    [House Hearing, 117 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

                     REVIEW OF USDA NUTRITION DISTRIBUTION
                                  PROGRAMS

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   BEFORE THE

                    SUBCOMMITTEE ON NUTRITION, OVERSIGHT, AND
                               DEPARTMENT OPERATIONS

                                     OF THE

                            COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
                            HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

                        ONE HUNDRED SEVENTEENTH CONGRESS

                                 FIRST SESSION

                                   __________

                                DECEMBER 8, 2021

                                   __________

                               Serial No. 117-24

              Printed for the use of the Committee on Agriculture
                             agriculture.house.gov

                                   __________

                        U.S. GOVERNMENT PUBLISHING OFFICE
    47-783 PDF                 WASHINGTON : 2022

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------

                            COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE

                         DAVID SCOTT, Georgia, Chairman

    JIM COSTA, California                GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania,
    JAMES P. McGOVERN, Massachusetts     Ranking Minority Member
    FILEMON VELA, Texas                  AUSTIN SCOTT, Georgia
    ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina, Vice  ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD,
    Chair                                Arkansas
    ABIGAIL DAVIS SPANBERGER, Virginia   SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee
    JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut            VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri
    ANTONIO DELGADO, New York            DOUG LaMALFA, California
    SHONTEL M. BROWN, Ohio               RODNEY DAVIS, Illinois
    BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois              RICK W. ALLEN, Georgia
    CHELLIE PINGREE, Maine               DAVID ROUZER, North Carolina
    GREGORIO KILILI CAMACHO SABLAN,      TRENT KELLY, Mississippi
    Northern Mariana Islands             DON BACON, Nebraska
    ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire         DUSTY JOHNSON, South Dakota
    CHERI BUSTOS, Illinois               JAMES R. BAIRD, Indiana
    SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York       JIM HAGEDORN, Minnesota
    STACEY E. PLASKETT, Virgin Islands   CHRIS JACOBS, New York
    TOM O'HALLERAN, Arizona              TROY BALDERSON, Ohio
    SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California        MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas
    RO KHANNA, California                TRACEY MANN, Kansas
    AL LAWSON, Jr., Florida              RANDY FEENSTRA, Iowa
    J. LUIS CORREA, California           MARY E. MILLER, Illinois
    ANGIE CRAIG, Minnesota               BARRY MOORE, Alabama
    JOSH HARDER, California              KAT CAMMACK, Florida
    CYNTHIA AXNE, Iowa                   MICHELLE FISCHBACH, Minnesota
    KIM SCHRIER, Washington              JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana
    JIMMY PANETTA, California
    SANFORD D. BISHOP, Jr., Georgia

                                     ______

                          Anne Simmons, Staff Director

                     Parish Braden, Minority Staff Director

                                     ______

        Subcommittee on Nutrition, Oversight, and Department Operations

                     JAHANA HAYES, Connecticut, Chairwoman

    JAMES P. McGOVERN, Massachusetts     DON BACON, Nebraska,  Ranking
    ALMA S. ADAMS, North Carolina        Minority Member
    BOBBY L. RUSH, Illinois              ERIC A. ``RICK'' CRAWFORD,
    GREGORIO KILILI CAMACHO SABLAN,      Arkansas
    Northern Mariana Islands             SCOTT DesJARLAIS, Tennessee
    SALUD O. CARBAJAL, California        VICKY HARTZLER, Missouri
    AL LAWSON, Jr., Florida              JAMES R. BAIRD, Indiana
    ANN M. KUSTER, New Hampshire         CHRIS JACOBS, New York
    JIMMY PANETTA, California            MICHAEL CLOUD, Texas
    SEAN PATRICK MALONEY, New York       KAT CAMMACK, Florida
                                         JULIA LETLOW, Louisiana

                 Katherine Stewart, Subcommittee Staff Director

                                      (ii)

                                 C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page
    Adams, Hon. Alma S., a Representative in Congress from North
      Carolina, submitted articles...................................    41
    Bacon, Hon. Don, a Representative in Congress from Nebraska,
      opening statement..............................................     3
        Submitted report.............................................    54
        Submitted statement on behalf of Metz Culinary Management,
          Inc........................................................    66
    Hayes, Hon. Jahana, a Representative in Congress from
      Connecticut, opening statement.................................     1
        Prepared statement...........................................     3
    Panetta, Hon. Jimmy, a Representative in Congress from
      California, submitted letter...................................    53
    Thompson, Hon. Glenn, a Representative in Congress from
      Pennsylvania, opening statement................................     4

                                   Witnesses

    Rodriguez, Carlos M., President and Chief Executive Officer,
      Community FoodBank of New Jersey, Hillside, NJ.................     5
        Prepared statement...........................................     7
        Submitted questions..........................................    67
    Greene Trottier, Mary, President, National Association of Food
      Distribution Program on Indian Reservations; Director of Food
      Distribution Programs, Spirit Lake Tribe, Fort Totten, ND......    11
        Prepared statement...........................................    13
    Kubik, Frank, Director of the Commodity Supplemental Food
      Program, Focus: HOPE; Member, Board of Directors, National
      Commodity Supplemental Food Program Association, Detroit, MI...    17
        Prepared statement...........................................    19
    Donaldson, Dave, Co-Founder and Chairman, CityServe
      International, Bakersfield, CA.................................    20
        Prepared statement...........................................    22

                 REVIEW OF USDA NUTRITION DISTRIBUTION PROGRAMS

                                  ----------

                          WEDNESDAY, DECEMBER 8, 2021

                              House of Representatives,
          Subcommittee on Nutrition, Oversight, and Department
                                                    Operations,
                                      Committee on Agriculture,
                                                       Washington, D.C.
        The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:01 a.m., in
    Room 1300 of the Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Jahana
    Hayes [Chairwoman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
        Members present: Representatives Hayes, McGovern, Adams,
    Rush, Carbajal, Kuster, Panetta, Brown, Bacon, Crawford, Baird,
    Cloud, Letlow, Thompson (ex officio), and Mann.
        Staff present: Caitlin Balagula, Chu-Yuan Hwang, Katherine
    Stewart, Ricki Schroeder, Jennifer Tiller, Erin Wilson, and
    Dana Sandman.

      OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JAHANA HAYES, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                       CONGRESS FROM CONNECTICUT

        The Chairwoman. Good morning. This hearing of the
    Subcommittee on Nutrition, Oversight, and Department Operations
    entitled, Review of USDA Nutrition Distribution Programs, will
    come to order. Welcome, and thank you all for joining us here
    today.
        After brief opening remarks, Members will receive testimony
    from our witnesses today, and then the hearing will be open for
    questions. Members will be recognized in order of seniority,
    alternating between Majority and Minority Members and in order
    of arrival for those Members who have joined us after the
    hearing was called to order. When you are recognized, you will
    be asked to unmute your microphone and will have 5 minutes to
    ask your questions or make a comment. If you are not speaking,
    I ask that you remain muted in order to minimize background
    noise. In order to get as many questions as possible, the timer
    will stay consistently visible on your screen. In consultation
    with the Ranking Member and pursuant to Rule XI(e), I want to
    make Members of the Subcommittee aware that other Members of
    the full Committee may join us today.
        I now recognize myself for an opening statement.
        Thank you to each of our witnesses for joining us today. I
    appreciate you taking the time out of your schedules to provide
    us with your expertise. I look forward to your testimony and to
    a productive conversation about USDA Food and Nutrition
    Service's nutrition distribution programs: The Emergency Food
    Assistance Program, ``TEFAP,'' Commodity Supplemental Food
    Program, ``CSFP,'' and Food Distribution Programs on Indian
    Reservations, ``FDPIR.'' I would also like to offer a warm
    welcome to our newest Agriculture Committee Member,
    Representative Shontel Brown from Ohio's 11th District. We are
    excited to have you join us today for your first Committee
    hearing.
        Today, we will explore the implementation of these
    important programs, the adjustments made during the COVID-19
    pandemic, and the long-term need of these programs and the
    organizations that operate them.
        TEFAP, CSFP, and FDPIR support millions of Americans in
    need each year. These programs purchase American-grown
    commodities for distribution to food banks, Tribal
    organizations, and other eligible community-based organizations
    supporting individuals experiencing food insecurity, serving
    both to combat hunger and support America's farmers.
        Throughout the pandemic, as many of us saw firsthand in our
    communities, these programs have shown great resiliency. They
    have responded to unprecedented challenges and adjusted quickly
    to continue delivering food safely to those in need. USDA's
    Economic Research Service found that in 2020, 6.7 percent of
    U.S. households reported using a food pantry, an increase from
    4.4 percent in 2019. Further, TEFAP supplied 2.2 billion pounds
    of USDA Foods to emergency food providers, many of which are
    faith-based organizations, up from the 1.7 billion pounds that
    were supplied in Fiscal Year 2019.
        In October 2020, the Connecticut Food Bank reported seeing
    a 44 percent increase in demand for food and services, while at
    the same time facing complications from national supply chain
    issues and a reduction of corporate food donations by more than
    half. Despite the incredible challenges, in Fiscal Year 2020,
    they were able to distribute 47 million pounds and serve
    147,000 people each month.
        It is clear that, while the pandemic has created continuous
    challenges for our food banks and emergency food organizations,
    such as supply chain struggles and soaring demand, they have
    overcome these obstacles and shown great resiliency in the face
    of crisis. Similarly, CSFP, FDPIR, and organizations that
    operate them transitioned quickly to continue serving seniors
    and families living on reservations during the pandemic.
    Respectively, they served more than 69,000 and 75,000 Americans
    on average each month in Fiscal Year 2020.
        From home delivery to mobile pantries to drive through
    services, feeding organizations have made critical adjustments
    to protect the safety of their volunteers, employees, and those
    they serve, while still fulfilling their commitment to provide
    food to those in need during challenging times, especially
    during the holiday season when so many are relying on food
    distribution programs to feed their families at times of
    celebration.
        We thank each of you for your incredible service to your
    communities. I look forward to hearing more about your
    experiences over the past couple years and your recommendations
    for our Committee as we move forward.
        [The prepared statement of Mrs. Hayes follows:]

     Prepared Statement of Hon. Jahana Hayes, a Representative in Congress
                                from Connecticut
        Thank you to each of our witnesses for joining us today. I
    appreciate you taking time out of your schedules to provide us with
    your expertise. I look forward to your testimony and to a productive
    conversation about USDA's Food and Nutrition Service's nutrition
    distribution programs: The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP),
    Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP), and Food Distribution
    Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR).
        I would also like to offer a warm welcome to our newest Agriculture
    Committee Member, Representative Shontel Brown from Ohio's 11th
    District! We are so excited to have you join us, and I am overjoyed to
    be able to host you for your first Agriculture Committee activity.
        Today we will explore the implementation of these important
    programs, the adjustments made during the COVID-19 pandemic, and the
    long-term needs of these programs and the organizations that operate
    them.
        TEFAP, CSFP, and FDPIR support millions of Americans in need each
    year. These programs purchase American-grown commodities for
    distribution to food banks, Tribal organizations, and other eligible
    community-based organizations supporting individuals experiencing food
    insecurity, serving both to combat hunger and support America's
    farmers.
        Throughout the pandemic, as many of us saw first-hand in our
    communities, these programs have shown great resiliency. They have
    responded to unprecedented challenges and adjusted quickly to continue
    delivering food safely to those in need.
        USDA's Economic Research Service found that, in 2020, 6.7 percent
    of U.S. households reported using a food pantry, an increase from 4.4
    percent in 2019. Further, TEFAP supplied 2.2 billion pounds of USDA
    Foods to emergency food providers, many of which are faith-based
    organizations, up from the 1.7 billion pounds that were supplied in
    Fiscal Year 2019.
        In October 2020, the Connecticut Food Bank reported seeing a 44
    percent increase in demand for food and services while, at the same
    time, facing complications from national supply chain issues and a
    reduction of corporate food donations by more than half. Despite the
    incredible challenges, in Fiscal Year 2020, they were able to
    distribute 47 million meals and serve 147,000 people each month.
        It is clear that, while the pandemic has created continuous
    challenges for our food banks and emergency feeding organizations, such
    as supply chain struggles and soaring demand, they have overcome these
    obstacles and shown great resiliency in the face of crisis.
        Similarly, CSFP, FDPIR, and the organizations that operate them
    transitioned quickly to continue serving seniors and families living on
    reservations during the pandemic. Respectively, they served more than
    690,000 and 75,000 Americans on average each month in Fiscal Year 2020.
        From home delivery to mobile pantries, to drive-through service,
    feeding organizations have made critical adjustments to protect the
    safety of their volunteers, employees, and those they serve, while
    still fulfilling their commitment to provide food to those in need
    during challenging times.
        Especially during the holiday season, when so many are relying on
    food distribution programs to feed their families at times of
    celebration, we thank each of you for your incredible service to your
    communities. I look forward to hearing more about your experiences over
    the past couple years and your recommendations for our Committee moving
    forward.

        The Chairwoman. I now would like to welcome the
    distinguished Ranking Member, the gentleman from Nebraska, Mr.
    Bacon, for any opening remarks he would like to give.

       OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. DON BACON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                         CONGRESS FROM NEBRASKA

        Mr. Bacon. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I appreciate your
    comments, and I also want to welcome Representative Shontel
    Brown. Welcome to Congress, and welcome to the Subcommittee. I
    want to thank each of our witnesses for your participation
    today as well.
        I want to first reiterate how important it is for this
    Committee, and frankly, all the committees of Congress to bring
    forward to the Administration for conversations such as these.
    Whether it is the Agriculture Committee or any of the other
    committees, the Administration has largely been AWOL from these
    committees. We are failing at our obligation as policy makers
    and as stewards of taxpayer dollars when we neglect our
    oversight committees. And right now, as far as I can tell, the
    only Committee doing that is the Armed Services Committee. I
    think we can do better.
        Now, on the topic at hand, the Department's nutrition
    distribution programs, namely TEFAP, CSFP, and FDPIR have long
    been complementary to SNAP and have aided families in need
    across the country, but we may be at a crossroads. The pandemic
    has shown us that there are so many different ways to do
    things, that massive spending does not necessarily lead to
    desired outcomes. So, I look forward to hearing what has worked
    and what has not worked, and where we can potentially step in
    and make changes that make sense to both operators and
    recipients.
        I think CSFP is a great example. I recall Mr. Kubik's 2017
    testimony regarding CSFP, and from that, necessary improvements
    were made to the program in the 2018 Farm Bill. So, this
    testimony does work. Simply put, I am not sure autopilot is the
    right way to continue.
        With that, I look forward to continuing today's
    conversation, and again, I want to thank the witnesses for
    taking your valuable time to share your expertise.
        With that, Madam Chairwoman, I yield back.
        Madam Chairwoman, you may be on mute.
        The Chairwoman. Thank you. I now recognize Chairman Scott
    for any opening statements he would like to make. I don't think
    Chairman Scott is here from the full Committee, so I recognize
    Ranking Member Thompson for any opening comments he would like
    to make.

     OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. GLENN THOMPSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
                       CONGRESS FROM PENNSYLVANIA

        Mr. Thompson. Thank you, Chairwoman Hayes. I appreciate
    that, and I want to add my welcome to the gentlelady from Ohio
    that is joining us. I am glad to have you on board. Thank you
    to our witnesses for your participation today.
        We last discussed these nutrition distribution programs,
    TEFAP, CSFP, and FDPIR in 2017. Now, that hearing focused on
    the interaction between them and how they, in concert with
    SNAP, Americans in need found nutrition relief. Since 2017, a
    farm bill was signed into law and a pandemic ravished our
    nation and disrupted the way these programs were implemented.
    Today is an opportunity to hear about both, but also what the
    future looks like for each program.
        The way I envision the future is through questions. Can we
    potentially reimagine how we distribute aid to families in
    need? If the pandemic taught us anything, it is that there is
    no one way to do anything, nutrition distribution programs
    included. Is there an opportunity to further work with
    organizations who are more deeply immersed in the communities?
    Does it make sense to expand these services to help families
    find independence simultaneously? How do we ensure these
    programs don't contribute to the growing instances of
    nutrition-related chronic disease? Is there an opportunity for
    a stronger relationship between distribution and nutrition
    education?
        Again, I appreciate the witnesses taking the time to share
    their expertise and foresight, and look forward to the
    discussion.
        Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and I yield back the balance
    of my time.
        The Chairwoman. Thank you, Ranking Member Thompson.
        The chair would request that other Members submit their
    opening statements for the record so witnesses may begin their
    testimony, and to ensure that there is ample time for
    questions.
        I am pleased to welcome such a distinguished panel of
    witnesses to our hearing today. Our witnesses bring to our
    hearing a wide range of experience and expertise, and I thank
    you for joining us.
        Our first witness today is Mr. Carlos Rodriguez, the
    President and CEO of Community FoodBank of New Jersey. The
    Community FoodBank of New Jersey has seen record growth in its
    food distribution and program development under his leadership.
    Mr. Rodriguez has more than 25 years of executive leadership
    experience focused on improving policies and delivering
    services to those in need.
        Our next witness today is Ms. Mary Greene Trottier, who is
    the President of the National Association of Food Distribution
    Programs on Indian Reservations. Ms. Trottier brings a great
    wealth of knowledge to our hearing today, having served as
    Spirit Lake Tribes Director of Food Distribution Programs for
    36 years, and director of their Commodity Supplemental Food
    Program for 4 years.
        Our third witness today is Mr. Frank Kubik, the Commodity
    Supplemental Food Program Director at Focus: HOPE in Detroit,
    Michigan. Mr. Kubik is a current board member of the National
    Commodity Supplemental Food Program Association, and a four-
    time president of the association. He has been with Focus: HOPE
    since 1981, and has served in his current role for 10 years.
    Each month, Focus: HOPE provides food assistance to over 41,000
    senior citizens in Michigan.
        Our fourth and final witness is Mr. Dave Donaldson, who is
    the Chairman and Chief Executive Officer of CityServe
    International in Bakersfield, California. In his role, Mr.
    Donaldson works to train and resource local churches and
    nonprofits to serve families in need. He has been with the
    organization since 2016.
        I welcome all of our witnesses today for this hearing so
    that we can conduct our oversight responsibilities on the NODO
    (Nutrition, Oversight, and Department Operations) Subcommittee.
        We will now proceed to hearing your testimony. You will
    each have 5 minutes. The timer should be visible to you on your
    screen and will count down to 0, at which point, your time has
    expired.
        Mr. Rodriguez, if you are ready, please begin your
    testimony.

    STATEMENT OF CARLOS M. RODRIGUEZ, PRESIDENT AND CHIEF EXECUTIVE
        OFFICER, COMMUNITY FoodBank OF NEW JERSEY, HILLSIDE, NJ

        Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you, Chairwoman Hayes and Ranking
    Member Bacon, as well as distinguished Committee Members, for
    the invitation to testify today. I am grateful to share my
    perspective on the levels of food insecurity in my community
    and how critically important nutrition distribution programs
    are to assist.
        The Community FoodBank of New Jersey is a member of Feeding
    America, the largest hunger relief network in the country. A
    network of more than 200 food banks and over 60,000 local
    partner agencies. This network helped provide 6.6 billion meals
    to tens of millions of people in need last year. Like our
    sister food banks across the country, the Community FoodBank of
    New Jersey works to fight hunger by engaging, educating, and
    empowering our community. We provide food for immediate need,
    connect families with critical financial resources, and address
    root causes of hunger. We work across sectors to create food
    security for all, and work with a wide variety of private and
    Federal food sources to secure donated and purchased essential
    groceries. Through this large, decentralized grassroots network
    of more than 800 community-based feeding programs, in 2021, we
    distributed food to support more than 85 million meals in 15 of
    the 21 New Jersey counties, where 800,000 residents struggle
    with food insecurity, including 200,000 children.
        In the circumstances we face today, there is more
    uncertainty in front of us than stability. I want to be clear
    that despite the significant actions that have been taken, our
    concerns about the charitable food supply keeping pace with
    need are serious. Any time there is a natural disaster or
    economic crisis, low-income families and individuals are the
    last to recover. Although the overall statistics of our
    national economy have rebounded with low unemployment, the
    families we serve are still on a longer road to recovery,
    particularly as the direct pandemic relief measures phase out.
        During an early pandemic distribution, I met a mom of two
    and a caretaker for her own elderly mom. Marissa was in a
    miles-long line for emergency food assistance. Having been
    furloughed from her job at a daycare a few months before, her
    savings were enough to pay for 2 months' rent and expenses
    before she found herself running critically low on funds. She
    was unsure what the future would hold for her family when she
    turned to the food bank for help. She told us right now, we are
    just living day by day. The struggles of our neighbors and food
    bank challenges continue to be complicated, not just by current
    supply chain disruptions and temporary increases in food
    prices. These challenges are all felt across the food bank
    network.
        Feeding America reports that costs to transport donated
    food has increased 20 percent since last year. Our own
    transport costs jumped 34 percent in a single year due to
    COVID. COVID has dramatically altered the mix of food that we
    source. A drop in donations necessitated a dramatic increase in
    food purchases, 58 percent nationally, and our own food
    purchases more than tripled in a single year. For these
    reasons, our national network of food banks has requested, and
    I encourage this Committee to support, an additional $900
    million for TEFAP in Fiscal Year 2022 spending legislation.
    With investment from the Federal Government, the United States
    has the potential not just to emerge from this crisis stronger
    and better positioned to meet the evolving needs of our
    communities, but towards ending hunger in America. We applaud
    the actions taken by Congress and USDA, and a special thank you
    to Secretary Vilsack for his heartfelt note last night, which
    have been critical to support communities and families since
    the start of the pandemic. Bipartisan Federal intervention and
    an unprecedented response from the charitable food system
    helped prevent food insecurity from increasing even higher in
    2020.
        We will overcome supply chain challenges, but to achieve
    the reality of people in America not facing hunger, we have to
    commit with increased fervor. There were tens of millions of
    people in America facing hunger before the pandemic, and that
    is still true today. Yet, as stated, an unprecedented response
    can achieve significant change. The most significant source of
    USDA Foods is The Emergency Food Assistance Program, or TEFAP.
    It smoothes out volatility that the pandemic-related supply
    chain challenges have caused. It provides stable source of food
    for the network. Today, TEFAP offers more than 120 foods. It is
    the backbone of charitable food system with an impact that is
    felt across every state in the country.
        The food banks and Feeding America network are uniquely
    capable of working to reduce food insecurity. Through 40 years
    of growing our capacity, building public and private
    partnerships, responding to numerous crises, and driving
    innovation, we have certainly seen a lot. I hope my testimony
    and the questions I am open to answering have demonstrated the
    critical value of USDA food programs, TEFAP chief among them,
    to the work food banks do to address and prevent hunger among
    our neighbors. TEFAP's stabilizing effect on the food supply as
    a reliable source of nutritious food for families in need has
    never been more important.
        Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Rodriguez follows:]

