Broward school meals: Families' next steps as universal free lunches will come to an end
Broward County Public Schools on Friday offered students' families some lunch-preparation updates for the upcoming school year, as the district transitions to no longer offering universal free lunches.
For the 2025-26 school year, lunch prices will rise by $1 for paying students: $3.50 for lunch in high school, $3.35 in middle school and $3 in elementary school.
But those costs wouldn't pertain to certain eligible students. In a news release Friday, the district provided additional steps that families can take.
Broward schools on July 14 will begin 'accepting Meal Benefits Applications' at www.myschoolapps.com to determine families' eligibility for free or reduced-price school lunches. The application is available throughout the school year at myschoolapps.com. For those eligible, each reduced-price lunch is 40 cents, the district said.
Broward school district to end universal free lunches, raise lunch prices
The application process marks a transition back to the steps in place before the district began offering free lunches to all students during the past two years, bolstered by program funding. For the past two years, Broward Schools' Food and Nutrition Services Department assisted families with the cost of meals through two U.S. Department of Agriculture programs, as well as Food and Nutrition Services funds, the district said in a news release.
For the upcoming school year, 'free and reduced-price lunches will be offered based on eligibility, requiring families to complete an application,' it said.
The district said automatically certified to receive free lunches are students who either:
— Receive Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits. — Have Temporary Assistance for Needy Families benefits. — Are 'enrolled in Head Start, Foster, Homeless, or Migrant.'
Families should create an account for each student through My School Bucks at www.myschoolbucks.com, starting July 28, to buy meals and a la carte items, the district said.
All students will keep receiving free breakfasts through the U.S. Department of Agriculture Universal Free Breakfast Program, the district said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
4 hours ago
- Yahoo
Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' Would Boost Subsidies for Rich Farmers
It should be clear by now that, despite the assurances from President Donald Trump and his allies in government, the One Big Beautiful Bill Act—which passed the U.S. House of Representatives last month—not only won't reduce the federal budget deficit but will in fact increase the nation's debt load by $2.4 trillion over the next decade. Given that Trump came into office promising to cut federal spending, it's worth looking at how Trump's bill does the opposite of what he and other Republicans say it does. And one of the more egregious things it does is boost corporate welfare for wealthy farmers. "The government provides agricultural subsidies—monetary payments and other types of support—to farmers or agribusinesses," says the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). "While some subsidies are given to promote specific farming practices, others focus on research and development, conservation practices, disaster aid, marketing, nutrition assistance, risk mitigation, and more." "In reality, this support is highly skewed toward the five major 'program' commodities of corn, soybeans, wheat, cotton, and rice," according to the Environmental Working Group (EWG), an environmental advocacy organization. "Despite the rhetoric of 'preserving the family farm,' the vast majority of farmers do not benefit from federal farm subsidy programs and most of the subsidies go to the largest and most financially secure farm operations." The new bill will only make the problem worse: According to an analysis by the American Farm Bureau Federation, the bill "would increase agriculture-facing programs spending by $56.6 billion over the next decade," of which "$52.3 billion is tied to enhancements in the farm safety net." That "farm safety net" comprises most agricultural subsidy spending in any given year. It includes price and revenue guarantees for certain crops, ensuring farmers earn a set minimum on staples like corn and soybeans, as well as crop insurance assistance, covering up to 60 percent of farmers' insurance premiums in the event of price declines or poor harvests. The programs are a bad deal for taxpayers—indeed, for anybody but the very wealthiest agribusinesses. "Just in the last 10 years, crop insurance agents and the 14 companies the USDA allows to sell and service crop insurance policies…received almost $33.3 billion from the federal Crop Insurance Program," EWG Midwest director Anne Schechinger wrote in 2023. "In some years, up to one-third of crop insurance payments are made to companies and agents, not farmers." The new bill would make the program even more generous, tying payouts to inflation and putting taxpayers on the hook for even more insurance company