Tag: Security

  • Higher Education Inquirer : Security Threats: Groypers on Campus

    Higher Education Inquirer : Security Threats: Groypers on Campus

    1. Transitional Vulnerability

    First-year students often experience isolation, uncertainty, and identity formation. Groypers prey on this transitional moment by offering belonging, brotherhood, and contrarian confidence.

    2. Political Vacuum
    As universities retreat from serious civic education and as student affairs offices shrink under austerity, space opens for fringe networks to fill the ideological void.

    3. Online Radicalization Pipelines
    Groypers thrive in places like:

    Discord
    Telegram
    X/Twitter
    anonymous forums
    niche livestream communities

    Campus life becomes an extension of these networks, where online provocations evolve into real-world harassment or orchestrated spectacle.

    4. Conservative Student Groups as Entry Points
    Mainstream Republican or “free speech” groups are often targeted for infiltration. Groypers show up:
    to push Q&A sessions into racist or antisemitic talking points,
    to pressure student Republicans to shift further right,
    to create rifts between libertarian, traditional conservative, and MAGA factions.

    The strategy is division, not dialogue.

    Common Groyper Tactics on Campus
    1. Ambush Questioning
    At public lectures or campus Republican events, Groypers coordinate to dominate Q&A sessions, posing racially charged or conspiratorial questions designed to go viral.

    2. Online Harassment and Dogpiling
    Students—often women, LGBTQ+ students, or activists—find themselves targeted with:

    brigade attacks,
    doxxing attempts,
    edited clips taken out of context,
    swarm-like intimidation.

    3. Misery Farming
    Groypers intentionally provoke negative reactions to harvest “proof” that campuses are hostile to conservatives. This content is then fed into national media pipelines.

    4. Grooming and Recruitment
    They seek out students who feel:
    lonely
    unsupported
    resentful
    ideologically adrift
    economically anxious

    A mix of dark humor, contrarian bravado, and “insider knowledge” becomes the grooming pathway.

    The Institutional Problem: Campuses Are Not Prepared
    Universities often misread these actors as:
    “just trolls,”
    “rowdy conservatives,”
    “free speech activists.”

    They’re not.

    Groypers are engaged in ideological recruitment and targeted harassment that can escalate into threats, coordinated disruption, and offline violence. Yet institutions remain slow to respond because:
    they lack digital literacy,
    they fear backlash from right-wing media,
    they outsource security and student affairs to PR firms,
    administrators underestimate decentralized extremist networks.

    Faculty—especially contingent or early-career academics—often feel unsupported or intimidated.

    How Groypers Fit into the Larger Campus Crisis
    The Groypers’ rise exposes deeper fractures:
    neoliberal hollowing of the university
    growing distrust in democratic institutions
    political polarization fueled by billionaire-backed media
    the decline of genuine civic education
    surveillance capitalism and algorithmic radicalization

    Campuses have become battlegrounds—not by accident, but because they sit at the intersection of youth, identity, technology, and national politics.

    What Higher Education Must Do Now
    Universities need to respond with clarity, not panic, and with structural solutions, not symbolic statements.

    1. Treat Digital Extremism as Part of Student Safety
    This means training staff, hiring specialists, and supporting targets of online harassment.

    2. Reinvest in Human Infrastructure
    Student Affairs, counseling centers, and campus journalism must be strengthened—not cut or replaced with outsourcing contracts.

    3. Support Independent Investigative Student Journalism
    Student reporters are often the first to detect radicalization trends—but only if their newsrooms are funded and protected.

    4. Protect Academic Freedom Without Ceding Ground to Harassment
    “Free speech” cannot be a shield for sustained intimidation campaigns.

    5. Strengthen Civic Education Rooted in Truth and Inclusion
    The real antidote to extremism is not censorship—it’s meaningful democratic literacy.

    Seeing the Threat Clearly
    Groypers are not the dominant force on campus. Most students reject their worldview. But they are a growing presence within a broader crisis where U.S. higher education lacks the stability, funding, and courage to defend its mission.

    The real danger is not the meme or the mascot—it’s the vacuum that allows extremist networks to flourish.

