefits timely.
Summer EBT agencies are responsible for assisting children who do
not live in a permanent dwelling or a fixed mailing address so they may
obtain the Summer EBT benefits. This can be accomplished by assisting
such households in finding an authorized representative who can act on
their behalf, or through other appropriate means. Vulnerable
populations such as these may need benefits quickly to meet an acute
need. These standards require the administering agency to identify
eligible households and make benefits available.
Use of EBT cards is the industry standard for SNAP and WIC, and
USDA expects that Summer EBT agencies will issue Program benefits on
EBT cards in a similar manner to SNAP or WIC. However, section
13A(b)(2)(B) allows benefits to be issued through another electronic
means, as determined by the Secretary. In the event that a Summer EBT
agency wants to adopt a new method of Summer EBT payment, such as
payment with a mobile phone, USDA will work with the Summer EBT agency
to determine whether and how this can best be executed while still
meeting other program requirements. Some Territories operating the
Nutrition Assistance Program (NAP), including American Samoa and the
Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, do not currently issue
program benefits electronically. For these agencies, Summer EBT
benefits may be issued in the same manner as NAP benefits.
Accordingly, this rulemaking codified requirements for Summer EBT
benefit issuance at 7 CFR 292.15(c).
2. Dual Participation
Dual participation in Summer EBT in the same summer operational
period is not allowed. This means that, in each summer, children may
not receive multiple benefit allotments from the same State or ITO-
administered program, and children may not receive benefits from more
than one State or ITO-administered program each summer. For example, a
child who moves in the spring may not receive a benefit from the State
they left and from the State to which they moved. (Note: as stated
above in section iv.3. (Applications), SNAP benefits are interoperable,
which means they can be used in any SNAP-authorized retailer in the
United States, regardless of where they were issued. Therefore,
households that move can use the benefits issued by their previous
State of residence in the State to which they moved.) Likewise, a child
living within an ITO Summer EBT agency's service area (as described in
Sec. 292.9) may not receive benefits from the ITO-administered program
and a State-administered program that operates in a proximate
geographic area, nor may they receive benefits from two ITO-
administered programs. (Note: also stated above, benefits issued by
ITO-administered programs are not interoperable. FNS will work with
ITOs to determine the best way to convey eligibility and use of
benefits for children enrolled in an ITO program who move during the
summer.) That same child also may not receive duplicative Summer EBT
benefits from the same source, i.e., multiple Summer EBT benefit
allotments from a State Summer EBT agency which total in excess of $40
per month for that child, as adjusted annually. Households engaged in
dual participation may be subject to a claim by the Summer EBT agency
as described in 292.27.
State and ITO Summer EBT agencies must work together to prevent
dual participation, particularly in border areas and around ITO service
areas, and must establish detection and prevention procedures in their
POMs. Summer EBT agencies could choose to adapt systems already in
place for their SNAP or WIC program, or propose an alternative
approach. USDA seeks comment on best practices for collaboration across
States and ITOs to detect and prevent dual participation.
Accordingly, 7 CFR 292.15(d) promulgates regulations on
requirements for prevention of dual participation in the Summer EBT
Program.
3. Benefit Amount
As established in the NSLA, the monthly value of the Summer EBT
benefit will be $40 in 2024, and will be adjusted annually starting in
2025 to reflect changes to the Thrifty Food Plan, which is a plan
developed by USDA to estimate the cost of a low-cost, healthy diet.\14\
The statute defines a benefit rate per month, as opposed to a daily or
weekly rate, and allows States and ITOs to streamline program
administration by establishing a single summer operational period.
Therefore, Summer EBT agencies may not prorate benefits for partial
months and must issue the full summer benefit to each eligible child.
In general, summer break spans all or part of three months, with the
May to September period being the most common months of summer break.
Accordingly, USDA considers the summer operational period to constitute
three months, meaning that Summer
[[Page 90268]]
EBT agencies must issue a full three months of benefits, even if the
benefit issuance does not align with calendar months. In summer 2024,
the benefits level is $40 per child per month and so each participating
child will receive a $120 benefit, issued at the intervals described
the Summer EBT agency's POM. Children who are certified as eligible for
the Program during the summer must be issued the full summer benefit as
well.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\14\ https://www.fns.usda.gov/taxonomy/term/415.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Consistent with other USDA programs, the Agency will publish a
notice in January of each year in the Federal Register to announce the
monthly benefit level for that year. This notice will also include
details on how the benefit was calculated. Annual benefit adjustments
will be consistent across programs operated by States and ITOs. Due to
a higher cost of living in areas outside the contiguous United States,
the statute allows USDA to adjust the monthly benefit for Alaska,
Hawaii, Guam, American Samoa, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands of the
United States, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
Rates for these areas will also be included in an annual Federal
Register notice.
Summer EBT agencies have the flexibility to establish an issuance
schedule, which does not need to align with the start of calendar
months, and may include a single benefit issuance before the start of
the summer operational period, or periodic issuances during the Summer.
Benefits provided as a single issuance must be issued prior to the
start of the summer operational period. If multiple issuances are
provided, the first issuance must occur before the start of the summer
operational period. Summer EBT agencies may also stagger throughout the
month. Staggering means that a State is issuing benefits to eligible
households on multiple days within a given month. In this case, a
staggered issuance means that not every household in the State gets
receives their benefit on the exact same day, which can help State
agencies administer the program. Pro-rated benefits, which are
prohibited under this rulemaking, is where participants would only
receive a part of their benefits. Once established, the Summer EBT
agency must inform households of the first day they will be able to
access benefits and the schedule for expunging benefits. USDA urges
Summer EBT agencies to consider the needs of eligible households and
their benefit usage patterns when establishing an issuance schedule.
Regardless of the issuance schedule used, the Summer EBT agency must
adhere to the reporting requirements and benefit issuance requirements
established in this rulemaking. These standards are designed to be
consistent with SNAP regulations at Sec. 274.2(a) and (b), except
that, instead of the 30-day standard described in Sec. 274.2, Summer
EBT agencies must adhere to the 15-day issuance standard described
above.
Accordingly, this program's requirements for related to the value
of benefits that may be issued and the manner of issuance are
promulgated in 7 CFR 292.15(e)(f).
4. Participant Support
Clear and consistent communication with the public will be central
to successful implementation of Summer EBT in a State or ITO. Summer
EBT is a new program, which means stakeholders at all levels need
information that clearly explains what the Program is, who is eligible,
and how benefits can be accessed and redeemed. Because P-EBT similarly
provided EBT benefits to children who lost access to free or reduced
price school meals, USDA anticipates that some eligible households and
stakeholders will be confused about the difference between Summer EBT
and P-EBT. Summer EBT agencies will need to provide information to
clarify differences between Summer EBT and P-EBT. A key difference is
that, in P-EBT, all children attending special provision schools, where
every student is served meals at no charge, were eligible to receive
the P-EBT benefit. However, Summer EBT is only available to children at
special provision schools who have been determined to be income
eligible for free or reduced price meals through existing
administrative data or a Summer EBT application, as required by the
statute. Communications with households of children attending special
provision schools will need to clearly explain that, unlike P-EBT,
households must submit a Summer EBT application if their child(ren)
cannot be identified as eligible through streamlined certification, and
that children attending special provision schools who received P-EBT
are not eligible to receive Summer EBT if they are not determined to be
income eligible. Similarly, Summer EBT is a program for school-age
children while the statute authorizing P-EBT explicitly extended
eligibility to children from birth to age 6 who were members of SNAP
households whose covered child care facility was closed or operating
with reduced hours or attendance. Families will need to know that their
children are only eligible for Summer EBT if they are income eligible
and attend an NSLP or SBP-participating school or are school-age and
identified through existing administrative data.
In addition, Summer EBT benefits will be issued for the summer
operational period while P-EBT also included the school year. Families
of eligible children will need materials that explain when the benefit
will be made available and the period of time, they have to use their
benefits before the benefits are no longer available to spend.
Summer EBT agencies must provide written materials to each
household prior to Summer EBT issuance and as needed during ongoing
operation of the Summer EBT program. At a minimum, the household
materials must provide information including, but not limited to: where
benefits can be used, what foods are eligible for purchase, unallowable
uses of benefits, and penalties for misuse, use of security Personal
Identification Numbers (PINs), how families may access customer service
supports during non-business hours, the eligibility criteria for
benefits, and disclosure information regarding adjustments and a
household's rights to notice, fair hearings, and provisional credits.
The disclosure must also state where and how to dispute an adjustment
and request a fair hearing. All materials must include the USDA
statement of non-discrimination and be prepared at an educational
reading level suitable for participant households. These standards are
a minimum, and UDSA highly encourages Summer EBT agencies to maintain
more frequent contact with eligible households to ensure they have the
information they need to access program benefits. Examples include
providing information through the schools before the end of the school
year, robo-calls and texts to families to remind them that they have
benefits available to spend, and social media ads. Summer EBT agencies
should consider how they can incorporate outreach throughout the summer
period in a manner that is inclusive of individuals with disabilities
or limited English proficiency, and people who are unhoused, or
generally are not well connected with community services or media.
This subsection also addresses requirements for EBT cards and PINs,
adjustments to posted benefits, and providing replacement EBT cards or
PINs. To ease program implementation, these requirements largely mirror
SNAP and WIC regulations on these issues.
In the event benefits are erroneously posted or adjustments are
needed to an account to correct an auditable, out-of-balance settlement
condition that occurs during the redemption process as a
[[Page 90269]]
result of a system error, the Summer EBT agency may adjust benefits
posted to household accounts. The Summer EBT agency must also ensure a
duplicate account is not established which would permit households to
access more than one account in the system.
The Summer EBT agency must implement a reporting system which is
continually operative. Once a household reports their EBT card has been
lost or stolen, the Summer EBT agency must assume liability for
benefits subsequently drawn from the account and replace any lost or
stolen benefits to the household. An immediate hold must be placed on
Summer EBT accounts at the time notice is received from a household
regarding the need for card or PIN replacement in order to limit agency
liability in the event the card is used for additional purchases after
a card or PIN replacement request is received. The Summer EBT agency or
its agent must maintain a record showing the date and time of all
reports by households of a lost or stolen card. Finally, the Summer EBT
agency must make replacement EBT benefits available to households when
the household reports food purchased with Summer EBT benefits was
destroyed in a household misfortune or disaster. FNS is interested in
comments on the challenges associated with providing replacement Summer
EBT benefits or not providing replacement Summer EBT benefits.
Accordingly, this program's requirements for participant support
are codified at 7 CFR 292.15(g).
5. Expungement
Summer EBT benefits are intended to be available for households to
spend when children are not receiving school meals during the summer.
Accordingly, the NSLA places limits on how long benefits may remain
available for households to spend after the summer operational period
ends. As discussed in subpart B, Summer EBT agencies have the
discretion to establish a summer operational period that generally
reflects the start and end dates of local summer vacations. In order to
allow a reasonable amount of time after the end of the summer
operational period for households to finish spending their benefits,
Summer EBT benefits must be expunged four months after issuance, which,
for the purpose of Summer EBT, will be 122 calendar days. Once
expunged, benefits may not be reinstated. This approach may be new for
ITO Summer EBT agencies as WIC benefits are not available to spend
beyond the month for which they were issued. In the SEBTC demonstration
projects, a few grantees that were WIC-administering agencies and used
WIC infrastructure issued benefits that were available to spend
throughout the entire summer period and they found that this increased
benefit redemption and was appealing to participating households.
Summer EBT agencies must also provide notice to the household that
benefits in their EBT account are approaching expungement not less than
30 days before benefit expungement is scheduled to begin. This approach
is consistent with statutory limits on benefit availability included in
the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, while also allowing flexibility for
families to use their benefits. In the SEBTC demonstrations, grantees
determined that frequent contact with households throughout the summer
was a best practice for providing timely technical assistance and
encouraging benefit use.
Summer EBT agencies must establish procedures to adjust Summer EBT
benefits that have already been posted to an EBT account prior to the
household accessing the account funds, or to remove benefits from
inactive accounts for expungement. Whenever benefits are expunged, the
Summer EBT agency must document the date and amount of the benefits in
the household case file and issuance reports must reflect the
adjustment to the Summer EBT agency issuance totals to comply with
reporting requirements in 7 CFR 292.23.
Some State Summer EBT agencies may choose to load Summer EBT
benefits on existing SNAP cards for households that participate in both
programs. Because Summer EBT benefits have a shorter expungement period
than SNAP benefits, Summer EBT agencies that load Summer EBT benefits
onto existing SNAP accounts must ensure Summer EBT benefits are drawn
down prior to SNAP benefits so they are used prior to expungement
period.
Accordingly, this program's benefit expungement requirements are
codified at 7 CFR 292.15(h) and (i).
ii. Issuance and Adjustment Requirements Specific to States That
Administer SNAP
This section details benefit issuance requirements that are
specific to all States that operate SNAP. This section does not apply
to Territories that administer the Nutrition Assistance Program (NAP).
As previously stated, USDA's aim in promulgating these regulations is
to streamline operations and reduce burden to the greatest extent
possible by adopting systems and processes that Summer EBT agencies are
already accustomed to using. To that end, this rulemaking establishes a
framework that includes certain SNAP requirements for effective and
responsible administration of the Summer EBT Program by State Summer
EBT agencies.
These requirements are:
Basic issuance requirements including the establishment of
issuance and accountability systems consistent with Sec. 274.1.
Requirements and restrictions regarding general SNAP terms
and conditions consistent with Sec. 272.1.
Automation and computerization of State Summer EBT
operations and data management systems for obtaining, maintaining,
utilizing and transmitting information concerning Summer EBT consistent
with Sec. 292.16(c).
Requirements regarding internal controls consistent with
Sec. 272.4(c)(1), court suit reporting consistent with Sec. 272.4(d),
Summer EBT agency monitoring of duplication consistent with Sec.
272.4(e), and hours of operations consistent with Sec. 272.4(f).
Program informational activities that convey information
about the Program, including household rights and responsibilities,
through means such as publications, telephone hotlines, and face-to-
face contacts, consistent with t Sec. 272.5(b).
Procedures for program administration in Alaska. To
achieve the efficient and effective administration of SNAP in rural
areas of Alaska, USDA has determined that it is necessary to develop
additional regulations which are specifically designed to accommodate
the unique demographic and climatic characteristics which exist in
these rural areas. USDA is applying the regulations established at
Sec. 272.7 for SNAP implementation in Alaska to Summer EBT
implementation in Alaska.
Procedures for household disqualification consistent with
273.16 .
Requirements that Summer EBT benefits may only be used to
purchase eligible foods from retail food stores approved for
participation in SNAP.
Requirement that SNAP retailers to also accept Summer EBT
benefits, subject to the participation requirements for SNAP.
Requirement that the State Summer EBT agency to maintain
issuance, inventory, reconciliation, and other accountability records
consistent with Sec. 274.5.
Requirements for standards regarding benefit redemption by
eligible households consistent with Sec. 274.7.
State Summer EBT agency assurance that its EBT system is
capable
[[Page 90270]]
of performing necessary functional requirements, including
interoperability and portability requirements, consistent with the
regulations at Sec. 274.8.
State Summer EBT agencies must account for all issuance
through a reconciliation process as described by USDA.
Accordingly, this subsection codifies issuance and adjustment
requirements for State Summer EBT agencies at 7 CFR 292.16.
iii. Retailer Integrity Requirements Specific to States, Including
Territories That Administer SNAP
As required by section 13A of the NSLA, Summer EBT benefits are
subject to certain integrity requirements found in the Food and
Nutrition Act of 2008. Specifically, Summer EBT agencies must comply
with section 12, Civil penalties and disqualification of retail food
stores and wholesale food concerns; section 14, Administrative and
judicial review; and section 15 Violations and enforcement (7 U.S.C.
2021, 2023, 2024). As these requirements were established in the Food
and Nutrition Act for SNAP, USDA has already promulgated regulations
that implement each requirement. These SNAP regulations were informed
by real-world experience and were developed through notice and comment
rulemaking, so they have the benefit of practical knowledge and public
input. USDA has determined that many aspects of the SNAP regulations
implementing sections 12, 14, and 15 of the Food and Nutrition Act are
also appropriate for Summer EBT, and adopting these same requirements
is preferable to developing different requirements for Summer EBT. This
approach is also the least burdensome for administering agencies
because it does not require agencies to develop new implementation
approaches to meeting the requirements in sections 12, 14, and 15 of
the Food and Nutrition Act for Summer EBT.
Specifically, this rulemaking applies the following SNAP
requirements to the Summer EBT Program:
Participation of retail food stores and wholesale food
concerns, and redemption of
Summer EBT benefits requirements at Sec. Sec. 278.2,
278.3, and 278.4.
Firm eligibility standards found in parts 271, 278, and
279.
Penalties for firms that commit certain violations
described in part 278.
Claims standards for retail food stores and wholesale food
concerns described at Sec. 278.7.
Administrative and Judicial review. Firms aggrieved by
administrative action under sections 271, 278, and 279 may request
administrative review of the administrative action with USDA in
accordance with part 279, subpart A, of this chapter. Firms aggrieved
by the determination of such an administrative review may seek judicial
review of the determination under 5 U.S.C. 702 through 706.
Accordingly, this section codifies retailer integrity requirements
for State, including territories that administer SNAP, in 7 CFR 292.17.
iv. Requirements Specific to States That Administer Nutrition
Assistance Programs (NAP)
In lieu of SNAP, section 19 of the Food and Nutrition Grant [42
U.S.C. 2028] authorizes Nutrition Assistance Program (NAP) block grants
for food assistance to low-income households in the U.S. Territories of
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico and American Samoa. Pursuant to
authority at 48 U.S.C. 1469d, FNS has also extended a NAP grant in lieu
of SNAP to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
This rulemaking codifies section 13A(b)(1)(A) of the NSLA, which
requires that Summer EBT benefits issued by a Territory administering
NAP may only be used by the eligible household to purchase NAP-eligible
foods from retail food stores that have been approved for participation
in NAP. In addition, States that administer NAP shall establish
issuance and accountability systems which ensure that only certified
eligible households receive Summer EBT benefits.
Accordingly, this rulemaking codified requirements for States that
administer NAP at 7 CFR 292.18.
v. Requirements Specific to ITO Summer EBT Agencies
This section of the IFR provides ITO-specific responsibilities
related to the issuance of Summer EBT program benefits, in addition to
the general standards set forth in this subsection. The ITO Summer EBT
agency must ensure that Summer EBT program benefits are used by the
eligible household that receives such benefits to transact for
supplemental foods from Summer EBT-enrolled vendors that have been
approved for participation in the WIC Program.
ITO Summer EBT agency procedures and operations related to basic
issuance requirements, reconciliation, benefit redemption, and
functional and technical EBT system requirements, should be consistent
with WIC regulations at 7 CFR part 246.12 as applicable to the benefit
delivery model used, to the extent such requirements do not conflict
with the requirements set forth for ITO Summer EBT agencies in this
part.
The Department learned from participating ITOs through the Summer
EBT demonstration projects the importance of providing flexibility in
how benefits may be offered to participants. To promote maximum
flexibility, ITO Summer EBT agencies may choose to pursue a cash-value
benefit (CVB) model, a food package model, a combination of the two, or
an alternate model. The ITO Summer EBT agency must use the same benefit
model for all participants throughout its service area, in accordance
with its POM.
For ITOs using solely a CVB model, the ITO Summer EBT agency must
issue a benefit level equal to the amount set forth in 7 CFR 292.15(e).
For 2024, the monthly benefit level will equal $40, and USDA will
adjust the benefit level amount in subsequent years pursuant to
statutory and regulatory requirements. For ITOs choosing to use a food
package model, a combination CVB/food package model, or alternate
model, the benefit level may not exceed that set forth in 7 CFR
292.15(e). The ITO Summer EBT agency is not required to restrict CVB to
the purchase of fruits and vegetables and may expand their Summer EBT-
eligible foods to include other items that meet the definition of a
supplemental food as described below. USDA is open to innovative
benefit issuance solutions, and will work with ITO Summer EBT agencies
to identify which model best fits the unique needs of each community.
In addition, pursuant to statute, this section requires ITO Summer
EBT agencies to provide supplemental foods that: contain nutrients
determined by nutritional research to be lacking in the diets of
children and promote the health of the population served by the
program, as indicated by relevant nutrition science, public health
concerns, and cultural eating patterns or allow for different cultural
eating patterns than foods described in such subparagraph. Supplemental
food that can be purchased with WIC benefits have similar nutritional
requirements; thus, an ITO Summer EBT agency may consider supplemental
foods authorized in its WIC Program to meet the requirements to be a
Summer EBT-authorized product. However, infant formula and infant foods
are excluded from use in Summer EBT program, consistent with the
statutory definition of supplemental food in section 13(A)(h)(4) of the
NSLA and Summer EBT program regulations at 7 CFR
[[Page 90271]]
292.19 even if they are approved for the ITO's WIC program. ITO Summer
EBT agencies may tailor the benefit to specific student age groups as
long as the monthly benefit level equals that set forth in 7 CFR 292.15
9(e).
Further, ITO Summer EBT agencies must ensure that vendors charge
prices for eligible food items which are reasonable for the area(s)
served and are at the current price or less than the current price
charged to other customers. Vendors may not charge Summer EBT
participants more for an item than the price in the retail environment
for all other customers. This section also requires ITO Summer EBT
agencies to ensure vendor integrity, in accordance with existing WIC
regulations. However, ITO Summer EBT agencies may also set forth an
alternate system to ensure effective vendor management and vendor
integrity.
Accordingly, this rulemaking codifies requirements specific to ITO
Summer EBT agencies at 7 CFR 292.19.
Subpart E--General Administrative Requirements
i. Payments to Summer EBT Agencies and Use of Administrative Program
Funds
The language in this section applies to States, territories, and
ITOs unless otherwise specified.
1. Benefit Funds
Summer EBT is a permanent program that will provide benefits to
children each summer. This permanence and stability will afford Summer
EBT agencies the opportunity to plan, prepare, and invest in program
infrastructure to deliver Summer EBT benefits in a manner that is
efficient, effective, and supports high levels of program integrity.
Establishing systems to keep Summer EBT benefits fully separate
from other benefit streams is critical to the integrity of the Program.
For P-EBT, USDA permitted States to issue food benefits through the
Account Management Agent (AMA), using the same account through which
the State's SNAP benefits are issued. As a result, P-EBT and SNAP
benefits are generally indistinguishable throughout the issuance and
redemption process. This has made it very challenging for USDA to
separately track SNAP and P-EBT funds and undermines USDA's oversight
and integrity efforts. Despite these significant drawbacks, States were
permitted to use this approach for P-EBT so that the Program could be
implemented quickly during a national emergency, delivering timely
benefits to millions of children who had suddenly lost access to school
meals because of the COVID-19 pandemic. USDA has identified a better
approach to providing Summer EBT benefit funds that Summer EBT agencies
will have the time and stability to implement.
To help Summer EBT agencies meet the statutory integrity
requirements discussed in subpart D of this rule, USDA will obligate
100 percent of Summer EBT benefit funds to Summer EBT agencies as a
grant. Summer EBT agencies, in partnership with their EBT processors,
will need to manage the Summer EBT benefit funds in a manner similar to
WIC, State-funded food assistance programs, and cash programs. At the
point of redemption, the Summer EBT agency will draw funds from the
USDA-provided Summer EBT benefit grant through the associated Automated
Standard Application for Payments (ASAP) account. This account will be
accessed and managed by the Summer EBT agency. This approach will
enable Summer EBT agencies to more effectively track Summer EBT
benefits separately from SNAP benefits, WIC benefits, or other benefit
types, allowing them to apply the same oversight, restrictions and
requirements as SNAP and WIC benefits. ITOs will be familiar with this
process as it is the method used to fund WIC. Territories that
administer NAP will issue Summer EBT benefits in the same manner they
issue NAP benefits.
2. State Administrative Funds
USDA is authorized to pay each Summer EBT agency an amount equal to
50 percent of the administrative expenses incurred by the Summer EBT
agency in operating the program under this section, including the
administrative expenses of LEAs and other agencies in each State or ITO
relating to the operation of their Summer EBT Program. This means that
Summer EBT agencies will need to cover the balance of their
administrative costs, i.e., their ``match,'' with non-Federal funds. As
previously discussed, Summer EBT agencies must include an
administrative budget as part of the annual POM. In States or ITOs
operating Summer EBT through more than one agency, each Summer EBT
agency may include separate administrative funding requests in their
POM for the administrative convenience of receiving funds without the
need to transfer money between Summer EBT agencies. However, the
coordinating Summer EBT agency and partnering Summer EBT agency
requests must be coordinated to ensure the requests are consistent with
overall program operations and the required cost allocations are
maintained.
The Child Nutrition Programs, SNAP, and WIC are distinct programs
from Summer EBT. Therefore, States and ITOs, generally may not use
Federal Child Nutrition, SNAP, or WIC administrative funds in the
administration of Summer EBT. If a Summer EBT agency conducts
activities that will benefit the administration of more than one
Federal program, the agency must appropriately allocate administrative
costs to each affected program. In addition, the Summer EBT agency may
generally not use other Federal program funds as part of their Summer
EBT match.
The Summer EBT agency may use the following resources to pay their
50% share of administrative funding:
project costs financed with cash contributed or donated to
the Summer EBT, and
project costs represented by services and real or personal
property donated to the Summer EBT agency (i.e., in kind
contributions).
Project costs may be reported on either a cash or accrual basis by
the Summer EBT agency.
Cash or in-kind contributions, as described above, are generally
allowable if they are verifiable, allowable, necessary, in the agency's
approved budget, and not related to any other Federal program costs
unless specifically provided in regulations. The value of services
rendered by volunteers is not an allowable in-kind contribution.
USDA received feedback from State agencies and ITOs that there are
barriers and challenges to securing Summer EBT funding, designing and
planning the program, and coordinating across agencies in time to
implement benefit issuance in summer 2024. To address this, States and
ITOs may receive administrative funding for a ``planning year'' if
needed in 2024. States and ITOs will still be required to provide the
50% State or ITO match and submit and interim POM, but Summer EBT
agencies will not be required to issue benefits in 2024. While this
option is in place, USDA highly encourages States in a position to
issue benefits in 2024 to do so. States and ITOs taking advantage of
this option must have a plan to issue benefits by summer 2025 in order
to receive administrative funding in 2024.
USDA will recover any administrative funds which are in excess of
obligations reported at the end of each fiscal year through an
adjustment in the Summer EBT agency's Letter of Credit. Each Summer EBT
agency must maintain Program records to support
[[Page 90272]]
administrative costs and retain these records for a period of 3 years,
or as otherwise specified.
Accordingly, payments to Summer EBT agencies and use of
administrative program funds requirements are codified at 7 CFR 292.20.
ii. Methods of Payment
Summer EBT agencies will receive benefit funds and administrative
funds through separate letters of credit (LOC). Each Summer EBT agency
that wants to receive administrative funds directly from USDA will do
so through its own LOC. If a State or ITO requests funds through only
one LOC, the Summer EBT agency that is responsible for that LOC will
also be responsible for distributing administrative funds across
partnering agencies, as appropriate. The Summer EBT agency that
administers the EBT benefit issuance will receive the benefit grant.
The LOC is the document by which an official of FNS authorizes a
Summer EBT agency to draw funds from the United States Treasury. Summer
EBT agencies will request payment(s) by submitting a request to the
appropriate Treasury Regional Disbursing Office with a copy to FNS. If
a Summer EBT agency cannot meet the requirements for the LOC method of
payment, it will be provided funds by Treasury check in accordance with
Treasury requirements.
Accordingly, methods of payment are codified at 7 CFR 292.20.
iii. Standards for Financial Management Systems
Summer EBT agencies are subject to the same standards for financial
management systems as agencies administering other USDA programs. These
standards also apply to all Summer EBT agencies and their respective
subagencies or contractors.
Financial management systems for a Summer EBT agency's program
funds must be able to provide accurate, current, and complete financial
records, identify Federal awards received and expended and the Federal
programs under which they were received, and include an audit trail to
support any costs claimed for reimbursement. These systems must also be
able to provide effective controls and accountability to safeguard
Federal funds and minimize the time it takes for the agency to disburse
funds for program costs. In addition, system procedures are needed to
determine the reasonableness, allowability, and allocability of costs.
Periodic audits of Summer EBT agency financial management systems,
consistent with 2 CFR part 200, subpart F, are required. The financial
systems must support agency resolution of audit findings,
recommendations, and follow up on corrective or preventive actions.
Accordingly, standards for financial management systems are
codified at 7 CFR 292.21.
iv. Performance Criteria
This rulemaking establishes four performance criteria for Summer
EBT in order to promote program access, a high standard of customer
service, and program integrity. USDA adopted a similar approach with
direct certification in 7 CFR 245.13. Performance benchmarks for direct
certification are tied to a State's ability to directly certify each
child who can be directly certified through SNAP in order to promote
program accuracy, reduce paperwork for States and households, and
increase eligible children's access to school meals. States that do not
meet the NSLP direct certification benchmarks are required to submit a
continuous improvement plan (CIP) which USDA supports with technical
assistance during plan development and implementation. USDA data show
that State direct certification rates are trending upward,\15\ a
finding which suggests that enhanced data collection, matching, and
technical assistance associated with these benchmarks have supported
program improvement over time.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\ U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service,
Office of Policy Support, Direct Certification in the National Lunch
Program: State Implementation Progress, School Year 2015-2016 and
School Year 2016-2017, by Dennis Ranalli, Joe Templin and Maggie
Applebaum, Alexandria, VA: October 2018.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The performance criteria for Summer EBT established in this rule
making are directly linked to the effectiveness of the Program and must
be monitored and documented by the Summer EBT agency. USDA does not
expect that Summer EBT agencies will reach 100% on each of these
benchmarks at the onset of the Program. Rather, the purpose of
monitoring and documenting these criteria in the immediate term is to
establish a reasonable baseline for each. If it is determined that
these criteria are meaningful and can be accurately measured, USDA will
consider adding numeric targets for each criterion to encourage
continued Programmatic improvement. Similar to direct certification, if
a target is not met, USDA would work with the Summer EBT agency to
develop a continuous improvement plan (CIP) and provide technical
assistance to help the Summer EBT agency achieve that target. USDA is
interested in comments on the concept of having performance criteria,
the benefits and challenges of linking numeric targets to a CIP, the
value of each criteria as a meaningful and measurable assessment of
performance, and if there are other metrics that are meaningful and
measurable, such as the percent of benefits issued that are redeemed.
USDA will provide guidance on how to evaluate and document each of
these criteria:
Performance Criteria 1--Percentage of children eligible for Summer
EBT benefits who participated by using their benefits at least once.
This metric measures the Summer EBT agency's ability to identify,
enroll, issue benefits to the correct location, and provide customer
support to all children eligible for the program.
Performance Criteria 2--Percentage of Summer EBT benefits that are
erroneously issued to children not eligible for Summer EBT, or
erroneously not issued to children who are eligible.
This metric measures the Summer EBT agency's ability to correctly
identify which children are eligible (or ineligible) and to prevent
improper payments.
Performance Criteria 3--Percentage of children issued benefits who
receive their first issuance before the start of the summer operational
period.
This metric measures the Summer EBT agency's ability to enroll
eligible children timely, obtain correct addresses for households of
eligible children, and issue EBT cards (or other benefit instruments)
in advance of the last day of school so that benefits are available to
spend immediately when school lets out. P-EBT benefits were not issued
timely for a variety of reasons, and this benchmark is intended to aid
USDA and States in identifying why lags occur and develop strategies to
prevent late issuances.
Performance Criteria 4--Percentage of eligible children who can be
identified through streamlined certification who are enrolled without
further application.
This metric measures the effectiveness of the Summer EBT agency's
systems and processes to enroll children using existing administrative
data without additional burden on families.
Accordingly, this IFR codified performance criteria at 7 CFR
292.22.
v. Records and Reports
Consistent with other USDA programs, Summer EBT agencies and LEAs
must retain records for a period of 3 years after submission of the
certification data for the fiscal year. If audit findings have not been
resolved, the records must be retained beyond the
[[Page 90273]]
3-year period as long as required for the resolution of the issues
raised by the audit. Records may be retained in their original form or
electronic form.
Accordingly, record retention and reporting requirements are
codified at 7 CFR 292.23.
vi. Audits and Management Control Evaluations
1. Audits
Summer EBT agencies must arrange for audits of their own operations
in accordance with uniform administrative requirements, cost principle,
and audit requirement for Federal awards. Agencies must also provide
USDA's Office of the Inspector General with full opportunity to audit
the Summer EBT agency and LEAs.
2. Management Control Evaluations
Summer EBT agencies must provide USDA with full opportunity to
conduct management control evaluations of all operations of the Summer
EBT agency. The Summer EBT agency must make available its records,
including records of the receipts and expenditures of funds, upon a
reasonable request by USDA.
vii. Investigations
In order to improve Program performance, Summer EBT agencies must
promptly investigate complaints received or irregularities noted in
connection with the operation of the Program and take appropriate
action to correct any irregularities. The Summer EBT agency must
maintain on file all evidence relating to such investigations and
actions. The Summer EBT agency must also inform the appropriate FNSRO
of any suspected fraud or criminal abuse in the Program which would
result in a loss or misuse of Federal funds and USDA may make
investigations at the request of the Summer EBT agency, or where it
determines investigations are appropriate.
Accordingly, this IFR codifies investigation procedures for Summer
EBT at 7 CFR 292.25.
viii. Hearing Procedure for Families and Summer EBT Agencies
Each Summer EBT agency must establish a hearing procedure allowing
households to appeal decisions made with respect to a Summer EBT
application they submitted and allowing Summer EBT agencies to
challenge continued eligibly of a child. Because the process to
establish eligibility for Summer EBT is rooted in the NSLP/SBP
eligibility process, these requirements are largely the same as those
included in NSLP/SBP regulations. As a result, a household's experience
will be consistent if it requests a hearing in the NSLP, SBP, or Summer
EBT. In order to provide for fair treatment of all parties involved in
the hearing process, the regulations detail required hearing procedures
including notices and written records, timeframes for action, the
rights of participants to legal counsel and to present and view
evidence, the right to refute any testimony or evidence, and
requirements for hearing officials.
Accordingly, hearing procedures are codified at 7 CFR 292.26.
ix. Claims
Summer EBT agencies are responsible to ensure that program benefits
are provided only to eligible children in the correct amount, and that
no child receives duplicate benefits, in accordance with program
regulations. USDA may hold Summer EBT agencies liable for erroneous
payments and pursue claims against the State in the aggregate when
merited, based on the nature of the error that gave rise to the
erroneous payment, the size of the error, and whether such action would
advance program purposes.
In turn, Summer EBT agencies must develop a process to manage cases
of erroneous issuances and pursue claims against a household, as
appropriate. Summer EBT agencies have the discretion to determine when
to pursue a claim when erroneous issuances are discovered based on cost
effectiveness or the individual circumstances. Most children who
receive Summer EBT benefits will be enrolled through streamlined
certification with no action on the part of the household required.
Therefore, a child enrolled through streamlined certification might
unknowingly use benefits that were issued in error, including a
situation where the child's household applies for duplicate benefits
because they are not aware of their automatic enrollment. It may be a
significant burden on low-income households to pay back benefits
already spent, especially when they were unaware of the error and do
not have sufficient funds on hand to pay the claim. To the maximum
extent practicable, Summer EBT agencies should limit claims against
households to situations where there is evidence that the household
knowingly obtained benefits through fraudulent activities. To limit
risk of unintentional use of erroneous benefits, Summer EBT agencies
have the responsibility to communicate eligibility determinations to
households and provide sufficient information for households to
determine their eligibility status and the amount they should be
issued. In addition, Summer EBT agencies may not reclaim Summer EBT
benefits by reducing a household's SNAP or WIC benefit. Summer EBT
agencies must also develop a process to allow households to submit a
claim for benefits that were not issued or issued in the incorrect
amount.
To inform future rulemaking, USDA is interested in comments on
Summer EBT claims including: the most common reasons for erroneous
issuances, the frequency of erroneous issuances, how such issuances are
detected, the feasibility of successfully pursuing a claim against a
household, and the resources required to purse a claim.
Accordingly, claims procedures are codified at 7 CFR 292.27.
x. Procurement Standards
1. General
In general, Summer EBT is subject to Federal procurement
requirements for Summer EBT agency and local agency costs paid with
Federal funds, including costs associated with eligibility systems.
Consistent with other USDA programs, such purchases must comply with
Federal procurement requirements in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D, and USDA
implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 and 415.
As discussed in 7 CFR 292.11, Summer EBT is subject to the Advance
Planning Document (APD) process, which is a series of successive steps
through which agencies administering USDA programs obtain Federal prior
approval and financial participation in automation projects supporting
USDA programs. This generally includes all SNAP and WIC eligibility
system and EBT projects. APD procurement requirements take the place of
standard procurement rules for costs associated with projects subject
to the APD process. Therefore, any costs associated with EBT projects
for a Summer EBT program will follow APD rules and will not follow
standard procurement rules.
Although the APD process usually applies to eligibility system
projects, USDA is not requiring Summer EBT agencies that also operate
Child Nutrition Programs to follow the APD process at this time. As
detailed in 7 CFR 292.11, USDA has not historically used the APD
process for CNP eligibility systems, which are the eligibility systems
most likely to need changes to implement Summer EBT. The agency has
determined that adding APD requirements for CNP agencies would take
more time and planning than is available at this time, so they will
[[Page 90274]]
remain subject to standard procurement rules.
Accordingly, procurement requirements are codified at 7 CFR 292.27.
2. Contractual Responsibilities
The standards contained in this part, 2 CFR part 200, subpart D,
and USDA implementing regulations at 2 CFR parts 400 and 415, as
applicable, do not relieve any Summer EBT agency or local agency of any
contractual responsibilities under its contracts. The Summer EBT agency
or local agency is the responsible authority, without recourse to USDA,
regarding the settlement and satisfaction of all contractual and
administrative issues arising out of procurements entered into in
connection with the Program. This includes, but is not limited to,
source evaluation, protests, disputes, claims, or other matters of a
contractual nature. Matters concerning violation of law are to be
referred to the local, State, ITO, or Federal authority that has proper
jurisdiction.
Accordingly, contractual responsibilities are codified at 7 CFR
292.27(c).
3. Procedures
The Summer EBT agency may elect to follow either the State or ITO
laws, policies and procedures as authorized by 2 CFR 200.317, or the
procurement standards for other governmental grantees and all
governmental subgrantees in accordance with 2 CFR 200.318 through
200.326. Regardless of the option selected, Summer EBT agencies must
ensure that all contracts include any clauses required by Federal
statutes and executive orders and that the requirements in 2 CFR
200.236 and 2 CFR part 200, appendix II, Contract Provisions for Non-
Federal Entity Contracts Under Federal Award, are followed.
Accordingly, additional procurement procedures are codified at 7
CFR 292.27(d).
xi. Miscellaneous Administrative Provisions
1. Civil Rights
In the operation of the Program, no child shall be denied benefits
or be otherwise discriminated against because of race, color, national
origin, age, sex, or disability. Summer EBT agencies and LEAs must
comply with the requirements of: Title VI of the Civil Rights Act of
1964; title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972; section 504 of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973; the Age Discrimination Act of 1975;
Department of Agriculture regulations on nondiscrimination (7 CFR parts
15, 15a, and 15b); and FNS Instruction 113-1.
2. Program Evaluations
Summer EBT agencies, LEAs, schools, and contractors must cooperate
in studies and evaluations conducted by or on behalf of the Department
that are related to programs authorized under the NSLA and the Child
Nutrition Act of 1966.
3. General Responsibilities
The criminal penalties and provisions established in section 12(g)
of the NSLA, (42 U.S.C. 1760(g)), state substantially: Whoever
embezzles, willfully misapplies, steals, or obtains by fraud any funds,
assets, or property that are the subject of a grant or other form of
assistance under this Act or the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C.
1771 et seq.), whether received directly or indirectly from the United
States Department of Agriculture, or whoever receives, conceals, or
retains such funds, assets, or property to personal use or gain,
knowing such funds, assets, or property have been embezzled, willfully
misapplied, stolen, or obtained by fraud must, if such funds, assets,
or property are of the value of $100 or more, be fined not more than
$25,000 or imprisoned not more than five years, or both, or, if such
funds, assets, or property are of a value of less than $100, must be
fined not more than $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year, or
both.
Accordingly, this IFR codifies civil right requirements at 7 CFR
292.28(a), requirements for cooperation with Program evaluations at 7
CFR 292.28(b), and general responsibilities of Summer EBT agencies at 7
CFR 292.28(c).
xii. Information Collection/Recordkeeping--OMB Assigned Control Numbers
F. Severability
The statutory enhancement of the USDA summer meals programs for
children through establishment of the Summer Electronic Benefits
Transfer Program for Children providing States and covered Indian
Tribal Organizations nutrition assistance through electronic benefit
transfer or similar methods, which may be used to purchase food from
approved retail stores is essential for ensuring that all children
receive nutritious meals during the summer months when school is not in
session. The benefits will be used to purchase food during the summer
months. As directed by statute, USDA is establishing the Summer EBT
program beginning in Summer 2024 through this rulemaking, in
partnership with States and covered Indian Tribal Organizations which
choose to participate. Based on the statutory requirement to establish
the Summer EBT program beginning in 2024, USDA has determined that its
authority to implement the regulation is well-supported in law as well
as in practice, based on USDA's administration of demonstration
projects and similar programs over the past decade. Accordingly, USDA
has determined that this exercise of its statutory authority reflects
sound policy and should be upheld in any legal challenge. However, if
any portion of the rule is declared invalid, USDA intends the various
aspects of this rule to be severable. For example, if a court were to
find any provision unlawful, such as (1) student eligibility
determination protocols, (2) the expungement timeframes, or (3) some
other aspect of this rule, USDA intends that all other provisions in
the rule will remain in effect so that States and covered Indian Tribal
Organizations can implement the Summer EBT program beginning in 2024.
USDA has concluded that it is in the interests of our Nation's children
for electronic benefits to be provided to families so they may purchase
food during the summer months when school is not in session.
Furthermore, in the event any part or the entirety of the Summer EBT
program established by this rulemaking were declared invalid, Summer
EBT is severable and does not prevent the non-congregate rural option,
discussed above, from proceeding since the non-congregate rural option
and Summer EBT program function independently.
IV. Coordinated Services Plan
The creation of the permanent Summer EBT Program, as well as the
establishment of the Summer rural non-congregate meal service option,
create together a fundamental shift in how summer nutrition can be
provided to children across the country. As part of that fundamental
shift, it is important to consider how these two Programs can
complement one another, but also how other Federal, State, Tribal, and
local programs can join efforts to increase children's access to food
in the summer, as well as access to other important services.
Therefore, beginning in 2025, each State will be required to submit
to FNS (and update at least every three years thereafter) a single
Coordinated Services Plan (CSP). Any significant changes must be
updated on an annual basis. States must also notify the public of their
CSP and make it readily available
[[Page 90275]]
on their website. The intent of the CSP is for each State to craft a
coordinated approach to reaching children with various human services
programs in the summertime, with a focus on summer nutrition. If more
than one State or Summer EBT agency administers these Programs within a
respective State, they must work together to develop and implement the
CSP. Indian Trial Organizations that administer Summer EBT may create
their own CSP to the maximum extent practicable. In addition, States
are strongly encouraged to coordinate services across other
governmental and non-governmental programs in partnership with
community organizations that directly administer the program and/or
support its operation (e.g., libraries that operate as sites and
provide summer reading programs, community organizations that operate
sites and provide funding or enrichment activities, etc.).
In order to ensure that CSPs remain up to date, they will be
required to be submitted annually when there are significant updates,
or at least once every three years. For both the initial CSP submission
as well as the subsequent significant annual and/or triennial updates,
States must consult with FNS to receive technical assistance and
recommendations of additional avenues to ensure access for eligible
children.
FNS plans to issue a CSP template following publication of this
rule which will include a suggested format and examples of the kind of
information to include in the Plans. FNS will provide technical
assistance and share best practices to assist States and ITOs in
drafting their Plans along with the release of the template in 2024.
USDA seeks public comments on all aspects of the Coordinated
Services Plan. Commenters are especially encouraged to provide input on
the following:
Types of information that FNS should consider including in
a Coordinated Services Plan template.
Recommendations about what metrics States are able to
collect in relation to all summer nutrition programs (for example,
metrics capturing the expansion of non-congregate meal service into
previously under-served areas, metrics related to community engagement
and support for families to access summer nutrition options).
Recommendations on how often Plans should be updated and
resubmitted.
Recommendations on partnerships with other Federal, State,
Tribal, and local agencies, as well as organizations involved in the
administration of nutrition and human services programs, participants,
and other stakeholders that States may want to consider consulting with
for the creation of their Plans.
Specific recommendations on the steps States and ITOs
could take to fully and substantively implement their plans.
Accordingly, this rule establishes a new Sec. 225.3(e) in part 225
and a new Sec. 292.10 in part 292 to require States to submit a
Coordinated Services Plan.to require States to submit a Coordinated
Services Plan.
V. Procedural Matters
Executive Orders 12866, 13563, and 14094. Executive Orders 12866
and 13563 direct agencies to assess all costs and benefits of available
regulatory alternatives and, if regulation is necessary, to select
regulatory approaches that maximize net benefits (including potential
economic, environmental, public health and safety effects, distributive
impacts, and equity). Executive Order 13563 emphasizes the importance
of quantifying both costs and benefits, of reducing costs, of
harmonizing rules, and of promoting flexibility.
This interim final rule has been determined to be significant under
section 3(f)(1) of Executive Order 12866, as amended by Executive Order
14094, and was reviewed by the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) in
conformance with Executive Order 12866.
Regulatory Impact Analysis
As required by Executive Order 12866, (as amended by Executive
Order 14904), a Regulatory Impact Analysis (RIA) was developed for this
interim final rule. It follows this rule as an appendix. The following
summarizes the conclusions of the regulatory impact analysis:In total,
the 10-year cost of the interim final rule is estimated at $40.3
billion, with $7.4 billion attributed to non-congregate meal option
implementation ($7.35 billion for program meal reimbursements and $43.2
million for provision administration) and $32.9 billion in costs
attributed to Summer EBT implementation ($28.0 billion for program
benefits and $5.0 billion for program implementation and
administration). These costs represent the operation of both provisions
over a ten-year period between Fiscal Years (FY) 2023 and 2032. It
should be noted that Summer EBT will not be implemented until 2024 and
therefore all analyses pertaining to Summer EBT represent only nine
years of program operation. Though some States may have already
incurred costs in FY 2023 preparing for the implementation of Summer
EBT in FY 2024, it is assumed that the costs estimated in FY 2024 are
representative of the total cost of program implementation occurring
either during or prior to Summer EBT rollout.
The non-congregate meal provision is expected to increase
participation among eligible populations in rural sites by 4.25 million
children by 2027 (Year 5) with annual costs for associated meal
reimbursements of just over $1 billion once peak participation is
reached. Annual administrative burden to households add only marginally
to these costs--between $0.2 million and $4.7 million annually, for a
total of $29.3 million over ten years. The analysis also accounts for
one-time costs associated with modifying operating systems to
accommodate non-congregate meal service, which has been estimated at
$250,000 per State agency, totaling $14.0 million across all 56 State
agencies in 2023.
It is expected that 25.0 million children out of approximately 30.1
million eligible children will receive Summer EBT benefits, resulting
in between $2.8 and $3.4 billion in benefits distributed each summer.
Program implementation and administration costs, which include initial
start-up costs equal to 30% of benefits administered and ongoing
administrative costs equal to 7% of benefits administered, are expected
to peak at $1 billion in 2024 and level off at $366 million by 2028.
This includes expected administrative burden for Summer EBT retailers
due to reporting and recordkeeping at $8.9 million, while the expected
household burden of administrative tasks required for program
participation (e.g., applications) for children not already certified
as Free and Reduced-Price eligible is estimated at $149 million. The
retailer costs are expected to be incurred primarily in Year 1 (2024).
Total annual costs for Summer EBT benefits and administration are
estimated at between $3.5 and $3.8 billion annually for a total nine-
year cost of $32.9 billion.
This rule is expected to yield substantial public benefit,
including improvements in nutrition security and diet quality and
economic growth via retail transactions.
Regulatory Flexibility Act
The Regulatory Flexibility Act (5 U.S.C. 601-612) requires Agencies
to analyze the impact of rulemaking on small entities and consider
alternatives
[[Page 90276]]
that would minimize any significant impacts on a substantial number of
small entities. Pursuant to that review, it has been certified that
this interim final rule would not have a significant impact on a
substantial number of small entities. The provisions of this interim
final rule are intended to reflect the needs of program operators of
all sizes. No specific additional burdens are placed on small program
operators seeking to operate summer nutrition programs. Additionally,
non-congregate meal service and Summer EBT are optional provisions, and
there is no requirement for States, Tribes, and/or sponsors to
participate.
Congressional Review Act and Administrative Procedure Act
Pursuant to subtitle E of the Small Business Regulatory Enforcement
Fairness Act of 1996 (also known as the Congressional Review Act, 5
U.S.C. 801 et seq.), the Office of Management and Budget's Office of
Information and Regulatory Affairs has determined that this rule meets
the criteria set forth in 5 U.S.C. 804(2). In addition, pursuant to 5
U.S.C. 808(2), USDA has for good cause determined that the provisions
of this interim final rule shall take effect immediately. A statutory
requirement at 42 U.S.C. 1762(a) establishes a new program and
specifies that it must begin in Summer 2024. Statutory requirements
established at 42 U.S.C. 1761(a)(13)(F) and 42 U.S.C. 1762(f) further
specify that the promulgation of regulations (to include interim final
regulations) must occur not later than December 29, 2023. In accord
with congressional direction to issue these provisions through interim
final regulations, USDA finds that notice and public procedure thereon
are unnecessary and that, for good cause, this rule will take effect
immediately under 5 U.S.C. 808(2).
Furthermore, because this rule does not compel immediate action but
rather provides the certainty that program stakeholders need to timely
implement these regulatory provisions in support of Summer 2024 program
operations and provide nutritious meals to children when school is not
in session, all of which is consistent with congressional direction,
there is no need for affected parties to have lead time to adjust their
behavior before this rule takes effect. For these reasons USDA finds
good cause for this rule to take effect immediately under 5 U.S.C.
553(d)(3).
