Penn-Trafford enacted the free and reduced lunch program for students that do not meet the income required by the state to qualify for full food options.
     There are around 12 options in total, some including a chicken patty sandwich or a slice of pizza with crinkle fries. Students had mixed opinions when it came to the program, some saying it is fine the way it is and others claiming that it needs improvements and should fit the students’ wants.
     In 2016, P-T withdrew from the Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 which was utilized for prompting healthier cafeteria options. The government option was healthier, but many students did not like it because the options were reduced and the food did not appeal well. The program enacted the government to control food that had high amounts of sodium or other unhealthy qualities specifically for students.
     In a recent survey, the students involved in the reduced lunch program felt as if the quality of food needed improved.
     After P-T dropped out of the program, the decision was made to start offering free and reduced lunches outside of federal funding and made meals directed towards the students and what they would like with new meal options never before seen. However, with that decision, many meals were boosted in price because it was out of the way compared to getting money granted for lunch, according to the school board.
     “I think that they are decent, but could be better. All students should get the same options to choose from whether they pay in full for their meals or get reduced lunches,” responded one student to a survey regarding the quality of reduced lunches.
     However, at P-T, the reduced lunch program brings in no revenue. Regardless of whether a student is considered a part of the free program or the reduced program, they pay no money for their food and there is absolutely no reimbursement for the money needed to purchase and cook what is sold.
     Cafeteria director Zach Malavite stated, “If there’s 200 kids eating that meal, there’s 200 kids not paying for any of that food.”
     That being said, it is difficult for the school to provide the free and reduced lunch program students with the same options as other stations in the cafeteria due to the cost demands. Unlike most schools involved in a program like this, P-T also receives no federal monetary assistance.
     Students were pleased with the reduced lunch idea to help lower income, however they believe more spotlight should be put on the idea. “I believe that it is a good program with good intentions, however I feel that qualified students are limited to what they can and cannot purchase,” claimed another student.
     “We try to find a happy medium between offering variety because, again, when the program was first introduced here at the high school, that line only had one option,” added Malavite.
     The free and reduced lunch program is commonly discussed at school board meetings and it always looking for room for improvement in order to create a beneficial and happy lunch environment for students.

Jacob Simmons, Staff Writer