MONROE - For the eighth consecutive year, student eligibility for free or reduced-price school meals increased in Wisconsin, according the Wisconsin Department of Public Instruction.
State-wide, the percentage rose 1.1 point from last year.
A DPI report released last month shows 42.5 percent of Wisconsin students qualify based on family income for the current school year, up from 41.4 percent in 2010. This represents an increase of 7,155 students over last school year.
Individually, Wisconsin school percentage point changes range from a decrease of 12.4 percent in Winter to an increase of 14.4 percent in Northern Ozaukee.
Percentage point changes of schools in Green County and western Lafayette County ranged from a decease of 4.3 percent in Belleville to an increase of 10.4 percent in Argyle.
While more than 100 districts in the state - including four of the state's five largest districts: Milwaukee Public, Racine, Green Bay Area and Madison Metropolitan - have 50 percent or more of their students eligible for free or reduced-price meals, none of the schools in the local area reach those heights.
Albany, Argyle, Juda, Black Hawk and Shullsburg are between 40 and 45 percent.
Juda rose into that bracket this year, moving from 37.7 to 41.3 percent.
"I don't consider us higher than any other district," said Pam Green, bookkeeper for Juda School District.
Green pointed out that in schools with small student bodies, small changes in total student population or in the number of students receiving free or reduced meals can appear as large percentage swings.
"Our student count went up about 20 students, and if those people are eligible for free or reduced lunches, that would affect the percentage," she said.
Juda School District sends information about the program via its newsletters and packets distributed at the beginning of each school year.
Green noted a new USDA mandatory direct certification in schools implemented in 2010 could also have had an impact on the climbing numbers.
The Healthy, Hunger-free Kids Act of 2010 requires schools to obtain student eligibility information directly from SNAP officials. Schools then notify SNAP families to ensure they are aware of their children's eligibility.
Among area schools, Argyle's percentage rose the most, 10.4 points.
Dr. Bob Gilpatrick, Argyle District Administrator, said direct certification is one factor in his school's large jump from 30 to 40 percent in the past year. The other factor is the economy.
"Argyle is in the middle of a fairly depressed time. We really do believe we have more families who qualify for free or hot lunches," he said.
Greg Holcomb, director of Green County Human Services, said his department takes advantage of every available resource for the clients they see. That includes getting an ever-increasing number of children into the free or reduced school hot lunch program.
In 2011, Green County Human Services saw the number of homeless and near homeless families increase to 225 families, up from 175 families in 2010, according to a report by Jeannie Blumer, economic support supervisor for Green County Human Services, in February.
The number of individuals in those families served was 572, of which 309 were adults and 263 were children.
In 2010, the 175 families being served included 434 individuals of which 222 were adults and 212 were children.
Monroe saw its percentage drop slightly, less than one point compared to 2010, and the district now, at 36.8 percent, sits in the middle of the pack among area school districts.
Ron Olson, the Monroe School District's business manager, said the increases his district saw in its free and reduced lunch program last year and the year before may be leveling off. But he also pointed out that virtual school students skew the numbers in the Monroe School District.
Without including the virtual school students, 40 percent of Monroe's "bricks and mortar" school population receives free or reduced lunches, he said.
The percentage of Monroe students in the program is higher in the elementary grades and decreases as students enter middle school, "which is indicative of every school," Olson noted.
Although Olson didn't know the exact reason for the decline, he suspected teenage awareness and peer pressures, as well as rural culture, may account for some of the decline.
Some families don't want to take the free or reduced lunches because they don't want their kids stigmatized at school.
"Rural families, historically, just went about their business" in private, Olson noted.
Olson believes the presence of the stigma may be declining as families hit hard by the recent economy are looking at more options that benefit their family, including an opportunity to supply a good lunch for their children.
The stigma "shouldn't have ever been," he said.
It is financially advantageous for the schools to make sure kids who are eligible get applied or enrolled in free or reduced lunches, Olson added.
"Many federal programs' funding allocations are driven by the percentage of free or reduced lunches," he said.
