Foodlinks America - June 6, 2008
Foodlinks America - June 6, 2008
In this issue:
• Price Hikes, Cancellations, Delays Make Emergency Food Road Bumpier
• Food Banks Document Growth of Hunger
• Food Stamp Facts
• School Food News and Notes
• Obesity Round-Up
• Reports from the Field – Fairfax, VA
• Small Bites
Foodlinks America is published 24 times a year by California Emergency Foodlink in Sacramento, CA and distributed by Weinberg & Vauthier Consulting, 6412 CR 116, Burnet, TX 78611; Zy Weinberg and Barbara Vauthier, Editors; email: bvauthier@tefapalliance.org.
Foodlinks America is not copyrighted, so the information can be freely shared with colleagues and friends, though attribution for reprinted articles is appreciated. For archived issues of Foodlinks America, go to: www.tefapalliance.org. To request a free subscription to the newsletter or to submit story ideas, contact Barbara Vauthier at: bvauthier@tefapalliance.org.
Price Hikes, Cancellations, Delays Make Emergency Food Road Bumpier
The promised food never arrived. A caravan of chicken leg quarters – 60 truckloads with approximately 600,000 four-pound family-sized packages – never sent; the order cancelled due to “limitations on production capacity.”
As a result, California Emergency Foodlink (CEF) has less food to distribute this season. “This was a huge disappointment to California,” said Melinda Annis, Senior Vice President for Food Programs at CEF in Sacramento. Moreover, “It comes at the worst possible time, when children are out of school and poor households are faced with more meals to prepare,” she added.
For food banks and other emergency food providers around the country struggling to garner enough food to feed the hungry in their areas, such events are occurring with disturbing frequency. Within a week after CEF’s order for chicken leg quarters was axed, another order for canned chicken was cancelled by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), which provides CEF with commodities under The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP).
The situation was the same on the other side of the country. “I just got notice today that our load of applesauce was cancelled,” Randy Mraz, TEFAP director for the Maine Department of Agriculture, Food, and Rural Resources, told Foodlinks America on June 4, 2008. “On top of that [USDA] messages said that the chicken legs were cancelled on May 29 and canned chicken on June 2,” Mraz added.
“The loss of these commodities will have a large impact on our rural emergency food organizations,” Mraz continued. “Protein items are especially hard to find and the cancellation of these chicken orders will make these scarce items even more so. The value of these much needed bonus commodities represents about 10 percent of our entitlement total; not an easy loss to make up for,” he lamented.
And, foods that do get delivered through USDA’s TEFAP system are costing more. CEF tracked the price of 33 commodity foods ordered this spring and 85 percent of them increased in cost between the time the food item was offered by USDA and when it was actually purchased. Increases ranged from less than one percent to over 100 percent.
The recently-passed Farm Bill upped entitlement spending on TEFAP commodities by 78 percent, from $140 million to $250 million annually. But radical price spikes are already significantly undercutting the hard-won legislative gains. “A truckload of macaroni is now $32,283; in April of 2007 that same product was $14,994,” noted Maine’s Mraz. “Cost increases such as this easily will eat up any extra entitlement dollars. Not all products have gone up this much but macaroni is a staple and is now too expensive for us to buy at this time.”
The price increases are creating havoc for TEFAP and food relief organizations nationwide. “When TEFAP entitlement food prices increase significantly AFTER states place orders, it makes nutritional and financial planning difficult and reduces states’ food purchasing power,” explained Jonathan Bader, Programs Manager for the Wisconsin Community Action Programs Association (WISCAP) in Madison, who orders TEFAP food statewide. “This problem is an additional dimension of the serious problem of food price inflation,” Bader said.
In addition to cancellations, TEFAP agencies often face significant delays in receiving food, much of it bartered by USDA in swaps with manufacturers. At the end of May, 2008, for example, Wisconsin was advised that, not only were all of its shipments of chicken leg quarters cancelled, but the delivery of canned chicken and canned tuna that it ordered some time ago will be delayed by several months. “Cancellations and delays of barter food are occurring regularly. We are concerned this early trend could presage delays or cancellations of the remaining barter foods we have on order, which families critically need,” said WISCAP’s Bader. “While we appreciate the USDA’s efforts to secure these foods in the first place, unfortunately, 46 percent of all of our planned barter food deliveries to date have been either cancelled or delayed.”