Unfunded Mandates Reform Act
Title II of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of 1995 (UMRA), Public
Law 104-4, establishes requirements for Federal agencies to assess the
effects of their regulatory actions on State, local, and Tribal
governments and the private sector. Under section 202 of the UMRA, USDA
generally must prepare a written statement, including a cost benefit
analysis, for proposed and final rules with ``Federal mandates'' that
may result in expenditures by State, local, or Tribal governments, in
the aggregate, or the private sector, of $177 million or more (when
adjusted for inflation; GDP deflator source: Table 1.1.9 at https://www.bea.gov/iTable) in any one year. When such a statement is needed
for a rule, section 205 of the UMRA generally requires USDA to identify
and consider a reasonable number of regulatory alternatives and adopt
the most cost effective or least burdensome alternative that achieves
the objectives of the rule.
This interim final rule does not contain Federal mandates (under
the regulatory provisions of Title II of the UMRA) for State, local,
and Tribal governments or the private sector of $177 million or more in
any one year. Thus, the rule is not subject to the requirements of
sections 202 and 205 of the UMRA.
Executive Order 12372
The Summer Food Service Program is listed in the Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance under Number 10.559. The Summer Electronic Benefit
Transfer Program for Children is listed in the Catalog of Federal
Domestic Assistance under Number 10.646. The National School Lunch
Program (which includes the Seamless Summer Option) is listed in the
Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance under Number 10.555. They are
subject to Executive Order 12372, which requires intergovernmental
consultation with State and local officials. (See 2 CFR chapter IV.)
Since the Child Nutrition Programs are State-administered, FNS has
formal and informal discussions with State and local officials,
including representatives of Indian Tribal Organizations, on an ongoing
basis regarding program requirements and operations. This provides USDA
with the opportunity to receive regular input from program
administrators and contributes to the development of feasible program
requirements.
Federalism Summary Impact Statement
Executive Order 13132 requires Federal agencies to consider the
impact of their regulatory actions on State and local governments.
Where such actions have federalism implications, agencies are directed
to provide a statement for inclusion in the preamble to the regulations
describing the agency's considerations in terms of the three categories
called for under section (6)(b)(2)(B) of Executive Order 13132.
USDA has determined that this rule has Federalism implications.
1. Prior Consultation with State and Local Agencies: FNS has
gathered extensive input from national, State, and local community
partners through a variety of public engagement activities. These
include, but are not limited to, webinars, over 40 listening sessions
with a diverse array of program stakeholders, and town hall style
meetings. These activities have helped FNS monitor program operations,
identify best practices, and take into consideration requests from
States and local program operators. In addition, since Child Nutrition
Programs are State administered, federally-funded programs, and FNS
Regional offices have informal and formal discussions with State and
local officials on an ongoing basis regarding program implementation
and performance.
2. Nature of Concerns and the Need to Issue this Rulemaking:
Publication of this interim final rule is required under the provisions
of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023 (Pub. L. 117-328). Program
stakeholders expressed concerns related to the length of the
implementation timeframe in advance of summer 2023 and 2024 operations,
possible start-up and implementation costs, as well as the need for
additional guidance and technical assistance from FNS to assist with
implementation activities.
3. Extent to Which We Meet These Concerns: FNS has made every
effort to address these concerns, balancing the goal of meeting
statutory requirements established around the publication of this
interim final rule against the need to minimize administrative burden
and provide necessary implementation support. This final rule takes
into account and is responsive, where feasible, to public input
received during the stakeholder consultation process to ensure the
provisions of this interim final rule are implemented efficiently and
in a manner that is least burdensome. In addition, FNS will solicit
robust feedback through public comment rulemaking with the publication
of this interim final rule, and will assess and respond to such public
comments when promulgating a final rule.
Executive Order 12988, Civil Justice Reform
This interim final rule has been reviewed under Executive Order
12988, Civil Justice Reform. This interim final rule is not intended to
have preemptive
[[Page 90277]]
effect with respect to any State or local laws, regulations or policies
which conflict with its provisions or which would otherwise impede its
full and timely implementation.
Civil Rights Impact Analysis
USDA has reviewed this rule in accordance with USDA Regulation
4300-4, ``Civil Rights Impact Analysis,'' to identify any major civil
rights impacts the rule might have on program participants on the basis
of age, race, color, national origin, sex (including gender identity
and sexual orientation) or disability.
USDA believes that this rule will impact State agencies and local
Program operators by increasing summer nutrition assistance for
children between the introduction of both non-congregate meal service
for rural areas and the establishment of the newly authorized Summer
EBT Program. State agencies and Program operators will also be impacted
by increased emphasis on accountability and strengthening monitoring
efforts. However, mitigation strategies such as providing ample
technical assistance and training to State agencies and Program
operators will assist them with complying with the revised and newly
established program requirements while also alleviating impacts that
may result from the implementation of this rule.
Executive Order 13175
Executive Order 13175 requires Federal agencies to consult and
coordinate with Tribes on a government-to-government basis on policies
that have Tribal implications, including regulations, legislative
comments or proposed legislation, and other policy statements or
actions that have substantial direct effects on one or more Indian
Tribes, on the relationship between the Federal Government and Indian
Tribes, or on the distribution of power and responsibilities between
the Federal Government and Indian Tribes. What follows is a summary of
Tribal implications that are present and consultation/coordination
taken to date:
This rule has potential Tribal implications. FNS provided an
opportunity for consultation on this issue on May 23, 2023. During the
consultation, participating Tribal representatives expressed enthusiasm
for the permanent availability of rural non-congregate meal service
during the summer. Some concerns raised by attendees included operating
under State-wide limitations on meal service options (one respondent
specifically highlighted limitations on multi-day meal distribution),
the inability to serve members of their Tribe that live outside their
service area, and concern about the rural definition. In response to
these issues, this interim final rule only permits State agencies to
limit multi-meal issuance on a case-by-case basis for an individual
sponsor, based on specific concerns regarding a sponsor's ability to
ensure Program integrity, food safety, and meal quality. In addition,
this interim final rule expands the previously established definition
of rural in response to Tribal and other stakeholder concerns.
In regard to Summer EBT, participating Tribal representatives also
indicated excitement and interest in administering this program in the
future, noting the significant potential health benefits for
participants. However, concerns were raised regarding: the 50%
administrative funding match requirement; the need to develop an MIS
system to support program administration; the timeline to stand up a
new program; ensuring ITOs are able to serve children in their
jurisdictions; accessing data on children eligible for free and
reduced-price school meals; and empowering Tribes to determine what
foods may be purchased with Summer EBT benefits. In response to these
concerns, the interim final rule clearly specifies the types of cash
and in-kind contributions that ITO Summer EBT agencies may use to pay
their 50% share of administrative funding, consistent with Federal
administrative requirements. To address concerns about the timeline for
developing a new program, the IFR will allow ITO Summer EBT agencies to
receive administrative funding for a ``planning year'' if needed in
2024, in anticipation of launching their program in 2025. The IFR will
also provide ITO Summer EBT agencies with priority consideration to
serve eligible children in their service areas while also allowing
households of eligible children the option to participate in a State-
administered Summer EBT Program. This approach ensures that ITO-
administered Summer EBT Programs are the default choice for households
in their communities, rather than automatically enrolling these
children in the State-administered Summer EBT Program through
streamlined certification. With regard to accessing student data, the
interim final rule requires that an ITO and a State Summer EBT agency
serving proximate geographic areas must ensure the coordination of
Summer EBT program services, including the timely transfer of student
eligibility information from the State Summer EBT agency to the ITO
Summer EBT agency, as applicable. Finally, the interim final rule
provides significant flexibility for ITO Summer EBT agencies to select
which foods may be purchased through their Summer EBT Programs. As
described in the rule, each ITO Summer EBT agency will propose its
benefit delivery model [i.e., a cash-value benefit (CVB) model, a food
package model, a combination of the two, or an alternate model] and
will provide the list of supplemental foods which participants can
purchase upon enrollment in the Summer EBT Program.
If further consultation on the provisions of this final rule is
requested, the Office of Tribal Relations will work with FNS to ensure
quality consultation is provided.
Paperwork Reduction Act
The Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995 (44 U.S.C. Chapter 35; see 5
CFR part 1320) requires that the Office of Management and Budget (OMB)
approve all collection of information requirements by a Federal agency
before they can be implemented. Respondents are not required to respond
to any collection of information unless it displays a current valid OMB
control number. This interim final rule will codify provisions of the
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023 that provides State agencies
operating the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP) the option to provide
non-congregate meal service in rural areas with no congregate meal
service and establishes a permanent summer electronic benefits transfer
for children program (Summer EBT). As a result, the changes to SFSP
meal delivery would provide flexibilities to program operators,
including home delivery and parent pick-up meal service options, that
would increase opportunities to rural children and families to benefit
from SFSP. Likewise, the Summer EBT Program will ensure continued
access to food when school is not in session for the summer.
In accordance with the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995, this
interim final rule revises existing information collection requirements
and contains new information collection requirements, which are subject
to review and approval by OMB. The existing requirements are currently
approved under OMB Control Number 0584-0280 7 CFR part 225 Summer Food
Service Program, expiration date September 30, 2025. This interim final
rule also introduces new information collection requirements into OMB
Control Number 0584-0280. Furthermore, the interim final rule will add
additional new information
[[Page 90278]]
collection requirements that extend the non-congregate meal service
option to SFAs utilizing the Seamless Summer Option (SSO) of the
National School Lunch Program (NSLP). Existing requirements for the SSO
are currently approved under OMB Control Number 0584-0006, 7 CFR part
210 National School Lunch Program, expiration date September 30, 2026.
This interim final rule adds new information requirements and a new
respondent group into OMB Control Number 0584-0006. In addition, this
interim final rule is introducing new information collection
requirements associated with the Summer EBT Program. This rulemaking
revises existing and sets out new reporting and public disclosure
requirements for State agencies, local sponsoring organizations, and
non-profit private institutions and camps that administer the Summer
Food Service Program (SFSP), as well as households that participate in
the Program. This interim final rule also sets out new reporting,
recordkeeping, and public disclosure requirements for Summer EBT
agencies, Summer EBT Authorized Retailers, and households that will
administer and participate in the Summer EBT Program.
FNS is submitting for public comment the revisions to OMB Control
Number 0584-0280, 7 CFR part 225, Summer Food Service Program, that
will result from the adoption of this interim final rule. FNS is also
submitting for public comment the revisions to OMB Control Number 0584-
0006, 7 CFR part 210 National School Lunch Program, that will result
from the adoption of this interim final rule. In addition, FNS is
requesting an OMB control number for a new information collection to
contain the new reporting, recordkeeping, and public disclosure
information collection requirements for the Summer EBT Program in 7 CFR
part 292 that will result from this rulemaking and is also seeking
public comment on this collection. Since this rule impacts three
separate information collections, three separate PRA sections have been
included to capture the burden impact that this interim final rule is
estimated to have on these collections. The establishment of the
information collection requirements and their associated burden are
contingent upon OMB approval under the Paperwork Reduction Act of 1995.
When the information collection request is approved, the Department
will publish a separate notice in the Federal Register announcing OMB's
approval.
Comments on the information collection in this interim final rule
must be received by February 27, 2024.
Comments may be sent to: J. Kevin Maskornick, Community Meals
Policy Division, USDA Food and Nutrition Service, 1320 Braddock Place,
Alexandria, VA 22314. Comments will also be accepted through the
Federal eRulemaking Portal. Go to https://www.regulations.gov, and
follow the online instructions for submitting comments electronically.
Comments are invited on: (1) Whether the collection of information
is necessary for the proper performance of the functions of the agency,
including whether the information will have practical utility; (2) the
accuracy of the agency's estimate of the burden of the collection of
information, including the validity of the methodology and assumptions
used; (3) ways to enhance the quality, utility and clarity of the
information to be collected; and (4) ways to minimize the burden of the
collection of information on those who are to respond, including use of
appropriate automated, electronic, mechanical, or other technological
collection techniques or other forms of information technology.
All responses to this notification will be summarized and included
in the request for OMB approval. All comments will also become a matter
of public record.
Title: 7 CFR part 210, National School Lunch Program.
Form Number: None.
OMB Control Number: 0584-0006.
Expiration Date: 09/30/2026.
Type of Request: Revision.
Abstract: This is a revision adding new information collection
requirements to the existing information collection approved under OMB
Control Number 0584-0006, as a result of this interim final rule. Below
is a summary of the changes in the rule and the accompanying reporting
requirements for State agencies, school food authorities, and
households that are being impacted by this rule.
The interim final rule will codify provisions of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act of 2023 that establish rural non-congregate service
options in the Seamless Summer Option (SSO) of the National School
Lunch Program (NSLP). In current regulations, there is not an option
for rural schools to provide non-congregate meal service. The interim
final rule allows schools, in an area designated as rural, to have the
option to enroll as non-congregate schools for the summer operating
period.
This interim final rule will amend regulations 7 CFR 210.18(e) and
210.34(a) to extend the non-congregate service option to SSO and
require that State agencies conduct at least two site reviews of a
school food authority (SFA) that chooses to operate non-congregate meal
service through SSO.
Reporting
State Agencies and School Food Authorities
The changes in this interim rule will add new reporting
requirements to those that are currently approved under OMB Control
Number 0584-0006 for State agencies and School Food Authorities (SFAs).
USDA estimates that 56 State agencies will be required to fulfill
the requirement at 7 CFR 210.18(e)(3)(ii) that the State agency must
review the Seamless Summer Option (SSO), if the school food authority
(SFA) operates congregate and non-congregate meal service, at a minimum
of two sites, one congregate and one non-congregate. USDA estimates
that the 56 State agencies will review 338 schools that operate non-
congregate meal service through SSO and that it takes approximately 2
hours to complete this reporting requirement for each record, which is
estimated to add a total of 37,895 annual burden hours and 18,947
responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 1,997 school food authorities will be required
to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 210.34(a) that an SFA operating the
SSO in a rural area may be approved to offer a non-congregate meal
service consistent with that established in part 225 of this chapter.
USDA estimates that the 1,997 school food authorities each will approve
3,111 meals consistent with non-congregate meal service during the
summer operational period and that it takes approximately 5 minutes
(0.0835 hours) to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add
a total of 518,698 annual burden hours and 6,211,948 responses into
OMB's information collection inventory. Of the 6,211,948 meals being
served, USDA estimates that 5% of non-congregate meals will be served
utilizing the home delivery meal service option. Estimates from the
ongoing Meals to You (MTY) demonstration estimate that the mailing
costs associated with home delivery is equal to the SFSP lunch meal
reimbursement rate. As such, USDA estimates that this requirement will
also have $1,537,457.13 (6,211,948 meals * .05 * $4.95) in mailing
costs.
USDA expects that 1,997 school food authorities will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 210.34(a) that an SFA must comply with
the non-congregate meals service provisions set forth at Sec.
225.16(b)(5)(i) to obtain prior
[[Page 90279]]
parental consent, if meals are to be delivered to a child's home. USDA
expects that the 1,997 school food authorities will obtain 3 adult
consent forms annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add a total of 5,647
annual burden hours and 5,647 responses into OMB's information
collection inventory.
USDA estimates that 1,997 school food authorities will be required
to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 210.34(a) that an SFA must comply
with the non-congregate meals service provisions set forth at Sec.
225.16(b)(5)(iv) to claim reimbursement for all eligible meals served
to children at sites in areas in which poor economic conditions exist,
as defined in Sec. 225.2. At all other sites, only the non-congregate
meals served to children who meet the eligibility standards for this
Program may be reimbursed. USDA estimates that the 1,997 school food
authorities will report reimbursement claims for 55 days during the
summer operating period annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour
to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add a total of
109,835 annual burden hours and 109,835 responses into OMB's
information collection inventory.
USDA expects that 1,997 school food authorities will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 210.34(a) that an SFA may use the non-
congregate meal service options contained in Sec. 225.16(i). SFAs
electing to operate non-congregate meal service must have a system in
place to ensure that the proper number of meals are distributed to each
eligible child. USDA expects that the 1,997 school food authorities
will have a system in place to ensure that the proper number of meals
are distributed to each eligible child annually and that it takes
approximately 5 hours to complete this requirement, which adds a total
of 9,985 annual burden hours and 1,997 responses into OMB's information
collection inventory.
USDA estimates that 1,997 school food authorities will be required
to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 210.34(a) that an SFA may use the
non-congregate meal service options contained in Sec. 225.16(i) of
this chapter. USDA estimates that the 1,997 school food authorities
will have procedures in place to ensure that bulk meal components meet
the requirements annually and that it takes approximately 2 hours to
complete this requirement, which adds a total of 3,994 annual burden
hours and 1,997 responses into OMB's information collection inventory.
Households
The changes to be implemented in this rule will add households, and
reporting requirements for those households, to the types of
respondents and information collection requirements that are currently
approved under OMB Control Number 0584-0006. Currently, households are
not part of the respondents currently covered under this collection.
USDA estimates that 5,647 households will be required to fulfill
the requirement at 7 CFR 210.34(a) that households provide written
consent to participate in the Program at a rural site that utilizes the
home delivery option. USDA estimates that 5,647 households will submit
a parental consent form annually and that it takes approximately 15
minutes (0.25 hours) to complete this requirement, which is estimated
to add a total of 1,412 annual burden hours, 5,647 responses, and 5,647
respondents into OMB's information collection inventory.
USDA expects that 5,647 households will be required to fulfill the
requirement at 7 CFR 210.34(a) that households travel to the parent or
guardian pick-up site to take meals home to their children. USDA
expects that the 5,647 households will travel to the pick-up site once
a week for a total of 11 weeks during the summer operational period
annually, and that it takes approximately 2 hours to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add a total of 124,239 annual burden
hours, 62,119 responses, and 5,647 respondents into OMB's information
collection inventory.
As a result of this interim final rule, USDA estimates that the
burden for this existing information collection will increase to a
total of 127,229 respondents, 54,050,134 responses, and 10,620,405
burden hours, which is an increase of 13,347 respondents, 6,418,138
responses, 811,704 burden hours. The average burden per response and
the annual burden hours are explained below and summarized in the
charts which follow. Once the information collection request (ICR) for
the final rule is approved, USDA estimates that the burden for OMB
Control Number 0584-0006 will increase by 6,418,138 responses, 811,704
burden hours, 11,294 respondents, and $1,537,457.13 in total costs.
For NSLP, USDA estimates a cost of $769.88 per school food
authority in mailing costs to provide home delivered meals to
households in areas designated as rural due to this interim final rule.
Therefore, as a result of what's outlined in this interim final rule,
USDA estimates that this collection is expected to have $1,537,457.13
in costs related to the provision of home delivered meals that will be
added to the currently approved burden for NSLP under OMB Control
Number 0584-0006.
Reporting
Respondents (Affected Public): Households and State, local, and
Tribal government. The respondent groups identified include households,
school food authorities, and State agencies.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 13,347 respondents.
Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 481 responses.
Estimated Total Annual Responses: 6,418,138 responses.
Estimated Time per Response: 0.1 hours.
Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 811,704 hours.
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P
[[Page 90280]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.000
[[Page 90281]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.001
[[Page 90282]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.002
BILLING CODE 3410-30-C
[[Page 90283]]
Summary of Burden
[OMB #0584-0006]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total No. Respondents...................................... 127,229
Average No. Responses per Respondent....................... 425
Total Annual Responses..................................... 54,050,134
Average Hours per Response................................. 0.19
Total Burden Hours......................................... 10,620,405
Current OMB Approved Burden Hours.......................... 9,808,701
Adjustments................................................ 0
Program Changes............................................ 811,704
Total Difference in Burden................................. 811,704
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title: 7 CFR part 225, Summer Food Service Program.
Form Number: FNS-905, approved in OMB Control # 0584-0649,
expiration date, December 31st, 2025.
OMB Control Number: 0584-0280.
Expiration Date: 09/30/2025.
Type of Request: Revision.
Abstract: This is a revision which introduces new information
collection requirements and revises existing information collection
requirements into the information collection currently approved under
OMB Control Number 0584-0280, as a result of this interim final rule.
Below is a summary of the changes in the rule and the accompanying
reporting and public disclosure requirements for the State/local/Tribal
agencies, non-profit institutions, camps, and participating households
that are being impacted by this rule.
The interim final rule will codify provisions of the Consolidated
appropriations Act of 2023 that establish rural non-congregate meal
service options in SFSP. In current regulations, there is not an option
for rural sites to provide non-congregate meal service. The interim
final rule allows sites, in an area designated as rural, to have the
option to enroll as non-congregate sites for the summer operating
period.
Currently, the regulations define ``rural'' as any areas in a
county which is not a part of a Metropolitan Statistical Area or any
``pocket'' within a Metropolitan Statistical Area which is determined
to be geographically isolated from urban areas. The interim final rule
will expand the ``rural'' definition to also include any census tract
classified as a non-metropolitan area based on Rural-Urban Commuting
Area codes, areas of a Metropolitan Statistical Area which is not part
of a Census Bureau-defined urban area, and areas of a State which are
not part of an urban areas as determined by the Secretary. These
revisions will expand access to SFSP by increasing the defined total
rural service area. This will provide more program operators with an
additional option for offering no-cost meals to children in rural
areas.
This interim final rule will amend 7 CFR 225.16(b)(5) and (i) to
define non-congregate meal service and the options available under the
new meal service provisions. The revisions will establish the sponsors
eligible for the new meal service options and the requirements for
rural non-congregate participation.
Reporting
State/Local/Tribal Governments
The changes in this rule will introduce new reporting requirements
and impact existing ones in the information collection currently
approved under OMB Control Number 0584-0280 for State/local/Tribal
governments.
USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill
the requirement at 7 CFR 225.3(e)(1) that State agencies must
establish, and update annually as needed, a coordinated services plan
to coordinate the statewide availability of services offered through
the Summer Food Service Program described in this part and the Summer
EBT program established in 7 CFR part 292. USDA estimates that the 53
State agencies will be required to submit a coordinated services plan
annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete this
reporting requirement for the plans. This new requirement will add 53
hours and responses to the collection.
USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfil
the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.4(d)(7) that State agencies must
develop a plan for ensuring compliance with the food service management
company procurement requirements set forth at Sec. 225.6(l). USDA
estimates that the 53 State agencies will be required to develop a
compliance plan annually and that it takes approximately 5 hours to
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add a total of 265
annual burden hours and 53 responses to the collection.
USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill
the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.4(d)(8) that State agencies must
provide an estimate of the State's need for monies available to pay for
the cost of conducting health inspections and meal quality tests. USDA
estimates that the 53 State agencies will be required to conduct a
budget estimate for conducting health and meal quality inspections
annually and that it takes approximately 5 hours to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add a total of 265 annual burden
hours and 53 responses to the collection.
USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill
the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.4(d)(9) that State agencies must
include in the Program Management Administration Plan (MAP) a plan to
provide a reasonable opportunity for children to access meals across
all areas of the State. USDA estimates that the 53 State agencies will
be required to include a plan to provide a reasonable opportunity for
children to access meals across all areas of the State as a part of
their MAP annually and that it takes approximately 5 hours to complete
this requirement, which is estimated to add a total of 265 annual
burden hours and 53 responses to the collection.
USDA expects that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill the
new requirement at 7 CFR 225.4(d)(10) that State agencies must include
in the Program Management Administration Plan (MAP) a plan for Program
delivery in areas that could benefit the most from the provision of
non-congregate meals, including the State's plan to identify areas with
no congregate meal service, and target priority areas for non-
congregate meal service. USDA expects that the 53 State agencies will
be required to submit the Program delivery plan annually as a part of
their MAP and that it takes approximately 5 hours to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add a total of 265 annual burden
hours and 53 responses to the collection.
USDA expects that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill the
new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(a)(2) that State agencies must identify
rural areas with no congregate meal service and encourage participating
sponsors to provide non-congregate meals in those areas. USDA expects
that 53 State agencies will be required to identify rural areas within
their State annually and that it will take approximately 5 hours to
complete this rural identification, which is estimated to add 265 hours
and 53 responses to the collection.
USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill
the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(b)(6) that State agencies may
approve exceptions for any sponsor to operate more than 200 sites or to
serve more than an average of 50,000 children per day, if the applicant
demonstrates it has the capability of managing a program larger than
these limits, and the SA has the capacity to conduct reviews of at
least 10 percent of the sponsor's sites, as described in Sec.
225.7(e)(4)(v). USDA estimates that the 53 State agencies will
[[Page 90284]]
each approve exceptions for at least 1 sponsor annually for a total of
76 responses and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete the
requirement, which is estimated to add 76 annual burden hours and
responses to the collection.
USDA expects that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill the
new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(c)(2) that State agencies must review
applications submitted by new sponsors, new sites, and, as determined
by the State agency, sponsors and sites which have experienced
significant operational problems, for the provided information on the
procedures that document meals are only distributed, to a reasonable
extent, to eligible children and that duplicate meals are not
distributed to any child, if the applicant sponsor is electing to use
the non-congregate meal service options described in Sec. 225.16(i)(1)
and (2). USDA expects that the 53 State agencies will each review 20
applications annually for a total of 1,066 responses and that it takes
approximately 1 hour to complete the requirement, which is estimated to
add 1,066 annual burden hours and responses to the collection.
USDA estimates that 640 local government sponsors will be required
to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(c)(2)(ix) that new
sponsors, new sites, and, as determined by the State agency, sponsors
and sites which have experienced significant operational problems must
provide information on the procedures that document meals are only
distributed, to a reasonable extent, to eligible children and that
duplicate meals are not distributed to any child if the applicant
sponsor is electing to use the non-congregate meal service options
described in Sec. 225.16(i)(1) and (2). USDA estimates that 640 local
government sponsors will each provide information on their procedures
to document meals annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to
complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 640 annual burden
hours and responses to the collection.
USDA expects that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill the
new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(c)(3)(viii) that State agencies must
review applications submitted by experienced sponsors and experienced
sites and review provided information on the procedures that document
meals are only distributed, to a reasonable extent, to eligible
children and that duplicate meals are not distributed to any child, if
the applicant sponsor is electing to use the non-congregate meal
service options described in Sec. 225.16(i)(1) and (2). USDA expects
that the 53 State agencies will review provided information from 84
sponsors for a total of 4,458 responses and that it takes approximately
1 hour to complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 4,458
annual burden hours and responses to the collection.
USDA estimates that 2,675 local government sponsors will be
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(c)(3)(viii) that
experienced sponsors and experienced sites must provide information on
the procedures that document that meals are only distributed, to a
reasonable extent, to eligible children and that duplicate meals are
not distributed to any child, if the applicant sponsor is elected to
use the non-congregate meal service options described in Sec.
225.16(i)(1) and (2). USDA estimates that 2,675 local government
sponsors will be required to provide information annually and that it
takes approximately 1 hour to complete the requirement, which is
estimated to add 2,675 annual burden hours and responses to the
collection.
USDA expects that 567 local government sponsors will be required to
fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(f)(1)(iii) that sponsors
must submit the policy statement of all camps and conditional non-
congregate sites that charge separately for meals that includes
specific eligibility information and a copy of its hearing procedures
with its application. USDA expects that the 567 local government
sponsors will need to submit the policy statement annually with its
application and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete the
requirement, which is estimated to add 567 total annual burden hours
and responses to the collection.
USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill
the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(g)(1) that State agencies must
review the site information sheet submitted by sponsors, for new sites
where non-congregate meal service is proposed for the first time. USDA
estimates that the 53 State agencies will review at least 1 site
information sheet annually for a total of 53 responses and that it will
take approximately 1 hour to complete the requirement, which is
estimated to add 53 annual burden hours and responses to the
collection.
USDA expects that 38 local government sponsors will be required to
fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(g)(1) that sponsors must
submit documentation, for new sites where non-congregate meals service
is proposed for the first time, once every five years, or earlier if
the State agency determines that an area's rural status has changed
significantly since the last designation, on the site information
sheet. USDA expects that the 38 local government sponsors will submit
documentation once every five years for a total 8 responses annually
and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete the requirement,
which is estimated to add 8 annual burden hours and responses to the
collection.
USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill
the new requirement at 7 CFR 226.6(g)(2) that State agencies must
review the site information sheet submitted by sponsors, for
experienced sites where non-congregate meal service is proposed for the
first time. USDA estimates that the 53 State agencies will review 3
site information sheets annually for a total of 177 annual responses
and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete the requirement,
which is estimated to add 177 annual burden hours and responses to the
collection.
USDA expects that 529 local government sponsors will be required to
fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(g)(2) that sponsors must
submit documentation, for experienced sites where non-congregate meal
service operation is proposed for the first time, once every 5 years,
or earlier, if the State agency determines that an area's rural status
has changed significantly since the last designation, on the site
information sheet. USDA expects that the 529 local government sponsors
will submit documentation once every five years for a total of 106
responses annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete
the requirement, which is estimated to add 106 annual burden hours and
responses to the collection.
USDA expects that 53 local government sponsors will be required to
fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(h)(3) and (4) that State
agencies must ensure that sites applying for non-congregate meal
service, or sites applying for both congregate and non-congregate meal
service, meet the requirements for non-congregate meal service. USDA
estimates that 53 State agencies will submit 18 responses annually and
that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement, which
is estimated to add 946 hours and responses to the collection.
USDA estimates that 53 local government sponsors will be required
to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 225.7(d) that State agencies must
review sponsors and sites to ensure compliance with Program
regulations, including all applicant sponsors that did not participate
in the prior year, all applicant sponsors that had operational problems
noted in the prior year, and all
[[Page 90285]]
sites that the State agency has determined need a pre-approval visit,
including sites did not participate in the prior year or sites that are
new to non-congregate meal service. USDA estimates that 53 local
government agencies will submit 485 responses annually and that it
takes approximately 2 hours to complete this requirement for each
record. The interim final rule is increasing the number of estimated
sites that must respond to this requirement, which in turn increases
the responses for this collection by 946 responses, from 24,764 to
25,710 responses. This results in an increase in the burden hours for
this requirement by 49,364 hours, from 2,055 to 51,419 hours per year.
USDA expects that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill the
new requirement at 7 CFR 225.7(d)(2) that State agencies may conduct
pre-approval visits of a CACFP institution if it was reviewed by the
State agency under their respective programs during the preceding 12
months, and had no significant deficiencies noted in that review. USDA
expects that the 53 State agencies will review 64 CACFP institutions
annually and that it takes approximately 2 hours to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add 6,750 annual burden hours and
3,375 responses into OMB's information collection inventory.
USDA expects that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill the
new requirement at 7 CFR 225.7(d)(4) that State agencies must establish
a process to determine which sites need a pre-approval visit, including
sites that did not participate in the Program in the prior year,
existing sites that are new to non-congregate meal service and existing
sites that exhibited operational problems in the prior year. USDA
expects that 53 State agencies will establish a process annually and
that it takes approximately 5 hours to complete this requirement, which
is estimated to add 265 hours and 53 responses to the collection.
USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill
the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.7(e)(4)(i) that State agencies must
conduct a review of every new sponsor at least once during the first
year of operation. USDA estimates that the 53 State agencies will
conduct a review of 7 new sponsors annually for a total of 370
responses and that it takes approximately 2 hours to complete the
requirement, which is estimated to add 740 annual burden hours and 370
responses to the collection.
USDA expects that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill the
new requirement at 7 CFR 225.7(e)(4)(ii) that State agencies must
annually review every sponsor that experienced significant operational
problems in the prior year. USDA expects that the 53 State agencies
will conduct a review of 3 sponsors with significant operation problems
annually for a total of 159 responses and that it takes approximately 2
hours to complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 318 annual
burden hours and 159 responses to the collection.
USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill
the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.7(e)(4)(iii) that State agencies must
review each sponsor at least once every three years. USDA estimates
that the 53 State agencies will review at least 35 sponsors annually
for a total of 1,841 responses and that it will take approximately 2
hours to complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 3,683
annual burden hours and 1,841 responses to the collection.
USDA expects that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill the
new requirement at 7 CFR 225.7(e)(4)(iv) that State agencies may review
sponsors that require additional technical assistance more frequently
at their own discretion. USDA expects that the 53 State agencies will
review 3 sponsors annually for a total of 159 responses and that it
takes approximately 2 hours to complete the requirement, which is
estimated to add 318 annual burden hours and 159 responses to the
collection.
USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill
the new requirements at 7 CFR 225.7(j) that State agencies must develop
and provide monitor review forms to all approved sponsors. USDA
estimates that the 53 State agencies will each develop a monitor review
form annually and that it takes approximately 5 hours to complete the
requirement, which is estimated to add 265 annual burden hours and 53
responses to the collection.
USDA expects that 3,314 local government sponsors will be required
to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.7(j) that sponsors must
complete provided monitor review forms and include the required
information. USDA expects that the 3,314 local government sponsors will
complete a monitor review form annually and that it takes approximately
1 hour to complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 3,314
annual burden hours and responses to the collection.
USDA expects that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill the
requirement at 7 CFR 225.8(e) that State agencies, by May 1 of each
fiscal year, submit to FNS a list of open site locations and their
operational details via the Summer Meal Site Locator form (FNS-905) and
update weekly as needed, with a minimum of 3 updates during the summer
operational period. USDA expects that 53 State agencies will submit 3
Summer Meal Site Locator forms annually for a total of 159 responses
and that it takes approximately 7.5 minutes (0.125 hours) to complete
this requirement. The reporting burden for the FNS-905 is already
accounted for in a separate information collection for OMB Control
Number 0584-0649, Summer Food Sites Locations for State Agencies. This
requirement is currently voluntary but the interim final rule changes
it to a mandatory requirement for the participating State agencies.
Therefore, USDA estimates that an additional 20 annual burden hours and
159 responses beyond what is currently approved for this requirement
will be needed due to this interim final rule. To account for this
burden, USDA is adding this requirement into this collection and
estimates that it will add 20 burden hours and 159 responses into the
collection. USDA intends to incorporate the burden associated with the
requirement at 7 CFR 225.8(e) into the information collection for OMB
Control Number 0584-0649, at a later date.
USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill
the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.8(e) that State agencies will update
Information Systems (IS) to facilitate the submission of FNS-905 forms
to FNS. USDA estimates that the 53 State agencies will each need to
update their Information Systems to support the submission of FNS-905
forms to FNS and that it will take approximately 10 hours to complete
the requirement. Furthermore, USDA estimates that each of the 53 State
agencies incur a total of $14,542.96 in start-up costs to complete the
requirement. USDA estimates that this requirement will add 530 annual
burden hours, 53 responses, and $14,542.96 in costs to the collection.
USDA estimates that 28 local government sponsors will be required
to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.14(d)(6) that sponsors that
operate non-congregate meal service and deliver meals directly to
children's homes obtain written parental participation consent. USDA
estimates that 28 local government agencies will submit 226 responses
annually and that it takes approximately 15 minutes (0.25 hours) to
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 1,603 hours and
6,410 responses to the collection.
USDA expects that 567 local government sponsors will be required to
[[Page 90286]]
fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.14(d)(7) that sponsors that
operate conditional non-congregate sites must certify that it will
collect information to determine children's Program eligibility to
support its claims for reimbursement. USDA expects that 567 local
government agencies will submit a certification annually and that it
takes approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement, which is
estimated to add 567 hours and responses will be added to the
collection.
USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill
the requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(1) that SAs must develop training
for administrative and site personnel, which must include: the purpose
of the Program, site eligibility, recordkeeping, congregate and non-
congregate meal services, meal pattern requirements, and the duties of
the monitor. USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will need to develop
training for SFSP annually and that it takes approximately 10 hours to
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 530 annual burden
hours and 53 responses to the collection.
USDA estimates that 3,314 local government sponsors will be
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(1) that
sponsors must hold Program training sessions for its administrative and
site personnel, which must include: the purpose of the Program, site
eligibility, recordkeeping, congregate and non-congregate meal
services, meal pattern requirements, and the duties of the monitor.
USDA estimates that the 3,314 local government sponsors will each
conduct a training session for its administrative and site personnel
annually and that it takes approximately 5 hours to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add 16,570 annual burden hours and
3,314 responses to the collection.
USDA estimates that 3,314 local government sponsors will be
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(1) that
sponsors must provide documentation that its administrative personnel
have attended the State agency training provided to the sponsors. USDA
estimates that the 3,314 local government sponsors will each submit
documentation annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 3,314 annual
burden hours and responses to the collection.
USDA estimates that 3,314 local government sponsors will be
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(2) that
sponsors must conduct pre-operational visits for new sites, including
existing sites that are new to non-congregate meal service, sites that
experienced operational problems the previous year, and sites that have
experienced significant staff turnover from the prior year before a
site operates the Program to determine that the sites have the
facilities and capability to provide and conduct the proposed meal
service for the anticipated number of children. USDA estimates that
3,314 local government agencies will conduct 9 pre-operational visits
annually and that it takes approximately 2 hours to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add 60,787 hours and 30,393
responses to the collection.
USDA estimates that 3,314 local government sponsors will be
required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(3) that sponsors
must visit each of their sites at least once during the first week of
operation under the Program. USDA estimates that the 3,314 local
government sponsors will conduct 9 site visits annually for a total of
30,393 responses and that it takes approximately 30 minutes (0.5 hours)
to complete the requirement for a total of 15,197 hours. This reporting
requirement is currently approved in OMB Control Number 0584-0280, 7
CFR part 225, Summer Food Service Program, at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(2), but
the interim final rule moves the requirement to 7 CFR 225.15(d)(3).
USDA also estimates that the number of responses will increase by 567,
from 29,826 to 30,393 responses, and that the number of annual burden
hours will increase by 284, from 14,913 to 15,197 burden hours.
USDA expects that 3,314 local government sponsors will be required
to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(4) that sponsors must
review food service operations for all sites at least once during the
first four weeks of Program operations, and thereafter maintain a
reasonable level of monitoring. USDA expects that the 3,314 local
government sponsors will review 9 food service operations annually for
a total 30,393 responses and that it takes approximately 2 hours to
complete the requirement for a total of 60,787 hours. This requirement
is currently approved in OMB Control Number 0584-0280 at 7 CFR
225.15(d)(3), but the interim final rule moves this requirement to 7
CFR 225.15(d)(4). USDA also estimates that the number of responses will
increase by 567, from 29,826 to 30,393 responses, and that the number
of annual burden hours will increase by 1,135, from 59,652 to 60,787
burden hours.
USDA estimates that 567 local government sponsors will be required
to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(b)(5)(i) that a sponsor
that is approved to provide non-congregate meals in rural areas with no
congregate meal service must obtain prior parental consent, if meals
are to be delivered to a child's home. USDA estimates that the 567
local government sponsors will obtain 11 parental consent forms
annually for a total of 6,410 responses and that it takes approximately
1 hour to complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 6,410
annual burden hours and responses to the collection.
USDA expects that 567 local government sponsors will be required to
fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(b)(5)(ii) that a sponsor
that is approved to provide parent or guardian pick-up non-congregate
meals in rural areas with no congregate meal service must serve meals
as described in paragraph (b)(3) of 7 CFR 225.16. USDA expects that the
567 local government sponsors will serve 11,805 meals annually for a
total of 6,698,902 responses and that it takes approximately 5 minutes
(0.0835 hours) to complete the requirement, which is estimated to add
559,358 annual burden hours and 6,698,902 responses to the collection.
Of the 6,698,902 meals being served, USDA estimates that 5% of non-
congregate meals will be served utilizing the home delivery meal
service option. Estimates from the ongoing Meals to You (MTY)
demonstration estimate that the mailing costs associated with home
delivery is equal to the SFSP lunch meal reimbursement rate. As such,
USDA estimates that $1,657,978.25 (6,698,902 meals * .05 * $4.95) in
mailing costs will be associated with this requirement.
USDA estimates that 567 local government sponsors will be required
to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(b)(5)(ii) that a sponsor
that is approved to provide multi-day meal issuance or bulk meal
component non-congregate meals in rural areas with no congregate meals
service must serve meals as described in paragraph (b)(3) of 7 CFR
225.16. USDA expects that the 567 local government sponsors will serve
621 meals annually for a total of 352,574 responses and that it takes
approximately 2 hours to complete the requirement, which is estimated
to add 705,148 annual burden hours and 352,574 responses to the
collection.
USDA expects that 567 local government sponsors will be required to
fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(b)(5)(iv) that a sponsor
that is approved to provide non-congregate meals in rural areas with no
congregate meal service must claim reimbursement for all eligible meals
served to children at sites in areas in which poor economic
[[Page 90287]]
conditions exist, as defined in Sec. 225.2. At all other sites, only
the non-congregate meals served to children who meet the eligibility
standards for this Program may be reimbursed. USDA expects that the 567
local government sponsors will submit reimbursement claims for 55 days
during the summer operating period annually, for a total of 31,211
responses and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete the
requirement, which is estimated to add 31,211 annual burden hours and
responses to the collection.
USDA estimates that 567 local government sponsors will be required
to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(i) that sponsors
electing to operate multi-day meal issuance, parent or guardian pick-
up, or bulk meal component non-congregate meal service must have a
system in place to ensure that the proper number of meals are
distributed to each eligible child. USDA estimates that 567 local
government agencies will need to ensure that a system is in place
annually, for 567 responses, and that it takes approximately 5 hours to
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 2,837 hours and
567 responses to the collection.
USDA expects that 188 local government sponsors will be required to
fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(i)(3) that sponsors
electing to serve bulk meal components must ensure that required food
components for each reimbursable meal are served, as described in
paragraph (d) of 7 CFR 225.16. USDA expects that the 188 local
government sponsors will have procedures in place to ensure that bulk
meal components meal service meets the requirements annually and that
it takes approximately 2 hours to complete the requirement; which is
estimated to add 3,376 annual burden hours and 188 responses to the
collection.
USDA estimates that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill
the requirement at 7 CFR 225.3(b) to notify USDA if it intends to
administer SFSP, by January 1 of each fiscal year, and submit an
agreement that contains assurance that the State agency will comply
with policy, instructions, guidance, and handbooks issued by FNS. USDA
estimates that the 53 State agencies will be required to notify USDA
annually and that it takes approximately 36 hours to complete this
requirement. The interim final rule revises the submission date for the
currently approved Program agreement from November 1 to January 1. As
such, the 1,908 total annual burden hours and 56 responses will remain
unchanged from the currently approved collection.
USDA expects that 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill the
requirement at 7 CFR 225.8(d)(2) that State agencies within 5 days of
approval of sponsors, must notify the appropriate FNSRO of sponsors,
approved sites, locations, days of operation, estimated daily
attendance, type of site approval, and other important details about
each site. USDA expects that 53 State agencies will notify the
appropriate FNSRO 104 times annually, once for each operating sponsor,
and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement.
This is an existing requirement that is currently approved in OMB
Control Number 0584-0280. The interim final rule adds type of site
approval to the information collected about the site. This revision,
however, is not expected to change the currently approved burden of
5,512 annual burden hours and responses.
Businesses (Non-Profit Institutions and Camps)
The changes in this rule will introduce new reporting requirements
and impact existing ones in the information collection currently
approved under OMB Control Number 0584-0280 for Non-profit Institutions
and Camps.
USDA estimates that 426 non-profit institutions and camps be
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(c)(2)(ix) that
new sponsors, new sites, and, as determined by the State agency,
sponsors and sites which have experienced significant operational
problems must provide information on the procedures that document meals
are only distributed, to a reasonable extent, to eligible children and
that duplicate meals are not distributed to any child, if the applicant
sponsor is electing to use the non-congregate meal service options
described in Sec. 225.16(i)(1) and (2). USDA estimates that the 426
non-profit institutions and camps will provide information on their
procedures annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete
the requirement, which is estimated to add 426 annual burden hours and
responses to the collection.
USDA expects that 1,783 non-profit institutions and camps will be
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(c)(3)(viii) that
experienced sponsors and experienced sites must provide information on
the procedures that document meals are only distributed, to a
reasonable extent, to eligible children and that duplicate meals are
not distributed to any child. USDA expects that the 1,783 non-profit
institutions and camps will provide information on their procedures
annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete the
requirement, which is estimated to add 1,783 annual burden hours and
responses to the collection.
USDA estimates that 378 non-profit institutions and camps will be
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(f)(1)(iii) that
sponsors submit the policy statement of all camps and conditional non-
congregate sites that charge separately for meals that includes
specific eligibility information and a copy of its hearing procedures
with its application. USDA estimates that the 378 non-profit
institutions and camps will submit a policy statement annually and that
it takes approximately 1 hour to complete the requirement, which is
estimated to add 378 annual burden hours and responses to the
collection.
USDA expects that 25 non-profit institutions and camps will be
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(g)(1) that
sponsors must submit documentation, for new sites where non-congregate
meal service operation is proposed for the first time, once every 5
years, or earlier, if the State agency determines that an area's rural
status has changed significantly since the last designation, on the
site information sheet. USDA expects that the 25 non-profit
institutions and camps will submit documentation once every 5 years for
a total of 5 responses annual and that it takes approximately 1 hour to
complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 5 annual burden
hours and responses to the collection.
USDA estimates that 353 non-profit institutions and camps will be
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.6(g)(2) that
sponsors must submit documentation, for experienced sites where non-
congregate meal service operation is proposed for the first time, once
every 5 years, or earlier, if the State agency determines that an
area's rural status has changed significantly since the last
designation, on the site information sheet. USDA estimates that the 353
non-profit institutions and camps will submit documentation once every
five years for a total of 71 responses annually and that it takes
approximately 1 hour to complete the requirement, which is estimated to
add 71 annual burden hours and responses to the collection.
USDA expects that 2,210 non-profit businesses and camps will be
required to fulfill the new requirements at 7 CFR 225.7(j) that
sponsors must complete provided monitor review forms and include the
required information. USDA expects that the 2,210 non-profit
institutions and camps will be required
[[Page 90288]]
to complete the monitor review form annually and that it takes
approximately 1 hour to complete the requirement, which is estimated to
add 2,210 annual burden hours and responses to the collection.
USDA expects that 19 non-profit institutions and camps will be
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.14(d)(6) that
sponsors that operate non-congregate meal service and deliver meals
directly to children's homes must obtain participation consent from an
adult household member. USDA expects that 19 non-profit institutions
and camps will collect 226 consent forms annually and that it takes
approximately 15 minutes (0.25 hours) to complete this requirement,
which is estimated to add 1,069 hours and 4,275 responses to the
collection.
USDA estimates that 378 non-profit institutions and camps will be
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.14(d)(7) that
sponsors that operate a conditional non-congregate site must certify
that it will collect information to determine children's Program
eligibility to support its claims for reimbursement. USDA estimates
that 378 non-profit institutions and camps will certify that it will
collect information annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 378 hours and
responses to the collection.
USDA expects that 2,210 non-profit institutions and camps will be
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.14(d)(8) that
sponsors that are not a school food authority (SFA) must enter into a
written agreement or Memoranda of Understanding (MOU) with the State
agency or SFA if it chooses to receive school data to determine
children's Program eligibility, as required under Sec. 225.15(k). USDA
expects that 2,210 non-profit institutions and camps will enter an MOU
annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add 2,210 hours and responses to the
collection.
USDA estimates that 2,210 non-profit institutions and camps will be
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(1) that
sponsors must hold Program training sessions for its administrative and
site personnel. USDA estimates that the 2,210 non-profit institutions
and camps will hold a training session annually for administrative and
site personnel and that it takes approximately 5 hours to complete the
requirement; which is estimated to add 11,050 annual burden hours and
2,210 responses to the collection.
USDA estimates that 2,210 non-profit institutions and camps will be
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(1) that
sponsors must provide documentation that its administrative personnel
have attended the State agency training provided to the sponsors. USDA
estimates that the 2,210 non-profit institutions and camps will provide
documentation annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to
complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 2,210 annual burden
hours and responses to the collection.
USDA estimates that 2,210 non-profit institutions and camps will be
required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(2) that sponsors
must conduct pre-operational visits for new sites, including existing
sites that are new to non-congregate meal service, and sites that
experienced operational problems the previous year before a site
operates the Program to determine that the sites have the facilities
and capability to provide and conduct the proposed meal service for the
anticipated number of children. USDA estimates that 2,210 non-profit
institutions and camps will conduct 9 pre-operational visits annually
and that it takes approximately 30 minutes (0.5 hours) to complete this
requirement; which is estimated to add 10,134 hours and 20,268
responses to the collection.
USDA estimates that 2,210 local government sponsors will be
required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(3) that sponsors
must visit each of their sites at least once during the first week of
operation under the Program. USDA estimates that the 2,210 local
government sponsors will conduct 9 site visits annually for a total of
20,268 responses and that it takes approximately 30 minutes (0.5 hours)
to complete the requirement for a total of 10,134 hours. This
requirement is currently approved in OMB Control Number 0584-0280, 7
CFR part 225, Summer Food Service Program, at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(2), but
the interim final rule moves the requirement to 7 CFR 225.15(d)(3).
USDA also estimates that the number of responses will increase by 378,
from 19,890 to 20,268 responses, and that the number of annual burden
hours will increase by 189, from 9,945 to 10,134 hours.
USDA expects that 2,210 local government sponsors will be required
to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(d)(4) that sponsors must
review food service operations for all sites at least once during the
first four weeks of Program operations, and thereafter maintain a
reasonable level of monitoring. USDA expects that the 2,210 local
government sponsors will review 9 food service operations annually for
a total 20,268 responses and that it takes approximately 2 hours to
complete this requirement for a total of 40,537 hours. This requirement
is currently approved in OMB Control Number 0584-0280 at 7 CFR
225.15(d)(3), but the interim final rule moves it to 7 CFR
225.15(d)(4). USDA also estimates that the number of responses will
increase by 378, from 19,890 to 20,268 responses, and that the number
of annual burden hours will increase by 757, from 39,780 to 40,537
hours.
USDA estimates that 2,210 non-profit institutions and camps will be
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(f) that
sponsors may also use the household application procedures to identify
eligible children in non-area eligible areas instead of entering into a
written agreement or MOU with the local SFA. USDA estimates that the
2,210 non-profit institutions and camps will use household application
procedures to identify 26 eligible children each for a total of 58,365
responses annually and that it takes approximately 30 minutes (0.5
hours) to complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 29,183
annual burden hours and 58,365 responses into the collection.
USDA expects that 378 non-profit institutions and camps will be
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(b)(5)(i) that a
sponsor that is approved to provide non-congregate meals in rural areas
with no congregate meal service must obtain prior parental consent, if
meals are to be delivered to a child's home. USDA expects that the 378
non-profit institutions and camps will obtain 11 parental consent forms
for a total of 4,275 responses annually and that it takes approximately
1 hour to complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 4,275
annual burden hours and responses to the collection.