    The Higher Education Inquirer will continue monitoring this issue as the 2026 and 2028 election cycles approach, when radical groups often intensify campus recruitment and provocation.

    Source link

  • How school IT teams lock down QR-based SSO without hurting usability

    How school IT teams lock down QR-based SSO without hurting usability

    Key points:

    Schools can keep QR logins safe and seamless by blending clear visual cues, ongoing user education, and risk-based checks behind the scenes

    QR-based single sign-on (SSO) is fast becoming a favorite in schools seeking frictionless access, especially for bring-your-own-device (BYOD) environments.

    The BYOD in education market hit $15.2 billion in 2024 and is projected to grow at a 17.4 percent CAGR from 2025 to 2033, driven by the proliferation of digital learning and personal smart devices in schools.

    However, when attackers wrap malicious links into QR codes, school IT leaders must find guardrails that preserve usability without turning every login into a fortress.

    Phishing via QR codes, a tactic now known as “quishing,” is where attackers embed malicious QR codes in emails or posters, directing pupils, faculty, and staff to fake login pages. Over four out of five K-12 schools experienced cyber threat impacts with human-targeted threats like phishing or quishing, exceeding other techniques by 45 percent.

    Because QR codes hide or obscure the URL until after scanning, they evade many traditional email spam filters and link scanners.

    Below are three strategies to get that balance between seamless logins and safe digital environments right.

    How to look out for visual signals

    Approximately 60 percent of emails containing QR codes are classified as spam. Branded content, such as the school or district logo, consistent with the look and feel of other web portals and student apps, will help students identify a legitimate QR over a malicious one.

    Frontier research shows that bold colors and clear iconography can increase recognition speed by up to 40 percent. This is the kind of split-second reassurance a student or teacher needs before entering credentials on a QR-based login screen.

    Training your users to look for the full domain or service name, such as “sso.schooldistrict.edu” under the QR, is good practice to avoid quishing attacks, school-related or not. However, this will be trickier for younger students.

    The Frontier report demonstrates how younger children rely more heavily on color and icon cues than on text or abstract symbols. For K-12 students, visual trust cues such as school crests, mascots, or familiar color schemes offer a cognitive shortcut to legitimacy.

    Still, while logos and “Secured by…” badges are there to reassure users, attackers know this. Microsoft, Cisco Talos, and Palo Alto Unit42 have documented large-scale phishing campaigns where cybercriminals cloned Microsoft 365 and Okta login pages, complete with fake security seals, to harvest credentials.

    For schools rolling out QR-based SSO, pairing visible trust cues with dynamic watermarks unique to the institution makes it harder for attackers to replicate.

    User education on quishing risk

    Human error drives most breaches, particularly in K-12 schools. These environments handle a mix of pupils who are inexperienced with security risks and, therefore, are less likely to scrutinize QR codes, links, or credentials.

    Students and teachers must be taught the meaning of signs and the level of detail to consider in order to respond more quickly and correctly. A short digital literacy module about QR logins can dramatically cut phishing and quishing risk, reinforcing what legitimate login screens should look like. These should be repeated regularly for updates and to strengthen the retrieval and recognition of key visual cues.

    Research in cognitive psychology shows that repeated exposure can boost the strength of a memory by more than 30 percent, making cues harder to ignore and easier to recall. When teaching secure login habits, short, repeated micro-lessons–for example, 3-5 min videos with infographics–can boost test scores 10-20 percent. Researcher Piotr Wozniak suggests spacing reviews after 1 day, then 7 days, 16 days, 35 days, and later every 2-3 months.

    With proper education, students should instinctively not trust QRs received via text message or social media through unverified numbers or accounts. Encouraging the use of a Secure QR Code Scanner app, at least for staff and perhaps older students, can be helpful, because it will verify the embedded URL before a user opens it.

    When to step up authentication after a scan

    QR codes make logging in fast, but after a scan, you don’t have to give full access right away. Instead, schools can use these scans as the first factor and decide whether to require more proof before granting access, depending on risk signals.

