Page images
PDF
EPUB

sary, including prosecution for fraud under applicable Federal statutes. If FNS determines that any part of the money received by a State agency, or food purchased or vouchers redeemed with WIC program funds were, through State agency or local agency negligence or fraud, misused or otherwise diverted from the WIC program purposes, the State agency shall, on demand by FNS, pay to FNS a sum equal to the amount of the money or the value of the food or vouchers so misused or diverted. Further, if FNS determines that any part of the money received by a State agency, or food purchased or vouchers redeemed with WIC program funds, were lost as a result of thefts, embezzlements, or unexplained causes, the State agency shall, on demand by FNS, pay to FNS a sum equal to the amount of the money or the value of the food or vouchers so lost. The State agency shall have full opportunity to submit evidence, explanation or information concerning alleged instances of noncompliance or diversion before a final determination is made in such cases.

(b) Requests for information or assistance on the WIC program and all applications, transmittals, agreements or other documents required by this part shall be sent to the FNSRO serving the State as listed below :

(1) Connecticut, Delaware, District of Columbia, Maine, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Vermont, Virginia, West Virginia; U.S. Department of Agriculture, FNS, Northeast Region, 707 Alexander Road, Princeton, New Jersey 08540.

(2) Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi, North Carolina, Puerto Rico, South Carolina, Tennessee, Virgin Islands; U.S. Department of Agriculture, FNS, Southeast Region, 1100 Spring Street NW., Atlanta, Georgia 30309.

(3) Illinois, Indiana, Iowa, Kansas, Michigan, Minnesota, Missouri, Nebraska, Ohio, Wisconsin; U.S. Department of Agriculture, FNS, Midwest Region, 536 South Clark Street, Chicago, Illinois 60605.

(4) Arkansas, Colorado, Louisiana, Montana, New Mexico, North Dakota, Oklahoma, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Wyoming: U.S. Department of Agriculture, FNS, West-Central Region, 1100 Commerce Street, Room 5-D-22, Dallas, Texas 75202.

(5) Alaska, American Samoa, Arizona, California, Guam, Hawaii, Idaho, Nevada, Oregon, Trust Territory, Washington: U.S. Department of Agriculture, FNS, Western Region, 550 Kearney Street, Room 400 San Francisco, California 94108.

(c) FNS shall issue instructions or procedures to implement the provisions of this part.

(d) Nothing contained in this part shall prevent a State agency from imposing additional requirements for participation in the WIC program which are not inconsistent with the provisions of this part.

NOTE: The reporting and/or record keeping requirements contained herein have been approved by the Office of Management and Budget in accordance with the Federal Reports Act of 1942.

Effective date. This part shall become effective on July 13, 1973.
Signed at Washington, D.C., on July 6, 1973.

CLAYTON YEUTTER,

Assistant Secretary.

[FR Doc. 73-14024 Filed 7-6–73; 11:35 am]

BILLINGS AREA OFFICE,
INDIAN HEALTH SERVICE,
January 30, 1974.

SUGGESTED NEWS RELEASE-WIC PROJECT

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has granted the Montana State Department of Health and Environmental Sciences up to $133,000 for a supplemental food program on the Fort Peck and Northern Cheyenne Reservations. The project, known as WIC (Women-Infants-Children), will make certain foods available to women who are pregnant or breast feeding and to children less than four years old. The foods will supplement the diet at the time when health is particularly important for the child's future. The program, which, must be conducted as a component of health care, will be administered by the Indian Health Service on the two reservations.

All women and children who are receiving maternity or well child care through the Indian Health Service and reside in the reservation communities are eligible for the supplemental foods.

Available foods will be iron fortified infant formula, fresh eggs, milk, cereal, and orange juice. Dried skim milk, evaporated milk, or cheese may be substituted for fresh milk. The foods will be obtained from participating grocers in the reservation communities. Vouchers which can be exchanged at the grocery for the foods will be issued at the Indian Health Service clinics.

The Fort Peck Reservation was chosen for this program because of the excessive number of reservation children under one year of age who die each year. The infant death rate for the Fort Peck Reservation remains three times that of other reservations in Montana and shows no downward trend. The WIC Project will assist the Indian Health Service staff in their effort to provide prenatal and postpartum care to the mothers and well child care to the infants and children. The proportion of pregnant women who seek prenatal care is the lowest for Northern Cheyenne women than anywhere else in the State. Only half of the women present themselves early enough for the care to have a favorable effect on the outcome of the pregnancy. As a result, many of the pregnancies have medical complications affecting the health of the mother or baby. The WIC Project will provide a needed improvement in the diet of the pregnant woman and will encourage earlier and more regular care during the pregnancy.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture requires periodic health evaluations of the infants and children participating in the WIC Project. These evaluations will be done by the Indian Health Service staff in the well child clinics. The evaluations will consist of measurement to determine growth and tests for anemia, all of which are ordinarily done during well child care.

