TEFAP Alliance Blog

Foodlinks America - March 2, 2007

In this issue:

• Harkin Seeks to Promote Nutrition and Health
• Beyond the Farm Bill
• Severe Poverty Growing Rapidly
• Proposed Legislation
• TEFAP Tidbits
• Child Nutrition Eligibility Guidelines Updated
• Farmers’ Market Funding Available
• Community Food Project Profile: Hog Farmers Get a Hand in Rural Missouri
• 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.

Harkin Seeks to Promote Nutrition and Health

For more than 20 years, Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA) has been a key figure in Congress in the establishment and funding of nutrition services for low-income Americans. This year, at the pinnacle of his congressional career, Senator Harkin’s scope is even broader; he sits on both the authorizing committees and the appropriations subcommittees that oversee all federal food assistance programs.

Harkin has been elevated to chairman of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, a position from which he will direct reauthorization of the Farm Bill affecting food stamps, food distribution programs, and the senior farmers’ market nutrition program. The Committee oversees child nutrition legislation as well. Harkin also serves on the Health, Education, Labor, and Pensions (HELP) Committee with jurisdiction over senior nutrition and community service programs. Senator Harkin will be instrumental in setting funding levels for all government nutrition programs, as he serves on the Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee and chairs the Appropriations Subcommittee on Labor, Health and Human Services, and Education.

Therefore, when Tom Harkin speaks, his words carry a lot of weight. And his February 27, 2007 remarks to the National Anti-Hunger Policy Conference in Washington, D.C. cheered advocates for the renewal and expansion of food programs. Harkin noted that food and nutrition are very high priorities for him in the upcoming Farm Bill. “Although I refer to it as a Farm Bill,” he said, “it’s going to be a food bill also. The biggest question is how much money we will have. Additional funding is needed, not for commodity price supports, but for the Food Stamp Program, The Emergency Food Assistance Program [TEFAP], and others. We need resources for the food assistance title.”

Harkin said he expects Congress to complete action soon on raising the minimum wage. “But even with an increase in the minimum wage,” he stated, “more families will need food assistance. A strong and responsive food assistance system is more important now than ever.”

Specific priorities mentioned by the Senator include: raising the food stamp asset limit and indexing it for inflation; expanding the fruit and vegetable pilot program he created a few years ago so that within 10 years, “there are free, fresh fruits and vegetables in every school, every day;” expanding the availability of electronic benefits transfer (EBT) at farmers’ markets; “doing more for TEFAP in the Farm Bill;” and restoring funding for the Community Food and Nutrition Program (CFNP), which has been zeroed out for the past two years. “Hopefully, we’ll get it back again,” concluded Harkin.

Beyond the Farm Bill

Most legislative efforts to improve nutrition and increase access to food for low-income Americans are focused this year on the Farm Bill, which includes renewal of the Food Stamp Program and key commodity distribution programs. However, child nutrition advocates, unwilling to wait until the next reauthorization cycle of the Child Nutrition Act, are seeking non-traditional ways to bring about action this year.

“We’re not going to wait until 2009 to make expansions and improvements in child nutrition programs,” Ellen Teller of the Food Research and Action Center (FRAC) in Washington, D.C. told the National Anti-Hunger Policy Conference in late February 2007. Teller noted that reauthorization of the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act, a signature Bush Administration initiative, may provide a window for advancing changes in child nutrition programs.

The key issues in the NCLB legislative scheme that addresses afterschool programs are improvements in 21st Century community learning centers, further development of supplemental education services such as tutoring, and career development programs and internships for middle school students and high school age youth. Child nutrition programs can provide important links to food to enhance both the nutritional quality and educational advancement of outside-of-school-hours care programs and services.

Consequently, several nutrition initiatives are being considered as adjuncts to the NCLB legislation. They are universal free school breakfast programs, expansion of the simplified Summer Food Service Program pilot project to all states, and growth of subsidized supper programs. “The Afterschool Supper Program is currently only available through the Child and Adult Care Food Program and operates in only seven states,” notes FRAC. “This is a key resource for providing nutrition for low-income students spending longer hours in afterschool programs while their parents are working. Particularly as more low-income parents work jobs with non-traditional hours, suppers need to be available to their children in all states, and in both school-based and other programs in low-income areas. In 2007 this step can be taken in the NCLB reauthorization.”