USDA estimates that 378 non-profit institutions and camps will be
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(b)(5)(ii) that
a sponsor that is approved to provide parent or guardian pick-up of
non-congregate meals in rural areas with no congregate meal service
must serve meals as described in paragraph (b)(3) of 7 CFR 225.16. USDA
estimates that the 378 non-profit institutions and camps will each
serve 11,805 meals for a total of 4,467,283 responses annually and that
it takes approximately 5 minutes (0.0835 hours) to complete the
requirement, which is estimated to add 373,018 annual burden hours and
4,467,283 responses to the collection. Of the 4,467,283 meals being
served, USDA estimates that 5% of non-
[[Page 90289]]
congregate meals will be served utilizing the home delivery meal
service option. Estimates from the ongoing Meals to You (MTY)
demonstration estimate that the mailing costs associated with home
delivery is equal to the SFSP lunch meal reimbursement rate. As such,
USDA estimates that $1,105,652.54 (4,467,2831,337,472 meals * .05 *
$4.95) in mailing costs will also be added to this requirement.
USDA expects that 378 non-profit institutions and camps will be
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(b)(5)(ii) that
a sponsor that is approved to provide multi-day meal issuance or bulk
meal component non-congregate meal service in rural areas with no
congregate meal service must serve meals as described in paragraph
(b)(3) of 7 CFR 225.16. USDA expects that the 378 non-profit
institutions and camps will each serve 621 meals for a total of 235,120
responses annually and that it takes approximately 2 hours to complete
the requirement, which is estimated to add 470,240 annual burden hours
and 235,120 to the collection.
USDA estimates that 378 non-profit institutions and camps will be
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(b)(5)(iv) that
a sponsor that is approved to provide non-congregate meals in rural
areas with no congregate meal service must claim reimbursement for all
eligible meals served to children at sites in areas in which poor
economic conditions exist, as defined in Sec. 225.2. At all other
sites, only the non-congregate meals served to children who meet the
eligibility standards for this Program may be reimbursed. USDA
estimates that the 378 non-profit institutions and camps will each
submit reimbursement claims for 55 days during the summer operational
period annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete the
requirement, which is estimated to add 20,814 annual burden hours and
responses to the collection.
USDA expects that 378 non-profit institutions and camps will be
required to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(i) that
sponsors electing to operate multi-day meal issuance, parent or
guardian pick-up, or bulk meal component non-congregate meal service
must have a system in place to ensure that the proper number of meals
are distributed to each eligible child. USDA expects that 378 non-
profit institutions and camps will ensure that a system is in place
annually and that it takes approximately 5 hours to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add 1,892 hours and 378 responses to
the collection.
USDA estimates that 125 local government sponsors will be required
to fulfill the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(i)(3) that sponsors
electing to serve bulk meal components must ensure that required food
components for each reimbursable meal are served, as described in
paragraph (d) of 7 CFR 225.16, USDA estimates that the 125 local
government sponsors will have procedures in place to ensure that bulk
meal components meal service meets the requirements annually and that
it takes approximately 2 hours to complete the requirement, which is
estimated to add 251 annual burden hours and 125 responses to the
collection.
Households
The changes in this rule will add new reporting requirements to
those currently approved under OMB Control Number 0584-0280 for
Households.
USDA estimates that 10,685 households will be required to fulfill
the new requirement at 7 CFR 225.14(d)(6) that households provide
written consent to participate in the Program at a rural site that
utilizes the home delivery option. USDA estimates that 10,685
households will have to provide their written consent to participate
annually and that it takes approximately 15 minutes (0.25 hours) to
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 2,671 hours and
10,685 responses to the collection.
USDA expects that 10,685 households will be required to fulfill the
new requirement at 7 CFR 225.16(i)(2) that households travel to the
parent or guardian pick-up site to take meals home to their children.
USDA expects that the 10,685 households will travel to the pick-up site
11 times annually for a total of 117,539 responses and that it takes
approximately 2 hours to complete the requirement, which is estimated
to add 235,078 annual burden hours and 117,539 responses to this
collection.
Public Disclosure
State/Local/Tribal Governments
The changes in this rule will add a new public disclosure
requirement to those currently approved under OMB Control Number 0584-
0280 for State/Local/Tribal Governments.
USDA estimates 53 State agencies will be required to fulfill the
new requirement at 7 CFR 225.3(e)(4) that State agencies must make
their service coordination plans available to the public through a
website, or through similar means. USDA estimates that the 53 State
agencies will have to make their State coordination plans publicly
available annually and that it takes approximately 15 minutes (0.25
hours) to complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 13 hours
and 53 responses to the collection.
Businesses (Non-Profit Institutions and Camps)
The changes in this rule will add a new public disclosure
requirement to those currently approved under OMB Control Number 0584-
0280 for Businesses (Non-profit institutions and camps).
USDA estimates that 2,210 non-profit institutions and camps will be
required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 225.15(e) that each
sponsor of sites that use free meal applications to determine
individual eligibility must include certain information as a part of
its notification to enrolled children. USDA estimates that the 2,210
non-profit institutions and camps will be required to provide the
information as a part of its notification to 26 enrolled children
annually for a total of 58,365 responses and that it takes
approximately 15 minutes (0.25 hours) to complete the requirement,
which is estimated to add 14,591 annual burden hours and 58,365
responses the collection.
As a result of what's outlined in this rulemaking, USDA estimates
that this information collection will have 63,942 respondents,
12,505,697 responses, and 3,120,966 burden hours. The average burden
per response and the annual burden hours are explained below and
summarized in the charts which follow. Once the ICR for the final rule
is approved USDA estimates that the burden for OMB Control Number 0584-
0280 will increase by 12,113,902 responses and 2,658,267 burden hours.
For SFSP, there is a wide variation in development and
administration costs to implement information systems to accommodate
the FNS-905 requirements. USDA estimates a cost of $14,542.96 per State
agency to perform the necessary system upgrades for respondents of this
interim rule ICR. Likewise, program operators will face increased costs
to offer home delivered meals as a part of this interim final rule ICR.
USDA estimates a cost of $2,924.12 for each local government sponsor
and a cost of $2,925.01 for each non-profit institution and camp to
cover mailing costs associated with providing home delivery. Therefore,
as a result of the interim final rule, USDA estimates that this
collection is expected to have $770,777 in system upgrade costs,
$1,657,978.25 in local government sponsor mailing costs, and
$1,105,652.54 in non-profit institution and camp mailing costs, which
will add a total of $3,534,407.79 in combined
[[Page 90290]]
system upgrades and annual mailing costs to the currently approved
burden for SFSP under OMB Control Number 0584-0280 to the currently
approved burden for OMB Control Number 0584-0280.
Reporting
Respondents (Affected Public): Individual/households; businesses;
and State, local, and Tribal government. The respondent groups
identified include households, non-profit institutions and camps, and
State/local/Tribal governments.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 26,948 respondents.
Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 454 responses.
Estimated Total Annual Responses: 12,238,098 responses.
Estimated Time per Response: 0.23 hours.
Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 2,770,008 hours.
Public Disclosure
Respondents (Affected Public): Businesses and State, local, and
Tribal government. The respondent groups identified include State
agencies and non-profit institutions and camps.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 2,263 respondents.
Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 26 responses.
Estimated Total Annual Responses: 58,418 responses.
Estimated Time per Response: 0.25 hours.
Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 14,605 hours.
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P
[[Page 90291]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.003
[[Page 90292]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.004
[[Page 90293]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.005
[[Page 90294]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.006
[[Page 90295]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.007
[[Page 90296]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.008
[[Page 90297]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.009
[[Page 90298]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.010
[[Page 90299]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.011
[[Page 90300]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.012
[[Page 90301]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.013
[[Page 90302]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.014
[[Page 90303]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.015
[[Page 90304]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.016
[[Page 90305]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.017
[[Page 90306]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.018
[[Page 90307]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.019
[[Page 90308]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.020
[[Page 90309]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.021
BILLING CODE 3410-30-C
[[Page 90310]]
Summary of Burden
[OMB #0584-0280]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total No. Respondents...................................... 63,942
Average No. Responses per Respondent....................... 196
Total Annual Responses..................................... 12,505,697
Average Hours per Response................................. 0.25
Total Burden Hours......................................... 3,120,966
Current OMB Approved Burden Hours.......................... 462,699
Adjustments................................................ 0
Program Changes............................................ 2,658,267
Total Difference in Burden................................. 2,658,267
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Title: 7 CFR part 292, Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (Summer
EBT) Program.
Form Number: FNS-366(a), approved in OMB Control #0584-0594,
expiration date, September 30th, 2026; FNS-388, approved in OMB Control
#0584-0594, expiration date, September 30th, 2026; and SF-778, approved
in OMB Control #0584-0594, expiration date, September 30th, 2026. Forms
included to capture burden specific to this rule that is not captured
in OMB Control Number 0584-0594.
OMB Control Number: 0584-NEW.
Expiration Date: Not Yet Determined.
Type of Request: New.
Abstract: FNS is requesting a new OMB Control Number for the
information collection requirements and associated burden for the
Summer EBT program which is being implemented as a result of this
interim final rule. Below is a summary of the changes in the rule and
the accompanying reporting, recordkeeping, and public disclosure
requirements that will impact the burden on Summer EBT Agencies (State
agencies and Indian Tribal Organizations (ITOs)), the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico, local government agencies, Summer EBT authorized retailers
(firms and retail food stores), and participating households.
The interim final rule will codify provisions of the Consolidated
Appropriations Act of 2023 that establish a permanent, nationwide
Summer EBT Program, beginning in 2024. The Summer EBT program will
provide benefits on EBT cards for families to purchase food for their
children, during the summer months, when school is not in session.
The interim final rule will create a new chapter in 7 CFR part 292
to establish the Summer EBT Program and the required procedures to
fully implement the Program. This rulemaking will introduce new
reporting, recordkeeping, and public disclosure requirements to ensure
State agencies and Indian Tribal Organization (ITO) operations are
compliant with the NSLA and the regulations. New requirements include
State agency responsibilities, new eligibility and benefit issuance
requirements, and the development of standards and monitoring
requirements to ensure that eligible children receive the proper
benefit and protect program integrity. The interim final rule will
create new reporting and recordkeeping responsibilities that Summer EBT
authorized retailers must comply with in order to redeem Summer EBT
benefits spent at their locations. As a part of this rulemaking, some
households will be required to submit an income eligibility, notify the
appropriate Summer EBT agency for opting-out of Program participation
or seeking an appeal of a Summer EBT decision, and respond to a Summer
EBT agency's request for verification their Program eligibility to
participate in the Program.
Reporting
Summer EBT Agencies (State Agencies, Indian Tribal Organizations, and
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico)
The changes in this rule will establish new reporting requirements,
as required by statute, under OMB Control Number 0584-NEW 7 CFR part
292, Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (Summer EBT) Program for
State/Local/Tribal governments.
USDA estimates that 55 State agencies will be required to fulfill
the requirement at 7 CFR 292.3(b)(1) that State agencies that have been
approved to administer the Program must enter into a written agreement
with FNS for the administration of the Program in the State (this is
known as the Federal/State agreement). USDA estimates that the 55 State
agencies will be required to enter into a Program agreement annually,
and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement,
which is estimated to add 55 annual burden hours and responses into the
inventory.
USDA expects that 55 State agencies will be required to fulfill the
requirement at 7 CFR 292.3(e) that if the State has designated
partnering agencies to provide support services to the Program, State
agencies designated as the Summer EBT Coordinating Agency in their
State must enter into a written agreement with partnering Summer EBT
agencies that defines the roles and responsibilities of each (known as
an inter-agency agreement). USDA expects that 55 State agencies will be
required to enter into an inter-agency agreement annually, and that it
takes approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement, which is
estimated to add 55 annual burden hours and responses into the
inventory.
USDA estimates that 55 State agencies will be required to fulfill
the requirement at 7 CFR 292.3(f)(2) that the State agency may submit a
request for a waiver under paragraph (f)(1) of 7 CFR 292.3. USDA
estimates that the 55 State agencies will submit a request for a waiver
annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add 55 annual burden hours and
responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 55 State agencies will be required to fulfill the
requirement at 7 CFR 292.3(f)(3) that State agencies may submit a
request to waive specific statutory or regulatory requirements on
behalf of eligible service providers that operate in the State. USDA
expects that the 55 State agencies will submit a waiver request on
behalf of 757 eligible service providers annually and that it takes
approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement, which is estimated
to add 41,635 annual burden hours and responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 55 State agencies will be required to fulfill
the requirement at 7 CFR 292.3(f)(4) that State agencies must review
any waiver request submitted by an eligible service provider and
promptly forward approved requests to the appropriate FNSRO. USDA
estimates that the 55 State agencies will review 757 waiver requests
annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add 41,635 annual burden hours and
responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 55 State agencies will be required to fulfill the
requirement at 7 CFR 292.3(f)(4)(v) that the State agency must notify
the requesting eligible service provider that the request is denied and
state the reason for denying the request in writing within 30 calendar
days of the receipt of the request. USDA expects that the 55 State
agencies will notify 757 eligible service providers annually and that
it takes approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement, which is
estimated to add 41,635 annual burden hours and responses to the
inventory.
USDA estimates that 102 Indian Tribal Organizations will be
required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.3(h)(3) that Indian
Tribal Organizations must provide compelling justification for the
waiver request in terms of how the waiver will improve the efficiency
and effectiveness of the administration of the Program. USDA estimates
that the 102 Indian Tribal
[[Page 90311]]
Organizations will provide justification for a waiver request annually
and that it takes approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement,
which is estimated to add 102 annual burden hours and responses to the
inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.8(a) that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies must, by August 15th of each fiscal
year, submit to the appropriate FNS Regional Office (FNSRO) of its
intent to administer the Summer EBT Program. USDA expects that the 157
Summer EBT agencies will be required to submit its intent to administer
the Program annually and that it takes approximately 5 minutes (0.08
hours) to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 13
annual burden hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.8(a) that, for 2024, State and
Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must submit to the FNSRO
its intent to administer the Summer EBT Program by January 1, 2024.
USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
submit its intent to operate the Program annually and that it takes
approximately 5 minutes (0,08 hours) to complete this requirement,
which is estimated to add 13 annual burden hours and 157 responses to
the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.8(a) that, for 2024, State and
Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must submit an interim
Plan for Operations and Management that must include the programmatic
information required in Sec. 292.8(e) and (f). USDA expects that the
157 Summer EBT agencies will submit an interim Plan for Operations and
Management annually and that it takes approximately 4 hours to complete
this requirement, which is estimated to add 628 annual burden hours and
157 responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.8(b)(1) that, no later than
February 15th of each year, the State and Indian Tribal Organization
Summer EBT agencies must submit to the FNSRO a final Plan for
Operations and Management that addresses all the requirements of Sec.
292.8(e) and (f), for the Summer EBT Program for that fiscal year if
the State has elected to participate in the Program. USDA estimates
that the 157 Summer EBT agencies must submit a final Plan for
Operations and Management annually and that it takes approximately 4
hours to complete this requirement; which is estimated to add 628
annual burden hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.8(d) that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies may amend an interim or final Plan for
Operations and Management to reflect changes and must submit the
amendments to USDA for approval. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT
agencies will submit an amendment annually and that it takes
approximately 2 hours to complete this requirement, which is estimated
to add 314 annual burden hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.8(e) that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies must include their final Plan for
Operation and Management, which includes all of the required
agreements, plans, procedures, and other documentation. USDA estimates
that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will include the required documents as
a part of their final Plan for Operations and Management annually and
that it takes approximately 4 hours to complete this requirement, which
is estimated to add 628 annual burden hours and 157 responses to the
inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.8(e)(3) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must submit an administrative
budget on behalf of the entire Program as part of the Plan for
Operations and Management, using the FNS-366A Form. USDA expects that
the 157 Summer EBT agencies will submit an FNS-366a form annually, and
that it takes approximately 12 hours and 49 minutes (12.82 hours) to
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 2,012 annual
burden hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.8(e)(3) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must submit an amended
expenditure plan should administrative fund needs change. USDA
estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will submit amendments
annually and that it takes approximately 2 hours to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add 314 annual burden hours and 157
responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 102 Indian Tribal Organizations will be
required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.8(f) that Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must also include the required
plans, descriptions, lists, and other documentation as part of their
final Plan for Operations and Management. USDA estimates that the 102
Indian Tribal Organizations will submit the required information
annually and that it takes approximately 4 hours to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add 408 annual burden hours and 102
responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 55 State agencies will be required to fulfill the
requirement at 7 CFR 292.9(b) that State agencies and Indian Tribal
Organizations serving the same geographic areas must enter into a
written agreement to ensure the coordination of Summer EBT program
services. USDA expects that the 55 State agencies will enter into
approximately 1.85 agreements with an ITO annually and that it takes
approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement, which is estimated
to add 102 burden hours and responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 102 Indian Tribal Organizations will be
required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.9(b) that State
agencies and Indian Tribal Organizations serving the same geographic
areas must enter into a written agreement to ensure the coordination of
Summer EBT program services. USDA estimates that the 102 Indian Tribal
Organizations will enter into approximately 0.54 agreements with the
State agency annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to
complete this requirement, which is estimated to 55 burden hours and
responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.10(a) that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies must establish, and update annually as
needed, a plan to coordinate the statewide availability of services
offered through the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP) and Summer EBT
Program. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will establish
and update a coordinated services plan annually and that it takes
approximately 5 hours to complete this requirement, which is estimated
to add 785 burden hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 55 State Summer EBT agencies will be required
to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.11(b) that
[[Page 90312]]
State Summer EBT agencies must acquire Information Systems (IS)
equipment or services to be utilized in an EBT system and adhere to the
ADP process. USDA estimates that the 55 State Summer EBT agencies will
be required to acquire IS equipment or services annually and that it
takes approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement. Furthermore,
USDA estimates that the 55 State Summer EBT agencies will face a total
of $73,317,942 in start-up costs and $25,760,358 in ongoing operation
and maintenance costs related to this requirement. USDA estimates that
this will add 550 annual burden hours, 55 responses, and $99,078,300 in
total costs to the inventory.
USDA expects that 55 State Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.11(b)(4)(i) that State Summer EBT
agencies must submit a new Planning APD, Implementation APD, and
Testing documents to FNS for approval of IS projects. USDA expects that
the 55 State Summer EBT agencies will be required to submit a new
Planning APD, Implementation APD, and Testing documents to FNS annually
and that it takes approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement,
which is estimated to add 550 annual burden hours and 55 responses to
the inventory.
USDA estimates that 55 State Summer EBT agencies will be required
to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.11(b)(4)(ii) that State Summer
EBT agencies must submit an Annual APD to FNS 60 days prior to the
expiration of the Federal Financial Participation (FFP) approval for
the initial implementation of Summer EBT and subsequent significant
project changes. USDA estimates that the 55 State Summer EBT agencies
will be required to submit annual Planning APD to FNS annually and that
it takes approximately 2 hours to complete this requirement, which is
estimated to add 110 annual burden hours and 55 responses to the
inventory.
USDA expects that 55 State Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.11(g) that State Summer EBT
agencies must execute service agreements when IS services are to be
provided by a State central IT facility or another State or local
agency. USDA expects that the 55 State Summer EBT agencies will be
required to execute a service agreement annually and that it takes
approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement, which is estimated
to add 55 annual burden hours and responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.11(q)(2) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must implement and maintain a
comprehensive Security Program for IS and installations involved in the
administration of Summer EBT. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT
agencies will be required to implement and maintain a comprehensive
Security Program annually and that it takes approximately 10 hours to
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 1,570 annual
burden hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.11(q)(3) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer State agencies must establish and maintain a
program for conducting periodic risk analysis to ensure that
appropriate, cost-effective safeguards are incorporated into the new
and existing system. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will
be required to establish and maintain a program for conducting periodic
risk analysis annually and that it takes approximately 10 hours to
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 1,570 annual
burden hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirements at 7 CFR 292.11(q)(4) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must review the security of IS
involved in the administration of Summer EBT on a biennial basis. USDA
estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to review
the security of IS systems twice annually and that it takes
approximately 2 hours to complete this requirement, which is estimated
to add 628 annual burden hours and 314 responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 102 Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT
agencies will be required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.11(r)
that Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must acquire IS
equipment or services to be utilized in an EBT system and adhere to the
ADP process. USDA expects that the 102 Indian Tribal Organization
Summer EBT agencies will acquire IS equipment or services annually and
that it takes approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement.
Furthermore, USDA estimates that the 102 Indian Tribal Organization
Summer EBT agencies will face a total of $136,018,290 in start-up costs
and $47,790,210 in ongoing operation and maintenance costs to complete
the requirement. USDA estimates that this requirement adds 1,020 annual
burden hours, 102 responses, and $183,808,500 in total costs to the
inventory.
USDA expects that 102 Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT
agencies will be required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR
292.11(s)(1) that ITO Summer EBT agencies must follow the Department
APD requirements and submit Planning and Implementation APDs and
appropriate updates. USDA expects that the 102 ITO EBT Coordinating
agencies will submit Planning and Implementation APDs annually and that
it takes approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement, which is
estimated to add 1,020 burden hours and 102 responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 102 Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT
agencies will be required to follow the requirements at 7 CFR
292.11(s)(3) that Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must
submit EBT project status reports annually as a part of the State plan.
USDA estimates that the 102 State Summer EBT agencies will submit a EBT
project status report annually and that it takes approximately 2 hours
to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 204 burden
hours and 102 responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(b)(1) that Summer EBT agencies
must establish procedures to ensure correct eligibility determinations.
USDA expects that the 157 State and Indian Tribal Organization Summer
EBT agencies will each develop a process to determine eligibility
annually and that it takes approximately 10 hours to complete this
reporting requirement, which is estimated to add 1,570 annual burden
hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(b)(2) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must establish procedures that
allow households to provide updated contact information for the purpose
of receiving Summer EBT benefits. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer
EBT agencies will each develop a process to update contact information
annually and that it takes approximately 10 hours to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add 1,570 annual burden hours and
157 responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(b)(3) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies
[[Page 90313]]
must establish procedures that allow eligible households to opt out of
participation in the Program. USDA estimates that the 157 State and
Summer EBT agencies must establish procedures annually and that it
takes approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement, which is
estimated to add 1,570 annual burden hours and 157 responses to the
inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(c) that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies must establish and maintain a State/
ITO wide database of all children in NSLP/SBP participating schools
within the State or ITO service area for the purposes of enrolling
children for Summer EBT benefits and preventing duplicate benefit
issuance. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will establish
and maintain a State/ITO wide database annually and that it takes
approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement. Furthermore, USDA
estimates that the 157 State and Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT
agencies will face a total of $207,325,800 in start-up costs and
$72,755,100 in ongoing operation and maintenance costs for this
requirement. USDA estimates that a total of 1,570 annual burden hours,
157 responses, and $280,080,900 in costs will be added to the
inventory.
USDA estimates that 102 Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT
agencies will be required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(c)
that Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies may submit for USDA
approval alternate plans to enroll children for Summer EBT benefits and
detect and prevent duplicate benefit issuance, if an ITO determines
that establishing and maintaining a database is not feasible or is
unnecessary. USDA estimates that the 102 Indian Tribal Organization
Summer EBT agencies will submit for approval an alternate plan annually
and that it takes approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement,
which is estimated to add 1,020 annual burden hours and 102 responses
to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(d) that Summer EBT agencies
must use streamlined certification to automatically enroll, without
further application, each eligible child without regard to whether the
child has been matched against an NSLP/SBP enrollment list. USDA
expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will each automatically enroll
66,304 eligible children annually and that it takes approximately 5
minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this requirement; which is estimated
to add 869,212 annual burden hours and 10,409,726 responses to the
inventory.
USDA estimates that 102 Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT
agencies will be required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR
292.12(d)(4) that Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies may
submit for USDA approval alternate plans to efficiently enroll children
with minimal burden for households if it determines that any element of
automatic enrollment with Streamlined Certification is not feasible or
is unnecessary. USDA estimates that the 102 Indian Tribal Organization
Summer EBT agencies will submit an alternate plan annually and that it
takes approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement, which is
estimated to add 1,020 annual burden hours and 102 responses to the
inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(e) that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies must make an application available to
children who attend NSLP/SBP participating schools not already
identified through streamlined certification and enroll them after
matching against the statewide eligibility database. USDA estimates
that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will each enroll 91,185 eligible
children annually and that it takes approximately 5 minutes (0.08
hours) to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add
1,195,387 annual burden hours and 14,316,012 responses to the
inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(e)(2) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must match children on
applications submitted directly to a Summer EBT agency against the
statewide eligibility database, as required in Sec. 292.12(c) prior to
benefit issuance. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will
each match 91,185 eligible children annually and that it takes
approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this requirement,
which is estimated to add 1,195,387 annual burden hours and 14,316,012
responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(f)(1) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must notify the household that
filed an income application of their children's eligibility within 15
operating days of receiving the application from the household. USDA
estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will send 91,185
notifications annually and that it takes approximately 1 minute (0.02
hours) to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 239,077
annual burden hours and 14,316,012 responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(f)(2) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must notify households that
their children are eligible for Summer EBT and that no application is
required. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will each
notify 66,304 eligible households annually and that it takes
approximately 1 minute (0.02 hours) to complete this requirement, which
is estimated to add 173,842 annual burden hours and 10,409,726
responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(g) that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies must notify households that submitted
an incomplete application or does not meet the eligibility requirements
for Summer EBT benefits that their application has been denied, the
reason for the denial, the notification of the right to appeal,
instructions on how to appeal, and a statement reminding households
that they may reapply for benefits at any time. USDA estimates that the
157 Summer EBT agencies will each notify 4,559 households annually and
that it takes approximately 1 minute (0.02 hours) to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add 11,954 annual burden hours and
715,801 responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(h) that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies must receive a request for an appeal
by households that submitted a denied application and promptly schedule
a fair hearing upon request. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT
agencies will each receive 4,559 requests annually and that it takes
approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this requirement,
which is estimated to add 59,769 annual burden hours and 715,801
responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(h) that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies must provide a conference to a
household upon request to provide the opportunity for the household to
discuss the situation,
[[Page 90314]]
present information, and obtain an explanation of the data submitted in
the application or the decision rendered. USDA estimates that the 157
Summer EBT agencies will provide 4,559 conferences annually and that it
takes approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement, which is
estimated to add 715,801 annual burden hours and responses to the
inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.13(a) that, by 2025, State and
Indian Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must develop a Summer
EBT application to make available to households whose children attend
NSLP/SBP participating schools, and who do not already have an
individual eligibility determination. USDA expects that the 157 Summer
EBT agencies will each develop an application annually and that it
takes approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement, which is
estimated to add 1,570 annual burden hours and 157 responses to the
inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.13(h) that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies may establish a system for executing
household applications electronically and using electronic signatures.
USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will establish a system
for executing household applications electronically annually and that
it takes approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement.
Furthermore, USDA estimates that the 157 State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies will face a total of $207,325,800 in
start-up costs and $72,755,100 in ongoing operation and maintenance
costs to complete the requirement. USDA estimates that this requirement
adds a total of 1,570 annual burden hours, 157 responses, and
$280,080,900 in total costs to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement 7 CFR 292.14(a)(1) that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies must verify questionable applications,
on a case-by-case basis. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies
will verify 531 applications and that it takes approximately 1 hour to
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 83,311 burden
hours and responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.14(a)(2) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies may verify an application for
cause at any time during the instructional year or summer operational
period, but verification must be completed within 30 days of receipt of
the application. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will
verify 531 applications for cause and that it takes approximately 1
hour to complete this requirement; which is estimated to add 83,311
burden hours and responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.14(a)(3) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must verify eligibility of
children in a sample of household Summer EBT applications approved for
benefits for the summer. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT
agencies will sample 3,011 applications and that it takes approximately
1 hour to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 472,766
burden hours and responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.14(f)(2) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must provide written
notification to households that their application has been selected for
verification. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will each
notify 531 households annually and that it takes approximately 1 minute
(0.02 hours) to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add
1,391 annual burden hours and 83,311 responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.14(f)(6) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must make at least two
attempts, at least one week apart, to contact any household that does
not respond to a verification request. USDA expects that the 157 Summer
EBT agencies will make 1,134 attempts to follow-up on verification
requests annually and that it takes approximately 2 hours to complete
this requirement, which is estimated to add 356,076 annual burden hours
and 178,038 responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.14(f)(7) that State and Indian
Tribal Organizations Summer EBT agencies must provide written
notification to households of any reduction or termination of benefits
as a result of verification. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT
agencies will each notify 531 households annually and that it takes
approximately 1 minute (0.02 hours) to complete this requirement, which
is estimated to add 1,391 annual burden hours and 83,311 responses to
the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.15(c)(1)(i) that State and ITO
Summer EBT agencies are responsible for the timely and accurate
issuance of benefits to certified eligible children. USDA expects that
the 157 Summer EBT agencies will issue benefits to 157,489 eligible
children annually and that it takes approximately 1 minute (0.02 hours)
to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 412,920 annual
burden hours and 24,725,737 responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.15(f)(2)(ii) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must establish an availability
date for household access to their benefits and inform households of
this date. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will
establish an availability date annually and that it takes approximately
1 hour to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 157
annual burden hours and responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.15(g)(1) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies provide written training
materials to each household prior to or at Summer EBT issuance. USDA
expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will issue training materials
to 157,489 households annually and that it takes approximately 5
minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this requirement, which is estimated
to add 2,064,599 annual burden hours and 24,725,737 responses to the
inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.15(g)(4) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must provide replacement EBT
cards available for pickup or place the card in the mail within two
businesses days following notification by the household to the State
agency that the card has been lost, stolen, or damaged and report
issuance. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will issue
replacement benefits to 40 households annually and that it takes
approximately 1 minute (0.02 hours) to complete this requirement, which
is estimated to add
[[Page 90315]]
104 annual burden hours and 6,227 responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.15(g)(5) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must provide replacement EBT
benefits to households whose benefits were stolen or who lost Summer
EBT benefits as a result of a natural disaster. USDA expects that the
157 Summer EBT agencies will issue replacement benefits to 40
households annually and that it takes approximately 1 minute (0.02
hours) to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 104
annual burden hours and 6,227 responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.15(h)(1)(ii) that Summer EBT
agencies must provide notice, no less than 30 calendar days before
benefit expungement is expected to begin, to households that their
Summer EBT benefits are approaching expungement due to nonuse/
inactivity. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will notify
11,812 households annually and that it takes approximately 1 minute
(0.02 hours) to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add
30,969 annual burden hours and 1,854,430 responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.15(h)(2) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must establish procedures to
permit the appropriate managers to adjust Summer EBT benefits that have
already been posted to an EBT account prior to the household accessing
the account, or to remove benefits from inactive accounts for
expungement. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies establish
procedures annually and that it takes approximately 10 hours to
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 1,570 annual
burden hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.15(h)(2)(ii) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must produce issuance reports
that reflect the adjustment made to the Summer EBT agency issuance
totals to comply with the reporting requirements in Sec. 292.23. USDA
estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will produce 11,812 issuance
reports annually and that it takes approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours)
to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 154,845 annual
burden hours and 1,854,430 responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 55 State agencies will be required to fulfill
the requirement at 7 CFR 292.16(a) that State agencies must establish
issuance and accountability systems as defined in Sec. 274.1. USDA
estimates that the 55 State agencies will establish issuance and
accountability systems annually and that it takes approximately 10
hours to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 550
annual burden hours and 55 responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico will be required
to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.18 that the Commonwealth of
Puerto Rico is authorized to establish issuance and accountability
systems which ensure that only certified eligible households receive
Summer EBT benefits. USDA expects that the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico
will establish issuance and accountability systems annually and that it
takes approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement, which is
estimated to add 10 annual burden hours and 1 response to the
collection.
USDA estimates that 102 ITOs will be required to fulfill the
requirement at 7 CFR 292.19(c) that ITOs must create a system that
ensures effective vendor integrity in accordance to specification. USDA
estimates that the 102 ITOs will establish a system annually and that
it takes approximately 10 hours to complete this requirement, which is
estimated to add 1,020 annual burden hours and 102 responses to the
inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.21(b)(4) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT Agencies must provide for effective
control and accountability by the Summer EBT agency for all Program
funds, property, and other assets acquired with Program funds. USDA
expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will provide for effective
control and accountability for all Program funds, property, and other
assets annually and that it takes approximately 4 hours to complete
this requirement, which is estimated to add 628 annual burden hours and
157 responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.21(b)(5) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must complete an Automated
Standard Application for Payment (ASAP) setup form so that FNS may set
up a Letter of Credit by which Summer EBT funds will be made available.
USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will each submit an
ASAP form annually and that it takes approximately 4 hours to complete
this requirement, which is estimated to add 628 annual burden hours and
157 responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.21(b)(6) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must provide for controls which
minimize the time between the receipt of Federal Funds from the United
States Treasury and their disbursement for Program costs. USDA expects
that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will provide controls annually and
that it takes 10 hours to complete this requirement, which is estimated
to add 1,570 annual burden hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.21(b)(7) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must provide for procedures to
determine the reasonableness, allowability, and allocability of costs
in accordance with the applicable provisions prescribed in 2 CFR part
200, subpart D, and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400
and 415. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will provide
for procedures annually and that it takes approximately 10 hours to
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 1,570 annual
burden hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.21(b)(9) that the State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must provide for an audit trail
including identification of time periods, initial and summary accounts,
cost determination and allocation procedures, cost centers or other
accounting procedures to support any costs claimed for Program
administration. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will
provide for an audit trail annually and that it takes approximately 10
hours to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add of 1,570
annual burden hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.22 that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies must monitor and document compliance
with Performance Standards I-IV. USDA
[[Page 90316]]
estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will document 3 compliance
reviews and that it takes approximately 10 hours to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add 4,160 annual burden hours and
416 responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.23(d) that, for Summer EBT
Administrative Grants, State and Indian Tribal Organizations Summer EBT
agencies will be required to submit an expenditure plan by August 15th,
prior to the beginning of each fiscal year. USDA expects that the 157
Summer EBT agencies will submit an expenditure plan annually and that
it takes 1 hour to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add
157 annual burden hours and responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.23(e) that State Administrative
Grant expenditures will be reported to FNS quarterly on a Summer EBT
financial status report, using the FNS-778 Federal Financial Form. USDA
estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will report 4 Summer EBT
financial status reports and that it takes 1 hour to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add 628 annual burden hours and
responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.23(f) that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies must report participation and issuance
on a monthly basis using the FNS-388 Form. USDA expects that the 157
Summer EBT agencies will submit 12 FNS-388 forms annually and that it
takes approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement, which is
estimated to add 1,884 annual burden hours and responses to the
inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.24(a) that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies shall arrange for audits of their own
operations to be conducted in accordance with 2 CFR part 200, subpart
F, and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 and 415. USDA
expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will conduct an audit of their
own operations and that it takes approximately 4 hours to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add 628 annual burden hours and 157
responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.24(b) that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies shall provide FNS with the full
opportunity to conduct management evaluations and financial management
reviews of all operations of the SA or ITO. USDA estimates that the 157
Summer EBT agencies will conduct an audit of their own operations
annually and that it takes approximately 4 hours to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add 628 annual burden hours and 157
responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.25 that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies shall promptly investigate complaints
received or irregularities noted in connection with the operation of
the Program, and shall take appropriate action to correct any
irregularities. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will
review 121 complaints received or irregularities noted in connection
with the operation of the Program annually and that it takes 4 hours to
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 75,700 annual
burden hours and 18,925 responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.26(a) that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies must establish a fair hearing
procedure that is applicable to the State or ITO program as a whole.
USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will establish a process
annually and that it takes approximately 10 hours to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add 1,570 annual burden hours and
157 responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.26(b) that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies must produce oral or documentary
evidence for a requested hearing. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT
agencies will produce oral or documentary evidence for 4,559 hearings
and that it takes approximately 4 hours to complete this requirement,
which is estimated to add 2,863,202 annual burden hours and 715,801
responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.26(b)(9) that a hearing official
must transmit written notification to the Summer EBT agency and the
household of the hearing official's decision. USDA expects that the 157
Summer EBT agencies will notify 4,559 households and that it takes
approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this requirement,
which is estimated to add 59,769 annual burden hours and 715,801
responses to the inventory.
Local Government Agencies
The changes in this rule will establish a new reporting
requirement, as required by statute, under OMB Control Number 0586-NEW
7 CFR part 292, Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (Summer EBT)
Program for the local government agencies.
USDA estimates that 757 local government agencies will be required
to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.3(f)(4) that eligible service
providers may submit a request for a waiver under paragraph (f)(1) of 7
CFR 292.3 in accordance with section 12(l) and the provisions of this
part. USDA estimates that the 757 local government agencies will submit
a waiver request annually and that it takes approximately 1 hour to
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 757 annual burden
hours and responses to the inventory.
Businesses (Summer EBT Authorized Retailers)
The changes in this rule will establish new reporting requirements,
as required by statute, under OMB Control Number 0584-NEW, 7 CFR part
292, Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (Summer EBT) Program for the
Summer EBT Authorized Retailers.
USDA estimates that 247,636 Summer EBT Authorized Retailers will be
required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.17(a) that firms shall
submit claims in accordance to the standards for determination and
disposition of claims described at Sec. 278.7. USDA estimates that the
247,636 Summer EBT Authorized Retailers will submit a claim monthly (12
claims annually) and that it takes approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours)
to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 248,131 annual
burden hours and 2,971,632 responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 9,552 Summer EBT Authorized Retailers will be
required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.17(e) that firms
aggrieved by administrative action may request an administrative review
of the administrative action with FNS. USDA expects that the 9,552
Summer EBT Authorized Retailers will submit a request annually and that
it takes approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add 798 annual burden hours and
9,552 responses to the inventory.
[[Page 90317]]
Households
The changes in this rule will establish new reporting requirements,
as required by statute, under OMB Control Number 0584-NEW 7 CFR part
292, Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (Summer EBT) Program for the
households.
USDA estimates that 14,316,012 households will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(f)(1) that households not
directly certified must submit an income application to determine
eligibility for Summer EBT benefits. USDA estimates that the 14,316,012
households will submit an application annually and that it takes
approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement, which is estimated
to add 14,316,012 annual burden hours and responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 2,132,112 households will be required to fulfill
the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(f)(3) that households must notify the
appropriate Summer EBT agency that they decline their Summer EBT
benefits. USDA expects that the 2,132,112 households will notify the
Summer EBT agency annually and that it takes approximately 5 minutes
(0.08 hours) to complete this requirement; which is estimated to add
178,031 annual burden hours and 2,132,112 responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 715,801 households will be required to fulfill
the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(h) that households that received a
notice of denial may seek an appeal in accordance to the procedures
established by the Summer EBT agency or LEA. USDA estimates that the
715,801 households will submit a request for appeal annually and that
it takes approximately 1 hour to complete this requirement; which is
estimated to add 715,801 annual burden hours and responses to the
inventory.
USDA expects that 715,801 households will be required to fulfill
the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(h) that households can request and
participate for a conference to provide the opportunity for the
household to discuss the situation, present information, and obtain an
explanation of the data submitted in the application or the decision
rendered. USDA expects that the 715, 801 households will request and
participate in a conference annually and that it takes approximately 2
hours to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 1,431,601
annual burden hours and 715,801 responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 83,311 households will be required to fulfill
the requirement at 7 CFR 292.14(f) that households selected and
notified of their selection for verification must provide documentation
of income or evidence of SNAP, FDPIR, or TANF participation. USDA
estimates that the 83,311 households will notify the Summer EBT agency
annually and that it takes approximately 2 hours to complete this
requirement; which is estimated to add 166,623 annual burden hours and
83,311 responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 83,311 households will be required to fulfill the
requirement at 7 CFR 292.14(f)(6) that households must respond to a
follow-up attempt at verification by the Summer EBT agency. USDA
expects that the 83,311 households will participate in a follow-up
meeting annually and that it takes approximately 2 hours to complete
this requirement, which is estimated to add 166,623 annual burden hours
and 83,311 responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 57,874 households will be required to fulfill
the requirement at 7 CFR 292.26(a) that households can request for an
appeal from a decision made with respect to the application the family
has made for Summer EBT benefits. USDA estimates that the 57,874
households will request for an appeal annually and that it takes
approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this requirement,
which is estimated to add 4,833 annual burden hours and 57,874
responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 57,874 households will be required to fulfill the
requirement at 7 CFR 292.26(b)(5) that households may present oral or
documentary evidence and arguments that support their position. USDA
expects that the 57,874 households will present oral or documentary
evidence and arguments before a hearing official annually and that it
takes approximately 4 hours to complete this requirement, which is
estimated to add 231,497 annual burden hours and 57,874 responses to
the inventory.
Recordkeeping
State/Local/Tribal Governments
The changes in this rule will establish new recordkeeping
requirements, as required by statute, under OMB Control Number 0584-
NEW, 7 CFR Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (Summer EBT) Program for
the State agencies and the Summer EBT agencies.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(c) that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies must establish and maintain a
statewide database of eligible children that attend NLSP/SBP
participating schools for the purposes of conducting streamlined
certification. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will
maintain records of 157,489 eligible children and that it takes
approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to complete the requirement, which
is estimated to add 2,064,599 annual burden hours and 24,725,737
responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(f)(3) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must document and maintain a
record or any notification from a household declining Summer EBT
benefits. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will each
maintain 32,257 records annually and that it takes approximately 5
minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this requirement; which is estimated
to add a total of 422,870 annual burden hours and 5,064,308 responses
to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(g) that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies must document and maintain a record of
the reasons for an ineligibility determination for a written
application. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will each
maintain 4,559 records annually and that it takes approximately 5
minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this requirement, which is estimated
to add 59,769 annual burden hours and 715,801 responses to the
inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.15(h)(2)(i) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies must document the date and
amount of benefits in the household case file whenever benefits are
expunged. USDA expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will each
document the date and amount of 145,677 records annually and that it
takes approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add 1,909,754 annual burden hours
and 22,871,307 responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 55 Summer agencies will be required to fulfill
the requirement at 7 CFR 292.16(h) that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies must maintain issuance, inventory,
reconciliation, and other accountability records as described in Sec.
274.5. USDA expects that the 55 State agencies will each maintain 12
records annually and that it takes approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours)
to complete this requirement, which is
[[Page 90318]]
estimated to add 55 annual burden hours and 660 responses to the
inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.20(h) that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies must maintain Program records as
necessary to support the administrative costs claimed and the reports
submitted to FNS under this paragraph and ensure that such records are
retained for a period of 3 years. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer
EBT agencies will each maintain a record of administrative costs
claimed and that it takes approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 13 annual burden
hours and 157 responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.22 that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies must monitor and document the
performance standards listed in this paragraph. USDA expects that the
157 Summer EBT agencies will each maintain 1 record annually and that
it takes approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add 13 annual burden hours and 157
responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.23(b) that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies must retain records substantiating
eligibility determinations on file for at least 3 years after the date
of the submission of the final financial reports or until the audit
findings have been resolved. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT
agencies will each maintain 157,489 records annually and that it takes
approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this requirement,
which is estimated to add 2,064,599 annual burden hours and 24,725,737
responses to the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.25 that State and Indian Tribal
Organizations Summer EBT agencies shall maintain on file all evidence
relating to such investigations and corrective action procedures. USDA
expects that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will each maintain 121 records
annually and that it takes approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to
complete this requirement, which is estimated to add 1,580 annual
burden hours and 18,925 responses to the inventory.
USDA estimates that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.26(b)(11) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies shall preserve a written record
of each hearing for a period of 3 years. USDA estimates that the 157
Summer EBT agencies will each maintain 4,559 records annually and that
it takes approximately 5 minutes (0.08 hours) to complete this
requirement, which is estimated to add 59,769 annual burden hours and
715,801 responses to the inventory.
Businesses (Summer EBT Authorized Retailers)
The changes in this rule will establish a new recordkeeping
requirement, as required by statute, under OMB Control Number 0584-NEW,
7 CFR Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (Summer EBT) Program for the
Summer EBT Authorized Retailers.
USDA expects that 2,428 Summer EBT Authorized Retailers will be
required to fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.19(c)(3) that retail
food stores and wholesale food concerns shall submit claims in
accordance to the standards for determination and disposition of claims
described in Sec. 246.12. USDA expects that 2,428 firms will retain 12
records of submitted claims and that it takes approximately 5 minutes
(0.08 hours) to complete this requirement, which is estimated to add
2,433 annual burden hours and 29,134 responses to the inventory.
Public Disclosure
The changes in this rule will establish new public disclosure
requirements, as required by statute, under OMB Control Number 0584-
NEW, 7 CFR part 292, Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (Summer EBT)
Program for the Summer EBT agencies.
State/Local/Tribal Governments
USDA estimates 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to fulfill
the requirement at 7 CFR 292.10(d) that State and Indian Tribal
Organization Summer EBT agencies must make their coordinated service
plans available to the public through a website, or through similar
means. USDA estimates that the 157 Summer EBT agencies will each make
their coordinated service plans available to the public annually and
that it takes 15 minutes (0.25 hours) to complete the requirement,
which is estimated to add 39 annual burden hours and 157 responses to
the inventory.
USDA expects that 157 Summer EBT agencies will be required to
fulfill the requirement at 7 CFR 292.12(a)(1) that State and Indian
Tribal Organization Summer EBT agencies shall inform participant and
applicant households of their Program rights and responsibilities and
that the materials meet the requirements. USDA expects that the 157
Summer EBT agencies will each publicly disclose to 157,489 households
annually and that it takes approximately 1 minute (0.02 hours) to
complete the requirement, which is estimated to add 412,920 annual
burden hours and 24,725,737 responses to the inventory.
As a result of what's outlined in this rulemaking, FNS estimates
that this new information collection will have 16,696,674 respondents,
246,393,631 responses, and 35,748,275 burden hours. The average burden
per response and the annual burden hours are explained below and
summarized in the charts which follow. Once the ICR for the final rule
is approved, FNS estimates that the burden for OMB Control Number 0584-
NEW 7 CFR part 292, Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (Summer EBT)
Program will increase OMB's information collection inventory by
246,393,631 responses and 35,748,275 burden hours.
For S-EBT, given the wide variation in information system
development and maintenance costs across State and ITO Summer EBT
agencies, USDA estimates a total program cost of $282,886,800 to
acquire IS technology and perform system upgrades annually for the
Advanced Planning Document (ADP) process described in this interim
final rule ICR. Likewise, USDA estimates a total program cost of
$280,080,900 to acquire and develop statewide NSLP/SBP databases per
State and ITO Summer EBT agency and an additional cost of $280,080,900
to develop and maintain a system that is capable of processing
electronic applications for S-EBT. Therefore, as a result of what's
outlined in this final rule, USDA estimates that this collection is
expected to have $628,260,000 in start-up costs related to system
upgrades, and an additional $220,740,000 in ongoing operation and
maintenance costs. USDA estimates that a total of $849,000,000 in
combined start-up costs and ongoing operation and maintenance costs
will be added to the inventory.
Reporting
Respondents (Affected Public): Individual/households; businesses;
and State, local, and Tribal government. The respondent groups
identified include households, Summer EBT Authorized Retailers (firms),
State agencies, ITOs, Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, Summer
[[Page 90319]]
EBT agencies, and local government agencies.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 16,696,674 respondents.
Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 9 responses.
Estimated Total Annual Responses: 142,800,013 responses.
Estimated Time per Response: 0.2 hours.
Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 28,749,862 hours.
Recordkeeping
Respondents (Affected Public): Businesses; and State, local, and
Tribal government. The respondent groups identified include Summer EBT
Authorized Retailers (retail food stores), State agencies and Summer
EBT agencies.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 2,585 respondents.
Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 30,512 responses.
Estimated Total Annual Responses: 78,867,723 responses.
Estimated Time per Response: 0.08 hours.
Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 6,585,455 hours.
Public Disclosure
Respondents (Affected Public): State, local, and Tribal government.
The respondent groups identified include State and ITO Summer EBT
agencies.
Estimated Number of Respondents: 157 respondents.
Estimated Number of Responses per Respondent: 157,49013 responses.
Estimated Total Annual Responses: 24,725,894 responses.
Estimated Time per Response: 0.02 hours.
Estimated Total Annual Burden on Respondents: 412,959 hours.
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P
[[Page 90320]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.022
[[Page 90321]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.023
[[Page 90322]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.024
[[Page 90323]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.025
[[Page 90324]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.026
[[Page 90325]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.027
[[Page 90326]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.028
[[Page 90327]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.029
[[Page 90328]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.030
[[Page 90329]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.031
[[Page 90330]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.032
[[Page 90331]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.033
[[Page 90332]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.034
[[Page 90333]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.035
[[Page 90334]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.036
[[Page 90335]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.037
[[Page 90336]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.038
[[Page 90337]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.039
[[Page 90338]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.040
[[Page 90339]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.041
[[Page 90340]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.042
[[Page 90341]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.043
[[Page 90342]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.044
[[Page 90343]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.045
[[Page 90344]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.046
[[Page 90345]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.047
[[Page 90346]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.048
BILLING CODE 3410-30-C
[[Page 90347]]
Summary of Burden
[OMB #0584-NEW]
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Total No. Respondents...................................... 16,696,674
Average No. Responses per Respondent....................... 15
Total Annual Responses..................................... 246,393,631
Average Hours per Response................................. 0.145
Total Burden Hours......................................... 35,748,276
Current OMB Approved Burden Hours.......................... 0
Adjustments................................................ 0
Program Changes............................................ 35,748,276
Total Difference in Burden................................. 35,748,276
------------------------------------------------------------------------
E-Government Act Compliance
USDA is committed to the E-Government Act, which requires
Government agencies in general to provide the public the option of
submitting information or transacting business electronically to the
maximum extent possible. An electronic copy of this interim final rule
will be made available through the agency's website.
List of Subjects
7 CFR Part 210
Children, Commodity School Program, Food assistance programs,
Grants programs--social programs, National School Lunch Program,
Nutrition, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, Surplus
agricultural commodities.
7 CFR Part 220
Grant programs--education, Grant programs--health, Infants and
children, Nutrition, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements, School
breakfast and lunch programs.
7 CFR Part 225
Food assistance programs, Grant programs--health, Infants and
children, Labeling, Reporting and recordkeeping requirements.
7 CFR Part 292
Administrative practice and procedure, Agriculture, Food assistance
programs, Grant programs--education, Grant programs--health, Infants
and children, Nutrition, Public Assistance Programs, Reporting and
recordkeeping requirements, School breakfast and lunch programs,
Supplemental Assistance Programs.