Through the WIC Project, information which will help her improve food buying and the diet of her family will be provided the mother.

The project will start about March 1, 1974. Further information may be obtained at the Indian Health Service clinics at Poplar, Wolf Point and Lame Deer. C. H. MCCRACKEN, M.D.

FOOD AND NUTRITION

(Newsletter of the Food and Nutrition Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, July 12, 1973, No. 30)

PILOT SUPPLEMENTAL FOOD PROGRAM FOR WOMEN, INFANTS AND CHILDREN FNS has announced the start of a pilot special supplemental food program that will provide pregnant and lactating women, and children under 4 years old, with nutritious foods.

The program, to be carried out by local health agencies under Public Law 92-433, will help USDA identify the benefits of food in combating physical and mental damages that might affect malnourished infants.

Regulations governing the Special Supplemental Food Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) were announced on July 6.

The pilot WIC program will operate through June 30, 1974, in selected areas. The delivery system may include distribution of food at health clinics, issuance of food vouchers redeemable at retail stores, or any other method a State selects. The Department will provide cash grants to health departments, or comparable State agencies, to make supplemental foods available. A WIC program may be carried out in any area, in both food stamp and food distribution areas.

Project areas are required to maintain medical records on participants. A local agency may apply for the program if:

It provides health services to residents of areas in which a substantial number of persons have low incomes.

Its staff includes competent medical personnel to examine persons receiving health services.

Its facilities include equipment for conducting a series of tests.
Participants are eligible for the pilot program if:

They reside in an approved project area.

They are eligible for medical treatment at reduced cost from a local agency serving the project area in which they reside.

They are determined by competent medical personnel of the local agency to be in need of supplemental food.

The 5 FNS Regional Offices started immediately to contact State Health Departments, to advise them of operating details of the new program, and to determine their interest in participating.

FNS REGIONAL BOUNDARIES CONFORM TO FEDERAL REGIONS

FNS HAS CHANGED its regional boundaries to conform to the pattern of the Standard Federal Regions.

While the new FNS boundary lines will follow those of the Standard Federal Regions, FNS will combine the 10 SFR into five FNS regions.

States included in the FNS Northeast Region-which will cover the same area as SFR I, II, and III-are Conn., Del., Maine, Md., N.H., N.J., N.Y., Pa., R.I., Va., Vt., W. Va., Puerto Rico, and the Virgin Islands.

The FNS Southeast Region will cover the SFR IV and will include Ala., Fla., Ga., Ky., Miss., N.C., and S.C.

The FNS Midwest Region will cover Ill., Ind., Iowa., Kans., Mich., Minn., Mo., Ohio, Nebr., and Wis.-the same area as SFR V and VII.

The FNS West-Central Region-now termed Southwest-will include Ark., Colo., La., Mont., N. Mex., N. Dak., Okla., S. Dak., Tex., Utah, and Wyo.; it will cover SFR VI and VIII.

The following States will be included in the FNS Western Region, which will cover the SFR IX and X: Alaska, Ariz., Calif., Hawaii, Oreg., Nev., Wash., Guam, American Samoa, and the Trust Territory.

The change will be gradual, starting now and continuing over the next 3 months, to be completed Sept. 1. The change will be made later in Puerto Ricoand the Virgin Islands.

Locations of the five FNS regional offices will continue to be:

Northeast: 707 Alexander Rd., Princeton, N.J. 08550;

Southeast: 1100 Spring St., N.W., Atlanta, Ga. 30309;

Midwest: 536 S. Clark St., Chicago, Ill. 60605;
West-Central: 1100 Commerce St., Dallas, Tex. 75202;
Western: 550 Kearny St., San Francisco, Calif. 94108.

[merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][merged small][graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][merged small]

FUNDING SUMMARY-THE SPECIAL SUPPLEMENTAL FOOD PROGRAM FOR WOMEN, INFANTS, AND CHILDREN-WIC

I. FISCAL 1974 (JULY 1, 1973-JUNE 30, 1974) (UNDER PUBLIC LAW 92-433) The courts ordered USDA to spend $40 million for WIC in fiscal 1974. In a series of announcements last year, USDA committed the entire $40 million:

For the first 163 grantees (based on 6 months of operations).
For the medical evaluation (based on 6 months of operations).
For the next 53 grantees (based on 5 months of operations) -

Total

(Million)

$28.9

.4

10.7

40.0

But because programs started late, a substantial part of the $40 million was not spent. March 6, 1974, USDA announced that another $3.9 million in grants had been made, these based on 3 months of operations. Despite these new grants, more money is still available and will almost certainly be distributed this fiscal year. That means there will be even more new grantees.