Severe Poverty Growing Rapidly

The percentage of Americans living in severe poverty – with incomes less than half of the federal poverty line – has reached a 32-year peak. A recent analysis of 2005 census data by McClatchy Newspapers found nearly 16 million Americans living in deep or severe poverty, defined as a family of four with income of $9,903 a year or less and an individual living on less than $5,080 a year.

The analysis found that the number of severely poor people increased by 26 percent between 2000 and 2005, more than 56 percent faster than the rise of poverty in the overall population during those years. Significant increases in severe poverty were found in 28 states and 65 of the country’s 215 largest counties.

Washington, D.C. had the highest rate of severely poor people at 10.8 percent, followed by Mississippi and Louisiana at 9.3 and 8.3 percent respectively. Severe poverty was also prevalent along the Mexican border. In raw numbers, California had 1.9 million severely poor people, followed by Texas with 1.6 million, and New York with 1.2 million.

Demographically, one out of three severely poor people is under age 17 and almost two out of three are female. A large share of the severely poor consists of female-headed households with children. Nearly two-thirds (10.3 million) of the severely poor are white.

The McClatchy report noted that despite economic expansion and increased worker productivity, corporate profits so outstripped wages and salaries that household income for working families declined every year in the five-year period studied. “These and other factors have helped push 43 percent of the nation’s 37 million poor people into deep poverty – the highest rate since at least 1975,” the newspaper group reported. With the exception of Mexico and Russia, the U.S. directs the smallest portion of its gross domestic product to federal anti-poverty programs than any other country in the world.

Consequently, one in three Americans will experience a year of extreme poverty during his or her adult life, said Mark Rank, a University of Wisconsin at Madison professor who has done long-term research on poverty. “It would appear that for most Americans the question is no longer if, but rather when, they will experience poverty,” said Rank. “In short, poverty has become a routine and unfortunate part of the American life course,” Rank wrote in a recent study. “Whether these patterns will continue throughout the first decade of 2000 and beyond is difficult to say … but there is little reason to think that this trend will reverse itself any time soon.”

For more details on the McClatchy analysis, go to: http://www.realcities.com/mld/krwashington/16760690.htm.
Proposed Legislation

Among bills recently introduced in the 110th session of the U.S. Congress are the following:
• House Resolution (H.R.) 1163: Introduced by Representative Nita Lowey (D-NY), the Stop Obesity in Schools Act would help reduce childhood obesity by developing a national strategy to address the problem, make grants to local educational agencies to adopt wellness policies and other anti-obesity initiatives, evaluate programs for the prevention of obesity in children and adolescents, and abet the establishment of healthy living and wellness coordinating councils.

• Senate (S.) 591: Introduced by Senator Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) and five bipartisan co-sponsors, the Food Stamp Personal Savings and Investment Act would adjust for inflation the allowable amounts of financial resources of eligible households in the Food Stamp Program and exclude from countable resources certain retirement and education accounts.

For bill summary and status information, along with the text of legislation, visit: http://thomas.loc.gov and enter the bill number.

TEFAP Tidbits

• Winners and losers in reallocation: A total of $189.5 million has been provided to The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) in fiscal year 2007 – $140 million for food purchases and $49.5 million for storage and distribution expenses. Funds are parceled out by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) on the basis of a statutory formula that includes each state’s share of national poverty and unemployment figures and is adjusted annually. As a result of the annual formula adjustments for fiscal year 2007, eight jurisdictions – DC, FL, IL, LA, NE, NM, SD, and VT – had funding reduced by more than five percent while 11 states – AR, AZ, GA, IN, MD, MS, NJ, NV, RI, SC, and WI – had funding increased by more than five percent.

• States needing distribution money even more than food: Federal law allows states to convert up to $10 million of TEFAP funding annually from food purchases to storage and distribution costs. In spite of declining amounts of food provided for the program, a record 47 states and territories (out of 55 operating the program) converted at least some food money for distribution needs in fiscal year 2007. Transfers totaled $7.8 million.

USDA staff have not studied the phenomenon, but agreed with Foodlinks America that the reasons for the transfers are probably the result of higher gasoline prices, increased storage costs related to the handling of more fresh and frozen commodities, and states spending money to actively seek more donated product to supplement the decreased supply of federal food.