Accordingly, 7 CFR chapter II is amended as follows:
PART 210--NATIONAL SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM
0
1. The authority citation for part 210 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1751-1760, 1779.
0
2. In Sec. 210.2, add in alphabetical order a definition for
``Seamless Summer Option'' to read as follows:
Sec. 210.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Seamless Summer Option means the meal service alternative
authorized by section 13(a)(8) of the Richard B. Russell National
School Lunch Act, 42 U.S.C. 1761(a)(8), under which public or nonprofit
school food authorities participating in the National School Lunch
Program or School Breakfast Program offer meals at no cost to children
during the traditional summer vacation periods and, for year-round
schools, vacation periods longer than 10 school days.
* * * * *
0
3. In Sec. 210.18, amend paragraph (e)(3)(ii) as follows:
0
a. Remove the period at the end of the first sentence and add in its
place ``and only operates congregate meal service.''; and
0
b. Add two sentences following the first sentence.
The addition reads as follows:
Sec. 210.18 Administrative reviews.
* * * * *
(e) * * *
(3) * * *
(ii) * * * If the school food authority operates congregate and
non-congregate meal service, a minimum of two sites must be reviewed,
one congregate site and one non-congregate site. If the school food
authority has one site that operates both congregate and non-congregate
meal services, the State agency may review a minimum of one site and
must observe both a congregate and non-congregate meal service at that
one site. * * *
* * * * *
0
4. Add Sec. 210.34 to read as follows:
Sec. 210.34 Seamless Summer Option non-congregate meal service.
A school food authority operating the Seamless Summer Option in a
rural area may be approved to offer a non-congregate meal service
consistent with that established in part 225 of this chapter. Such
school food authorities must comply with the non-congregate meal
service provisions set forth at Sec. 225.16(b)(5)(i) and (iv) of this
chapter and may use the non-congregate meal service options contained
in Sec. 225.16(i) of this chapter.
PART 220--SCHOOL BREAKFAST PROGRAM
0
5. The authority citation for part 220 continues to read as follows:
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1773, 1779, unless otherwise noted.
0
6. In Sec. 220.2, add in alphabetical order a definition for
``Seamless Summer Option'' to read as follows:
Sec. 220.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Seamless Summer Option means the meal service alternative
authorized by section 13(a)(8) of the Richard B. Russell National
School Lunch Act, 42 U.S.C. 1761(a)(8), under which public or nonprofit
school food authorities participating in the National School Lunch
Program or School Breakfast Program offer meals at no cost to children
during the traditional summer vacation periods and, for year-round
schools, vacation periods longer than 10 school days.
* * * * *
0
7. Add Sec. 220.23 to read as follows:
Sec. 220.23 Seamless Summer Option non-congregate meal service.
A school food authority participating in the National School Lunch
Program's Seamless Summer Option, and which is approved to offer a non-
congregate meal service, must comply with the provisions specified in
Sec. 210.34 of this chapter.
PART 225--SUMMER FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM
0
8. The authority citation for part 225 continues to read as follows:
Authority: Secs. 9, 13 and 14, Richard B. Russell National
School Lunch Act, as amended (42 U.S.C. 1758, 1761 and 1762a).
0
9. In Sec. 225.2:
0
a. Revise the definition for ``Children'';
0
b. Add in alphabetical order the definitions for ``Conditional non-
congregate site'', ``Congregate meal service'', and ``Good standing'';
0
c. Revise the definition for ``New site'';
0
d. Add in alphabetical order a definition for ``Non-congregate meal
service''; and
0
e. Revise the definitions for ``Operating costs'', ``Rural'', ``Site'',
and ``Site supervisor''.
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 225.2 Definitions.
* * * * *
Children means:
(1) Persons 18 years of age and under; and
(2) Persons over 18 years of age who are determined by a State
educational agency or a local public educational agency of a State to
be mentally or
[[Page 90348]]
physically disabled and who participate in a public or nonprofit
private school program established for the mentally or physically
disabled.
* * * * *
Conditional non-congregate site means a site which qualifies for
Program participation because it conducts a non-congregate meal service
for eligible children in an area that does not meet the definition of
``areas in which poor economic conditions exist'' and is not a
``Camp,'' as defined in this section.
Congregate meal service means a food service at which meals that
are provided to children are consumed on site in a supervised setting.
* * * * *
Good standing means the status of a program operator that meets its
Program responsibilities, is current with its financial obligations,
and, if applicable, has fully implemented all corrective actions within
the required period of time.
* * * * *
New site means a site which did not participate in the Program in
the prior year, an experienced site that is proposing to operate a non-
congregate meal service for the first time, or, as determined by the
State agency, a site which has experienced significant staff turnover
from the prior year.
* * * * *
Non-congregate meal service means a food service at which meals are
provided for children to consume all of the components off site. Non-
congregate meal service must only be operated at sites designated as
``Rural'' with no ``Congregate meal service,'' as determined in Sec.
225.6(h)(3) and (4).
* * * * *
Operating costs means the cost of operating a food service under
the Program:
(1) Including the:
(i) Cost of obtaining food;
(ii) Labor directly involved in the preparation and service of
food;
(iii) Cost of nonfood supplies;
(iv) Rental and use allowances for equipment and space; and
(v) Cost of transporting children in rural areas to feeding sites
in rural areas;
(vi) Cost of delivering non-congregate meals in rural areas; but
(2) Excluding:
(i) The cost of the purchase of land, acquisition or construction
of buildings;
(ii) Alteration of existing buildings;
(iii) Interest costs;
(iv) The value of in-kind donations; and
(v) Administrative costs.
* * * * *
Rural means:
(1) Any area in a county which is not a part of a Metropolitan
Statistical Area based on the Office of Management and Budget's
Delineations of Metropolitan Statistical Areas;
(2) Any area in a county classified as a non-metropolitan area
based on USDA Economic Research Service's Rural-Urban Continuum Codes
and Urban Influence Codes;
(3) Any census tract classified as a non-metropolitan area based on
USDA Economic Research Service's Rural-Urban Commuting Area codes;
(4) Any area of a Metropolitan Statistical Area which is not part
of a Census Bureau-defined urban area;
(5) Any area of a State which is not part of an urban area as
determined by the Secretary;
(6) Any subsequent substitution or update of the aforementioned
classification schemes that Federal governing bodies create; or
(7) Any ``pocket'' within a Metropolitan Statistical Area which, at
the option of the State agency and with FNSRO approval, is determined
to be rural in character based on other data sources.
* * * * *
Site means the place where a child receives a program meal. A site
may be the indoor or outdoor location where congregate meals are
served, a stop on a delivery route of a mobile congregate meal service,
or the distribution location or route for a non-congregate meal
service. However, a child's residence is not considered a non-
congregate meal site for Program monitoring purposes.
Site supervisor means the individual who has been trained by the
sponsor and is responsible for all administrative and management
activities at the site, including, but not limited to: maintaining
documentation of meal deliveries, ensuring that all meals served are
safe, and maintaining accurate point of service meal counts. Except for
non-congregate meal service sites using delivery services, the
individual is on site for the duration of the food service.
* * * * *
0
10. In Sec. 225.3, revise paragraph (b) add paragraph (e) to read as
follows:
Sec. 225.3 Administration.
* * * * *
(b) State administered programs. Within the State, responsibility
for the administration of the Program must be in the State agency. Each
State agency must notify the Department by January 1 of the fiscal year
regarding its intention to administer the Program. Each State agency
desiring to take part in the Program must enter into a written
agreement with FNS for the administration of the Program in accordance
with the provisions of this part. The agreement must cover the
operation of the Program during the period specified therein and may be
extended by written consent of both parties. The agreement must contain
an assurance that the State agency will comply with the Department's
nondiscrimination regulations (7 CFR part 15) issued under title VI of
the Civil Rights Act of 1964, and any Instructions issued by FNS
pursuant to 7 CFR part 15, title IX of the Education Amendments of
1972, and section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973. However, if a
State educational agency is not permitted by law to disburse funds to
any of the nonpublic schools in the State, the Secretary must disburse
the funds directly to such schools within the State for the same
purposes and subject to the same conditions as the disbursements to
public schools within the State by the State educational agency.
* * * * *
(e) Coordinated Services Plan. (1) Each State agency must
establish, and update annually as needed, a plan to coordinate the
statewide availability of services offered through the Summer Food
Service Program described in this part and the Summer Electronic
Benefits Transfer (EBT) Program regulations (7 CFR part 292).
(2) Only one plan must be established for each State in which both
the Summer Food Service Program and the Summer EBT Program is
administered. If more than one agency administers the Summer Food
Service Program and Summer EBT within a respective State, they must
work together to develop and implement the plan. States should also
ensure that plans include the National School Lunch Program's Seamless
Summer Program if appropriate.
(3) The plan must include, at minimum, the following information:
(i) A description of the roles and responsibilities of each State
administering agency, and, as applicable, any other agencies, Indian
Tribal Organizations, or public or private organizations which will be
involved in administering the Programs;
(ii) A description of how the State agency and any other
organizations included in the plan will coordinate outreach and
programmatic activities to maximize the reach of the Summer Food
Service Program and Summer EBT Program;
(iii) Metrics to assess Program reach and coverage; and
[[Page 90349]]
(iv) The State agency's plans to partner with other Federal, State,
Tribal, or local programs to aid participants in accessing all Federal,
State, Tribal, or local programs for which they are eligible.
(4) States must notify the public about their plan and make it
available to the public through a website, and should, to the maximum
extent practicable, solicit and consider input on plan development and
implementation from other State, Tribal, and local agencies;
organizations involved in the administration of nutrition and human
services programs; participants; and other stakeholders.
(5) States must consult with FNS on the development of and any
significant subsequent updates to their plan. Initial Plans must be
submitted to FNS no later than January 1, 2025. States must submit
updates annually when significant changes are made to the plan, and
otherwise no less than every 3 years.
0
11. In Sec. 225.4, revise paragraphs (d)(7) and (8) and add paragraphs
(d)(9) and (10) to read as follows:
Sec. 225.4 Program management and administration plan.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(7) The State's plan for ensuring compliance with the food service
management company procurement monitoring requirements set forth at
Sec. 225.6(l);
(8) An estimate of the State's need, if any, for monies available
to pay for the cost of conducting health inspections and meal quality
tests;
(9) The State's plan to provide a reasonable opportunity for
children to access meals across all areas of the State; and
(10) The State's plan for Program delivery in areas that could
benefit the most from the provision of non-congregate meals, including
the State's plan to identify areas with no congregate meal service, and
target priority areas for non-congregate meal service.
0
12. In Sec. 225.6:
0
a. Revise paragraphs (a)(2) and (b)(6) and (8);
0
b. Add paragraph (b)(12);
0
c. Remove the word ``and'' at the end of the paragraph (c)(2)(ix);
0
d. Remove the period at the end of paragraph (c)(2)(x) and add in its
place ``; and'';
0
e. Add paragraph (c)(2)(xi);
0
f. Remove the word ``and'' at the end of the paragraph (c)(3)(vi);
0
g. Remove the period at the end of paragraph (c)(3)(vii) and add in its
place ``; and'';
0
h. Add paragraph (c)(3)(viii); and
0
i. Revise paragraphs (f)(1), (f)(2) introductory text, and (g) through
(i).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 225.6 State agency responsibilities.
(a) * * *
(2) By February 1 of each fiscal year, each State agency must
announce the purpose, eligibility criteria, and availability of the
Program throughout the State, through appropriate means of
communication. As part of this effort, each State agency must:
(i) Identify areas in which poor economic conditions exist to
qualify for the Program and actively seek eligible applicant sponsors
to serve:
(A) Rural areas;
(B) Indian Tribal territories; and
(C) Areas with a concentration of migrant farm workers.
(ii) The State agency must identify rural areas with no congregate
meal service and encourage participating sponsors to provide non-
congregate meals to eligible children in those areas.
(iii) The State agency must target outreach efforts to priority
outreach areas.
(iv) For approval of closed enrolled sites, the State agency must
establish criteria to ensure that operation of a closed enrolled site
does not limit Program access for eligible children in the area where
the site is located.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(6) The State agency must not approve any sponsor to operate more
than 200 sites or to serve more than an average of 50,000 children per
day. However, the State agency may approve exceptions if:
(i) The applicant demonstrates that it has the capability of
managing a program larger than the limits in this paragraph (b)(6); and
(ii) The State agency has the capacity to conduct reviews of at
least 10 percent of the sponsor's sites, as described in Sec.
225.7(e)(4)(v).
* * * * *
(8) Applicants which qualify as camps and sponsors of conditional
non-congregate sites must be approved for reimbursement only for meals
served free to enrolled children who meet the Program's income
standards.
* * * * *
(12) The State agency must not deny a sponsor's application based
solely on the sponsor's intent to provide a non-congregate meal
service.
(c) * * *
(2) * * *
(xi) Procedures that document meals are only distributed, to a
reasonable extent, to eligible children and that duplicate meals are
not distributed to any child, if the applicant sponsor is electing to
use the non-congregate meal service options described in Sec.
225.16(i)(1) and (2).
(3) * * *
(viii) Procedures that document meals are only distributed, to a
reasonable extent, to eligible children and that duplicate meals are
not distributed to any child, if the applicant sponsor is electing to
use the non-congregate meal service options described in Sec.
225.16(i)(1) and (2).
* * * * *
(f) * * *
(1) Nondiscrimination statement. (i) Each sponsor must submit a
nondiscrimination statement of its policy for serving meals to
children. The statement must consist of:
(A) An assurance that all children are served the same meals and
that there is no discrimination in the course of the food service; and
(B) Except for camps and conditional non-congregate sites, a
statement that the meals served are free at all sites.
(ii) A school sponsor must submit the policy statement only once,
with the initial application to participate as a sponsor. However, if
there is a substantive change in the school's free and reduced price
policy, a revised policy statement must be provided at the State
agency's request.
(iii) In addition to the information described in paragraph (i) of
this section, the policy statement of all camps and conditional non-
congregate sites that charge separately for meals must also include:
(A) A statement that the eligibility standards conform to the
Secretary's family size and income standards for reduced price school
meals;
(B) A description of the method to be used in accepting
applications from families for Program meals that ensures that
households are permitted to apply on behalf of children who are members
of households receiving SNAP, FDPIR, or TANF benefits using the
categorical eligibility procedures described in Sec. 225.15(f);
(C) A description of the method to be used for collecting payments
from children who pay the full price of the meal while preventing the
overt identification of children receiving a free meal;
(D) An assurance that the sponsor will establish hearing procedures
for families
[[Page 90350]]
requesting to appeal a denial of an application for free meals. These
procedures must meet the requirements set forth in paragraph (f)(2) of
this section;
(E) An assurance that, if a family requests a hearing, the child
will continue to receive free meals until a decision is rendered; and
(F) An assurance that there will be no overt identification of free
meal recipients and no discrimination against any child on the basis of
race, color, national origin, sex (including gender identity and sexual
orientation), age, or disability.
(2) Hearing procedures statement. Each camp or sponsor of a
conditional non-congregate site must submit a copy of its hearing
procedures with its application. At a minimum, the procedures must
provide that:
* * * * *
(g) Site information sheet. The State agency must develop a site
information sheet for sponsors.
(1) New sites. The application submitted by sponsors must include a
site information sheet for each site where a food service operation is
proposed. Where a non-congregate meal service operation is proposed for
the first time, the sponsor must follow the requirements of this
paragraph (g)(1). At a minimum, the site information sheet must
demonstrate or describe the following:
(i) An organized and supervised system for serving meals to
children;
(ii) The estimated number of meals to be served, types of meals to
be served, and meal service times;
(iii) Whether the site is rural, as defined in Sec. 225.2, or non-
rural. Documentation supporting the rural designation is required. New
documentation is required every 5 years, or earlier, if the State
agency determines that an area's rural status has changed significantly
since the last designation;
(iv) Whether the meal service is congregate or non-congregate;
(v) Whether the site is a self-preparation site or a vended site,
as defined in Sec. 225.2;
(vi) Arrangements for delivery and holding of meals until meal
service times and storing and refrigerating any leftover meals until
the next day, within standards prescribed by State or local health
authorities;
(vii) Access to a means of communication to make necessary
adjustments in the number of meals delivered, based on changes in the
number of children in attendance at each site;
(viii) Arrangements for food service during periods of inclement
weather;
(ix) For open sites and restricted open sites:
(A) Documentation supporting the eligibility of each site as
serving an area in which poor economic conditions exist;
(B) When school data are used, new documentation is required every
5 years;
(C) When census data are used, new documentation is required every
5 years, or earlier, if the State agency determines that an area's
socioeconomic status has changed significantly since the last census;
and
(D) At the discretion of the State agency, sponsors proposing to
serve an area affected by an unanticipated school closure may be exempt
from submitting new site documentation if the sponsor has participated
in the Program at any time during the current year or in either of the
prior 2 calendar years;
(x) For closed enrolled sites:
(A) The projected number of children enrolled and the projected
number of children eligible for free and reduced price school meals for
each of these sites; or documentation supporting the eligibility of
each site as serving an area in which poor economic conditions exist;
(B) When school data are used, new documentation is required every
5 years; and
(C) When census data are used, new documentation is required every
5 years, or earlier, if the State agency determines that an area's
socioeconomic status has changed significantly since the last census;
(xi) For NYSP sites, certification from the sponsor that all of the
children who will receive Program meals are enrolled participants in
the NYSP;
(xii) For camps, the number of children enrolled in each session
who meet the Program's income standards. If such information is not
available at the time of application, this information must be
submitted as soon as possible thereafter, and in no case later than the
filing of the camp's claim for reimbursement for each session;
(xiii) For sites that will serve children of migrant workers:
(A) Certification from a migrant organization, which attests that
the site serves children of migrant workers; and
(B) Certification from the sponsor that the site primarily serves
children of migrant workers, if non-migrant children are also served;
and
(xiv) For conditional non-congregate sites, the number of children
enrolled who meet the Program's income standards. If such information
is not available at the time of application, this information must be
submitted as soon as possible thereafter, and in no case later than the
filing of the sponsor's claim for reimbursement.
(2) Experienced sites. The application submitted by sponsors must
include a site information sheet for each site where a food service
operation is proposed. The State agency may require sponsors of
experienced sites to provide information described in paragraph (g)(1)
of this section. At a minimum, the site information sheet must
demonstrate or describe the following:
(i) The estimated number of meals, types of meals to be served, and
meal service times;
(ii) Whether the site is rural, as defined in Sec. 225.2, or non-
rural. Documentation supporting the rural designation is required. New
documentation is required every 5 years, or earlier, if the State
agency determines that an area's rural status has changed significantly
since the last designation;
(iii) Whether the meal service is congregate or non-congregate;
(iv) For open sites and restricted open sites:
(A) Documentation supporting the eligibility of each site as
serving an area in which poor economic conditions exist;
(B) When school data are used, new documentation is required every
5 years;
(C) When census data are used, new documentation is required every
5 years, or earlier, if the State agency determines that an area's
socioeconomic status has changed significantly since the last census;
and
(D) Any site that a sponsor proposes to serve during an
unanticipated school closure, which has participated in the Program at
any time during the current year or in either of the prior 2 calendar
years, is considered eligible without new documentation;
(v) For closed enrolled sites:
(A) The projected number of children enrolled and the projected
number of children eligible for free and reduced price school meals for
each of these sites; or documentation supporting the eligibility of
each site as serving an area in which poor economic conditions exist;
(B) When school data are used, new documentation is required every
5 years; and
(C) When census data are used, new documentation is required every
5 years, or earlier, if the State agency determines that an area's
socioeconomic status has changed significantly since the last census;
[[Page 90351]]
(vi) For NYSP sites, certification from the sponsor that all of the
children who will receive Program meals are enrolled participants in
the NYSP;
(vii) For camps, the number of children enrolled in each session
who meet the Program's income standards. If such information is not
available at the time of application, this information must be
submitted as soon as possible thereafter, and in no case later than the
filing of the camp's claim for reimbursement for each session; and
(viii) For conditional non-congregate sites, the number of children
enrolled who meet the Program's income standards. If such information
is not available at the time of application, this information must be
submitted as soon as possible thereafter, and in no case later than the
filing of the sponsor's claim for reimbursement.
(h) Approval of sites. (1) When evaluating a proposed food service
site, the State agency must ensure that:
(i) If not a camp or a conditional non-congregate site, the
proposed site serves an area in which poor economic conditions exist,
as defined by Sec. 225.2;
(ii) The area which the site proposes to serve is not or will not
be served in whole or in part by another site, unless it can be
demonstrated to the satisfaction of the State agency that each site
will serve children not served by any other site in the same area for
the same meal;
(iii) The site is approved to serve no more than the number of
children for which its facilities are adequate; and
(iv) If it is a site proposed to operate during an unanticipated
school closure, it is a non-school site.
(2) When approving the application of a site which will serve meals
prepared by a food service management company, the State agency must
establish for each meal service an approved level for the maximum
number of children's meals which may be served under the Program. These
approved levels must be established in accordance with the following
provisions:
(i) The initial maximum approved level must be based upon the
historical record of the number of meals served at the site if such a
record has been established in prior years and the State agency
determines that it is accurate. The State agency must develop a
procedure for establishing initial maximum approved levels for sites
when no accurate record from prior years is available. The State agency
may consider participation at other similar sites located in the area,
documentation of programming taking place at the site, statistics on
the number of children residing in the area, and other relevant
information.
(ii) The maximum approved level must be adjusted, if warranted,
based upon information collected during site reviews. If the number of
meals served at the site on the day of the review is significantly
below the site's approved level, the State agency should consider
making a downward adjustment in the approved level with the objective
of providing only one meal per child.
(iii) The sponsor may seek an upward adjustment in the approved
level for its sites by requesting a site review or by providing the
State agency with evidence that the number of meals served exceeds the
sites' approved levels. The sponsor may request an upward adjustment at
any point prior to submitting the claim for the impacted reimbursement
period.
(iv) Whenever the State agency establishes or adjusts approved
levels of meal service for a site, it must document the action in its
files, and it shall provide the sponsor with immediate written
confirmation of the approved level.
(v) Upon approval of its application or any adjustment to its
maximum approved levels, the sponsor must inform the food service
management company with which it contracts of the approved level for
each meal service at each site served by the food service management
company. This notification of any adjustments in approved levels must
take place within the time frames set forth in the contract for
adjusting meal orders. Whenever the sponsor notifies the food service
management company of the approved levels or any adjustments to these
levels for any of its sites, the sponsor must clearly inform the food
service management company that an approved level of meal service
represents the maximum number of meals which may be served at a site
and is not a standing order for a specific number of meals at that
site. When the number of children being served meals is below the
site's approved level, the sponsor must adjust meal orders with the
objective of serving only one meal per child as required under Sec.
225.15(b)(3).
(3) When approving the application of a site that will provide a
non-congregate meal service, the State agency must ensure that the
proposed site:
(i) Meets the requirements described in paragraphs (h)(1) and (2)
of this section.
(ii) Is rural, as defined in Sec. 225.2.
(iii) Will not serve an area where children would receive the same
meal at an approved congregate meal site, unless it can be demonstrated
to the satisfaction of the State agency that the site will serve a
different group of children who may not be otherwise served.
(iv) Serves an area in which poor economic conditions exist or is
approved for reimbursement only for meals served free to enrolled
children who meet the Program's income standards.
(v) Distributes up to the allowable number of reimbursable meals
that would be provided over a 10-calendar day period. The State agency
may establish a shorter calendar day period on a case-by-case basis and
without regard to sponsor type.
(4) When approving the application of a site which will provide
both congregate and non-congregate meal services, the State agency must
ensure that:
(i) The proposed site meets the requirements in paragraphs (h)(1)
through (3) of this section.
(ii) The proposed site will only conduct a non-congregate meal
service when the site is not providing a congregate meal service.
(iii) The sponsor proposes an organized and supervised system which
prevents overlap between meal services and reasonably ensures children
are not receiving more than the daily maximum allowance of meals as
required in Sec. 225.16(b)(3).
(i) State-sponsor agreement. A sponsor approved for participation
in the Program must enter into a permanent written agreement with the
State agency. The existence of a valid permanent agreement does not
limit the State agency's ability to terminate the agreement, as
provided under Sec. 225.11(c). The State agency must terminate the
sponsor's agreement whenever a sponsor's participation in the Program
ends. The State agency or sponsor may terminate the agreement at its
convenience, upon mutual agreement, due to considerations unrelated to
either party's performance of Program responsibilities under the
agreement. However, any action initiated by the State agency to
terminate an agreement for its convenience requires prior consultation
with FNS. All sponsors must agree in writing to:
(1) Operate a nonprofit food service during the period specified,
as follows:
(i) From May through September for children on school vacation;
(ii) At any time of the year, in the case of sponsors administering
the Program under a continuous school calendar system; or
(iii) During the period from October through April, if it serves an
area
[[Page 90352]]
affected by an unanticipated school closure due to a natural disaster,
major building repairs, court orders relating to school safety or other
issues, labor-management disputes, or, when approved by the State
agency, a similar cause.
(2) For school food authorities, offer meals which meet the
requirements and provisions set forth in Sec. 225.16 during times
designated as meal service periods by the sponsor and offer the same
meals to all children.
(3) For all other sponsors, serve meals which meet the requirements
and provisions set forth in Sec. 225.16 during times designated as
meal service periods by the sponsor and serve the same meals to all
children.
(4) Serve meals without cost to all children, except that camps and
conditional non-congregate sites may charge for meals served to
children who are not served meals under the Program.
(5) Issue a free meal policy statement in accordance with paragraph
(c) of this section.
(6) Meet the training requirement for its administrative and site
personnel, as required under Sec. 225.15(d)(1).
(7) Claim reimbursement only for the types of meals specified in
the agreement that are served:
(i) Without charge to children at approved sites, except camps and
conditional non-congregate sites, during the approved meal service
time;
(ii) Without charge to children who meet the Program's income
standards in camps and conditional non-congregate sites;
(iii) Within the approved level for the maximum number of
children's meals that may be served, if a maximum approved level is
required under paragraph (h)(2) of this section;
(iv) At the approved meal service time, unless a change is approved
by the State agency, as required under Sec. 225.16(c); and
(v) At the approved site, unless the requirements in Sec.
225.16(g) are met.
(8) Submit claims for reimbursement in accordance with procedures
established by the State agency, and those stated in Sec. 225.9.
(9) In the storage, preparation and service of food, maintain
proper sanitation and health standards in conformance with all
applicable State and local laws and regulations.
(10) Accept and use, in quantities that may be efficiently utilized
in the Program, such foods as may be offered as a donation by the
Department.
(11) Have access to facilities necessary for storing, preparing,
and serving food.
(12) Maintain a financial management system as prescribed by the
State agency.
(13) Maintain on file documentation of site visits and reviews in
accordance with Sec. 225.15(d) (2) and (3).
(14) Upon request, make all accounts and records pertaining to the
Program available to State, Federal, or other authorized officials for
audit or administrative review, at a reasonable time and place. The
records shall be retained for a period of 3 years after the end of the
fiscal year to which they pertain, unless audit or investigative
findings have not been resolved, in which case the records shall be
retained until all issues raised by the audit or investigation have
been resolved.
(15) For approved congregate meal service, maintain children on
site while meals are consumed. Sponsors may allow a child to take one
fruit, vegetable, or grain item off-site for later consumption if the
requirements in Sec. 225.16(h) are met.
(16) Retain final financial and administrative responsibility for
its program.
* * * * *
0
13. In Sec. 225.7, revise paragraphs (d), (e)(2) and (4), (e)(5)(i),
(j), and (n)(1) to read as follows:
Sec. 225.7 Program monitoring and assistance.
* * * * *
(d) Pre-approval visits. The State agency must conduct pre-approval
visits of sponsors and sites, as specified in paragraph (d)(1) through
(4) of this section, to assess the applicant sponsor's or site's
potential for successful Program operations and to verify information
provided in the application.
(1) The State agency must visit, prior to approval:
(i) All applicant sponsors that did not participate in the program
in the prior year;
(ii) All applicant sponsors that had operational problems noted in
the prior year; and
(iii) All sites that the State agency has determined need a pre-
approval visit.
(2) If a sponsor is a school food authority or Child and Adult Care
Food Program institution and was reviewed by the State agency under
their respective programs during the preceding 12 months, and had no
significant deficiencies noted in that review, a pre-approval visit may
be conducted at the discretion of the State agency.
(3) Pre-approval visits of sponsors proposing to operate the
Program during unanticipated school closures may be conducted at the
discretion of the State agency.
(4) Each State agency must establish a process to determine which
sites need pre-approval visits. Characteristics that must be considered
include, but are not limited to:
(i) Sites that did not participate in the program in the prior
year;
(ii) Existing sites that are new to non-congregate meal service;
and
(iii) Existing sites that exhibited operational problems in the
prior year.
(e) * * *
(2) Sample selection. In determining which sponsors and sites to
review, the State agency must, at a minimum, consider the sponsors and
sites' previous participation in the Program, their current and
previous Program performance, whether they operate as congregate or
non-congregate sites, and the results of previous reviews.
* * * * *
(4) Frequency and number of required reviews. State agencies must:
(i) Conduct a review of every new sponsor at least once during the
first year of operation;
(ii) Annually review every sponsor that experienced significant
operational problems in the prior year;
(iii) Review each sponsor at least once every 3 years;
(iv) Review more frequently those sponsors that, in the
determination of the State agency, require additional technical
assistance; and
(v) As part of each sponsor review, conduct reviews of at least 10
percent of each reviewed sponsor's sites, or one site, whichever number
is greater. The review sample must include sites representative of all
meal service models operated by the sponsor.
(5) * * *
(i) State agencies must develop criteria for site selection when
selecting sites to meet the minimum number of sites required under
paragraph (e)(4)(v) of this section. State agencies should, to the
maximum extent possible, select sites that reflect the sponsor's entire
population of sites. Characteristics that should be reflected in the
sites selected for review include:
(A) The maximum number of meals approved to serve under Sec.
225.6(h)(1) and (2);
(B) Method of obtaining meals (i.e., self-preparation or vended
meal service);
(C) Time since last site review by State agency;
(D) Type of site (e.g., open, closed enrolled, camp);
(E) Type of physical location (e.g., school, outdoor area,
community center);
(F) Rural designation (i.e., rural, as defined in Sec. 225.2, or
non-rural);
[[Page 90353]]
(G) Type of meal service (i.e., congregate or non-congregate);
(H) If non-congregate, meal distribution method (e.g., meal pick-
up, delivery); and
(I) Affiliation with the sponsor, as defined in Sec. 225.2.
* * * * *
(j) Forms for reviews by sponsors. Each State agency must develop
and provide monitor review forms to all approved sponsors. These forms
must be completed by sponsor monitors. The monitor review form must
include, but not be limited to:
(1) The time of the reviewer's arrival and departure;
(2) The site supervisor's printed name and signature;
(3) A certification statement to be signed by the monitor;
(4) The number of meals prepared or delivered;
(5) Whether the meal service is congregate or non-congregate;
(6) The number of meals served to children;
(7) The deficiencies noted;
(8) The corrective actions taken by the sponsor; and
(9) The date of such actions.
* * * * *
(n) * * *
(1) Each State agency must comply with all requirements of title VI
of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, title IX of the Education Amendments
of 1972, section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, the Age
Discrimination Act of 1975, and the Department's regulations concerning
nondiscrimination (7 CFR parts 15, 15a, and 15b), including
requirements for racial and ethnic participation data collection,
public notification of the nondiscrimination policy, and reviews to
assure compliance with such policy, to the end that no person must, on
the grounds of race, color, national origin, sex (including gender
identity and sexual orientation), age, or disability, be excluded from
participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be otherwise subjected
to discrimination under the Program.
* * * * *
0
14. In Sec. 225.8, revise paragraph (d)(2)(iii) and (iv) and add
paragraph (e) to read as follows:
Sec. 225.8 Records and reports.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(2) * * *
(iii) The type of site approval--open, restricted open, closed
enrolled, conditional non-congregate, or camp; and
(iv) Any other important details about each site that would help
the FNSRO plan reviews, including whether the site is rural or urban,
congregate or non-congregate, or vended or self-preparation.
(e) By June 30 of each year, or a later date approved by the
appropriate FNSRO, the State agency must submit to FNS a list of open
site locations and their operational details and provide a minimum of
two updates during the summer operational period. State agencies are
encouraged to submit updates weekly if there are any changes to their
data.
0
15. In Sec. 225.9:
0
a. Revise paragraph (d)(9);
0
b. Redesignate paragraph (d)(10) as paragraph (d)(12);
0
c. Add new paragraph (d)(10) and paragraph (d)(11); and
0
d. Revise paragraph (f).
The revisions and additions read as follows:
Sec. 225.9 Program assistance to sponsors.
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(9) Sponsors of camps are reimbursed only for meals served to
children in camps whose eligibility for Program meals is documented.
(10) Sponsors of NYSP sites are reimbursed only for meals served to
children enrolled in the NYSP.
(11) Sponsors of conditional non-congregate sites are reimbursed
only for meals served to children whose eligibility for Program meals
is documented.
* * * * *
(f) Meal claiming. The sponsor must not claim reimbursement for
meals served to children at any site in excess of the site's approved
level of meal service, if one has been established under Sec.
225.6(h)(2). However, the total number of meals for which operating
costs are claimed may exceed the approved level of meal service if the
meals exceeding this level were served to adults performing necessary
food service labor in accordance with paragraph (d)(5) of this section.
In reviewing a sponsor's claim for congregate meals served, the State
agency must ensure that reimbursements for second meals are limited to
the percentage tolerance established in Sec. 225.15(b)(4).
* * * * *
0
16. In Sec. 225.11, revise paragraphs (c)(4) and (d) to read as
follows:
Sec. 225.11 Corrective action procedures.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(4) Program violations at a significant proportion of the sponsor's
sites. Such violations include, but are not limited to, the following:
(i) Noncompliance with the meal service time restrictions set forth
at Sec. 225.16(c), as applicable;
(ii) Failure to maintain adequate records;
(iii) Failure to adjust meal orders to conform to variations in the
number of participating children;
(iv) For congregate meal service operations, the simultaneous
service of more than one meal to any child;
(v) The claiming of Program payments for meals not served to
participating children;
(vi) For non-congregate meal service operations, distributing more
than the daily meal limit when multi-day service is used;
(vii) Service of a significant number of meals which did not
include required quantities of all meal components;
(viii) For congregate meal service operations, excessive instances
of off-site meal consumption;
(ix) Continued use of food service management companies that are in
violation of health codes.
(d) Meal service restriction. (1) With the exception for
residential camps and non-congregate meal service set forth at Sec.
225.16(b)(1)(ii) and (b)(5)(iii), respectively, the State agency must
restrict to one meal service per day:
(i) Any food service site which is determined to be in violation of
the time restrictions for meal service set forth at Sec. 225.16(c)
when corrective action is not taken within a reasonable time as
determined by the State agency; and
(ii) All sites under a sponsor if more than 20 percent of the
sponsor's sites are determined to be in violation of the time
restrictions set forth at Sec. 225.16(c).
(2) If this action results in children not receiving meals under
the Program, the State agency must make reasonable effort to locate
another source of meal service for these children.
* * * * *
0
17. In Sec. 225.14:
0
a. Revise paragraph (c)(3);
0
b. Remove paragraph (d)(4);
0
c. Redesignate paragraphs (d)(5) and (6) as paragraphs (d)(4) and (5);
and
0
d. Add new paragraph (d)(6) and paragraphs (d)(7) and (8).
The revision and additions read as follows:
Sec. 225.14 Requirements for sponsor participation.
* * * * *
(c) * * *
(3) Will conduct a regularly scheduled food service for children
from areas in which poor economic conditions exist,
[[Page 90354]]
or qualifies as a camp or a conditional non-congregate site;
* * * * *
(d) * * *
(6) If the sponsor operates a non-congregate meal service that will
deliver meals directly to a child's residence, it must obtain written
parental consent prior to providing meals to children in that
household.
(7) If the sponsor operates a conditional non-congregate site, it
must certify that it will collect information to determine children's
Program eligibility to support its claim for reimbursement.
(8) If the sponsor is not a school food authority, it must enter
into a written agreement or Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the
State agency or school food authority if it chooses to receive school
data for the purposes of identifying eligible children and determining
children's Program eligibility, as required under Sec. 225.15(k).
0
18. In Sec. 225.15, revise paragraphs (b)(3) and (4), (d), (e), and
(f)(3) introductory text to read as follows:
Sec. 225.15 Management responsibilities of sponsors.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(3) All sponsors must plan for and prepare or order meals on the
basis of participation trends with the objective of providing only one
meal per child at each meal service.
(i) The sponsor must make the adjustments necessary to achieve this
objective using the results from its monitoring of sites.
(ii) The sponsor must adjust the number of meals ordered or
prepared whenever the number of children receiving meals is below the
maximum approved level of meal service.
(iii) The sponsor must not order or prepare meals for children at
any site in excess of the site's approved level, but may order or
prepare meals above the approved level if the meals are to be served to
adults performing necessary food service labor in accordance with Sec.
225.9(d)(5).
(iv) Records of participation and of preparation or ordering of
meals must be maintained to demonstrate positive action toward meeting
the objective of this paragraph (b)(3).
(4) In recognition of the fluctuation in participation levels which
makes it difficult to estimate precisely the number of meals needed and
to reduce the resultant waste, sponsors may claim reimbursement for a
number of second meals which does not exceed 2 percent of the number of
first meals served to children for each meal type (i.e., breakfasts,
lunches, supplements, or suppers) during the claiming period for
congregate meals served. The State agency must disallow all claims for
second meals if it determines that the sponsor failed to plan and
prepare or order meals with the objective of providing only one meal
per child at each meal service. Second meals must be served only after
all participating children at the site's congregate meal service have
been served a meal. Second meals may not be served as part of a non-
congregate meal service.
* * * * *
(d) Training and monitoring. (1) Each sponsor must hold Program
training sessions for its administrative and site personnel and must
not allow a site to operate until personnel have attended at least one
of these training sessions. The State agency may waive these training
requirements for operation of the Program during unanticipated school
closures.
(i) Training of site personnel must, at a minimum, include: the
purpose of the Program; site eligibility; recordkeeping; site
operations, including both congregate and non-congregate meal services;
meal pattern requirements; and the duties of a monitor.
(ii) Each sponsor must ensure that its administrative personnel
attend State agency training provided to sponsors, and sponsors must
provide training throughout the summer to ensure that administrative
personnel are thoroughly knowledgeable in all required areas of Program
administration and operation and are provided with sufficient
information to enable them to carry out their Program responsibilities.
(iii) Each site must have present at each meal service at least one
person who has received this training.
(2) Sponsors must conduct pre-operational visits for new sites,
sites that experienced operational problems the previous year, and
existing sites that are new to non-congregate meal service, to
determine that the sites have the capacity to provide meal service for
the anticipated number of children in attendance and the capability to
conduct the proposed meal service.
(3) Sponsors must visit each of their sites, as specified in
paragraphs (d)(3)(i) through (iv) of this section, at least once during
the first two weeks of program operations and must promptly take such
actions as are necessary to correct any deficiencies. In cases where
the site operates for seven calendar days or fewer, the visit must be
conducted during the period of operation. Sponsors must conduct these
visits for:
(i) All new sites;
(ii) All existing sites that are new to providing non-congregate
meal service;
(iii) All sites that have been determined by the sponsor to need a
visit based on criteria established by the State agency pertaining to
operational problems noted in the prior year, as set forth in Sec.
225.7(o); and
(iv) Any other sites that the State agency has determined need a
visit.
(4) Sponsors must conduct a full review of food service operations
at each site at least once during the first four weeks of Program
operations, and thereafter must maintain a reasonable level of site
monitoring. Sponsors must complete a monitoring form developed by the
State agency during the conduct of these reviews. Sponsors may conduct
a full review of food service operations at the same time they are
conducting a site visit required under paragraph (d)(3) of this
section.
(e) Notification to the community. Each sponsor must annually
announce in the media serving the area from which it draws its
attendance the availability of free meals. Sponsors of camps, closed
enrolled sites, and conditional non-congregate sites must notify
participants of the availability of free meals and if a free meal
application is needed, as outlined in paragraph (f) of this section.
For sites that use free meal applications to determine individual
eligibility, notification to enrolled children must include: the
Secretary's family-size and income standards for reduced price school
meals labeled ``SFSP Income Eligibility Standards;'' a statement that a
foster child and children who are members of households receiving SNAP,
FDPIR, or TANF benefits are automatically eligible to receive free meal
benefits at eligible program sites; and a statement that meals are
available without regard to race, color, national origin, sex
(including gender identity and sexual orientation), age, or disability.
State agencies may issue a media release for all sponsors operating
SFSP sites in the State as long as the notification meets the
requirements in this section.
(f) * * *
(3) Application based on the household's receipt of SNAP, FDPIR, or
TANF benefits. Households may apply on the basis of receipt of SNAP,
FDPIR, or TANF benefits by providing the following information:
* * * * *
0
19. In Sec. 225.16:
0
a. Add paragraph (b)(5);
0
c. Revise paragraphs (c);
0
d. Amend paragraph (e)(4) by removing the word ``believes'' and adding
in its place the word ``determines'';
0
e. Amend the first sentence of paragraph (h) by removing the word
[[Page 90355]]
``Sponsors'' and adding in its place the words ``For congregate meal
services, sponsors''; and
0
f. Add paragraph (i).
The additions and revision read as follows:
Sec. 225.16 Meal service requirements.
* * * * *
(b) * * *
(5) Non-congregate meal service. A sponsor of a site must have the
administrative capability; the capacity to meet State and local health,
safety, and sanitation requirements; and, where applicable, have
adequate food preparation and holding facilities to be approved to
serve non-congregate meals. Sponsors of sites that are approved to
provide non-congregate meals in rural areas with no congregate meal
service must:
(i) Obtain prior written parental consent, if meals are to be
delivered to a child's home, as described in Sec. 225.14(d)(6).
(ii) Serve meals as described in paragraph (b)(3) of this section.
(iii) Comply with meal service time requirements described in
paragraphs (c)(1), (4), and (5) of this section.
(iv) Claim reimbursement for all eligible meals served to children
at sites in areas in which poor economic conditions exist, as defined
in Sec. 225.2. At all other sites, only the non-congregate meals
served to children who meet the eligibility standards for this Program
may be reimbursed.
(c) Meal service times. (1) Meal service times must be:
(i) Established by sponsors for each site;
(ii) Included in the sponsor's application; and
(iii) Approved by the State agency. Approval of meal service times
must be in accordance with the State agency or sponsor's capacity to
monitor the full meal service during a review.
(2) Except for non-congregate meal service, breakfast meals must be
served at or close to the beginning of a child's day. Three component
meals served after a lunch or supper meal service are not eligible for
reimbursement as a breakfast.
(3) At all sites except residential camps and non-congregate meal
service, meal services must start at least one hour after the end of
the previous meal or snack.
(4) Meals served outside the approved meal service time:
(i) Are not eligible for reimbursement; and
(ii) May be approved for reimbursement by the State agency only if
an unanticipated event, outside of the sponsor's control, occurs. The
State agency may request documentation to support approval of meals
claimed when an unanticipated event occurs.
(5) The State agency must approve any permanent or planned changes
in meal service time.
(6) If congregate meals are not prepared on site:
(i) Meal deliveries must arrive before the approved meal service
time; and
(ii) Meals must be delivered within one hour of the start of the
meal service if the site does not have adequate storage to hold hot or
cold meals at the temperatures required by State or local health
regulations.
* * * * *
(i) Non-congregate meal service options. The options described in
this paragraph (i) are available to all types of sponsors in good
standing, as defined in Sec. 225.2, that are approved to operate non-
congregate meal service sites. The State agency may limit the use of
these options on a case-by-case basis, if it determines that a sponsor
does not have the capability to operate or oversee non-congregate meal
services at their sites. The State agency may not limit the use of
options to only certain types of sponsors. The State agency's decision
to prohibit a sponsor from using the options described in this
paragraph (i) is not an appealable action. Sponsors in good standing
may elect to use any of the following options:
(1) Multi-day meal issuance. Approved sponsors may distribute up to
the allowable number of reimbursable meals that would be provided over
a 10-calendar day period. The State agency may establish a shorter time
period, on a case-by-case basis. Sponsors electing this option must
have documented procedures, submitted with their application, in place
to ensure that the proper number of meals are distributed to each
eligible child.
(2) Parent or guardian pick-up of meals. Approved sponsors may
distribute meals to parents or guardians to take home to their
children. Sponsors electing this option must have documented
procedures, submitted with their application, in place to ensure that
meals are only distributed to parents or guardians of eligible children
and that duplicate meals are not distributed to any child.
(3) Bulk meal components. Approved self-preparation sponsors may
provide bulk food items that meet the minimum amounts of each food
component of a reimbursable meal breakfast, lunch, supper, or snack, as
described in paragraph (d) of this section. Sponsors electing this
option must ensure that:
(i) Required food components for each reimbursable meal are served,
as described in paragraph (d) of this section.
(ii) All food items that contribute to a reimbursable meal are
clearly identifiable.
(ii) Menus are provided and clearly indicate the food items and
portion sizes for each reimbursable meal.
(iv) Food preparation, such as heating or warming, is minimal.
Sponsors may offer food items that require further preparation only
with State agency and FNSRO approval.
(v) The maximum number of reimbursable meals provided to a child
does not exceed the number of meals that could be provided over a 5-
calendar day period. The State agency may establish a shorter or longer
time period, which may not exceed the time period for which the sponsor
is approved for multi-day meal issuance, on a case-by-case basis.
0
20. In Sec. 225.18, add paragraph (l) to read as follows:
Sec. 225.18 Miscellaneous administrative provisions.
* * * * *
(l) Updates to data sources. By January 1 each year, or as soon as
is practicable, FNS will issue any necessary updates to approved data
sources listed under the definition of ``rural'' in Sec. 225.2 to be
used for rural site designations in that program year. FNS will make
this information available and referenceable in a simplified format.
0
21. Add part 292 to read as follows:
PART 292--SUMMER ELECTRONIC BENEFITS TRANSFER PROGRAM
Sec.
Subpart A--General
292.1 General purpose and scope.
292.2 Definitions.
292.3 Administration.
292.4 [Reserved]
Subpart B--Eligibility Standards and Criteria
292.5 General purpose and scope.
292.6 Eligibility.
292.7 Period to establish eligibility.
Subpart C--Requirements of Summer EBT Agencies
292.8 Plan for Operations and Management.
292.9 Coordination between State-administered and ITO-administered
Summer EBT Programs.
292.10 Coordinated Services Plan.
292.11 Advance Planning Document (APD) processes.
292.12 Enrolling eligible children.
292.13 Application requirements.
292.14 Verification requirements.
[[Page 90356]]
Subpart D--Issuance and Use of Program Benefits
292.15 General standards.
292.16 Issuance and adjustment requirements specific to States that
administer SNAP.
292.17 Retailer integrity requirements specific to States that
administer SNAP.
292.18 Requirements specific to States that administer Nutrition
Assistance Program (NAP) programs.
292.19 Requirements specific to ITO Summer EBT agencies.
Subpart E--General Administrative Requirements
292.20 Payments to Summer EBT agencies and use of administrative
program funds.
292.21 Standards for financial management systems.
292.22 Performance criteria.
292.23 Records and reports.
292.24 Audits and management control evaluations.
292.25 Investigations.
292.26 Hearing procedure for families and Summer EBT agencies.
292.27 Claims.
292.28 Procurement standards.
292.29 Miscellaneous administrative provisions.
292.30 Severability.
292.31 [Reserved]
Authority: 42 U.S.C. 1762.
Subpart A--General
Sec. 292.1 General purpose and scope.
(a) This part establishes the regulations under which the Secretary
will administer the Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (Summer EBT)
Program. Section 13A of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch
Act authorizes the Secretary to establish a Program under which States,
and Indian Tribal Organizations (ITOs) that administer the Special
Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC),
electing to participate in the Summer EBT Program must, beginning in
Summer 2024 and annually thereafter, issue to each eligible household
Summer EBT benefits.
(b) This program was established for the purpose of providing
nutrition assistance during the summer months for each eligible child,
to ensure continued access to food when school is not in session for
the summer.
Sec. 292.2 Definitions.
2 CFR part 200 means the Uniform Administrative Requirements, Cost
Principles, and Audit Requirements for Federal Awards published by the
Office of Management and Budget (OMB). The part reference covers
applicable: Acronyms and Definitions (subpart A), General Provisions
(subpart B), Post Federal Award Requirements (subpart D), Cost
Principles (subpart E), and Audit Requirements (subpart F).
Act means the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, as
amended.
Acquisition means obtaining supplies or services through a purchase
or lease, regardless of whether the supplies or services are already in
existence or must be developed, created, or evaluated.
Administrative costs means costs incurred by a Summer EBT agency,
LEA, or local agencies operating in a formal agreement with a Summer
EBT agency related to planning, organizing, and managing a Summer EBT
Program.
Adult means, for the purposes of completing an application for
eligibility for Program benefits, any individual 18 years of age or
older.
Advance Planning Document for project planning or Planning APD (APD
or PAPD) means a brief written plan of action that requests Federal
financial participation to accomplish the planning activities necessary
for a Summer EBT agency to determine the need for, feasibility of,
projected costs and benefits of an IS equipment or services
acquisition, plan the acquisition of IS equipment and/or services, and
to acquire information necessary to prepare an Implementation APD.
Advance Planning Document Update (APDU) means a document submitted
annually (Annual APDU) by the Summer EBT agency to report the status of
project activities and expenditures in relation to the approved
Planning APD or Implementation APD; or on an as needed basis (As Needed
APDU) to request funding approval for project continuation when
significant project changes occur or are anticipated.
Cash-Value Benefit (CVB) means a type of benefit that is a fixed-
dollar amount used to obtain supplemental foods by participants served
by an ITO Summer EBT agency for the purposes of the Summer EBT Program.
Categorically eligible means considered income eligible for Summer
EBT, as applicable, based on documentation that a child is a member of
a household, as defined in this section, and one or more children in
that household are receiving assistance under SNAP, TANF, or FDPIR, or
another means tested program, as approved by the Secretary. A foster
child, homeless child, a migrant child, a Head Start child and a
runaway child, as defined in Sec. 245.2 of this chapter, are also
categorically eligible. Categorical eligibility and automatic
eligibility may be used synonymously.