        Prepared Statement of Carlos M. Rodriguez, President and Chief
       Executive Officer, Community FoodBank of New Jersey, Hillside, NJ
        Dear Chairwoman Hayes and Ranking Member Bacon,
    Who We Are
        Thank you for the invitation to testify at today's hearing, a
    Review of USDA Nutrition Distribution Programs. My name is Carlos
    Rodriguez and I am President and CEO of the Community FoodBank of New
    Jersey. I am grateful for the opportunity to share my perspective on
    the levels of food insecurity in my community and how nutrition
    distribution programs assist in ensuring we have enough nutritious food
    to serve any one who walks through the doors of the food bank and our
    partner agencies.
        The Community FoodBank of New Jersey is a member of Feeding
    America, the largest hunger-relief network in the country. Through a
    network of more than 200 food banks, 21 statewide food bank
    associations, and over 60,000 partner agencies, food pantries and meal
    programs, our food bank and the Feeding America network helped provide
    6.6 billion meals to tens of millions of people in need last year. Like
    our sister food banks across the country, the Community FoodBank of New
    Jersey works to fight hunger by engaging, educating and empowering our
    community. We provide food for immediate need, connect families with
    critical financial resources, and address root causes of hunger,
    working across sectors to create food security for all. We work with a
    wide variety of retailers, farmers, manufacturers, distributors, and
    Federal programs to secure donated and purchased essential groceries.
    We distribute this food through a large, decentralized grassroots
    network of more than 800 community-based feeding programs. In 2020, we
    distributed food to support more than 85 million meals through our
    network of partners in New Jersey, where 800,000 residents struggle
    with food insecurity, including 200,000 children.
        Our work depends on broad community support. Feeding America food
    banks are supported by millions of volunteers, who help us pack food
    boxes, organize and manage food distributions, and address other client
    needs. In addition to managing a food supply chain that moves 7.5
    billion pounds of food in 2020, the national network of food banks also
    provides a variety of additional programs and services, ranging from
    food pharmacies and nutrition education to job training and assistance
    with applying for benefit programs. Collectively, we serve children,
    families and seniors in every county in the United States, including
    each of the 21 counties in New Jersey.
        The food banks in the Feeding America network are uniquely capable
    of working to reduce food insecurity. Through forty years of growing
    our capacity, building public-private partnerships, responding to
    crises and driving innovation, we've seen it all.
    Demand We Are Seeing
        Between disruptions to the supply chain, increased need for help,
    and adoption of new safety protocols that shifted our distribution
    models, the pandemic presented a perfect storm for the charitable food
    system. We are still feeling those effects today. The COVID-19 pandemic
    continues both to significantly impact people facing hunger, and to
    challenge food banks to meet higher demand for emergency food
    assistance. Feeding America food banks have reported a 40 percent
    average increase in demand for food assistance, and nearly 40 percent
    of people served at food banks since the beginning of the pandemic are
    new to the charitable food system. Our experience in New Jersey matches
    these national trends.
        There were tens of millions of people in America facing hunger
    before the pandemic and that is still true today. In 2020, 38 million
    people (one in eight individuals), including 12 million children (one
    in six children) were food-insecure, up from 35 million in 2019. In
    addition, households with children were 1.7 times more likely to face
    hunger compared to households with no children. Households headed by
    single women are 2.6 times more likely than average to face hunger.
    Bipartisan Federal intervention and an unprecedented response from the
    charitable food system helped prevent food insecurity from increasing
    even higher in 2020. According to data compiled by the Urban Institute,
    60 million people accessed charitable food assistance in 2020, an
    increase of 50% over the prior year (Source, Charitable Food assistance
    report from FA: https://www.feedingamerica.org/research/charitable-
    food-access).
        COVID-19 Recovery Legislation and investments in nutrition programs
    in the American Rescue Plan Act have helped support families and reduce
    some of the demand our food bank is seeing, but demand is continuing to
    exceed pre-pandemic levels. With the sustained demand for food
    assistance, people facing hunger and food banks across the nation will
    need additional investments in nutrition programs to put food on the
    table.
        Our work to provide enough nutritious foods for households in New
    Jersey is complicated by current supply chain disruptions and temporary
    increases in food prices. These challenges are felt across the food
    bank network. Feeding America reports that the cost to transport
    donated food to food banks has increased 20% since last year. Our own
    transport costs jumped 34% in a single year due to COVID.
        In addition, COVID has dramatically altered the mix of food sources
    that food banks are accessing in order to keep up with pandemic needs.
    A drop in donations has necessitated dramatic increases in food
    purchases--up 58% nationally for FY21 from the previous fiscal year
    (1,096M meals vs. 692M). The Community FoodBank of New Jersey's food
    purchases more than tripled in a single year.
        At the same time, food from USDA commodities are also lower this
    year. USDA foods, some of the most nutritious foods our network
    distributes, are the backbone of our network's food supply. This vital
    food source is expected to decline by up to 30%.
    CFBNJ Food Sourcing Trends and Plans
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

        The most significant source of USDA foods is The Emergency Food
    Assistance Program, or TEFAP, which helps smooth out the volatility
    that pandemic-related supply chain challenges have caused by providing
    a stable source of nutritious food for our network.
    What is The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP)
        Since its inception in the early 1980s as a program to connect
    surplus commodity products with emergency feeding organizations, TEFAP
    has served a dual purpose of providing nutritious food to the nation's
    charitable community while supporting U.S. grown commodities. As the
    program proved its efficacy and efficiency, it expanded to become an
    essential part of how food banks and other local organizations provide
    food to people in need. Today, TEFAP offers more than 120 foods,
    including fruits and vegetables, eggs, meat, poultry, fish, nuts, milk
    and cheese, and whole-grain and enriched grain products, including
    rice, cereal, and pasta. It is the backbone of the charitable food
    system with an impact that is felt in every state across the country.
        The Feeding America network is the largest TEFAP participant, with
    193 of our 200 food banks receiving and distributing TEFAP foods.
    Feeding America food banks receive TEFAP foods through their respective
    states and then distribute the food directly to local organizations,
    including food pantries, soup kitchens, and shelters.
        States and the Feeding America food bank network place food orders
    with USDA, which then works with the food industry to fulfill the
    orders. Each state is required to determine how TEFAP foods are
    distributed, and they oversee the agencies that distribute the food.
    The Federal statute requires states collect streamlined information on
    who is in need of emergency food assistance, specifically name,
    address, number in household, and income. States have significant
    flexibility to structure TEFAP operations to meet the needs of local
    communities, something the state of New Jersey was a critical partner
    on throughout the pandemic.
        TEFAP Bonus commodity purchases are driven by the need for
    commodity support as prices for commodity foods fluctuate. When the
    price of an agricultural commodity falls so low that the market for it
    is in danger, the Department of Agriculture spends money to purchase
    enough of that commodity to stabilize the market. These purchased foods
    are then distributed through the TEFAP program to those who need a
    helping hand. This is a highly-efficient public private partnership,
    supporting agricultural markets, while allowing for the purchase of
    nutritious food when it is at a very low price point.
        The farm bill also authorizes funds to support the storage and
    distribution of TEFAP commodities, although this is not mandatory
    funding and depends on an annual appropriation. These are dollars spent
    to help defray the cost of storing commodities and then moving them to
    the distribution point so they can be accessed by our clients.
    Unfortunately, the funds Congress has historically appropriated for the
    purposes of TEFAP storage and distribution are significantly less than
    the costs incurred by our food bank members. Food banks make up the
    shortfall for the storage and distribution costs to ensure equitable
    and efficient distribution of TEFAP foods into the community. If
    Congress were to appropriate the full authorized amount of storage and
    distribution funds, food charities would have additional resources to
    provide services in their communities.
    How TEFAP Helps
        The Emergency Food Assistance Program illustrates how a government
    program, nonprofits, and the private sector can work together to
    provide targeted, accessible, and cost efficient food assistance that
    is responsive to immediate need in local communities. TEFAP is a very
    responsive program, because it can be accessed by struggling families
    and individuals on an as needed basis. After a sudden emergency leaves
    a family without money, there is a place to turn. For many of the
    people we serve, the need for food assistance can be episodic and due
    to unexpected expenses, such as a car breaking down or a sudden layoff.
    TEFAP helps fill the gaps when this happens.
        In addition to the food provided to food banks and other nonprofits
    by USDA, support for food assistance through other nutrition programs
    plays a critical role in feeding families and individuals in our
    communities and across the country. Our food-insecure neighbors rely
    heavily on an array of Federal programs such as SNAP, school lunches,
    WIC, and senior meals to meet their families needs. Millions of
    Americans would not have the food they need to survive without the
    continued support of strong Federal nutrition programs.
        SNAP is the most important of these programs and stands as the
    nation's first line of defense against hunger. Feeding America food
    banks will distribute between six and seven billion meals this year.
    SNAP provides nine times that amount of food. Continuing to invest in
    SNAP will reduce food insecurity, improve health outcomes, reduce
    burden on food banks, and continue to stimulate local economies.
    What More is Needed
        We applaud the actions taken by Congress and USDA, which have been
    critical to support communities and families since the start of the
    pandemic. These actions have led to innovative school meal delivery
    programs like Pandemic EBT, SNAP emergency allotments for the duration
    of the public health emergency, an additional $1.2 billion in short-
    term TEFAP funding in 2020, and an estimated $2 billion in USDA funding
    for emergency food assistance in 2022. In 2020, USDA foods provided 2.4
    billion out of the 6.1 billion meals that the Feeding America network
    distributed.
        We anticipate total food delivered from USDA to have dropped 30% in
    2021 compared to 2020 due to the end of USDA's trade mitigation food
    purchases and other temporary programs. Although actions taken by USDA
    to support the emergency food network will help provide $2 billion in
    support in Fiscal Year 2022, we are concerned it can't keep pace with
    the headwinds and continued demand we are seeing. Congress can help the
    families we serve by providing additional funding for TEFAP food
    purchases in FY2022 spending legislation, building on the strong
    foundation of TEFAP food USDA already expects to provide in 2022.
        The Community FoodBank of New Jersey is grateful for the continued
    partnership between the USDA, farmers, and agriculture partners to
    provide healthy, nutritious U.S. grown commodities to community members
    in need. We also look forward to continuing to work with Congress to
    ensure continued investments in TEFAP and other Federal nutrition
    programs to serve families facing hunger.
        We also hope that Congress will pass additional essential support
    programs for the people we serve in The Build Back Better Act, which is
    a strong down payment on the investments that are needed to drastically
    reduce hunger and poverty for millions of children nationwide. These
    provisions are a critical step forward for millions in our country
    struggling to make ends meet--particularly for children facing hunger
    in this country.
    Conclusion
        I hope my testimony has demonstrated the critical value of USDA
    food programs, TEFAP chief among them, to the work food banks do to
    address and prevent hunger among our neighbors. TEFAP's stabilizing
    effect on the food supply as a reliable source of nutritious food for
    families in need has never been more important.
        In the circumstances we face today, with more uncertainty in front
    of us than stability, I want to also be clear that despite the
    significant actions that have been taken, our concerns about the food
    supply keeping pace with need are serious. Any time there is a natural
    disaster or economic crisis, low-income families and individuals are
    the last to recover; this crisis has left no community untouched.
    Although the overall statistics of our national economy have rebounded,
    with low unemployment, the families I serve are still on a road to
    recovery.
        For these reasons, our national network of food banks has
    requested--and I encourage this Committee to support--an additional
    $900 million for TEFAP in FY 2022 spending legislation. With investment
    from the Federal Government, the United States has the potential to
    emerge from this crisis stronger and better-positioned to meet the
    evolving needs of our communities and to end hunger in America.
                Sincerely,
                [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Carlos Rodriguez,
    President & CEO,
    Community FoodBank of New Jersey.

        The Chairwoman. Thank you, Mr. Rodriguez.
        I now recognize Ms. Greene Trottier. If you are ready,
    please begin your testimony.

             STATEMENT OF MARY GREENE TROTTIER, PRESIDENT,
      NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF FOOD DISTRIBUTION PROGRAM ON INDIAN
                    RESERVATIONS; DIRECTOR OF FOOD
       DISTRIBUTION PROGRAMS, SPIRIT LAKE TRIBE, FORT TOTTEN, ND

        Ms. Greene Trottier. Good morning, everyone. Chairwoman
    Hayes, Ranking Member Bacon, and Members of Congress, my name
    is Mary Greene Trottier, and I am member of the Spirit Lake
    Tribe in North Dakota. I serve as President of the National
    Association of Food Distribution Programs on Indian
    Reservations. I also serve as the Director for my program
    serving food distribution, commodity food, and also senior
    farmers' markets. These programs are a critical part of our
    food security safety net in our Tribal community, as well as
    other Tribal communities across the country. I would like to
    thank the Committee for asking me to testify today.
        A little bit about food distribution. We provide food
    assistance and nutrition education to nearly 100,000 people
    across Indian Country each month. We also employ local and
    Tribal community members in over 100 Indian Tribal
    organizations who administer the programs locally for citizens
    of 276 different Tribes. Over half of our FDPIR participants
    are working men and women, many of whom have children at home,
    in addition to nearly half of the FDPIR household members who
    have a household member over the age of 60. FDPIR is a critical
    part of our food security safety net for rural and remote
    reservation communities where many of our people lack the
    access to a grocery store or convenience store that might serve
    as a SNAP vendor. It is also critical as a stop-gap for our
    Tribal citizens in places with no food, with no, or limited,
    access to storage or transportation. [inaudible] operations, we
    serve over 100 ITOs in Indian Country----
        The Chairwoman. Excuse me. I am sorry. Ms. Greene Trottier,
    can you suspend for just a second? I must remind all members to
    please mute your lines so that we can hear the testimony of the
    witnesses. Thank you.
        Ms. Greene Trottier, I am sorry about that. Please
    continue.
        Ms. Greene Trottier. One distribution practice is known as
    tailgating, and essentially consists of delivery out of the
    back of a truck to clients who are homebound or otherwise may
    be unable to pick up food for the month. Poor internet access
    makes the practice of tailgating very difficult. Tribal
    communities have some of the lowest access to broadband in the
    entire country, and where that access does exist, it comes with
    an average speed 66 percent slower than any other areas. This
    is especially problematic for FDPIR when we are transferring to
    a new inventory system that doesn't accommodate mobile usage,
    so that cripples our tailgating sites and finding it difficult,
    if not impossible, to use the new software developed on
    tailgating sites. Mobile markets would be another addition that
    would be beneficial for FDPIR sites.
        Other inventory management software programs exist that
    could both meet Federal data and privacy standards and work
    better for ITOs, so there are other models out there that we
    are looking to use.
        In the spirit of self-determination and to solve some of
    these problems, Tribes have recently requested that USDA look
    more broadly at allowable software systems that better suit our
    daily operations. While USDA has agreed they have the legal
    authority to authorize this, it has not yet utilized that
    authority to--and unable to present a timely time table for
    FDPIR. We will continue to work with our Tribal leadership to
    discuss this issue and the government-to-government
    consultation with USDA officials.
        Some of the impacts that we have had for food distribution,
    the COVID pandemic has had a disastrous impact on supply chain
    issues and the U.S. overall food system, and FDPIR has
    significantly felt those impacts. When the pandemic began in
    March 2020, our program saw an immediate rise in participation,
    with half of ITOs reporting that they certified over 600 new
    households in 1 week during the first week in March.
        The rise in participation put a strain on inventory
    initially. Fresh produce deliveries were significantly delayed
    and are even feeling the impacts of the supply chain crisis
    right now, especially with fresh produce, which is one of our
    important products that we offer for our participants.
        One of the ways that we can address these issues would be
    through opening up more local sourcing opportunities for these
    products in a way that looks similar to what USDA accomplished
    in the early rounds of the Farmers to Families Food Boxes. ITOs
    would be willing to work directly with local vendors to source
    local fruits and vegetables. It would eliminate a whole host of
    fresh produce delivery problems. The food would be traveling
    shorter distances, and therefore far less likely to arrive
    spoiled or rotten. By prioritizing local purchasing, it would
    also provide that market opportunity for native producers.
        Investing in agriculture through nutrition programs is a
    huge benefit for everyone. Tribal citizens will have more
    access to good food, and native producers will have a chance to
    grow their businesses, create jobs, and support the local
    Tribal economy.
        The 2018 Farm Bill made several adjustments for FDPIR that
    ITO program managers and Tribal leaders have been seeking for a
    long time. One of the most exciting changes is the ``638'' *
    demonstration project. This project acknowledges Tribal
    sovereignty and food system by authorizing Tribes to procure
    foods directly for the food package instead of going through
    USDA and having the Federal Government choose what food
    products are best for us. The 638 contracts started working a
    couple of months ago, and they are already ensuring that
    Tribally-grown nutritious foods are making their way to the
    tables of Native Americans.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        * Editor's note: 638 refers to Pub. L. 93-638, the Indian Self-
    Determination and Education Assistance Act.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Although 638 contracts were awarded at the end of September
    2021 and Tribes were prepared immediately to purchase and
    provide these Native American produced foods to their own
    people, the system issues delayed them. At least two out of the
    638 Tribes have had the decision to make to either wait up to 8
    additional weeks to start delivering fresh produce to their
    participants, or undertake the process of manually recording
    inventory until the product codes can be pushed through the
    system. So, there are some glitches----
        The Chairwoman. Ms. Greene Trottier----
        Ms. Greene Trottier.--with our inventory management system
    that we need to address, upgrade, and keep our inventories
    accurate.
        [The prepared statement of Ms. Greene Trottier follows:]

