IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/wly/jpamgt/v28y2009i4p626-654.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

A comparative cost analysis of commodity foods from the U.S. Department of Agriculture in the National School Lunch Program

Author

Listed:
  • Cora Peterson

    (Graduate student, Department of Social Policy, London School of Economics and Political Science)

Abstract

Schools that participate in the National School Lunch Program receive a portion of their federal funding as commodity foods rather than cash payments. This research compared the product costs and estimated total procurement costs of commodity and commercial foods from the school district perspective using data from 579 Minnesota ordering sites in school year (SY) 2008-2009. Though comparison of product prices indicates that commercial foods were an average of 17 percent more expensive than equivalent commodity foods, once full estimated procurement costs were included, the commercial products became 9 percent less expensive per food case than commodity products. Base case results were sensitive to the cost of risk to hold inventory. When this input was tested at zero, the estimated cost to procure commercial foods was 2 percent higher per case than commodity foods, though total commercial procurement costs remained less than commodity costs by 3 percent. It is estimated that Minnesota schools collectively spent an additional $1.7 to $3.7 million to procure USDA commodity foods in SY 2008-2009. © 2009 by the Association for Public Policy Analysis and Management.

Suggested Citation

  • Cora Peterson, 2009. "A comparative cost analysis of commodity foods from the U.S. Department of Agriculture in the National School Lunch Program," Journal of Policy Analysis and Management, John Wiley & Sons, Ltd., vol. 28(4), pages 626-654.
  • Handle: RePEc:wly:jpamgt:v:28:y:2009:i:4:p:626-654
    DOI: 10.1002/pam.20458
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: http://hdl.handle.net/10.1002/pam.20458
    File Function: Link to full text; subscription required
    Download Restriction: no

    Citations

    Citations are extracted by the CitEc Project, subscribe to its RSS feed for this item.
    as


    Cited by:

    1. Peterson, Cora, 2011. "A rotten deal for schools? An assessment of states' success with the National School Lunch Program's in-kind food benefit," Food Policy, Elsevier, vol. 36(5), pages 588-596, October.

    More about this item

    Statistics

    Access and download statistics

    Corrections

    All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:wly:jpamgt:v:28:y:2009:i:4:p:626-654. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

    For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: (Wiley-Blackwell Digital Licensing) or (Christopher F. Baum). General contact details of provider: http://www3.interscience.wiley.com/journal/34787/home .

    If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

    We have no references for this item. You can help adding them by using this form .

    If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

    Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

    IDEAS is a RePEc service hosted by the Research Division of the Federal Reserve Bank of St. Louis . RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.