    For example, if a student or teacher scans the QR code with a phone or tablet that’s not on the school’s “known device” list, the system should prompt for a PIN, passphrase, or MFA push before completing login. The same applies to sensitive systems that include student data or financial information.

    Microsoft’s 2024 Digital Defense Report shows that adding MFA blocks 99.2 percent of credential attacks. That means a simple SMS or push-based MFA can drastically slash phishing and quishing success rates. By adding a quick MFA prompt only when risk signals spike, school IT teams preserve the speed of QR logins without giving up security.

    Schools can also apply cloud-security platforms to strengthen QR-based SSO without sacrificing ease of use. These tools sit behind the scenes, continuously monitoring Google Workspace, Microsoft 365, and other education apps for unusual logins, risky devices, or policy violations.

    By automatically logging every QR login event, including device, time, and location, and triggering alerts when something looks off, IT teams gain visibility and early warning without adding extra friction for staff or students. This approach lets schools keep QR sign-ins fast and familiar with risk-based controls and data protection running in the background.

    Schools can keep QR logins safe and seamless by blending clear visual cues, ongoing user education, and risk-based checks behind the scenes. Students and staff learn to recognize authentic screens, while IT teams add extra verification only when behavior looks risky. Simultaneously, continuous monitoring tracks every scan to catch problems early and improve education resources, all without slowing anyone down.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • U.S. Universities Are National Security Assets (opinion)

    U.S. Universities Are National Security Assets (opinion)

    For too long, Americans have underestimated the strategic value of our universities. The popular belief is that higher education’s chief contribution to national security is soft power—the goodwill generated by cultural exchange, academic diplomacy and global networking. That’s accurate, but it’s only a small part of the security story.

    The vast majority of our 4,000-odd colleges and universities (including the elite ones) are hardly the ivory towers so associated with so-called woke movements and high-profile culture wars. Many, in fact, are the R&D labs of our national security infrastructure. They are the training grounds for the nation’s cyber warriors, military leaders, intelligence officers and diplomats. To be sure, they are one of America’s most potent weapons in an era of fierce geopolitical competition.

    The Reserve Officers’ Training Corps is the military’s largest commissioning source, with a footprint that spans the nation. Army ROTC alone operates at about 1,000 college campuses and provides merit-based benefits to roughly 15,000 students each year. It produces approximately 70 percent of the officers entering the Army annually, commissioning around 5,000 second lieutenants in a typical year.

    The scale is cross-service: Air Force ROTC maintains 145 host detachments with more than 1,100 partner universities and commissioned 2,109 Air Force and 141 Space Force officers in 2022. Navy/Marine Corps ROTC fields 63 units hosted at 77 colleges and extends to 160-plus colleges via cross-town agreements. Between 2011 and 2021, about 1,441 U.S. colleges and universities had at least one ROTC host, cross-town or extension unit—and every state has at least one host. Over its first century, ROTC has produced more than one million officers.

    The Department of Defense, as key partner with higher education, invests billions annually in university research. In fiscal year 2022 alone, the DOD’s research, development, test and evaluation budget authority reached $118.7 billion. For example, the Defense University Research Instrumentation Program awarded $43 million in equipment grants to 112 university researchers for the 2025 fiscal year. Entities like DARPA (the Defense Advanced Research Projects Agency), the Army Research Laboratory, and the Office of Naval Research fund breakthroughs in AI, quantum computing, hypersonics and cyber resilience. Universities partner with the Defense Department and other government agencies to conduct research in areas like drone technology, stealth aircraft and, historically, the development of the Internet and GPS.

    Cybersecurity is another front where U.S. universities lead with global distinction. The National Security Agency has designated nearly 500 campuses as national Centers of Academic Excellence in Cybersecurity. Universities like Carnegie Mellon, Purdue and the University of Texas at San Antonio run advanced programs focused on cryptography, digital forensics and cyber policy, partnering with both government and industry to build systems that repel state-sponsored hackers.