        Prepared Statement of Mary Greene Trottier, President, National
       Association of Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations;
    Director of Food Distribution Programs, Spirit Lake Tribe, Fort Totten,
                                       ND
    Introduction
        Chairwoman Hayes, Ranking Member Bacon, and Members of the
    Committee, my name is Mary Greene Trottier. I am a member of the Spirit
    Lake Sioux Nation and President of the National Association of Food
    Distribution Programs on Indian Reservations (NAFDPIR). I also serve as
    the manager for my food distribution program in Fort Totten, North
    Dakota, where we regularly serve approximately 850 people through FDPIR
    each month. This program is a critical part of our food security safety
    net in my community, and I would like to thank the Committee for asking
    me to testify today about this important program.
    About FDPIR
        The Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR)
    provides both food assistance and nutrition education to nearly 100,000
    people across Indian Country each month. The program employs Tribal and
    local community members in over 100 Indian Tribal Organizations (ITOs)
    who administer the program locally for citizens of 276 different
    Tribes. While over \1/2\ of FDPIR participants are working men and
    women, many of whom have young children at home, FDPIR also serves a
    significant number of elders--nearly \1/2\ of FDPIR households have
    members over the age of sixty.
        We employ Tribal members like myself at ITOs across the country,
    where we serve our communities as ITO managers, ITO staff, warehouse
    employees, and more. FDPIR has also provided a means for some of our
    Tribal food businesses and producers to access the USDA Commodity Foods
    market and sell food directly to USDA for use in our food packages. In
    this way, our participants gain access to traditional foods like wild
    rice, bison, blue cornmeal, salmon, and catfish, while Tribally owned
    food businesses see the benefits of economic development through
    agricultural production. Recent developments in the 2018 Farm Bill have
    further opened up that market opportunity for our Tribal producers, and
    I will discuss those impacts later in my testimony.
        FDPIR is a critical part of our food security safety net for our
    rural and remote reservation communities where many of our people lack
    meaningful access to a full-service grocery store or convenience store
    that might serve as a Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
    vendor. As a commodities program providing food directly to our
    participants, FDPIR serves as a critical stopgap for Tribal citizens in
    places with no or limited access to stores or transportation. In
    addition to providing a food package that ranks incredibly high on the
    USDA's Healthy Eating Index, we also strive to provide nutrition
    education opportunities to our participants, to the extent that we are
    able with our limited nutrition education funding.
        The ITO program managers who administer this program across Indian
    Country have been working with their Tribal leadership for decades--
    some of us since the program began in the 1970s--to improve the quality
    and nutrition of the products offered in the food package. Today,
    because of that work and advocacy, we offer fresh fruits and vegetables
    in the food package year-round, as well as a small but growing variety
    of traditional and culturally appropriate foods, including wild rice,
    bison, salmon, blue cornmeal, lamb and mutton, catfish, and more. These
    foods are not only incredibly nutritious--high in omega 3 fatty acids
    that support heart health and cognition--but they are also more
    frequently being sourced from Tribal food producers, which supports
    Tribal economies across Indian Country.
    Current Operations
        Currently, FDPIR is serving approximately 75,000-80,000 people each
    month across Indian Country, administered on the ground by a little
    over 100 Indian Tribal Organizations (ITOs), the Indian Country
    equivalent of State Agencies. Although Federal regulations are in place
    that guide the overall structure of the program and available foods in
    the package, ITOs do have some flexibility with program setup and
    delivery. Some ITOs are set up as a warehouse model where participants
    come to pick up assembled food packages, while others are set up as a
    storefront concept where participants come and shop for their monthly
    food package like they would in a store, selecting allowable products
    as determined by USDA.
        One of the distribution practices in FDPIR that has received some
    criticism is the practice of tailgating, or what is essentially
    delivery of FDPIR food packages to participants who may be homebound or
    otherwise unable to come to the ITO for pickup. While I do not agree
    that tailgating should be ended, because in many cases those deliveries
    are the only ways Tribal elders receive their food packages, the
    criticisms of this practice that have come from some Tribal nutrition
    advocates are understandable. From their perspective, this practice is
    a direct callback to a time when the Federal Government ``fulfilled''
    its trust responsibility to Tribal Nations by dumping rotting
    foodstuffs in Tribal communities. The impact of that historical trauma
    is still present in our communities today, and that drives a lot of the
    critiques of tailgating. Modern tailgating as offered by Tribes, for
    Tribal citizens, however, is not at all like that horrible practice of
    dumped food from a faceless and uncaring Federal Government. Instead,
    ITOs making food deliveries and tailgating today do it as part of a
    service to their community. Food is delivered safely in refrigerated
    vehicles where refrigeration is needed, and prior to COVID-19 and the
    need for social distancing, ITO staff would often be welcomed into our
    elders' homes to help unpackage heavy boxes of food and visit with them
    at the same time, providing a vital social lifeline for our homebound
    elders.
        The main issue we are actually having with tailgating now is not
    bad service from the Federal Government, but bad internet service.
    Tribal communities have some of the lowest access to broadband in the
    entire country, and where that access does exist it comes with an
    average speed that is 66% slower than other areas. This is problematic
    for FDPIR for many reasons, but especially now as we are working to
    transition to a new inventory management software. This software, the
    Integrated Food Management System (IFMS) was developed by a Federal
    contractor using USDA specifications. Unfortunately, despite early
    feedback and concerns from ITOs, IFMS does not accommodate mobile
    usage, so sites that offer tailgating services are finding it difficult
    if not impossible to utilize this new software on tailgating runs
    because of the lack of mobile functionality and limited internet
    service. To be able to properly adjust inventory while on deliveries,
    the software needs to be able to function on a mobile phone using
    cellular data, or more ideally, a strong WiFi signal, neither of which
    is currently possible with the system as developed.
        There are other inventory management software programs that could
    both meet Federal data and privacy standards and work better for ITOs.
    In the spirit of self-determination and to solve some of these problems
    ourselves, Tribes have recently requested that USDA look more broadly
    at allowable software systems and authorize FDPIR sites to use our
    administrative funds to support licensing our own software that suits
    our daily operations. While USDA has agreed that they do have the legal
    authority to authorize this, the Department has not yet decided whether
    or not they want to utilize that authority. We continue to work with
    our Tribal leadership to discuss this issue in government-to-government
    consultation with USDA officials, and just concluded a consultation
    yesterday on this issue.
    Pandemic Impacts on FDPIR
        The ongoing COVID-19 pandemic has had disastrous impacts on supply
    chains and the overall U.S. food system, and FDPIR has certainly felt
    those impacts as well. When the pandemic began in March 2020, our
    program saw an immediate rise in participation as Tribal Governments
    closed borders and businesses to try and slow the spread of the
    coronavirus. Between March and April 2020, the program as a whole saw a
    14% average rise in participation, with 50% of all ITOs reporting that
    they certified over 600 new households in 1 week in March 2020. That
    rise in participation put a strain on inventory initially, with 66% of
    ITOs reporting in March/April 2020 that they were out of some inventory
    items and 43% of ITOs reporting that fresh fruits and vegetables were
    out of stock.
        Fresh produce deliveries were very much impacted by the pandemic.
    Many of our sites are so rural and remote that fresh produce trucks
    servicing our sites are not only carrying produce for FDPIR on their
    delivery trucks, but also shipments for local schools, restaurants, and
    other businesses. As schools and restaurants closed down in response to
    the pandemic, those delivery companies could no longer fill trucks and
    justify the expense of sending a driver and paying for fuel to just one
    site--so in my region, Mountain Plains, we had deliveries of produce
    that were incredibly delayed. Delaying shipment of fresh produce of
    course means that there is a higher potential for produce to be spoiled
    when it does finally arrive, and waiting for USDA to work with the
    Department of Defense Fresh Program to replace that produce frequently
    took weeks. This reduced the fresh produce offerings we were able to
    provide to our participants. Those issues have not entirely stopped,
    either--even now in late 2021, we are still experiencing supply chain
    issues around fresh produce.
        One way to address the ongoing produce issues that some FDPIR sites
    experience would be opening up more local sourcing opportunities for
    those products, in a way that looks similar to what USDA accomplished
    with the early rounds of the Farmers to Families Food Box Program in
    2020. When that program debuted, Tribal leaders and the NAFDPIR Board
    recognized the model AMS was using immediately, because it was exactly
    what we have been asking for in FDPIR for years. Moving to a system
    like Farmers to Families, where ITO's and Tribes are able to work
    directly with local vendors to source fresh fruits and vegetables would
    eliminate a whole host of fresh produce delivery problems and result in
    more regular offerings of nutritious food for our participants. Because
    the food would be traveling shorter distances, it would also be far
    less likely to arrive spoiled or rotten, and because we would be
    prioritizing local purchasing it would also provide that market
    opportunity for Native producers. Investing in agriculture through
    nutrition programs is a huge benefit for everyone: Tribal citizens have
    more access to good food, and Native producers have a chance to grow
    their businesses, create jobs, and support the local Tribal economy.
    Farm Bill 2018 Implementation: ``638'' for FDPIR
        The 2018 Farm Bill made several adjustments to FDPIR that ITO
    program managers and Tribal leaders had been seeking for a long time,
    but the most exciting one of those changes is likely the application
    for the first time of ``638'' authority to USDA. This demonstration
    project acknowledges Tribal sovereignty in food systems by authorizing
    Tribes to produce food products directly for the food package instead
    of going through USDA and having the Federal Government choose what
    food products are best for us.
        The first 638 contracts started work just a couple of months ago,
    and are already ensuring that Tribally grown nutritious foods are
    making their way to their participants, like halibut in programs served
    by the Alaska Native Tribal Health Consortium; bison, whitefish, wild
    rice, apples and lake trout from Oneida and Menominee; walleye, shell
    eggs, and an entire package of fresh produce from Little Traverse Bay
    Bands of Odawa Indians; beef and roast beef from Chickasaw Nation;
    fresh produce from Mississippi Band of Choctaw Indians; salmon from
    Lummi Nation; and whitefish, wild rice, and fresh produce from Red
    Cliff Band of Superior Chippewa. These contracts and associated award
    costs totaled $3.5 million in spending, leaving USDA with $2 million
    remaining in current appropriations to continue the good work this
    program is doing for Tribal citizens and Native food producers.
        Aside from ensuring that the demonstration project continues to
    receive annual appropriations of at least $3 million, if not the full
    $5 million authorized by the 2018 Farm Bill, one of the more
    significant hurdles to swiftly implementing this provision has actually
    been the computer systems issue that I raised earlier. Because the food
    products Tribes are sourcing have not previously been part of the food
    package, they must have product codes created for them so that they can
    be received into and processed out of site inventory. This is a best
    practice for inventory management that ITOs are happy to follow,
    however, the delays in addressing technical issues with IFMS have also
    delayed creation and deployment of these new product codes. The end
    result of this delay is that although 638 contracts were awarded at the
    end of September 2021 and Tribes were prepared to immediately purchase
    and provide Native produced foods to their people through these
    contracts, the system was not ready to receive them. At least two of
    the 638 Tribes have had to make the decision to either wait up to 8
    additional weeks to start delivering fresh products to their
    participants, or undertake the process of manually recording inventory
    until product codes can be pushed out through system updates.
        All of these things may sound like a normal cost of doing business
    in a retail environment--but it's important to remember that FDPIR is
    not a retail environment. Our program is a public service that provides
    food to our people, and in some cases, we are their sole source of
    nutritious food products or nutrition education, especially nutrition
    education done in a culturally relevant way. As Tribal Nations, we also
    come to the administration of this program from a different perspective
    than similar commodity programs run primarily for non-Native audiences.
    For Tribes, this is a matter of sovereignty and a means of renewing our
    food systems in a good way that seeks to heal from some of the past
    historical trauma associated with Federal food provisioning, like the
    example about food dumped on riverbanks. Those traumas are still
    associated with food in our communities, and that means when problems
    like these discussed here today continue to occur over decades in a
    program we see as an extension of the trust responsibility the Federal
    Government owes to Tribal Nations, we view those problems not just as
    frustrations, but as further disparate treatment from the Federal
    Government.
        Continued Nation to Nation consultation with USDA has gone a long
    way to solving some of our longstanding programmatic issues, however.
    Over the past three Presidential Administrations our Tribal leaders
    have talked directly with USDA officials about FDPIR and the service it
    provides to our communities. We are hopeful that this continued
    dialogue will support further progress, not only for FDPIR, but for
    other commodity assistance programs, such as the Commodity Supplemental
    Food Program (CSFP). CSFP is one of the only other commodity programs
    that Tribes are legally eligible to administer--others, like The
    Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) currently do not include
    Tribal Nations as statutorily eligible to administer. I run my Tribe's
    CSFP program in addition to our FDPIR program, and can state
    unequivocally that there is significant work to be done in bringing
    CSFP food offerings up to the standard that we are able to offer in
    FDPIR. The inventory we are provided through CSFP is not of the same
    quality as FDPIR and often comes in truly bizarre packaging--one recent
    example from the past year were gallon Ziploc bags of spaghetti sauce
    intended to be handed out through CSFP to our Tribal elders. We have
    requested consultation with USDA on these and similar CSFP issues and
    hope to open up that conversation soon so that we can address some of
    these problems.
    Future Policy Pathways to Improved Nutrition Distribution Service in
            Indian Country
        Expanding the FDPIR 638 demonstration project from the 2018 Farm
    Bill and making it permanent, with mandatory funding, would be a
    wonderful pathway to continue increasing Tribal citizens' access to
    nutritious, traditional and culturally appropriate foods, as well as
    fresh fruits and vegetables. The program could also use another influx
    of infrastructure dollars--the $50 million in CARES Act funds that
    Congress appropriated last year for this was a significant help to
    program sites that have not been able to upgrade their warehouse
    facilities and vehicles in decades, but the cost increases in materials
    for those upgrades, especially construction, meant that not every FDPIR
    site was able to take advantage of that new funding to response to
    coronavirus pandemic impacts. Some FDPIR sites actually declined to
    apply for the funds because they knew their neighboring sites or other
    sites in their regions had deeper needs. Another influx of
    infrastructure dollars would help serve every site and make sure each
    ITO has their needs met.
        We also need increased access to nutrition education dollars so
    that Tribes can provide nutrition education directly to Tribal citizens
    instead of forcing us to go through State Agencies to access those
    funds. The President's FY22 budget requested a small increase in
    nutrition education funds for FDPIR, which is a great start. But the
    largest pool of nutrition education dollars in USDA's programming is
    the SNAP-Ed program, and Tribal Nations and ITOs are not included as
    eligible applicants for these programs. That would require a statutory
    change in the 2023 Farm Bill. Having an increased opportunity to
    provide nutrition education right now would be well-timed, as our
    program is starting to see more traditional foods and fresh produce
    from the 638 contracting, and USDA is partnering with Indigenous chefs
    like Sean Sherman to do demo recipes using those traditional foods.
    That kind of Indigenous-led education about our foods reconnects
    Indigenous people to the nutritious foods that kept us healthy and
    thriving for thousands of years, but we currently lack the funding
    capacity within our program to provide that as a regular service.
    Instead, ITOs compete for a small amount of funding annually that
    cannot cover every FDPIR participant. This pits Tribes against each
    other when we could be working more cooperatively if we were all fully
    eligible for funding, but ultimately the people who are harmed by this
    lack of funding are our Tribal citizens.
        It is always important to remember that not every Tribe is a self-
    governance Tribe, however, and we need to continue to see policies that
    support both self-governance and direct service Tribes in feeding their
    people the best possible food. Working with USDA to offer more
    localized purchasing of fresh fruits and vegetables through the
    Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS), for example, would be a way to
    support direct service Tribes; expanding 638 to source more foods and
    making that a permanent part of the program would support self-
    governance Tribes. Both policy pathways lead to a place where Tribal
    citizens are eating better food likely sourced from Native producers,
    and both are important to have in place at the same time, because there
    is no one size fits all solution when you are addressing the needs of
    574 sovereign Tribal Nations.

        The Chairwoman. Thank you. Ms. Greene Trottier, we are over
    the 5 minutes.
        Ms. Greene Trottier. Okay.
        The Chairwoman. I would ask you to stop there. I apologize
    for calling you by the wrong name earlier. I skipped ahead in
    my script. Thank you.
        I now recognize Mr. Kubik for 5 minutes of testimony.
    Please begin when you are ready.

               STATEMENT OF FRANK KUBIK, DIRECTOR OF THE
    COMMODITY SUPPLEMENTAL FOOD PROGRAM, FOCUS: HOPE; MEMBER, BOARD
                        OF DIRECTORS, NATIONAL
                  COMMODITY SUPPLEMENTAL FOOD PROGRAM
                        ASSOCIATION, DETROIT, MI

        Mr. Kubik. Thank you. Good morning, Chairwoman Hayes and
    Ranking Member Bacon, Members of the Subcommittee. Thank you
    for this invitation to speak about the Commodity Supplemental
    Food Program today. I am grateful for this opportunity.
        CSFP has a long history of supporting our at-risk senior
    population by providing regular access to food items to
    supplement a healthy diet for them. The monthly food boxes
    provide a variety of items that can be incorporated into meals
    throughout a given month, reducing out-of-pocket costs and
    allowing senior income to be used for other food, medicine, or
    personal household needs, helping the senior to remain healthy
    and independent.
        I want to thank this Subcommittee for improvements to the
    certification process in the last farm bill, and for their long
    consistent support for our program. Extending the certification
    period from 1 year to 3 years results in easing the paperwork
    burden on program operators, and more importantly, it allows
    senior participants, whose financial situation is not likely to
    change significantly, it allows them to stay enrolled in this
    important program while they need it the most.
        We are hopeful that the next farm bill will address the
    issue of allowing seniors at risk to receive the program
    services that they need but are currently ineligible for.
    Removing the Medicare deduction from the senior's income
    determination is one idea that we are looking at.
        These past 2 years have been challenging, not only for
    participants, but for the staff and volunteers who run CSFP.
    Normal practices had to be quickly set aside in the face of the
    pandemic to protect those most susceptible. Stay-at-home
    orders, social distancing, and personal protection for
    essential workers combined to help keep us safe, but forced our
    agencies to revamp many of their distribution practices for the
    safety of all involved. Thank you to the Food Nutrition Service
    at USDA for their additional administrative action to help
    participants of programs and the workers and volunteers to stay
    safe while distributing and receiving the needed food package.
        The practice of participants entering a building to stand
    and wait in line for food was replaced by drive-through
    distribution boxes at many sites. Agencies set up social
    distancing areas and used personal protection equipment and
    drive-through pickup to allow participants to stay safe in
    their cars. Some put up tents in their parking lots to help
    staff and volunteers all through the elements. Others added or
    expanded delivery programs. Michigan winters are challenging,
    but the dedicated staff and volunteers stepped up to ensure
    that program participants continued to receive the nutritious
    food that they needed. Local agencies continued and expanded
    the use of proxies for food pick up, allowing seniors to stay
    home. They used automated calling services to announce closures
    and reschedule distributions. They used phone apps and signage
    to keep the lines moving. Some agencies used a third party,
    such as Amazon, to help deliver boxes to seniors who are
    homebound. And while these efforts kept distributions going,
    there are areas beyond their control that limited program
    operations.
        Stay-at-home orders kept participants away from
    distribution sites. New COVID variants, personal safety
    concerns, and lack of personal transportation continue to limit
    participation. Despite all of this, agencies combined to serve
    their senior participants and not one senior in our program at
    Focus: HOPE went without their food box, no matter what their
    situation was in regards to COVID. Thank you to the dedicated
    staff and volunteers who make this possible.
        CSFP became available in all 50 states in 2019. National
    program caseload has remained the same since 2019, with
    caseload adjustments made between regions and states to support
    distribution trends. We are working to maintain distribution
    levels and expect higher participation rates as the pandemic
    subsides and participant levels rise as previous participants
    return and new participants join in the program. In addition,
    beyond the effects of the pandemic, the population of
    potentially eligible CSFP participants is expected to grow as
    baby boomers age into the required age bracket.
        States and partner agencies have the benefit of maintaining
    CSFP caseload and funding last year, and will benefit from the
    same opportunity moving forward as the program and
    participation stabilize.
        I would like to take this opportunity to thank the USDA
    Midwest Region Food Nutrition Service and the Michigan
    Department of Education, Office of Health and Nutrition
    Services for all of their support in the State of Michigan and
    the entire Midwest region. They are great partners in the fight
    to end hunger in this country.
        Working for others is an honor and a privilege. Thank you,
    Madam Chairwoman and Members of the Subcommittee, for allowing
    us to do our part and for your support of the Commodity
    Supplemental Food Program. We are deeply appreciative of you,
    and I know that the seniors who are on the program that you
    have impacted share my appreciation for all that you have done
    and continue to do on their behalf. Thank you for your
    continued support of CSFP and the seniors across the country
    who need their basic services.
        Thank you very much.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Kubik follows:]

         Prepared Statement of Frank Kubik, Director of the Commodity
      Supplemental Food Program, Focus: HOPE; Member, Board of Directors,
     National Commodity Supplemental Food Program Association, Detroit, MI
        Chairwoman Hayes and Members of the Nutrition Subcommittee,

        My name is Frank Kubik. I am the Commodity Supplemental Food
    Program (CSFP) Director at Focus: HOPE in Detroit, Michigan and I am
    also a board member of the National CSFP Association. Thank you for the
    invitation to speak about CSFP here today. I am grateful for the
    opportunity to share the efforts and effects of the CSFP over the past
    2 years.
        CSFP has a long history of supporting our senior population by
    providing regular access to food items that supplement a healthy diet
    for seniors. The monthly food boxes provide a variety of items that can
    be incorporated into meals throughout a given month, reducing out of
    pocket food costs, and allowing senior income to be used for other
    food, medicine, or personal and household needs.
        I want to thank this Subcommittee for improvements to the
    certification process for CSFP in the last farm bill. Extending the
    certification period for our senior participants from 1 year to 3 years
    resulted in easing the paperwork burden on program operators. More
    importantly, it allows senior participants, whose financial situation
    is not likely to change significantly, to stay enrolled on this
    important program while they need it the most. We are hopeful that the
    next farm bill will address the issue of allowing seniors to receive
    the program services while they may currently be ineligible but still
    in need of CSFP. Removing the Medicare deduction from a senior's income
    determination is one idea that we are looking at.
        CSFP provides more than just food. Our distributions provide
    information on healthy meal planning and lifestyle choices. Where
    possible, some offer health screenings, cooking demonstrations, tax
    assistance, utility assistance, and even access to other food programs
    such as The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP). CSFP
    distributions provide social interaction and connection for seniors 60
    years of age or older, providing comfort in the face of need.
        My comments today are mostly representative of the experiences and
    efforts in Michigan, with some additional awareness of national efforts
    from my role as a member of the National CSFP Association. These past 2
    years have been challenging, not only for our participants, but for the
    staff and volunteers who run CSFP. Normal practices had to be quickly
    set aside in the face of the pandemic to protect those most
    susceptible. Stay at home orders, social distancing, and personal
    protection for essential workers combined to help keep us safe but
    forced our agencies to revamp many of their distribution practices for
    the safety of all involved.
        The practice of participants entering a building to stand and wait
    in line for food was replaced by drive through distribution of boxes at
    many sites. Agencies set up social distancing areas and used personal
    protection equipment and drive through pick-up to allow participants to
    stay safe in their cars. Some put up tents in their parking lots to
    keep staff and volunteers out of the elements. Others added or expanded
    delivery programs. They continued and expanded the use of proxies for
    food box pick up, allowing seniors to stay home. They used automated
    calling services to announce closures and rescheduled distributions.
    They used phone apps and signage to keep the lines moving. Some
    agencies used a third party, such as Amazon, to help deliver boxes to
    seniors who were homebound. And while these efforts kept distributions
    going, there were areas beyond their control that limited program
    operations.
        At times, some agencies had to close down due to quarantine and
    outbreaks. Stay at home orders kept participants away from distribution
    sites. New [COVID] variants, personal safety concerns, and lack of
    personal transportation continue to limit participation. The
    availability of CSFP food items decreased. Canned fruit and vegetables
    due to packaging material shortages, and Ultra High Temperature (UHT)
    fluid milk due to increase prices in the commercial food market,
    resulted in reduced food packages for extended periods of time,
    continuing still today for canned fruits and vegetables as national
    inventories continue to be replaced and built up to previous levels.
        CSFP became available in all 50 states in 2019, as well as in six
    federally recognized Tribes and Puerto Rico. National program caseload
    has remained the same since 2019, with caseload adjustments made
    between regions and states to support distribution trends. We are
    working to maintain distribution levels and expect higher participation
    rates as the pandemic subsides and participant levels rise as previous
    participants return and new participants join to become active
    participants. In addition, beyond the effects of the pandemic, the
    population of potentially eligible CSFP participants is projected to
    grow as baby boomers age into the required age bracket.
        While additional food program support was much needed over the past
    2 years, programs such as CARES, Families First, [COVID] Supplemental,
    Farmers to Families, and others provided alternatives to CSFP
    participants that may have been more accessible at times. Those
    programs provided temporary support and have ended or transitioned into
    other programs, and CSFP is working back to full packages for
    distribution as participants both old and new seek food support moving
    forward. States and partner agencies had the benefit of maintaining
    CSFP caseload and funding last year and would benefit from the same
    opportunity moving forward as the program and participation stabilize.
        Thank you again for the chance to share with you today.

        The Chairwoman. Thank you, Mr. Kubik. I really appreciate
    your testimony.
        I will now move to Mr. Donaldson. If you are ready, please
    begin your testimony.

    STATEMENT OF DAVE DONALDSON, CO-FOUNDER AND CHAIRMAN, CityServe
                     INTERNATIONAL, BAKERSFIELD, CA

        Mr. Donaldson. Good morning, Chairwoman Hayes, Ranking
    Member Bacon, Chairman Scott, and Ranking Member Thompson of
    the full Agriculture Committee, and the Members of the
    Subcommittee. CityServe International offers the following
    comments on USDA's nutrition distribution programs and the role
    that faith-based organizations can provide in the execution of
    these programs.
        I am grateful for your service on the Committee for a
    couple of reasons. First, I married a farmer's daughter from
    North Dakota, and I managed our ranch there for several years
    while she taught school. And so, she ran from bell to bell as
    well, Chairwoman Hayes. But I know the value of family farms
    and what they offer to our nation.
        Second, I know what it is like to go to bed hungry. In
    1969, my parents were hit head-on by a drunk driver, killing my
    dad and debilitating my mother for many years. It was a village
    comprised of government, food banks, churches that provided
    food, clothing, and hope that we can make it through the
    crisis. Subsequently, my mother got on her feet and became a
    lead buyer for Dow Chemical. Now, let me just add, it was a
    combination of the aid, but also the life coaching of a trusted
    friend.
        CityServe International is a 501(c)(3) tax exempt faith-
    based organization that provides logistical and structural
    guidance to churches that feel ill-equipped to fully reach the
    needs of their communities. CityServe is aware of TEFAP, CSFP,
    FDPIR, and while we acknowledge the goals of these programs,
    gaps exist among them in both rural and urban communities.
    Moreover, access to them to further drive down community and
    regional hunger has not been made available yet to our
    organization. Our experience with government funding programs
    is linked to USDA's Agricultural Marketing Services, Farmers to
    Families Food Box Program. By all acknowledgment, the Food Box
    Program was a new and innovative program geared to respond to
    anyone in the U.S. facing food insecurity due to COVID-19. The
    Food Box Program, however, was catalytic in discovering other
    needs of families that CityServe and our partners were able to
    tangibly meet, such as beds, diapers, school supplies, home
    furnishings that we provided through our many warehouse hubs
    and points of distribution.
        But during each distribution, CityServe cultivated trusted
    relationships with under-resourced families, and we were able
    to successfully link many of them to public and private
    programs geared towards helping them move from dependency to
    stability.
        Under the program, CityServe and its 2,000+ affiliated
    organizations, that include National Baptist Convention, World
    Vision, Hispanic networks, together we came together to make
    sure that the neediest among us would receive food. The program
    has effectively responded to the persistent economic disruptive
    effects in urban and rural communities, and also with our
    Tribal nations. And it was also transformative, reaching those
    acutely affected by the recent joblessness and long-term
    unemployment, and many had even given up on seeking employment
    opportunities and traditional government social support
    systems.
        On a personal note, I participated in many of the
    distributions as part of the means testing, and spoke with
    people about their need for the food boxes. Nearly every person
    I spoke to said they were running out of food and felt alone in
    their struggle. And I cannot adequately describe the importance
    of the social interaction that this program brought to people
    that were cut off from the support systems of their friends and
    churches. And so, this degree of interaction was important. It
    may not be available in some of the traditional USDA food
    distribution outlets.
        Many valuable lessons were learned from the Food Box
    Program. With these, CityServe and others across the country
    are right now attempting to replicate the program with private
    funding. CityServe is currently conducting a Food Box Program
    distribution in several states. We actually have instructions
    and recipes on how to really live a good balanced life.
        Despite the resources of the Federal Government and
    redeploying the Food Box Program, and its inclusion of faith
    and community-based organizations could significantly bridge
    gaps in current USDA programs and could curb food insecurity
    among all ages, genders, ethnicities in both rural and urban
    communities. CityServe highly encourages Congress to restore
    the Food Box Program as a tool within USDA's nutrition
    distribution programs.
        CityServe thanks the Subcommittee for inviting us to
    provide testimony, and is committed to the conversation and
    action towards improving the efficiency, reach, and value of
    Federal nutrition assistance and distribution programs.
        Thank you.
        [The prepared statement of Mr. Donaldson follows:]