operating costs. The bill would also increase the price minimums for many staple crops, though the increases for those grown in southern U.S. states go up exponentially: While corn would go up by 18 percent, and wheat and soybeans by more than 70 percent each, minimum prices for seed cotton, peanuts, and rice—grown primarily in the southern states—would each more than double, with the minimum price of rice going up 185 percent. Price minimums inherently distort the market, causing farmers to prioritize favored crops even if others would be better suited to the growing conditions—after all, if you're guaranteed a minimum price for what you sell, and you're covered for what doesn't grow, what do you have to lose? At the same time, "subsidies increase land prices, which benefits wealthy landowners at the expense of the many farmers who rent," writes Nan Swift of the R Street Institute. "Young farmers can't afford to rent or buy land at inflated prices. Likewise, young farmers often have smaller farms that don't benefit from the primary federal subsidy programs." Not only does the "Big Beautiful Bill" keep these programs intact, it expands them; it even introduces an "insurance pilot program" for "poultry growers." "The farm subsidy increases in the reconciliation bill are brazen. The GOP lavished the biggest subsidy increases on GOP parts of the country," writes Chris Edwards of the Cato Institute. "More importantly, in a supposed spending reform bill, the GOP doesn't just spare millionaire farmers from cuts, they aggressively expand inefficient farm giveaways by $57 billion." The post Trump's 'Big Beautiful Bill' Would Boost Subsidies for Rich Farmers appeared first on
Yahoo
6 hours ago
- Yahoo
Senate GOP Seeks to Scale Back Food Aid Cuts in Trump Tax Bill
(Bloomberg) -- Senate Republicans plan to scale back cuts to federal food aid for the poor that their counterparts in the House used to help pay for Donald Trump's massive tax and spending package, a key senator said Wednesday. Trump's Military Parade Has Washington Bracing for Tanks and Weaponry Shuttered NY College Has Alumni Fighting Over Its Future NYC Renters Brace for Price Hikes After Broker-Fee Ban NY Long Island Rail Service Resumes After Grand Central Fire NYC Mayoral Candidates All Agree on Building More Housing. But Where? The Senate version of the tax legislation would exempt states that keep their food stamp payment error rates low from a new cost-shifting provision House Republican imposed requiring state governments to cover as much as a quarter of the cost of federal food stamps received by their residents, Senate Agriculture Chairman John Boozman said. Boozman, whose committee has jurisdiction over portions of the legislation covering federal food aid and farm subsidies, said the Senate version also would exempt parents of children younger than 10 years old from work requirements for food assistance. The House version of the tax bill imposes work requirements on parents once their children turn 7 years old. The House version of the legislation would require states to pay between 5% and 25% of the cost of benefits their residents receive through federal food stamps, formally known as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP. States with lower payment error rates would pay a smaller share of food stamp costs. The new requirements for SNAP will be delayed to 2028 to give states time to adjust, Boozman said. The Senate version would exempt states with a payment error rate below 6% from the cost-sharing requirement, Boozman said. Republicans on the Senate Agriculture Committee considered the House version too burdensome on states, the Arkansas senator said. New Grads Join Worst Entry-Level Job Market in Years The Spying Scandal Rocking the World of HR Software American Mid: Hampton Inn's Good-Enough Formula for World Domination The SEC Pinned Its Hack on a Few Hapless Day Traders. The Full Story Is Far More Troubling Cavs Owner Dan Gilbert Wants to Donate His Billions—and Walk Again ©2025 Bloomberg L.P. Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data
Yahoo
7 hours ago
- Yahoo
By the numbers: Here are the changes proposed to the food stamp program
The Brief More than 3 million people could be cut from food stamp assistance if President Trump's spending bill is approved. A little over 42 million people receive food stamps in the U.S., or one out of every eight people. President Donald Trump's big, beautiful spending bill could mean billions of dollars in cuts for food stamps. The proposed changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, would make states pick up more of the costs, require several million more recipients to work or lose their benefits, and potentially reduce the amount of food aid people receive in the future. Those changes would likely cut 3.2 million people from the SNAP program, the Congressional Budget Office estimated. Here's what to know: RELATED: Senate Republicans plan to release revisions to Trump tax bill The backstory The federal aid program formerly known as food stamps was renamed