Food Banks Document Growth of Hunger
Emergency food organizations across America are reporting a significant increase in the number of people seeking assistance, while they are simultaneously experiencing a drop in food inventories that is forcing many food banks, soup kitchens, and food pantries to cut back food distribution and adjust operations to meet demands. A “Local Impact Survey” of some 90 percent of food banks around the nation, released in May 2008 by America’s Second Harvest, found that 99 percent of the groups were serving more people than last year – 15 to 20 percent more on average.
Food bank representatives said increasing food and fuel prices are the primary factors driving the increases in need. Other factors included low wages, inadequate food stamp benefits, unemployment, underemployment, and rent or mortgage costs.
With large numbers of families turning to them for aid, food banks and food pantries have tried to stretch their resources to meet the growing need, but many are falling short. Second Harvest reported that “More than 80 percent of the food banks surveyed indicated an inability to adequately meet the demands of hungry people without having to reduce the amount of food or their operations.” About half of the emergency food sources have reduced either the amount and/or the variety of food provided to their recipient agencies.
Second Harvest explained that part of the problem is that, “food banks have experienced about a $200 million decline in government commodities entering the charitable food distribution system because a healthy farm economy has required less intervention from the federal government to buy surplus food to support farmers. As a result, there is a growing trend among food banks purchasing food, rather than relying solely on donated food sources, to feed people who need help.” Moreover, the tables have turned for some in the farm and food industry: Second Harvest noted “former donors now standing in line to receive food assistance.”
“I’ve seen a lot of empty shelves around the country, and it is not hard to imagine in this weakening economy how stretched food banks are to find food,” said Vicki Escarra, President of Chicago-based Second Harvest. “This coupled with such large increases in the number of people we need to feed has left food banks to make very difficult choices. Unfortunately, in some cases, agencies are shutting down or turning clients away.”
For more details and information on the Local Impact Survey, go to: http://www.secondharvest.org/news_room/2008_press_releases/051208.html.
Food Stamp Facts
Participation holds steady: Food stamp usage nationwide continued at a high level in February 2008, the latest month for which data is available. More than 27.6 million people received benefits that month, down about 30,000 from January 2008, but up over 1.5 million from February 2007.
Spotlight shifts to implementation: With final passage of the Farm Bill, the emphasis in the Food Stamp Program in the coming months will be on getting all the changes in place by the October 1, 2008 deadline. States will need to re-figure benefit levels for participating households, taking into account a new standard deduction level of $144 a month for households with three or fewer members, a deduction for actual dependent care expenses, and a revised minimum benefit level, which is expected to rise to $14 from the current $10. Participants with retirement and dedicated education savings accounts will be allowed to exclude them from program resources.
Numerous other changes, large and small, will be implemented or considered. Some new procedures, like simplified annual reporting, offering transitional food stamps for those leaving the rolls, splitting allotments into two or more monthly issuances, and allowing people to apply for benefits over the phone, will be at state option. Others, such as revised employment and training activities, a greater emphasis on nutrition education, and changing the program name from the Food Stamp Program to the “Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program,” or SNAP, will affect participants nationwide.
Of the $10.3 billion in increased spending on nutrition programs contained in the Farm Bill, $7.8 billion was dedicated to food stamp improvements. But with that program covering more than 27 million people, most households will see an increase in benefits of less than $10 per month; the adjustment of the standard deduction alone is pegged at $5.4 billion. Nonetheless, the need for revised policies and implementation of food stamp Farm Bill provisions “provide[s] great opportunities for advocates and other stakeholders to reintroduce the program to eligible non-participants, including vulnerable elderly, for whom program improvements can be significant,” noted the Food Research and Action Center (FRAC) in Washington, D.C., which will be monitoring implementation.
Food stamps and obesity ties examined: For most Americans – specifically men and children – participation in the Food Stamp Program does not increase the likelihood of being overweight or obese. Women are the only group for whom multiple studies have shown a potential link between program participation and body weight. An update on research related to “Food Stamps and Obesity: What We Know and What It Means,” was recently issued by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in its periodic research magazine for June 2008, Amber Waves.