        Prepared Statement of Dave Donaldson, Co-Founder and Chairman,
                    CityServe International, Bakersfield, CA
        Chairwoman Hayes, Ranking Member Bacon, and Members of the
    Subcommittee, CityServe International (CityServe) offers the following
    comments on USDA's nutrition distribution programs and the role that
    faith-based organizations can provide in the execution of these
    programs.
        My name is Dave Donaldson. I am the co-founder and Chairman of
    CityServe International. I am grateful to each of you for your service
    on the Agriculture Committee for a couple reasons: First, I married a
    farmer's daughter from North Dakota and helped to manage our ranch in
    North Dakota for several years, so I know the value family farms bring
    to our nation. Also, I know what it is like to go to bed hungry. In
    1969 my parents were hit head-on by a drunk driver killing my dad and
    debilitating my mother for many years. A village comprised of
    government, food banks and churches provided food and clothing with the
    hope that we could make it through the crisis. Subsequently, my mother
    got on her feet and became a lead buyer for Dow Chemical.
    Background
        CityServe International is a [501(c)(3)] tax-exempt faith-based
    organization that provides logistical and structural guidance to
    churches that feel ill equipped to fully reach and meet the needs of
    their local communities. Local needs and community initiatives include
    addressing hunger as well as meeting the needs of the poor and
    disaffected, the addicted, and the exploited. Through capacity and
    partnership building, CityServe assists in empowering churches to make
    greater community engagement and impacts across the world. CityServe's
    collaborative network includes faith-based nonprofits, corporations,
    retail stores, farmers, and ranchers among other food supply
    partnerships.
        Since 2016 the CityServe supply chain comprised of warehouse
    ``HUB's'' channeled millions worth of household goods, furniture,
    school supplies, toys, and food to local churches serving their
    communities. Local churches are the primary Point of Distribution
    (POD). Each POD has committed to be actively involved with their
    neighborhoods and community through compassion initiatives. In 2020,
    CityServe and its Regional Affiliates distributed over $500 million of
    in-kind gifts through PODs to needy families across America. At the
    urging of my wife who taught school for 13 years we are even developing
    Teacher Resource Centers to furnish teachers with school supplies. It
    should be noted that instead of this product ending up in landfills it
    is meeting tangible needs.
    Current USDA Nutrition Distribution Programs
        Specific to USDA's currently operated nutrition distribution
    programs, CityServe is aware of The Emergency Food Assistance Program
    (TEFAP), the Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP), and the Food
    Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR). CityServe
    acknowledges the goals of these programs to meet the nutritional needs
    of vulnerable American citizens. We also recognize, however, that gaps
    exist within and among these programs in both rural and urban
    communities.
        It is well known that over 40 million Americans face hunger every
    day and that food insecurity affects all genders, ethnicities, ages,
    and backgrounds. Through-out the CityServe network we have established
    over 2,000 distribution sites that have been trained in proper food
    management and distribution. Despite working with varying ethic groups,
    seniors, and children, CityServe and its affiliate members have not
    participated in TEFAP, CSFP, or FDPIR. While we acknowledge the work of
    these programs, access to them to further drive down community and
    regional hunger has not been available to our organization.
    Pandemic Response--Farmers to Families Food Box Program
        In May 2020, USDA's Agricultural Marketing Service developed and
    executed the Farmers to Families Food Box Program. By all
    acknowledgement, this new and innovative program was geared to respond
    to anyone in the U.S. facing food insecurity due to Sars-CoV-2, also
    known as the novel coronavirus (COVID-19). The food box program,
    however, has been catalytic in discovering other needs of families that
    CityServe has been able to tangibly meet by providing beds, diapers,
    school supplies, and home furnishings, among other needs. During each
    distribution, which represented 17 million boxes from June 2020 through
    May 2021, CityServe cultivated the trust of under-resourced families
    and successfully linked them to both public and private programs geared
    towards helping them move from dependency to stability.
        During the operation of the box program, CityServe and its 2,000+
    affiliated organizations which included hundreds of African American
    led churches within the National Baptist Convention, Hispanic churches,
    and great organizations like World Vision, we worked to ensure the
    neediest among us had the opportunity to receive food who would
    otherwise go without sustenance due to no fault of their own. The
    program effectively responded to the significant and persistent
    economic disruptive effects on urban and rural communities across
    America. In addition, it would become transformative in not just
    reaching those acutely affected by recent joblessness, but also the
    long-term unemployed who had given up on both employment opportunities
    and traditional government social support systems.
        On a personal note, I participated in many of the distributions and
    as part of the ``Means Testing'' and spoke with people about their need
    for the food boxes. Nearly every person I spoke to said that they were
    running out of food and felt alone in their struggle. I cannot
    adequately convey the importance of the food but also the social
    interaction with people closed off from their support system of
    friends. This degree of interaction is typically not available at
    traditional USDA food distribution outlets.
        As the pandemic persisted in 2020, CityServe shifted its focus
    towards incremental improvements to USDA's food box program and even
    coined the term ``Last Mile'' to describe its mission to assist the
    hardest to reach regions in the nation. USDA subsequently incorporated
    last mile organizations in the program which enabled CityServe, among
    many other nonprofit and faith-based organizations, to efficiently
    maximize the reach of the box program. By the end of the program,
    CityServe and its affiliates assisted in the delivery of 17 million
    food boxes to urban, rural, Tribal Nations and to those in the Rio
    Grande Valley. In addition, CityServe has formed enduring relationships
    with over 30,000 families and individuals who were given a food box but
    now have also found new purpose and commitments within their
    communities.
        It should be noted that the majority of last mile food box
    distribution work was funded through direct donations and targeted
    fundraising. In addition, some USDA contractors voluntarily contributed
    to CityServe in the early rounds of the food box program. These monies
    offset the costs of the last mile deliveries for expenses such as
    personal protective equipment, refrigeration, storage, and
    transportation costs. When last mile was merged into USDA's
    solicitation process, awarded contractors in most cases committed
    resources to faith- and community-based organizations in advance of
    distributions. This action provided for reaching even farther into
    America's food-insecure populations.
        The food box program was the first time CityServe was significantly
    incorporated in a USDA food distribution program. In addition, the
    program's structure provided for higher levels of nutrition with its
    inclusion of fresh fruits, fresh vegetables, and dairy products. While
    the program was discontinued on May 29, 2021, in an assessment of
    USDA's traditional programs in light of the food box program, CityServe
    projects that if an aggressive effort of faith- and community-based
    nonprofit organizations was incorporated within the current body of
    food assistance programs an additional 20 million people annually would
    be reached. This reach would translate in helping pull Americans out of
    poverty and deal with the conditions that contribute to food
    insecurity.
    Post-Pandemic
        Many valuable lessons were learned from the food box program. The
    most significant among them is that the distribution of highly
    perishable food and nutrition assistance generally can be performed in
    ways that were not previously contemplated and tested. Second, the food
    box has proven that the Federal Government can utilize the efficiencies
    and seasonality of food in the free market to purchase and deliver high
    quality, fresh and highly nutritious food at reasonable prices and
    place that food directly in the hands of the food-insecure population.
    Such a program, began and could continue to cure food deserts, assist
    in curbing health issues that are prevalent among low income and food-
    insecure populations, and further the goal of ending hunger in America.
        Because of these lessons, CityServe, food pantries, and food
    producers and distributors across the country are all attempting to
    replicate the program with private funding. CityServe is currently
    conducting food box program distributions in several states. That said,
    the resources of the Federal Government in redeploying the food box
    program and its inclusion of the faith- and community-based
    organization could significantly bridge gaps in current USDA programs
    and curb food insecurity among all genders, ages, and ethnicities in
    both rural and urban communities. CityServe highly encourages Congress
    restore the food box program as a tool within USDA's nutrition
    distribution programs. We also encourage the inclusion of faith- and
    community-based organizations in existing USDA distribution programs.
    Conclusion
        CityServe has assisted in the delivery of 17 million USDA food
    boxes to the ``hardest-to-reach'' communities. Generally, CityServe's
    work represents a community of churches and nonprofit organizations
    that have proven that their assistance is needed and that we will
    continue to be a critical member of the nutrition assistance community
    to respond to that need. The reach of our organization has found food-
    insecure populations in both urban and rural areas and among some in
    Tribal Nations. CityServe takes seriously the work of feeding the
    needy, but in addition it also works to investigate and solve the
    underlining conditions associated with Americans who are food-insecure.
    For this reason, we have developed a network and skill set to reach and
    maintain the connection with families and individuals who are often
    lost within Federal and state social programs. We will continue to
    perform this mission and request that the recommendations above be
    considered and incorporated in the Committee's ongoing work.
        CityServe thanks the Subcommittee for inviting us to provide
    testimony and is committed to the conversation and action towards
    improving the efficiency and value of Federal nutrition assistance and
    distribution programs.