the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, on Oct. 1, 2008. The program provides monthly payments for food purchases to low-income residents generally earning less than $1,632 monthly for individuals, or $3,380 monthly for a household of four. Timeline The nation's first experiment with food stamps began in 1939. But the modern version of the program dates to 1979, when a change in federal law took effect eliminating a requirement that participants purchase food stamps. There currently is no cost to people participating in the program. RELATED: Trump's actions in Los Angeles spark debate over deportation funds in spending bill By the numbers A little over 42 million people nationwide received SNAP benefits in February, the latest month for which figures are available. That's roughly one out of every eight people in the country. Participation is down from a peak average of 47.6 million people during the 2013 federal fiscal year. Often, more than one person in a household is eligible for food aid. As of February, nearly 22.5 million households were enrolled in SNAP, receiving an average monthly household benefit of $353. The money can be spent on most groceries, but Trump's administration recently approved requests by six states — Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska and Utah — to exclude certain items, such as soda or candy. Big picture view Legislation passed by the House is projected to cut about $295 billion of federal spending from SNAP over the next 10 years, according to the Congressional Budget Office. A little more than half of those federal savings would come by shifting costs to states, which administer SNAP. Nearly one-third of those savings would come by expanding a work requirement for some SNAP participants, which the CBO assumes would force some people off the rolls. Additional money would be saved by eliminating SNAP benefits for between 120,000 and 250,000 immigrants legally in the U.S. who are not citizens or lawful permanent residents. RELATED: Trump touts $1,000 'Trump accounts' for babies born in US Another provision in the legislation would cap the annual inflationary growth in food benefits. As a result, the CBO estimates that the average monthly food benefit would be about $15 lower than it otherwise would have been by 2034. Dig deeper To receive SNAP benefits, current law says adults ages 18 through 54 who are physically and mentally able and don't have dependents need to work, volunteer or participate in training programs for at least 80 hours a month. Those who don't are limited to just three months of benefits in a three-year period. The legislation that passed the House would expand work requirements to those ages 55 through 64. It also would extend work requirements to some parents without children younger than age 7. And it would limit the ability of states to waive work requirements in areas that lack sufficient jobs. Local perspective The federal government currently splits the administrative costs of SNAP with states but covers the full cost of food benefits. Under the legislation, states would have to cover three-fourths of the administrative costs. States also would have to pay a portion of the food benefits starting with the 2028 fiscal year. All states would be required to pay at least 5% of the food aid benefits, and could pay more depending on how often they make mistakes with people's payments. States that had payment error rates between 6-8% in the most recent federal fiscal year for which data is available would have to cover 15% of the food costs. States with error rates between 8-10% would have to cover 20% of the food benefits, and those with error rates greater than 10% would have to cover 25% of the food costs. Many states could get hit with higher costs. The national error rate stood at 11.7% in the 2023 fiscal year, and just three states — Idaho, South Dakota and Vermont — had error rates below 5%. But the 2023 figures likely would not serve as the base year, so the exact costs to states remains unclear. As a result of the cost shift, the CBO assumes that some states would reduce or eliminate benefits for people. What's next The legislation, which narrowly passed the U.S. House, could undergo further changes in the Senate, where it's currently being debated. Trump wants lawmakers to send the "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" to his desk by July 4, when the nation marks the 249th anniversary of the Declaration of Independence. The bill passed the House last month by a margin of just one vote — 215-214. A vote also could be close in the Senate, where Republicans hold 53 of the 100 seats. Democrats did not support the bill in the House and are unlikely to do so in the Senate. Some Republican senators have expressed reservations about proposed cuts to food aid and Medicaid, and the potential impact of the bill on the federal deficit. GOP Senate leaders may have to make some changes to the bill to ensure enough support to pass it. The Source This report includes information from The Associated Press.