• Competition proposal stirs controversy: The Bush Administration’s Farm Bill proposal recommendation that states require competition for their local TEFAP distribution contracts at least once every three years has generated significant opposition. Although several states, including Arizona, Florida, and Georgia, periodically re-bid TEFAP contracts now, most do not.

“I worry that if the administration of the program is uncertain, operators like us may be less likely to make long-term investments in warehouse space, refrigeration, trucks, and other infrastructure,” noted Mark Lowry of the Orange County Food Bank in Garden Grove, CA told Foodlinks America. “My bigger concern, however, is the possibility that the local TEFAP distribution network may be destabilized. In many neighborhoods, the same community-based organization has been distributing TEFAP food for many years and eligible people know where to go to get their commodities. It could create confusion and restrict access if local distribution sites were frequently changed. Further, unless there is an increase funding for the program, there is no additional food. Although this recommendation will establish a new layer of bureaucracy and related costs, no additional people will get help,” Lowry noted.

However, others in the food distribution community welcome the proposed change, citing the increased accountability and improved service that competition for contracts could foster.

Bonus declines expected to continue: Bonus commodities for TEFAP and other domestic nutrition assistance programs are expected to continue to be in short supply. Weather conditions, increased commercial demand for some commodities, and industry efficiencies have reduced the number of items in surplus, according to USDA staff speaking at a national conference late last month. With demand for agricultural products growing at home and abroad, “Bonus is drying up,” stated USDA’s food distribution division staff. Recently, USDA received no bids from industry on at least two items – cranberries and raspberries – which were expected to be in surplus and for which funds had been set aside.

Child Nutrition Eligibility Guidelines Updated

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has issued annual adjustments to the income eligibility guidelines for child nutrition programs. The revised standards, which will be in effect from July 1, 2007 to June 30, 2008, are used to determine eligibility for free and reduced price meals in the school lunch, school breakfast, child and adult care food, and summer food service programs.

The updated guidelines, published in the February 27, 2007 Federal Register and reflecting a 3.25 percent increase over last year’s levels, may be reviewed at: http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20071800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/pdf/07-883.pdf.

Farmers’ Market Funding Available

The availability of funds to expand direct producer-to-consumer marketing through farmers’ markets, roadside stands, community supported agriculture programs, and other methods, has been announced by the Agricultural Marketing Service within the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Approximately $1 million in fiscal year 2007 funding under the Farmers’ Market Promotion Program is open to agricultural cooperatives, local governments, non-profit and public benefit corporations, economic development groups, regional farmers’ market authorities, and Tribal governments. Grants of up to $75,000 will be awarded.

The deadline for applications is April 30, 2007. For particulars, see the Notice of Funds Availability (NOFA), published in the February 27, 2007 Federal Register at: http://a257.g.akamaitech.net/7/257/2422/01jan20071800/edocket.access.gpo.gov/2007/pdf/E7-3263.pdf.

Community Food Project Profile: Hog Farmers Get a Hand in Rural Missouri

Editor’s Note: This is the eighth in a series of articles celebrating the tenth anniversary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Community Food Projects program and featuring some of the more successful projects.

In December 1998, hog prices in Central Missouri nosedived to a record low of seven and a half cents per pound, far below the cost of production. The low prices, coupled with corporate overproduction and rapidly-growing concentration in the industry, drove 75 percent of Missouri hog farmers out of business during the 1990s. Those who remained in business saw their share of the retail food dollar drop to less than 20 percent.

The “Break-Thru Community Food Security Project” of the Missouri Rural Crisis Center (MRCC), conceived in 1997 and awarded a $195,000, three-year Community Food Projects (CFP) grant in 1998, was a direct response to a severe crisis in hog country, said project director Rhonda Perry. The project, which established Patchwork Family Farms, a rural livestock production and processing cooperative, reflected the urgent need for grassroots-based projects to create real economic development and food security in a very rural part of the state.

The main goal of the project was to increase annual sales of meat products by small-scale hog producers and create distribution and sales jobs for members of the low-income community. The Patchwork cooperative marketed branded pork products through non-traditional means, including church and community organizations in Kansas City and St. Louis and MRCC’s retail outlet in a low-income neighborhood of Columbia.

Patchworks’ sustainably raised pork products (i.e. pork produced in a humane and environmentally sound manner with no continuous use of antibiotics or growth hormones) provided a price floor for members well above current market rates to keep them on the farm and in business. The project set an annual sales goal of $300,000, an amount that would allow the cooperative to break even and cover farmer and organizational costs.