Commercial Off-the-Shelf (COTS) means proprietary software products
that are ready-made and available for sale to the general public at
established catalog or market prices in which the software vendor is
not positioned as the sole implementer or integrator of the product.
Continuous school calendar means a situation in which all or part
of the student body of a school is:
(1) On a vacation for periods of 15 continuous school days or more
during the period October through April; and
(2) In attendance at regularly scheduled classes during most of the
period May through September.
Current income means income received during the month prior to
application for Summer EBT benefits. If such income does not accurately
reflect the household's annual income, income must be based on the
projected annual household income. If the prior year's income provides
an accurate reflection of the household's current annual income, the
prior year may be used as a base for the projected annual income.
Department means the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
Direct verification means the process of verifying household income
or categorical eligibility by matching against data sources or other
records without the need to contact households for documentation.
Disclosure means reveal or use individual children's program
eligibility information obtained through the Summer EBT eligibility
process for a purpose other than for the purpose for which the
information was obtained. The term refers to access, release, or
transfer of personal data about children by means of print, tape,
microfilm, microfiche, electronic communication or any other means.
Dual participation means a child simultaneously receiving benefits
from more than one State or ITO-administered Summer EBT Program, or
simultaneously receiving multiple allotments from the same State or
ITO-administered Summer EBT Program.
Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) account means a set of records
containing demographic, card, benefit, transaction, and balance data
for an individual household within the EBT system that is maintained
and managed by a Summer EBT agency or its contractor as part of the
client case record.
Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) card means a method to access EBT
benefits issued to a household member or authorized representative
through the EBT system by a benefit issuer. This method may include an
on-line magnetic stripe card, an off-line smart card, a chip card, a
contactless digital
[[Page 90357]]
wallet with a stored card, or any other similar benefit access
technology approved by USDA.
Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) contractor or vendor means an
entity that is selected to perform EBT-related services for the Summer
EBT agency.
Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) system means an electronic
payments system under which benefits are issued from and stored in a
central databank, maintained and managed by a Summer EBT agency or its
contractor, and uses electronic funds transfer technology for the
delivery and control of food and other public assistance benefits.
Eligible child means a child who meets the requirements to receive
Summer EBT benefits as provided in Sec. Sec. 292.5 and 292.6.
Eligible household means a household that includes at least one
eligible child.
Enhancement means modifications which change the functions of
software and hardware beyond their original purposes, not just to
correct errors or deficiencies which may have been present in the
software or hardware, or to improve the operational performance of the
software or hardware. Software enhancements that substantially increase
risk or cost or functionality will require submission of an IAPD or an
As Needed IAPDU.
Enrolled students means students who are enrolled in and attending
schools participating in the NSLP/SBP and who have access to a meal
service (breakfast or lunch) on a regular basis.
Expungement means the removal of Summer-EBT benefits from the EBT
account to which they were issued, typically by an EBT processor on
behalf of a Summer EBT agency.
FDPIR means the food distribution program for households on Indian
reservations operated under 7 CFR part 253, and the food distribution
program for Indian households in Oklahoma under 7 CFR part 254.
FNS means the Food and Nutrition Service, United States Department
of Agriculture.
FNSRO means an FNS Regional Office.
Firm, as used in this part:
(1) Means:
(i) A retail food store that is authorized to accept or redeem
Summer EBT benefits;
(ii) A retail food store that is not authorized to accept or redeem
Summer EBT benefits; or
(iii) An entity that does not meet the definition of a retail food
store in Sec. 271.2 of this chapter.
(2) For purposes of the regulations in this part the terms firm,
entity, retailer, and store may be used interchangeably.
Food instrument, as applicable to ITO Summer EBT agencies, means
the definition set forth in WIC regulations at Sec. 246.2 of this
chapter.
Household means a group of related or nonrelated individuals, who
are not residents of an institution or boarding house, but who are
living as one economic unit.
Implementation Advance Planning Document or Implementation APD
(IAPD) means a written plan of action requesting Federal financial
participation (FFP) to acquire and implement Electronic Benefit
Transaction services. The Implementation APD includes the general
design, development, testing, and implementation phases of the project
during its initiation. Once the Summer EBT process becomes more routine
(e.g., after its initial implementation), the IAPD will be streamlined
to include one the following documents as outlined in this section and
in FNS Handbook 901:
(1) Transmittal letter.
(2) Cost Allocation Plan.
(3) Pre-conversion outlays (where applicable).
(4) Brief schedule of events and payments, and budget.
Income eligibility guidelines means the household-size and income
standards prescribed annually by the Secretary for determining income
eligibility for reduced price meals under the National School Lunch
Program and the School Breakfast Program.
Indian Tribal Organization (ITO) means an Indian Tribe, band, or
group recognized by the Department of the Interior or an intertribal
council or group which is an authorized representative of Indian
Tribes, bands or groups recognized by the Department of the Interior
and which has an ongoing relationship with such Tribes, bands or
groups. For the purposes of the Summer EBT Program, this definition
only includes those Indian Tribal Organizations which administer the
Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children
(WIC Program) established under section 17 of the Child Nutrition Act
of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786). For the purposes of the Summer EBT Program,
an administering Indian Tribal Organization is also referred to as a
``Summer EBT agency''.
Information System (IS) means a combination of hardware and
software, data and telecommunications that performs specific functions
to support the Summer EBT agency, or other Federal, State, or local
organization.
Instructional year means the period from July 1 of the prior year
through one day prior to the summer operational period.
ITO Service Area means the geographic area served by an ITO Summer
EBT agency.
Local Education Agency (LEA) means a public board of education or
other public or private nonprofit authority legally constituted within
a State for either administrative control or direction of, or to
perform a service function for, public or private nonprofit elementary
schools or secondary schools in a city, county, township, school
district, or other political subdivision of a State, or for a
combination of school districts or counties that is recognized in a
State as an administrative agency for its public or private nonprofit
elementary schools or secondary schools. The term also includes any
other public or private nonprofit institution or agency having
administrative control and direction of a public or private nonprofit
elementary school or secondary school, including residential child care
institutions, Bureau of Indian Affairs schools, and educational service
agencies and consortia of those agencies, as well as the State
educational agency in a State or territory in which the State
educational agency is the sole educational agency for all public or
private nonprofit schools.
NSLP/SBP means the National School Lunch Program established under
the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1751 et
seq.) and/or the School Breakfast Program established under the Child
Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.).
NSLP/SBP application means an application for free and reduced
price meals, submitted by a household for a child or children enrolled
at an NSLP- or SBP-participating school(s). Eligibility determinations
based on NSLP/SBP applications may be used to confer eligibility for
Summer EBT.
OIG means the Office of Inspector General of the Department.
Period of eligibility means the period of time from the first day
of instructional year, as defined in this section, immediately
preceding the summer operational period, as defined in this section,
through the last day of the summer operational period.
Planning Advanced Planning Document (PAPD) means a brief written
plan of action that requests FFP to accomplish the planning activities
necessary for a Summer EBT agency to determine the need for,
feasibility of, projected costs and benefits of EBT service
acquisitions, plan the acquisition of EBT services, and to acquire
information necessary to
[[Page 90358]]
prepare an Implementation APD when there is a change or an enhancement
to the EBT technology.
Program means the Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer for Children
Program authorized by section 13A of the Richard B. Russell National
School Lunch Act, 42 U.S.C. 1762.
Program funds means Federal financial assistance made available to
Summer EBT agencies for the purpose of making Program payments.
Project means a related set of information technology related
tasks, undertaken by a Summer EBT agency, to improve the efficiency,
economy and effectiveness of administration and/or operation of its
human services programs. A project may also be a less comprehensive
activity such as office automation, enhancements to an existing system,
or an upgrade of computer hardware.
Request for Proposal (RFP) means the document used for public
solicitations of competitive proposals from qualified sources as
outlined in paragraphs (1) through (7) of this definition:
(1) In competitive negotiation, proposals are requested from a
number of sources and the Request for Proposal is publicized,
negotiations are normally conducted with more than one of the sources
submitting offers, and either a fixed-price or cost-reimbursable type
contract is awarded, as appropriate.
(2) Competitive negotiation may be used if conditions are
appropriate for the use of formal advertising. If competitive
negotiation is used for procurement under a grant, the following
requirements must apply:
(i) Proposals must be solicited from an adequate number of
qualified sources to permit reasonable competition consistent with the
nature and requirements of the procurement. The Request for Proposals
must be publicized and reasonable requests by other sources to compete
must be honored to the maximum extent practicable.
(ii) The Request for Proposal must identify significant evaluation
factors, including price or cost where required and their relative
importance.
(iii) The Summer EBT agency must provide procedures for technical
evaluation of the proposals received, determinations of responsible
offerors for the purpose of written or oral discussions, and selection
for contract award.
(iv) Award may be made to the responsible offeror whose proposal
will be most advantageous to the Summer EBT agency, price and other
factors considered. Unsuccessful offerors should be notified promptly.
(v) State agencies may utilize competitive negotiation procedures
for procurement of architectural/engineering professional services
whereby competitors' qualifications are evaluated, and the most
qualified competitor is selected subject to negotiation of fair and
reasonable compensation.
Rolling verification means sampling applications for verification
on a rolling basis from the beginning of the instructional year
immediately preceding the summer operational period.
School aged means the years in which a child is required to attend
school, or an equivalent program as defined by State or Tribal law.
Also known as the age requirement for compulsory education.
Secretary means the Secretary of Agriculture.
SNAP means the program operated pursuant to the Food and Nutrition
Act of 2008.
SNAP eligible foods means any food or food product that meets the
definition of eligible foods at Sec. 271.2 of this chapter.
SNAP retail food store means an establishment that meets the
definition of retail food store at Sec. 271.2 of this chapter.
Special provision school means, for the purposes of Summer EBT,
those schools which do not collect NSLP/SBP applications annually
described in section 11(a)(1)(B)-(F) of the Richard B. Russell National
School Lunch Act (NSLA) which are provision 1 at Sec. 245.9(a) of this
chapter, provision 2 at Sec. 245.9(b) and (c) of this chapter,
provision 3 at Sec. 245.9(d) and (e) of this chapter, and the
community eligibility provision codified at Sec. 245.9(f) of this
chapter.
State means any of the fifty States, the District of Columbia, the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, Guam, American
Samoa, or the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands.
Streamlined certification means automatically enrolling an eligible
child for Summer EBT, without need for further application or
confirmation of school enrollment.
Summer EBT application means an application submitted to a Summer
EBT agency or an NSLP/SBP-participating school by a household for a
child or children who are enrolled at a NSLP/SBP-participating school
for Summer EBT benefits. Eligibility determinations based on Summer EBT
applications may not be used to confer eligibility for the NSLP/SBP.
Summer EBT agency, as used in this part:
(1) Means:
(i)(A) Any agency of State government that has been designated by
the Governor or other appropriate executive or legislative authority of
the State which is responsible for the administration of the Summer EBT
Program within the State and enters into a written agreement with USDA
to administer Summer EBT. In those States where such assistance
programs are operated on a decentralized basis, it includes all State
agencies that assist with administration of the Summer EBT Program
unless otherwise specified.
(B) Coordinating Summer EBT agencies have an inter-agency written
agreement with partnering Summer EBT agencies to administer the
Program, as applicable.
(ii) An ITO that is responsible for the administration of the
Summer EBT Program and has entered into a written agreement with USDA
to administer Summer EBT.
(2) Summer EBT agencies may be further described to clarify roles
and requirements, as necessary, including:
(i) Coordinating Summer EBT agency means the Summer EBT agency
within a State that is designated as the primary point of contact for
USDA for the Summer EBT Program within the State or ITO and is
responsible for the effective and efficient administration of the
Program.
(ii) Partnering Summer EBT agency means a Summer EBT agency other
than the coordinating Summer EBT agency that has a role in
administration of the Program.
(iii) ITO Summer EBT agency means an agency of an ITO that
administers the Program on behalf of the ITO.
(iv) State Summer EBT agency means an agency of a State that
administers the Program on behalf of the State.
Summer operational period means the benefit period that generally
reflects the period between the end of classes during the current
school year and the start of classes for the next school year, as
determined by the Summer EBT agency.
Supplemental foods means, for the purposes of ITOs administering
the Summer EBT Program, foods--
(1) Containing nutrients determined by nutritional research to be
lacking in the diets of children; and
(2) Promoting the health of the population served by the program
under this section, as indicated by relevant nutrition science, public
health concerns, and cultural eating patterns, as determined by FNS;
and
[[Page 90359]]
(3) Supplemental foods authorized for the WIC Program by the
applicable WIC ITO meet the requirements set forth in this definition,
excluding infant foods and infant formula.
System error means an error resulting from a malfunction at any
point in the redemption process. These adjustments may occur after the
availability date and may result in either a debit or credit to the
household.
TANF means the State funded program under part A of title IV of the
Social Security Act that the Secretary determines complies with
standards established by the Secretary that ensure that the standards
under the State program are comparable to or more restrictive than
those in effect on June 1, 1995. This program is commonly referred to
as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, although States may refer
to the program by another name.
Trafficking means:
(1)(i) The buying, selling, stealing, or otherwise effecting an
exchange of Summer EBT benefits issued and accessed via Electronic
Benefit Transfer (EBT) cards, card numbers, and personal identification
numbers (PINs), or by manual voucher and signature, for cash or
consideration other than eligible food, either directly, indirectly, in
complicity or collusion with others, or acting alone;
(ii) The exchange of firearms, ammunition, explosives, or
controlled substances, as defined in 21 U.S.C. 802, for Summer EBT
benefits;
(iii) Purchasing a product with Summer EBT benefits that has a
container requiring a return deposit with the intent of obtaining cash
by intentionally discarding the product and intentionally returning the
container for the deposit amount;
(iv) Purchasing a product with Summer EBT benefits with the intent
of obtaining cash or consideration other than eligible food by
reselling the product, and subsequently intentionally reselling the
product purchased with Summer EBT benefits in exchange for cash or
consideration other than eligible food; or
(v) Intentionally purchasing products originally purchased with
Summer EBT benefits in exchange for cash or consideration other than
eligible food.
(2) Attempting to buy, sell, steal, or otherwise affect an exchange
of Summer EBT benefits issued and accessed via Electronic Benefit
Transfer (EBT) cards, card numbers and personal identification numbers
(PINs), or by manual voucher and signatures, for cash or consideration
other than eligible food, either directly, indirectly, in complicity or
collusion with others, or acting alone.
Vendor means a sole proprietorship, partnership, cooperative
association, corporation, or other business entity operating one or
more stores enrolled by an ITO for the purposes of the Summer EBT
Program to provide supplemental foods in areas approved for service. To
be eligible for the Summer EBT Program, the vendor must be authorized
by the WIC ITO to provide authorized supplemental foods to WIC
participants under a retail food delivery system.
Verification means confirmation of eligibility for the Summer EBT
Program when a child's eligibility is established through a Summer EBT
application. Verification includes confirmation of income eligibility
and, at State or local discretion, may also include confirmation of any
other information required in the application. Direct verification, as
outlined in Sec. 292.14(e), must be attempted prior to contacting the
household. If such efforts are unsuccessful, verification may be
accomplished by examining information provided by the household such as
wage stubs, or by other means as specified in Sec. 292.14(f)(3). If a
SNAP or TANF case number or a FDPIR case number or other identifier is
provided for a child, verification for such child must only include
confirmation that the child is a member of a household receiving SNAP,
TANF, or FDPIR benefits.
Verification for cause means verification of questionable
applications, on a case-by-case basis, such as an instance when the
Summer EBT agency is made aware of conflicting or inconsistent
information than what was provided on the application.
WIC or WIC Program means the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program
for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) established under section 17 of
the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786).
Sec. 292.3 Administration.
(a) Delegation to FNS. FNS must act on behalf of USDA in the
administration of the Program.
(b) Delegation to a State or ITO. The Governor or other appropriate
executive or legislative authority of the State or ITO will designate
one or more Summer EBT agencies to be responsible for the
administration of the Summer EBT Program within the State or ITO. If
more than one Summer EBT agency is named within a State or ITO, a
coordinating Summer EBT agency must be named. All other Summer EBT
agencies will be partnering Summer EBT agencies.
(1) Coordinating Summer EBT agency. (i) Each coordinating Summer
EBT agency must enter into a written agreement with USDA for the
administration of the Program in accordance with the applicable
requirements of this part.
(ii) The coordinating Summer EBT agency is:
(A) The primary point of contact for the Summer EBT Program within
the State or ITO;
(B) Responsible for the complete and timely submission of any
required plans, forms, and reports;
(C) Responsible for activities as outlined in the inter-agency
written agreement; and
(D) Responsible for the effective and efficient administration of
the Program in accordance with the requirements of this part; the
Department's regulations governing nondiscrimination (7 CFR parts 15,
15a, and 15b); governing administration of grants (2 CFR part 200,
subparts A through F, and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts
400 and 415); governing non-procurement debarment/suspension (2 CFR
part 180 and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR part 417);
governing restrictions on lobbying (2 CFR part 200, subpart E, and USDA
implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400, 415, and 418); and
governing the drug-free workplace requirements (2 CFR part 182); FNS
guidelines; and, instructions issued under the FNS Directives
Management System.
(2) Partnering Summer EBT agencies. (i) Each partnering Summer EBT
agency must enter into a written agreement with USDA for the
administration of the Program in accordance with the applicable
requirements of this part.
(ii) The partnering Summer EBT agency is:
(A) Responsible for activities as outlined in the inter-agency
written agreement. If only one Agency will be responsible for the
administration of Summer EBT, designation of partnering agencies is not
applicable.
(B) Responsible for the effective and efficient administration of
the Program in accordance with the requirements of this part; the
Department's regulations governing nondiscrimination (7 CFR parts 15,
15a, and 15b); governing administration of grants (2 CFR part 200,
subparts A through F, and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts
400 and 415); governing non-procurement debarment/suspension (2 CFR
part 180 and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR part 417);
governing restrictions on lobbying (2 CFR part 200, subpart E, and USDA
implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400, 415, and 418); and
governing the drug-free workplace requirements (2
[[Page 90360]]
CFR part 182); FNS guidelines; and, instructions issued under the FNS
Directives Management System.
(c) Designation of responsibility among Summer EBT agencies and
requirements for written inter-agency agreements. To ensure clear roles
and responsibilities, the coordinating Summer EBT agency and any
partnering Summer EBT agency or agencies must enter into an inter-
agency written agreement that defines the roles and responsibilities of
each, as well as the administrative structure and lines of authority,
if applicable.
(1) The inter-agency written agreement should outline the Summer
EBT agencies assignment of responsibilities including, but not limited
to:
(i) Certification and enrollment of children;
(ii) Issuance, control, and accountability of Summer EBT benefits
and EBT cards;
(iii) Developing and maintaining complaint procedures;
(iv) Developing, conducting, and evaluating training;
(v) Keeping records necessary to determine whether the program is
being conducted in compliance with the requirements in this part for
the proper storage and use of data. The records must survive the
duration of this agreement;
(vi) Submitting accurate and timely financial and program plans,
forms, and reports; and
(vii) Public notification and participant support.
(2) [Reserved]
(d) Suspension, termination, and closeout procedures. Whenever it
is determined that a Summer EBT agency has materially failed to comply
with the provisions of this part, FNS may suspend or terminate the
agreement between FNS and the Summer EBT agency or agencies or take any
other action as may be available and appropriate. A Summer EBT agency
may also terminate the agreement, but must provide FNS at least 60 days
advance written notice, including a detailed explanation and the
proposed effective date of the change. FNS and the Summer EBT agency
shall comply with the provisions of 2 CFR part 200, subpart D, and USDA
implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 and 415 concerning grant
suspension termination and closeout procedures.
(e) Authority to waive statute and regulations for State Summer EBT
agencies. (1) As authorized under section 12(l) of the Richard B.
Russell National School Lunch Act, 42 U.S.C. 1760(l), FNS may waive
provisions of such Act or the Child Nutrition Act of 1966, as amended,
and the provisions of this part with respect to a State or eligible
service provider. The provisions of this part required by other
statutes may not be waived under this authority. FNS may only approve
requests for a waiver that are submitted by a State Summer EBT agency
and comply with the requirements at section 12(l)(1) and the
limitations at section 12(l)(4), including that FNS may not grant a
waiver that increases Federal costs.
(2) A State Summer EBT agency may submit a request for a waiver
under paragraph (e)(1) of this section in accordance with section
12(l)(2) and the provisions of this part.
(3) A State Summer EBT agency may submit a request to waive
specific statutory or regulatory requirements on behalf of eligible
service providers that operate in the State. Any waiver where the State
concurs must be submitted to the appropriate FNSRO.
(4) An eligible service provider may submit a request for a waiver
under paragraph (e)(1) of this section in accordance with section 12(l)
and the provisions of this part.
(i) Any waiver request submitted by an eligible service provider
must be submitted to the State Summer EBT agency for review.
(ii) A State Summer EBT agency must act promptly on such a waiver
request and must deny or concur with a request submitted by an eligible
service provider.
(iii) If a State Summer EBT agency concurs with a request from an
eligible service provider, the Summer EBT agency must promptly forward
to the appropriate FNSRO the request and a rationale, consistent with
section 12(l)(2), supporting the request.
(iv) By forwarding the request to the FNSRO, the State Summer EBT
agency affirms:
(A) The request meets all requirements for waiver submissions; and,
(B) The State Summer EBT agency will conduct all monitoring
requirements related to regular Program operations and the
implementation of the waiver.
(v) If the State Summer EBT agency denies the request, the State
Summer EBT agency must notify the requesting eligible service provider
and state the reason for denying the request in writing within 30
calendar days of the State Summer EBT agency's receipt of the request.
The State Summer EBT agency response is final and may not be appealed
to FNS.
(f) Waivers for ITO Summer EBT agencies. (1) The Secretary may
waive or modify specific regulatory provisions of this part for one or
more ITO Summer EBT agency. Waivers may be issued following an ITO
Summer EBT agency request or at the discretion of USDA.
(2) To be approvable, a waiver must:
(i) Address a specific regulatory provision which cannot be
implemented effectively by the requesting ITO operation;
(ii) Result in more effective and efficient administration of the
Program;
(iii) Be consistent with the provisions of the Act; and
(iv) Not result in material impairment of any statutory or
regulatory rights of participants or potential participants.
(3) When submitting requests for waivers, ITO Summer EBT agencies
must provide compelling justification for the waiver in terms of how
the waiver will improve the efficiency and effectiveness of the
administration of the Program. At a minimum, requests for waivers must
include, but not necessarily be limited to:
(i) Reasons why the waiver is needed;
(ii) Anticipated impact on service to participants or potential
participants who would be affected;
(iii) Anticipated time period for which the waiver is needed; and
(iv) A thorough description of the proposed waiver and how it would
be implemented.
Sec. 292.4 [Reserved]
Subpart B--Eligibility Standards and Criteria
Sec. 292.5 General purpose and scope.
(a) Summer EBT eligibility is based on the eligibility standards
for the NSLP/SBP, which includes children who are income eligible for
free or reduced-price school meals based on the Income Eligibility
Guidelines published by the Department by notice in the Federal
Register and in accordance with the household size and income standards
for free and reduced price school meals, and children who are
categorically eligible, as defined in Sec. 292.2.
(b) The Income Eligibility Guidelines are published annually and
change on July 1. The guidelines in effect on the date of application
must be used to determine eligibility.
Sec. 292.6 Eligibility.
Children eligible for Summer EBT include those who, at any time
during the period of eligibility, are:
(a) School-aged and categorically eligible.
(b) Enrolled in an NSLP/SBP-participating school, except for
special provision schools, and:
(1) Categorically eligible;
[[Page 90361]]
(2) Meet the requirements to receive free or reduced price meals at
Sec. 292.5(a), as determined through an NSLP/SBP application;
(3) Otherwise are determined eligible to receive a free or reduced
price meal; or
(4) Determined eligible through a Summer EBT application,
consistent with Sec. 292.13.
(c) Enrolled in a special provision school, and:
(1) Categorically eligible;
(2) Otherwise meet the requirements to receive free or reduced
price meals at Sec. 292.5(a), as determined through an NSLP/SBP
application; or
(3) Determined eligible through a Summer EBT application,
consistent with Sec. 292.13.
Sec. 292.7 Period to establish eligibility.
(a) Eligibility for Summer EBT, as determined through an
application or by streamlined certification, may be established from
the first day of the instructional year immediately preceding the
summer operational period through the last day of the summer
operational period, as defined by the Summer EBT agency in the Plan for
Operations and Management (POM).
(b) Households are not required to report changes in circumstances
during the instructional year or summer operational period, but a
household may voluntarily contact the State or LEA to report any
changes in income, household composition, or program participation.
(c) The carryover period in the school meal programs, as required
at Sec. 245.6(c)(1) of this chapter, may not be used to confer
eligibility for Summer EBT benefits during the summer operational
period following the instructional year in which the carryover benefit
was provided as it is outside of the period to establish eligibility,
as described in paragraph (a) of this section.
Subpart C--Requirements of Summer EBT Agencies
Sec. 292.8 Plan for Operations and Management.
(a) Not later than August 15 of each year, the Summer EBT agency
must submit to the FNS Regional Office its intent to administer the
Summer EBT Program the following summer, along with an interim Plan for
Operations and Management (POM) and expenditure plan for the Summer EBT
Program for the upcoming fiscal year. For 2024 only, the Summer EBT
agency must submit to the FNS regional office its intent to administer
the Summer EBT Program by January 1, 2024, and the interim POM and
expenditure plan as soon as is practicable. The interim POM must:
(1) Include the Summer EBT agency's forecasted program
participation, anticipated administrative funding needs as part of an
expenditure plan, and other programmatic information required in
paragraphs (e) and (f) of this section, if applicable, to the extent
that such information has been determined at the time of submission.
(2) Be approved by FNS before the Summer EBT agency may draw
Federal administrative funds for the fiscal year.
(b) Not later than February 15 of each year, the Summer EBT agency
must submit to the FNS Regional Office a final POM. The final POM must:
(1) Address all the requirements of paragraphs (e) and (f) of this
section, if applicable.
(2) Be approved by FNS before the Summer EBT agency may draw
Federal food benefit funds for the fiscal year.
(c) USDA will respond to the interim and final POM, respectively,
within 30 calendar days of receipt. If the plan initially submitted is
not approved, the Summer EBT agency and USDA will collaborate to ensure
changes to the plan are submitted for approval.
(d) At any time after approval, the Summer EBT agency may amend an
interim or final POM to reflect changes. The Summer EBT agency must
submit the amendments to USDA for approval. The amendments must be
signed by the Summer EBT agency-designated official responsible for
ensuring that the Program is operated in accordance with the POM.
(e) Summer EBT agencies must include the following in their final
POM, at a minimum:
(1) A copy of the inter-agency written agreement between the Summer
EBT coordinating agency and each partnering agency that outlines the
roles and responsibilities of each as required in Sec. 292.3(e) if
applicable.
(2) An estimate of the number of participants who will be served
for the coming year.
(3) The administrative budget on behalf of the State's or ITO's
entire program operations which reflects the comprehensive needs of the
Summer EBT agencies and local education agencies. The budget must
include the Summer EBT agency's plan to comply with any standards
prescribed by the Secretary for the use of these funds, as well as an
expenditure plan reflecting planned administrative cost requirements
for the year. Should administrative fund needs change, an amended
expenditure plan is required.
(4) A plan for timely and effective action against program
violators.
(5) A plan to comply with the Summer EBT agency requirements in
Sec. Sec. 292.12 through 292.14.
(6) A plan to ensure that Summer EBT benefits are issued to
children based on their enrollment at the end of the instructional year
immediately preceding each summer.
(7) A description of enrollment procedures including, but not
limited to, applications, NSLP enrollment database, direct verification
and verification, as applicable.
(8) The plan to coordinate with an ITO Summer EBT Program or State
Summer EBT Program, as applicable, in accordance with Sec. 292.9.
(9) The procedures to detect and prevent dual participation
including a child simultaneously receiving benefits from more than one
Summer EBT Program, or simultaneously receiving multiple allotments
from the same State or ITO-administered Summer EBT Program as required
in Sec. 292.9(b)(3).
(10) A description of the issuance process including:
(i) The start and end dates of the summer operational period;
(ii) Date(s) when benefits will be issued;
(iii) Benefit issuance dates for LEAs operating on a continuous
school calendar, as applicable;
(iv) Whether benefits will be added to an existing EBT card or
other mobile payment instrument used to deliver SNAP or WIC benefits
or, instead, whether benefits will be issued on a unique Summer EBT
card or instrument;
(v) Whether benefits will be issued to each eligible child or to
households, as applicable;
(vi) How the Summer EBT agency will provide access to households
experiencing homelessness and other vulnerable populations; and
(vii) Claims procedures in cases of erroneous payments in
accordance with requirements at Sec. 292.16(g).
(11) Customer service plans including:
(i) A single point of contact for all customer service information
and inquiries including a hotline and website;
(ii) How eligible households will be informed of the availability
of program benefits and the process to apply for benefits, if
necessary; and
(iii) A simplified process for households to opt out of the
program.
(12) A copy of the fair hearing procedure for participants.
(f) In addition to the items listed in paragraph (e) of this
section, an ITO
[[Page 90362]]
Summer EBT agency must include in its POM:
(1) The service area of the ITO, a map or other visual reference
aid, and a description of any Tribal areas outside of the ITO's
jurisdiction that they propose to serve;
(2) A plan and procedures to enroll children already deemed
eligible by a State Summer EBT agency serving the same geographic area,
without further application;
(3) A plan and procedures to determine eligibility for and enroll
children who must apply through the ITO Summer EBT agency to receive
benefits because they have not already been identified as eligible,
e.g., by a State Summer EBT agency serving the same geographic area.
The ITO Summer EBT agency must use the eligibility criteria under Sec.
292.6;
(4) A description of the benefit delivery model to be used. The ITO
Summer EBT agency may use a cash-value benefit (CVB) model, a food
package model, a combination of the two, or an alternate model. The ITO
Summer EBT agency must use the same benefit model for all participants
throughout its service area;
(i) For ITOs using a CVB-only benefit delivery model, a description
of how the benefit level equal to the amount set forth in Sec.
292.15(e); or
(ii) For ITOs using a food package benefit delivery model, a
combination CVB and food package benefit delivery model, or an
alternate benefit delivery model, a description of how the benefit
level will not exceed the amount set forth in Sec. 292.15(e);
(5) The list of supplemental foods for which participants can
transact upon enrollment, excluding infant formula and infant foods;
(6) Procedures for enrolling applicable vendors to transact and
redeem Summer EBT Program benefits. As a prerequisite, such vendors
must be approved for participation in the WIC Program;
(7) A plan for providing technical assistance and training to
vendors enrolled to transact and redeem Summer EBT Program benefits;
and
(8) A plan for vendor integrity and monitoring, pursuant to Sec.
292.19.
Sec. 292.9 Coordination between State-administered and ITO-
administered Summer EBT Programs.
(a) The ITO Summer EBT agency must receive priority consideration
to serve eligible individuals within its service area, as identified in
its FNS-approved Plan for Operations and Management (POM) per Sec.
292.8.
(b) An ITO Summer EBT agency and State Summer EBT agency serving
proximate geographic areas must coordinate Summer EBT Program services,
which may include a written agreement between both parties. ITO Summer
EBT agency and State Summer EBT agency coordination must, at minimum,
include the following:
(1) The State Summer EBT agency must share data, including
household contact information, indicating those individuals deemed
eligible in the ITO Summer EBT agency's service area in a manner and
timeframe that will allow the ITO Summer EBT agency to issue program
benefits timely;
(2) The ITO Summer EBT agency and the State Summer EBT agency must
each provide notice to eligible individuals or households that they may
choose to receive Summer EBT Program benefits from either Summer EBT
agency, in addition to referral information upon individual or
household request; and
(3) The ITO Summer EBT agency and State Summer EBT agency must
coordinate to detect and prevent dual participation in the same summer
operational period when serving proximate service areas in accordance
with Sec. 292.15(d). For all student data exchanged applicable to the
Summer EBT Program, the ITO Summer EBT agency and State Summer EBT
agency must ensure the confidentiality of such data and data must only
be used for program purposes in accordance with Sec. 292.13(o).
(c) Eligible households choosing to participate in either the ITO-
operated Summer EBT Program or the State-operated Summer EBT Program
must participate in the same program for the duration of the summer
operational period in any given year.
Sec. 292.10 Coordinated Services Plan.
(a) Each State Summer EBT agency must establish, and update
annually as needed, a plan to coordinate the statewide availability of
services offered through the Summer EBT Program described in this part
and the Summer Food Service Program established in 7 CFR part 225. Each
ITO Summer EBT agency is encouraged to develop a plan coordinating
summer services available to the children and households they serve.
(b) Only one plan must be established for each State in which both
the Summer Food Service Program and the Summer EBT Program is
administered. If more than one agency administers the Summer Food
Service Program and Summer EBT within a respective State, they must
work together to develop and implement the plan. States should also
ensure that plans include the National School Lunch Program's Seamless
Summer Program if appropriate.
(c) The plan must include, at minimum, the following information:
(1) A description of the roles and responsibilities of each Summer
Food Service Program and Summer EBT agency, and, as applicable, any
other agencies, ITOs, or public or private organizations which will be
involved in administering the Programs;
(2) A description of how the Summer EBT agency and any other
organizations included in the plan will coordinate outreach and
programmatic activities to maximize the reach of the Summer Food
Service Program and Summer EBT Program; metrics to assess program reach
and coverage; and
(3) The Summer EBT agency's plans to partner with other Federal,
State, Tribal, or local programs to aid participants in accessing all
Federal, State, Tribal, or local programs for which they are eligible.
(d) States must notify the public about their plan and make it
available to the public through a website, and should, to the maximum
extent practicable, solicit and consider input on plan development and
implementation from other State agencies, ITOs, and local agencies;
organizations involved in the administration of nutrition and human
services programs; participants; and other stakeholders.
(e) States must consult with FNS on the development of and any
significant subsequent updates to their plan. Initial plans must be
submitted to FNS no later than January 1, 2025. States must submit
updates annually when significant changes are made to the plan, and
otherwise no less than every 3 years.
Sec. 292.11 Advance Planning Document (APD) processes.
(a) APD process for State agencies and ITOs. As a condition for the
initial and continued ability to claim Federal financial participation
(FFP) for the costs of the planning, development, acquisition,
installation, and implementation of Information System (IS) equipment
and services used in the administration of the Summer EBT Program,
Summer EBT agencies must adhere to the APD process in this section (see
guidance in Food and Nutrition Service's (FNS' Handbook 901 for more
information), the State Systems APD process in paragraph (b) of this
section, and for SNAP and WIC ITOs the existing APD process
requirements for Management Information Systems and/or Information
Systems as outlined in 7 CFR parts 246, 274, and 277, respectively.
Summer EBT Projects have
[[Page 90363]]
the option to include the Summer EBT Program in an existing SNAP or WIC
EBT APD or to create a separate APD specific to Summer EBT services.
Where the Summer EBT agency is a SNAP or WIC agency, changes to the
Management Information System to support Summer EBT follow the APD
processes as outlined in Sec. Sec. 246.12 and 277.18 of this chapter
(see guidance within FNS' Handbook 901 for more information). Child
Nutrition Programs do not have a similar requirement for Management
Information Systems, so the APD requirements will only apply the EBT
services projects associated with the Summer EBT Program.
(b) APD process for States. Requirements for FNS prior approval of
IS projects--
(1) For the acquisition of IS equipment or services to be utilized
in an EBT system regardless of the cost of the acquisition in
accordance with the Summer EBT issuance standards (subpart D of this
part). For Summer EBT agencies that administer SNAP and are planning
changes to their SNAP information systems to incorporate the Summer EBT
requirements, refer to Sec. 277.18 of this chapter.
(2) Specific prior approval requirements. (i) For IS projects which
require prior approval, as specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this
section, the State Summer EBT agency must obtain the prior written
approval of USDA for:
(A) Conducting planning activities, entering into contractual
agreements or making any other commitment for acquiring the necessary
planning services for the development of an initial Summer EBT services
project; and
(B) Conducting design, development, testing or implementation
activities, entering into contractual agreements or making any other
commitment for the acquisition of IS equipment or services.
(ii) For IS equipment and services acquisitions requiring prior
approval as specified in paragraph (b)(1) of this section, prior
approval of the following documents associated with such acquisitions
is also required:
(A) Requests for Proposals (RFPs). Unless specifically exempted by
FNS, the State Summer EBT agency must obtain prior written approval of
the RFP before the RFP may be released. The State Summer EBT agency
must obtain prior written approval from FNS for RFPs which are
associated with an EBT system regardless of the cost.
(B) Contracts. All contracts must be submitted to FNS. The State
Summer EBT agency must obtain prior written approval from FNS for
contracts which are associated with an EBT system regardless of the
cost.
(C) Contract amendments. All contract amendments must be submitted
to FNS. Unless specifically exempted by FNS, the State Summer EBT
agency must obtain prior written approval from FNS of any contract
amendments which cumulatively exceed 20 percent of the base contract
costs before being signed by the State Summer EBT agency.
(3) Procurement requirements. (i) Procurements of IS equipment and
services are subject to Sec. 277.14 of this chapter (procurement
standards) regardless of any conditions for prior approval contained in
this section, except the requirements of Sec. 277.14(b)(1) and (2) of
this chapter regarding review of proposed contracts. The procurement
standards in Sec. 277.14(b)(1) and (2) include a requirement for
maximum practical open and free competition regardless of whether the
procurement is formally advertised or negotiated.
(ii) The standards prescribed by Sec. 277.14 of this chapter, as
well as the requirement for prior approval in this paragraph (b), apply
to IS services and equipment acquired primarily to support Summer EBT
regardless of the acquiring entity.
(iii) The competitive procurement policy prescribed by Sec. 277.14
of this chapter must be applicable except for IS services provided by
the agency itself, or by other State or local agencies.
(iv) The following FNS-required provisions as required under 2 CFR
part 200, appendix II, apply to Summer EBT procurements as well:
(A) Compliance with Executive Order 11246 related to equal
employment opportunity.
(B) Compliance with Clean Air Act (42 U.S.C. 7401-7671q).
(C) Compliance with Clean Water Act (33 U.S.C. 1251-1387).
(D) Compliance with Anti-Lobbying Act.
(E) Compliance with Americans with Disabilities Act.
(F) Compliance with drug-free workplace requirements.
(G) Compliance with suspension/debarment requirements.
(H) USDA has royalty-free rights to use software and documentation
developed.
(I) The State Summer EBT agency must obtain prior written approval
from FNS, as specified in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this section, to
claim and receive reimbursement for the associated costs of the IS
acquisition.
(4) Document submission requirements. (i) For IS projects requiring
prior approval as specified in paragraphs (b)(1) and (2) of this
section, the State Summer EBT agency must submit the following
documents to FNS for approval:
(A) Planning APD as described in Sec. 292.2.
(B) Implementation APD as described in Sec. 292.2.
(C) Annual APDU as described in Sec. 292.2 for the initial Summer
EBT implementation.
(ii) The Annual APDU must be submitted to FNS 60 days prior to the
expiration of the FFP approval, unless the submission date is
specifically altered by USDA. In years where an As Needed APDU is
required, as described in Sec. 292.2, FNS may waive or modify the
requirement to submit the annual APDU. The requirement in this
paragraph (b)(4)(ii) will only apply to the initial implementation of
Summer EBT.
(iii) As Needed APDU as described in Sec. 292.2. As Needed APDU
are required to obtain a commitment of FFP whenever significant project
changes occur. Significant project changes are defined as changes in
cost, schedule, scope or strategy which exceed FNS-defined thresholds
or triggers. Without such approval, the Summer EBT agency is at risk
for funding of project activities which are not in compliance with the
terms and conditions of the approved APD and subsequently approved APDU
until such time as approval is specifically granted by FNS.
(iv) Acquisition documents as described in Sec. 277.14(g) of this
chapter for Summer EBT agencies that administer SNAP (see guidance
within in FNS Handbook 901 for more information), or for Summer EBT
services projects utilizing an existing or new SNAP EBT services
contract for Summer EBT.
(v) Emergency acquisition requests as described in paragraph (j) of
this section.
(c) Prior approval. The State Summer EBT agency must obtain prior
FNS approval of the documents specified in paragraph (b)(4)(i) of this
section in order to claim and receive reimbursement for the associated
costs of the IS acquisition.
(d) Approval by the State Summer EBT agency. Approval by the State
Summer EBT agency is required for all documents and acquisitions
specified in this subpart prior to submission for FNS approval.
However, the State Summer EBT agency may delegate approval authority to
any subordinate entity for those acquisitions of IS equipment and
services not requiring prior approval by FNS.
[[Page 90364]]
(e) Prompt action on requests for prior approval. FNS will reply
promptly to State Summer EBT agency requests for prior approval. If FNS
has not provided written approval, disapproval, or a request for
additional information within 60 days of FNS' acknowledgment of receipt
of the State Summer EBT agency's request, the request will be deemed to
have provisionally met the prior approval requirement in paragraph (b)
of this section. However, provisional approval will not exempt a State
Summer EBT agency from having to meet all other Federal requirements
which pertain to the acquisition of IS equipment and services. Such
requirements remain subject to Federal audit and review.
(f) APD content requirements--(1) Planning APD (PAPD). The PAPD is
a written plan of action to acquire proposed services or equipment and
to perform necessary activities to investigate the feasibility, system
alternatives, requirements and resources needed to replace, modify, or
upgrade the State Summer EBT agency's IS. The PAPD must contain
adequate documentation to demonstrate the need to undertake a planning
process, as well as a thorough description of the proposed planning
activities, and estimated costs and timeline (see guidance within FNS'
Handbook 901 for more information).
(2) Implementation APD (IAPD). The IAPD is a written plan of action
to acquire the proposed IS services or equipment and to perform
necessary activities to design, develop, acquire, install, test, and
implement the new IS. The IAPD must contain detailed documentation of
planning and preparedness for the proposed project, (see guidance
within FNS' Handbook 901 for more information), demonstrating the
feasibility of the project, thorough analysis of system requirements
and design, a rigorous management approach, stewardship of Federal
funds, a realistic schedule and budget, and preliminary plans for key
project phases. The IAPD must be submitted and approved prior to
incurring any costs under the new EBT service contract.
(3) Annual APDU content requirements. The Annual APDU is a yearly
update to ongoing IS projects when planning or implementation
activities occur. The Annual APDU must contain documentation on the
project activity status and a description of major tasks, milestones,
budget, and any changes (see guidance within FNS' Handbook 901 for more
information).
(4) As Needed APDU content requirements.
The As Needed APDU document must contain the items as defined in
paragraph (b)(4)(ii) of this section with emphasis on the area(s) where
changes have occurred or are anticipated that triggered the submission
of the APDU (see guidance within FNS' Handbook 901 for more
information).''
Paragraph (d) should read: (q) APD process for ITOs. For the
acquisition of IS equipment or services to be utilized in an EBT system
regardless of the cost of the acquisition in accordance with the Summer
EBT issuance standards in subpart D to this part, WIC EBT coordinating
Summer EBT agencies, administering WIC, that are planning changes to
their ITO Management Information Systems to incorporate the Summer EBT
requirements should refer to the APD process requirements outlined in 7
CFR 246.12, 2 CFR part 200, appendix XI, and the APD process in this
section (see guidance within FNS' Handbook 901 for more information).
(g) Service agreements. (1) The State Summer EBT agency must
execute service agreements when IS services are to be provided by a
State central IT facility or another State or local agency. Service
agreement means the document signed by the State or local agency and
the State or local central IT facility whenever an IT facility provides
IT services to the State or local agency. Service agreements must:
(i) Identify the IS services that will be provided;
(ii) Include a schedule of rates for each identified IS service,
and a certification that these rates apply equally to all users;
(iii) Include a description of the method(s) of accounting for the
services rendered under the agreement and computing services charges;
(iv) Include assurances that services provided will be timely and
satisfactory;
(v) Include assurances that information in the IS as well as
access, use and disposal of IS data will be safeguarded in accordance
with provisions of Sec. Sec. 272.1(c) (disclosure) and 277.13
(property) of this chapter;
(vi) Require the provider to obtain prior approval from FNS
pursuant to paragraph (b) of this section for IS equipment and IS
services that are acquired from commercial sources primarily to support
federally aided public assistance programs and require the provider to
comply with Sec. 277.14 of this chapter (procurement standards) for
procurements related to the service agreement. IS equipment and
services are considered to be primarily acquired to support federally
aided public assistance programs when the Programs may reasonably be
expected to either be billed for more than 50 percent of the total
charges made to all users of the IS equipment and services during the
time period covered by the service agreement, or directly charged for
the total cost of the purchase or lease of IS equipment or services;
(vii) Include the beginning and ending dates of the period of time
covered by the service agreement; and
(viii) Include a schedule of expected total charges to the Program
for the period of the service agreement.
(2) The State Summer EBT agency must maintain a copy of each
service agreement in its files for Federal review upon request.
(h) Basis for continued Federal financial participation (FFP)--(1)
General. FNS will continue FFP at the levels approved in the Planning
APD and the Implementation APD provided that project development
proceeds in accordance with the conditions and terms of the approved
APD and that IS resources are used for the purposes authorized. FNS
will use the APDU to monitor IS project development. The submission of
the update as prescribed in paragraph (b)(4) of this section for the
duration of project development is a condition for continued FFP. In
addition, periodic onsite reviews of IS project development and State
and local agency IS operations may be conducted by or for FNS to assure
compliance with approved APDs, proper use of IS resources, and the
adequacy of State or local agency IS operations.
(2) Pre-implementation. The State Summer EBT agency must
demonstrate through thorough testing that the system meets all program
functional and performance requirements. FNS may require a pre-
implementation review of the system to validate system functionality
prior to Summer EBT agency testing.
(3) Testing. The State Summer EBT agency must commit to completing
and submitting the following documents for FNS approval and obtaining
such approval prior to issuance of benefits to eligible households in
the project area:
(i) Functional demonstration. A functional demonstration of the
functional requirements prescribed in this part in combination with the
system components described by the approved system design is
recommended in order to identify and resolve any problems prior to
acceptance testing. The Department reserves the right to participate in
the functional demonstration if one is conducted. FNS may require that
any or all of these tests be repeated in instances where significant
modifications are made to
[[Page 90365]]
the system after these tests are initially completed or if problems
that surfaced during initial testing warrant a retest.
(ii) An Acceptance Test Plan. The Acceptance Test Plan for the
project must describe the methodology to be utilized to verify that the
EBT system complies with Program requirements and System Design
specifications. At a minimum, the Acceptance Test Plan must address:
(A) The types of testing to be performed;
(B) The organization of the test team and associated
responsibilities, test database generation, test case development, test
schedule, and the documentation of test results. Acceptance testing
must include functional requirements testing, error condition handling
and destructive testing, security testing, recovery testing, controls
testing, stress and throughput performance testing, and regression
testing; and
(C) A ``what-if'' component must also be included to permit the
opportunity for observers and participants to test possible scenarios
in a free-form manner.
(iii) Independent testing. The Department reserves the right to
participate and conduct independent testing as necessary during the
acceptance testing and appropriate events during system design,
development, implementation, and operation.
(iv) An acceptance test report. The State Summer EBT agency must
provide a separate report after the completion of the acceptance test
only in instances where FNS is not present at the testing or when
serious problems are uncovered during the testing that remain
unresolved by the end of the test session. The report must summarize
the activities, describe any discrepancies, describe the proposed
solutions to discrepancies, and the timetable for their retesting and
completion. In addition, the report must contain the State Summer EBT
agency's recommendations regarding implementation of the EBT system.
(v) A prototype food retailer agreement. The State Summer EBT
agency must enter an agreement with each FNS authorized retailer that
complies with the requirements under Sec. 274.3 of this chapter.
(vi) An implementation plan. (A) The implementation plan must
include the following:
(1) A description of the tools, procedures, detailed schedules, and
resources needed to implement the project;
(2) The equipment acquisition and installation requirements,
ordering schedules, and system and component testing;
(3) A phase-in-strategy which permits a measured and orderly
transition from one EBT system to another. In describing this strategy,
the plan must address schedules that avoid disruption of normal
shopping patterns and operations of participating children and food
retailers. Training of Summer EBT eligible children, State Summer EBT
agency personnel and retailers and/or their trainers must be
coordinated with the installation of equipment in retail stores;
(4) A description of on-going tasks associated with fine-tuning the
system and making any corrective actions necessary to meet contractual
requirements. The description must also address those tasks associated
with ongoing training, document updates, equipment maintenance, on-site
support and system adjustments, as needed to meet Program requirements;
and,
(5) A plan for orderly phase-out of the project and/or for
continuing benefit issuance operations if it is demonstrated during the
pilot project or conversion operations that the new system is not
acceptable.
(B) The State Summer EBT agency must submit a written contingency
plan for FNS approval. The contingency plan must contain information
regarding the back-up issuance system that will be activated in the
event of an emergency shut-down which results in short-term or extended
system inaccessibility, or total discontinuation of EBT system
operations. The contingency plan must be incorporated into the Summer
EBT State system security plan after FNS approval as specified in
paragraph (p) of this section.
(i) Disallowance of Federal financial participation (FFP). If FNS
finds that any acquisition approved under the provisions of paragraph
(b) of this section fails to comply with the criteria, requirements and
other undertakings described in the approved or modified APD, payment
of FFP may be suspended or may be disallowed in whole or in part.
(j) Emergency acquisition requirements. The State Summer EBT agency
may request FFP for the costs of IS equipment and services acquired to
meet emergency situations in which the agency can demonstrate to FNS an
immediate need to acquire IS equipment or services in order to continue
operation of Summer EBT; and the State Summer EBT agency can clearly
document that the need could not have been anticipated or planned for
and precludes the State from following the prior approval requirements
of paragraph (c) of this section. FNS may provide FFP in emergency
situations if the following conditions are met:
(1) The State Summer EBT agency must submit a written request to
FNS prior to the acquisition of any IS equipment or services. The
written request must include:
(i) A brief description of the IS equipment and/or services to be
acquired and an estimate of their costs;
(ii) A brief description of the circumstances which result in the
State Summer EBT agency's need to proceed with the acquisition prior to
fulfilling approval requirements at paragraph (c) of this section; and
(iii) A description of the adverse impact which would result if the
State Summer EBT agency does not immediately acquire the IS equipment
and/or services.
(2) Upon receipt of a written request for emergency acquisition FNS
must provide a written response to the State Summer EBT agency within
14 days. The FNS response must:
(i) Inform the State Summer EBT agency that the request has been
disapproved and the reason for disapproval.
