School choice shouldn’t mean choosing whether a child can afford lunch 

 As National School Lunch Week comes to an end, Congress should celebrate by finally fixing an inequity that leaves hundreds of thousands of children behind: the exclusion of full-time online public school students from the National School Lunch Program.

Right now, more than 347,000 online public school students who would otherwise qualify for free or reduced-price lunch are denied benefits. That is about 57 percent of all virtual public school students nationwide. These are families that meet the same income thresholds as their peers in traditional schools, but they lose access to help just because of where their children attend school.

In some states, the numbers are staggering. In Michigan, more than 70 percent of the state’s full-time online students — 22,000 students — qualified for free lunch benefits but did not receive them, according to data from the Center for Educational Performance and Information for the 2024-25 school year.  

This percentage trends even higher at some of the state’s largest schools: 78 percent of students at Michigan Great Lakes Academy and 80 percent of Highpoint Virtual Academy of Michigan qualify for the program but receive nothing.

These are not small gaps. They represent children who are just as hungry as their peers in brick-and-mortar schools but are punished for exercising school choice. 

These numbers echo the stories I’ve heard from families across the country.  When Shenelle, a Florida resident, lost her job in social education, her family lost their house due to her loss of income. They began staying in hotels. She decided to enroll her special needs daughter in an online public school to give her a sense of stability while ensuring her educational needs were met. 

Although the transition to virtual public school offered academic stability, it came with a heavy and unexpected tradeoff: Her family no longer qualified for the National School Lunch Program.

“When you’re in that situation, you can’t promise your child things like when they will eat, what they will eat, or if they will eat at all. In brick and mortar, she had that reliable eating structure,” Shenelle shared in an interview with Parents for School Options. 

Kimberly, a Tennessee grandmother raising her three grandchildren on a fixed income, has seen her grocery bills triple since switching to an online public school program. A brick-and-mortar school is not an option for her family due to her youngest grandchild’s health and immunity issues.

No family should be forced to choose between a child’s health and his or her hunger.

Congress knows this is a problem. In fact, appropriations report language already directed the USDA to explore solutions. Now is the time to act. We saw during the pandemic how flexible and creative leaders could be when it came to feeding students outside of cafeterias, through curbside pickup, meal delivery services and EBT cards. If Congress could solve it then, it can solve it now.

This isn’t a partisan issue. Leaders across the political spectrum, including Republicans who have championed school choice and family freedom, should see this as a priority. Excluding low-income families from essential nutrition support undercuts the very promise of education choice. 

Congress can fix this easily: remove the congregate setting requirements in the National School Lunch Program that restrict states from being able to extend school meal benefits to full-time online public school students. Doing so would ensure no family has to choose between the school that works for their child and the food they need to thrive. 

As we mark National School Lunch Week, let’s commit to more than celebrations and slogans. Let’s make sure every child who otherwise qualifies for the National School Lunch Program actually receives it. Congress has already acknowledged the problem. Now, it’s time for Congress to solve it. 

Letrisha Weber is the president of Parents for School Options.