Why do tax payers’ representatives who fund NSLP program experience more difficulties in designing effective incentive structures for officials who manage that program than do a company’s shareholders who seek to change the incentives confronting firms’ managers? Concept Introduction: The National School Lunch Program (NSLP) is one of the biggest food and nourishment help programs in the United States, bolstering many kids each day. Amid the 2006 school year, the program served 28 million snacks every day, overall, at a cost of $8 billion for the year. School supper suppliers confront the undertaking of serving nutritious and engaging school snacks, including free and decreased cost snacks for low-salary understudies, and doing as such under spending requirements. As of late, questions have been raised about the program's capacity to meet this objective, particularly as the principle nourishment issue has moved from undernutrition to overweight and heftiness. Open worry for the program has concentrated on whether it is adding to the developing issue of youth corpulence and on the nature of nourishments accessible to school-children. Accordingly, numerous states and territories have forced stringent nutritious necessities on both NSLP suppers and "aggressive sustenance’s" (different nourishments and drinks accessible in the school). School feast suppliers have grappled with meeting these limitations and other program necessities while taking care of increasing expenses and empowering understudy cooperation. In the interim, issues at the Federal level incorporate how to help school supper suppliers enhance the dietary nature of sustenance’s filled in and also how to adjust program access and uprightness, especially with respect to guaranteeing that ineligible understudies don't get free or decreased cost lunches.

Question

Want to see the full answer?

Answer 1

Question

Chapter 5, Problem EFCT

To determine

Why do tax payers’ representatives who fund NSLP program experience more difficulties in designing effective incentive structures for officials who manage that program than do a company’s shareholders who seek to change the incentives confronting firms’ managers?

Concept Introduction:

The National School Lunch Program (NSLP) is one of the biggest food and nourishment help programs in the United States, bolstering many kids each day. Amid the 2006 school year, the program served 28 million snacks every day, overall, at a cost of $8 billion for the year. School supper suppliers confront the undertaking of serving nutritious and engaging school snacks, including free and decreased cost snacks for low-salary understudies, and doing as such under spending requirements.

As of late, questions have been raised about the program's capacity to meet this objective, particularly as the principle nourishment issue has moved from undernutrition to overweight and heftiness. Open worry for the program has concentrated on whether it is adding to the developing issue of youth corpulence and on the nature of nourishments accessible to school-children. Accordingly, numerous states and territories have forced stringent nutritious necessities on both NSLP suppers and "aggressive sustenance’s" (different nourishments and drinks accessible in the school).

School feast suppliers have grappled with meeting these limitations and other program necessities while taking care of increasing expenses and empowering understudy cooperation. In the interim, issues at the Federal level incorporate how to help school supper suppliers enhance the dietary nature of sustenance’s filled in and also how to adjust program access and uprightness, especially with respect to guaranteeing that ineligible understudies don't get free or decreased cost lunches.

Expert Solution & Answer

Want to see the full answer?

Check out a sample textbook solution

See solution

Students have asked these similar questions

16:10 ← BEC 3701 - Assignments-... KWAME NKRUMAH UNIVERSITY TEACHING FOR EXCELLENCE SCHOOL OF BUSINESS STUDIES DEPARTMENT OF ECONOMICS AND FINANCE ADVANCED MICRO-ECONOMICS (BEC 3701) Assignments INSTRUCTIONS: Check instructions below: LTE 1) Let u(q1,q2) = ln q₁ + q2 be the (direct) utility function, where q₁ and q2the two goods. Denote P₁ and P2 as the prices of those two goods and let M be per period money income. Derive each of the following: a) the ordinary or Marshallian demand functions q₁ = d₂ (P₁, P₂, M) for i = 1,2 [3 Marks] b) the compensated or Hicksian demand functions q₁ = h₂ (P₁, P2, M) for i = 1,2 [3 Marks] c) the Indirect Utility Function uº = v(P₁, P2, M) [3 Marks] d) the Expenditure Function E(P1, P2, U°) [3 Marks] e) Draw a diagram of the solution. There should be two graphs, one above the other; the first containing the indifference curves and budget constraint that characterize the solution to the consumer's choice problem; the second characterizing the demand…

How would you answer the question in the News Wire “Future Living Standards”? Why?

al Problems (v) T (ix) F 1. Out of total number of 2807 women, who were interviewed for employment in a textile factory, 912 were from textile areas and the rest from non-textile areas. Amongst the married women, who belonged to textile areas, 347 were having some work experience and 173 did not have work experience, while for non-textile areas the corresponding figures were 199 and 670 respectively. The total number of women having no experience was 1841 of whom 311 resided in textile areas. Of the total number of women, 1418 were unmarried and of these the number of women having experience in the textile and non-textile areas was 254 and 166 respectively. Tabulate the above information. [CA. (Foundation), May 2000 Exactly (14) of the total employees of a sugar mill were these were married and one-half