(ii) If FNS approves the request submitted under paragraph (j)(1)
of this section, FFP will be available from the date the State Summer
EBT agency acquires the IS equipment and services.
(iii) FNS recognizes that an emergency situation exists and grants
conditional approval pending receipt of the State Summer EBT agency's
formal submission of the IAPD information specified at paragraph (b)(4)
of this section within 90 days from the date of the agency's initial
written request.
(iv) If the complete IAPD submission required by paragraph (b)(2)
of this section is not received by FNS within 90 days from the date of
the initial written request, costs may be subject to disallowance.
(k) General cost requirements--(1) Cost determination. Actual costs
must be determined in compliance with 2 CFR part 200, subpart E, and
USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 and 415 and an FNS
approved budget and must be reconcilable with the approved FNS funding
level. A State Summer EBT agency must not claim reimbursement for costs
charged to any other Federal program or uses of IS systems for purposes
not connected with Summer EBT. The approved APD cost allocation plan
includes the methods which will be used to identify and classify costs
to be claimed. This methodology must be submitted to FNS
[[Page 90366]]
as part of the request for FNS approval of funding as required in this
section. Operational costs are to be allocated based on the statewide
cost allocation plan rather than the APD cost plan. Approved cost
allocation plans for ongoing operational costs must not apply to IS
system development costs under this section unless documentation
required under paragraph (b) of this section is submitted to and
approvals are obtained from FNS. Any APD-related costs approved by FNS
must be excluded in determining the Summer EBT agency's administrative
costs under any other section of this part.
(2) Cost identification for purposes of FFP claims. State Summer
EBT agencies must assign and claim the costs incurred under an approved
APD in accordance with the following criteria:
(i) Development costs. Using its normal departmental accounting
system, in accordance with the cost principles set forth in 2 CFR part
200, subpart E, and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400
and 415, the State Summer EBT agency must specifically identify what
items of costs constitute development costs, assign these costs to
specific project cost centers, and distribute these costs to funding
sources based on the specific identification, assignment and
distribution outlined in the approved APD. The methods for distributing
costs set forth in the APD should provide for assigning identifiable
costs, to the extent practicable, directly to program/functions. The
State Summer EBT agency must amend the cost allocation plan required by
2 CFR part 200, subpart E, to include the approved APD methodology for
the identification, assignment, and distribution of the development
costs.
(ii) Operational costs. Costs incurred for the operation of an IS
must be identified and assigned by the State Summer EBT agency to
funding sources in accordance with the approved cost allocation plan
required by 2 CFR part 200, subpart E.
(iii) Service agreement costs. States that operate a central data
processing facility must use their approved central service cost
allocation plan required by 2 CFR part 200, subpart E, and USDA
implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 and 415 to identify and
assign costs incurred under service agreements with the State Summer
EBT agency. The State Summer EBT agency must then distribute these
costs to funding sources in accordance with the development and
operational costs outlined in this section.
(iv) Claiming costs. Prior to claiming funding under this section
the State Summer EBT agency must have complied with the requirements
for obtaining approval and prior approval of paragraph (b) of this
section.
(v) Budget authority. FNS approval of requests for funding must
provide notification to the State Summer EBT agency of the budget
authority and dollar limitations under which such funding may be
claimed. FNS must provide this amount as a total authorization for such
funding which may not be exceeded unless amended by FNS. FNS's
determination of the amount of this authorization must be based on the
budget submitted by the State Summer EBT agency. Activities not
included in the approved budget, as well as continuation of approved
activities beyond scheduled deadlines in the approved plan, must
require FNS approval of an As Needed APDU as prescribed in paragraphs
(b)(4) and (f)(4) of this section, including an amended State budget.
Requests to amend the budget authorization approved by FNS must be
submitted to FNS prior to claiming such expenses.
(l) Access to the system and records. Access to the system in all
aspects, including but not limited to design, development, and
operation, including work performed by any source, and including cost
records of contractors and subcontractors, must be made available by
the State Summer EBT agency to FNS or its authorized representatives at
intervals as are deemed necessary by FNS, in order to determine whether
the conditions for approval are being met and to determine the
efficiency, economy and effectiveness of the system. Failure to provide
full access to all parts of the system may result in suspension and/or
termination of Summer EBT funds for the costs of the system and its
operation.
(m) Ownership rights. The State Summer EBT agency must comply with
the requirements under this part and the requirement for intangible
property in 2 CFR 200.315.
(n) Software. (1) The State or local government must include a
clause in all procurement instruments which provides that the State or
local government must have all ownership rights in any software or
modifications thereof and associated documentation designed, developed,
or installed with FFP under this section.
(2) FNS reserves a royalty-free, nonexclusive, and irrevocable
license to reproduce, publish, or otherwise use and to authorize others
to use for Federal Government purposes, such software, modifications,
and documentation.
(3) Proprietary operating/vendor software packages which meet the
definition of COTS in Sec. 292.2 must not be subject to the ownership
provisions in paragraph (m) of this section. FFP is not available for
development costs for proprietary application software developed
specifically for Summer EBT.
(o) Information Systems equipment. The policies and procedures
governing title, use and disposition of property purchased with FFP,
which appear at 2 CFR 200.315 are applicable to IS equipment.
(p) Information system security requirements and review process-(1)
Information system security requirements. State and local agencies are
responsible for the security of all IS projects under development, and
operational systems involved in the administration of Summer EBT. State
and local agencies must determine appropriate IS security requirements
based on recognized industry standards or compliance with standards
governing security of Federal information systems and information
processing.
(2) Information security program. State Summer EBT agencies must
implement and maintain a comprehensive Security Program for IS and
installations involved in the administration of the Summer EBT.
Security Programs must include the following components:
(i) Determination and implementation of appropriate security
requirements as prescribed in paragraph (p)(1) of this section.
(ii) Establishment of a security plan and, as appropriate, policies
and procedures to address the following areas of IS security:
(A) Physical security of IS resources;
(B) Equipment security to protect equipment from theft and
unauthorized use;
(C) Software and data security;
(D) Telecommunications security;
(E) Personnel security;
(F) Contingency plans to meet critical processing needs in the
event of short- or long-term interruption of service;
(G) Emergency preparedness; and
(H) Designation of an Agency IS Security Manager.
(3) Periodic risk analyses. State Summer EBT agencies must
establish and maintain a program for conducting periodic risk analyses
to ensure that appropriate, cost-effective safeguards are incorporated
into new and existing systems. In addition, risk analyses must be
performed whenever significant system changes occur.
(4) IS security reviews. State Summer EBT agencies must review the
security
[[Page 90367]]
of IS involved in the administration of Summer EBT on a biennial basis.
At a minimum, the reviews must include an evaluation of physical and
data security, operating procedures and personnel practices. State
Summer EBT agencies must maintain reports of their biennial IS security
reviews, together with pertinent supporting documentation, for Federal
review upon request.
(5) Applicability. The security requirements of this section apply
to all IS systems used by State and local governments to administer
Summer EBT.
(q) APD process for ITOs. For the acquisition of IS equipment or
services to be utilized in an EBT system regardless of the cost of the
acquisition in accordance with the Summer EBT issuance standards in
subpart D of this part, WIC EBT coordinating Summer EBT agencies,
administering WIC, that are planning changes to their ITO Management
Information Systems to incorporate the Summer EBT requirements should
refer to the APD process requirements outlined in 7 CFR 246.12, 2 CFR
part 200, appendix XI, and the APD process (see guidance within FNS'
Handbook 901 for more information).
(r) ITO EBT management and reporting. (1) The Summer EBT agency
must follow the Department APD requirements in this section and submit
Planning and Implementation APDs and appropriate updates, for
Department approval, for planning, development, and implementation of
initial and subsequent EBT systems.
(2) If an ITO plans to incorporate additional programs in its EBT
system, the ITO must consult with ITO officials responsible for
administering the programs prior to submitting the Planning APD (PAPD)
document and include the outcome of those discussions in the PAPD
submission to the Department for approval.
(3) Annually as part of the State plan, the Summer EBT agency must
submit EBT project status reports. At a minimum, the annual status
report must contain:
(i) Any information on future EBT changes and procurement updates
affecting present operations; and
(ii) Such other information the Secretary may require.
(4) The ITO must be responsible for EBT coordination and management
for planning, implementation and ongoing operations of Summer EBT.
(s) ITO Summer EBT procurements. The following procurement
requirements from title 2 of the Code of Federal Regulations apply to
ITO Summer EBT agencies:
(1) 2 CFR 200.315;
(2) 2 CFR 200.317;
(3) 2 CFR 200.326;
(4) 2 CFR part 200, appendix II:
(i) Remedies for violation or breach;
(ii) Termination for cause and for convenience;
(iii) Equal employment opportunity (EEO) provisions;
(iv) Clean Air Act and Federal Water Pollution Control Act;
(v) Debarment and suspension requirements; and
(vi) Anti-lobbying requirements; and
(5) 2 CFR part 400.
(t) ITO Program costs. (1) The two kinds of allowable costs under
the Program are ``food costs'' and ``nutrition services and
administration costs.'' In general, costs necessary to the fulfillment
of Program objectives are to be considered allowable costs. The two
types of nutrition services and administration costs are:
(i) Direct costs. Those direct costs that are allowable under 2 CFR
part 200, subpart E, and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts
400 and 415.
(ii) Indirect costs. Those indirect costs that are allowable under
2 CFR part 200, subpart E, and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR
parts 400 and 415. When computing indirect costs, food costs may not be
used in the base to which the indirect cost rate is applied. In
accordance with the provisions of 2 CFR part 200, subpart E, and USDA
implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 and 415, a claim for
indirect costs must be supported by an approved allocation plan for the
determination of allowable indirect costs.
(2) Program funds may not be used to pay for retroactive benefits.
Sec. 292.12 Enrolling eligible children.
(a) Minimum requirements for Program informational activities.
Summer EBT agencies must comply with the following minimum information
requirements for applicants and recipients.
(1) Summer EBT agencies must inform participant and applicant
households of their Program rights and responsibilities. This
information may be provided through whatever means the Summer EBT
agency deems appropriate.
(2) All Program informational material must:
(i) Be in an understandable and uniform format, and to the maximum
extent practicable, in a language that parents and guardians can
understand;
(ii) Include the USDA nondiscrimination statement; and
(iii) Be provided in alternate formats for individuals with
disabilities, as practicable.
(3) All program information material should be provided by
households' preferred method of contact, to the maximum extent
practicable.
(b) General requirements. In enrolling eligible children, Summer
EBT agencies must:
(1) Establish procedures to ensure correct eligibility
determinations;
(2) Establish procedures to allow households to provide updated
contact information for the purpose of receiving Summer EBT; and
(3) Establish procedures to enable anyone who has been determined
to be eligible for Summer EBT benefits to confirm their eligibility
status and unenroll, or opt out, of the Program, if they do not want to
receive benefits; and
(4) Provide assistance to households that seek help in applying for
benefits.
(c) NSLP/SBP enrollment database. By 2025, Summer EBT agencies must
establish and maintain a State- or ITO-wide database of all children
enrolled in NSLP- or SBP-participating schools within the State or ITO
service area, as applicable, for the purposes of enrolling children for
Summer EBT benefits and detecting and preventing duplicate benefit
issuance. If an ITO, in consultation with FNS, determines that
establishing and maintaining a database meeting the requirements of
this section is not feasible or is unnecessary based on their method of
enrolling children, the ITO may submit a waiver request under Sec.
292.3(h).
(1) Database elements. At a minimum, the database must contain the
following information for these children:
(i) Name;
(ii) Date of birth;
(iii) School/school district where enrolled;
(iv) Mailing address;
(v) Individual free or reduced price eligibility status, as
applicable; and
(vi) Any other information needed to issue benefits timely and with
integrity.
(2) Data use and confidentiality. Summer EBT agencies must ensure
the confidentiality of all such data, and the data must be used only
for the purposes of the Summer EBT Program, or to provide other social
service benefits to eligible children.
(3) Data sharing across Summer EBT Programs. State Summer EBT
agencies must make this data available to ITO Summer EBT agencies for
children within an ITO's Summer EBT service area, in a timeframe that
allows ITO Summer EBT agencies to issue timely benefits. ITO Summer EBT
agencies must ensure confidentiality of the data in accordance with
paragraph (c)(2) of this section.
(d) Automatic enrollment with streamlined certification. (1) Summer
[[Page 90368]]
EBT agencies must enroll eligible children through streamlined
certification, including those who, during the period of eligibility
were:
(i)(A) Individually certified for free or reduced price school
meals through the NSLP/SBP, per Sec. 245.6 of this chapter; or
(B) School aged and:
(1) Members of a household receiving assistance under SNAP, as
defined in Sec. 292.2;
(2) Members of a household receiving assistance under FDPIR and
TANF, if data for these programs are available at the State level; or
(3) A foster, homeless, migrant, runaway, or Head Start child, as
defined in Sec. 245.2 of this chapter, if data for these programs are
available at the State level.
(ii) Not enrolled in a special provision school but are otherwise
determined eligible for a free or reduced priced meal through the NSLP/
SBP.
(2) Summer EBT agency may enroll eligible children through
streamlined certification who are members of a household receiving
assistance under other means-tested programs, as approved by the
Secretary.
(3) Streamlined certification does not require further confirmation
of school enrollment.
(4) If an ITO, in consultation with FNS, determines that any
element of automatic enrollment with streamlined certification is not
feasible or is unnecessary based on available resources or
circumstances to the population served, the ITO may submit a waiver
request under Sec. 292.3(h).
(e) Enrollment by Summer EBT application. (1) Summer EBT agencies
must enroll eligible children in Summer EBT if it is determined that
they meet the requirements to receive free or reduced price meals at
Sec. 292.5(a), as determined through a complete Summer EBT
application. A Summer EBT application is considered complete if the
following information is provided:
(i) Names of children and other household members;
(ii) Amount, source, and frequency of income for each household
member; and
(iii) Signature of an adult household member, including electronic
signatures, as described in Sec. 292.13(h).
(2) Confirmation of enrollment in an NSLP/SBP- participating school
during the immediately preceding instructional year is required for
children who apply by Summer EBT application. This can be accomplished
by matching against the State or ITO-wide NSLP/SBP enrollment database,
as required in paragraph (c) of this section, prior to benefit
issuance.
(3) Children who are not in an NSLP or SBP-participating school in
the immediately preceding instructional year cannot be certified as
eligible, and therefore cannot be deemed eligible for Summer EBT
through submission of an application for Summer EBT benefits.
(4) Summer EBT agencies are prohibited from requiring income
documentation at the time of application.
(f) Notice of approval--(1) Income applications. The Summer EBT
agency must notify (or place notification in the mail) eligible
households of a child's approved status within 15 operational days of
receipt of a complete application. This may be included in the mailing
containing the EBT card, if applicable, or other communication
informing the household about the issuance or use of benefits.
(2) Streamlined certification. Households approved for benefits
based on information provided by the appropriate State or local agency
responsible for the administration of a means-tested program that has
been approved by the Secretary must be notified, in writing, that their
children are eligible for Summer EBT and that no application is
required. The notice of approval must also inform the household how to
opt-out if they do not want their children to receive Summer EBT
benefits.
(3) Households declining benefits. Children from households that
notify the Summer EBT agency that they do not want Summer EBT benefits
must not be issued benefits, or have their benefits expunged as soon as
possible if already issued. Any notification from the household
declining benefits must be documented and maintained on file, as
required under Sec. 292.23, to substantiate the change in benefits.
Because any expungement in this instance is at the request of the
household, the 30 day household notice typically required for expunging
benefits is not required in this instance.
(4) Duplicate benefit issuance. Summer EBT agencies must include in
the notice of approval a statement communicating that households that
are erroneously issued duplicate benefits from more than one State or
ITO should only use benefits from the State or ITO where their
child(ren) completed the instructional year immediately preceding the
summer operational period. Under no circumstances may they use both.
(g) Denied applications and the notice of denial. When the
application furnished by a household is not complete or does not meet
the eligibility criteria for Summer EBT benefits, the Summer EBT agency
must document and retain the reasons for ineligibility and must retain
the denied application. In addition, the Summer EBT agency must provide
written notice to each household denied benefits within 15 operational
days of receipt of a complete application. At a minimum, this notice
must include:
(1) The specific reason or reasons for the denial of benefits,
e.g., income in excess of allowable limits or incomplete application;
(2) Notification of the right to appeal;
(3) Instructions on how to appeal; and
(4) A statement reminding households that they may reapply for
benefits at any time.
(h) Appeals of denied benefits. A household that wishes to appeal
an application that was denied may do so in accordance with the
procedures established by the Summer EBT agency as required by Sec.
292.26. However, prior to initiating the hearing procedure, the
household may request a conference to provide the opportunity for the
household to discuss the situation, present information, and obtain an
explanation of the data submitted in the application or the decision
rendered. The request for a conference must not in any way prejudice or
diminish the right to a fair hearing. The Summer EBT agency must
promptly schedule a fair hearing, if requested.
(i) Confidential nature of streamlined certification information.
Information about children or their households obtained through the
streamlined certification process must be kept confidential and is
subject to the limitations on disclosure of information in section 9 of
the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, 42 U.S.C. 1758.
Sec. 292.13 Application requirements.
(a) Statewide application. By 2025, the Summer EBT agency must make
a Summer EBT application available to households whose children are
enrolled in NSLP- or SBP-participating schools and who do not already
have an individual eligibility determination.
(b) Contracting application processes. Summer EBT agencies may not
delegate to LEAs the responsibility of making a Summer EBT application
available. However, a Summer EBT agency may contract with another
entity into order to fulfill the requirement in this paragraph (b).
(c) Household applications. The application must be clear and
simple in design and the required information must be limited to what
is required to
[[Page 90369]]
demonstrate that the household does, or does not, meet the eligibility
criteria for Summer EBT benefits at Sec. 292.5(a). The application or
associated instructions must also include the income eligibility
guidelines and an explanation that households with incomes at or below
the income limit may be eligible for Summer EBT. Summer EBT agencies
are encouraged to include optional questions on the application to
improve customer service including, but not limited to:
(1) Preferred method of communication (e.g., mail, email, phone,
text message);
(2) Preferred contact information;
(3) Preferred language of communication;
(4) Preferred method of benefit issuance (e.g., EBT card,
electronic benefit);
(5) Interest in receiving information about how to access other
assistance program benefits (e.g., Summer Food Service Program, NSLP/
SBP, Child and Adult Care Food Program, SNAP, WIC, TANF, FDPIR,
Medicaid);
(6) Membership in an ITO; and
(7) Other program options where a household may have preferences,
receipt of information that households may find useful, or information
that would aid Summer EBT agencies in successful program
implementation.
(d) Understandable communications. Any communication with
households for eligibility determination purposes must be in an
understandable and uniform format and, to the maximum extent
practicable, in a language that parents and guardians can understand.
(e) Availability of applications. Summer EBT agencies must ensure
that a Summer EBT application is available throughout the period of
eligibility, as defined in Sec. 292.2.
(f) Timely certifications. Summer EBT agencies must follow-up with
a household that submits an incomplete application within 10
operational days of receipt of the application. See notice of approval
at Sec. 292.12(f) for additional requirements for complete
applications that are approved for benefits, and providing benefits to
participants at Sec. 292.15(c) for requirements around timely issuance
of benefits for eligible children.
(g) Deadline for applications. Households must submit an
application for Summer EBT benefits by the last day of the summer
operational period in order to receive benefits for that summer.
Applications that are submitted after the last day of the summer
operational period may be used to establish eligibility for the
following summer. Summer EBT agencies may encourage households to apply
prior to the application deadline, however applications must be
accepted and processed up until the application deadline, and benefits
must be issued if the application is approved.
(h) Electronic applications. In addition to the distribution of
information, applications, and descriptive materials in paper form, the
Summer EBT agency may establish a system for executing household
applications electronically and using electronic signatures. The
electronic submission system must comply with the same requirements as
paper applications. Descriptive materials may also be made available
electronically by the Summer EBT or local educational agency. If the
application is made available electronically, a paper version must also
be available.
(i) Application content requirements. Summer EBT applications must
contain the following elements:
(1) Required income information. The information requested on the
application with respect to the current income of the household must be
limited to:
(i) The income received by each member identified by the household
member who received the income or an indication which household members
had no income; and
(ii) The source of the income (such as earnings, wages, welfare,
pensions, support payments, unemployment compensation, social security
and other cash income). Other cash income includes cash amounts
received or withdrawn from any source, including savings, investments,
trust accounts, and other resources which are available to pay for a
child's meals.
(2) Household members. The application must require applicants to
provide the names of all household members. However, the application
must allow the household to provide a case number if they participate
in SNAP, or another means-tested program that has been approved by the
Secretary, in lieu of names of all household members and household
income information.
(3) Name of school where child is enrolled. A State- or ITO-wide
application must contain a space for the household to indicate the name
of the school or district where each eligible child is enrolled.
(4) Mailing address. The application must contain a space for the
household to list their mailing address. However, the application must
be accepted and processed as complete even if the field was not
completed by the applicant. The instructions should communicate that it
will be used to mail their EBT card, as applicable, and therefore
should be the address that will be used by the household at the time
the Summer EBT agency issues benefits.
(5) Adult member's signature. The application must be signed by an
adult member of the household.
(j) Attesting to information on the application. The application
must also include a statement, immediately above the space for
signature, that the person signing the application certifies that all
information furnished in the application is true and correct, that the
application is being made in connection with the receipt of Federal
funds, that the applicant is not already receiving Summer EBT benefits
in another State or ITO, that Summer EBT agencies may verify the
information on the application, and that deliberate misrepresentation
of the information may subject the applicant to prosecution under
applicable State and Federal criminal statutes.
(k) Race and ethnicity. The application must contain space for
collection of information on race and ethnicity of applicants. The
questions should be labeled as optional, and incomplete responses
cannot be used as the basis for the denial of benefits.
(l) Accompanying instructions. The application must contain clear
instructions is with respect to the completion and submission of the
application to the Summer EBT agency to make eligibility
determinations. The instructions should inform households that if they
intend to move, or have recently moved, that they should apply for
benefits in the State where their child will complete or completed the
school year immediately preceding the summer operational period.
(m) Required statements for the application. The application and
descriptive materials must include substantially the following
statements:
(1) ``The Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act requires
that we use information from this application to determine who
qualifies for Summer EBT benefits. We can only approve complete forms.
We may share your eligibility information with education, health, and
nutrition programs to help them deliver program benefits to your
household. Inspectors and law enforcement may also use your information
to make sure that program rules are met. Some children qualify for
Summer EBT without an application. Please contact your State or ITO to
get Summer EBT for a foster child, and children who are homeless,
migrant, or runaway.''
[[Page 90370]]
(2) When either the Summer EBT agency or the LEA plans to use or
disclose children's eligibility information for non-program purposes,
additional information, as specified in Sec. 245.6(h) of this chapter,
must be added to this statement. State agencies and LEAs are
responsible for drafting the appropriate statement.
(3) The application must contain the USDA nondiscrimination
statement for Child Nutrition Programs.
(4) The Summer EBT agency must inform applicants and prospective
applicants that a non-household member may be designated as the
authorized representative for application processing purposes if they
have difficulty completing the application process.
(n) Calculating income. The Summer EBT agency must use the income
information provided by the household on the application to calculate
the household's total current income. When a household submits a
complete application, and the household's total current income is at or
below the eligibility limits specified in the Income Eligibility
Guidelines, the children in that household must be approved for Summer
EBT benefits.
(o) Persons authorized to receive eligibility information. Only
persons directly connected with the administration or enforcement of a
program or activity listed in this section may have access to
children's eligibility information, without parent or guardian consent.
Persons considered directly connected with administration or
enforcement of a program or activity are Federal, State, ITO, or local
program operators responsible for the ongoing operation of the program
or activity or responsible for program compliance. Program operators
may include persons responsible for carrying out program requirements
and monitoring, reviewing, auditing, or investigating the program.
Program operators may include contractors, to the extent those persons
have a need to know the information for program administration or
enforcement. Contractors may include evaluators, auditors, and others
with whom Federal or State agencies, ITOs, and program operators
contract with to assist in the administration or enforcement of their
program in their behalf.
(p) Disclosure of all eligibility information in addition to
eligibility status. In addition to children's names and eligibility
status, the Summer EBT agency, as appropriate, may disclose, without
parental consent, all eligibility information obtained through the
Summer EBT eligibility process (including all information on the
application or obtained through streamlined certification) to:
(1) Persons directly connected with the administration or
enforcement of programs authorized under the Richard B. Russell
National School Lunch Act, the Child Nutrition Act of 1966, or the Food
and Nutrition Act of 2008. This means that all eligibility information
obtained for the Summer EBT Program may be disclosed to persons
directly connected with administering or enforcing regulations under
the Summer EBT Program, National School Lunch or School Breakfast
Programs (7 CFR parts 210 and 220, respectively), Child and Adult Care
Food Program (7 CFR part 226), Summer Food Service Program (7 CFR part
225), the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and
Children (WIC) (7 CFR part 246), and the Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance Program (SNAP) (7 CFR parts 271 through 285);
(2) Federal, State, and local law enforcement officials for the
purpose of investigating any alleged violation of the programs listed
in Sec. 292.16(b)(1)(iii); and
(3) The Comptroller General of the United States for purposes of
audit and examination.
(q) Phase-in flexibility. For 2024, alternative income applications
that do not meet the criteria in paragraph (i) of this section can be
used to confer eligibility for Summer EBT if the information provided
on the alternative application is sufficient for the Summer EBT agency
or LEA to determine that the household meets the income eligibility
guidelines for Summer EBT. In 2024, Summer EBT agencies may delegate
application processing to LEAs. If a Summer EBT agency delegates
application processing to LEAs, then it must cover all administrative
costs incurred by the LEAs with respect to Summer EBT application
processing.
Sec. 292.14 Verification requirements.
(a) Summer EBT applications are subject to the following
verification requirements:
(1) Verification for cause. (i) The Summer EBT agency must verify
for cause applications, on a case-by-case basis, such as in an instance
when the agency is aware of conflicting or inconsistent information
from what was provided on the application.
(ii) The Summer EBT agency may verify an application for cause at
any time during the instructional year or summer operational period,
but verification must be completed within 30 days of receipt of the
application.
(iii) Applications verified for cause are not considered part of
three (3) percent sample size described in paragraph (a)(2) of this
section.
(iv) Applications do not need to be selected for verification for
cause during initial application processing. A Summer EBT agency may
become aware of a questionable application after the initial
certification was completed and benefits were issued. In this case, the
Summer EBT agency must verify the application for cause at the time
they learn of the questionable or conflicting information.
(v) All verification procedures in this section must be followed
for applications selected for verification for cause in the same manner
as an application randomly selected as part of the sample described in
paragraph (a)(2) of this section.
(2) Verification sample. (i) The Summer EBT agency must verify
eligibility of children in a sample of household Summer EBT
applications approved for benefits for the summer.
(ii) The sample size for the Summer EBT agency must equal three (3)
percent of all applications approved by the Summer EBT agency from the
start of the instructional year through April 1 of the school year
immediately preceding the summer operational period, selected randomly
from all applications.
(3) Verification alternatives. (i) In lieu of carrying out
provisions in paragraph (a)(2) of this section, Summer EBT agencies may
propose alternative methods for verification that strengthen program
integrity and preserve participant access.
(ii) Summer EBT agencies that intend to propose alternative
procedures must include a detailed description of their plan in their
POM submission. Proposals are subject to USDA approval.
(b) Replacing applications. The Summer EBT agency may, on a case-
by-case basis, replace up to ten percent of applications that are
randomly selected as part of the verification sample. Applications may
be replaced if the Summer EBT agency determines that the household
would be unable to satisfactorily respond to the verification request.
(c) Rolling verification sample selection. Summer EBT agencies may
choose to conduct verification on a rolling basis, as long as the
sample size requirements in paragraph (a)(3) of this section are met.
(1) If conducting rolling verification, the Summer EBT agency must:
(i)(A) Include in each sample pool only applications approved since
the last sample was selected; and
[[Page 90371]]
(B) Select three (3) percent of approved applications, as required
by the sampling method, each time, but round down to the nearest whole
number to prevent over-sampling. If rounding down results in a zero, no
applications should be verified for the sample period, and the
applications received in that sample period should be included in the
next sample pool.
(ii) Select the final sample on April 1.
(A) Selecting only from the applications approved since the last
sampling;
(B) Summing the number of applications selected for verification to
date (including the final, April 1 sample); and
(C) Calculating three (3) percent of all applications approved as
of April 1, and rounding up to the next whole number.
(2) If the number of applications summed per paragraph
(c)(1)(ii)(B) of this section is less than the three (3) percent
calculated per paragraph (c)(1)(ii)(C) of this section, the Summer EBT
agency must fill the remainder of the sample by selecting randomly from
all applications.
(3) Summer EBT agencies may choose to sample at any frequency prior
to April 1, but may not sample any applications after April 1.
(d) Verification after April 1. Applications that come in after
April 1 are still subject to verification for cause, on a case-by-case
basis, per paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
(e) Direct verification. Summer EBT agencies must conduct direct
verification activities with the programs eligible for use in
streamlined certification, as defined in Sec. 292.12(d), as well as
records from other assistance programs and administrative data, where
available. Data records are subject to the timeframe specified in
paragraph (e)(2) of this section.
(1) Direct verification must be conducted prior to contacting the
household for documentation.
(2) For the purposes of direct verification, documentation may
indicate participation in an applicable program or income at any point
during the period of eligibility. The information provided only needs
to indicate eligibility at a single point in time during the period of
eligibility, not that the child was eligible at the time of application
or verification.
(3) Summer EBT agencies must include in their POM submission all
sources of administrative data that is intended to be used for direct
verification.
(f) Verification procedures and assistance for households--(1)
Exceptions from verification. Verification is not required of
households if all children in the household are determined eligible
based on documentation provided by the State or local agency
responsible for the administration of the SNAP, FDPIR, TANF, or another
means tested program, as approved by the Secretary, or if all children
in the household are determined to be foster, homeless, migrant, or
runaway, as defined in Sec. 245.2 of this chapter.
(2) Notification of selection. Households selected for verification
must be notified in writing that their applications were selected for
verification. The written statement must include a telephone number to
contact for assistance. Any communications with households concerning
verification must be in an understandable and uniform format and, to
the maximum extent practicable, in a language that parents and
guardians can understand. These households must be advised of the type
of information or documents that will be expected. Households selected
for verification must be informed that:
(i) They are required to submit the requested information to verify
eligibility for Summer EBT benefits, by the date determined by the
Summer EBT agency.
(ii) They may, instead, submit proof that the children receive
assistance under SNAP, FDPIR, TANF, or another means tested program, as
approved by the Secretary.
(iii) They may, instead, request that the Summer EBT agency contact
the appropriate officials to confirm that their children are foster,
homeless, migrant, or runaway.
(iv) Failure to cooperate with verification efforts will result in
the termination of benefits.
(3) Sources of information. For the purposes of this section,
sources of information for verification may include, but are not
limited to, written evidence, individuals outside of the child's
household who can verify the child's circumstances, and systems of
records as follows:
(i) Written evidence must be used as the primary source of
information for verification. Written evidence includes written
confirmation of a household's circumstances, such as wage stubs, award
letters, and letters from employers. Whenever written evidence is
insufficient to confirm income information on the application or
current eligibility, the verifying agency may require confirmation from
a person outside of the child's household, or accept a statement from
an adult member of the child's household.
(ii) Verbal confirmations of a household's circumstances by a
person outside of the household may be made in person or by phone. The
verifying official may select a person to contact if the household
fails to designate one or designates one which is unacceptable to the
verifying official. If the verifying official designates a person,
contact must not be made without providing written or oral notice to
the household. At the time of this notice, the household must be
informed that it may consent to the contact or provide acceptable
documentation in another form. If the household refuses to choose one
of these options, its eligibility must be terminated in accordance with
the normal procedures for failure to cooperate with verification
efforts. Individuals outside of the child's household who can verify
the child's circumstances could include but are not limited to:
employers, social service agencies, school officials, and migrant
agencies.
(iii) Agency records to which the verifying agency may have access
are not considered to be the same as a person outside of the child's
household who can verify their circumstances. Information concerning
income, household size, or SNAP, FDPIR, or TANF eligibility, maintained
by other government agencies to which the verifying agency can legally
gain access, must be used to confirm a household's income, size, or
receipt of benefits, as applicable. Information may also be obtained
from individuals or agencies serving categorically eligible children,
as defined in Sec. 292.2, including foster, homeless, migrant, or
runaway children.
(iv) Households which dispute the validity of income information
acquired through an individual outside of the child's household or a
system of records must be given the opportunity to provide other
documentation.
(4) Documentation timeframe. Households selected and notified of
their selection for verification must provide documentation of income.
The documentation must indicate the source, amount and frequency of all
household income and may indicate eligibility at any point during the
period of eligibility. The information provided only needs to indicate
eligibility for participation in the program at a single point in time
during the period of eligibility, not that the child was certified for
that program's benefits at the time of application or verification.
(5) Household cooperation. If a household refuses to cooperate with
efforts to verify, eligibility for Summer EBT benefits must be
terminated.
[[Page 90372]]
(6) Telephone assistance. The Summer EBT agency must provide a
telephone number to households selected for verification to call free
of charge to obtain information about the verification process. The
telephone number must be prominently displayed on the letter to
households selected for verification.
(7) Follow-up attempts. The Summer EBT agency must make at least
two attempts, at least one week apart, to contact any household that
does not respond to a verification request. The attempt may be through
a telephone call, email, or mail, and must be documented. Non-response
to the initial request for verification includes no response and
incomplete or ambiguous responses that do not permit the Summer EBT
agency to resolve the children's eligibility for Summer EBT benefits.
(8) Eligibility changes. The Summer EBT agency must complete the
following activities if there is an eligibility change as a result of
verification:
(i) Make appropriate modifications to the initial eligibility
determinations.
(ii) Notify the household of any change in eligibility as a result
of verification.
(iii)(A) The notice must advise the household of:
(1) The change;
(2) The reasons for the change;
(3) Notification of the right to appeal and when the appeal must be
filed;
(4) Instructions on how to appeal; and
(5) The right to reapply at any time during the instructional year
or summer operational period.
(B) Properly document and retain on file at the Summer EBT agency
the reasons for ineligibility.
(9) Issuance of benefits. Benefits cannot be issued for
applications selected for verification until the verification process
is completed with the exception of verification for cause, as described
in paragraph (a)(1) of this section.
(10) Timing of verification for continuous school calendars. In the
case of children who are enrolled in a school operating on a continuous
school calendar, the Summer EBT agency must receive approval from USDA
for any alternative plans for the timing of conducting verification, in
accordance with the State or ITO's approved POM.
(11) Verification after benefit issuance. If a Summer EBT agency is
alerted to a questionable application after initial approval or
issuance of benefits, no further benefits should be issued until
verification for cause, as outlined in paragraph (a)(1) of this section
is complete and eligibility is confirmed.
(12) Nondiscrimination. The verification efforts must be applied
without regard to race, sex, color, national origin, age, or
disability.
(g) Verification of alternative income applications in 2024. In
2024, Summer EBT agencies or LEAs should, on a case-by-case basis,
verify for cause any questionable Summer EBT application or alternate
income applications used to confer Summer EBT eligibility and follow
the procedures in paragraphs (e) and (f) of this section.
Subpart D--Issuance and Use of Program Benefits
Sec. 292.15 General standards.
(a) Timing. Summer EBT benefits are intended for use during the
summer operational period, in accordance with the Summer EBT agency's
approved POM.
(b) Continuous school calendar. In the case of children who attend
a school operating on a continuous school calendar, the Summer EBT
agency must receive approval from USDA for any alternative plans for
the periods during which Summer EBT benefits must be issued and used,
in accordance with the State or ITO's approved POM.
(c) Benefit issuance-(1) Providing benefits to participants. (i)
The Summer EBT agency shall ensure the timely and accurate issuance of
benefits.
(A) For children who can be streamline certified or who have an
approved Summer EBT application on file, benefits must be issued and
available for participants to use at least seven calendar days and not
more than 14 calendar days before the start of the summer operational
period. When the Summer EBT agency does not have sufficient data to
issue a benefit to an eligible child, the agency must work to resolve
the case and issue the benefit as expeditiously as possible.
(B) For eligible children who apply after the summer operational
period begins, benefits must be issued and available to spend not later
than 15 operational days after a complete application is received by
the Summer EBT agency, so that participants may use their benefits
during the summer.
(ii) If the Summer EBT agency issues benefits after the summer
operational period, the Summer EBT agency must submit to FNS a
corrective action plan outlining the reasons benefits were not issued
in a timely manner, and steps the Summer EBT agency will take to ensure
timely issuance in the future.
(iii) The Summer EBT agency's issuance schedule does not need to
align with the start of calendar months and may include staggered
benefit issuance across multiple days. Regardless of the issuance
schedule, Summer EBT agencies may only issue a full three months of
benefits for the summer operational period.
(iv) Children on applications that are selected for verification
must not be issued benefits until verification is complete and
eligibility is confirmed. Additional information about the verification
requirements for Summer EBT applications can be found at Sec. 292.14.
(v) Summer EBT agencies must aid households with eligible children
who do not reside in a permanent dwelling or have a fixed mailing
address in obtaining Summer EBT benefits by assisting them in finding
authorized representatives who can act on their behalf, or by using
other appropriate means.
(2) Method of issuance. Benefits may be issued:
(i) In the form of an EBT card;
(A) Into an existing EBT account associated with an existing EBT
card; or
(B) Into a new EBT account associated with a new EBT card;
(ii) Through other electronic methods, as determined by the
Secretary; or
(iii) In the case of a Summer EBT agency that does not issue
nutrition assistance program benefits electronically, using the same
methods by which that Summer EBT agency issues benefits under the
nutrition assistance program of that State.
(d) Dual participation. (1) Dual participation in Summer EBT in the
same summer operational period is not allowed.
(2) Summer EBT agencies must develop procedures to detect and
prevent dual participation across multiple States and/or ITOs, and must
describe these procedures in their POMs, as explained in Sec.
292.8(e)(9).
(e) Benefit amount. (1) In 2024, the benefit will be $40 per month
in the summer operational period for each eligible child, and will be
adjusted in subsequent years to reflect changes in the cost of food as
measured by the Thrifty Food Plan (TFP). Any year-to-year decrease of
the TFP will not be implemented.
(2) In Alaska, Hawaii, Guam, American Samoa, Puerto Rico, the
Virgin Islands of the United States, and the Commonwealth of the
Northern Mariana Islands, the Secretary may establish appropriate
adjustments for each such State to the national average payment rates
to reflect the differences between the costs of foods in those
[[Page 90373]]
States and the costs of foods in all other States.
(3) Benefit amounts will be issued in an amount equal to the
unrounded benefit amount from the prior year, adjusted to the nearest
lower dollar increment to reflect changes to the cost of the diet
described in section 3(u) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7
U.S.C. 2012(u)) for the 12-month period ending on November 30 of the
preceding calendar year and rounded to the nearest lower dollar
increment. Rates will be effective January 1 through December 31 of
each year.
(4) Summer EBT agencies may not prorate benefits for partial months
and must issue the full three months of summer benefits to each
eligible child.
(f) Benefit allotments. (1) The Summer EBT agency may issue benefit
allotments to a child in a single issuance prior to the start of the
summer operational period, or multiple issuances provided that the
first issuance occurs before the start of the summer operational
period.
(2) In providing benefit allotments Summer EBT agencies:
(i) May stagger issuance throughout the month.
(ii) Must establish an availability date for household access to
their benefits and inform households of this date.
(iii) Must issue the full benefit amount for all summer months to
each eligible child who applies before the last day of the summer
period, independent of the date of application submission or
eligibility determination.
(iv) Must adhere to the reporting requirements specified by USDA,
regardless of the issuance schedule used.
(g) Participant support--(1) Household training. The Summer EBT
agency must provide written training materials to each eligible
household prior to Summer EBT benefit issuance and as needed during
ongoing operation of the Summer EBT Program. At a minimum, the
household training must include:
(i) Content which will familiarize each eligible household with:
(A) Where benefits can be used;
(B) What benefits can be used to purchase; and
(C) Unallowable uses of benefits, and penalties for misuse;
(ii) The appropriate utilization and security of the personal
identification number (PIN);
(iii) The established procedures to provide customer service during
non-business hours that enable participants or proxies to report a
lost, stolen, or damaged card, report other card or benefit issues,
receive information on the EBT food balance, and receive the current
benefit end date;
(iv) Eligibility criteria for the Program;
(v) Written materials and other information, including the specific
rights to benefits. This must include the USDA statement of non-
discrimination. Written materials must be prepared at an educational
reading level suitable for participant households; and
(vi) Disclosure information regarding adjustments and a household's
rights to notice, fair hearings, and provisional credits. The
disclosure must also state where to call to dispute an adjustment and
request a fair hearing.
(2) EBT cards and PINs. Summer EBT agencies which issue EBT cards
by mail must, at a minimum, use first class mail and sturdy non-
forwarding envelopes or packages to send Summer EBT cards to
households.
(i) The Summer EBT agency must permit a Summer EBT eligible
household to select their PIN.
(ii) PIN assignment procedures must be permitted in accordance with
industry standards as long as PIN selection is available to households
if they so desire and households are informed of this option.
(iii) If assigning a PIN by mail in conjunction with card issuance,
Summer EBT agencies must mail the PIN separate from the card one
business day after the card is mailed.
(3) Adjustments. The Summer EBT agency:
(i) May make adjustments to benefits posted to household accounts
after the posting process is complete but prior to the availability
date for household access in the event benefits are erroneously posted.
(ii) Must make adjustments to an account to correct an auditable,
out-of-balance settlement condition that occurs during the redemption
process as a result of a system error.
(4) Providing replacement EBT cards or PINs. The Summer EBT agency
must make replacement EBT cards available for pick up or place the card
in the mail within two business days following notice by the household
to the Summer EBT agency that the card has been lost, stolen or
damaged.
(i) The Summer EBT agency must ensure a duplicate account is not
established which would permit households to access more than one
account in the system.
(ii) An immediate hold must be placed on accounts at the time
notice is received from a household regarding the need for card or PIN
replacement. The Summer EBT agency must implement a reporting system
which is continually operative. Once a household reports their EBT card
has been lost or stolen, the agency must assume liability for benefits
subsequently drawn from the account and replace any lost or stolen
benefits to the household. The Summer EBT agency must maintain a record
showing the date and time of all reports by households that their card
is lost or stolen.
(5) Providing replacement EBT benefits. The Summer EBT agency must
make replacement EBT benefits available to a household when the
household reports that food purchased with Summer EBT benefits was
destroyed in a household misfortune or disaster.
(h) Expungement--(1) General expungement procedures--(i) Summer EBT
agencies shall expunge Summer EBT benefits 122 calendar days after
their issuance.
(ii) No less than 30 days before benefit expungement is scheduled
to begin, Summer EBT agencies must provide notice to the household of
the expungement date and amount that is scheduled for expungement.
(iii) Expunged benefits shall not be reinstated.
(2) Procedures to adjust Summer EBT accounts. The Summer EBT agency
shall establish procedures to adjust Summer EBT benefits that have
already been posted to an EBT account prior to the household accessing
the account, or to remove benefits from inactive accounts for
expungement.
(i) Whenever benefits are expunged, the Summer EBT agency must
document the date and amount of the benefits in the household case
file.
(ii) Issuance reports must reflect the adjustment to the Summer EBT
agency issuance totals to comply with reporting requirements in Sec.
292.23.
(i) Expungement Procedures specific to States that administer the
supplemental nutrition assistance program (SNAP). (1) Summer EBT
agencies that load Summer EBT benefits onto existing SNAP accounts must
draw down Summer benefits prior to drawing from the household's SNAP
benefits.
(2) Expunged benefits must be returned to the State's Summer EBT
account and must not be co-mingled with SNAP funds.
Sec. 292.16 Issuance and adjustment requirements specific to States
that administer SNAP.
(a) Basic issuance requirements. State Summer EBT agencies must
establish issuance and accountability systems which ensure that only
certified eligible households receive benefits; that Program benefits
are timely distributed in the correct amounts; and that benefit
[[Page 90374]]
issuance and reconciliation activities are properly conducted and
accurately reported to FNS.
(1) On-line issuance of electronic benefits. State Summer EBT
agencies may issue benefits to households through an on-line EBT system
in which Program benefits are stored in a central computer database and
electronically accessed by households at the point of sale via reusable
plastic cards.
(2) Alternative benefit issuance system. (i) If the Secretary, in
consultation with the Office of the Inspector General, determines that
Program integrity would be improved by changing the issuance system of
a State, the Secretary shall require the State Summer EBT agency to
issue or deliver benefits using another method.
(ii) The cost of documents or systems which may be required as a
result of a permanent alternative issuance system must not be imposed
upon retail food firms participating in the Program.
(3) Contracting or delegating issuance responsibilities. State
Summer EBT agencies may assign to others such as banks, savings and
loan associations, and other commercial businesses, the responsibility
for the issuance of benefits. State Summer EBT agencies may permit
contractors to subcontract assigned issuance responsibilities.
(i) Any assignment of issuance functions must clearly delineate the
responsibilities of both parties. The State Summer EBT agency remains
responsible, regardless of any agreements to the contrary, for ensuring
that assigned duties are carried out in accordance with these
regulations. In addition, the State Summer EBT agency is strictly
liable to FNS for all losses of benefits, even if those losses are the
result of the performance of issuance, security, or accountability
duties by another party.
(ii) All issuance contracts must follow procurement standards set
forth in Sec. 292.27.
(iii) The State Summer EBT agency must not assign the issuance of
benefits to any retail food firm.
(4) EBT system administration. (i) The State Summer EBT agency must
be responsible for the coordination and management of the EBT system.
The Secretary may suspend or terminate some or all EBT system funding
or withdraw approval of the EBT system from the State Summer EBT agency
upon a finding that the State Summer EBT agency or its contracted
representative has failed to comply with the requirements of this part.
(ii) The State Summer EBT agency must indicate how it plans to
incorporate additional programs into the EBT system if it anticipates
the addition of other public assistance programs concurrent with or
after implementation of the EBT system. The State Summer EBT agency
must also consult with the State agency officials responsible for
administering the WIC prior to submitting the Planning APD for FNS
approval.
(5) Master issuance file. (i) The State Summer EBT agency must
establish a master issuance file which is a composite of the issuance
records of all eligible children. The master issuance file must contain
all the information needed to identify eligible children, issue Summer
EBT benefits, record the participation activity for each household, and
supply all information necessary to fulfill the reporting requirements
in Sec. 292.23.
(ii) The master issuance file must be kept current and accurate. It
must be updated and maintained through the use of documents such as
notices of change and controls for expired certification periods.
(iii) Before entering an eligible child's data on the master
issuance file, the State Summer EBT agency must review the master
issuance file to ensure that the child is not currently participating
in, or disqualified from, the Program.
(6) Shared responsibility of issuance activities. State Summer EBT
agencies may divide issuance responsibilities between at least two
persons to prevent any single individual from having complete control
over the authorization of issuances and the issuances themselves.
Responsibilities to be divided include maintenance of inventory
records, the posting of benefits to an EBT account, and preparation of
EBT cards and PINs for mailing. If issuance functions in an office are
handled by one person, a second-party review must be made to verify
card inventory, the reconciliation of the mail log, and the number of
mailings prepared.
(7) Summer EBT monitoring, examinations, and audits. State Summer
EBT agency's accountability system monitoring procedures must be
included in the monitoring procedures for SNAP as described at Sec.
274.1(i) of this chapter.
(8) Compliance investigations. State Summer EBT agencies must
provide on-line read-only access to State EBT systems for compliance
investigations.
(i) The State Summer EBT agency is required to provide software and
telecommunications capability as necessary to FNS Retailer
Investigation Branch Area offices, Regional offices, and Field offices
so that FNS compliance investigators, other appropriate FNS personnel,
and USDA OIG investigators have access to the system in order to
conduct investigations of program abuse and alleged violations; and
(ii) The State Summer EBT agency must ensure that FNS compliance
investigators and USDA OIG investigators have access to EBT cards and
accounts that are updated as necessary to conduct SNAP investigations.
(9) Federal financial participation. Access to system
documentation, including cost records of contractors or subcontractors
shall be made available and incorporated into contractual agreements.
(b) Disclosure. (1) Use or disclosure of information obtained from
Summer EBT recipients must be restricted to:
(i) Persons directly connected with the administration or
enforcement of the provisions of section 13A of the Richard B. Russell
National School Lunch Act, the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, or
regulations in this chapter, other Federal assistance programs, or
federally-assisted State programs providing assistance on a means-
tested basis to low income individuals;
(ii) Employees of the Comptroller General's Office of the United
States for audit examination authorized by any other provision of law;
and
(iii) Local, State, or Federal law enforcement officials, upon
their written request, for the purpose of investigating an alleged
violation of the NSLA, Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, or regulations
in this chapter. The written request shall include the identity of the
individual requesting the information and their authority to do so,
violation being investigated, and the identity of the person on whom
the information is requested.
(2) Local educational agencies administering the National School
Lunch Program established under the Richard B. Russell National School
Lunch Act or the School Breakfast Program established under the Child
Nutrition Act of 1966, for the purpose of directly certifying the
eligibility of school-aged children for receipt of free and reduced
price meals under the School Lunch and School Breakfast programs.
(3) Recipients of information released under this section must
adequately protect the information against unauthorized disclosure to
persons or for purposes not specified in this section.
(4) If there is a written request by a responsible member of the
household, its currently authorized representative, or a person acting
on its behalf to review
[[Page 90375]]
material and information contained in its casefile, the material and
information contained in the casefile shall be made available for
inspection during normal business hours. However, the Summer EBT agency
may withhold confidential information, such as the names of individuals
who have disclosed information about the household without the
household's knowledge, or the nature or status of pending criminal
prosecutions.
(5) Copies of regulations, plans of operation, State Summer EBT
agency manuals, State Summer EBT agency corrective action plans, and
Federal procedures may be obtained from FNS in accordance with 7 CFR
part 295.
(c) Program administration--(1) Automation of Summer EBT
operations. All State Summer EBT agencies are required to sufficiently
automate their Summer EBT operations and computerize their systems for
obtaining, maintaining, utilizing, and transmitting information
concerning Summer EBT.
(2) Requirements. In order to safeguard certification and issuance
records from unauthorized creation or tampering, the Summer EBT
agencies must establish an organizational structure which divides the
responsibility for eligibility determinations and benefit issuance
among certification, data management, and issuance units within
coordinating or partnering Summer EBT agencies.
