PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in Senate · Apr 3, 2014
School Food Modernization Act - Amends the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act to direct the Secretary of Agriculture (USDA) to issue loan guarantees to local educational agencies (LEAs) or school food authorities administering or operating a school lunch program, tribal organizations, or consortia of such entities to finance the construction, remodeling, or expansion of infrastructure or the purchase of durable equipment that will facilitate their provision of healthy meals through the school lunch program.
Requires the Secretary to give a preference to applicants that demonstrate a substantial or disproportionate need for food service infrastructure or durable equipment. Prohibits a loan guarantee from covering more than 80% of a loan's principal.
Requires the Secretary to establish fees for the loan guarantee program that: (1) are sufficient to cover the federal government's administrative costs in operating the program, and (2) may be based on the risk premium associated with the particular loan or loan guarantee.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary to award competitive matching grants to assist LEAs or school food authorities administering or operating a school lunch program, tribal organizations, or consortia of such entities in purchasing the durable equipment and infrastructure they need to serve healthier meals and improve food safety.
Requires the Secretary to give grant priority to applicants that: (1) have identified and are reasonably expected to meet an unmet local or community need, and (2) are located in states that have enacted funding measures to assist them with such purchases.
Prohibits such a grant from covering more than 80% of the total cost of the durable equipment and infrastructure.
Directs the Secretary to award competitive matching grants to experienced third-party training institutions to provide school food service personnel with the training and technical assistance they need to meet updated school lunch program nutrition standards.
Prohibits such a grant from covering more than 80% of the total cost of the training and technical assistance.
People & committees
Sen. Collins, Susan M. [R-ME] · R–ME
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Sponsor introductory remarks on measure. (CR S2164-2165)
Introduced in Senate
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 12, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze S.2210 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine S.2210 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine S.2210 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine S.2210 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.