Ending universal school meals: student perspectives on how policy reversal shapes hunger, stigma, and learning

During the COVID-19 pandemic, federal waivers allowed schools participating in federal school meal programs to provide free breakfast and lunch, regardless of income. When these waivers expired in June 2022, most states returned to means-tested eligibility. This study examined middle and high school students' experiences transitioning from Universal School Meals (USM) to a means-tested system.

We conducted 36 semi-structured interviews with students in Texas (n = 21) and Arizona (n = 15) to explore their experiences before, during, and after USM implementation.

Students reported seven themes after USM ended: (1) witnessing food insecurity among peers; (2) hunger interfering with learning; (3) increased financial stress and anxiety; (4) meal denial and debt; (5) reduced participation; (6) renewed stigma and social hierarchies; and (7) desire for USM restoration, perceiving means-testing as unfair. Students described that USM reduced economic distinctions and supported learning. Post-USM, they observed peers skipping meals, sharing food, struggling to concentrate, and experiencing public embarrassment when unable to pay.

Students described the return to means-testing as inequitable and harmful. Policies that restore or expand USM could reduce stigma, improve nutritional access, and support educational outcomes. Moreover, USM should be considered as a public health and educational investment rather than a temporary measure.