Fact Sheet: Congressional Republicans’ Big Beautiful Bill Threatens Access to Free School Meals

One in five children in the United States lives in a household that struggles to afford sufficient food. Access to free school meals is essential to meeting students’ basic needs and supporting their academic success. However, the recent passage of congressional Republicans’ One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA) threatens to take free school meals away from many students.

A new Center for American Progress report examines how the OBBBA affects access to free and reduced-price school meals and the resulting impact on families. This fact sheet highlights key findings from the report and offers recommendations for states to mitigate harm where possible.

Who is eligible for free or reduced-price school meals?

• Millions of students rely on free and reduced-price school meals. According to CAP analysis, approximately 33.9 million public school students were eligible to receive free or reduced-price meals either through individual eligibility or school participation in the Community Eligibility Provision (CEP) during the 2024-25 school year; 24.6 million of these students were individually eligible, with 10.6 million directly certified. More than 49,000 public schools participated in the CEP, offering free meals to all students and serving around 25.1 million public school students. For detailed data by state and congressional district and methodology, see the full report.
• Students can become eligible in two ways—household applications or direct certification. However, the income requirements for the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and the School Breakfast Program (SBP) fail to include all students who are food insecure. Household applications can also create administrative barriers and induce stigma around participation. Thus, direct certification, which automatically enrolls students who participate in programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) or Medicaid (in some states) in free school meals, is an important avenue to ensure student access and participation.
• Direct certification can help offer free meals schoolwide. Districts and schools with at least 25 percent of students directly certified are eligible to participate in the CEP. The CEP allows schools to offer free meals to all students without collecting household applications, reducing stigma and fostering a positive learning environment for all students.

How does the OBBBA affect school meals?

• The OBBBA makes the largest cuts in history to SNAP and Medicaid and strains state budgets. More than 4 million people have already lost access to SNAP benefits as of February 2026, and new Medicaid work reporting requirements are projected to result in the loss of coverage for 5.2 million individuals by 2034. States may further restrict enrollment due to mandates that increase their administrative and benefits costs.
• Cuts to SNAP and Medicaid could revoke access to free meals for entire schools. Together, Medicaid and SNAP support 34 million children, or nearly 45 percent of all children in the United States. However, from July 2025 to May 2026, the enactment of the OBBBA resulted in more than 700,000 children in the 12 states reporting child participation data losing SNAP assistance. When children lose access to SNAP and Medicaid, they may also lose their direct certification for free school meals. This harm expands beyond individual impacts. As a result, schools participating in the CEP may fall below the 25 percent of direct certified students required to qualify for the CEP, ending free school meals for the entire school or district.

How will this affect students and families?

• Students would be deprived of the nutritional benefits they currently receive. Nutritional standards for school meals have significantly increased over the past two decades. These meals provide a much higher nutrient quality than those obtained elsewhere and are often children’s healthiest option.
• Families would pay the price. CAP estimates that a typical family with two children in public school will spend an additional $1,170 to pay for school-offered lunch and $720 to pay for school-offered breakfast, totaling $1,890 per school year, or more than $2,214 to pay for packed meals. This assumes schools do not need to raise school meal prices as production costs rise, which is unlikely as seen by price increases from the 2024-25 school year to the 2025-26 school year.

State policy recommendations

The OBBBA will inevitably worsen the financial strain on American families, making everyday life less affordable. States must take action to reduce the impact on access to free school meals where possible.

• Oppose proposals to eliminate broad-based categorical eligibility (BBCE). Forty-three states and Washington, D.C., have adopted BBCE, expanding SNAP eligibility by allowing states to confer eligibility on households receiving or authorized to receive noncash benefits or services funded by Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). By aligning income and asset rules with TANF-funded supports, BBCE enables states to increase income limits and raise or eliminate restrictive asset tests, allowing more low-income households to receive benefits. However, cost shifts associated with the OBBBA may force states to terminate BBCE programs. Additionally, the Trump administration is expected to propose a regulation to eliminate BBCE entirely, which could result in 1.8 million children losing benefits. This would further push students off direct certification for school meals.
• Protect existing state universal free meal programs. Nine states currently operate universal school meal programs to provide free meals to all students regardless of family income. As children face the potential loss of nutritional programs at home, maintaining these programs will be more important than ever to ensure students have access to healthy food.
• Strengthen direct certification and simplify school meal application processes. States that do not already use Medicaid as a method for direct certification should apply to do so. States should also strengthen direct certification efforts by ensuring systems are in place to extend eligibility to all children in a household, increasing the frequency of direct certification matches, improving data-matching systems, and providing training to school staff to identify vulnerable children. Household applications for school meals should also be made available in multiple languages, provided online and in person, simplified to make it clear which information is optional, and distributed with other mandatory forms. Community sites and frequent reminders can also help increase application completion.
• Educate families about direct certification. Recent policy changes may prompt states to implement stricter program rules, which could discourage some families from applying for or maintaining benefits if they view them as too low or too difficult to keep. States and local agencies should explicitly educate families through both online and in-person platforms on how to apply for benefits; how anti-poverty programs are linked through categorical eligibility; the importance of maintaining participation to preserve access to multiple supports; and how to maintain or regain benefits, including free school meals, if eligibility is lost.
• Support partnerships with local farmers and community gardens. Partnerships between schools and local farmers, such as school gardens through farm-to-school initiatives and local procurement contracts, could help schools access fresh, local foods at lower costs. States can invest in and encourage these partnerships by coordinating statewide networks, setting goals, providing training, and creating tools that connect schools with local producers. To maximize impact, the federal Local Food for Schools program, which provided funding to help states expand access to locally sourced foods in school, must be reinstated as well.

Conclusion

Roughly half of Americans report that they cannot afford the true cost of living. Yet the OBBBA will increase financial pressure on families by putting students at risk of losing access to free or reduced-price school meals. States must act to mitigate the harm by protecting essential programs, streamlining access, and strengthening local partnerships. Providing students with nutritious meals remains critical for their well-being and success in the classroom and beyond.