Addressing obesity within the context of the Food Stamp Program is a tough assignment because of the program’s broad reach. USDA notes that, “Devising policy changes for household members who may be at risk of gaining weight, without harming those who are not but still need food assistance, is a difficult challenge. To review the study, go to:
http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/June08/Features/FoodStampsObesity.htm.
School Food News and Notes
Gearing up for fruit and vegetable start-up: The recently-passed Farm Bill and the fiscal year 2008 Consolidated Appropriations Act are responsible for the expansion of the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program (FFVP) to all states, along with a funding increase to $150 million a year. A May 15, 2008 memo from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) provides information to the 37 states new to the FFVP on when funds are coming (each state will initially get around $253,000) and how they may be allocated to meet program guidelines. For more detailed information, go to: http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/Governance/Policy-Memos/2008/SP_22-2008.pdf.
Listening session locations provided: Additional information on the dates, times, and locations of USDA’s regional Child Nutrition Reauthorization Listening Sessions this summer is now available. The sessions offer parents, participants, food service workers, advocates, and others an opportunity to recommend changes to child nutrition programs, including school lunch, school breakfast, child and adult care food, summer food service, WIC, and the Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program.
Listening sessions have been scheduled for Boston, MA on June 10, Austin, TX on July 15, Baltimore, MD on August 6, San Francisco, CA on August 6, Atlanta, GA on August 20, Chicago, IL on September 10, and Denver, CO on September 11. For details, see: http://www.fns.usda.gov/cga/Sessions/default.htm.
Free meals for Head Start: Recent changes in federal law have mandated free meals for all children in Head Start programs regardless of household income. “Any child enrolled in Head Start is automatically eligible for free meals without further application or eligibility determination,” according to a May 16, 2008 policy memo issued by USDA, which may be found at: http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/Governance/Policy-Memos/2008/SP_23-2008.pdf.
Meal revenues cover production: USDA’s latest analysis of school meal programs has concluded that, “On average, revenue generated from reimbursable lunches exceeded the reported cost of production,” for breakfasts and lunches served in school year 2005-2006. The “School Lunch and Breakfast Cost Study – II” examines revenues generated from reimbursable meals, the treatment of a la carte items, and school food break-even points. For more, go to: http://www.fns.usda.gov/cga/PressReleases/2008/FNS-0002.htm.
Obesity Round-Up
Childhood obesity temporarily ends upward trend: The U.S. may finally have turned the corner on the growing epidemic of childhood obesity. There was no increase in obesity rates among children and youth between 2003-2004 and 2005-2006, according to new data from the National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS). “After 25 years of extraordinarily bad news about childhood obesity, this study provides a glimmer of hope,” claimed Dr. David Ludwig from Children’s Hospital in Boston. “But it’s much too soon to know whether this is a true plateau or just a temporary lull,” he cautioned.
Researchers could not ascribe a cause to the slowdown and stressed that continued efforts are needed to combat childhood obesity. “This let us know that the epidemic is not an unstoppable epidemic and gives us hope our collective work can reverse it,” noted Risa Lavizzo-Mourey, president of the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, which has funded anti-obesity programs. “It tells us that when we all work together – parents and schools, government, voluntary organization, industry – we can make a difference,” she added.
Yet nearly one-third of American children remain overweight or obese. “It’s too soon to uncork the champagne,” said Dr. Ludwig, who co-authored the NCHS report. “We’re not out of the woods by any stretch. Even if the rates don’t go up any more, they are so high that the full impact of the childhood obesity epidemic will continue for the next few decades,” he concluded.
Sleep regime affects obesity: You are more likely to be fat if you sleep too much or too little, according to the results of a new study from the NCHS based on personal surveys with 87,000 U.S. adults. People who slept less than six hours a night or more than nine hours had obesity rates of 33 percent and 26 percent, respectively, compared to 22 percent obesity among normal sleepers.
“The data is all coming together that short sleepers and long sleepers don’t do as well, said Ron Kramer, a physician who heads up the American Academy of Sleep Medicine. Putting such information to use could result in new methods to aid sleepers. “We’re getting to the point that they may start recommending getting enough sleep as a standard approach to weight loss and the prevention of obesity,” noted James Gangswisch, a sleep researcher from Columbia University.