The more parents that apply for reduced lunches, the more money the schools can receive for those other school programs using the lunch numbers to determine funding.
State-wide, the percentage rose 1.1 point from last year.
A DPI report released last month shows 42.5 percent of Wisconsin students qualify based on family income for the current school year, up from 41.4 percent in 2010. This represents an increase of 7,155 students over last school year.
Individually, Wisconsin school percentage point changes range from a decrease of 12.4 percent in Winter to an increase of 14.4 percent in Northern Ozaukee.
Percentage point changes of schools in Green County and western Lafayette County ranged from a decease of 4.3 percent in Belleville to an increase of 10.4 percent in Argyle.
While more than 100 districts in the state - including four of the state's five largest districts: Milwaukee Public, Racine, Green Bay Area and Madison Metropolitan - have 50 percent or more of their students eligible for free or reduced-price meals, none of the schools in the local area reach those heights.
Albany, Argyle, Juda, Black Hawk and Shullsburg are between 40 and 45 percent.
Juda rose into that bracket this year, moving from 37.7 to 41.3 percent.
"I don't consider us higher than any other district," said Pam Green, bookkeeper for Juda School District.
Green pointed out that in schools with small student bodies, small changes in total student population or in the number of students receiving free or reduced meals can appear as large percentage swings.
"Our student count went up about 20 students, and if those people are eligible for free or reduced lunches, that would affect the percentage," she said.
Juda School District sends information about the program via its newsletters and packets distributed at the beginning of each school year.
Green noted a new USDA mandatory direct certification in schools implemented in 2010 could also have had an impact on the climbing numbers.
The Healthy, Hunger-free Kids Act of 2010 requires schools to obtain student eligibility information directly from SNAP officials. Schools then notify SNAP families to ensure they are aware of their children's eligibility.
Among area schools, Argyle's percentage rose the most, 10.4 points.
Dr. Bob Gilpatrick, Argyle District Administrator, said direct certification is one factor in his school's large jump from 30 to 40 percent in the past year. The other factor is the economy.
"Argyle is in the middle of a fairly depressed time. We really do believe we have more families who qualify for free or hot lunches," he said.
Greg Holcomb, director of Green County Human Services, said his department takes advantage of every available resource for the clients they see. That includes getting an ever-increasing number of children into the free or reduced school hot lunch program.
In 2011, Green County Human Services saw the number of homeless and near homeless families increase to 225 families, up from 175 families in 2010, according to a report by Jeannie Blumer, economic support supervisor for Green County Human Services, in February.
The number of individuals in those families served was 572, of which 309 were adults and 263 were children.
In 2010, the 175 families being served included 434 individuals of which 222 were adults and 212 were children.
Monroe saw its percentage drop slightly, less than one point compared to 2010, and the district now, at 36.8 percent, sits in the middle of the pack among area school districts.
Ron Olson, the Monroe School District's business manager, said the increases his district saw in its free and reduced lunch program last year and the year before may be leveling off. But he also pointed out that virtual school students skew the numbers in the Monroe School District.
Without including the virtual school students, 40 percent of Monroe's "bricks and mortar" school population receives free or reduced lunches, he said.
The percentage of Monroe students in the program is higher in the elementary grades and decreases as students enter middle school, "which is indicative of every school," Olson noted.
Although Olson didn't know the exact reason for the decline, he suspected teenage awareness and peer pressures, as well as rural culture, may account for some of the decline.
Some families don't want to take the free or reduced lunches because they don't want their kids stigmatized at school.
"Rural families, historically, just went about their business" in private, Olson noted.
Olson believes the presence of the stigma may be declining as families hit hard by the recent economy are looking at more options that benefit their family, including an opportunity to supply a good lunch for their children.
The stigma "shouldn't have ever been," he said.
It is financially advantageous for the schools to make sure kids who are eligible get applied or enrolled in free or reduced lunches, Olson added.
"Many federal programs' funding allocations are driven by the percentage of free or reduced lunches," he said.
The more parents that apply for reduced lunches, the more money the schools can receive for those other school programs using the lunch numbers to determine funding.