Scroll to:
Scroll to:

Provisional Programs

Provisional programs offer an opportunity for districts to reduce paperwork in their efforts to provide a school meal program for their students and possibly increase revenue through greater participation. These programs come from two legislative actions.

The first program is the Community Eligibility Option (CEP) that is based on a policy requirement of Healthy Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010. The intent of the CEP option is to provide an alternative to household applications and to improve access to free school meals for high-poverty schools.

Provisional Programs

Provisional programs offer an opportunity for districts to reduce paperwork in their efforts to provide a school meal program for their students and possibly increase revenue through greater participation. These programs come from two legislative actions.

The first program is the Community Eligibility Option (CEP) that is based on a policy requirement of Healthy Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010. The intent of the CEP option is to provide an alternative to household applications and to improve access to free school meals for high-poverty schools.

For a School Food Authority (SFA) to be eligible to use CEP, the SFA must have one or more schools having an identified student percentage of 40% or greater as of April 1, 2014. The identified student percentage is NOT the same as the total number of students eligible for free and reduced-price meals. The identified students are those children that are directly certified as free. The other provisional programs are called Provision 1, Provision 2, and Provision 3 and were authorized at different times under the Nation School Lunch Act.

The programs were set up to reduce paperwork and provide an alternative to the normal requirements for annual determinations of eligibility for free and reduced price school meals and daily meal counts by type (free, reduced price, and paid meals) at the point of service. For some school districts these programs can help increase participation and improve certainty of revenue by fixing the spread in the mix of free, reduced, and paid eligibility.

Community Eligibility Provision

The Community Eligibility Provision (CEP) allows schools with high numbers of low-income children to serve free breakfast and lunch to all students without collecting school meal applications each year. This option increases participation by children in the school meal programs and usually increases their federal revenues, while the school district reduces labor costs by not having to collect/process applications every school year. A formula based on direct certification data is the basis for reimbursements instead of the paper applications.

Community Eligibility Provision

The Community Eligibility Provision (CEP) allows schools with high numbers of low-income children to serve free breakfast and lunch to all students without collecting school meal applications each year. This option increases participation by children in the school meal programs and usually increases their federal revenues, while the school district reduces labor costs by not having to collect/process applications every school year. A formula based on direct certification data is the basis for reimbursements instead of the paper applications.

To be eligible, a local educational agency (LEA) and/or school must meet the minimum level of 40% of the students directly certified. These are children that are certified for free meals without a paper application based on their status, as in foster care, Head Start, homeless, migrant, or living in households that receive SNAP/Food Stamps, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), cash assistance or Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR) benefits. Once approved for participation in CEP, the eligibility of the school or district is good for four years. The program can be discontinued at any time during the period of eligibility should the district determine that the program is not working in its best interest. The Food Research and Action Center (FRAC) has extensive information about CEP.

Benefits include:

  • All students in a district or school receive all meals at no charge.
  • Paperwork for the department and families is dramatically reduced. The department no longer has to certify individual student eligibility. This eliminates the verification process for the district, and the families no longer have to complete the applications.
  • School meal service is streamlined. At the sites they simply count the total meals served and assure that each student only receives one meal at the point of service.

Each state will have their own requirements for districts to notify their state agency about eligible students. It will generally occur in April of each year. By May 1 each year the state must notify districts that are eligible to participate or near eligible to participate in CEP. By June 30 each year the districts must notify the state of their intention to participate.

The reimbursement rate for both lunch and breakfast is determined by multiplying the percentage of students directly certified by 1.6 (this rate is good through 2014-15, in the future the rate will be between 1.3 and 1.6). The resulting number is the percentage of meals reimbursed at the “free” reimbursement rate, with the rest being reimbursed at the “paid” rate. Risks Include:

  • The district or school must pay the costs of serving lunches or breakfasts in excess of the value of special assistance payments with non-federal funds. In other words, if the revenue exceeds the cost of the program, the school district must cover the costs with funds that are not received through any other federal program (such as Title I).
  • CEP may impact the Title I allocation to sites. The student eligibility rates drive the funding allocations. Without collecting the number of eligible students each year for free, reduced, and paid meals, the Title I funding1 allocation model will need revision. Even though it may be of benefit to the Food and Nutrition Services Department it might have unintended consequences to the Title I funds the school sites usually receive through school ranking. Before a district decides to participate in this method of reimbursement they should consult with the department in their school district that oversees Title I fund allocations to the school sites. The U.S. Department of Education has provided guidance on this aspect of the program.
  • This program may also impact the District E-Rate2 application since student eligibility is a factor in obtaining E-Rate funds. The Federal Communications Commission provides guidance in this area.