    Biosecurity is equally critical. The COVID-19 pandemic proved that viruses can fundamentally destabilize economies and national morale as quickly as warfare can. Johns Hopkins, Emory, Harvard and Vanderbilt Universities all were at the forefront of research on the coronavirus and vaccines. Land-grant universities like Texas A&M and Iowa State have long been securing our food supply against agroterrorism and climate threats. As just one example of this partnership, in 2024, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Institute of Food and Agriculture announced $7.6 million in grants to 12 different universities focused on agricultural biosecurity.

    Then there’s the talent pipeline. American universities train the linguists, engineers, analysts and scientists who feed the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Central Intelligence Agency, the Department of Homeland Security and the armed forces. Through partnerships with universities, the National Security Education Program, the Critical Language Scholarship and the National Security Language Initiative for Youth help produce graduates fluent in Arabic, Mandarin and Farsi—utterly essential skills for both diplomacy and national intelligence.

    Boren Scholars and Fellows are dedicated to harnessing their advanced linguistic and cultural skills within the federal government by securing a minimum of one year of employment in national security, actively strengthening the federal workforce and significantly elevating U.S. capabilities, deterrence and readiness.

    Meanwhile, China has built a centralized academic–military complex under its Military–Civil Fusion strategy. Top universities like Tsinghua and Beihang Universities are deeply integrated with the People’s Liberation Army, producing dual-use research in AI, quantum and hypersonics—technologies intended to challenge U.S. dominance. The National University of Defense Technology is a flagship institution in this network, known for dual-use supercomputing and aerospace research. This model is potent but currently lacks the kind of innovative potential of U.S. institutions.

    The U.S. system, by contrast, is decentralized, competitive and open. We often refer to this as “loose coupling”; the accompanying organizational dynamic is what enables so much of the innovative, interdisciplinary and cross-institutional work that U.S. higher education produces. But adequately funding this system is quickly becoming unsustainable and unpopular. The Trump administration is cutting funding for politically inconvenient fields—such as climate science, public health and international cooperation—and subjecting grant applications to political review. Many of these cuts target areas of academic inquiry that may appear obscure to the public but are fundamental to the foundational domains of national security. It is also worth noting that recent research suggests that the already high public and private returns to federally funded research are likely much higher than those reflected in current estimates.

    Focusing solely on weapons labs while neglecting other strategic fields is short-sighted and dangerous. Security is not merely about firepower—it’s about the stability of the knowledge-based society. Public health, basic sciences, environmental resilience, diplomacy and social cohesion are just as critical to preventing conflict as advanced missiles and cyber weapons. To be sure, our colleges and universities contribute, almost beyond measure, to the stability of U.S. civil society through each of these domains.

    Universities are not optional in the defense of this republic—they are indispensable. Undermine them and we hand our international competitors the high ground in both technology and ideas. In the contest for global leadership, the fight won’t just be won on battlefields. It will be won in classrooms, labs and libraries.

    Brian Heuser is an associate professor of the practice of international education policy at Peabody College of Vanderbilt University. For much of his career, he has worked on numerous projects related to national security education, including with the Boren Scholars Program, the former Edmund S. Muskie Graduate Fellowship Program and as a U.S. Embassy policy specialist to the Republic of Georgia.

    Source link

  • Understanding how inflation affects teacher well-being and career decisions

    Understanding how inflation affects teacher well-being and career decisions

    Key points:

    In recent years, the teaching profession has faced unprecedented challenges, with inflation emerging as a significant factor affecting educators’ professional lives and career choices. This in-depth examination delves into the complex interplay between escalating inflation rates and the self-efficacy of educators–their conviction in their capacity to proficiently execute their pedagogical responsibilities and attain the desired instructional outcomes within the classroom environment.

    The impact of inflation on teachers’ financial stability has become increasingly evident, with many educators experiencing a substantial decline in their “real wages.” While nominal salaries remain relatively stagnant, the purchasing power of teachers’ incomes continues to erode as the cost of living rises. This economic pressure has created a concerning dynamic where educators, despite their professional dedication, find themselves struggling to maintain their standard of living and meet basic financial obligations.

    A particularly troubling trend has emerged in which teachers are increasingly forced to seek secondary employment to supplement their primary income. Recent surveys indicate that approximately 20 percent of teachers now hold second jobs during the academic year, with this percentage rising to nearly 30 percent during summer months. This necessity to work multiple jobs can lead to physical and mental exhaustion, potentially compromising teachers’ ability to maintain the high levels of energy and engagement required for effective classroom instruction.