Reports from the Field – Fairfax,, VA
The average food stamp benefit nationwide is approximately $90 per month or roughly $1.00 per meal per person. Food stamp shoppers are careful, penny-pinching consumers. They have to be with the limited resources they have at hand. Featured below is an account of the challenges faced by one food stamp household in the Northern Virginia suburbs of Washington, D.C. which appeared in The Washington Post of May 27, 2008.
Christina Hall’s weekly grocery shopping ritual begins Thursday night in the kitchen of her cramped mobile home in Fairfax County, with the low hum of the refrigerator and the steady drip of the faucet in the background. “Shredded cheese, bagels, milk . . . Maybe we can do two gallons this week,” she says hopefully, scribbling the grocery list on a sheet of notebook paper. She goes through a cabinet, looks in the freezer, checks a shelf behind the linoleum-covered table. “Yogurt, crackers, bananas.” She jots down a dozen or so more items: salad dressing, frozen vegetables . . . “That should keep me at about $50 for the week.”
A divorced mother of two, Hall receives $219 a month in food stamps; the fastidious inspection of her cupboards and the dollar-by-dollar addition she does in her head are the only way she can make the allotment last through a month. At a time when food prices are soaring, a growing number of Americans are struggling financially and local social service agencies are seeing record numbers of applicants, advocates are concerned that the purchasing power of food stamps has shrunk since 1996, when Congress recalculated benefit levels. The result slowed the value of food stamps relative to inflation. If benefits had kept pace with inflation over 12 years, a family with one working parent and two children would be receiving an additional $37 a month, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a Washington-based think tank.
To qualify for food stamps, recipients must have an income below 130 percent of the federal poverty level, or less than $22,880 for a family of three. “An extra $37 a month,” Hall said, chuckling. “That would be nice. Might be able to splurge every now and again.” Hall, 38, who lives in a scruffy, tree-lined cul-de-sac of mobile homes in Hybla Valley, one of the poorest sections of one of the country’s richest counties, knows that the monthly payment doled out on a blue plastic debit card is meant only to supplement her food budget. The federal government’s guidelines make that clear.
But her $8.75-an-hour home health aide job – about $1,200 after taxes during a good month – stretches only so far, with rent ($550), utilities ($100, sometimes much more), gas ($180, even in her fuel-efficient Honda Civic), a car payment ($288) and car insurance ($163). That doesn’t include other expenses that come with raising a 13-year-old son and a 7-year-old daughter. The stamps are the family’s entire food budget.
Skyrocketing food prices and the declining value of the government benefit has made feeding the family a daily struggle for Hall, a first-time food stamp recipient. Hall wrestled with the challenge the next day as she tried to manage the family’s weekly food needs and squeeze in a few extra items for her daughter’s birthday party that weekend. Her son had lost his school meal card, which allows him to eat a free breakfast at school every day, so she has to make him breakfast at home until the end of the month, adding an unexpected expense. “Okay, we can get one package of potato chips and one package of popcorn, okay?” Hall said to her daughter, Rosita, who was having a tough time containing her excitement about the party.
Hall shops at the Aldi on Route 1, a discount supermarket along the frayed commercial strip, where many shoppers go to save money on store brand items that can be as much as 50 percent cheaper than other chains’. The week’s dinner plan called for spaghetti, macaroni and cheese, sloppy Joes, tacos and chicken nuggets, plus mixed vegetables with each meal. As she shopped earlier this month, though, she was feeling lucky. Her mother had given her some ground beef and pork earlier in the week. And her son, Richard, was going on a Scout trip, so she wouldn’t need as much food over the weekend. (As it turned out, Richard came home a day early, so she had to “wing it for Sunday dinner,” she said later.)
Hall made her way through the store using her shopping list as a guide: two gallons of milk, $3.08 each; one package of macaroni and cheese, 59 cents; two quarts of yogurt for her lunch, $1.29. She picked out a box of yellow cake mix and chocolate frosting for Rosita’s birthday cake, only to put them back later. Her mother would buy them. Into the cart went vegetables, frozen orange juice and hoagie buns. Bacon and ground turkey, initially on the list, would have to wait. “This! This!” Rosita squealed, pointing to a stack of bagel pizzas at $5.99 apiece.