        The Chairwoman. Thank you, Mr. Donaldson.
        At this time, Members will be recognized for questions in
    order of seniority, alternating between Majority and Minority
    Members. You will be recognized for 5 minutes each in order to
    allow us time to get to as many questions as possible. I will
    stop questions after 5 minutes. Please keep your microphones
    muted until you are recognized in order to minimize background
    noise. I will recognize--I am not sure if Ranking Member
    Thompson is still here.
        Mr. Thompson. I am, Madam Chairwoman.
        The Chairwoman. If you would like to be recognized first, I
    will recognize you out of order to ask your questions. Thank
    you for joining us.
        Mr. Thompson. Thank you so much. Thanks for this great
    hearing. Thanks to all the witnesses for your insightful, both
    your written testimony and your oral, testimony.
        Mr. Donaldson, your written testimony references CSFP,
    TEFAP, FDPIR, and acknowledges that gaps exist within and among
    these programs in both rural and urban communities. What are
    those gaps, and what has CityServe done to fill them?
        Mr. Donaldson. Well, thank you for asking that,
    Congressman.
        CityServe has worked hard on building a collaboration of
    faith-based, community-based organizations, and as I mentioned,
    over really 2,300 different distribution sites, many of which
    are in rural areas. We call it the last mile of need, and in
    rural areas, it has been unprecedented to see the many sectors
    come together, government, churches, social services, emergency
    services that have come together to fill those gaps and to make
    sure that nobody is falling through.
        And as I mentioned, I really feel like the key component to
    this network and engaging the churches is the relationship
    side. If you provide--if you wed the social services, which are
    wonderful, such as SNAP and others, and you combine that with
    the relational programs, for example, of churches, that is the
    key, I believe, to helping people move from really dependency
    to sustainability. Obviously, there are people that are
    suffering with mental, physical disabilities that we just need
    to continue to support, and also, we need to respond to victims
    of disasters. But overall, I believe that--like my mom, people
    want to be lifted out of dependency and into sustainability,
    and it has worked.
        Mr. Thompson. Thank you, sir. I mean, really describing the
    amazing moving parts of America's nutritional support that we
    are--I know this Committee is proud to be a part of that.
        In many cases--and I am going to open this up to whoever
    would like to respond. In many cases, food preparation is just
    as important as the types of food selected and distributed.
    Now, I am interested to hear from the panel about your current
    nutrition education efforts that you believe have proven to be
    effective, and can you share your views on practical and easy
    to understand nutritional education recommendations and their
    effects on our communities?
        Any of the witnesses who would care to respond to that?
        Ms. Greene Trottier. This is Mary Greene Trottier. I would
    like to respond that food distribution, we do offer nutrition
    education. Our funding is very limited. We have competitive
    grants that are available to FDPIR participants that is less
    than $1 million. There is additional money in the 2022 budget,
    so we are hoping that we can access some of those dollars.
        The models that we have within our program are very
    sustainable, and they are working. Our clients see us every
    month to pick up food, sometimes two, three, four times a month
    to receive those benefits. So, they have that ability to
    provide that much needed nutrition education in Indian Country.
        Mr. Thompson. Of all the programs that you offer, is there
    one in particular that just really rises to the top, you are
    very proud of and would like to see it replicated, just be a
    great example of a best practice?
        Ms. Greene Trottier. I would have to give a shout-out to my
    program. We offer CSFP, Senior Farmers' Market Program, and the
    nutrition education component along with the food distribution
    program services, and we are also co-located with our local
    SNAP agency. So, that model has been a really good use in our
    country to work together and we are able to provide education
    for both agencies by having them co-located.
        Mr. Thompson. Very good. I know my time is waning here, so
    I don't really have time to hear from the other witnesses. But
    I would ask if you do have best practices that you have
    identified, just great examples of effective nutrition
    education, if you could forward that and share that with the
    Committee, I think we would all benefit from your experiences
    and your successes.
        So, Madam Chairwoman, thank you so much and I yield back.
        The Chairwoman. Thank you, Ranking Member Thompson.
        I now recognize myself for 5 minutes.
        Mr. Rodriguez, you mentioned the need for continued storage
    and distribution funds for food banks. I have heard about this
    same issue back in Connecticut. I led a bipartisan letter with
    Representatives Schrier, Davis, and Young asking for $100
    million for storage and distribution under TEFAP in Fiscal Year
    2022. Is the greater need for storage and distribution funding
    a reflection of a lack of sufficient storage space at food
    banks, more fresh and perishable food being available to your
    clientele, or something else, and how would more funding for
    these purposes help you better support your clients?
        Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
        It is a combination of all three. It is the combination of
    wanting to provide more nutritious food, which tends to be more
    perishable, needing the capacity for food banks, in some cases,
    to store more of it. But more importantly, that last mile of
    distribution, which is the 60,000 local partners that Feeding
    America's network engages with, the faith-based organizations
    and the very diverse partners that we engage with, making sure
    that they have local or sufficient storage capacity to hold
    food, even if it is just temporarily, to get it out to folks in
    a food safe manner.
        So, we need it in our efforts to continue to grow the
    nutritional density of the product that we distribute, and to
    couple it with nutrition education and the financial resources
    so families can shop on their own. This capacity that you
    reference is critical.
        We focus on food first, but not food only, and I think that
    comprehensive approach is what has a profound impact on our
    neighbors.
        The Chairwoman. Thank you. I was pleased to see that food
    banks consider the items received through USDA Foods to be
    highly nutritious and balanced, and include everything from
    fruits and vegetables to eggs, meat, poultry, fish, nuts, milk
    and more.
        The UConn Rudd Center for Food Policy and Health has
    recently done research showing that when food banks provide
    simple nutrition information on the food they offer to
    pantries, food bank clients tend to choose healthier food
    options. In your experience, are the healthy foods provided
    through the USDA Foods in high demand, and do you think
    providing uniform nutrition information across food pantries
    would help clients? I would appreciate any help you can give us
    in dispelling harmful stereotypes about how low-income families
    are not willing to or care about nutritious foods.
        Mr. Rodriguez. In just a few years before the pandemic to
    this current year, our distribution of fresh produce has
    increased from about 15 million pounds to over 35 million
    pounds. If there was no demand by our neighbors that we are
    looking to serve, there would be no distribution.
        What helps in accomplishing that is exactly what you
    mentioned, and what the Congressman asked earlier. Simple
    awareness is the best education. Many folks don't know what a
    rutabaga is, but once we create samples in our test kitchen and
    provide it to local pantries and they taste it with common
    ingredients, everyone knows what a rutabaga is and we can move
    them by the truckload.
        So, there is a lot of diversity in food-insecure Americans
    around the country, and introducing them to new products,
    especially produce, teaching them what the nutritional value
    is, and getting the children involved is something that has
    been a winning recipe for creating awareness and helping us to
    distribute more of that product throughout the country.
        And we have great programs. The SNAP-Ed Program supports
    nutrition education throughout the country. Here in New Jersey,
    we partnered with the state and really bring the two programs
    together to be able to leverage not just the foods that we
    introduce, but proven interventions that can create nutritional
    awareness and healthy habits as well. And it starts with
    something simple: awareness.
        The Chairwoman. Thank you.
        Mr. Kubik, in your testimony, you mentioned that seniors
    with income just above eligibility levels often still need food
    assistance from CSFP. Can you elaborate on what you have seen
    on the ground that speaks to those needs, and how would
    reevaluating what is considered income for the purposes of
    eligibility for the program help that situation?
        Mr. Kubik. We have seen a lot of seniors who come in here
    and have real needs for food, but were slightly over the income
    guidelines based on the Medicare portion of their social
    security. That is considered income even though the money never
    hits the senior's account, and the senior never has access to
    that cash. So, they are missing the program because they just
    went over based on that. We don't have any deductions to
    income. We have a straight flat income requirement. We are not
    asking for a lot. We don't want to add a burden in terms of
    paperwork, administration to the program, but the Medicare
    portion, which is not money that the senior sees, seems to be
    something that we could look at, and not consider income. That
    is all we are saying. We are not looking at any other
    deductions or anything else. We just would like to see that
    Medicare portion not considered income, because we are missing
    seniors who have real needs, and seniors, in our experience,
    don't come for help unless they need help, and I think that
    is----
        The Chairwoman. Thank you. Sorry, my time has expired. I
    yield back.
        I now recognize the Ranking Member, the gentleman from
    Nebraska, Ranking Member Bacon.
        Mr. Bacon. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and I appreciate
    your line of questioning, too. I think nutrition and fresh
    foods is a very important topic here.
        I work in a lot of different areas with our military and
    trying to get people in the military and recruitment, and what
    we find is over 70 percent of our 18 year olds to 21, 22 year
    olds don't qualify to get in the military largely because of
    physical fitness and nutrition. And so, this is a serious
    problem, and not just here with folks and food insecurity, but
    it is a national problem that merits our discussion.
        My first question is to the whole panel. In many cases,
    food preparation is just as important as the types of food
    selected or distributed. I am interested to hear from the panel
    on current nutrition education efforts that you believe have
    proven to be effective. Can you share your views on practical,
    easy to understand nutrition education recommendations and
    their effect in our communities? And I will start with Mr.
    Rodriguez.
        Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you, Ranking Member Bacon.
        Nutrition education and the simple awareness of what food
    is being provided and available has been very successful for
    us. Simple things like including recipes inside distribution
    boxes or bags, doing tastings as I referenced earlier, have
    gone a long way to introduce new product, mostly fresh product
    and fresh produce at that, to a diverse community, especially
    here in New Jersey, but throughout the country.
        So, it is very simple. We have proven interventions. USDA
    has a wonderful list of SNAP-Ed curriculum that have been
    proven to have the impact of awareness and creating healthy
    habits. When we bring the two together and coordinate both
    programs, we found meaningful change. So much so that we are in
    a 3 year initiative where we have done exactly that--married
    nutritious food to nutrition education and some more health
    awareness--and we have seen an impact on diabetes and pre-
    diabetic populations in a pilot that we have been running. That
    pilot held strong, even throughout the pandemic, and we are now
    looking to see how this model, as have other food banks have
    done throughout the country, can be expanded and can be
    replicated in every community by every partner.
        The most wonderful thing about this model is that we did
    not do this ourselves. We did this in partnership with our
    local network, faith-based pantries, local after school
    programs, schools in some cases, to be able to bring product,
    no matter who the partner could be, but more importantly, where
    the neighbor is that needs it.
        Mr. Bacon. Thank you for your comments there.
        I would like to ask Ms. Greene Trottier or Mr. Kubik or Mr.
    Donaldson if they have anything else to add?
        Ms. Greene Trottier. Yes, I would like to add that some of
    our nutrition best practices are handing out the recipes,
    nutrition education, incentives. We also hold classes with the
    high school students and the 5th and 6th grade students. They
    come to our facility and they do hands-on food preparation and
    learning how to actually prepare food.
        One of the issues that I would also like to address is that
    Tribes do not have the access to these state SNAP-Ed dollars.
    So, we need to find a way that Tribes can have that direct
    access to those state SNAP-Ed funds where our communities are
    based that have some of the highest poverty levels.
        Mr. Bacon. Thank you for your input. I appreciate it.
        Mr. Kubik or Mr. Donaldson?
        Mr. Donaldson. Yes, thank you for your question.
        As I mentioned, we are distributing food boxes that are
    privately funded and inside, we have recipe cards that describe
    the boxes contents, what fresh fruit, vegetables, dairy are in
    the box along with recipes, cooking preparation methods for
    healthy eating, and as I mentioned earlier, we really believe
    that you combine that program with life coaches, people that
    care and that can hold you accountable in a really positive
    way. And that has really rendered the most success thus far.
        Mr. Kubik. I would like to add something also.
        Mr. Bacon. Thank you.
        Mr. Kubik. Nutrition education is part of the CSFP
    requirement each month, so that each food box does get a
    recipe, a newsletter. We do, in our sites, have food
    demonstration kitchens, so we can take some of the newer
    products that USDA provides and make recipes with them to help
    seniors utilize them the best way they can to maximize them.
    Many of the seniors will turn in recipes themselves. The
    National CSFP Association has a cookbook that is made up of
    recipes that were submitted by seniors to the different
    programs across the country. So, nutrition ed is really
    important, and the seniors love it as well. It gives them a
    chance to work with the foods and get the most out of them, and
    make new things that they never thought of before.
        Mr. Bacon. Thank you, sir.
        And with that, Madam Chairwoman, I will yield back.
        The Chairwoman. Thank you, Ranking Member Bacon, for your
    comments.
        I just would like to add that in reference to the USDA
    Farmers to Families Food Box, although the program has been
    ended under the Biden Administration, it was replaced with
    targeted funding to support food banks and the emergency food
    systems, including $400 million for purchases of fresh fruits
    and vegetables, $100 million to expand the reach of emergency
    food systems into underserved areas, including rural, remote,
    Tribal, and low-income communities, and $400 million for states
    and Tribes to directly purchase local foods for distribution
    and as an effort to combat or address some of the fraud that
    was reported in that [Farmers to Families Food Box] program.
        So, although the program has been suspended, the
    investments remain, just in more targeted programs.
        I now recognize the gentlelady from North Carolina,
    Representative Adams for 5 minutes of questioning. You may
    begin when you are ready.
        Ms. Adams. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman and Ranking Member
    Bacon, for hosting today's hearing, and thank you to our
    witnesses for their testimony.
        Food distribution programs have played a critical role in
    addressing food insecurity during the ongoing COVID-19
    pandemic. According to Feeding America, at least 60 million
    people turned to charitable food assistance programs in 2020.
    That is an increase of 50 percent from the previous year. In my
    district in Mecklenburg County, The Emergency Food Assistance
    Program and the Commodity Supplemental Food Program
    collectively provided over 22.6 million pounds of food in our
    community. And, as the U.S. continues to grapple with the
    pandemic and associated supply chain disruptions, we must
    continue to provide the waivers and the flexibilities that have
    assisted Federal distributions programs to fight hunger.
        Though, in previous hearings, my colleagues from across the
    aisle would have framed current supply chain disruptions and
    volatile food prices as being caused by the current
    Administration. These problems were brought on by the pandemic
    during the last Administration, problems that we continue to
    face today.
        Now, Madam Chairwoman, before I continue, I would like
    unanimous consent to insert two articles into the record, a May
    11, 2020 New York Times article describing empty shelves at
    grocery stores in New York and across the country, with waiting
    lists and black markets for items such as flour and pasta, and
    a June 9, 2020 article from Wall Street Journal highlighting
    the fastest rising food prices in more than 40 years.
        The Chairwoman. So ordered.
        [The articles referred to are located on p. 41.]
        Ms. Adams. Okay, thank you.
        Ms. Greene Trottier, excuse me. You noted that supply chain
    issues caused by the pandemic began to be felt by the Food
    Distribution Program on Indian Reservations as early as March
    of 2020, with 66 percent of Indian Tribal organizations
    reporting in March and April of 2020 that they were out of some
    inventory items. I want to ask how have stocking levels
    recovered for most of the Indian Tribal organizations? Are you
    seeing any continued impacts that we should be aware of?
        Ms. Greene Trottier. We have struggled with maintaining
    adequate fresh produce choices through the pandemic. Supply
    chain issues were a big part of not receiving the full
    catalogue of items that we expected. We continue to have,
    oftentimes, poor quality of produce and vendor accountability
    for supplying fresh produce.
        Ms. Adams. Okay, thank you.
        Mr. Rodriguez, in addition to supply chain complications
    which have impacted food banks since the beginning of the
    pandemic, you mentioned that a drop in donations has
    contributed substantially to the dramatic increase in food
    purchases that food banks have had to make. So, how have the
    decreases in donations impacted the ability of your food bank
    to plan for and keep up with increased demand during the
    pandemic, and are there ways that Congress can better
    incentivize donations?
        Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you, Congresswoman.
        You are absolutely right, first of all, that supply chain
    issues started as early as March of 2020, as soon as the
    pandemic hit ground. It started with donations not being as
    available as there was a run on products by those who can
    afford and did afford to be able to purchase. And it has
    evolved since then, and I just have to commend the team here at
    Community FoodBank of New Jersey that adapted to the many
    different supply chain challenges throughout the last 20+
    months.
        A stabilizing element in our ability to provide the record
    amount of food that we provided was the TEFAP program, as I
    testified earlier. It is this product that we can consistently
    work on bringing in, work with our local state Department of
    Agriculture, who have been amazing partners throughout this
    effort to be able to purchase food where we see gaps, make the
    buys that are available, and bringing in the quantities that
    make sense for our local partners to absorb. It is this
    juggling act and ability to leverage different food sources and
    supplies of food that make food banks an essential, boots-on-
    the-ground responder, and it is the way we have been able to
    adapt to the many challenges, and I am sure will continue to
    adapt to the challenges that are in front of us.
        We commit to----
        Ms. Adams. Thank you very much. Madam Chairwoman, thank
    you. Madam Chairwoman, I am out of time so I am going to yield
    back. Thank you.
        The Chairwoman. Thank you, Representative Adams.
        I now recognize the gentleman from Arkansas, Representative
    Crawford. If you are ready, please begin your 5 minutes of
    questioning.
        Mr. Crawford. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I appreciate the
    hearing today, and to the panelists, I appreciate your
    comments.
        First, let me applaud CityServe's important work in your
    community and the work you do to include high quality food in
    your distribution efforts. I represent a rural district, as
    many on this Committee do, and many of my constituents don't
    have immediate access to fresh foods, especially produce, in
    their communities. And that is one of the ironies of rural
    America, one of the most productive agricultural parts of the
    world, and we suffer from food deserts in many cases for a lot
    of folks.
        Mr. Donaldson, you are correct that the Farmers to Families
    Food Box Program did reveal opportunities to move excess fresh
    foods to people in need. How could CityServe's model be
    expanded in that role or utilized nationwide to help solve that
    last mile challenge that you addressed earlier?
        Mr. Donaldson. Well, thank you for your question,
    Congressman, and yes, we have put a lot of effort into the
    rural areas in Arkansas where the need is severe.
        I just got to tell you, the [Farmers to Families] Food Box
    Program, for us, was highly successful. It was a huge welcome
    mat to faith-based, community-based organizations within our
    network that were previously not engaged in food insecurity
    issues. And so, as a result, it raised up an army of compassion
    across the country. We distributed over 17 million boxes and we
    were also able to train these volunteers. And then it ended, as
    you know, last May. And so, we really believe, as I described
    in my testimony, it was very effective. Obviously, there were
    some bad actors and there were some things that we can improve
    upon, but that is our hope that this could be reinstituted and
    we could build upon the success of it.
        Mr. Crawford. Thank you for the response.
        Madam Chairwoman, thank you for holding this hearing, and I
    don't have anything further, so I will yield back.
        The Chairwoman. Thank you, Representative Crawford, and
    thank you for your questions. That is a very important issue.
    One of the complaints that we heard about the program is that
    it didn't reach all communities. About 22 percent of U.S.
    counties did not have access to the program, so that is a very
    important question to ask. Thank you for asking that here.
        I now recognize Representative Carbajal for 5 minutes for
    questioning. I am not sure if he is still on the platform.
        Okay. I will go to our next Democratic Member. I recognize
    the gentlelady from New Hampshire, Representative Kuster.
        Ms. Kuster. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. I just want to
    unmute and make sure you can hear me.
        During this holiday season, we are especially reminded of
    the needs of our fellow Americans who struggle with food
    insecurity and hunger, and so, this hearing is so important to
    highlight advocates and champions who work year-round to make
    sure that families have enough food to put on their table.
        In New Hampshire, we have our food banks, our community
    action programs, and pantries across the state that provide
    millions of pounds of food and millions of meals to our fellow
    Granite Staters every year. So, I am pleased we have been able
    to work in a bipartisan way to strengthen Federal food
    purchasing and distribution programs that support these
    efforts, especially during the COVID pandemic. And I believe
    there is more that Congress can do to strengthen The Emergency
    Food Assistance Program, or TEFAP, and other USDA programs.
        So, with that in mind, let me turn to Mr. Kubik. The
    Commodity Supplemental Food Program is imperative in New
    Hampshire, as we have one of the oldest median populations in
    the country. With the numbers of these over 60 and eligible for
    CSFP growing dramatically, how is your organization, Focus:
    HOPE, working to address the growing need and do you have
    recommendations for what we can do at the Federal level to
    ensure that this program will continue to serve all who need
    it?
        Mr. Kubik. Well thank you, first of all, for your support
    of the program. We are glad to see that New Hampshire came on
    10, 15 years ago. The program is thriving there, but we don't
    want programs to thrive just to grow programs. We want programs
    to serve a need and fit a need. And so, we know with the aging
    population with seniors, we have to address the nutritional
    needs of those seniors, those who are homebound and isolated. I
    think what has worked for us is partnering with other agencies,
    other groups in our service area. Whether it is community
    agencies, whether it is apartment buildings, businesses, to
    make sure that seniors get the food delivered to them at their
    apartment building or where they are at. Transportation and
    having the ability to reach the food is critical, especially
    for seniors. You have to get the food to them, and CSFP with
    their volunteer network, with their community organizations can
    reach a lot of seniors who are isolated.
        But the reality is, the numbers are growing and the
    challenge we have as operators is to reach those seniors. And I
    can say what has worked for us has been those relationships.
    And we have businesses----
        Ms. Kuster. Right, and the volunteer efforts. I know I have
    done some of that myself, delivering Meals on Wheels, and it
    does make such a difference. Often, that is the only contact
    that seniors and shut-ins have.
        So, I have to move along here. My time is short.
        Mr. Rodriguez, I would be curious to get your thoughts
    about administrative flexibilities that were put in place for
    TEFAP during the pandemic, including adjusting income
    eligibility and waiving signature requirements. Do you believe
    these flexibilities have been helpful, and do you think that
    any of these flexibilities should be made permanent?
        Mr. Rodriguez. I do. We are taking stock of the many
    waivers that New Jersey applied for and USDA granted. They gave
    us the flexibility to adapt when we didn't even know what we
    were adapting to in those early days. And it is not just for
    the TEFAP program, but for CSFP as well, and all the
    distribution programs that we engage with.
        It is important to maintain this level of flexibility
    because the need constantly changes. Whether it is the root
    causes because of a pandemic, a natural disaster, or other
    reasons, we are constantly and we are continuously learning
    from our neighbors, from our local partners to see how we can
    better meet the evolving need of our communities.
        And so, yes, I do believe that we should take stock of the
    waivers and keep making the program as flexible with the right
    balance of maintaining integrity and supply chain opportunity.
        Ms. Kuster. Excellent. In my remaining seconds, in addition
    to the supply chain complications, you mentioned a drop in
    donations. How have the decreases in donations impacted your
    ability to plan for and keep up with increasing demand?
        Mr. Rodriguez. We had to replace the drop in donations and
    address the increase in demand with purchases. As I mentioned,
    over three times more purchases than we were doing before the
    pandemic. We project we will have to do that for at least
    another 2 years to meet the continuous need, absent any more
    variables introduced or economic shocks introduced into the
    system.
        We do see donations coming up, but it is going to take a
    longer time to ramp up those relationships, at least here in
    New Jersey, and we are hearing the same across the country.
        Ms. Kuster. Wonderful. Well, I want to thank you all for
    the work that you do, and with that, I will yield back.
        The Chairwoman. Thank you, Representative Kuster.
        I now recognize the gentlelady from Louisiana,
    Representative Letlow. You have 5 minutes to begin your
    questioning.
        Ms. Letlow. Thank you, Chairwoman Hayes, and to all the
    witnesses, thank you for your time and participation in this
    hearing today to discuss the U.S. Department of Agriculture's
    nutrition distribution programs.
        I represent the 5th District of Louisiana, and as many of
    you know, that region of the state is home to many rural
    communities that are stimulated by agriculture, small business,
    and local economies. When reviewing these nutrition programs, I
    believe it is essential to ensure they are adequately meeting
    the needs of families, especially in rural America where many
    lack access to fresh foods like fruits and vegetables.
        Mr. Kubik, in your experience working with the Commodity
    Supplemental Food Program, what is the participation rate
    across rural areas?
        Mr. Kubik. I am not prepared to answer that question right
    now. I would have to take a look at that because each program,
    I am in an urban area, and even our association, our membership
    is varied so I don't have an answer to that today. I can
    definitely look into that for you and even speak to the program
    in Louisiana, Food for Families. Food for Seniors is a program
    there that administers it. We can find out and get back to you
    on that.
        Ms. Letlow. Okay, thank you for that.
        And in your written and oral testimony, you complimented
    the Committee's work on the 2018 Farm Bill and extending
    certification periods for senior participants from at least 1
    year to up to 3 years in some circumstances. Can you further
    expand upon the impact of these changes, and have you seen an
    increase in participation?
        Mr. Kubik. Well, our caseload definitely went up, national
    cases went up in 2019 to 736,000. So, the impact has been
    seniors who, the challenge for them sometimes is just
    identifying those documents that you have to certify once a
    year on. And so, to come in every 3 years is a big help. Their
    situations are going to change. Their eligibility, they go up,
    the cost of living and social security, which doesn't put them
    over. CSFP gets an adjustment to income once a year because of
    inflation. So, there are a lot of seniors that would have been
    11th, 12th month and that 1 year certification, and couldn't
    find the records at home. I mean, that happens. I can't find
    things at home that I am looking for sometimes, so it
    definitely is a challenge. So, just spreading it out to 3 years
    made a big difference. But again, the situations are going to
    change for that senior, so we think 3 years makes sense. We do
    updates every year to make sure that they are still current and
    with us, but as far as to have to the full certification, proof
    of income, we all need that now and it has been a big help.
        Ms. Letlow. Okay. Thank you so much for your time, and
    Madam Chairwoman, I yield back the remainder of my time.
        The Chairwoman. Thank you, Representative Letlow and Mr.
    Kubik. I can't find things on my desk sometimes, so I think it
    is completely appropriate that they can't find 3 years' worth
    of documents.
        I now recognize the gentleman from California,
    Representative Panetta. You have 5 minutes when you are ready
    to begin your questioning.
        Mr. Panetta. Outstanding. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and
    thank you to Ranking Member Bacon. Thank you for holding this
    hearing which is on a topic that is obviously very important,
    not just to our nation, but also to my home on the Central
    Coast of California. And obviously, thank you to the witnesses
    who have taken time to prepare their testimony, but more
    importantly, all the work that you do to ensure food security
    for those who need it the most throughout our country. So,
    thank you very much.
        I appreciate you being here today to discuss these
    important USDA nutrition programs, and obviously, how they
    support all Americans in need, particularly in light of what we
    have been through and are continuing to go through with the
    COVID-19 pandemic. Obviously, over the last 2 years, the
    fragility of our nation's food supply has been highlighted, but
    so were many opportunities. I have to say, at the Federal
    level, we bolstered nutrition assistance programs, and actually
    planned for the future to protect Americans experiencing food
    insecurity.
        And I have to say, I am actually proud of the bipartisan
    work that we did here in the United States Congress. Look,
    starting back in December of 2018, in which we passed the farm
    bill in the 115th Congress, and then obviously, moving forward
    into 2020 and 2021, dealing with the pandemic, the increase in
    Federal funding for food assistance that obviously led the way
    in which we could have a more food-secure future, and then even
    now with the Build Back Better Act (H.R. 5376), which invests
    nearly $35 billion in funding for proven child nutrition
    programs that will help us combat childhood hunger and ensure
    children overcome the educational health and economic impacts
    of the pandemic.
        But obviously, as you have talked about today and we know
    pretty well here on this Subcommittee, there is a lot more work
    to do. And so, I appreciate our witnesses being here today to
    provide these updates, and I do look forward to working with
    all of you and working with my colleagues in Congress on both
    sides of the aisle to strengthen the USDA nutrition programs.
        Mr. Rodriguez, I am going to hit on you first, in regards
    to my questions. Recently, I sent a bipartisan letter with my
    friend, Adrian Smith, both of us on the Ways and Means
    Committee, requesting that there be enhanced tax deductions for
    food preparation and donations to food banks.
        Now, I am also sure, and based on my discussions with our
    food bank people back in the district, in my district on the
    Central Coast of California, you are probably aware of the
    Harvard Food Policy Clinic's letter that they sent about
    basically asking for tax deductions for donations on food that
    will be resold, if you see the difference.
        Now, I think we will understand that tax incentives for
    donations obviously help food banks, but I am concerned that
    including food that will be resold in these incentives will
    create a revenue stream for those who will sell food rather
    than assist food banks, and who will give it away.
        So, Mr. Rodriguez, obviously your understanding, your
    knowledge of this area, talk to us if you can on how tax
    deductions for donations complement your work, but also how
    might tax deductions for resold food create larger challenges?
        Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you for the question, and you are
    absolutely right. Tax incentives do help motivate and help
    inspire donations by many of our food industry partners, many
    of whom participate in donation programs already.
        I would be concerned if we expanded to food that is going
    to be sold at this moment, and the reason for that, as I
    testified earlier, we have seen a drop in donated product. We
    are reengaging with our local food industry partners, many of
    whom are retail stores, whether they are big brand names or
    local family-owned chains, and to be able to have to compete
    with a for-profit incentive may cloud and may distract from
    being able to bring the food that we need for our most
    vulnerable neighbors.
        If our neighbors can go buy and purchase food, I guarantee
    you they would. The reason they turn to us is because they have
    no other choice, and we don't want to limit their choices by
    funneling food away into endeavors that may be worth it, but at
    this point, I would pause on that and look at what the
    implications are, especially as we are just trying to build
    back a response and a base that is sorely needed at the moment.
        Mr. Panetta. Outstanding. Thank you, Mr. Rodriguez. I am
    short on time.
        And just let me also say, Mr. Donaldson, I too married a
    farmer's daughter from North Dakota, Rugby, North Dakota. So,
    we have that in common. So, I yield back.
        Mr. Donaldson. Congressman, we have more than that. I
    actually live in the Bay area and am a big fan of your dad, and
    Monterrey is my favorite getaway place.
        Mr. Panetta. It is my favorite place, too.
        Mr. Donaldson. I look forward to getting acquainted.
        Mr. Panetta. Thank you. I yield back, Madam Chairwoman.
        The Chairwoman. Thank you, Representative Panetta. Happy to
    host an entire hearing to bring the two of you together.
        I now recognize the gentleman from Indiana, Representative
    Baird. You have 5 minutes for questioning. Please begin when
    you are ready.
        Mr. Baird. Madam Chairwoman, I appreciate the invitation,
    and I really appreciate you and the Ranking Member's efforts to
    bring this kind of discussion, and I appreciate the witnesses.
        I have no additional questions. A lot of the ones I had
    have been answered already very well, and so, I yield back.
        Thank you.
        The Chairwoman. Well, thank you so much for joining us on
    today's hearing.
        Seeing no further Members of the Subcommittee, I now
    welcome the gentlelady from Ohio, Representative Brown, who has
    waived onto this Committee to join us for questions. You have 5
    minutes. Whenever you are ready, please begin.
        Ms. Brown. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman. Thank you, thank
    you, thank you for the kind introduction and thank you to the
    witnesses for joining us today.
        Madam Chairwoman, I am proud to attend my first Agriculture
    Committee hearing, especially on the topic of the critical role
    of food distribution programs which have played a huge role in
    fighting hunger during the pandemic.
        Congress made historic investments, including through the
    CARES Act (P.L. 116-136) and the American Rescue Plan (P.L.
    117-2), aimed at strengthening and expanding the nutrition
    safety net. Boosts to SNAP and USDA nutrition distribution
    programs provided a critical lifeline to vulnerable children
    and families from Ohio and across America. Specifically, The
    Emergency Food Assistance Program supported Ohio's food banks,
    including the Greater Cleveland Food Bank and the Akron Canton
    Regional Food Bank in my district, as they did heroic work to
    feed hungry Ohioans in the darkest days of the pandemic. From
    July 1, 2020 to June 30, 2021, the Ohio Association of Food
    Banks, network of food banks, and hunger relief agencies
    provided 290 million pounds of food, or around 242 million
    meals to Ohio families. Of this, TEFAP provided over 72 million
    pounds of food, or nearly 1 out of every 4 pounds of food
    distributed statewide. So, there is no doubt that food
    distribution programs played a critical role in addressing
    hunger during the pandemic.
        According to the USDA, food insecurity remained nearly
    unchanged from 2019 to 2020; however, hundreds of thousands of
    Ohio households continue to experience food insecurity and
    hunger actually increased among Black Americans nationwide. In
    the face of these continued challenges, I look forward to
    working with my colleagues on the Committee to further
    strengthen nutrition programs to ensure no American goes
    hungry.
        So, I have a couple of questions for Mr. Carlos Rodriguez.
    In your written testimony, you say that SNAP is the most
    important of our Federal anti-hunger programs, and the nation's
    first line of defense against hunger. Can you please speak
    about the interactions between SNAP and TEFAP and how SNAP
    supports the work you do at the Community FoodBank of New
    Jersey?
        Mr. Rodriguez. Thank you, Congresswoman Brown, for that
    question, and welcome to the Committee I should say as well.
        Ms. Brown. Thank you.
        Mr. Rodriguez. A big shout-out to our friends in Cleveland.
    I had the privilege of visiting them a few years back. An
    amazing food bank indeed.
        TEFAP and SNAP work hand in hand, and in fact, in many of
    the food distributions that we are part of, either directly or
    through our pantries, we want to ensure that anyone who finds
    they have a need for emergency food also has access and the
    opportunity to apply for the SNAP Program. And in fact, it is
    the first line of defense, you are correct in pointing out. It
    allows families to do what you and I probably take for granted:
    going to a local market and making the choices that are right
    for our families. That is what the SNAP Program does. It gets
    us closer and closest to doing what we all want to do, which is
    be able to sustain ourselves with our employment and our jobs
    and what our community provides. When that is not enough, the
    SNAP Program is that first line of defense, and when that is
    not enough, you have TEFAP and emergency food, or as folks
    transition to that program or become aware or navigate the
    application process, we have those programs.
        So, you are right in pointing out that they work hand in
    hand, glove in glove, and hopefully the more folks on SNAP, at
    one point we hope, with an adequate and strong program, and it
    has been strengthening, it will mean less need for emergency
    food over the long run.
        Ms. Brown. Thank you.
        Mr. Rodriguez, USDA this week announced $400 million in
    funding through the American Rescue Plan to support local food
    purchases with an emphasis on purchasing from underserved
    farmers and ranchers, as well as another $50 million available
    for TEFAP reach and resiliency grants. What kind of things
    could this funding help you do?
        Mr. Rodriguez. Well, we are excited to look into the
    details of that funding, work with our local farmers here in
    the Garden State of New Jersey, and see how we can continue to
    build on something we have been doing since the Farmers to
    Families boxes, which is bring in more produce, more garden,
    more Jersey fresh produce specifically into the hands of our
    neighbors that need it the most. So, we are eager to see how we
    can put that to work.
        I just have to commend the focus on disadvantaged farmers
    to kind of give them a leg up. It is overall strengthening our
    supply chain and our ability to produce our own food in more
    than the ways that we are used to and were disrupted by the
    pandemic. So, it is a welcome addition, and we look forward to
    engaging with it as appropriate.
        Ms. Brown. Thank you, Mr. Rodriguez.
        Madam Chairwoman, I see my time is expiring, so I yield
    back. Thank you so much.
        The Chairwoman. Thank you, Representative Brown, for
    joining us and for your line of questioning. It is always very
    important to me to highlight the dignity that goes to low-
    income families having the ability to shop and choose their own
    foods, and I think that the SNAP Program and the benefits
    provided really help to do that.
        Seeing no other Republican Members, I see that Mr. Carbajal
    has rejoined the hearing. Are there any Republicans on the
    platform who would like to ask questions?
        Okay. I recognize Mr. Carbajal, the gentleman from
    California, for questions. You have 5 minutes. Please begin
    when you are ready.
        Mr. Carbajal. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman.
        Mr. Rodriguez, in September of this year I hosted a day-
    long hunger tour in my district to visit programs addressing
    food insecurity throughout the Central Coast. That day, I also
    hosted the ``Hunger Holistically'' roundtable to discuss equity
    and access needs in the food systems, and ways that local
    programs are helping fill the gaps. I appreciate all the
    efforts in my district that are addressing hunger holistically
    by providing quality nutritious food, stimulating our local
    economy by collaborating with farmers, helping address climate
    change, and supporting the health of children and their
    families. With over $1.7 billion in COVID relief supplemental
    funding for The Emergency Food Assistance Program, TEFAP.
        In your experience, how did the extra funds help address
    food insecurity on a holistic level?
        Mr. Rodriguez. First, thank you for your continued
    commitment and creating awareness in your local community, and
    I love the approach to be holistic. It is not an either/or, but
    it is how much can we bring together to make a family whole and
    to really nourish our neighbors into a post-pandemic success.
        The TEFAP Program was absolutely critical at providing a
    stable source of food through 120 different products, many of
    them fresh produce and other like products that help us bring
    the nutrition that is needed into local communities.
        The wonderful thing about our network of food banks, it is
    not just a one commodity type or one food source type. We
    leverage what we know is available through TEFAP, which at its
    core is critical, and we surround it with donations and
    purchases to make sure that in every community there is an
    opportunity to bring the food that is needed. We couple that
    with nutrition education. We invest in our local pantries here
    in New Jersey, last year alone $3.2 million for capacity for
    hand warmers for those winter distribution months, and other
    things that are needed. And that is the investment and that is
    the holistic approach that we can learn from through this
    pandemic and build on as we move forward to a much stronger
    recovery.
        Mr. Carbajal. Thank you. Mr. Rodriguez, to continue, with
    all the impacts that the COVID-19 pandemic has had and will
    continue to have on tackling hunger, and as we move forward,
    what specific aspects of TEFAP work and what elements of the
    program can improve, from your perspective as the president of
    an organization of your size?
        Mr. Rodriguez. Continuing the flexibility that we saw
    through waivers is something we can build on to be able to
    reach and give flexibility on signatures and documentation, on
    alternative use for distributions is something we want to
    explore.
        As was mentioned already a number of times, this local
    purchasing opportunity will help strengthen this public-private
    partnership that TEFAP is, strengthen the abilities of new
    farmers to engage in the program and help more of the food that
    we see in high demand become available to the populations that
    need it most.
        I think there is a lot to learn. There is a lot to
    seriously digest, pun intended here, as we move from this
    pandemic reality, continue through a recovery, but really deal
    with the aftermath of financial impact that this has had for so
    many Americans throughout the country.
        Mr. Carbajal. Thank you.
        Continuing on, with your ask for an additional $900 million
    for the TEFAP Program in Fiscal Year 2022, can you highlight
    how that money would be used to tackle the crisis at hand?
        Mr. Rodriguez. So, there is a drop in TEFAP overall
    distribution product that we see happening or happening, about
    30 percent of what was cumulative TEFAP product, whether it is
    the entitlement, the boxes, or even some trade mitigation
    product, that all became available, or intersected, during the
    pandemic. Most of that will drop, because some of them were, in
    fact, temporary. The $900 million will help us address some of
    that drop, especially as I testified, when we see a lot of
    volatility and uncertainty in front of us, and donations still
    building up over the next 2 years, at least, that is what we
    predict here in New Jersey.
        So, it is a stabilizing force, a further stabilizing force
    that will help us address problems that we know are coming, but
    don't really know exactly how they will manifest. And, it is
    that stability that we need and we owe for our neighbors that
    will continue to struggle and may struggle anew as the economic
    rebound continues to take shape.
        Mr. Carbajal. Great.
        As the farm bill gets ready to be reauthorized in 2023, how
    can we improve the TEFAP Program? And I am limited on time, so
    a short answer would be great.
        Mr. Rodriguez. More food, distribution capacity for us in
    our local pantries are the two things that I know happen most.
    We bring in new partners all the time. Those two things are
    core to expanding further into areas of high need.
        Mr. Carbajal. Thank you very much.
        Madam Chairwoman, I yield back.
        The Chairwoman. Thank you so much, Representative Carbajal,
    for your questions.
        Seeing no other Members on the platform, this concludes our
    questions from Members. Before we adjourn, I invite the Ranking
    Member to share any closing comments he may have.
        Mr. Bacon. Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, and I appreciate
    the Chairwoman's mentioning the additional $2 billion in the
    food bank center investments. The Office of Inspector General
    continues to review TEFAP. I look forward to seeing their
    findings. I request unanimous consent to submit the USDA's
    OIG's August 2021 Interim Report on TEFAP.
        The Chairwoman. Without objection.
        [The report referred to is located on p. 54.]
        Mr. Bacon. With that, I just want to thank all the
    panelists today for sharing their expertise. Nutrition
    distribution is important. We live in the wealthiest country in
    the world, I would say the greatest country in the world, and a
    great nation provides a safety net and also helps get people
    out of poverty.
        Some of the key takeaways today are that we need multiple
    methods in getting nutrition to the most needy. We need to
    stress nutrition more as well. I heard that as well today
    clearly. And faith-based groups also provide a great
    alternative to serving those in need. Finally, it should always
    be our goal to give a hand up out of poverty, and not just a
    hand out.
        And with that, Madam Chairwoman, I thank you for your time.
    I yield back.
        The Chairwoman. Thank you, Ranking Member Bacon, and I echo
    your sentiment in the wealthiest nation in the world, people
    should not be hungry, full stop.
        I want to thank each of our witnesses for your time today.
    I think I speak for the whole Subcommittee when I say how much
    we value and respect the important work your organizations are
    doing each day to combat food insecurity in the United States.
    We value your expertise and appreciate your willingness to
    share your time with this Subcommittee.
        As we begin to craft the next farm bill, we will reflect on
    what we have learned today to make policy that meets the
    current needs of our constituents, and again, ensures that no
    person goes hungry. Thank you again so much for joining us
    today.
        Under the Rules of the Committee, the record of today's
    hearing will remain open for 10 calendar days to receive
    additional material and supplementary written responses from
    the witnesses to any questions posed by a Member. This hearing
    of the Subcommittee on Nutrition, Oversight, and Department
    Operations is adjourned.
        [Whereupon, at 11:36 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
        [Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]
    Submitted Articles by Hon. Alma S. Adams, a Representative in Congress
                              from North Carolina
                                   Article 1
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    [https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/11/nyregion/Coronavirus-supermarkets-
    items-missing.html]
    Gone From Grocery Shelves, Now There's a Mad Dash to Find Them
              Here's why some everyday staples have disappeared from
            shelves as the crisis changes how people shop and eat.
            [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