    The phenomenon of “moonlighting” among educators has far-reaching implications for teacher self-efficacy. When teachers must divide their attention and energy between multiple jobs, their capacity to prepare engaging lessons, grade assignments thoroughly, and provide individualized student support may be diminished. This situation often creates a cycle where reduced performance leads to decreased self-confidence, potentially affecting both teaching quality and student outcomes.

    Financial stress has also been linked to increased levels of anxiety and burnout among teachers, directly impacting their perceived self-efficacy. Studies have shown that educators experiencing financial strain are more likely to report lower levels of job satisfaction and decreased confidence in their ability to meet professional expectations. This psychological burden can manifest in reduced classroom effectiveness and diminished student engagement.

    Perhaps most concerning is the growing trend of highly qualified educators leaving the profession entirely for better-paying opportunities in other sectors. This “brain drain” from education represents a significant loss of experienced professionals who have developed valuable teaching expertise. The exodus of talented educators not only affects current students but also reduces the pool of mentor teachers available to guide and support newer colleagues, potentially impacting the professional development of future educators.

    The correlation between inflation and teacher attrition rates has become increasingly apparent, with economic factors cited as a primary reason for leaving the profession. Research indicates that districts in areas with higher costs of living and significant inflation rates experience greater difficulty in both recruiting and retaining qualified teachers. This challenge is particularly acute in urban areas where housing costs and other living expenses have outpaced teacher salary increases.

    Corporate sectors, technology companies, and consulting firms have become attractive alternatives for educators seeking better compensation and work-life balance. These career transitions often offer significantly higher salaries, better benefits packages, and more sustainable working hours. The skills that make effective teachers, such as communication, organization, and problem-solving, are highly valued in these alternative career paths, making the transition both feasible and increasingly common.

    The cumulative effect of these factors presents a serious challenge to the education system’s sustainability. As experienced teachers leave the profession and prospective educators choose alternative career paths, schools face increasing difficulty in maintaining educational quality and consistency. This situation calls for systematic changes in how we value and compensate educators, recognizing that teacher self-efficacy is intrinsically linked to their financial security and professional well-being.

    Latest posts by eSchool Media Contributors (see all)

    Source link

  • U of Md. Criticized for Charging Turning Point Security Fee

    U of Md. Criticized for Charging Turning Point Security Fee

    Sarah L. Voisin/The Washington Post via Getty Images

    University of Maryland officials are facing backlash for requiring the campus chapter of a conservative student organization to pay what chapter leaders called a “viewpoint discriminatory” security fee for an event on Wednesday, CBS News reported

    While university police staffed the event free of charge, officials required the chapter to hire its own security to conduct entrance screenings. The event, titled Fighting Like Charlie, featured Daily Wire senior editor Cabot Phillips and was held just over a month after Charlie Kirk, the founder of Turning Point USA, was shot and killed during an event at Utah Valley University. 

    “It’s basically saying anybody, if they want to threaten our chapter or threaten us because of our viewpoints and our speech, then the university, in turn, is going to impose financial burdens on us, or else we can’t have our events,” University of Maryland senior Connor Clayton, communications chair for the campus Turning Point USA chapter, told CBS News. “That is a very dangerous precedent to put on a Turning Point chapter.”

    University officials said the fee is routine and that they have required the same of other student organizations that host similar guest speaker events on campus, regardless of the speaker or message. 

    The Leadership Institute, a Virginia-based nonprofit that trains conservative activists and leaders, ultimately paid the fee—which amounted to $148—on behalf of the chapter. The event proceeded as planned, according to posts on the chapter’s Instagram account. 

    Source link

  • New York City workplace shooting exposes building security weaknesses

    New York City workplace shooting exposes building security weaknesses

    This audio is auto-generated. Please let us know if you have feedback.