The decision to participate in CEP must be a District decision, not only a food services department decision. The department should also conduct an analysis for their district to determine the financial impact of opting for the CEP method. The USDA has provided an estimator tool that is available on their CEP web page.


1 Title I, Part A (Title I) of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, as amended (ESEA) provides financial assistance to local educational agencies (LEAs) and schools with high numbers or high percentages of children from low-income families to help ensure that all children meet challenging state academic standards. Federal funds are currently allocated through formulas that are based primarily on census poverty estimates and the cost of education in each state.

2 E-Rate is the commonly used name for the Schools and Libraries Program of the Universal Service Fund, which is administered by the Universal Service Administrative Company (USAC) under the direction of the Federal Communications Commission. The program provides discounts to assist most schools and libraries in the United States (and U.S. territories) to obtain affordable telecommunications and Internet access.

Provision 1

This Provision reduces application burden by allowing free eligibility to be certified for a two-year period. In schools where at least 80% of the children enrolled are eligible for free or reduced price meals, annual notification of program availability and certification of children eligible for free meals may be reduced to once every two consecutive school years. All other households must be provided with a meal application and are permitted to apply for meal benefits each school year. There is no requirement to serve meals at no charge to all students. Schools must continue to record daily meal counts of the number of meals served to children by type as the basis for calculating reimbursement claims.


Provision 2

Provision 2 requires that the school serve meals to participating children at no charge but reduces application burden from annual application collection to once every four years. Provision 2 also simplifies meal counting and claiming procedures by allowing a school to receive meal reimbursement based on claiming percentages. During the first year, known as the base year, there is no change in traditional procedures and administrative burden. During years two, three, and four of the cycle, the school makes no new eligibility determinations and continues to serve all children meals at no charge. The school takes count of only the total number of reimbursable meals served each day. Reimbursement during these years is determined by applying the percentages of free, reduced price and paid meals served during the base year to the total meal count for the claiming period in subsequent years. Federal reimbursement is based on these percentages, and the meals are reimbursed at the free, reduced price and paid rates. A district can opt to do breakfast and/or lunch and may choose whether to participate on a district-wide basis or only in specific schools.

Generally schools with high percentages of low-income students (75% or more) utilize this option. Provision 2 schools pay the difference between the cost of serving meals at no charge to all students and the federal reimbursement for the meals. Most participating districts still collect some type of eligibility information on an annual basis so as to not impact the Title I allocations to sites, but eligibility determinations cannot be altered during this period. In years two through four, sites only need to count and claim the total reimbursable meals; the eligibility percentages from year one are applied to the total for reimbursement purposes. School nutrition programs should contact their State Agencies for assistance on how to implement Provision 2 in some or all of their schools (see USDA memo).


Provision 3

Provision 3 reduces application burden and meal counting and claiming procedures. It allows schools to simply receive the same level of federal cash and commodity assistance each year, with some adjustments, for a four-year period. Schools must serve meals to all participating children at no charge for a period of four years. These schools do not make additional eligibility determinations. Instead, they receive the level of federal cash and commodity support paid to them in their “base year,” which is the last year they made eligibility determinations and meal counts by type. For each of the four years, the level of federal cash and commodity support is adjusted to reflect changes in enrollment and inflation. The base year is not included as part of the four years. At the end of each four-year period, the state agency may approve four-year extensions if the income level of the school’s population remains stable. Schools electing this alternative must pay the difference between federal reimbursement and the cost of providing all meals at no charge. The money to pay for this difference must be from sources other than federal funds.

Recommended Next Topic: Wellness Policy & Smart Snacks

As a part of Healthy Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010 (HHFKA), these two areas require a broader understanding of what the requirements are and how the Local Education Agency (LEA, aka the school district, as opposed to solely the food service department) is responsible for meeting the regulations.

Recommended Next Topic: Wellness Policy & Smart Snacks

As a part of Healthy Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010 (HHFKA), these two areas require a broader understanding of what the requirements are and how the Local Education Agency (LEA, aka the school district, as opposed to solely the food service department) is responsible for meeting the regulations.

Help The Lunch Box!

Please help us keep our tools & resources free for all users by registering here!

Thank you for signing up!

There was an error, please try again.