(3) Court suit reporting--(i) State Summer EBT agency
responsibility. (A) In the event that a State Summer EBT agency is sued
by any person(s) in a State or Federal Court in any matter which
involves the State Summer EBT agency's administration of Summer EBT,
the Summer EBT agency shall immediately notify FNS that suit has been
brought and shall furnish FNS with copies of the original pleadings.
Summer EBT agencies involved in suits shall, upon request of FNS, take
such action as is necessary to join the United States and/or
appropriate officials of the Federal Government, such as the Secretary
of USDA or the Administrator of FNS, as parties to the suit. FNS may
request to join the following types of suits:
(1) Class action suits;
(2) A suit in which an adverse decision could have a national
impact;
(3) A suit challenging Federal policy such as a provision of the
NSLA, Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, or regulations in this part or an
interpretation of the regulations in this part; or,
(4) A suit based on an empirical situation that is likely to recur.
(B) FNS may advise a Summer EBT agency to seek a settlement
agreement of a court suit if the Summer EBT agency is being sued
because it misapplied Federal policy in administering the Summer EBT
Program.
(C) State Summer EBT agencies shall notify FNS when court cases
have been dismissed or otherwise settled. State Summer EBT agencies
shall also provide FNS with information that is requested regarding the
State Summer EBT agency's compliance with the requirements of court
orders or settlement agreements.
(4) Notification of lawsuits. FNS shall notify all Summer EBT
agencies of any suits brought in Federal court that involve FNS'
administration of the Program and which have the potential of affecting
many Summer EBT agencies' Program operations. Summer EBT agencies may
not be notified of suits brought in Federal Court involving FNS'
administration of the Program which may only affect Program operations
in one or two States or ITOs. The notification provided to Summer EBT
agencies shall contain a description of the Federal policy that is
affected.
(d) Procedures for program administration in Alaska--(1) Purpose.
To achieve the efficient and effective administration of Summer EBT in
rural areas of Alaska, FNS has determined that it is necessary to
develop additional regulations which are specifically designed to
accommodate the unique demographic and climatic characteristics which
exist in these rural areas. The regulations established in this
paragraph (d) apply only in those areas of Alaska designated as
``rural'' in Sec. 272.7(b) of this chapter. All regulations in this
part not specifically modified by this paragraph (d) shall remain in
effect.
(2) Fee agents. Fee agent means a paid agent who, on behalf of the
State Summer EBT agency, is authorized to make applications available
to low-income households, assist in the completion of applications,
conduct required interviews, secure required verification, forward
completed applications and supporting documentation to the State Summer
EBT agency, and provide other services as required by the State Summer
EBT agency. Such services shall not include making final decisions on
household eligibility or benefit levels.
(3) Application processing. The State Summer EBT agency may modify
the application processing requirements in this part as necessary to
insure prompt delivery of services to eligible households. The
following restrictions apply:
(4) Fee agent processing. If the signed application is first
submitted by a household to a fee agent, the fee agent shall mail the
application to the State Summer EBT agency within 5 days of receipt.
(5) Application filing date. An application is considered filed for
purposes of timely processing when it is received by an office of the
State Summer EBT agency.
(6) Expedited service. (i) If the signed application is first
submitted by a household to a fee agent, the fee agent shall mail the
application to the State Summer EBT agency within 5 days of receipt. If
the household is eligible for expedited service, the State agency will
mail the benefits no later than the close of business of the second
working day following the date the application was received by the
State Summer EBT agency.
(ii) If the signed application is submitted directly to the State
Summer EBT agency in person by a rural resident or its authorized
representative or by mail, the State Summer EBT agency shall process
the application and issue benefits to households eligible for expedited
service in accordance with the time standards contained in this part.
(iii) If an incomplete application is submitted directly to the
State Summer EBT agency by mail, the State Summer EBT agency shall
conduct the interview by the first working day following the date the
application was received if the fee agent can contact the household or
the household can be reached by telephone or radio-phone and does not
object to this method of interviewing on grounds of privacy. Based on
information obtained during the interview, the State Summer EBT agency
shall complete the application and process the case. Because of the
mailing time in rural areas, the State Summer EBT agency shall not
return the completed application to the household for signature. The
processing standard shall be calculated from the date the application
was filed.
(7) Social Security insurance (SSI) joint processing. Social
Security Administration (SSA) workers shall mail all jointly processed
applications to the appropriate Summer EBT agency office within 5 days
of receipt of the application. A jointly processed application shall be
considered filed for purposes of timely processing when it is received
by an office of the State Summer EBT agency. The household, if
determined eligible, shall receive benefits retroactive to the first
day of the month in which the jointly processed
[[Page 90376]]
application was received by the SSA worker.
(8) Fair hearings, fraud hearings, and agency conferences. The
Summer EBT agency shall conduct fair hearings, administrative fraud
hearings, and agency conferences with households that wish to contest
denial of expedited service in the most efficient manner possible,
either by face-to-face contact, telephone, radiophone, or other means
of correspondence including written correspondence, in order to meet
the respective time standards contained in this part.
(e) Disqualification. (1) The Summer EBT agency shall be
responsible to investigate cases of alleged intentional Program
violation, and to ensure that appropriate cases are acted upon The
State Summer EBT agency must ensure investigations are consistent with
Sec. 273.16(a) of this chapter.
(2) The penalties for intentional Summer EBT Program violations
specified at Sec. 273.16(b) of this chapter as well as the definition
of intentional program violations at Sec. 273.16(c) of this chapter
are applicable to individuals 18 years of age or over who:
(i) Allegedly committed an intentional Summer EBT Program
violation; or
(ii) Allegedly ordered, coerced, persuaded, encouraged, or
otherwise induced a person under the age of 18 to commit an intentional
Summer EBT Program violation.
(3) Requirements for notifying households about disqualification
penalties that are specified at Sec. 273.16(d) of this chapter apply
to Summer EBT.
(4) Disqualification hearing procedures for individuals accused of
intentional Program violation specified at Sec. 273.16(e)(f) through
(h) of this chapter also apply to Summer EBT.
(5) Each State Summer EBT agency must report to FNS information
concerning individuals disqualified for an intentional Program
violation in accordance with Sec. 273.16(i) of this chapter for Summer
EBT.
(6) In cases where the determination of intentional program
violation is reversed by a court of appropriate jurisdiction, the State
agency must reinstate the individual in the program if the household is
eligible.
(f) Restoration of lost benefits--(1) Entitlement. (i) The Summer
EBT agency must restore benefits which were lost whenever the loss was
caused by an error by the Summer EBT agency or by an administrative
disqualification for intentional Program violation which was
subsequently reversed, or if there is a statement elsewhere in the
regulations specifically stating that the household is entitled to
restoration of lost benefits. Furthermore, unless there is a statement
elsewhere in this part that a household is entitled to lost benefits
for a longer period, benefits shall be restored for not more than
twelve months prior to whichever of the following occurred first:
(A) The date the Summer EBT agency receives a request for
restoration from a household; or
(B) The date the Summer EBT agency is notified or otherwise
discovers that a loss to a household has occurred.
(ii) The Summer EBT agency must restore benefits which were found
by any judicial action to have been wrongfully withheld. If the
judicial action is the first action the recipient has taken to obtain
restoration of lost benefits, then benefits must be restored for a
period of not more than twelve months from the date the court action
was initiated. When the judicial action is a review of a Summer EBT
agency action, the benefits must be restored for a period of not more
than twelve months from the first of the following dates:
(A) The date the Summer EBT agency receives a request for
restoration.
(B) If no request for restoration is received, the date the fair
hearing action was initiated; but
(C) Never more than one year from when the Summer EBT agency is
notified of, or discovers, the loss.
(D) Benefits must be restored even if the child is currently
ineligible.
(2) Errors discovered by the Summer EBT agency. If the Summer EBT
agency determines that a loss of benefits has occurred, and the
household is entitled to restoration of those benefits, the Summer EBT
agency must automatically take action to restore any benefits that were
lost. No action by the household is necessary. However, benefits must
not be restored if the benefits were lost more than 12 months prior to
the month the loss was discovered by the State agency in the normal
course of business, or were lost more than 12 months prior to the month
the State agency was notified in writing or orally of a possible loss
to a specific household. The State agency shall notify the household of
its entitlement, the amount of benefits to be restored, any offsetting
that was done, the method of restoration, and the right to appeal
through the fair hearing process if the household disagrees with any
aspect of the proposed lost benefit restoration.
(3) Disputed benefits. (i) If the Summer EBT agency determines that
a household is entitled to restoration of lost benefits, but the
household does not agree with the amount to be restored as calculated
by the Summer EBT agency or any other action taken by the Summer EBT
agency to restore lost benefits, the household may request a fair
hearing within 90 days of the date the household is notified of its
entitlement to restoration of lost benefits. If a fair hearing is
requested prior to or during the time lost benefits are being restored,
the household shall receive the lost benefits as determined by the
Summer EBT agency pending the results of the fair hearing. If the fair
hearing decision is favorable to the household, the Summer EBT agency
must restore the lost benefits in accordance with that decision.
(ii) If a household believes it is entitled to restoration of lost
benefits but the Summer EBT agency, after reviewing the case file, does
not agree, the household has 90 days from the date of the Summer EBT
agency determination to request a fair hearing. The Summer EBT agency
must restore lost benefits to the household only if the fair hearing
decision is favorable to the household. Benefits lost more than 12
months prior to the date the Summer EBT agency was initially informed
of the household's possible entitlement to lost benefits shall not be
restored.
(4) Lost benefits to individuals disqualified for intentional
Program violation. Individuals disqualified for intentional Program
violation are entitled to restoration of any benefits lost during the
months that they were disqualified, not to exceed twelve months prior
to the date of Summer EBT agency notification, only if the decision
which resulted in disqualification is subsequently reversed.
(5) Method of restoration. Regardless of whether a household is
currently eligible or ineligible, the Summer EBT agency must restore
lost benefits to a household by issuing an allotment equal to the
amount of benefits that were lost. The amount restored shall be issued
in addition to the allotment currently eligible households are entitled
to receive.
(6) Accounting procedures. The Summer EBT agency shall be
responsible for maintaining an accounting system for documenting a
child's entitlement to restoration of lost benefits and for recording
the balance of lost benefits that must be restored. The Summer EBT
agency must at a minimum, document how the amount to be restored was
calculated and the reason lost benefits must be restored. The
accounting system must be designed to readily identify those situations
where a claim against a household can be used to offset the amount to
be restored.
[[Page 90377]]
(g) Retailers. Retail food operations authorized to participate as
a SNAP retailer must also accept State Summer EBT benefits.
(h) Record retentions and forms of security. The State Summer EBT
agency must maintain issuance, inventory, reconciliation, and other
accountability records related to Summer EBT.
(1) Availability of records. (i) The State Summer EBT agency shall
maintain issuance, inventory, reconciliation, and other accountability
records for a period of three years. This period may be extended at the
written request of FNS.
(ii) In lieu of the records themselves, easily retrievable
microfilm, microfiche, or computer tapes which contain the required
information may be maintained.
(2) Control of issuance documents. The State Summer EBT agency
shall control all issuance documents which establish household
eligibility while the documents are transferred and processed within
the State Summer EBT agency. The State Summer EBT agency shall use
numbers, batching, inventory control logs, or similar controls from the
point of initial receipt through the issuance and reconciliation
process.
(3) Accountable documents. (i) EBT cards shall be considered
accountable documents. The State Summer EBT agency shall provide the
following minimum security and control procedures for these documents:
(A) Secure storage;
(B) Access limited to authorized personnel;
(C) Bulk inventory control records;
(D) Subsequent control records maintained through the point of
issuance or use; and
(E) Periodic review and validation of inventory controls and
records by parties not otherwise involved in maintaining control
records.
(ii) For notices of change which initiate, update or terminate the
master issuance file, the State Summer EBT agency shall, at a minimum,
provide secure storage and shall limit access to authorized personnel.
(i) Benefit redemption by eligible households--(1) Eligible food.
Program benefits may be used only by the household, or other persons
the household selects, to purchase eligible food for the household from
SNAP-authorized retailers, which includes, for certain households, the
purchase of prepared meals, and for other households residing in
certain designated areas of Alaska, the purchase of hunting and fishing
equipment with benefits.
(2) Prior payment prohibition. Program benefits must not be used to
pay for any eligible food purchased prior to the time at which an EBT
card is presented to authorized retailers or meal services. Benefits
must not be used to pay for any eligible food in advance of the receipt
of food, except when prior payment is for food purchased from a
nonprofit cooperative food purchasing venture.
(3) Transaction limits. No minimum dollar amount per transaction or
maximum limit on the number of transactions can be established. In
addition, no transaction fees can be imposed on Summer EBT households
utilizing the EBT system to access their benefits.
(4) Access to balances. (i) Households shall be permitted to
determine their Summer EBT account balances without making a purchase
or standing in a checkout line.
(ii) The Summer EBT agency must ensure that the EBT system is
capable of providing a transaction history for a period of up to 2
calendar months to households upon request.
(iii) Households must be provided printed receipts at the time of
transaction. At a minimum this information must:
(A) State the date, merchant's name and location, transaction type,
transaction amount and remaining balance for the Summer EBT account;
(B) Comply with the requirements of 12 CFR part 205 (Regulation E)
in addition to the requirements of this section; and
(C) Identify the Summer EBT households member's account number
using a truncated number or coded transaction number. The child's name
must not appear on the receipt except when a signature is required when
utilizing a manual transaction voucher.
(5) Equal treatment. The EBT system must be implemented and
operated in a manner that maintains equal treatment for Summer EBT
households. Summer EBT benefits must be accepted for eligible foods at
the same prices and on the same terms and conditions applicable to cash
purchases of the same foods at the same store. However, nothing in this
part may be construed as authorizing FNS to specify the prices at which
retail food stores may sell food. However, public or private nonprofit
homeless meal providers may only request voluntary use of Summer EBT
benefits from homeless Summer EBT recipients and may not request such
household using Summer EBT benefits to pay more than the average cost
of the food purchased by the public or private nonprofit homeless meal
provider contained in a meal served to the patrons of the meal service.
For purposes of this section, ``average cost'' is determined by
averaging food costs over a period of up to one calendar month.
Voluntary payments by Summer EBT recipients in excess of such costs may
be accepted by the meal providers. The value of donated foods from any
source must not be considered in determining the amount to be requested
from Summer EBT recipients. All indirect costs, such as those incurred
in the acquisition, storage, or preparation of the foods used in meals
shall also be excluded. In addition, if others have the option of
eating free or making a monetary donation, Summer EBT recipients must
be provided the same option of eating free or making a donation in
money or Summer EBT benefits. No retail food store may single out
Summer EBT recipients for special treatment in any way. The following
requirements for the equal treatment of Summer EBT households must
directly apply to EBT systems:
(i) Retailers must not establish special checkout lanes which are
only for Summer EBT households. If special lanes are designated for the
purpose of accepting other electronic debit or credit cards and/or
other payment methods such as checks, Summer EBT customers with EBT
cards may also be assigned to such lanes as long as other commercial
customers are assigned there as well.
(ii) Checkout lanes equipped with POS devices shall be made
available to Summer EBT households during all retail store hours of
operation.
(6) Households eligible for prepared meals--(i) Meals-on-wheels.
Eligible guardians of Summer EBT recipients 60 years of age or over or
guardians who are housebound, physically handicapped, or otherwise
disabled to the extent that they are unable to adequately prepare meals
may use Summer EBT benefits to purchase meals for the participant that
are prepared for and delivered to them by a nonprofit meal delivery
service authorized by FNS.
(ii) Communal dining facilities. Eligible guardians of Summer EBT
recipients 60 years of age or over may use Summer EBT benefits issued
to purchase meals for the participant that are prepared at communal
dining facilities authorized by FNS for that purpose.
(iii) Residents of certain institutions. (A) Eligible residents of
a group living arrangement may use Summer EBT benefits issued to them
to purchase meals prepared especially for them at a group living
arrangement which is authorized by FNS to redeem Summer
[[Page 90378]]
EBT benefits in accordance with paragraph (g) of this section.
(B) Residents of shelters for battered women and children may use
their Program benefits to purchase meals prepared especially for the
participant at a shelter which is authorized by FNS to redeem benefits
in accordance with paragraph (g) of this section.
(iv) Homeless households. (A) Homeless Summer EBT households may
use their benefits to purchase prepared meals for the participant from
authorized homeless meal providers.
(B) Eligible homeless Summer EBT households may use their benefits
to purchase meals for the participant from restaurants authorized by
FNS for such purpose.
(7) Allowable purchase of equipment for hunting and fishing.
Eligible Summer EBT households residing in areas of Alaska determined
by FNS as areas where access to authorized retailers is difficult and
which rely substantially on hunting and fishing for subsistence may use
all or any part of their benefits issued to purchase hunting and
fishing equipment such as nets, hooks, rods, harpoons and knives, but
may not use benefits to purchase firearms, ammunition, and other
explosives.
(8) Limiting hunting and fishing purchases to eligible households.
State Summer EBT agencies shall implement a method to ensure that
access to prepared meals and hunting and fishing equipment is limited
to eligible households as described in paragraphs (i)(6) and (7) of
this section.
(9) Container deposit fees. Program benefits may not be used to pay
for deposit fees in excess of the amount of the State fee reimbursement
required to purchase any food or food product contained in a returnable
bottle or can, regardless of whether the fee is included in the shelf
price posted for item. The returnable container type and fee must be
included in State law in order for the customer to be able to pay for
the upfront deposit with Summer EBT benefits. If a Summer EBT eligible
product has a State deposit fee associated with it, the product remains
eligible for purchase with Summer EBT benefits, and the State deposit
fee may be paid with Summer EBT benefits as well; however, any fee in
excess of the State deposit fee must be paid in cash or other form of
payment other than with Summer EBT benefits.
(j) Reconciliation. State Summer EBT agencies must account for all
issuance through a reconciliation process as described by USDA.
Sec. 292.17 Retailer integrity requirements specific to States that
administer SNAP.
(a) Participation of retail food stores and wholesale food
concerns, and redemption of Summer EBT benefits. Requirements and
restrictions on the participation of retail food stores and wholesale
food concerns and the redemption of benefits described at Sec. Sec.
278.2, 278.3 and 278.4 of this chapter, including the acceptance of
benefits for eligible food at authorized firms, also apply to
activities involving Summer EBT benefits.
(b) Firm eligibility standards. A firm may be subject to the
following actions described at Sec. 278.1 of this chapter for
noncompliance or violations involving Summer EBT benefits:
(1) The requirements described at Sec. 278.1(b)(4) of this chapter
regarding a collateral bond or irrevocable letter of credit for
applicant firms with certain sanctions apply to applicant firms with
sanctions imposed for violations involving Summer EBT benefits. The
amount of the collateral bond or irrevocable letter of credit shall be
calculated in accordance with Sec. 278.1(b)(4)(i)(D) and shall also
include the amount of Summer EBT benefit redemptions when calculating
the average monthly benefit redemption volume.
(2) Authorization shall be denied or withdrawn based on a
determination by the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) that a firm lacks
or fails to maintain necessary business integrity and reputation, in
accordance with the standards and time periods described at Sec.
278.1(b)(3), (k)(3), and (l)(1)(iv) of this chapter. When making such
determinations, FNS shall consider the criteria referred to in Sec.
278.1(b)(3), (k)(3), and (l)(1)(iv) where the underlying activities
involve Summer EBT benefits.
(3) Firm authorization shall be denied or withdrawn for failure to
pay any claims, fines, or civil money penalties in the manner described
at Sec. 278.1(k)(7) and (l)(1)(v) and (vi) of this chapter where such
sanctions were imposed for violations involving Summer EBT benefits.
(c) Penalties. For firms that commit certain violations described
at Sec. Sec. 278.6 and 278.2 of this chapter where such violations
involve Summer EBT benefits, FNS shall take the corresponding action
prescribed at Sec. 278.6 or Sec. 278.2 for that violation. For the
purposes of assigning a period of disqualification, a warning letter
shall not be considered to be a sanction. Specifically, FNS shall:
(1) Disqualify a firm permanently, as described at Sec.
278.6(e)(1)(i) of this chapter, for trafficking, as defined at Sec.
284.1(b)(1) of this chapter, or impose a civil money penalty in lieu of
permanent disqualification, as described at Sec. 278.6(i) of this
chapter, where such compliance policy and program is designed to
prevent violations of the regulations in this section;
(2) Disqualify a firm permanently, as described at Sec.
278.6(e)(1)(ii) of this chapter, for any violation involving Summer EBT
benefits committed by a firm that had already been sanctioned at least
twice before under this section or 7 CFR part 278;
(3) Disqualify the firm for 5 years, as described at Sec.
278.6(e)(2)(v) of this chapter, or for 3 years, as described at Sec.
278.6(e)(3)(iv) of this chapter, for unauthorized acceptance violations
involving Summer EBT benefits, and impose fines, as described at Sec.
278.6(m) of this chapter, for unauthorized acceptance violations
involving Summer EBT benefits;
(4) Disqualify the firm for 5 years in circumstances described at
Sec. 278.6(e)(2) of this chapter when the amount of redemptions, which
shall also include the amount of Summer EBT redemptions, exceed food
sales for the same period of time, as described at Sec.
278.6(e)(2)(ii) through (iv);
(5) Disqualify the firm for 3 years as described at Sec.
278.6(e)(3)(ii) of this chapter for situations described at Sec.
278.6(e)(2) of this chapter involving Summer EBT benefits;
(6) Disqualify the firm for 1 year for credit account violations as
described at Sec. Sec. 278.6(e)(4)(ii) and 278.2(f) of this chapter,
where such violations involve Summer EBT benefits;
(7) Disqualify the firm for ineligibles violations for such
circumstances and corresponding time periods as described at Sec.
278.6(e)(2)(i), (e)(3)(i), (e)(4)(i), and (e)(5) of this chapter, where
such violations involve Summer EBT benefits;
(8) Double the appropriate period of disqualification for a
violation, as described at Sec. 278.6(e)(6) of this chapter, where
such violation involves Summer EBT benefits, when the firm has once
before been assigned a sanction under this section or 7 CFR part 278;
(9) Issue a warning letter to the violative firm when violations
are too limited to warrant a period of disqualification, as described
at Sec. 278.6(e)(7) of this chapter, where such violations involve
Summer EBT benefits;
(10) Impose a civil money penalty for hardship or transfer of
ownership, as described at Sec. 278.6(g) of this chapter, in amounts
calculated using the described formula at Sec. 278.6(g), which shall
also
[[Page 90379]]
include the relevant amount of Summer EBT redemptions when calculating
the average monthly benefit redemptions; and
(11) Impose a civil money penalty in lieu of permanent
disqualification for trafficking as described at Sec. 278.6(j) of this
chapter in an amount calculated using the described formula at Sec.
278.6(j), which shall also include the relevant amount of Summer EBT
redemptions when calculating the average monthly benefit redemptions.
(d) Claims. The standards for determination and disposition of
claims against retail food stores and wholesale food concerns described
at Sec. 278.7 of this chapter apply to Summer EBT benefits.
(e) Administrative and Judicial review. Firms aggrieved by
administrative action under 7 CFR parts 271, 278, and 279 may request
administrative review of the administrative action with USDA in
accordance with 7 CFR part 279, subpart A. Firms aggrieved by the
determination of such an administrative review may seek judicial review
of the determination under 5 U.S.C. 702 through 706.
Sec. 292.18 Requirements specific to States that administer Nutrition
Assistance Program (NAP) programs.
Summer EBT benefits issued by a Territory that administers the
Nutrition Assistance Program in lieu of SNAP may only be used by the
eligible household that receives such summer benefits to purchase
eligible foods from retail food stores that have been approved for
participation in the Nutrition Assistance Program in American Samoa,
the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, and the Commonwealth of the Northern
Mariana Islands. States that administer NAP shall establish issuance
and accountability systems which ensure that only certified eligible
households receive Summer EBT benefits.
Sec. 292.19 Requirements specific to ITO Summer EBT agencies.
(a) The ITO Summer EBT Agency must ensure that Summer EBT Program
benefits are used by the eligible household that receives such benefits
to transact for supplemental foods from retailers that have been
approved for participation in the WIC Program. The ITO Summer EBT
agency must:
(1) Use the same benefit delivery model for all participants
throughout its service area, in accordance with its FNS-approved POM:
(i) For ITOs using a CVB-only benefit delivery model, issue a
benefit level equal to the amount set forth in Sec. 292.15(e); and
(ii) For ITOs using a food package benefit delivery model, a
combination CVB and food package benefit delivery model, or an
alternate benefit delivery model, issue a benefit not to exceed the
amounts set forth in Sec. 292.15(e);
(2) Ensure vendors charge prices for eligible food items which are
reasonable for the area(s) served and are at the current price or less
than the current price charged to other customers. Vendors may not
charge Summer EBT participants more for an item than the price in the
retail environment for all other customers;
(3) Provide participants supplemental foods deemed eligible for
Summer EBT via an FNS-approved POM. Supplemental foods authorized for
the WIC Program by the applicable WIC ITO must meet the requirements
set forth in this paragraph (a)(3). The POM must identify a list of
supplemental foods that:
(i) Contain nutrients determined by nutritional research to be
lacking in the diets of children, and promote the health of the
population served by the program, as indicated by relevant nutrition
science, public health concerns, and cultural eating patterns; and
(ii) Do not include infant formula and infant foods.
(b) ITO Summer EBT procedures and operations related to basic
issuance requirements, reconciliation, benefit redemption, and
functional and technical EBT system requirements, should be consistent
with WIC regulations at Sec. 246.12 of this chapter as applicable to
the benefit delivery model used, to the extent such requirements do not
conflict with the requirements set forth for ITO Summer EBT agencies in
this part.
(c) To ensure effective vendor integrity, the ITO Summer EBT agency
must set forth a system which ensures:
(1) Requirements and restrictions on the participation of vendors
and the transaction of food benefits described at Sec. 246.12 of this
chapter, apply to activities involving Summer EBT benefits; and
(2) Vendors are subject to the actions and penalties described at
Sec. 246.12 of this chapter for noncompliance or violations involving
Summer EBT benefits; and
(3) The standards for determination and disposition of claims
against vendors described at Sec. 246.12 of this chapter apply to
Summer EBT benefits; or
(4) Set forth an alternate system to ensure effective vendor
management and vendor integrity.
Subpart E--General Administrative Requirements
Sec. 292.20 Payments to Summer EBT agencies and use of administrative
program funds.
(a) General requirements for grant awards. Grant awards are all
subject to procedures established by USDA in accordance with 2 CFR part
200, subpart D, and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400
and 415.
(b) Program benefit funds. FNS shall provide a grant to the Summer
EBT agency that administers the EBT benefit issuance in an amount equal
to 100 percent of issued eligible benefit funds as reflected in the
final POM. Summer EBT benefits must be tracked separately from SNAP
benefits, or other benefit types.
(c) State administrative funds. FNS must pay to each Summer EBT
agency an amount equal to 50 percent of the administrative expenses
incurred by the Summer EBT agency in operating the program under this
section, including the administrative expenses of LEAs and other
agencies in each State or ITO, as applicable, relating to the operation
of the program under this section. Summer EBT agencies will report
their incurred administrative expenses on a financial status report.
Generally, Summer EBT agencies must cover the balance of their
administrative costs, i.e., their ``match,'' with non-Federal funds.
(d) Applicable terms and conditions on grant awards. All grant
awards described in paragraphs (a) through (c) of this section shall be
subject to terms and conditions and standard reporting requirements of
the Federal grant and Federal-State Agreement.
(e) Use of State administrative funds--(1) Matching funds. Summer
EBT agency costs for Federal matching funds may consist of:
(i) Charges reported on a cash or accrual basis by the Summer EBT
agency as project costs.
(ii) Project costs financed with cash contributed or donated to the
Summer EBT agency.
(iii) Project costs represented by services and real or personal
property donated to the Summer EBT agency.
(2) Cash and in-kind contributions. All cash or in-kind
contributions except as provided in paragraph (f) of this section must
be allowable as part of the Summer EBT agency's share of program costs
when such contributions:
(i) Are verifiable;
[[Page 90380]]
(ii) Are not contributed for another federally assisted program,
unless authorized by Federal legislation;
(iii) Are necessary and reasonable for accomplishment of project
objectives;
(iv) Are charges that would be allowable under this part;
(v) Are not paid by the Federal Government under another Federal
award, except where the Federal statute authorizing a program
specifically provides that Federal funds made available for such
program can be applied to matching or cost sharing requirements of
other Federal programs; and
(vi) Are in the approved budget.
(f) Volunteer services. The value of services rendered by
volunteers is unallowable for reimbursement purposes.
(g) Recovery of funds. The Summer EBT agency must return any
Federal funds made available under this part which are in excess of
obligations reported at the end of each fiscal year, in accordance with
the reconciliation procedures specified in paragraph (h) of this
section. The Summer EBT agency shall reflect such recoveries by a
related adjustment in the Summer EBT agency's Letter of Credit.
(h) Substantiation and reconciliation process. The Summer EBT
agency must maintain Program records necessary to support
administrative costs claimed and the reports submitted to USDA under
this paragraph (h). The Summer EBT agency must ensure such records are
retained for a period of 3 years or as otherwise specified in Sec.
292.23. Partnering agencies must also meet these requirements
consistent with the inter-agency agreement with the Summer EBT agency.
Sec. 292.21 Standards for financial management systems.
(a) General. This section prescribes standards for financial
management systems in administering program funds by the Summer EBT
agency and its subagencies or contractors.
(b) Responsibilities. Financial management systems for program
funds in Summer EBT must provide for the following. The standards in
this paragraph (b) also apply to subagencies or contractors involved
with program funding.
(1) Accurate, current, and complete disclosure of the financial
results of program activities in accordance with Federal reporting
requirements in Sec. 292.23.
(2) Records which identify the source and application of funds for
FNS or Summer EBT agency activities supporting the administration of
the Program. These records must show authorizations, obligations,
unobligated balances, assets, liabilities, outlays and income of the
Summer EBT agency, its sub-agencies and agents.
(3) Records which identify unallowable costs and offsets resulting
from FNS or other determinations and the disposition of these amounts.
Accounting procedures must be in effect to prevent a Summer EBT agency
from claiming these costs under ongoing program administrative cost
reports.
(4) Effective control and accountability by the Summer EBT agency
for all program funds, property, and other assets acquired with program
funds. Summer EBT agencies must adequately safeguard all such assets
and must assure that they are used solely for program-authorized
purposes unless disposition has been made in accordance with paragraph
(b)(3) of this section.
(5) If necessary, Summer EBT agencies will be expected to complete
an Automated Standard Application for Payment (ASAP) setup form so that
FNS may set up a Letter of Credit by which Summer EBT funds will be
made available.
(6) Controls which minimize the time between the receipt of Federal
funds from the United States Treasury and their disbursement for
program costs. In the Letter of Credit system, the Summer EBT agency
must make drawdowns from the U.S. Treasury through a U.S. Treasury
Regional Disbursing Office as nearly as possible to the time of making
the disbursements.
(7) Procedures to determine the reasonableness, allowability, and
allocability of costs in accordance with the applicable provisions
prescribed in 2 CFR part 200, subpart D, and USDA implementing
regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 and 415.
(8) Support and source documents for costs.
(9) An audit trail including identification of time periods,
initial and summary accounts, cost determination and allocation
procedures, cost centers or other accounting procedures to support any
costs claimed for program administration.
(10) Periodic audits by qualified individuals who are independent
of those who maintain Federal program funds as prescribed in Sec.
292.24(a).
(11) Methods to resolve audit findings and recommendations and to
follow up on corrective or preventive actions.
(12) The standards in this paragraph (b) also apply to subagencies,
or contractors involved with program funding.
(13) Identification in Summer EBT agency accounts of all Federal
awards received and expended and the Federal programs under which they
were received. Federal program and Federal award identification must
include, as applicable, the Assistance Listings title and number,
Federal award identification number and year, name of the Federal
agency, and name of the pass-through entity, if any.
Sec. 292.22 Performance criteria.
The Summer EBT agency must monitor and document data on each of the
following performance criteria:
(a) Performance Criteria 1--Percentage of children eligible for
Summer EBT benefits who participated by using their benefits at least
once.
(b) Performance Criteria 2--Percentage of Summer EBT benefits that
are issued to children not eligible for Summer EBT.
(c) Performance Criteria 3--Percentage of children issued benefits
who receive their first issuance before the start of the summer
operational period.
(d) Performance Criteria 4--Percentage of eligible children who can
be identified through streamlined certification who are enrolled
without further application.
Sec. 292.23 Records and reports.
(a) Summer EBT agencies and LEAs may retain necessary records in
their original or electronic form.
(b) Summer EBT agency records must be retained for a period of 3
years after the date of submission of the final Financial Reports for
the fiscal year. If audit and investigation findings have not been
resolved, the records must be retained beyond the 3-year period as long
as is required for the resolution of the issues raised by the audit or
investigation.
(c) Summer EBT agencies receiving Federal awards will be required
to submit periodic financial management planning and reporting
documentation in the Food Program Reporting System (FPRS), on standard
schedules that will be announced annually.
(d) For Summer EBT Administrative Grants, Summer EBT agencies will
be required to submit an expenditure plan for State expenditure
planning by August 15th, prior to the beginning of each fiscal year.
Regional approval for those documents will set funding levels for the
Summer EBT agency. These documents may be amended on a rolling basis
throughout the year as agency needs evolve.
(e) State Administrative Grant expenditures will be reported to FNS
[[Page 90381]]
quarterly on a Summer EBT financial status report.
(f) Summer EBT agencies must report participation and issuance on a
monthly basis.
Sec. 292.24 Audits and management control evaluations.
(a) Audits. Summer EBT agencies must arrange for audits of their
own operations to be conducted in accordance with 2 CFR part 200,
subpart F, and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 and
415. Unless otherwise exempt, LEAs must arrange for audits to be
conducted in accordance with 2 CFR part 200, subpart F, and USDA
implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 and 415. Summer EBT
agencies must provide the USDA Office of the Inspector General (OIG)
with full opportunity to audit the Summer EBT agency and LEAs. Unless
otherwise exempt, audits at the Summer EBT agency and LEA levels must
be conducted in accordance with 2 CFR part 200, subpart F and appendix
XI, and USDA implementing regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 and 415. While
OIG must rely to the fullest extent feasible upon Summer EBT agency-
sponsored or LEA-sponsored audits, it must, when considered necessary:
(1) Make audits on a State or ITO-wide basis;
(2) Perform on-site test audits; and
(3) Review audit reports and related working papers of audits
performed by or for Summer EBT agencies.
(b) Management control evaluations. Summer EBT agencies must
provide USDA with full opportunity to conduct management control
evaluations of all operations of the Summer EBT agency and must provide
OIG with full opportunity to conduct audits of all Summer EBT agency
Program operations. The Summer EBT agency must make available its
records, including records of the receipts and expenditures of funds,
upon a reasonable request by USDA.
(c) Error reduction strategies. USDA may omit designated areas of
review, in part or entirely, where a Summer EBT agency has implemented
FNS-approved error reduction strategies.
Sec. 292.25 Investigations.
The Summer EBT agency must promptly investigate complaints received
or irregularities noted in connection with the operation of the Program
and must take appropriate action to correct any irregularities. The
Summer EBT agency must maintain on file all evidence relating to such
investigations and actions. The Summer EBT agency must inform the
appropriate FNSRO of any suspected fraud or criminal abuse in the
Program which would result in a loss or misuse of Federal funds. The
Department may make investigations at the request of the Summer EBT
agency, or where the Department determines investigations are
appropriate.
Sec. 292.26 Hearing procedure for families and Summer EBT agencies.
(a) Each Summer EBT agency must establish a fair hearing procedure
that is applicable to the State or ITO program as a whole. Fair hearing
procedures must:
(1) Allow a household to appeal, within 90 days after the end of
the summer operational period, a decision made with respect to:
(i)(A) An application the household has made for Summer EBT
benefits;
(B) A streamlined certification for Summer EBT benefits; or
(C) A verification process or procedure.
(ii) Any adverse action taken against the household by the Summer
EBT agency.
(2) Require the State to provide a household with back-benefits for
Summer EBT if the fair hearing determines that the Summer EBT agency
erroneously failed to issue such benefits in the correct amount to an
eligible family, an administrative disqualification for intentional
Program violation was subsequently reversed, or if there is a statement
elsewhere in this part specifically stating that the household is
entitled to restoration of lost benefits.
(b) In response to an appeal, the Summer EBT agency may defend its
initial decision to deny the eligibility of the child for Summer EBT
benefits or take an adverse action against a household. The fair
hearing procedure must provide for both the household and the Summer
EBT agency:
(1) A simple, publicly announced method to make an oral or written
request for a hearing;
(2) An opportunity to be assisted or represented by an attorney or
other person;
(3) An opportunity to examine, prior to and during the hearing, any
documents and records presented to support the decision under appeal;
(4) That the hearing must be held with reasonable promptness and
convenience, and that adequate notice must be given as to the time and
place of the hearing;
(5) An opportunity to present oral or documentary evidence and
arguments supporting a position without undue interference;
(6) An opportunity to question or refute any testimony or other
evidence and to confront and cross-examine any adverse witnesses;
(7) That the hearing must be conducted and the decision made by a
hearing official who did not participate in making the decision under
appeal or in any previously held conference;
(8) That the decision of the hearing official must be based on the
oral and documentary evidence presented at the hearing and made a part
of the hearing record;
(9) That the parties concerned and any designated representative
must be notified in writing of the decision of the hearing official;
(10) That a written record must be prepared with respect to each
hearing, which must include the challenge or the decision under appeal,
any documentary evidence and a summary of any oral testimony presented
at the hearing, the decision of the hearing official, including the
reasons therefor, and a copy of the notification to the parties
concerned of the decision of the hearing official; and
(11) That the written record of each hearing must be preserved for
a period of 3 years and must be available for examination by the
parties concerned or their representatives at any reasonable time and
place during that period.
(12) That the household may request a conference to provide the
opportunity for the household to discuss the situation, present
information, and obtain an explanation of the data submitted in the
application or the decision rendered. The request for a conference must
not in any way prejudice or diminish the right to a fair hearing. The
Summer EBT agency must promptly schedule a fair hearing, if requested.
(13) Any communication with households related to fair hearings
must be in an understandable and uniform format and, to the maximum
extent practicable, in a language that parents and guardians can
understand.
Sec. 292.27 Claims.
(a) Basis for claims. Summer EBT agencies are responsible to ensure
that program benefits are provided only to eligible children and in the
correct amount in accordance with program regulations in this part.
Erroneous issuances include, but are not limited to:
(1) Benefits issued to ineligible children or in the incorrect
amount.
(2) Duplicate benefit issuances, including situations where the
Summer EBT agency allows an eligible household to access more than one
[[Page 90382]]
Summer EBT account for the same time period, or an eligible household
receives program benefits from more than one State or ITO for the same
time period.
(b) Claims against Summer EBT agencies. (1) USDA may hold Summer
EBT agencies liable for erroneous payments. USDA may pursue erroneous
claims in the aggregate when merited, based on the nature of the error
that gave rise to the over-issuance, the size of the error, and whether
such action would advance program purposes.
(2) Summer EBT agencies must develop a process to allow households
to submit a claim for benefits that were not issued or issued in the
incorrect amount.
(c) Claims against households. (1) Summer EBT agencies must develop
a process to manage cases of erroneous issuances and pursue claims
against a household, as appropriate.
(2) Summer EBT agencies have the discretion to determine when to
pursue a claim based on cost effectiveness or the individual
circumstances. To the maximum extent practicable, Summer EBT agencies
should limit claims against households to situations where there is
evidence that the household knowingly obtained benefits through
fraudulent activities.
(i) Summer EBT agencies must include in their POM submission a
proposed plan for identifying instances of fraudulent activity for use
in pursuing claims against households.
(ii) Procedures described in paragraph (c)(2)(i) of this section
must outline steps the Summer EBT agency will take to ensure that Civil
Rights provision at Sec. 292.29(a) are upheld.
(3) Summer EBT agencies must not reclaim Summer EBT benefits by
reducing a household's SNAP, NAP, or WIC benefit.
Sec. 292.28 Procurement standards.
(a) Applicability of the Advance Planning Document (APD) process.
If an EBT services contract established for the purpose of benefit
issuance includes Summer EBT, the State Systems Advance Planning
Document (APD) process must be followed in accordance with Sec.
292.11(b)(3) for States and Sec. 292.11(u) for ITOs, respectively.
(b) General requirements on the procurement of goods and services
with Federal funds. All other Summer EBT agency and local agency costs,
including eligibility systems, must comply with the requirements of
this part and 2 CFR part 200, subpart D, and USDA implementing
regulations in 2 CFR parts 400 and 415, as applicable, which implement
the applicable requirements concerning the procurement of all goods and
services with Federal funds.
(c) Contractual responsibilities. The standards contained in this
part and 2 CFR part 200, subpart D, and USDA implementing regulations
in 2 CFR parts 400 and 415, as applicable, do not relieve any Summer
EBT agency or local agency of any contractual responsibilities under
its contracts. The Summer EBT agency or local agency is the responsible
authority, without recourse to USDA, regarding the settlement and
satisfaction of all contractual and administrative issues arising out
of procurements entered into in connection with the Program. This
includes, but is not limited to, source evaluation, protests, disputes,
claims, or other matters of a contractual nature. Matters concerning
violation of law are to be referred to the local, State, or Federal
authority that has proper jurisdiction.
(d) Procedures. The Summer EBT agency must follow either the State
or ITO laws, policies and procedures as authorized by 2 CFR 200.317, or
the procurement standards for other governmental grantees and all
governmental subgrantees in accordance with 2 CFR 200.318 through
200.326. Regardless of the option selected, Summer EBT agencies must
ensure that all contracts include any clauses required by Federal
statutes and Executive orders and that the requirements in 2 CFR
200.236 and 2 CFR part 200, appendix II, are followed.
Sec. 292.29 Miscellaneous administrative provisions.
(a) Civil rights. In the operation of the Program, no child may be
denied benefits or be otherwise discriminated against because of race,
color, national origin, age, sex, or disability. Summer EBT agencies
and LEAs must comply with the requirements of: Title VI of the Civil
Rights Act of 1964; title IX of the Education Amendments of 1972;
section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973; the Age Discrimination
Act of 1975; and Department of Agriculture regulations on
nondiscrimination (7 CFR parts 15, 15a, and 15b).
(b) Program evaluations. States, ITOs, Summer EBT agencies, LEAs,
schools, and contractors must cooperate in studies and evaluations
conducted by or on behalf of the Department related to programs
authorized under the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act or
the Child Nutrition Act of 1966.
(c) General responsibilities. The criminal penalties and provisions
established in section 12(g) of the Richard B. Russell National School
Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1760(g)) provide that whoever embezzles, willfully
misapplies, steals, or obtains by fraud any funds, assets, or property
that are the subject of a grant or other form of assistance under the
Act or the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.),
whether received directly or indirectly from the United States
Department of Agriculture, or whoever receives, conceals, or retains
such funds, assets, or property to personal use or gain, knowing such
funds, assets, or property have been embezzled, willfully misapplied,
stolen, or obtained by fraud must, if such funds, assets, or property
are of the value of $100 or more, be fined not more than $25,000 or
imprisoned not more than five years, or both, or, if such funds,
assets, or property are of a value of less than $100, must be fined not
more than $1,000 or imprisoned for not more than one year, or both.
Sec. 292.30 Severability.
Any provision of this part held to be invalid or unenforceable as
applied to any person or circumstance shall be construed so as to
continue to give the maximum effect to the provision permitted by law,
including as applied to persons not similarly situated or to dissimilar
circumstances, unless such holding is that the provision of this part
is invalid and unenforceable in all circumstances, in which event the
provision shall be severable from the remainder of this part and shall
not affect the remainder thereof.
Sec. 292.31 [Reserved]
Cynthia Long,
Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service.
Note: This appendix will not appear in the Code of Federal
Regulations.
[[Page 90383]]
Appendix A--Regulatory Impact Analysis
Statement of Need
The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023 (Pub. L. 117-328)
requires the Secretary of Agriculture to make available an option to
States to provide summer meals for non-congregate meal service in
rural areas with no congregate meal service and to establish a
permanent summer electronic benefits transfer for children program
(Summer EBT) for the purpose of ensuring continued access to food
when school is not in session for the summer. This interim final
rule amends the Summer Food Service (SFSP) and National School Lunch
Program's Seamless Summer Option (SSO) regulations in 7 CFR parts
210, 220, and 225 to codify the flexibility for rural program
operators to provide non-congregate meal service in the SFSP and
SSO. This rule also establishes 7 CFR part 292 and codifies the
Summer EBT Program in this part.
Background
Ample research supports the effectiveness of programs like the
National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and School Breakfast Program
(SBP) in improving food security of participating children during
the school year.16 17 18 Despite substantial expansion of
summer meal programs in recent years, just 1 in 6 children who eat
free or reduced-price school meals participates in summer meal
programs in a typical year.\19\ There is evidence to suggest that
food insecurity among children increases in the summer months and
that participation in nutrition programs such as the SFSP can reduce
rates of food insecurity, and particularly its most severe
forms.20 21 22 23 24
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\16\ Arteaga, Irma, and Colleen Heflin (2014). Participation in
the National School Lunch Program and food security: An analysis of
transitions into kindergarten. Children and Youth Services Review,
47, 224-230. http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.childyouth.2014.09.014.
\17\ Gunderson, C., Kreider, B., & and Pepper, J. (2012). The
impact of the National School Lunch Program on child health: A
nonparametric bounds analysis. Journal of Econometrics 166(1): 79-
91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jeconom.2011.06.007.
\18\ Bartfeld, J., & Ryu, J. (2011). The School Breakfast
Program and Breakfast-Skipping among Wisconsin Elementary School
Children. Social Service Review 85(4):619-634. https://doi.org/10.1086/663635.
\19\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2019). USDA Highlights
Importance of Keeping Kids Fed During Summer Months. U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. https://
www.fns.usda.gov/pressrelease/2019/fns-
000719#:~:text=During%20the%20academic%20year%2C%20approximately,in%2
0the%20summer%20meal%20programs.
\20\ Huang, J., Barnidge, E., & Kim, Y. (2015). Children
Receiving Free or Reduced Price Meals Have Higher Food Insufficiency
Rates in Summer. The Journal of Nutrition 145: 2161-2168. https://doi.org/10.3945/jn.115.214486.
\21\ Nord, M., & Romig, K. (2006). Hunger in the Summer:
Seasonal Food Insecurity and the National School Lunch and Summer
Food Service Programs. Journal of Children & Poverty 12(2): 141-158.
https://doi.org/10.1080/10796120600879582.
\22\ Miller, D.P. (2016). Accessibility of summer meals and the
food insecurity of low-income households with children. Public
Health Nutrition 19(11): 2079-2089. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980016000033.
\23\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2021). USDA Summer Meals Study
Summary. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service.
https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/resource-files/SummerMealsStudy-2018-SummaryofFindings.pdf.
\24\ Turner, L., & Calvert, H.G. (2019). The Academic,
Behavioral, and Health Influence of Summer Child Nutrition Programs:
A Narrative Review and Proposed Research and Policy Agenda. Journal
of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics 119(6): 972-983. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jand.2019.02.006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Since 2011, the USDA has administered Summer EBT demonstration
projects in collaboration with State agencies \25\ and Indian Tribal
Organizations \26\ with the goals of reducing or eliminating food
insecurity and hunger and improving nutritional status among
participating children. Authorized and funded by the 2010
Agriculture Appropriations Act (Pub. L. 111-80), these demonstration
projects have been rigorously evaluated over the course of a decade
and have proven successful at mitigating food insecurity and
improving diet quality. Evaluation findings show that Summer EBT
benefits reduce the most severe category of food insecurity by one-
third among participating children, compared with those receiving no
benefits, and indicate that this model could be effectively
implemented in a wide variety of communities.27 28
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\25\ For the purpose of this analysis, State agency refers to
State agencies administering the SFSP and Summer EBT agencies,
including Indian Tribal Organizations (ITOs) administering Summer
EBT.
\26\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2023). Evaluation of the 2019-
2022 Summer EBT Demonstration (Draft Final Report). U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Publication forthcoming.
\27\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2016). Summer Electronic
Benefit Transfer for Children (SEBTC) Demonstration: Summary Report.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/ops/sebtcfinalreport.pdf.
\28\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2020). Summer Electronic
Benefit Transfer for Children Evaluation: Final Report. U.S.
Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The USDA has also initiated other demonstration projects to
improve the reach and impact of summer meal programs under section
749(g) of the Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and
Administration, and Related Agencies Appropriations Act, 2010 (Pub.
L. 111-80; 123 Stat. 2132). One demonstration project was the
Enhanced Summer Food Service Program (eSFSP), which tested changes
to the existing structure and delivery mechanism of SFSP for the
purpose of determining effects on program participation. The eSFSP
included the Meal Delivery demonstration which offered breakfast and
lunch delivery to homes of eligible children in rural areas, as well
as the Food Backpack demonstration which provided weekend and
holiday meals to SFSP participants for consumption when SFSP sites
were not open.
In 2013, Non-Congregate Feeding for Outdoor Summer Feeding Sites
Experiencing Excess Heat was implemented, allowing SFSP and Seamless
Summer Option (SSO) sponsors operating approved outdoor meal sites
without temperature-controlled alternate sites to operate as non-
congregate sites during conditions of excessive heat.\29\ In 2019,
this demonstration was expanded to allow sites in four States to
operate as non-congregate due to smoke and air quality concerns. In
more recent years, USDA implemented Meals-to-You (MTY) under the
demonstration authority. MTY was developed in response to
stakeholder feedback about the challenges and difficulties of
serving summer meals in sparsely populated communities and remote
areas. Through MTY, food boxes were mailed directly to families of
children who were eligible for free or reduced price school meals.
Each eligible child received a weekly box, which contained five
breakfast meals, five snacks, and five lunch/supper meals.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2019, May 29). Demonstration
Project for Non-Congregate Feeding for Outdoor Summer Meal Sites
Experiencing Excessive Heat with Questions & Answers. Policy memo SP
28-2019, SFSP 13-2019. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and
Nutrition Services. https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/demonstration-
project-non-congregate-feeding-outdoor-summer-meal-
sites#:~:text=Non%2Dcongregate%20meal%20service%20shall,outdoor%20mea
l%20site%20is%20located.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
These non-congregate meal service projects offered potential
solutions to some of the most common challenges related to summer
meal service, including transportation and geographical access
issues, that can act as barriers to sustained participation in
summer meal programs. USDA research has shown that access to meal
sites is a significant challenge to participation and is often
exacerbated in rural areas where fewer sites and more limited
transportation options exist.30 31
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\30\ Miller, D.P. (2016). Accessibility of summer meals and the
food insecurity of low-income households with children. Public
Health Nutrition 19(11): 2079-2089. https://doi.org/10.1017/S1368980016000033.
