LINCOLN – Sherry Brooks-Nelson has been very busy in her kitchen preparing chili, spaghetti and meatballs with bell peppers, and even fresh cornbread. The 66-year-old retiree most recently worked as a middle school cafeteria worker, and as the sole provider for her two teenage granddaughters, she doesn’t always have the resources to cook these big meals.

Nebraska’s Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer program, a federal initiative to feed hungry kids during the long summer months, helped Brooks-Nelson and thousands of families that would’ve otherwise gone hungry.

Over the summer, the extra $40 per month per child for three months helped families across the state buy fresh produce they don’t usually have in their grocery budget, such as cabbage, spinach, cauliflower, broccoli, apples and bananas.

“We’re able to get some things that we’re not used to eating because we just don’t have the money,” Brooks-Nelson said. “It’s a lot of money for me because I know how to stretch it. We love spinach and cabbage around here.”

But families like Brooks-Nelson’s in Nebraska almost didn’t get summer EBT benefits.

Last December, Nebraska was under the national spotlight when Gov. Jim Pillen rejected $18 million in grocery-buying federal funds from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to help feed low-income Nebraskans, telling the media he didn’t “believe in welfare.” But in February, Pillen changed course after young Nebraskans and state lawmakers from both political parties convinced him to opt into the program.

Pillen’s initial reasoning for not opting into summer EBT was his argument that Nebraska’s Summer Food Service Program, which created a system of sites where children could access free meals, was adequate enough and helped provide important touch points for check-ins with families.

But advocates and lawmakers said it wasn’t enough, including Republican state Sen. Ray Aguilar, who prioritized a bill urging the state to opt into summer EBT. He had heard from former and current school administrators in Grand Island, a city in his district just west of Lincoln, that the area had the highest rate of students eligible for free and reduced lunches in the state.

“They were well aware that in the summertime, without cafeteria service, there’s kids going hungry,” Aguilar told USA TODAY. “That was an important reason, as far as I was concerned. Hearing from them, and coupled with the fact that I don’t want to see any kids go hungry, I thought it was kind of a no-brainer for me to jump on that.”

But more than a dozen states — all with Republican governors — refused the federal funds, including Alabama, Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah and Wyoming, according to the USDA.

According to the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Services, the state distributed about $28 million in summer EBT funding to over 76,000 households.

“Under Governor Pillen’s direction, DHHS successfully developed the “Nebraska way” of implementing the S-EBT program while also identifying additional needs of children and their families through multiple touchpoints,” the Nebraska Department of Health and Human Service said in a statement to USA TODAY.

Eric Savaiano, a program manager at Nebraska Appleseed, a non-profit that advocates for underserved communities, said they heard from families who were “excited” about receiving EBT cards. He noted that while summer meal sites help families while school is out, they aren’t as accessible in the state’s rural areas, and summer EBT helped fill those gaps.

“We’re a very rural state, and it’s hard to go to those summer food service program sites,” Savaiano said. “Although there’s some new options that make it a little bit easier and spreads a bit more of the meals around, this is a program that reaches a ton more kids and can be a real lifeline.”

‘It’s just one thread’

While Nebraska rolled out summer EBT, across the state’s eastern border in the neighboring state of Iowa, Gov. Kim Reynolds chose not to have the state participate in the program this year, arguing that it was unsustainable and didn’t adequately address the state’s high childhood obesity rates.

“An EBT card does nothing to promote nutrition at a time when childhood obesity has become an epidemic,” Reynolds said in a December press release.

Luke Elzinga, chair of the Iowa Hunger Coalition, saw the negative impacts of the decision, with more children using food pantries this summer compared to past years when pandemic benefits were going out.

“In Iowa, we had 245,000 kids who would have qualified for this. It was $29 million in benefits could have gone out, and that certainly would have had an impact,” Elzinga said.

Alicia Christensen, the director of advocacy and policy for Together Omaha, an organization focused on combating homelessness and hunger, said there was a difference in traffic between their food pantry in Omaha, Neb., and their Council Bluffs location right across the border in Iowa.

Christensen noted that although the differences in food pantry usage can’t be attributed to one program, it didn’t hurt to have summer EBT in Nebraska, saying it worked in combination with other food and nutrition programs to help strengthen both food and nutrition security.

“It’s just one thread in different things that make up the whole cloth of that supportive system,” Christensen said. “The school lunch and breakfast program is a component, along with SNAP and WIC. And then summer EBT is just another. The more threads you have woven in there, the stronger it’s going to be, and when you take one of those out, it shifts all those resources downstream.”