              Allison Arevalo started making and selling pasta after she
            couldn't find any at local stores or online.
              Credit. Demetrius Freeman for The New York Times.

    By Winnie Hu \1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ https://www.nytimes.com/by/winnie-hu.

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    May 11, 2020

        The fallout from the coronavirus hit Allison Arevalo when she could
    no longer find pasta at the supermarket.
        She tried ordering online from Whole Foods. Out of stock. She ran
    over to Key Food. Too late: The pasta aisle was cleaned out except for
    two bags of whole wheat no one wanted.
        So Ms. Arevalo, 41, a chef and cookbook author,\2\ dusted off her
    fancy pasta maker and ordered a 50 pound bag of semolina flour from a
    restaurant supplier. Soon, her neighbors in Park Slope, Brooklyn, were
    turning to her for their pasta fix.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ https://www.amazon.com/Pasta-Friday-Cookbook-Lets-Together/dp/
    1449497896.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        ``I wanted to give people another way to get pasta,'' said Ms.
    Arevalo, who now sells 120 pounds of pasta a week.
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

              ``I wanted to give people another way to get pasta,'' said
            Ms. Arevalo, who now sells 120 pounds of pasta a week.
              Credit. Demetrius Freeman for The New York Times.

        As the pandemic has gripped New York, it has caused shortages of
    the grocery staples that have become essential for coping with home
    confinement. Pasta and bread have become scarce--available today but
    not tomorrow, in this store but not that one. Paper towel and snack
    aisles have been wiped out. Frozen vegetables, chicken nuggets and even
    oat milk are rationed.
        The empty shelves have sent frustrated shoppers to online scavenger
    hunts and to store after store to wait outside in long lines. Baking
    supplies--yeast, flour, baking powder--have become particularly prized
    finds as people stuck at home have time to perfect their challah bread
    or knead out their anxieties.
        ``Everybody's becoming a mini-Martha Stewart,'' said Joseph
    Viscomi, a supervisor for Morton Williams, which now limits customers
    to one yeast package each and has waiting lists at many of its 15 New
    York City supermarkets.
        Five-pound bags of King Arthur Flour have been so hard to score
    that they were selling this week on eBay for $26.49,\3\ five times the
    store price.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ https://www.ebay.com/itm/5lb-Bag-King-Arthur-Unbleached-All-
    Purpose-Flour-FREE-Priority-Shipping/
    133397431899?epid=4030642862&hash=item1f0f1b465b:g:VMQAAOSwlANeo
    JfM.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        ``There's a black market for flour right now,'' said Cristen
    Kennedy, 38, a college health educator who has scoured a dozen grocery
    and baking sites since flour disappeared from her grocery store in the
    Bronx.
        The shortages began with panic buying and hoarding as the pandemic
    spread, and then continued as those staying at home consumed more
    meals, snacks, paper products and cleaning supplies.
        ``I never knew we ate so much,'' said Nelson Eusebio, the
    government relations director of the National Supermarket Association,
    who said he was spending between $50 and $75 more per week on his
    groceries than he used to.
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

              A familiar scene at many grocery stores in New York and
            across the country.
              Credit. John Taggart for The New York Times.

        Oat milk has become a hot commodity, in part as coffee shop
    regulars have become home baristas. It topped a list of fastest-moving
    grocery items nationwide, with sales up 353 percent over last year,
    according to Nielsen data of consumer packaged goods for an 8 week
    period ending April 18.
        The slow movers? Sunscreen and vegetable party platters.
        The tidal wave of grocery shopping has wiped out inventories at
    grocery stores and, in turn, the food distributors that send them
    goods.
        Since most stores rely on specific distributors, what they have--or
    don't have--on the shelves depends on what their distributors have in
    stock, and that can vary from store to store.
        The inventory shortages have spread to the part of the food supply
    chain that serves retail stores, while another part that serves now-
    closed restaurants, hotels and schools has been so overwhelmed by a
    surplus that farmers have destroyed fresh food \4\ that cannot be sold,
    according to food industry analysts.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/02/business/coronavirus-food-
    waste-destroyed.html.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Some manufacturers have run up against limited production or
    packaging capacity, or cannot find enough trucks to move additional
    loads. Many meat processing plants have closed \5\ as their workers
    have been sickened by the coronavirus.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ https://www.nytimes.com/2020/05/05/business/coronavirus-meat-
    shortages.html.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        ``The problem is that the supply chain--which is everything from
    the farm to the supermarket shelf--is fragile at certain points, and
    that's why we're seeing the shortages,'' said Phil Lempert, a food
    industry analyst and founder of supermarketguru.com.
        So now Frank Zapata cannot get enough Nissin instant ramen noodles
    for the two CTown supermarkets he owns in Brooklyn and the Bronx.
    ``When everything is normal, my supplier has a lot, whatever you want
    to get,'' he said. ``Now it's hard to get, it's not available.''
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

              Some CTown stores have had a hard time keeping Nissin instant
            ramen noodles on their shelves.
              Credit. Brittainy Newman/The New York Times.

        Morton Williams is missing about 10 to 15 percent of its regular
    stock, which is better than a month ago, when it was down nearly 30
    percent, Mr. Viscomi said. When he orders ten cases of 2 pound Gold
    Medal flour bags from a distributor, he said, ``we're lucky if we get
    two cases, and that sells out in a day or two.''
        Gristedes and D'Agostino supermarkets have been cleaned out of
    Charmin toilet paper, Bounty paper towels, and Lysol and Clorox
    cleaners. ``Six months ago, you had one bottle of Lysol for your home,
    now everybody wants to have one bottle for every room,'' said John
    Catsimatidis, the chief executive of Red Apple Group, which includes
    the supermarkets.
        His supermarkets have turned to alternative brands and tried to tap
    new suppliers. A Canadian company was ready to send a truckload of
    Clorox wipes and sprays until its driver refused to deliver to New
    York.
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

              Toilet paper has been in particularly high demand. Many
            stores have put a limit on how much each customer can buy.
              Credit. Brittainy Newman/The New York Times.

        Still, shopping for oat milk and Oreos may soon get easier as some
    manufacturers expand their production and distribution operations.
        In the past month, Mondelez International has increased snack
    production in the United States in response to double-digit sales
    growth of its brands, including Oreos and Ritz crackers.
        It has also hired 1,000 more workers for ``front-line teams'' in
    manufacturing, sales and distribution to get snacks onto store shelves
    faster, said Glen Walter, president of the company's North America
    division.
        The pandemic has accelerated the expansion of Oatly, a Swedish
    company that has grown steadily since introducing its oat milk to New
    York coffee shops in 2017.
        Oatly is now manufacturing an average of 500,000 cartons a week at
    its factory in New Jersey, up more than 40 percent from the 350,000
    cartons per week it was making in January.
        ``It still won't be enough to keep the shelves fully stocked,''
    said Mike Messersmith, president of Oatly North America.
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

              A delivery arriving at a Foodtown grocery store in the Bronx.
              Credit. Desiree Rios for The New York Times.

        King Arthur Flour has more than doubled production to five million
    bags of flour a month, up from less than two million a year ago. Extra
    shifts were added at mills and manufacturing plants, and two assembly
    lines were repurposed to pack flour into plastic pouches that will be
    sold on the company website, said Bill Tine, King Arthur's vice
    president of marketing.
        Robb MacKie, the president and chief executive of the American
    Bakers Association, an industry group, said that more flour was heading
    to store shelves, with yeast not far behind. ``We're seeing daily
    improvements,'' he said.
        The shortages have changed the way that Ms. Arevalo, the chef-
    turned-pasta maker, shops for groceries. She used to choose a recipe
    and stop for ingredients, now it is the other way around.
        Her fresh-made pasta has become so popular that she takes
    orders,\6\ selling out in an hour and a half. She charges $6 per pound
    online, and leaves the pasta in white paper bags on the stoop of her
    brownstone. Only one bag has been stolen.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ https://www.pastalouise.com/.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Even when the pandemic ends, she may keep offering pasta pickups.
        ``It's been this very satisfying way to connect with the
    neighborhood,'' she said. ``I can't imagine stopping it now.''
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

              A sign written in chalk outside Ms. Arevalo's home in
            Brooklyn where she leaves bags of pasta orders.
              Credit. Demetrius Freeman for The New York Times.

              Winnie Hu is a reporter on the Metro desk, focusing on
            transportation and infrastructure stories. She has also covered
            education, politics in City Hall and Albany, and the Bronx and
            upstate New York since joining the Times in 1999. @WinnHu
              A version of this article appears in print on May 13, 2020,
            Section A, Page 15 of the New York edition with the headline:
            Getting Creative Amid Shortages.
                                   Article 2
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    [https://www.wsj.com/articles/high-food-prices-drive-consumers-to-hunt-
    for-value-11591700401]
    Fastest-Rising Food Prices in Decades Drive Consumers to Hunt for Value
    Food makers, retailers respond by restoring promotions, bundling
            products to help offset biggest price jump since 1970s
    Monthly price change of selected food items
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

              Source: Labor Department

    By Annie Gasparro and Jaewon Kang

    June 9, 2020 7:00 a.m. ET

        Food makers are designing value packs, and supermarkets are
    restoring promotions, aiming to offset disruptions wrought by the
    coronavirus pandemic that have led to the fastest rise in food prices
    in more than 4 decades.
        While food companies and supermarkets say they have reopened plants
    and resolved supply constraints \1\ that contributed to higher prices,
    they also expect prices to remain elevated because of increased costs
    for labor and transportation. Companies are buying equipment \2\ and
    reconfiguring factories \3\ and stores to keep people safe from the new
    coronavirus. Some of those changes are adding costs that are trickling
    down to shoppers.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ https://www.wsj.com/articles/two-months-that-tore-apart-the-
    food-chain-11588174236.
        \2\ https://www.wsj.com/articles/makers-race-to-produce-supplies-
    for-coronavirus-economy-plexiglass-sanitizer-masks-11590944400.
        \3\ https://www.wsj.com/articles/she-polices-social-distancing-at-
    krafts-mac-and-cheese-factory-during-coronavirus-11587720602.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        ``These are historical price changes we have never seen in a short
    window,'' said Jagtar Nijjar, director of import and commodities at
    Gordon Food Service Inc., one of the biggest food-service distributors
    in the U.S.
        Prices for store-bought food rose a seasonally adjusted 2.6% in
    April from a month earlier, according to the Labor Department, the
    biggest monthly increase since 1974. The department is due to release
    figures for May on Wednesday, and many economic analysts expect it to
    be a sharper increase than April. Market-research firm Nielsen said
    food prices rose 5.8% in the 13 weeks from March 1 to May 30 compared
    with the year-ago period.
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

              Transportation and logistical costs for food makers have
            climbed, contributing to the rise in food prices.
              Photo: Daniel Acker/Bloomberg News.

        Mondelez International \4\ Inc. said it is considering smaller
    packages of some products like its Oreos and other snacks that cost
    less overall. Campbell Soup \5\ Co. said it might add more family-size
    packs \6\ that will cost less per ounce.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ https://www.wsj.com/market-data/quotes/MDLZ.
        \5\ https://www.wsj.com/market-data/quotes/CPB.
        \6\ https://www.wsj.com/articles/customers-come-back-to-campbells-
    soup-11591111836.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    U.S. spending on food as a share of disposable personal income
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

              Source: USDA.
              Editor's note: the chart is an interactive graphic. An
            animation of the chart is retained in Committee file.

        ``There is going to be strain, and I think value will play an
    important role for consumers going forward,'' Campbell's Chief
    Executive Mark Clouse said.
        The job and earning outlook for many is more uncertain than it has
    been in years. Nicholas Fereday, executive director of food and
    consumer trends for agricultural lender Rabobank, said he expects
    spending on food as a percentage of disposable income to rise this year
    for the first time in decades.
        Karen Stadnicki, a physician assistant in suburban Chicago, said
    her hours have been reduced because of the pandemic, lowering the
    income her family of five relies on. At the same time, she said, ``my
    grocery bill is so much higher.''
        ``Chicken and beef, if you can find it, is like double what I used
    to pay,'' she said.
        The jump in meat prices has propelled the overall increase in food
    prices. The pandemic has disrupted meatpacking plants, creating
    shortages of meat \7\ and pushing up prices. While the meat supply is
    improving, promotions are still hard to find, and prices remain high,
    retailers said. Meat prices rose 15% in the week ended May 23 from the
    prior year, according to Nielsen.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \7\ https://www.wsj.com/articles/a-smart-guide-to-the-u-s-meat-
    shortage-11588768651.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Average transaction price at grocery stores
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

              Source: Earnest Research.
              Editor's note: the chart is an interactive graphic. An
            animation of the chart is retained in Committee file.

        Transportation and logistical costs for food makers are rising,
    too. With most air traffic canceled, Be Well Nutrition Inc., maker of
    protein-drink brand Iconic Protein, recently chartered a plane to pick
    up its main ingredient, grass-fed milk protein, from Ireland.
        ``The cost is astronomical,'' Chief Operating Officer Mariah
    Faulhaber said. She said Be Well hasn't yet raised prices.
        Grocery costs also rose because food makers and supermarkets have
    pulled back on the discounts they typically apply to about \1/3\ of the
    items they sell. Consumers are finding some 28% fewer discounts,
    according to Nielsen, because manufacturers are focused on their top
    sellers, grocers said.
        SpartanNash \8\ Co., which owns more than 150 grocery stores in the
    Midwest and distributes food to about 2,100 retailers, said it cut
    promotions during the pandemic by about 5%. California chain Bristol
    Farms' discount volume is down by half from before the pandemic in part
    because the food supply is still in flux, said Kevin Davis, special
    adviser to the grocer's board.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \8\ https://www.wsj.com/market-data/quotes/SPTN.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Some customers are migrating to cheaper foods, generic brands and
    discount stores, as prices rise. Nicole Reeder, a program coordinator
    in New Orleans, said she recently bought vegetables instead of chicken
    thighs \9\ for $5.99 a pound, $2 a pound more than a few weeks earlier.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \9\ https://www.wsj.com/articles/supermarkets-adjust-meat-sections-
    as-coronavirus-cuts-supply-11587051995.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        ``My last grocery haul, I didn't buy any meat,'' she said.
    Share of grocery items sold on promotion
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

              Source: Nielsen.
              Editor's note: the chart is an interactive graphic. An
            animation of the chart is retained in Committee file.

        In response, food makers and retailers are restarting promotions
    and adding more lower-priced products to avoid losing customers.
    Private-label products have taken sales from big food makers, such as
    Kraft Heinz \10\ Co., in recent years, and mainstream grocers,
    including Kroger \11\ Co., have lost market share to discount chains,
    such as Aldi Inc., and dollar stores.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \10\ https://www.wsj.com/market-data/quotes/KHC.
        \11\ https://www.wsj.com/market-data/quotes/KR.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        SpartanNash said it has restarted promotions for cereal, coffee and
    other items but held back on discounts for faster-selling products such
    as pasta and frozen vegetables. Bristol Farms said it is promoting more
    fresh and prepared foods.
        Yogurt-maker Danone SA CEO Emmanuel Faber said shoppers are buying
    more bulk packs that cost less per ounce. ``We see people moving to
    value,'' he said.
        PepsiCo \12\ Inc. has been planning what ranges of prices it should
    have for its snacks in different economic scenarios, depending on how
    severe a recession is.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \12\ https://www.wsj.com/market-data/quotes/PEP.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        ``In any recession in recent history, our business has been pretty
    resilient. But we haven't seen anything like what people are
    forecasting,'' said Steven Williams, chief executive of PepsiCo Foods
    North America.
    Consumer Spending Slid in April; Here's Why That Matters
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

              Consumer spending fell 7.5% in March, prompting further
            concerns about the impact of the coronavirus pandemic on the
            economy. Here's why consumer spending is so important and how
            it can signal if the country is heading toward a recession.
            Photo: Getty Images.
              Editor's note: the video is retained in Committee file.
                                     ______

     Submitted Letter by Hon. Jimmy Panetta, a Representative in Congress
                                from California
    November 30, 2021

    Hon. Lily Batchelder,                Hon. Charles Rettig,
    Assistant Secretary,                 Commissioner,
    Office of Tax Policy,                Internal Revenue Service,
    U.S. Department of the Treasury,     U.S. Department of the Treasury,
    Washington, D.C.;                    Washington, D.C.