    Last month’s mass shooting in New York City, like every mass shooting incident, is yet another wake-up call to education leaders and school safety experts about how to better protect their buildings and therefore the students and staff inside. This story, from our sister publication Facilities Dive, provides insight into how commercial facilities operators are responding, with takeaways for the education sector.

    The mass shooting that took place in Midtown Manhattan last month, which resulted in the deaths of a police officer and three others, puts a spotlight on how building operators can protect occupants in the face of armed assailants. The incident makes clear that access control is a critical factor, but not all access systems are the same, security specialists say. 

    Prior to the assailant entering the office skyscraper’s lobby and beginning his attack, cameras at 345 Park Avenue flagged the approaching gunman as a potential threat, Reuters reported

    A still frame of closed circuit television footage the outlet obtained, time-stamped just over a minute before police received the first emergency call about the shooting, shows a man holding an assault-style rifle at his side. The photo shows a yellow box around the figure generated by the building’s security system, which analyzes live video feeds for threats requiring instant action. The system was supposed to alert guards at the front security desk, a former federal official told Reuters.

    Protecting building occupants in the case of an emergency starts with access control, especially in the case of an active shooter, according to Josh Sullivan, chief operating officer of the ALIVE Active Shooter Survival Training Program, which shares best practices with organizations on responding to threats. 

    “Access control and the physical security measures in place can prevent a lot of things from happening in the first place,” Sullivan said. “There are multiple ways. No. 1, they have systems out there, like the one that was in place [at 345 Park Avenue] that just didn’t get used properly.” 

    Software is available that can connect to cameras, identify threats and lock down access controls, doors and other systems, Sullivan said. The software can also notify local authorities or call 911.  

    “Those things save valuable time,” he said. In some cases, the software automatically provides the security system login to the emergency dispatchers, who can provide it to the first responders, giving them “access to the camera’s live feed, more plans and to where things are in the building.”

    The technology is only part of the equation, however, Matthew Dumpert, global leader of enterprise security risk management at financial and risk advisory firm Kroll, told Reuters. “It takes significant resources, alarms to notify people [and] training to recognize it,” he said. 

    Considering the rate of active threats today, allocating those resources and having a plan is increasingly important for facilities managers, Sullivan says. 

    The OSHA general duty clause says that employers must take reasonable actions to ensure the safety of employees or guests from recognized hazards that are “likely to cause death or serious physical harm.” 

    “An active shooter, unfortunately in today’s world, is a common hazard,” Sullivan said. “It’s No. 3 overall in any workplace as the cause of injury or death. In healthcare and education, it’s No. 1.” 

    Stagnant technologies leave gaps in security

    Many organizations use access control technologies that are outdated, improperly configured or insecure, according to Tina D’Agostin, CEO of Alcatraz AI, a company that provides facial authentication hardware and software solutions to enterprise clients. 

    “When you look at what is deployed today, 90% of it is still badges and proximity cards,” said D’Agostin, noting that the first access card technology was released in 1983, with little innovation since. “Imagine using a TV or phone from the ’80s. That’s essentially what we’re doing in access control. In no other area of life would that be allowed to happen.” 

    Among their weaknesses, these cards can be easily cloned, she said.

    Facility managers might want to look at other technologies, including mobile technologies and biometric-based systems, she said. Each has its pros and cons, she said. 

    Among their cons, mobile devices are carried, just like an access card, so they can be lost, and using biometrics requires a trade-off between friction and convenience, she said. 

    Separate from these issues is the problem of tailgating, where unknown actors follow authorized employees or occupants into a space, bypassing access controls. 

    Source link

  • Penn to Lose Security Clearance in Trump Attack

    Penn to Lose Security Clearance in Trump Attack

    President Donald Trump signed a directive Wednesday removing the security clearances of University of Pennsylvania community members, the latest government action to pummel the president’s alma mater.

    In the directive, Trump, a 1968 Wharton School of Business graduate, ordered the Department of Justice to investigate Miles Taylor, a former senior Department of Homeland Security official who has criticized the president, including in a 2018 New York Times op-ed and in a book in which he alleges presidential misconduct during Trump’s first term.

