Working Papers
School meal policies in the United States are at a crossroads: half of public K–12 schools provide universal free meals to all students, regardless of income, while the other half offer free and reduced-price (FRP) meals based on income eligibility. Do universal policies improve student outcomes compared to targeted policies for low-income children? I evaluate the short- and long-term effects of universal free school meal policies using linked administrative data from Texas. I exploit the staggered rollout of the Community Eligibility Provision (CEP), a federal policy that allows high-poverty schools to offer meals free to all students. I find that CEP increases meal take-up by 6.2 percentage points, or 20 additional meals per student per year (a 10 percent increase). Higher-income students previously ineligible for FRP are more responsive to CEP than low-income students already eligible under FRP. Despite the increase in take-up, I detect no improvements in academic, behavioral, or economic outcomes, either overall or across subgroups, in the short or long run. Applying the marginal value of public funds framework, I show that the costs of CEP exceed its benefits, suggesting limited efficiency gains from universal provision relative to targeted support.
Effects of SNAP Work Requirements
(with Hyewon Kim and Pauline Leung)
We examine the effectiveness of work requirements as a screening device in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Work requirements for “able-bodied adults without dependents” were suspended after the Great Recession and gradually reinstated across counties and states in the 2010s. Using linked administrative SNAP and employment data from five states and a triple-differences design, we find that work requirements reduce SNAP participation by seven percent without increasing labor supply, and disproportionately screen out low-income individuals. We develop a welfare framework to interpret these results and find that the social costs from poorer targeting exceed budget savings.
Disclaimer: This research was performed at the Cornell Federal Statistical Research Data Center (supported by the Cornell Center for Social Sciences) under FSRDC Project Number 3049. (CBDRB-FY26-P3049-R12788, CBDRB-FY26-P3049-R13048).
States have historically used students’ eligibility for the free and reduced-price meal program (FRP) to define student economic disadvantage. The count of economically disadvantaged students is used to allocate K-12 funding in many states. The Community Eligibility Provision (CEP), a universal free school meal program, can lower the count of economically disadvantaged students due to a reduction in applications. This can skew state K-12 funding if not actively monitored. I find that CEP reduced meal applications by 7.6 percentage points (a 27 percent decline) and lowered state funding by approximately $286 per pupil annually, or 2 percent. These effects are concentrated in states with high CEP exposure and in those that rely on alternative income measures to supplement FRP data. As universal free school meals continue to expand, this paper highlights the importance of monitoring FRP data and its downstream effects on school finance.