      Re: Pending Section 170(e)(3) Guidance Project

        Dear Assistant Secretary Batchelder and Commissioner Rettig:

        We are writing to you to raise our concerns with respect to the
    pending guidance project regarding the treatment of charitable
    contributions of inventory under section 170(e)(3) of the Internal
    Revenue Code. As the holiday season is upon us and pandemic-related
    food supply chain issues impact families in need, we ask why efforts
    that allow donors of prepared food to recover their basis and receive
    enhanced deductions are no longer being pursued.
        This important guidance project would clarify an issue created by
    the current Treasury Regulations to ensure that Section 170(e)(3) works
    as intended for donors to make charitable contributions of prepared
    food. Clarification will help donors satisfy the increased demand on
    food banks and other hunger relief agencies in light of the continuing
    impact of the COVID-19 crisis.
        Specifically, the guidance would provide certainty that donors
    would (i) be allowed to recover their basis in contributed inventory,
    and (ii) be able to compute the enhanced deduction. The enhanced
    deduction is intended by Congress to help compensate potential donors
    for the administrative costs associated in making inventory donations.
    These costs include the identification and selection of appropriate
    food banks and other hunger relief agencies as well as the preparation,
    packaging, and shipment of food in accordance with applicable food
    safety regulations.
        This guidance project has been included in every Treasury
    Department/Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Priority Guidance Plan since
    2015-2016 and has been designated in more recent plans as a high
    priority ``burden reduction'' project. In November of 2020, we
    cosponsored bipartisan legislation, H.R. 8817, the Preserving
    Charitable Incentives Act, that included a provision encouraging the
    IRS to issue this guidance as soon as possible.
        Despite the time and resources that the Treasury Department and the
    IRS has dedicated to this project and our significant interest in this
    guidance being issued in a timely manner, the guidance project was
    surprisingly dropped from the recently released 2021-2022 Priority
    Guidance Plan.
        We believe that the need for this guidance should be given more
    priority given the current food insecurity in this country. Given
    supply chain shortages at retailers, food banks, and other hunger
    relief agencies are even more reliant on donations of prepared foods
    from retailers and restaurants, which are particularly impacted by the
    lack of guidance in this area.
        We respectfully request a written response within thirty (30) days
    that explains (i) the reasons why this important project was dropped
    from the priority guidance plan, and (ii) what actions the Treasury
    Department and the IRS are taking to ensure that donors can recover
    their basis and compute the enhanced deduction with respect to
    donations of inventory such as currently purchased food.
        We believe that providing such certainty is essential to ensure
    that charitable donations are encouraged during this critical time and
    would like answers as to why it is no longer being prioritized. Thank
    you for your prompt attention and consideration of this important
    matter.
                Sincerely,
                [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Hon. Jimmy Panetta,                  Hon. Adrian Smith,
    Member of Congress                   Member of Congress

                                     ______

     Submitted Report by Hon. Don Bacon, a Representative in Congress from
                                    Nebraska
    [https://www.usda.gov/oig/audit-reports/covid-19-oversight-emergency-
    food-assistance-program-interim-report]
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    COVID-19_Oversight of The Emergency Food Assistance Program_Interim
            Report
            [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Inspection Report 27801-0001-21(1)

    August 2021

        The objective of our ongoing inspection is to evaluate FNS'
    oversight of TEFAP--this report provides interim results on whether FNS
    identified risks related to the safe and efficient distribution of USDA
    Food assistance to states during the COVID-19 pandemic.
    Objective
        One of the four objectives of our ongoing inspection was to
    determine what risks FNS identified related to the safe and efficient
    distribution of USDA Food assistance provided to states during the
    COVID-19 pandemic. Specifically: (a) did FNS accept any risk related to
    the safe distribution of food assistance without implementing an
    offsetting internal control?; and (b) what controls did FNS establish
    to manage risks it did not accept?
    Reviewed
        We evaluated if FNS identified risks related to the safe and
    efficient distribution of USDA food assistance provided to the states
    between March 1, 2020, and October 31, 2020.
    Recommends
        We recommend that FNS develop and implement a formal process to
    periodically identify, assess, and document risks that could impact the
    integrity of TEFAP. FNS should also document its response to the risks
    identified during its assessment and document and implement mitigation
    strategies, as applicable.
    What OIG Found
        The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) is a United States
    Department of Agriculture (USDA) program that provides supplemental
    food assistance to persons in need. TEFAP provides Federally purchased
    commodities (USDA Foods) to states and Territories (states) to
    distribute to recipient agencies serving low-income households and
    individuals. TEFAP also provides administrative funds to cover states'
    and recipient agencies' costs associated with the processing, storage,
    and distribution of USDA Foods and foods provided through private
    donations.
        We concluded that the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) did not
    formally evaluate what impact the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19)
    pandemic could have on the safe and efficient distribution of food
    assistance to states. This occurred because FNS had not established a
    formal enterprise risk management process to continuously identify and
    assess risks related to TEFAP program operations, including changing
    conditions that could impact the integrity of the program. Without a
    formal risk management process for TEFAP, there is no assurance that
    FNS periodically reviews and documents its response to the impact of
    changing conditions on the safe and effective distribution of food
    assistance to states. In Fiscal Year 2020, the Families First
    Coronavirus Response (FFCR) and Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic
    Security (CARES) Acts increased TEFAP funding by $850 million, with
    funding totaling more than $1.2 billion, thus increasing the potential
    risk that food assistance may not go to those in need.
        FNS agreed with our finding and recommendations, and we accepted
    management decision on both recommendations.
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

      Date: August 24, 2021
      Inspection Number: 27801-0001-21(1)
      To: Cindy Long, Acting Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service
      Attn: Melissa Rothstein, Director, Office of Internal Controls,
        Audits and Investigations
        [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

      From: Gil H. Harden, Assistant Inspector General for Audit

      Subject: COVID-19--Oversight of the Emergency Food Assistance Program

        This report presents the results of the subject review. Your
    written response to the official draft is included in its entirety at
    the end of the report. We have incorporated excerpts from your
    response, and the Office of Inspector General's position, into the
    relevant sections of the report. Based on your written response, we are
    accepting management decision for both inspection recommendations in
    the report, and no further response to this office is necessary. Please
    follow your internal agency procedures in forwarding final action
    correspondence to the Office of the Chief Financial Officer (OCFO).
        In accordance with Departmental Regulation 1720-1, final action
    needs to be taken within 1 year of each management decision to prevent
    being listed in the Department's annual Agency Financial Report. For
    agencies other than OCFO, please follow your internal agency procedures
    in forwarding final action correspondence to OCFO.
        We appreciate the courtesies and cooperation extended to us by
    members of your staff during our audit fieldwork and subsequent
    discussions. This report contains publicly available information and
    will be posted in its entirety to our website (http://www.usda.gov/oig)
    in the near future.
    Table of Contents
    Background and Objectives

        Section 1: What risks has FNS identified related to the safe and
    efficient distribution of USDA Food assistance provided to states
    during the pandemic?

              a. Did FNS accept any risk related to the safe distribution
            of food assistance without implementing an offsetting internal
            control?
              b. What controls did FNS establish to manage risks it did not
            accept?
              Recommendation 1
              Recommendation 2

    Scope and Methodology
    Abbreviations
    Agency's Response
    Background and Objectives
    Background
        The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) is a United States
    Department of Agriculture (USDA) program that provides supplemental
    food assistance to persons in need.\1\ TEFAP provides federally
    purchased commodities \2\ (USDA Foods) \3\ to states and Territories
    (states) \4\ to distribute to recipient agencies \5\ serving low-income
    households and individuals. TEFAP also provides administrative funds to
    cover states' and recipient agencies' costs associated with the
    processing, storage, and distribution of USDA Foods and foods provided
    through private donations.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ In 1981, TEFAP was first authorized to distribute surplus
    commodities under the Temporary Emergency Food Assistance Program in
    order to help supplement the diets of low-income Americans, including
    seniors. The Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 authorized TEFAP to
    provide other types of surplus foods.
        \2\ Commodities include fruits, vegetables, meats, and grains,
    among other foods.
        \3\ The term ``commodities'' is no longer commonly used, as it has
    been replaced by ``donated foods'' or ``USDA Foods.''
        \4\ States are defined as all 50 states of the United States, the
    District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and
    Northern Mariana Islands.
        \5\ Recipient agencies include emergency feeding organizations,
    such as food banks, food pantries, soup kitchens, and charitable
    institutions, which receive USDA Foods and/or administrative funds.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) administers TEFAP in
    collaboration with USDA's purchasing agencies: Agricultural Marketing
    Service, Farm Service Agency, and Commodity Credit Corporation. At the
    Federal level, FNS is responsible for allocating aid to states and for
    coordinating the ordering, processing, and distribution of USDA Foods.
    FNS allocates and distributes food and administrative funds \6\
    according to a formula based on each state's population of low-income
    and unemployed persons. State agencies \7\ administer TEFAP at the
    state level. State agencies are responsible for distributing USDA Foods
    and funds to recipient agencies and general oversight of the program at
    the local level. Figure 1 depicts the general responsibilities of TEFAP
    and the flow of USDA Foods and funds through TEFAP.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ Funds are provided to the state and recipient agencies for the
    costs associated with processing, storage, and distribution of USDA
    Foods or food provided through private donations.
        \7\ Examples of state agencies that administer TEFAP include
    entities such as the Department of Health and Human Services, the
    Department of Social Services, the Department of Agriculture, or the
    Department of Education.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Figure 1. Flow of Food and Funds through TEFAP.
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

              [\1\] States may distribute food to recipient agencies
            directly or task recipient agencies with food distribution to
            other recipient agencies. States often delegate this
            responsibility to food banks.

        Section 27 of the Food and Nutrition Act authorizes mandatory
    funding for TEFAP.\8\ In Fiscal Year (FY) 2020, Congress appropriated
    more than $397 million to TEFAP: $317.5 million for USDA Foods and
    $79.63 million for food distribution costs.\9\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \8\ The Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, Pub. L. No. 88-525 (Aug.
    1964), amended by Pub. L. No. 116-94 (Dec. 2019).
        \9\ The Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020, Pub. L. No.
    116-94 (Dec. 2019).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        In January 2020, the Secretary of Health and Human Services
    declared the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic \10\ a public
    health emergency for the United States. The pandemic resulted in
    catastrophic loss of life and substantial damage to the global economy,
    societal stability, and global security. In response to this
    unprecedented global crisis, Congress and the Administration took a
    series of actions, including providing additional funding for programs
    serving low-income households. The Families First Coronavirus Response
    (FFCR) Act,\11\ enacted on March 18, 2020, provided $400 million for
    TEFAP under the Commodity Assistance Program (CAP). Furthermore, the
    Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act,\12\ enacted
    on March 27, 2020, provided an additional $450 million in supplemental
    funding to CAP for TEFAP. The CARES Act additionally required that
    funds be used to ``prevent, prepare for, and respond to coronavirus.''
    The FFCR and CARES Acts did not change TEFAP's regulatory requirements;
    however, these Acts increased FY 2020 funding by $850 million.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \10\ COVID-19 is an infectious disease caused by a newly discovered
    coronavirus. On January 31, 2020, the Secretary of Health and Human
    Services declared a public health emergency for the United States,
    retroactive to January 27, 2020. On March 11, 2020, the World Health
    Organization characterized COVID-19 as a pandemic.
        \11\ Families First Coronavirus Response Act, Pub. L. No. 116-127
    (Mar. 2020).
        \12\ Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, Pub. L.
    No. 116-136 (Mar. 2020).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Figure 2 depicts the TEFAP funding from the FFCR and CARES Acts.
    Figure 2. FFCR and CARES Act Funding
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

              [For the Families First Coronavirus Response Act, enacted
            March 18, 2020, $400 million under the Commodity Assistance
            Program, FNS was to use the FFCR Act funds to provide food to
            people in need. FNS could distribute up to $100 million of the
            $400 million to U.S. states and Territories for costs
            associated with distributing USDA Foods. The remaining amount
            was to be made available for food costs. For the CARES Act,
            enacted on March 27, 2020, $450 million under the Commodity
            Assistance Program, FNS was to use the CARES Act funds to
            provide food to people in need. FNS could distribute up to $150
            million of the $450 million to U.S. states and Territories for
            costs associated with distributing USDA Foods. The remaining
            amount was to be made available for food costs.]
    Objectives
        One of our inspection objectives\13\ was to determine what risks
    FNS identified related to the safe and efficient distribution of USDA
    Food assistance provided to states during the pandemic. Specifically:
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \13\ During the course of our inspection, we plan to issue
    additional interim reports as we complete the other three objectives.
    In this report, we are addressing objective 3.

      a.  Did FNS accept any risk related to the safe distribution of food
                assistance without implementing an offsetting internal
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                control?

      b.  What controls did FNS establish to manage risks it did not
                accept?
    Section 1: What risks has FNS identified related to the safe and
            efficient distribution of USDA Food assistance provided to
            states during the pandemic?
    a. Did FNS accept any risk related to the safe distribution of food
            assistance without implementing an offsetting internal control?
    b. What controls did FNS establish to manage risks it did not accept?
        FNS did not formally evaluate the impact the pandemic could have on
    the safe and efficient distribution of food assistance to states. This
    occurred because FNS had not established a formal enterprise risk
    management (ERM) process to continuously identify and assess risks
    related to TEFAP program operations, including changing conditions that
    could impact the integrity of the program. Without a formal risk
    management process for TEFAP, there is no assurance that FNS
    periodically reviews and documents its response to the impact of
    changing conditions on the safe and effective distribution of food
    assistance to states. In FY 2020, the FFCR \14\ and CARES \15\ Acts
    increased TEFAP funding by $850 million, with funding totaling more
    than $1.2 billion, thus increasing the potential risk that food
    assistance may not go to those in need.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \14\ Families First Coronavirus Response Act, Pub. L. No. 116-127
    (Mar. 2020).
        \15\ Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act, Pub. L.
    No. 116-136 (Mar. 2020).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) Circular No. A-123 states
    that identifying risk is a continuous and ongoing process. Agencies
    must regularly review and monitor risk to identify whether risks still
    exist, whether new risks have arisen, and whether the likelihood and
    impact of risks have changed; report significant changes that adjust
    risk priorities; and deliver assurance on the effectiveness of
    controls.\16\ Furthermore, changing conditions often create new risks
    or changes to existing risks that prompt management to perform a risk
    assessment to identify, analyze, and respond to risks caused by these
    changing conditions.\17\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \16\ OMB, Management's Responsibility for Enterprise Risk
    Management and Internal Control, Circular A-123 (July 2016).
        \17\ Government Accountability Office (GAO), Standards for Internal
    Control in the Federal Government, GAO-14-704G (Sep. 2014).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        OMB defines ERM as an effective, agency-wide approach to address
    the full spectrum of significant internal and external risks by
    understanding the combined impact of risks as an interrelated
    portfolio, rather than addressing risks only within silos. ERM is a
    part of overall organizational governance and accountability functions
    and encompasses all areas where an organization is exposed to risk.\18\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \18\ OMB, Management's Responsibility for Enterprise Risk
    Management and Internal Control, Circular A-123 (July 2016).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        The FFCR and CARES Acts increased TEFAP funding by a total of $850
    million to purchase and distribute food to those in need. FNS modified
    or implemented oversight controls in response to the requirements of
    the CARES Act and the pandemic that:

       required separate reporting of pandemic funds in its
            financial reports;

       prioritized the use of CARES Act funds over other funding;
            \19\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \19\ The CARES Act required funds to be used to ``prevent, prepare
    for, and respond to coronavirus.'' As a result, FNS prioritized using
    these funds over FFCR Act and regular TEFAP funds.

       required that states provide a written justification for how
            they would use additional funds to ensure they would meet the
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
            intent of the CARES Act;

       revised its management evaluations (ME) \20\ to include
            pandemic-specific questions to assess whether state agencies
            complied with FNS' pandemic guidance beginning in FY 2021; and
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \20\ FNS regional offices conduct MEs, which include a review of
    all of the state agency's program operations. This includes an
    assessment of financial management, as well as compliance with
    eligibility requirements, inventory controls, distribution procedures,
    records and reports for TEFAP foods, and the state agencies' compliance
    with its own monitoring requirements. FNS regional offices review the
    five TEFAP state agencies identified as the most at risk for fraud,
    waste, or abuse on an annual basis.

       modified the timing of MEs and state agency monitoring
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
            reviews.

        However, FNS did not perform a formal program-wide risk assessment
    \21\ to evaluate what impact the pandemic could have on TEFAP's
    operations and processes.\22\ We concluded the pandemic created
    challenges for TEFAP, including difficulties in fulfilling TEFAP food
    orders and delays in conducting monitoring activities. Had FNS formally
    evaluated the impact of the pandemic on program operations, the agency
    could have further identified ways to mitigate risks to program
    integrity.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \21\ A program-wide risk assessment encompasses all areas where an
    organization is exposed to risk (financial, operational, reporting,
    compliance, governance, strategic, reputation, etc.).
        \22\ FNS did perform an annual risk assessment of TEFAP improper
    payments, as required by the Payment Integrity Information Act.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Delivery of USDA Foods
        In November 2020 \23\ and March 2021,\24\ GAO reported that FNS
    faced several challenges implementing TEFAP during the pandemic. For
    example, GAO reported that FNS canceled multiple TEFAP orders during
    the pandemic--such as orders for canned meats, soups, and vegetables--
    that left food banks without the USDA Foods they were expecting to
    distribute to participants.\25\ GAO's review of FNS data disclosed that
    food order cancellations were an ongoing challenge. In terms of both
    estimated value and total truckload, GAO reported the magnitude of
    canceled TEFAP orders was similar from March to September 2020,
    compared to the same months in 2019, and canceled orders were greater
    from October to December 2020, when compared to March to September
    2020. We asked FNS officials if they identified canceled orders as a
    risk to the program and, if so, did they implement any changes to
    address this issue. FNS officials stated they had not assessed risks
    related to canceled orders. However, in the fall of 2020, they began
    working more closely with their procurement department to identify
    additional vendors, make modifications to the list of food offerings,
    and increase their involvement within the food industry to reduce the
    risk of canceled orders.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \23\ GAO, COVID-19: Urgent Actions Needed to Better Ensure an
    Effective Federal Response, GAO-21-191 (Nov. 2020).
        \24\ GAO, COVID-19: Sustained Federal Action is Crucial as Pandemic
    Enters Its Second Year, GAO-21-387 (Mar. 2021).
        \25\ According to GAO, FNS officials and representatives from
    organizations who distribute food stated several factors contributed to
    canceled TEFAP orders during the pandemic, including vendors not
    bidding on a given order, supply chain issues making food unavailable,
    and increasing transportation and raw materials costs.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Oversight
        Travel restrictions due to the pandemic prevented FNS regional
    offices from completing MEs for two state agencies FNS identified as
    high risk for waste, fraud, and abuse of program resources.\26\
    Although FNS rescheduled these two MEs from FY 2020 to FY 2021, the
    agency did not formally identify or assess potential risks caused by
    postponing the MEs. For example, FNS did not formally evaluate and
    document whether it should implement alternate mitigating controls--
    such as a desk review of state agencies' operations--to replace or
    supplement the monitoring reviews postponed due to the pandemic.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \26\ FNS conducts an annual risk-based assessment to determine
    state agencies that pose the highest risk for waste, fraud, and abuse
    of TEFAP resources. Based on the results of the assessment, FNS selects
    the top five states its assessment identified as presenting the highest
    risk for fraud, waste, and abuse and performs a ME of those states. In
    FY 2020, FNS completed three of the five MEs before the pandemic and
    rescheduled the remaining two MEs to be completed in FY 2021.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Travel restrictions also impacted state agencies' ability to
    complete on-site monitoring of their TEFAP operations and processes.
    State agencies are required to annually review recipient agencies that
    participate in TEFAP.\27\ In light of the pandemic, FNS provided the
    state agencies the option to delay their oversight activities and
    encouraged virtual reviews to be conducted to the extent
    practicable.\28\ However, FNS modified these existing controls without
    performing a formal risk assessment to determine how these delays could
    impact the state's ability to monitor program operations effectively.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \27\ These on-site reviews evaluate how organizations conduct
    eligibility determinations, food ordering procedures, storage and
    warehouse practices, inventory controls, and adherence to reporting and
    record-keeping requirements.
        \28\ According to 7 CFR  250, storage facility reviews and
    physical inventory counts must be conducted on-site.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        ERM has six essential elements that fit together to form a
    continual process for managing enterprise risks. The absence of any one
    of the elements would likely result in an agency incompletely
    identifying and managing risk. For example, if an agency did not
    monitor risks, it would have no way to ensure it successfully respond
    to risks. If FNS had performed formal risk assessments as part of a
    continuous risk management process (depicted in Figure 3), FNS could
    have more timely identified the challenges OIG and GAO reported and may
    have been able to develop and implement strategies to mitigate the
    risks these challenges presented to the safe and efficient distribution
    of USDA Foods to states.
    Figure 3: Essential Elements of Federal Government Enterprise Risk
            Management
            [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

              Source: GAO-17-63.\29\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \29\ GAO, Enterprise Risk Management, Selected Agencies'
    Experiences Illustrate Good Practices in Managing Risk, GAO-17-63 (Dec.
    2016).

        While we acknowledge that FNS modified oversight controls in
    response to the pandemic, the agency did not conduct a comprehensive,
    formal risk assessment of all aspects of TEFAP, including an assessment
    of FNS's TEFAP operations and processes and an assessment of the impact
    that changing conditions caused by the pandemic and an increase in
    Federal funding could have on TEFAP operations. Although we noted FNS
    modified program operations in response to the pandemic, FNS officials
    shared they did not formally identify and document the risks of these
    modifications to the effective oversight of TEFAP. As a result, FNS
    cannot ensure that the oversight controls it modified did not create
    additional risks that FNS should have mitigated and that all risks to
    TEFAP operations are identified and assessed. FNS needs to conduct and
    document a formal risk assessment of TEFAP, including evaluating the
    impact of the pandemic on its operations. In addition, to ensure FNS
    appropriately uses current and future TEFAP funds, FNS needs to
    document any determinations regarding whether it is willing to accept
    risks to program integrity or identify and implement additional
    internal controls to mitigate risks.
    Recommendation 1
        Develop and implement a formal process to periodically identify,
    assess, and document risks, beyond improper payments, that could impact
    the integrity of TEFAP. This should include a comprehensive assessment
    of all aspects of TEFAP, including those that would arise as a result
    of changes in operations due to a significant event.
    Agency Response
        In its August 13, 2021, response, FNS stated:

              FNS concurs with this recommendation and will work to develop
            and implement a formal process to periodically identify,
            assess, and document risks that could affect the integrity of
            TEFAP, including those that would arise as a result of changes
            in operation due to a significant event such as the COVID-19
            pandemic. Though risk assessment is built into routine program
            operations and did inform FNS' response to the pandemic, we
            recognize that we do not have a formal risk evaluation process
            in place in which known risks, responses to risks, and
            mitigation strategies are documented and formally evaluated.
            Moving forward, we will implement a formal ERM process using
            the Office of Management and Budget's Management Responsibility
            for Enterprise Risk Management and Internal Control, Circular
            A-123 as a guide. We recognize that such an assessment is a
            best practice in program administration and will help to ensure
            the effective and efficient administration of the program.

        FNS provided an estimated completion date of May 1, 2022, for this
    action.
    OIG Position
        We accept management decision for this recommendation.
    Recommendation 2
        Document FNS' response to the risks identified during its
    assessment. Document and implement mitigation strategies, as
    applicable.
    Agency Response
        In its August 13, 2021, response, FNS stated:

              FNS concurs with this recommendation. The ERM process that
            will be developed and implemented will include a process for
            documenting FNS' response to any risks identified during the
            risk assessment and any corresponding mitigation strategies
            that will need to be put into place. In many cases, the process
            to document risks and mitigation strategies will simply be an
            articulation of known risks and strategies that FNS already has
            in place; however, we recognize that a formal process may yield
            different solutions or strategies than what FNS has already
            implemented for TEFAP.

        FNS provided an estimated completion date of August 1, 2022, for
    this action.
    OIG Position
        We accept management decision for this recommendation.
    Scope and Methodology
        Our inspection scope covered the period of March 1, 2020, through
    October 31, 2020. We conducted our fieldwork on Objective 3 from
    November 2020 through June 2021.
        To accomplish Objective 3, we:

       Obtained and reviewed applicable laws, policies, procedures,
            and regulations relating to TEFAP, FFCR Act and CARES Act;

       Reviewed GAO Reports to Congressional Committees: ``COVID-
            19: Urgent Actions Needed to Better Ensure an Effective Federal
            Response'' (November 2020) and ``COVID-19: Sustained Federal
            Action is Crucial as Pandemic Enters Its Second Year'' (March
            2021);

       Interviewed FNS officials and reviewed written responses to
            our questions;

       Reviewed and evaluated FNS' FY 2020 TEFAP improper payment
            risk assessment;

       Identified and reviewed controls implemented by FNS in
            response to the FFCR and CARES Acts; and

       Reviewed FNS' process for conducting MEs, including FNS'
            risk-based assessment for selecting states for ME reviews and
            the ME module.

