The local school district is losing between $50,000 and $120,000 a year in bad debts.
That’s the hard truth. Perhaps a more palatable way of saying it is that the district has a very charitable school breakfast and lunch program.
The debt comes in two ways. First, from not collecting from the students themselves for the school meals; secondly from losing out on generous state and federal government reimbursements for every breakfast and lunch served to students.
The lower a household’s income; the higher the subsidy.
For USD 257, slightly more than 57 percent of its 1,332 students are considered economically disadvantaged according to state and federal income guidelines. As a state, just about 46 percent of students fall to that level.
For the district to qualify for the subsidies, families must complete forms that show they earn 185 percent or less of the federal poverty income guidelines. That means a family of four that earns $41,348 or less would qualify for the reduced-priced meals; for those who earn $29,053 or less they would qualify for free meals.
In USD 257, 144 students qualify for reduced-priced meals. A whopping 625 qualify for free meals.
THE SUBSIDIES are more than chump change.
Currently, the district charges $1.85 for breakfast and $2.15 for lunches.
For the 625 who qualify for free breakfasts, the district would be reimbursed $1.48 per meal, and another $1.18 for those who qualify for reduced-priced meals.
Come lunch, the district could actually “make” money. For its $2.15 lunch, the district is reimbursed $3.30 for those who qualify for free meals; $2.90 for those who qualify for reduced-priced meals.
Brian Pekarek, new superintendent of schools, estimates the district has the necessary paperwork of “about half” of the students whose families would qualify for the subsidies provided to the district.
ANGELA HENRY, director of the district’s after-school SAFE BASE program, also knows a thing or two about the value of such numbers. Much of her program has been funded through state and federal grants that base their gifts on the proportion of the poor in an area.
In the current summer program, Henry estimated 190 of her 300 elementary students qualify for free or reduced-priced lunches. Of those, 160 are in the lower brackets, qualifying for free lunches.
Henry first got an inkling of the high number of at-risk students when SAFE BASE conducted health fairs in conjunction with school enrollment the past several Augusts.
Organizers offered free school supplies to families that participated in three “activities:”
* Head lice checks;
* Dental screenings, and
* Completion of forms that divulged their incomes to see if they qualified for free and reduced-priced lunches.
With enticing bags of crayons, rulers, notebooks and other such supplies in full sight, the children begged their parents to comply.
“There was a little bit of push-back,” by a few parents, Henry said. But the majority complied.
Henry said this is another reason the school district could use at least one social worker. Many parents are too intimidated by the paperwork to see it through. A skilled social worker also could help alleviate the stigma some attach to their financial situation.
Desperate times or not, the district is missing out on valuable funds that is ours for the asking.
Perhaps the district could copy Henry’s approach of enticing cooperation through the rewards of enhanced programming and services that the additional reimbursement funds can buy.
It’s a win-win for both students and schools.
— Susan Lynn