According to a report by the Food Research & Action Center (FRAC) participation in the Community Eligibility Provision (CEP) increased by almost 19% during the 2023-24 school year as half of all National School Lunch Program (NSLP) schools now use the provision that lets low-income schools serve free meals to all students. In fact, 47,766 schools from 7,717 schools districts opted into the federal program for 2023-24, resulting in upwards of 23 million students in high-poverty schools access to free breakfasts and lunches.

In 2023, the (U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) lowered the minimum threshold for low-income schools and school districts to qualify for the federal reimbursement program. Previously, 40% of students enrolled in a school had to be certified as eligible for free school meals, but that threshold is now 25%.

With the change in administration, it is unknown what the fate of the program will be since President-elect Trump has not signaled his position on the CEP, but Project 2025, a Heritage Foundation policy blueprint developed by former Trump administration officials, has called for the program’s elimination. The policy agenda also proposed that the USDA work with lawmakers to reject any efforts to support universal school meal programs.

For more details from K-12 Dive, click here.

On December 27, 2024, the U.S. Department of Education (USDE) withdrew a proposed federal rule that supporters said would have made it easier for schools to be reimbursed for school-based Medicaid services. It was seen as a way to reduce schools’ paperwork burdens and increase reimbursements for the rendering of applicable in-school Medicaid services.

The proposed rule, first issued in May 2023, recommended a rare amendment under the Individuals with Disabilities Education Act, which guarantees that students with disabilities receive supports for learning and related services. The rule also sought to eliminate an IDEA provision that requires one-time parental consent before schools file first-time invoices for school-based specialized services for children eligible for public benefits under Medicaid, the Children’s Health Insurance Program, or other public insurance and benefits programs. No other parental consent procedure under IDEA would have been affected. 

In addition, USDE leadership will change with the January 20th inauguration and it is unknown what the tenor would be for making such a rule change.

For more details, visit K-12 Dive by clicking here.

At a December 13, 2024 U.S. Commission on Civil Rights’ listening session, those testifying lamented the adverse effects brought on by the highly qualified special education teacher shortage crisis. In his testimony, Aaron Parsons, public policy chair for the National Association of Private Special Education Centers, said that if the situation persists, “[T]he impact will be profound. Students with disabilities may face increased dependency, reduced opportunities for employment, greater social isolation, and in turn, this will place a greater burden on social services and the broader community.” As a result, Parsons suggested prioritizing recruitment and retention of special educators through competitive salaries and comprehensive training programs.

The session followed up on a Nov. 15 briefing where panelists shared recommendations for increasing the special education workforce, including salary increases, reduced paperwork, expanded school choice, and robust teacher career pipelines. 

The commission plans to issue a report on the topic to the president and Congress in the latter half of 2025.

Source: K-12 Dive

The U.S. Department of Education’s (USDE) Office for Civil Rights (OCR) has released a new resource outlining 21 examples of how artificial intelligence (AI) could contribute to discrimination in schools and colleges based on race, color or natural origin, sex or disability. The resource clarifies for school leaders how existing legal requirements apply to AI technology to help schools and colleges ensure their use of AI does not violate federal civil rights protections.

The OCR resource points out that some scenarios could be considered discriminatory without AI, but they may also “be compounded by its use.” It also asserts that the examples provided are “illustrative” and “non-exhaustive” and would not determine the outcome of any future OCR investigations.

In addition, the resource in essence puts school districts and education agencies on notice that they cannot plead ignorance regarding this issue and that OCR clearly plans to view AI use in light of civil rights laws.

For more from K-12 Dive, click here.

To access additional AI resources from USDE including an AI toolkit titled Empowering Education Leaders: A Toolkit for Safe, Ethical, and Equitable AI Integration, click here.