\31\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2019). SFSP Characteristics
Study. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service.
https://www.fns.usda.gov/sfsp/summer-food-service-program-characteristics-study.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
During the COVID-19 public health emergency, many requirements
pertaining to child nutrition programs were waived to protect public
health and ensure continued access to healthy foods for children and
families. The availability of such waivers, including those that
permitted non-congregate meal service and the ability to provide
more than one meal at a time, were cited by State agencies as an
important factor in reducing barriers for kids and families to
access meals and increasing program participation.32 33
Also introduced in
[[Page 90384]]
response to the pandemic was Pandemic EBT, a program which
successfully provided food benefits through EBT to families of
eligible school children when children missed school due to COVID-19
related illness or when schools were closed or operating with
reduced hours.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\32\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2023). Child Nutrition Program
Operations During the COVID-19 Pandemic, March through September
2020: School Meals Operations Study, Year 1 Report. U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. https://www.mathematica.org/publications/child-nutrition-program-operations-during-the-covid-19-pandemic-march-through-september-2020-school.
\33\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2022). Summer Food Service
Program Integrity Study. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and
Nutrition Service. https://www.fns.usda.gov/sfsp/integrity-study.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Due in part to the precedent set by demonstration projects, the
favorable findings of rigorous evaluations, and the positive impact
of regulatory waivers exercised during the COVID-19 pandemic, the
Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023 (Pub. L. 117-328) authorized
both a non-congregate meal service option at SFSP and SSO sites in
rural areas and a permanent Summer EBT program.
Summary of Impacts
In total, the 10-year cost of the interim final rule is
estimated at approximately $40.3 billion, with $7.4 billion
attributed to non-congregate meal option implementation ($7.35
billion for program meals and $43.2 million for provision
administration) and $32.9 billion in costs attributed to Summer EBT
implementation ($28.0 billion for program benefits and $5.0 billion
for program implementation and administration) (see Table 1). These
costs represent the operation of both provisions over a ten-year
period between Fiscal Years (FY) 2023 and 2032, though it should be
noted that Summer EBT will not be implemented until 2024 and
therefore all analyses pertaining to Summer EBT represent only nine
years of program operation. Though some States may have already
incurred costs in FY 2023 preparing for the implementation of Summer
EBT in FY 2024, it is assumed that the administrative costs
estimated in FY 2024 are representative of the total cost of program
implementation occurring either during or prior to Summer EBT
rollout.
The non-congregate meal provision is expected to increase
participation among eligible populations in rural sites by 4.25
million children by 2027 (Year 5) at a cost of $1.0 billion in
associated meal reimbursements, for a total increase in Federal
Summer Food Service Program reimbursements of $7.35 billion over the
course of ten years. Annual administrative burden to households adds
only marginally to these costs--between $0.2 million and $4.7
million annually, for a total of $29.3 million over ten years. In
addition, we estimate one-time costs for modifying State systems to
accommodate non-congregate meal service. We estimate those costs
will average $250,000 per State agency based on past internal
analyses of regulatory changes with similar implementation
mechanisms, totaling $14.0 million across all 56 State agencies in
Year 1 (2023).\34\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\ Food and Nutrition Service. (July 24, 2019.) (AE62)
Revision of Categorical Eligibility in SNAP Regulatory Impact
Analysis (FNS-2018-0037-0002). U.S. Department of Agriculture Food
and Nutrition Service. https://www.regulations.gov/document/FNS-2018-0037-0002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
It is expected that 25.0 million children out of approximately
30.1 million considered eligible will receive Summer EBT benefits,
resulting in between $2.8 and $3.4 billion in benefits distributed
each summer period for a total cost of $28.0 billion in benefits
over nine years.\35\ Program implementation and administration
costs, which include initial start-up costs equal to 30% of benefits
administered and ongoing administrative costs equal to 7% of
benefits administered, are expected to peak at $1.0 billion in the
first year of program operation (2024) and level off at $366 million
by 2028. This includes expected administrative burden for Summer EBT
retailers due to reporting and recordkeeping at $8.9 million, while
the expected household burden of administrative tasks required for
program participation (e.g., applications) for children not already
certified as Free and Reduced-Price eligible is estimated at $149
million. The retailer costs are expected to be incurred primarily in
Year 1 (2024) and are reflected as such in Table 1. Total annual
costs for Summer EBT benefits and administration are estimated at
between $3.5 and $3.8 billion annually for a total nine-year cost of
$32.9 billion.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\35\ Students attending schools operating year-round may also
receive Summer EBT during other breaks occurring outside of typical
summer months, subject to USDA approval.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
This rule is expected to yield substantial public benefit,
including improvements in nutrition security and diet quality and
economic growth via retail transactions. These benefits are
discussed further in section V. (Benefits of the Interim Final
Rule).
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.049
As required by OMB Circular A-4, in Table 2 below the Department
has prepared an accounting statement showing the annualized
estimates of benefits, costs, and transfers associated with the
provisions of this rule. Meal costs and Summer EBT
[[Page 90385]]
benefit payments are categorized as transfers in the table below.
The next section provides an impact analysis for each change.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.050
Section by Section Analysis
The Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2023 (Pub. L. 117-328)
provides flexibility for summer meal sites in rural areas to provide
a non-congregate meal service, which means allowing children to take
meals off-site, for example, to their homes. The Act also authorized
an entirely new method for offering additional summer nutrition
assistance for children. The new Summer EBT program will provide
benefits on EBT cards so that families can purchase food for their
children to eat. Together, these changes will revolutionize how our
nation supports the nutritional needs of children during the summer
months when school is not in session. Because the Act directed the
Summer EBT program to begin operation in 2024 and the non-congregate
meal service option in rural areas was made available in 2023, there
has not been a formal opportunity for public comment prior to the
development of the interim final rule. However, the Food and
Nutrition Service (FNS) hosted 24 listening sessions on Summer EBT
and 21 listening sessions on non-congregate summer meals with
external stakeholders and gathered input from school food
authorities and summer meal program sponsors, advocacy groups,
program participants, and State agencies administering the
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), Special
Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children
(WIC), and Child Nutrition Programs. FNS also consulted with Tribal
leaders on Summer EBT in May 2023 and attended two conferences to
meet with and hear from ITOs administering WIC.
Key Assumptions
Baseline
Non-Congregate Meal Service
The baseline year providing data to predict the 1, 5, and 10-
Year costs associated with non-congregate meal service
implementation is FY 2022, as this is the most recent year for which
complete data on SFSP and SSO participation is available. Peak
program participation from July 2022 was used as a proxy for total
participation in summer meal programs, as this month sees the
highest participation level across summer months.\36\ Total rural
participation was estimated by applying the percentage of total
students enrolled in rural schools, as calculated in a dataset
produced by the most recent FNS School Nutrition and Meal Cost
Study.\37\ Estimated SSO meals, total meals, and rural meals were
calculated based on the ratio of participation to meals served in
SFSP.\38\ Participation in SFSP has largely returned to pre-pandemic
levels (see Table 3) and there is not sufficient evidence to suggest
that participation would change in any predictable way over the
course of the next five to 10 years in the absence of the rule. For
this reason, peak (July) SFSP and SSO participation, meals served,
and the proportion of eligible children who live in rural areas are
assumed to remain constant in the baseline scenario (see Table 3).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2023). Child Nutrition Tables.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. https://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/child-nutrition-tables.
\37\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2019). School Nutrition and
Meal Cost Study. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Service. https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/resource-files/SNMCS_Summary-Findings.pdf.
\38\ Though data was adjusted to exclude any months in which
schools may have been utilizing summer meals programs during the
regular school year, the 2022 baseline estimate may marginally
overestimate participation and meals served due to the waivers and
regulatory flexibilities afforded by the Keep Kids Fed Act,
including the Area Eligibility waivers. For example, in FY 2019,
peak (July) SFSP participation was 2,685,000 and peak (July) SSO
participation was 1,053,641 children, compared with 2,727,000 and
1,425,872 children, respectively, in FY 2022.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 90386]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.051
Summer EBT
The baseline year providing data to predict the 1, 5, and 10-
Year costs associated with Summer EBT implementation is FY 2023. The
number of students certified as eligible for free meals and the
number certified as eligible for reduced-price meals FY 2023 is
reported on form FNS-10: Report of School Program Operations.\39\
The total number of students certified as free or reduced-price
eligible is largely consistent with pre-pandemic levels (FY 2019);
as there is not sufficient evidence to suggest that they will change
significantly over the course of the next five to ten years, they
are assumed to remain constant for the sake of the analysis (see
Table 4). However, factors that could affect this assumption are the
increased adoption of State policies providing school meals to all
children at no charge and the expansion of the Community Eligibility
Provision in September 2023. These are discussed further in section
VI. (Uncertainties/Limitations).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\39\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2023). FNS-10: Report of
School Program Operations. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and
Nutrition Service. https://www.fns.usda.gov/form/report-school-program-operations.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.052
Interim Final Rule
Non-Congregate Meal Service
Meal Reimbursement Costs
FNS expects to see a substantial increase in reimbursements for
meals served to children during the summer due to increased
participation among populations eligible for non-congregate meals.
Because July 2023 SFSP and SSO participation data were unavailable
at the time of this analysis, expected participation was estimated
using alternate methods. Estimated increases in participation
through Year 3 (2025) are based in part on the increase in
participation that occurred during the COVID-19 pandemic, when
waivers--most notably, the Child Nutrition Area Eligibility Waivers,
which allowed States to waive summer meal programs requirements
limiting ``open site'' meal service to areas in which at least half
of all children are from low-income households--were implemented
across all summer meals sites (see Table 5).\40\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\40\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2020). Child Nutrition Area
Eligibility Waivers. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and
Nutrition Service. https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/child-nutrition-area-eligibility-waiver.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[[Page 90387]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.053
The observed increase in participation between 2019 and 2021
(96.8%) is used as a proxy for the expected increase in
participation in newly eligible rural areas only during the first
three years of the non-congregate option availability (FY 2023-
2025).\41\ This estimate is considered an upper bound, as the
increases in participation during the pandemic may have been due in
part to increased levels of financial hardship and food insecurity
that were present during this time. It should also be noted that
other waivers in place during this time, such as Area Eligibility
waivers, which served a purpose distinct from non-congregate meal
service and are no longer in effect, may have increased
participation rates.\42\ For this reason, we predict this
participation increase will happen more gradually than the increase
observed during the COVID-19 pandemic.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\41\ Though there is a comparable increase in summer meal
program participation between FY 2019 and FY 2020, the first year
non-congregate waivers were available, data from FY 2020 is
generally considered less reliable due to extenuating circumstances
surrounding the COVID-19 public health emergency. For practical
purposes, the calculated participation increase of 96.8% is assumed
to occur over the span of one to two years.
\42\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2022). Nationwide Waiver to
Extend Area Eligibility Waivers for Summer 2022 Operators--Extension
5. U.S. Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition Service.
https://www.fns.usda.gov/cn/covid-19-child-nutrition-response-107.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
From Year 1 of implementation (2023), we assume it will take
until Year 3 (2025) to reach the expected increase of 96.8% and it
will take until Year 5 (2027) to reach expected maximum
participation. Expected maximum participation is based on the
estimated total number of children eligible for non-congregate meal
service (see Table 6). Of all eligible children, we estimate that
about 65 percent will participate on an average day. This take-up
rate is somewhat higher than general take-up of school meals,
measured as the ratio of average daily participation to total
enrollment in NSLP schools, but consistent with the percentage of
students who choose to take meals when they are made available at no
charge to all students via the Community Eligibility Provision
(CEP).\43\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\43\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2022). Summer Food Service
Program Integrity Study. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and
Nutrition Service. https://www.fns.usda.gov/sfsp/integrity-study.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on this percentage, the maximum number of eligible
students who might be expected to participate in non-congregate
summer meals is 4.88 million, and the number of eligible students
expected to newly participate in summer meals (accounting for the
631,000 students who would be considered eligible but are already
participating at baseline) is 4.25 million. See Table 6 for the full
list of estimates and assumptions based on program data and outputs
from the FNS School Nutrition and Meal Cost Study dataset.\18\ For
the purpose of the analysis, the cost of meals served is based on
Federal SFSP reimbursement rates, rather than SSO reimbursement
rates, as SFSP meal pattern requirements are more conducive to
``grab and go'' packaged meals and will likely be used by most sites
choosing to serve non-congregate meals.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.054
[[Page 90388]]
Implementation and Administrative Costs
Administrative reporting and recordkeeping burdens for State
agencies resulting from the non-congregate provision in Year 1
(2023) include State agency identification, pre-approval (when
necessary), approval, reporting and documentation of eligible sites
in rural areas. Sponsor burdens include submission of rural site
documentation, information collection to determine child
eligibility, conduction of pre-operational site visits for new
sites, and reporting on meals distributed. Household burdens, which
are expected to be minimal, include providing written consent to
participate in the home delivery option of non-congregate meal
service. Reporting and recordkeeping costs associated with
administering the non-congregate option are based on the household
burden estimates discussed in the Paperwork Reduction Act section of
the interim final rule (see Table 7).\44\ Costs attributable to
household burden are prorated in Years 1-4 to reflect expected
participation levels.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\44\ Costs exclude ongoing reporting and recordkeeping for State
agencies as those costs will be absorbed through normal funding
streams. Costs also exclude administrative burden for sponsors and
program operators as those costs are factored into per meal
reimbursements.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.055
In addition, there are estimated one-time costs of $14.0 million
associated with shifting State systems to accommodate non-congregate
meal service in Year 1 (2023). These costs are based on previous
Regulatory Impact Analyses conducted on the proposed revision of
Categorical Eligibility in SNAP and are expected to be borne
primarily by State agencies.\45\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\45\ Food and Nutrition Service. (July 24, 2019.) (AE62)
Revision of Categorical Eligibility in SNAP Regulatory Impact
Analysis (FNS-2018-0037-0002). U.S. Department of Agriculture Food
and Nutrition Service. https://www.regulations.gov/document/FNS-2018-0037-0002.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summer EBT
Benefit Costs
Projected 1, 5, and 10-year costs of Summer EBT benefits are
primarily dependent upon State or ITO participation, the participant
take-up rate, and the participant benefit redemption rate. This
analysis assumes that all State agencies will implement Summer EBT
in the first year of the program (2024) and that participation is
sustained at this level through the time horizon of this analysis
(2032) resulting in a State agency take-up rate of 100 percent for
all years 2024-2032. Although not all States may implement the
program in the first year, the analysis presents the full potential
impact of the rule as all States are statutorily permitted to
implement the program.
Meanwhile, the best estimates of participation among ITOs are
derived from demonstration projects and other engagement of ITOs,
which indicate that a limited number of ITOs will independently
implement Summer EBT in the first year. Best estimates indicate that
four ITOs will participate in Year 1 (2024), increasing to 15 ITOs
participating by the end of the period of analysis (2032). For the
purpose of this analysis, this has minimal impact on overall
administrative costs, as administrative costs are calculated as a
percentage of benefits distributed, which reflect student
participation independent of which entity is administering the
program. A sensitivity analysis around these assumptions is included
elsewhere in this analysis, which accounts for a more gradual phase-
in of the Summer EBT program among States (see section VI.
(Uncertainties and Limitations), Tables 14-15).
Participant take-up (i.e., the share of eligible children who
are enrolled and participate by spending any amount of Summer EBT
benefits) is estimated based on two studies of Summer EBT
demonstration projects.\46\ The first study of Summer EBT
demonstration projects occurring between 2011 and 2014 provided a
range of participant take-up rates of children who are enrolled in
Summer EBT via passive enrollment and a separate range for those
enrolled via active enrollment.\47\ This study showed that the
average participant take-up rate via passive enrollment was 93.5%
(ranging from 90% to 97% in demonstration projects) and the average
participant take-up rate via active enrollment was 40% (ranging from
23% to 57%).\48\ It is expected that streamline certification will
account for 80% of Summer EBT enrollment and enrollment through
Summer EBT applications will account for the remaining 20% of
enrollment, which is reflective of the approximate ratio of students
who are certified free or reduced-price to those who are eligible
but must apply (e.g., students who have not been certified or
submitted applications for the NSLP because they are able to receive
free meals through CEP or are enrolled in Provision 2 or 3 schools).
Combining the passive enrollment take-up rate (93.5% for the passive
enrollment children) and the active enrollment take-up rate (40% for
the active enrollment children) results in a weighted average
participant take-up of 83%.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\46\ While demonstration projects were not nationally
representative, they were implemented in a broad set of communities
in numerous States (Connecticut, Michigan, Missouri, Oregon, and
Texas beginning in 2011; Delaware, Nevada, and Washington beginning
in 2012) and ITOs (Cherokee Nation and Chickasaw Nation beginning in
2012).
\47\ During the SEBT demonstrations, grantees chose a process to
enroll eligible children. Grantees with active enrollment asked
households to return a form indicating they wanted to participate in
the demonstration. Households that did not return the form were
excluded from the demonstration. Under permanent SEBT, eligible
children who are not individually certified as such, including those
enrolled in CEP or Provision 2 or 3 schools, can submit a Summer EBT
application to indicate their interest in participating. For passive
enrollment under the demonstrations, eligible children were
automatically included in the demonstration unless they returned a
form saying that they did not want to be included. Similarly, in
permanent SEBT, many eligible children will be enrolled through
administrative data (streamlined certification) and can then choose
to opt out of receiving benefits.
\48\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2023). Evaluation of the 2019-
2022 Summer EBT Demonstration (Draft Final Report). U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Publication forthcoming.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The second study of the Summer EBT demonstration projects
occurring between 2015 and 2018 yielded an overall participant take-
up rate of 84.5%.\49\ Though similar to the estimate generated by
the prior study, this does not account for the small number of
students that may participate via ITOs and will therefore utilize a
food package model (rather than electronic benefits), which yields
lower participation rates. For this reason, the lower. estimate of
83% is used in the analysis. Alternative scenarios presented in
section VI. (Uncertainties and Limitations), Tables 14-15 estimate
the potential impacts of lower participant up-take rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\49\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2016). Summer Electronic
Benefit Transfer for Children (SEBTC) Demonstration: Summary Report.
U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/ops/sebtcfinalreport.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally, the study of Summer EBT demonstration projects
occurring between 2011 and 2014 found that among enrolled
participants, between 92 and 93 percent of all benefits issued are
redeemed, resulting in an average benefit redemption rate of 92.5
[[Page 90389]]
percent.\50\ Benefits not redeemed are expunged according to the
procedural methods and timelines determined by State agencies, in
accordance with the regulations provided within the rule, and are
therefore not included in the total benefit cost.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\50\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2023). Evaluation of the 2019-
2022 Summer EBT Demonstration (Draft Final Report). U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Publication forthcoming.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The total annual cost of benefits to the Federal Government is
then calculated as follows:
(Number of free and reduced-price participants) x (% State take-up
rate) x (% Participant take-up rate) x
(% Benefit redemption rate) x ($ Monthly benefit) x (Months of
benefits)
All estimates assume participating children receive three months
of benefits. For FY 2024, benefit amounts are $40 per month. These
estimates are adjusted for inflation according to the Thrifty Food
Plan estimates in the 2024 President's Budget.\51\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\51\ White House, United States. (2023). The 2024 Mid-Session
Review. White House, United States. https://www.whitehouse.gov/omb/briefing-room/2023/07/28/the-2024-mid-session-review/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Implementation and Administrative Costs
The anticipated implementation and administrative costs of the
Summer EBT program were estimated based on programs serving similar
populations and operating with similar systems and technology,
including the Summer EBT demonstration projects, Pandemic EBT
benefit program, and SNAP. Estimates assume that Year 1 (2024)
implementation costs will be higher, equal to 30% of total benefits
issued, due to the wider scope of activities required to set up
Summer EBT, including establishing or modifying data systems to
identify eligible children and process Summer EBT benefits,
developing Summer EBT applications and establishing procedures to
determine eligibility, developing new promotional materials and
communication plans to reach families with eligible children,
developing and implementing training for staff and partners, and
entering into written agreements with the Federal Government and
partner State agencies. The first-year implementation cost estimate
of 30% is based on evidence from the most recent Summer EBT
demonstration project, which found a first-year cost equal to 43% of
benefits issued, and has been scaled down to 30% account for the
fact that demonstration projects (a) Served smaller populations,
with evidence that administrative costs decrease with increases in
population size; and (b) Included the cost of demonstration project
evaluation in administrative costs, which will not be the case for
the Summer EBT program. This was scaled down based on the assumption
that the cost of demonstration project evaluations accounted for
approximately one third of total administrative costs.
By Year 3 (2027), only recurring administrative costs will
remain, causing administrative costs to level off at 7% of benefits
issued. Ongoing administrative burdens for State, local, and Tribal
governments will include submitting an annual Plan for Operations
and Management, program budget, State Systems Advance Planning
Document, and other data reporting requirements, as well as
notification, verification, and enrollment of eligible children and
maintenance of systems required for benefit issuance. The
anticipated ongoing administrative cost estimate of 7% was
determined to be a reasonable midpoint estimate between calculated
Pandemic EBT administrative costs as a share of benefits issued
(1.4%) and the proportion of EBT-related SNAP administrative costs
as a share of benefits issued (11.3%).
The ratio of Pandemic EBT administrative costs to benefits was
calculated using State reporting data on total Federal share of
administrative costs (form FNS-425) and total benefit issuance (form
FNS-388).\52\ Data were compiled from School Year (SY) 2020-2021 and
SY 2021-2022, cleaned to remove missing data and outliers, and used
to generate average administrative costs as a percentage of benefits
issued (1.4%). Pandemic EBT administrative costs were covered by
Federal funds at 100%. Because implementation and administrative
costs were calculated as a percentage of benefits issued in the 1,
5, and 10-Year cost estimates of the Summer EBT program, it was not
necessary to apply an additional inflation factor to these costs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\52\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2023). National Data Bank
(NDB). U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service.
https://afnazre3ws08.usda.net/NDB8/Home/Home.aspx.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The EBT-related SNAP costs represented in the ratio of
administrative costs to benefits issued (11.3%) include
certification, issuance, Automated Data Processing development
costs, as well as Automated Data Processing operations costs, and
exclude costs related to Employment and Training programs or
workfare programs and fraud control.\53\ For reference, the total
administrative cost to benefits issued ratio for SNAP was 14.8% in
FY 2019.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\53\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2019). Exploring the Causes of
State Variation in SNAP Administrative Costs. U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/media/file/SNAP-State-Variation-Admin-Costs-FullReport.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
In addition to State and Federal costs for implementation and
ongoing operation of Summer EBT, retailers and households will incur
costs related to administrative burden. Administrative costs to
retailers due to verification and reporting requirements are
estimated at $8.92 million in Year 1 (2024), based on the product of
a total burden of 479,000 hours, an average hourly rate of $14.01,
and an overhead factor of 0.33. Administrative costs to households
who need to complete applications for free and reduced-price
eligible students and who are not already certified as such through
school meal programs are estimated at $149 million, based on the
product of a total burden of 15.4 million hours, an average hourly
rate of $7.25, and an overhead factor of 0.33.
Impacts
Children and Households Affected
Non-Congregate Meal Service
By Year 5 (2027) of rule implementation, an estimated 4.25
million children in 2.36 million households in rural areas will be
newly participating in summer meal programs during peak as a result
of the rule (assuming 1.8 participating children per household,
based on FNS administrative data). At this time, there will be a
total of 4.88 million children participating in eligible rural
areas--631,000 of whom were already participating at eligible sites
before the rule--and a total of 8.40 million children participating
in SFSP and SSO in both rural and non-rural areas nationwide. It is
expected that these participation levels will be sustained through
Year 10 (2032) following implementation of the rule (see Table 8).
Summer EBT
There are an estimated 25.0 million children in 13.4 million
households who will receive Summer EBT benefits each year beginning
in FY 2024 as a result of the rule (based on an average 1.87
children per household in Summer EBT demonstration projects). The
number of children receiving benefits is not expected to change over
the period of analysis (FY 2024-2032), as the overall number of
children certified as free and reduced-price is not expected to
change significantly (see Table 10). Participation in Summer EBT
would hypothetically increase or decrease with a corresponding
increase or decrease in certification for free and reduced-price
meals; see section VI. (Uncertainties/Limitations) for further
discussion of this and other factors that could affect Summer EBT
participation estimates.
Costs
Benefit and Meal Costs
Non-Congregate Meal Service
Federal reimbursements for summer meals resulting from increased
participation in rural areas under the non-congregate meal service
option are expected to total $7.35 billion over the course of ten
years (FY 2023-2032). Annual Federal reimbursements attributable to
the rule are estimated at $1.02 billion by Year 5 (2027), when peak
participation is reached, and are estimated at $1.14 billion by Year
10 (2032) due to inflation. See Table 9 for annual estimates of meal
reimbursement costs attributable to the rule over the ten-year
period of analysis.
Summer EBT
The total cost of benefit payments administered through the
Summer EBT program between FY 2024-2032 is estimated at $28.0
billion. Annual cost of benefit payments range from $2.8 billion in
2024 (Year 1) to $3.4 billion in 2032 (Year 9); as participation is
expected to remain consistent, annual increases in costs are due to
inflation only. See Table 11 for annual estimates of benefit payment
costs attributable to the Summer EBT program over the nine-year
period of analysis.
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P
[[Page 90390]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.056
[[Page 90391]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.057
BILLING CODE 3410-30-C
[[Page 90392]]
Implementation and Administrative Costs
Non-Congregate Meal Service
Implementation and administrative costs attributable to the non-
congregate meal service provision are expected to total $43.2
million over the course of ten years (FY 2023-2032). Annual
administrative costs are largely reflective of the requirement for
households to provide written consent to participate in the home
delivery option of non-congregate meal service, while a one-time
cost to State agencies in Year 1 (2023) accounts for systems changes
required to accommodate shifting to increased non-congregate meal
service operation. The administrative burden estimates are discussed
in more detail in the Paperwork Reduction Act section of this
interim final rule. See Table 9 for annual estimates of
administrative costs attributable to the non-congregate provision.
Summer EBT
Federal and State implementation and administrative costs are
estimated at a total of $3.6 billion over the nine-year period of
analysis (FY 2024-2032). In accordance with statute, these costs
will be shared equally (50%) between States and the Federal
Government. Implementation and administrative costs are highest
during the first year of program implementation (2024) due to
anticipated start-up costs, reaching a steady state by the fifth
year of program operation. Total State and Federal implementation
and administrative costs are estimated at $849 million in 2024, $217
million in 2028, and $238 million in 2032, including inflation.
See Table 11 for annual estimates of administrative costs
attributable to the Summer EBT program. As previously discussed,
additional administrative costs to retailers due to verification and
reporting requirements are estimated at $8.9 million in the first
year, while administrative costs to households who need to complete
Summer EBT applications are estimated at $149 million annually.
Retailer costs will be primarily limited to the first year of
program implementation.
[[Page 90393]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.058
[[Page 90394]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.059
BILLING CODE 3910-30-C
[[Page 90395]]
Benefits of the Interim Final Rule
Food Security and Diet Quality
Though food insecurity among households with children has
returned to pre-pandemic levels, it remains significant: In 2022,
about one in six (17.3%) households with children were affected by
food insecurity.\54\ Broadly speaking, the economic consequences of
food insecurity include higher average health care costs, lost
productivity, increased crime rates, and costs associated with lower
educational outcomes. The sum of these costs has been estimated at
more than $160 billion each year in the United States.\55\ There is
evidence to suggest that the introduction of both the non-congregate
option in rural areas and the Summer EBT Program will help to
address this challenge. The option to provide non-congregate meal
service in rural areas may reduce food insecurity among children by
way of increasing participation in summer meal programs, as previous
research has shown summer meal programs are likely to be effective
in reducing food insecurity.\56\ The provision of Summer EBT has
also been found to generate substantial and statistically
significant reductions in food insecurity. In Summer EBT
demonstration projects, a $60 monthly benefit reduced the prevalence
of food insecurity among children by one-fifth and reduced the most
severe form of food insecurity (Very Low Food Security, or VLFS)
among children by one-third.\57\ A smaller $30 benefit was found to
have similar impact on VLFS. The ability to use Summer EBT
concurrently with other summer meal programs may prove particularly
protective against food insecurity in periods of severe economic
downturn or other social and environmental disruptions that may
otherwise increase food insecurity rates.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\54\ Economic Research Service. (2023.) Household Food Security
in the United States in 2022. U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Economic Research Service. https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/107703/err-325.pdf?v=9638.3.
\55\ Cook, J., & Poblacion, A.P. (2015). Estimating the Health-
Related Costs of Food Insecurity and Hunger. Bread for the World
Institute. https://www.hungerreport.org/costofhunger/fullstudy.html.
\56\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2021). USDA Summer Meals Study
Summary. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service.
https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/resource-files/SummerMealsStudy-2018-SummaryofFindings.pdf.
\57\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2023). Evaluation of the 2019-
2022 Summer EBT Demonstration (Draft Final Report). U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Publication forthcoming.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Summer EBT has also been shown to improve diet quality among
participating children. Demonstration projects providing a $60
monthly benefit increased daily fruit and vegetable intake during
summer months by one-third of a cup per day, whole grains intake by
one-half ounce equivalent per day, and decreased intake of sugar-
sweetened beverages. A $30 monthly benefit level was also found to
produce statistically significant improvements in diet quality
across the same measures.\58\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\58\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2023). Evaluation of the 2019-
2022 Summer EBT Demonstration (Draft Final Report). U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Publication forthcoming.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Economic Benefits From EBT Retail
Because the redemption of Summer EBT benefits largely mirrors
the redemption of traditional SNAP benefits, we expect the economic
impacts of SNAP benefit redemption will apply to the Summer EBT
program. USDA research has consistently shown that SNAP spending
helps to stabilize the economy during economic downturn and
generates income for individuals and businesses producing,
transporting, and marketing food purchased by SNAP recipients. The
impact of each SNAP dollar spent is also multiplied throughout the
economy; recent estimates indicate that for each $1 in government
spending, the Gross Domestic Product increases between $0.80 and
$1.50, depending on current economic conditions.\59\ The multiplier
effect may be greater when spending is focused on low-income
households, such as those eligible for SNAP, because these
households tend to spend more of the money received soon after
receiving it compared with higher-income households. In this way,
government spending on programs such as SNAP and Summer EBT generate
economic benefit not only for program participants, but also for
individuals who participate in the economies in which program
dollars are spent.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\59\ Economic Research Service. (2019.) The Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program and the Economy: New Estimates of the
SNAP Multiplier. U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research
Service. https://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/pub-details/?pubid=93528.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Program Integrity
The provisions that are described as follows were included to
address program integrity concerns either identified during COVID P-
EBT operations or mentioned during listening sessions.
Summer EBT benefits are subject to integrity requirements found
in the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 established for SNAP. USDA has
determined that the SNAP regulations implementing sections 12, 14,
and 15 of the Food and Nutrition Act are also appropriate for Summer
EBT, and adopting these same requirements is preferable to
developing different requirements for Summer EBT. This approach is
also the least burdensome for administering agencies because it does
not require agencies to develop new implementation approaches.
The ITO Summer EBT Agencies must also ensure that Summer EBT
program benefits are used by the eligible household that receives
such benefits to transact for supplemental foods from Summer EBT-
enrolled vendors that have been approved for participation in the
WIC Program.
To ensure effective vendor integrity, the ITO Summer EBT agency
must set forth a system which ensures:
--Requirements and restrictions on the participation of vendors and
the transaction of food benefits described in IFR apply to
activities involving Summer EBT benefits;
--Vendors are subject to the actions and penalties described in the
IFR for noncompliance or violations involving Summer EBT benefits;
and
--The standards for determination and disposition of claims
described at IFR apply to Summer EBT benefits; or
--Set forth an alternate system to ensure effective vendor
management and vendor integrity.
In order to ensure program quality and integrity, Summer EBT
agencies must also have adequate processes to correctly determine
the eligibility of children for Summer EBT benefits. As with NSLP/
SBP applications, the Summer EBT verification process will align
with the typical Child Nutrition Program approach to verification,
which is conducted after the eligibility determination. USDA heard
from stakeholder engagement and listening sessions with Child
Nutrition and SNAP State Agencies that implemented P-EBT that up-
front verification (verification of income at the time of
application) was burdensome for both program administrators and
households. In contrast, other child nutrition programs like NSLP,
SBP, and CACFP do not require up-front household income verification
but rather they require verification on a subset of applications
after certification. Summer EBT applications (or alternative income
applications for Summer 2024) will be subject to verification for
cause, a process through which questionable applications are
verified on a case-by-case basis.
Integrity Measures for Non-Congregate Feeding
Based on stakeholder feedback, experience gained under COVID-19
operations, and summer 2023 implementation, USDA is codifying the
use of several meal service options specific to non-congregate
feeding including, but not limited to: multi-day meal issuance;
parent or guardian meal pick-up; and bulk meal components to meet
the needs of children in rural areas. While USDA is codifying the
use of these meal service options, integrity safeguards have been
added around the permittance and use of these options to ensure
Program access for eligible children while maintaining Program
accountability. Through the listening sessions, USDA received varied
feedback from stakeholders regarding the different meal service
options when used for non-congregate feeding during the COVID-19
pandemic. Many of the comments focused on the difficulty of
balancing Program integrity with Program access. Some stakeholders,
including a few State agencies, stated that that these options are
essential for providing non-congregate meals in rural areas and
praised the benefits to the community, such as the ability to
provide children meals for the weekend.
Under this IFR, the meal service options mentioned above may
only be used by sponsors considered to be in good standing, as
determined by the State agency. In addition, a State agency may only
prohibit sponsors from using these meal service options on a case-
by-case basis and without regard to sponsor type if the State agency
determines that a sponsor does not have the capability to operate or
oversee non-congregate meal service at their sites.
[[Page 90396]]
Integrity safeguards for multi-day meal issuance and parent or
guardian meal pick-up includes requiring sponsors to provide
documented procedures to ensure the proper number of meals are
distributed to each eligible child and duplicate meals are not
distributed. Lastly, integrity safeguards have been codified for
bulk foods to ensure the safety of the children who consume Program
meals. Sponsors are required to ensure that food items meet the meal
pattern requirements, foods are clearly identifiable, menus must be
provided to indicate the food items and portion sizes for all meals
provided, and only minimal to no preparation is required. In
addition, any sponsor using bulk foods can only provide a maximum of
5 days' worth of meals at a time, or less if the State agency
establishes a shorter calendar period on a case-by-case basis.
Finally, it is worth noting that all program regulations,
including existing compliance and oversight requirements of the SFSP
and NSLP, apply to non-congregate meals served under the Summer
Nutrition Programs. Under this rule, with a few exceptions, the
basic monitoring requirements will not change. However, to ensure
all Program operations, both congregate and non-congregate, are
properly adhering to Program requirements, USDA is amending the
regulations to incorporate operational changes to reflect the
introduction of non-congregate meal service and ensure that such
meal services are adequately reviewed for compliance.
Uncertainties/Limitations
There are numerous uncertainties and limitations inherent to
this analysis. The limitations most likely to affect the analysis
are noted below, accompanied by sensitivity analyses where relevant.
Some of these uncertainties and limitations result from the interim
final rule being developed in a time immediately following the
COVID-19 public health emergency, which introduced challenges
collecting timely and accurate data due to other urgent priorities
and numerous disruptions to trends in Child Nutrition Program
participation. Both of these challenges present unique complexities
in the projections of participation and costs.
Program Participation
Non-Congregate Meal Service
There are several limitations to the calculated increase in
summer meal program participation following the implementation of
the non-congregate meal service provision.
The projected increase in participation is guided by two key
data points. The first data point is the 96.8% increase in summer
meal participation that was observed between FY 2019 and FY 2021,
when waivers provided all SFSP and SSO sites with the ability to
utilize non-congregate meal service during the COVID-19 pandemic.
Table 6 demonstrates that peak (July) participation and meals served
approximately doubled during this time, and then returned to pre-
pandemic levels in FY 2022 following the expiration of the non-
congregate waivers. However, the COVID-19 public health emergency
ushered in a variety of other waivers and regulatory changes related
to Child Nutrition Program operations, including Area Eligibility
waivers,\24\ making it difficult to isolate the impact of the non-
congregate waiver on SFSP and SSO participation. In addition, many
households were experiencing higher than usual levels of financial
hardship and food insecurity during this time, which may have
increased their likeliness to utilize programs providing meals at no
cost. Our analysis partially addresses these external factors by
assuming that this 98.6% increase will occur more gradually, over a
period of three years (FY 2023-2025), as opposed to the period of
one to two years observed during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The second data point guiding the analysis is the expected
maximum participation in SFSP and SSO among eligible rural sites,
which is estimated at 4.88 million children (see Table 7). As
described in the Key Assumptions Section of section IV. (Section by
Section Analysis), the expected maximum participation among eligible
sites is the product of the total number of rural students eligible
for non-congregate meal service (7.51 million) and the percentage of
students who choose to receive school meals via NSLP (65%) when
meals are available at no charge (e.g., through CEP). Accounting for
the 631,000 children already participating in school meals at
eligible rural sites prior to the rule, the expected maximum number
of new SFSP and SSO participants is 4.25 million, representing a
substantial 574% increase in the number of children participating in
eligible areas. Although this increase is significant, conversations
with State agencies, sponsors, and other stakeholders suggest that
this increase may be achievable with robust communications efforts
and technical assistance on behalf of FNS. As such, the analysis
projects that expected maximum participation in eligible rural sites
will occur at Year 5 (2027).
Due to these uncertainties, sensitivity analyses were conducted
to assess the cost implications of more gradual or more rapid
participation increases (Tables 12-13). The first scenario assumes
more rapid increase in participation, in which maximum expected
participation is achieved by Year 3 (2025), resulting in a 24%
increase in Federal reimbursements over the course of 10 years as
compared to the primary estimates. The second scenario assumes a
more gradual increase in participation in which maximum expected
participation is achieved by Year 10 (2032), resulting in a 43.8%
decrease in Federal reimbursements over 10 years as compared to the
primary estimates. The third scenario assumes a more gradual
increase in participation in which only half of maximum expected
participation is achieved by Year 10 (2032), resulting in a 70.8%
decrease in Federal reimbursements over 10 years. Note that
participation increases are not linear, as each scenario assumes
that early increases in participation are more gradual and achieve
the 96.8% participation increase observed during the COVID-19
pandemic by either Year 1 (2023), Year 3 (2025), or Year 5 (2027),
depending on the scenario.
Summer EBT
As previously described, participant take-up (i.e., the share of
eligible children who are enrolled and participate in the Summer EBT
program) is estimated at 83% based on results from Summer EBT
demonstration studies.
The Summer EBT demonstration studies completed by FNS show that
the average participant take-up rate via passive enrollment is 93.5%
(ranging from 90% to 97% in demonstration projects) and the average
participant take-up rate via active enrollment is 40% (ranging from
23% to 57%).\11\ Combining the passive enrollment take-up rate
(93.5% for the passive enrollment children) and the active
enrollment take-up rate (40% for the active enrollment children)
results in a weighted average participant take-up of 83%. However,
it is possible that the participant take-up rate will be lower than
expected, as a growing number of States are offering school meals to
all students at no cost and households may be less incentivized to
submit applications for free and reduced-price meals, thereby
lowering the percentage of students that would be enrolled in Summer
EBT via active enrollment. For this reason, a sensitivity analysis
was conducted assuming participant take-up was at the low end of the
ranges provided in the Summer EBT Demonstration Study, resulting in
a participant take-up of 23% via active enrollment and 90% via
passive enrollment for an overall participant take-up rate of 77% in
Year 1 (2024). This would result in an 2.1% decrease in Summer EBT
benefit costs over the period of analysis (2024-2032) compared to
the primary estimates (see Tables 13-14).
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P
[[Page 90397]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.060
[[Page 90398]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.061
[[Page 90399]]
State Participation in Program
Summer EBT
As previously noted, it is the expectation of FNS that all
States will implement Summer EBT in the first year of the program
(2024) and that participation is sustained at this level through the
lifespan of this analysis (2032). However, there may be some States
that are prevented from fully implementing the program in the
initial year(s); for example, several States that plan to
participate have noted that there may be challenges implementing the
program beginning in 2024 due to the timing of budget cycles. For
this reason, a sensitivity analysis has been conducted to assess the
impact of delayed State take-up. A lagging State take-up rate
starting at 75% in Year 1 (2024) and reaching 100% by Year 5 (2028)
with annual linear increases would result in a 7.1% decrease in
Summer EBT benefit costs over the nine-year period of analysis
(2024-2032) (see Tables 14-15).
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.062
[[Page 90400]]
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.063
BILLING CODE 3410-30-C
Implementation and Administrative Costs
Summer EBT
Because Summer EBT is a new program, there is some uncertainty
inherent to the administrative costs the program will incur,
particularly on behalf of State and Federal governments and Tribal
Organizations. As previously described, the analysis assumes that
implementation costs will equal 30% of benefits issued in year 1 of
operation (2024), decreasing to a constant 7% of benefits issued by
year 5 of operation (2028). However, because these estimates
represent reasonable averages or midpoints among a range of
potential values, the true cost may be higher or lower; therefore, a
sensitivity analysis was conducted to assess the impact of potential
variation in implementation and administrative costs (see Table 16).
The results show that an initial start-up cost equal to 40% of
benefits issued, decreasing to a constant 10% by 2028, would
increase administrative costs by 29.7% over nine years compared to
the primary estimate, while an initial start-up cost equal to 20% of
[[Page 90401]]
benefits issued, decreasing to a constant 5% by 2028 would decrease
administrative costs by 31.4% over nine years.
[GRAPHIC] [TIFF OMITTED] TR29DE23.064
Alternative(s)
Throughout the development of the interim final rule, various
regulatory options were weighed and discussed with the goal of
identifying provisions that would optimize outcomes for all
stakeholders. Alternatives to key provisions of the interim final
rule are described below, along with the rationale favoring the
provisions selected.
Coordinated Services Plan
Each State agency will need to establish a Coordinated Services
Plan (CSP), to coordinate the statewide availability of services
offered through the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP) and the
Summer EBT Program (and the National School Lunch Program Seamless
Summer Program, if appropriate). Initial plans will need to be
submitted to FNS no later than January 1, 2025. They will need to be
submitted annually when significant updates are made--otherwise, at
least every three years. States will need to consult with other
agencies (as applicable) on their plans and must share them publicly
on a website.
The alternative would have been to include the CSP as part of a
combined Management and Administration Plan (MAP) for SFSP and
Summer-EBT. Due to the programs being on different planning
schedules for summer operations and considering how different State
agencies may administer the programs, a combined MAP would have
required the same or greater time and effort as required for the
CSP, despite condensing the number of required documents. States
administering the SFSP will continue to submit a MAP, and a separate
Plan for Operations and Management (POM) will be required for S-EBT.
The CSP will give a general overview of statewide programming while
keeping each program's operational details to the MAP/POM.
Non-Congregate Meal Service
Throughout the development of the non-congregate provisions for
this interim final rule, various regulatory options were weighed and
discussed with the goal of identifying provisions that would
optimize outcomes for all stakeholders. Two such provisions were the
regulatory definition of rural and the meal service options
available for non-congregate feeding. The alternatives to these key
provisions are discussed below.
The definition of ``rural'' under the Program was expanded to
include other Federal classification schemes to create an approach
that more expansively covers rural population and territory to the
satisfaction of stakeholders while upholding established measures of
rural. The alternative would have been to maintain the current
regulatory definition of rural, which is based solely on
metropolitan and non-metropolitan classification. This
classification scheme presents identification challenges for the
purposes of the Program as metropolitan and non-metropolitan areas
are defined at the county level, and thus, the different levels of
rurality within counties are not accurately delineated.
The current regulatory definition does provide discretion to
designate any ``pocket'' within a Metropolitan Statistical Area that
is determined to be geographically isolated from urban areas with
FNS Regional Office (FNSRO) approval. However, this has led to
inconsistent application of rural pockets across the States and
resulted in increased burden on the State agencies to identify and
receive approval for these designations. Incorporating additional
Federal classification schemes into the regulatory definition to
define what rural is under the Program will allow State agencies to
more effectively identify and target rural populations and
territories for outreach and non-congregate provision purposes and
will ease administrative burden and streamline the site
identification and approval process for State agencies and Program
operators. Because using the current regulatory definition may have
increased administrative burden, it may have also been associated
with marginal increases in administrative costs.
Under this interim final rule, USDA will allow operators to use
meal service options specific to non-congregate feeding including,
but not limited to: multi-day meal issuance; parent or guardian meal
pick-up; and bulk meal components to meet the needs of children in
rural areas. Based on stakeholder feedback, experience gained under
COVID-19 operations, and summer 2023 implementation, the use of
these flexibilities is imperative to children in rural communities
accessing meals during the summer months when school is out of
session. The alternative to this provision would have been to
require sites to distribute meals to children in-person, in limited
quantities, for each meal service during the approved meal service
times, similar to a congregate meal service. Such restrictions
defeat the purpose and efficacy of non-congregate service in rural
communities which may benefit from the use of these options where
children would otherwise have to travel long distances to receive a
meal, for instance. While the USDA is codifying these meal service
options, integrity safeguards have been included around the use of
these options to ensure Program access for eligible children while
maintaining Program accountability. These integrity safeguards are
discussed under the Program Integrity section of this Regulatory
Impact Analysis.
Summer EBT
Structure of ITO Food Benefits
ITO Summer EBT agencies may choose the benefit delivery model
they prefer: a cash-value benefit (CVB) model, a food package model,
a combination of the two, or an alternate model. The alternative
would have been to limit ITO Summer EBT agencies to only the food
benefit models typically available to them through the WIC program.
It is important to allow ITO choice of benefit delivery model so
they may best serve their populations. Participants in the Summer
EBT demonstration projects indicated they appreciated the greater
flexibility and choice in the food package items and quantities.\60\
The alternative would have likely been cost-neutral relative to the
interim final rule provision, as there are not significant
differences between the value of cash-value
[[Page 90402]]
Summer EBT benefits and the value of a food package.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\60\ Food and Nutrition Service. (2023). Evaluation of the 2019-
2022 Summer EBT Demonstration (Draft Final Report). U.S. Department
of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Publication forthcoming.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
ITO Enrollment Procedures
ITO Summer EBT agencies receive priority consideration to serve
eligible children within their service areas, meaning that children
from the ITO service area who can be enrolled through streamlined
certification will automatically be enrolled in the ITO-administered
Summer EBT program. If the eligible child wants to participate in
the State-administered program, they must notify the ITO and the
State and request this change. The alternative options would be to
require all participants in ITO service areas to participate in the
ITO-administered program, or to automatically enroll all children in
the State Summer EBT Program. Households may prefer ITO or State-
administered programs for a variety of reasons. Automatically
enrolling children in ITO-service areas in the ITO program while
allowing them to opt into the State-administered program permits
households to decide how and from whom they want to receive benefits
based on their individual circumstances. The selection of this
alternative would not have impacted overall program costs, as the
number of children served by the program would remain unchanged.
Structure of the Program
FNS will provide States with the flexibility to name which
agency will have the written agreement with FNS (i.e., the
coordinating Summer EBT agency) and to decide how Summer EBT
responsibilities are delegated across their respective State and
local agencies. The alternative option is for FNS to name which
agency within a State will be responsible for the overall
administration of the Summer EBT program, as well as the roles and
responsibilities of each agency within a State. Allowing States
maximum flexibility to delegate Summer EBT program responsibilities
will ease program administration and facilitate the Federal grant
process. This is expected to have little impact on overall program
costs.
Expungement
FNS will require Summer EBT benefits to become unavailable to
households 4 months after issuance. This approach will provide
households a reasonable amount of time after the summer operational
period to finish spending their benefits. With timely issuance,
benefits will exist for the summer period and be expunged soon
thereafter, consistent with congressional intent. The alternative
model is ``expungement from last use,'' meaning Summer EBT benefits
could exist well into the school year. This model would run counter
to the congressional intent of the program: to provide food benefits
during the summer to help reduce food insecurity while kids are out
of school. The current requirement may result in slightly lower
program costs than the alternative, due to the fact that unused
benefits will be expunged in a more timely fashion.
Verification for Cause
FNS will allow States or LEAs to conduct verification for cause
on all Summer EBT applications in FY2024. The guidance instituted
for verification for cause means that States or LEAs will only need
to target applications that they think present a higher than normal
risk of error. The alternative option is requiring that States or
LEAs verify three percent of all Summer EBT applications beginning
in FY 2024. However, FNS heard from stakeholder engagement and
listening sessions with Child Nutrition and SNAP State agencies that
this requirement would place undue burden on Summer EBT agencies in
the first year of program administration. FNS will require that
three percent of all Summer EBT applications be verified beginning
in FY 2025, in alignment with other school meal programs.
Required Statewide Database
FNS will require that States and ITOs administering the Summer
EBT program implement a statewide database with school meal
enrollment data by FY 2025. Requiring a statewide database will
facilitate the data sharing and enrollment processes, detect and
prevent duplicate benefit issuance, and increase data integrity
across the Summer EBT program. One grantee under the Summer EBT
demonstrations established a centralized database that contained
households that were eligible for free and reduced price meals. This
system annually compiled all household information from multiple
sources for households that were already eligible for free and
reduced-price meals into one file to upload to its benefit issuance
system, thereby efficiently automating the benefit issuance process.
Requiring a statewide database will also reduce burden on LEAs,
although the burden will shift to State agencies. Delaying this
requirement until FY 2025 will allow Summer EBT agencies time to
acquire necessary funding and for database development.
Benefit Funds Process
In FY 2024, FNS will disburse benefit funds through the Federal
grant process. The alternative option is to disburse Summer EBT
benefit funds through the Account Management Agent (AMA) process.
FNS decided on the grant process to give States more flexibility and
to reduce the cost and administrative burden related to modifying
the AMA process to support a separate, permanent program beginning
in 2024. Additionally, Summer EBT benefits must be tracked
separately from SNAP benefits, or other benefit types, but are
subject to the same oversight, restrictions, and requirements as
SNAP benefits. The Federal grant funding and issuance model supports
these requirements.
[FR Doc. 2023-28488 Filed 12-28-23; 8:45 am]
BILLING CODE 3410-30-P