[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: 
        [email protected].
          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]