“No, Grandma’s going to order pizza tomorrow for the party,” Hall answered, checking the price on a package of frozen French fries before throwing them back. Looking over the shopping cart, which included a package of Fruit Roll-Ups and a few other items that Rosita requested, Hall said, “we’re almost at $50, anyway.” Later, in the comfort of her small trailer, festooned with Barbie-themed birthday decorations from Wal-Mart, she looked over the receipt — $48.06. She looked satisfied. “Well, this allows me to get away with spending $55 for next week,” she said.
For the working poor of the Washington region, stretching the monthly food budget in a sagging economy is particularly difficult, because food prices in the area are consistently higher than the national average, according to the Council for Community and Economic Research, an Arlington County-based group that tracks the cost of living in hundreds of places across the country. During the first part of this year, the group said, the region’s food prices were eight percent higher than the national average. For instance, a pound of ground beef averaged $3.33 for a Washington area shopper, compared with $2.64 nationally. That’s a difference of 26 percent. A dozen eggs were 10 percent higher, while a 10-pound bag of potatoes cost 40 percent more. The consumer price index for food has increased faster than [at any time in the last] two decades, and it is especially grim news for people who rely on government subsidies.
“Food stamps aren’t meant to supply all of a family’s food, but for many people, it’s become a way of life. . . . It’s a struggle to make them last,” said Reuben Gist, director of advocacy and outreach for the Capital Area Food Bank. He cited a 2006 study by America’s Second Harvest, a hunger-relief organization, which found that only 16 percent of food stamp recipients said the allotment lasted them an entire month. “People on food stamps are calling us saying they have no idea what they are going to do.”
Food stamp benefits, which average about $1 per person per meal, are based on a plan set by the federal government designed to represent a very low-cost but nutritionally adequate diet. For a family of four, the cost of the diet, known as the Thrifty Food Plan, was $567 a month in April. But, under the benefit rate set in October, which was based on June 2007 food prices, a family of four receives about $542 in benefits.
Last week, Congress overrode President Bush’s veto of the $300 billion Farm Bill, which includes $200 billion for nutrition programs such as food stamps, school lunches and emergency food assistance. The legislation will help bring food stamp benefits in line with inflation and stop the erosion, according to national experts. But the new regulations won’t kick in until October and will only make up, on average, $5 of the $37 gap. “Next year will be the first year in the modern history of the food stamp program when food stamp value is the same as the year before,” said Dorothy Rosenbaum, a senior policy analyst for the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
Hall said she has had to adjust her expectations. “I think I first noticed when I bought what I usually buy – eggs, milk, you know, the basic stuff – and it cost me over $60 for a week. I thought there was a mistake,” she said. It wasn’t always like this for Hall. For several years, she had a job as a receptionist, making $15 an hour. The difficult times started when she was laid off and took the home health aide job soon afterward for nearly half the wage.
She has employed a few tricks to save here and there: picking up food from food pantries, grilling meat and vegetables on the porch to keep the gas bill down; rationing the medication that manages her Crohn’s disease by only periodically taking pills that she is supposed to take daily. She and her ex-husband agreed, through a mediator, that he would pay for Rosita’s after-school care, clothes and other essentials for the children. “Our life has changed. . . . My kids notice the changes, there’s no doubt about it,” she said, sitting on her porch. “There are things I can’t buy anymore, little things like desserts, or if I say we have to be careful how much we eat. It’s not just them; we all feel it. We all notice.”
Small Bites
Taking time to partake: The average American age 15 and older spent 67 minutes a day in “primary” eating and drinking of beverages, that is eating and drinking as the self-reported main activity.
Taking more time: In addition, the average American spent another 16 minutes eating and 42 minutes drinking beverages (other than water) as secondary activities, such as while watching television, working, or playing sports.
A liquid diet?: On an average day, four percent of people reportedly spent no time in primary eating/drinking, though they did spend 35 minutes in secondary eating and 107 minutes (1.8 hours) in secondary drinking.
Grazers amaze: At the other end of the spectrum is the eight percent of the U.S. population known as the “constant grazers,” who may spend up to 4.5 hours a day or more eating or drinking.
Where we eat: The top three places people went for primary eating and drinking were their own home or yard (67.2 percent), their workplace (12.9 percent) or a restaurant or bar (11.2) percent.
Eating is social: Two-thirds of Americans’ primary eating/drinking occurrences are with family or other friends.
mvauthier :: Jun.05.2008 :: Foodlinks America :: No Comments »:: Print This Post