Excluding the medical evaluation as a fixed cost and using March 1 as the average date, the following amounts have been saved:

[blocks in formation]

The March 6th grants bring the annualized rate of expenditure for WIC to over $99 million.

Monthly rates for each set of grants, $4.817 plus 2.140 plus 1.300_---
Yearly rate for all grants for programs---
Yearly rate for medical evaluation___

Total projected annual expenditures for WIC‒‒‒‒‒‒‒

(In millions)

$8.257

99.084

.4

99.484

II. FISCAL 1975 (JULY 1, 1974-JUNE 30, 1975) (UNDER PUBLIC LAW 93–150) At present only $40 million is available for WIC in fiscal 1975. For existing programs to continue, Congress would have to provide an additional $60 million. For expansion, even more money would be necessary.

U.S. SENATE,

COMMITTEE ON APPROPRIATIONS,
Washington, D.C., March 27, 1974.

Hon. JAMES B. ALLEN,
Chairman, Subcommittee on Agricultural Research and General Legislation,
Senate Committee on Agriculture and Forestry, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: In connection with your Subcommittee's hearings on S. 2871, to continue the USDA's commodity distribution program beyond June 30 this year, I am enclosing a copy of the March 15 letter received from Mr. Myron B. Thompson, Director of the Department of Social Services and Housing in the State of Hawaii.

Mr. Thompson cites facts that are pertinent to the question of extension of the Department's authority to purchase and distribute commodities for schools and public institutions.

[blocks in formation]

DEAR SENATOR FONG: We are writing to request your kokua in supporting S. 2871 or H.R. 12168 which would require USDA to continue to purchase commodities on the open market for schools and institutions. This authority expires on June 30, 1974 and S. 2871 or H.R. 12168 would extend the authority for another two years.

After June 30, 1974 (if an extension is not granted) schools and institutions would receive cash rather than donated foods. We are concerned that the cash method or the donated food method will not be sufficient to provide the

amount of food currently received due to inflationary prices. In other words, the schools cannot purchase at existing prices the kinds and quantities of foods they have been receiving under the donated food system.

The school lunch program in Hawaii (and Samoa and Guam) would be adversely affected if an extension is not granted. Also, the people of the Trust Territory is not included in the Food Stamp Act.

American Samoa, the Trust Territories and Guam depend heavily upon the Commodity Distribution Program to provide foods that would otherwise be unobtainable for school feeding programs.

In Hawaii school food services, high utilization of donated commodities has helped the State to maintain the low 25¢ charge for student lunches. Continuation of the Commodity Distribution Program with increased appropriations necessitated by rapidly rising food costs to maintain current level of services would be most beneficial to the children served by these programs.

The American School Food Services Association, the national organization of school lunch people, is in favor of extending USDA's authority to purchase foods in the open market.

In addition, as we wrote you earlier this month, we seek your support of H.R. 12168 or S. 2871 which would increase the federal matching of all costs incurred by the State in administering the Food Stamp Program.

[blocks in formation]

Chairman, Senate Agriculture and Forestry Committee, Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: Enclosed is a copy of a letter I have received from Mr. Clyde Carter, President of Riceland Foods in Stuttgart, Arkansas. I believe the Committee will find Mr. Carter's letter most informative, and I would appreciate your including it in the hearing record on S. 2871. With best wishes, I am Sincerely yours,

Enclosure.

Hon. J. W. FULBRIGHT,

Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.

J. W. FULBRIGHT,

U.S. Senate.

RICELAND FOODS,

Stuttgart, Ark., February 11, 1974.

Subject: Senate bill No. S. 2871 and House bill No. H.R. 12168.

DEAR SENATOR FULBRIGHT: For several months, this office has been in contact with the Food and Nutrition Service in Washington concerning their time table on switching from commodities to food stamps for needy families, beginning July 1, 1974. This directive to Food and Nutrition Service is contained in the farm bill, Public Law 93-86, which became effective upon printing in the Federal Register, September 10, 1973, Volume 38, No. 174. I feel we should support the extension of the purchasing authority by Food and Nutrition Service due to the following problems (there may be others), which come to mind: 1. The cost of the food stamps versus commodities will be sharply higher. Our firm and others offer competitive bids on each car of rice, oil, and shortening needed. Too, recipients are usually among the least educated of our society, who ordinarily buy mostly items advertised on national television. As a rule, national brands run 20 to 40% higher than house brands or regional brands. Items purchased by USDA cost 10 to 20% less than house or regional brands due to the competitive bidding on each shipment.

2. It's possible to counterfeit food stamps. It's not possible to counterfeit actual commodities.

3. Stamps are much more vulnerable to pilferage, or theft, than the actual commodity.

4. We have come through a period when competitors (national brands) actually withdrew from the shortening and oil market due to a disagreement,

« PreviousContinue »