        We conducted this inspection in accordance with the Council of the
    Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency's Quality Standards for
    Inspection and Evaluation.\30\ Those standards require that we obtain
    sufficient, competent, and relevant evidence to provide a reasonable
    basis for our findings, conclusions, and recommendations based on our
    inspection objectives. We believe that the evidence obtained provides a
    reasonable basis for our finding, conclusions, and recommendations
    based on our inspection objective.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \30\ Council of the Inspectors General on Integrity and Efficiency,
    Quality Standards for Inspection and Evaluation (Dec. 2020).
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Abbreviations

                        CAP   Commodity Assistance Program
                  CARES Act   Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security
                               Act
                        CFR   Code of Federal Regulations
                   COVID-19   coronavirus disease 2019
                        ERM   Enterprise Risk Management
                   FFCR Act   Family First Coronavirus Response Act
                        FNS   Food and Nutrition Service
                         FY   fiscal year
                        GAO   Government Accountability Office
                         ME   management evaluation
                        OMB   Office of Management and Budget
                      TEFAP   The Emergency Food Assistance Program
                       USDA   United States Department of Agriculture

    Agency's Response
    FNS' Response to Audit Report
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

      Date: August 13, 2021
      Inspection Number: 27801-0001-21(1)
      To: Gil H. Harden, Assistant Inspector General for Audit
      From: Cindy Long, Acting Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service

      Subject: Interim Report, COVID-19: Oversight of The Emergency Food
                Assistance Program

        This letter responds to the interim report official draft for
    inspection number 27801-0001-21(1), COVID-19: Oversight of The
    Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP). Specifically, the Food and
    Nutrition Service (FNS) is responding to the two recommendations in the
    report.
        FNS supports the Office of Inspector General's (OIG) objectives to
    assess the controls FNS has in place to monitor and evaluate risk in
    TEFAP. Such exercises only serve to bolster and improve the effective
    and efficient administration of the program. As the COVID-19 pandemic
    has demonstrated, TEFAP's vast network of food banks, food pantries,
    soup kitchens, and other local agencies are a lifeline for low-income
    Americans in need of emergency food assistance. We appreciate OIG's due
    diligence in helping to ensure that TEFAP remains a stable and reliable
    source of food assistance for those in need under any circumstances
    that may arise.
    OIG Recommendation 1
        Develop and implement a formal process to periodically identify,
    assess, and document risks, beyond improper payments, that could impact
    the integrity of TEFAP. This should include a comprehensive assessment
    of all aspects of TEFAP, including those that would arise as a result
    of changes in operations due to a significant event.
    FNS Response
        FNS concurs with this recommendation and will work to develop and
    implement a formal process to periodically identify, assess, and
    document risks that could affect the integrity of TEFAP, including
    those that would arise as a result of changes in operation due to a
    significant event such as the COVID-19 pandemic. Though risk assessment
    is built into routine program operations and did inform FNS' response
    to the pandemic, we recognize that we do not have a formal risk
    evaluation process in place in which known risks, responses to risks,
    and mitigation strategies are documented and formally evaluated. Moving
    forward, we will implement a formal enterprise risk management (ERM)
    process using the Office of Management and Budget's Management
    Responsibility for Enterprise Risk Management and Internal Control,
    Circular A-123 as a guide. We recognize that such an assessment is a
    best practice in program administration and will help to ensure the
    effective and efficient administration of the program.
    Estimated Completion Date
        May 1, 2022.
    OIG Recommendation 2
        Document FNS' response to the risks identified during its
    assessment. Document and implement mitigation strategies, as
    applicable.
    FNS Response
        FNS concurs with this recommendation. The ERM process that will be
    developed and implemented will include a process for documenting FNS'
    response to any risks identified during the risk assessment and any
    corresponding mitigation strategies that will need to be put into
    place. In many cases, the process to document risks and mitigation
    strategies will simply be an articulation of known risks and strategies
    that FNS already has in place; however, we recognize that a formal
    process may yield different solutions or strategies than what FNS has
    already implemented for TEFAP.
    Estimated Completion Date
        August 1, 2022.

        Learn more about USDA OIG

              Visit our website: www.usda.gov/oig/index.htm
              Follow us on Twitter: @OIGUSDA

        How to Report Suspected Wrongdoing in USDA Programs Fraud, Waste,
    and Abuse

              File complaint online: www.usda.gov/oig/hotline.htm

        Monday-Friday, 9:00 a.m.-3:00 p.m. ET

              In Washington, D.C. 202-690-1622
              Outside D.C. 800-424-9121
              TDD (Call Collect) 202-690-1202

        Bribes or Gratuities

        202-720-7257 (24 hours)

              In accordance with Federal civil rights law and U.S.
            Department of Agriculture (USDA) civil rights regulations and
            policies, the USDA, its Agencies, offices, and employees, and
            institutions participating in or administering USDA programs
            are prohibited from discriminating based on race, color,
            national origin, religion, sex, gender identity (including
            gender expression), sexual orientation, disability, age,
            marital status, family/parental status, income derived from a
            public assistance program, political beliefs, or reprisal or
            retaliation for prior civil rights activity, in any program or
            activity conducted or funded by USDA (not all bases apply to
            all programs). Remedies and complaint filing deadlines vary by
            program or incident.
              Persons with disabilities who require alternative means of
            communication for program information (e.g., Braille, large
            print, audiotape, American Sign Language, etc.) should contact
            the responsible Agency or USDA's TARGET Center at (202) 720-
            2600 (voice and TTY) or contact USDA through the Federal Relay
            Service at (800) 877-8339. Additionally, program information
            may be made available in languages other than English.
              To file a program discrimination complaint, complete the USDA
            Program Discrimination Complaint Form, AD-3027, found online at
            How to File a Program Discrimination Complaint and at any USDA
            office or write a letter addressed to USDA and provide in the
            letter all of the information requested in the form. To request
            a copy of the complaint form, call (866) 632-9992. Submit your
            completed form or letter to USDA by: (1) mail: U.S. Department
            of Agriculture, Office of the Assistant Secretary for Civil
            Rights, 1400 Independence Avenue, SW, Washington, D.C. 20250-
            9410; (2) fax: (202) 690-7442; or (3) email:
            program.intake@usda.gov.
              USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.
                                     ______

      Submitted Statement by Hon. Don Bacon, a Representative in Congress
           from Nebraska; on Behalf of Metz Culinary Management, Inc.
        [Madam Chairwoman] and Members of this Committee, thank you for
    holding this critical hearing to receive comments and review the U.S.
    Department of Agriculture's (USDA) food distribution programs. Metz
    Culinary Management appreciates the opportunity to provide additional
    details on how our company offers nutritious, ready-to-eat, frozen,
    shelf-stable meals through USDA's food and nutrition programs. In
    addition, we are extremely interested in working with the Committee to
    examine how these meals can be leveraged and expanded within USDA's
    food and nutrition programs to address growing needs and gaps
    surrounding COVID-19, senior feeding, culturally diverse meals, and
    emergency feeding.
        Metz Culinary Management, Inc. is a family-owned company
    established in 1994 to provide restaurant-inspired hospitality to
    public and independent schools, senior nutrition programs, higher
    education institutes, health care facilities, and corporate dining.
    Headquartered in Dallas, PA, and with significant culinary and catering
    centers throughout Florida and recently in Sarasota, FL. Metz Culinary
    Management employs 1,500 full-time employees directly involved in their
    food-service businesses and over 7,000 in related services.
        Metz Culinary Management has been a leader in nutrition,
    establishing programs that enhance the well-being of students, school
    faculty, and staff, and has provided meals through USDA school lunch
    programs and the Older Americans Act since 1994. Menus designed to
    incentivize healthy eating habits and nutrition education have been a
    priority and early focus. In addition, our experience in government
    commodities programs and school nutrition compliance enables school
    districts to make the most of their budgets while addressing local
    needs and preferences.
        In response to the COVID-19 pandemic, Metz has taken actions to
    address the challenges and dangers of COVID-19 to ensure the safety and
    nutrition of its meals provided through Federal food and nutrition
    programs. For example, Metz Culinary Management collaborated with local
    school districts to implement delivery of meals to pick-up locations
    and for curbside delivery. Also, special meals for delivery to
    residents and alternative dining settings have been established to
    address safety issues surrounding congregate settings. Finally, mobile
    kitchens have provided maximum flexibility and enabled meals to be
    delivered in remote areas not generally served to allow for more
    efficient meal distribution. Metz is extremely excited about the
    potential to expand upon these services and protocols for our ready-to-
    eat frozen meals to broaden and leverage assistance through appropriate
    USDA feeding programs.
        The Commodity Food Assistance Program and the Food Distribution
    Program on Indian Reservations serve populations that would benefit
    significantly from nutritionally balanced and culturally appropriate
    ready-to-eat frozen meals. In addition, such meals can be designed to
    address unique nutrition needs and even medically tailored to address
    underlying medical conditions. Similarly, the Emergency Food Assistance
    Program also provides opportunities to leverage frozen ready-to-eat
    shelf-stable meals to address gaps and provide targeted assistance to
    families and children throughout the school year.
        Metz has received input from local food banks interested in ready-
    to-eat meals. If approved under USDA food and nutrition programs and
    added to Food Available Lists for purchase, such meals could address
    gaps that confront food banks in serving vulnerable nutritionally at-
    risk populations, including seniors, Native Americans, ethnic
    minorities, and children and families. In particular, food banks have
    commented on how ready-to-eat shelf-stable frozen meals could be
    leveraged and expanded to address unique feeding and nutrition needs
    for seniors, disabled individuals, culturally diverse populations, and
    homebound individuals.
        As the Committee continues to examine how to tackle the many
    challenges surrounding food insecurity, we offer our assistance and
    support. We believe that expanding frozen shelf-stable ready-to-eat
    meal options designed to meet the specific nutrition and cultural needs
    of USDA's food and nutrition program recipients should be a priority.
        Thank you so much for this opportunity to provide comments and
    stand ready to support the Committee in its essential role in feeding
    America and ensuring nutritious meals to those in need.
                                     ______

                              Submitted Questions
    Questions Submitted by Hon. Kat Cammack, a Representative in Congress
            from Florida
    Response from Carlos M. Rodriguez, President and Chief Executive
            Officer, Community FoodBank of New Jersey
        Question 1. Mr. Rodriguez, SNAP is a program your organization has
    praised at length. In fact, your parent organization has testified
    before this Committee that ``for every meal delivered through TEFAP,
    SNAP delivers nine to a family in need.'' If that is the case, why
    don't we simply zero out TEFAP and focus our efforts on SNAP, a program
    which by your own organization's admission, can deliver more to
    Americans in need?
        Answer. Thank you for this question. SNAP and TEFAP both play
    important roles in providing food assistance to individuals and
    families in need, and work together to address different aspects of
    short-term and longer-term need for food assistance. As the program is
    designed, TEFAP is meant to provide emergency food assistance to
    provide food for families in need most immediately. Sometimes, one food
    distribution is enough to meet the short-term food assistance needs of
    individuals and families. Other times, more long-term assistance is
    needed. When families and individuals need more than episodic
    assistance from our food bank, we let them know about other programs
    they might be eligible for, such as SNAP, that can more effectively
    provide long term food assistance, and if requested provide information
    on eligibility and how to sign up for SNAP.
        Unfortunately, there are some families that need help from SNAP as
    well as charitable food assistance to make sure their families don't go
    without food. This is not surprising, given that SNAP is meant to
    provide only supplemental nutrition assistance each month.
        I also want to point out that 32% of food-insecure individuals earn
    incomes above 185% of the Federal poverty level, meaning they are
    likely income ineligible for SNAP, and in some states TEFAP as well.
    Food banks play a critical role for millions of working families and
    individuals that make too much for assistance from federal programs yet
    too little to assure food security for themselves and their families.

        Question 2. Mr. Rodriguez, your organization also actively pushed
    for the Biden Administration to discontinue the Farmers to Families
    Food Box Program. It was in part due to your organization's efforts
    that the program was ended. Can you provide me with the reasons for why
    Feeding America opposed this program?
        Answer. The Farmers to Families Food Box Program provided a
    critical source of short-term food relief for our food bank and other
    food banks and food pantries across the country. It is my understanding
    that the program was ended in large part due to a combination of a lack
    of additional funds and the restaurant industry opening again and
    purchasing from growers and producers that had needed support in 2020.
        The goal of the Farmers to Families Food Box Program was to provide
    much needed support to farmers, growers, and distributors who were
    impacted by the sudden shift in consumer eating habits and the shutdown
    of restaurants and other eating establishments at the start of the
    pandemic, and to connect this nutritious food with people in need.
        The Feeding America food bank network distributed approximately 25%
    of the 132 million food boxes provided through the program from May-
    December 2020. However, this distribution was not equitable across
    communities in need and our food bank network due to a lack of a
    comprehensive distribution plan among contracted distributors. Were a
    program like this to be considered again, we propose the following
    recommendations:

       Provide increased accountability for any future Farmers to
            Families Food Box Program by requiring distributors to
            distribute the food in an equitable manner nationwide through
            USDA Food Distributions Programs like TEFAP to emergency
            feeding organizations.

       Provide support for emergency food organizations for
            distribution costs by providing storage and distribution grants
            directly to the organizations per truckload of food received.

       Provide a steady supply of ready-to-load commodities to food
            banks to help meet demand. Both growers and food banks would
            benefit from knowing how long additional food purchase support
            from USDA could last so that they can plan accordingly and
            understand the impact of the program. This would allow food
            banks to plan with other partners to source additional food as
            needed.

       The Farmers to Families Food Box Program provided food
            quickly but was not as efficient or effective as it could be in
            distributing food to people in need. We recommend a program
            that provides food quickly during a supply chain crisis, but
            that operates through existing distribution channels to ensure
            equitable distribution across the country, predictable
            deliveries, and safe food handling.

        Question 3. Now Mr. Rodriguez, your Feeding America's CEO, last I
    checked, made close to $1 million in 2019, well above the average
    salary of most nonprofit CEOs. Can you explain why the leadership of an
    organization that claims to be about relief for those in need,
    regularly makes close to and--in years past--over $1 million a year?
        Answer. Feeding America follows IRS recommendations that nonprofits
    follow a three step process to determine that executive compens[a]tion
    is reasonable and not excessive. Feeding America executive compensation
    is determined by the executive compensation committee of the board of
    directors, which also utilizes the advice of independent advisors.
    These independent advisors conduct a total compensation market review
    process each year that provides an opinion as to the reasonableness of
    Feeding America's compensation levels in relation to market norms. In
    addition, Feeding America scores a 97.87 out of 100 on Charity
    Navigator,\1\ indicating that donors can give with confidence that the
    funds will be spent effectively. Feeding America spends 98.7% of total
    expenses on program operations and services.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/363673599.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                   attachment
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Feeding America
    Donate To This Charity \1\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \1\ https://www.charitynavigator.org/
    index.cfm?bay=my.donations.makedonation&ein=363673599.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Multipurpose Human Service Organizations D EIN: 36-3673599 D Chicago IL

        Mission: Feeding America' is the largest hunger-relief
    organization in the United States. Through a network of more than 200
    food banks, 21 statewide food bank associations, and over 60,000
    partner agencies, food pantries and meal programs, we helped provide
    6.6 billion meals to tens of millions of people in need last year.
    Feeding America also supports programs that prevent food waste and
    improve food security among the people we serve; brings attention to
    the social and systemic barriers that contribute to food insecurity in
    our nation; and advocates for legislation that protects people from
    going hungry.

        Feeding America is a 501(c)(3) organization, with an IRS ruling
    year of 1990, and donations are tax-deductible.

        Is this your nonprofit? Access your Star Rating Portal to submit
    data and edit your profile.\2\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \2\ https://www.charitynavigator.org/
    index.cfm?bay=my.nonprofit.update&orgid=5271.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Contact Information
    http://www.feedingamerica.org/

    161 North Clark Street, Suite 700, Chicago IL 60601

    800-771-2303
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Important note on the timeliness of ratings
        The IRS is significantly delayed in processing nonprofits' annual
    tax filings (Forms 990). As a result, the Financial and Accountability
    & Transparency score for Feeding America is outdated and the overall
    rating may not be representative of its current operations. Please
    check with the charity directly for any questions you may have.

        You are viewing this organization's new Charity Navigator profile
    page. To view the legacy version, click here.\3\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \3\ https://www.charitynavigator.org/
    index.cfm?bay=search.summary&orgid=5271&oldpage
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Star Rating System by Charity Navigator
        Charity Navigator evaluates a nonprofit organization's financial
    health including measures of stability, efficiency and sustainability.
    We also track accountability and transparency policies to ensure the
    good governance and integrity of the organization.
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Exceptional
        This charity's score is 97.87, earning it a 4-Star rating. Donors
    can ``Give with Confidence'' to this charity.
        This score is calculated from two sub-scores:

       Finance: 100.00

       Accountability & Transparency: 97.00

        This score represents Form 990 data from 2020, the latest year
    published by the IRS.
        View this organization's historical ratings.\4\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \4\ https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/363673599#historical-
    ratings.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Star Rated Report
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

    Program Expense Ratio
    98.6%
    Expenses: 3 Year Average
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

              Editor's note: this is an interactive graphic.

        The Program Expense Ratio is determined by Program Expenses divided
    by Total Expense (average of most recent three 990s).
        This measure reflects the percent of its total expenses a charity
    spends on the programs and services it exists to deliver. Dividing a
    charity's average program expenses by its average total functional
    expenses yields this percentage. We calculate the charity's average
    expenses over its three most recent fiscal years.

              Source: IRS Form 990.
    Additional Information
              Total Revenue and Expenses--Data Available \5\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \5\ https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/363673599#total-revenue.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Salary of Key Persons--Data Available \6\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \6\ https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/363673599#Salary-of-Key-
    Persons.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
              IRS Published Data (Business Master File)--Data Available \7\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \7\ https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/363673599#bmf-data.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Data Sources (IRS Forms 990) \8\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \8\ https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/363673599#data-source.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Historical Ratings--Data Available \9\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \9\ https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/363673599#historical-
    ratings.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Unscored
    Total Revenue and Expenses
        This chart displays the trend of revenue and expenses over the past
    several years for this organization, as reported on their IRS Form 990.
    [GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]

              Editor's note: this is an interactive graphic.
    Impact & Results
        This score estimates the actual impact a nonprofit has on the lives
    of those it serves, and determines whether it is making good use of
    donor resources to achieve that impact.
    Impact & Results Score
    100 out of 100
        Feeding America is, earning a passing score. This score has no
    effect on the organization's Star Rating.
    Impact
        $2 provides a meal to a person in need.
        Do you work at Feeding America? Join the waitlist for an updated
    Impact & Results score.\10\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \10\ https://www.charitynavigator.org/portal.

           Impact & Results Report                 100 of 100 points

    Rated Program \11\                    Program
    \11\ https://
     www.charitynavigator.org/ein/
     363673599#impact-rated-program.
    Outcomes and Cost \12\                Food Procurement
    \12\ https://
     www.charitynavigator.org/ein/
     363673599#OutcomesCost-content.
    Impact and Determination \13\         Activities
    \13\ https://
     www.charitynavigator.org/ein/
     363673599#determination-content.
    Analysis Details \14\                 The nonprofit collects, warehouses
                                           and distributes food to front-
                                           line organizations like food
                                           pantries and soup kitchens.
    \14\ https://
     www.charitynavigator.org/ein/
     363673599#analysis-details-content.
                                          Program Type
                                          Beneficiaries Served
                                          Program Geography
                                          Time Period of Data
                                          Learn how we assess the impact of
                                           nonprofits. \15\
    \15\ https://
     www.charitynavigator.org/
     index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=809
     1.

            Additional Information                      Unscored

    Largest Programs
      Feeding America reported its three
       largest programs on its FY 2020
       Form 990 as:
        $3,148,701,711 Spent in most       96% Percent of program expenses
         recent FY
      Food Procurement
        $94,742,225 Spent in most recent   2% Percent of program expenses
         FY
      Member Services
        $12,811,564 Spent in most recent   0% Percent of program expenses
         FY

    Research and Evaluation
    Leadership & Adaptability
        This score provides an assessment of the organization's leadership
    capacity, strategic thinking and planning, and ability to innovate or
    respond to changes in constituent demand/need or other relevant social
    and economic conditions to achieve the organization's mission.
    Leadership & Adaptability Score
    Not Currently Scored
        Feeding America is currently not eligible for a Leadership &
    Adaptability score because we have not received its L&A survey
    responses.
        Note: The absence of a score does not indicate a positive or
    negative assessment, it only indicates that the organization has not
    yet submitted data for evaluation.
    Additional Information
    Unscored
        Organization Leadership

              Claire Babineaux-Fontenot, Chief Executive Officer
              Gary Rodkin, Board Chair
    Culture & Community
        This score provides an assessment of the organization's culture and
    connectedness to the community it serves. Learn more about how and why
    we rate Culture & Community.\16\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \16\ https://www.charitynavigator.org/
    index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=8563.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Culture & Community Score
    99 out of 100
        Feeding America has earned a passing score. This score has no
    effect on the organization's Star Rating. The organization provided
    data about how it listens to constituents (Constituent Feedback) and
    its Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion (DEI) practices (see report below).
        The Culture & Community Beacon is comprised of the following
    metrics:

       Constituent Feedback: 100/100 (30% of beacon score)

       Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion: 98/100 (70% of beacon score)
    Culture & Community Report
    99 of 100 points
              Constituent Feedback--Data Available (100/100 Points) \17\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \17\ https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/363673599#culture-
    constituent-voice.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Diversity, Equity, & Inclusion--Data Available (98/100
            Points) \18\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \18\ https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/363673599#culture-dei.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
              Analysis and Research \19\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \19\ https://www.charitynavigator.org/ein/363673599#culture-coming-
    soon.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Constituent Feedback
    100/100 points
    30% of beacon score
        This organization reported that it is collecting feedback from the
    constituents and/or communities it serves. Charity Navigator believes
    nonprofit organizations that engage in inclusive practices, such as
    collecting feedback from the people and communities they serve, may be
    more effective.
        View this organization's Constituent Feedback Practices
      Who are the people you serve with your mission? Describe briefly.
              Our mission is to advance change in America by ensuring
            equitable access to nutritious food for all in partnership with
            food banks, policymakers, supporters, and the communities we
            serve. Millions of children and families living in America face
            hunger and food insecurity every day. Due to the effects of the
            coronavirus pandemic, more than 42 million people may
            experience food insecurity, including a potential 13 million
            children. The pandemic has most impacted families that were
            already facing hunger or one paycheck away from facing hunger.
            According to the USDA's latest Household Food Insecurity in the
            United States report, more than 35 million people in the United
            States experienced hunger in 2019. Households with children are
            more likely to experience food insecurity.
      How is your organization collecting feedback from the people you
            serve?
              SMS text surveys, Electronic surveys (by email, tablet,
            etc.), Focus groups or interviews (by phone or in person),
            Paper surveys, Case management notes, Community meetings or
            town halls, Constituent (client or resident, etc.) advisory
            committees, Suggestion box/email
      How is your organization using feedback from the people you serve?
              To identify and remedy poor client service experiences, To
            make fundamental changes to our programs and/or operations, To
            inform the development of new programs/projects, To strengthen
            relationships with the people we serve
      With whom does your organization share the feedback you got from the
            people you serve?
              Our staff, Our board, Our funders, Our community partners
      How has asking for feedback from the people you serve changed your
            relationship with them or shifted power--over decisions,
            resources, rules or in other ways--to them?
              Future plans are still being developed but the first phase
            resulted in a portfolio of prioritized concepts that we will be
            further co-developing, testing and implementing in partnership
            with the network. One concept includes embedding benefit
            enrollment in existing digital neighbor touchpoints like
            OrderAhead to make seeking charitable food and enrolling in
            benefits seamless.
      What challenges does your organization face in collecting feedback
            from the people you serve?
              We don't have the right technology to collect and aggregate
            feedback efficiently, Staff find it hard to prioritize feedback
            collection and review due to lack of time
      Briefly describe a recent change that your organization made in
            response to feedback from the people you serve.
              Feeding America is committed to delivering an equitable and
            dignified experience to the people we serve. In January, we
            completed phase one of ``Reimagining the Neighbor Experience,''
            an initiative to develop a multi-year roadmap of solutions to
            enhance the charitable food experience, in partnership with the
            people we serve, member food banks and agencies. We used a
            design-research approach, keeping neighbors' voices and
            experiences at the center of this work through in-depth
            interviews and diary studies, with a focus on communities of
            color. The research explored our neighbors' current journeys
            and experiences with food-both from charitable and other
            sources-to inspire and inform how the charitable food
            experience needs to evolve to meet their needs.
    Methodology
        We've partnered with Candid to survey organizations about their
    feedback practices. Nonprofit organizations can fill out the How We
    Listen section of their Candid profile \20\ to receive a rating.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \20\ http://guidestar.candid.org/update-nonprofit-profile/.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Learn more about the methodology.\21\
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        \21\ https://www.charitynavigator.org/
    index.cfm?bay=content.view&cpid=8563.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

                                      [all]