The Community Eligibility Provision (CEP) of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 allows school districts to provide free meals to all students if over 40 percent of them are directly certified as free-meal eligible. While emerging evidence documents positive effects on student behavior and academics, critics worry that CEP has unintended consequences for student weight, district finances, and instructional spending. We investigate these using school and district data from New York State and a difference-in-differences design. We exploit staggered CEP adoption, and explore differences between metro, town, and rural districts. We investigate potential mechanisms, including lunch and breakfast participation, and use event studies to assess pre-adoption trends and effects over time. We find that CEP increases total food expenditures, but spending per meal declines. Local food service revenues decline, but increased federal reimbursements more than compensate for local food revenues and expenditures changes. Indeed, while some worry that CEP crowds out education spending, we find no effect on instructional expenditures. Furthermore, CEP increases participation in school lunch and breakfast, but has no deleterious effect on weight outcomes and, instead, is associated with obesity declines in secondary grades. Rural districts experience larger impacts than metro and town districts, alongside some negative fiscal effects.

This paper offers new evidence on the impacts of school finance reforms (SFRs) precipitated by school finance litigation, exploring the extent to which the impact of SFR differs by district racial composition. Using difference-in-differences and event study models with a series of district and year (or state-by-year) fixed effects, and a sixteen-year panel of over 10,000 school districts, my analyses exploit variation in funding across school districts, and timing of school finance court orders across states, to estimate the effect of SFR on the distribution of district funding by racial composition. Models include relevant control variables available in national data and results are robust to numerous alternative specifications, including estimating impacts on percent changes in resources (in addition to levels), restricting analyses to districts in SFR states, controlling for additional covariates available in only some years and some states, and adding controls for state-specific time trends. In addition, I estimate changes in New York State to assess whether and to what extent results are sensitive to additional controls for revenue-raising capacity and district costs. Results suggest that SFR can work to alleviate racial funding gaps, though impacts are moderate.