Sales increased from $113,000 in 1998 to $246,000 in 2000 and reached the $300,000 mark by the end of 2001. The project directly increased the profitability of more than 10 small-scale hog producers by marketing more than 50 percent of their production and, as the project continued to grow, MRCC was able to increase the number of independent producers in the Patchwork network to 15 families.

Even after the pork market began to rebound, Patchwork members got a higher return on their sales, receiving 53 cents per pound (in 2000) compared to 39 cents per pound on the open market. “By receiving a fair price,” Ms. Perry explained, “our producers as a whole received $47,000 more in 2000 than if they had sold their hogs on the corporate market, and this increased the amount of money they had to spend in their rural communities.”

The project helped low-income consumers as well as producers. “We estimate that more than 60 percent of the retail sales came from limited-resource populations, primarily in the neighborhood surrounding our office (the poorest ward in Columbia), individual sales to food cooperative members, and through our connection with inner city churches in Kansas City,” stated Ms. Perry. Direct marketing to minority groups in Kansas City not only increased sales but provided a forum fostering mutual understanding between family farmers and inner-city consumers.

Another major component of the project was the organization of a network of local food-buying cooperatives, designed to provide high-quality, affordable food to low-income households in some of the state’s most economically depressed rural areas. Fourteen “food co-op” chapters were organized to supply sustainably produced and affordably priced fruits and vegetables, Patchwork pork products, and other grocery items to 1,200 families. Leadership training provided to chapter members has also strengthened the communities served.

As Patchwork’s sales grew under the 1998 grant, the family-owned processing plant used by the cooperative in Hale, MO reached capacity and a lack of other USDA-inspected facilities in the area put a damper on future expansion. However, a second CFP award helped the Patchwork cooperative overcome this problem. In 2000, MRCC received a two-year grant of $110,000 to expand capacity at a family-owned processing facility in Warrensburg, MO and increase members’ profitability by making value-added pork products, such as bratwursts, franks, bacon, and sausages.

The Patchwork Family Farms pork cooperative continues to be relatively small – 21 producers in 2006 – but successful for its members. Sustainable standards have been maintained, the cooperative still prohibits the use of growth hormones and antibiotics and animals are raised in the open with access to fresh air and sunshine. Sales have been maintained at around $250,000 per year. The group made a strategic decision to stay in its Mid-Missouri sales area and diversify the products distributed through the network rather than expand geographically. By the summer of 2006, the cooperative reported that “restaurants are our biggest sales category making up 65 percent of Patchwork sales,” and Patchwork is now a well-known name at Mid-Missouri restaurants.

The Patchwork operation continues to advantage its members and help insulate them from market fluctuations. Patchwork Family Farms still pays a base of 43 cents per pound or 15 percent above the market price, whichever is greater. Efforts to increase the number of pork products that can be utilized from the lower-demand cuts of meat that make up a large part of every hog processed (such as shoulders and ground meat) are ongoing, pushing the cooperative to develop and sell six specialty bratwursts and sausages.

MRCC’s CFP project is one of the few bright spots in a rural landscape devastated by declining farm prices and rising poverty rates. Jobs have been created in the hog production and processing sectors, as well as in marketing and transportation. And diversification is continuing; sales of free-range and antibiotic-free Patchwork poultry products began in June 2006.

Small Bites

H2O foods: Watermelons are 97 percent water, lettuce 97 percent, and tomatoes 95 percent.

Toxic lunch: High levels of lead have been found in children’s plastic lunchboxes. The Consumer Product Safety Commission recently admitted that it concealed data showing lunchbox lead levels up to 16 times higher than that allowed in lead paint.

Egg-zagerated advertising: A leading television network had its logo printed on 35 million eggs by Egg-fusion, an “on-egg messaging” company.

Pitching to children: Advertisers spend more than $12 billion annually marketing to children. The average child in America is exposed to some 40,000 ads per year.

Sticking to branded produce: Disney has its own line of fruits and vegetables that carry stickers of its characters.

And it works: When a network news magazine program asked children to choose between a banana and a rock with a Scooby-do sticker on it for breakfast, nearly all kids picked the rock.

mvauthier :: Mar.02.2007 :: Foodlinks America :: No Comments »:: Print This Post

Trackback this post | Feed on Comments to this post