    Taylor taught an undergraduate course at Penn in fall 2023 called The Future of Conservatism and the GOP, according to The Daily Pennsylvanian, and it’s this tie that has put Penn in the crosshairs.

    Trump’s memo asks the attorney general, the director of national intelligence and other relevant department and agency heads to suspend the security clearances held by Taylor “and any individuals at entities associated with Taylor, including the University of Pennsylvania.”

    According to The Philadelphia Inquirer, Penn does not conduct classified research and has no security clearance.

    “The University does not possess a government security clearance and cannot as a corporate entity possess classified material,” the website states. “It is the policy of the university not to accept agreements which require access to classified data, require university employees to obtain security clearances, or restrict the dissemination of the results.”

    Penn is also currently facing a $175 million funding freeze from the federal government, announced in March, related to participation of a transgender athlete on the women’s swimming team in 2022. The university was further affected by visa revocations of international students and scholars earlier this week.

    Source link

  • New Food Security Threats 5 Years After COVID-Era Effort to Feed All Kids – The 74

    New Food Security Threats 5 Years After COVID-Era Effort to Feed All Kids – The 74

    A multi-pronged attack on food aid by Republican lawmakers could mean more of the nation’s children will go hungry — both at home and at school.

    The U.S. Department of Agriculture recently cut two federal programs that provided roughly $1 billion in funding for the purchase of food by schools and food banks. 

    And the Community Eligibility Provision, which reimburses tens of thousands of schools that provide free breakfast and lunch to all students, may tighten its requirements, potentially pushing some 12 million kids out of the program.

    These moves come at the same time the House Republican budget plan calls for deep cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP. The program fed more than 42 million low-income people per month nationwide in 2023. In 2022, 40% were younger than 18.  

    This recent shift reflects a stark reversal of earlier, nationwide efforts to keep families fed during the pandemic. Many districts, such as Baltimore, organized grab-and-go meals sites days after schools were shuttered in March 2020 with no identification or personal information required. Those initiatives led to the nation’s food insecurity rate dropping to a 20-year low when it reached 10.2% in 2021, down from a 14.9% high a decade earlier, according to the USDA.

    It has since crept back up to 13.5% and now, five years after schools utilized USDA waivers to deliver meals in innovative ways, they are bracing for what could be massive cuts from the federal government.

    Latoya Roberson, manager at Mergenthaler Vocational-Technical High School in Baltimore (Baltimore City Public Schools) 

    Elizabeth A. Marchetta, executive director of food and nutrition services for Baltimore City Public Schools, said 31 campuses — serving 19,000 children — would lose out on free breakfast and lunch if the Community Eligibility Provision changes go through. They are among 393 schools and 251,318 children statewide who would be shut out. 

    “It would be devastating,” Marchetta said. “These are critical funds. If we are not being reimbursed for all of the meals we’re serving … the money has to come from somewhere else in the school district, so that is really not great.”

    Nearly 48,000 schools in more than 7,700 districts benefited from the Community Eligibility Provision in the 2023-24 school year. The program reimburses schools that provide universal free meals based on the percentage of their students who automatically qualify for free and reduced-price lunch because their families receive other types of assistance, like SNAP. 

    In 2023, after the COVID-era policy ended where any student could receive a free school meal regardless of income, President Biden lowered the percentage of high-need students required for a school to qualify from 40% to 25%, greatly expanding participation. 

    House GOP Budget Committee Chairman Jodey Arrington now seeks to raise the rate to 60%. The budget proposal would also require all students applying for free and reduced-price meals to submit documentation verifying their family income.

    School meal debt, a barometer of food insecurity among students, is already on the rise. It will almost certainly increase if universal school meals disappear for students whose families make too much to qualify for free and reduced-price lunch but too little to afford to buy meals at school. At the same time, kids who are eligible for free and reduced-price meals could lose that benefit if the required paperwork becomes harder. 

    In the fall of 2023, across 808 school districts, the median amount of school meal debt was $5,495. By the fall of 2024, that amount reached $6,900 across 766 districts, a 25% increase, according to the School Nutrition Association.

    It was just $2,000 a decade earlier. A trio of Democratic senators is pushing to erase the $262 million annual debt total, with Pennsylvania Sen. John Fetterman saying in 2023, “‘School lunch debt’ is a term so absurd that it shouldn’t even exist. That’s why I’m proud to introduce this bill to cancel the nation’s student meal debt and stop humiliating kids and penalizing hunger.”

    Research shows students benefit mightily from free meals: those who attend schools that adopted the Community Eligibility Provision saw lower rates of obesity compared to those who did not. Free in-school meals are also credited for boosting attendance among low-income children, improving classroom behavior and lowering suspensions.

    Joel Berg, CEO of Hunger Free America. 

    Joel Berg, the CEO of Hunger Free America, said further cuts will greatly harm the poorest students. 

    “Over the last few years, things have gone from bad to worse,” he said. “We were all raised seeing Frank Capra movies, where, in the end everything works out. But that’s not how the real world works. In the real world, when the economy gets a cold, poor people get cancer.”

    Hunger Free America found the number of Americans who didn’t have enough to eat over two one-week periods increased by 55.2% between August-September 2021 and August-September 2024. The states with the highest rates of food insecure children were Texas at 23.8%, Oklahoma at 23.2% and Nebraska at 22.6%. Georgia and Arkansas both came in at 22.4%. 

    The USDA slashed the $660 million Local Food for Schools Cooperative Agreement Program for 2025 — it allowed states to purchase local foods, including fresh fruits and vegetables, for distribution to schools and child care institutions — and $500 million from the Local Food Purchase Assistance Cooperative Agreement Program, which supported food banks nationwide. 

    Diane Pratt-Heavner, director of media relations for the School Nutrition Association, said that as families struggle with the high cost of groceries, the government should be doing more — not less — to bolster school meals and other food aid programs. 

    “We’re urging Congress not only to protect the federal Community Eligibility Provision, but to expand it,” Pratt-Heavner said. “Ideally, all students should have access to free school breakfast and lunch as part of their education.” 

    SNAP benefits stood at $4.80 per person per day through 2020 before jumping to more than $6 per person per day after they were adjusted for rising food and other costs. Even then, the higher amount was not enough to cover the cost of a moderately priced meal in most locations. 

    Republicans in Congress seek to cut the program by $230 billion over the next nine years, possibly by returning to the pre-pandemic allotment of $4.80 and/or expanding work-related requirements, said Salaam Bhatti, SNAP director at the Food Research & Action Center

    Another possibility, he said, is that SNAP costs could be pushed onto states — including those that can’t afford them. 

    “This would be an unfunded mandate,” Bhatti said. “States would have to take away from their discretionary spending to offset the cost and if it is not a mandate, then states in rural America and in the South that don’t have the budgets just won’t do it.” 

    Food-related funding decreases come as the child tax credit, created to help parents offset the cost of raising children, is also facing uncertainty, said Megan Curran, the director of policy at the Center on Poverty and Social Policy at Columbia University.

    The American Rescue Plan increased the amount of the child tax credit from $2,000 to $3,600 for qualifying children under age 6, and $3,000 for those under age 18. Many taxpayers received monthly advance payments in the second half of 2021, instead of waiting until tax filing season to receive the full benefits. The move cut child poverty nearly in half. The expanded child tax credit was allowed to lapse post-pandemic and now even the $2,000 credit could revert back to just $1,000

    All food-related and tax benefit cuts — plus the unknowns of Trump-era tariffs — will leave some Americans particularly vulnerable, Curran said. 

    “It’s shaping up to be a very precarious time for families,” she said, “especially families with children.”


    Get stories like these delivered straight to your inbox. Sign up for The 74 Newsletter



    Source link

  • BIG CHANGES to SNAP, Medicaid, Social Security & Student Loan Forgiveness – What You NEED to Know! (Low-Income Relief)

    BIG CHANGES to SNAP, Medicaid, Social Security & Student Loan Forgiveness – What You NEED to Know! (Low-Income Relief)

    If you’re worried about losing your benefits, you’re not alone. With new budget resolutions and lawsuits targeting SNAP, Medicaid, and student loan forgiveness, millions of Americans could be impacted.
     

     

    Source link