SNAP Outreach within Food Banks: A View From The Ground

Transcription

1 SNAP Outreach within Food Banks: A View From The Ground Shana Alford, Feeding America Colleen Heflin, University of Missouri Elaine Waxman, Feeding America FEEDING AMERICA + PARTNER NAME PARTNERSHIP DISCUSSION / 1 /

2 Overview of Feeding America Network Nation s Leading Domestic Hunger-Relief Charity 200 Network Member Food Banks o o 58,000 programs All 50 states, D.C., Puerto Rico o Serving more than 46 million people FEEDING AMERICA + PARTNER NAME PARTNERSHIP DISCUSSION / 2 /

3 National Trends in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Participation FEEDING AMERICA + PARTNER NAME PARTNERSHIP DISCUSSION / 3 /

4 SNAP Participation Historic High Participation o Great Recession o Policy and legislation Variation in SNAP participation among eligible population, by state and region o National average =79% FEEDING AMERICA + PARTNER NAME PARTNERSHIP DISCUSSION / 4 /

5 Economic and Policy Periods ( ) Welfare Reform Robust economy, federal policy reform PRWOA*, expansion of EITC Bush-Era Modernization SNAP application process is revamped, reduced income reporting requirements. Expanded eligibility for immigrants under Farm Bill SNAP receipt rebounds The Great Recession Record high unemployment, mortgage and foreclosure crisis SNAP receipt doubles Eligibility waivers and expansion increase state level participation Source: Ganong and Liebman, Harvard University, Explaining Trends in SNAP Enrollment, June 2013, * Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Act FEEDING AMERICA + PARTNER NAME PARTNERSHIP DISCUSSION / 5 /

6 60,000 Annual National SNAP Participation Average (Shown in Thousands) Great Recession NUMBER OF PARTICIPANTS 50,000 40,000 30,000 20,000 20,049 26,987 Welfare Reform ,619 19,791 17,194 Bush Modernization ,250 25,628 26,316 33,490 40,302 46,609 47,636 10, Total Costs for SNAP Estimated at $79 Billion in 2013 Source: United States Department of Agriculture, Participation and Costs FEEDING AMERICA + PARTNER NAME PARTNERSHIP DISCUSSION / 6 /

7 REGIONAL AVERAGE SNAP PARTICIPATION RATES AMONG ELIGIBLE POPULATIONS, BY USDA REGIONS % 74% 80% 72% 81% 85% 78% 82% 84% 77% 77% 78% 67% 69% 70% 60% 67% 75% 57% 64% 68% MID-ATLANTIC MIDWEST MOUNTAIN PLAINS NORTHEAST SOUTHEAST SOUTHWEST WESTERN DC, DE, NJ, MD, PA, VA, WV IL, IN, MI, MN, OH, WI CO, IA, KS, MO, MT, ND, NE, SD, WY, UT CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, RI, VT AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN AR, LA, NM, OK, TX AK, AZ, CA, ID, NV, OR, WA Sources: United States Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, Reaching Those In Need: State Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Participation Rates in 2011, February 2014 And Food Nutrition Service, Food Distribution Programs Regional Offices FEEDING AMERICA + PARTNER NAME PARTNERSHIP DISCUSSION / 7 /

8 SNAP Outreach at Feeding America Network Member Food Banks FEEDING AMERICA + PARTNER NAME PARTNERSHIP DISCUSSION / 8 /

9 Food Banks Reach Populations in Need Feeding America Network Food Banks reach an estimated 1 in 7 Americans. People visit food banks and agencies because they are facing temporary or longer term hardship. Food banks may offer environments that are more welcoming and familiar than government offices. Food bank staff often have their pulse on community level issues and are familiar with constituents, as well as local leaders. Food bank staff are involved with community activities, reaching children and adults through outreach and targeted programming. FEEDING AMERICA + PARTNER NAME PARTNERSHIP DISCUSSION / 9 /

10 SNAP Outreach & Application Assistance in Feeding America Network 2009, n=57 food banks 2009: 72,656 applications 2012, n=115 food banks 2010: 103,313 applications FA Network SNAP Applications 2011: 146,296 applications 2012: 161,290 applications FEEDING AMERICA + PARTNER NAME PARTNERSHIP DISCUSSION / 10 /

11 Individual Member Food Bank Program Trends TRENDS IN ANNUAL SNAP APPLICATION ASSISTANCE FISCAL YEAR Annual food bank trends tell a unique story about SNAP outreach program implementation Context for outreach matters Standardization is not the goal, but evidence-based practices can be beneficial for local program delivery NUMBER OF CLIENT APPLICATIONS Food Bank 1 Food Bank 2 Food Bank 3 Food Bank 4 Food Bank Source: Feeding America 5 of 9 Food Banks Shown on Chart FEEDING AMERICA + PARTNER NAME PARTNERSHIP DISCUSSION / 11 /

12 Case Study Evaluation of SNAP Outreach at Feeding America FEEDING AMERICA + PARTNER NAME PARTNERSHIP DISCUSSION / 12 /

13 Scope of SNAP Outreach and Application Assistance Multi-Site Case Study Nine Member Food Banks in Six States (Multi-Site) Six states within Mid-Atlantic, Midwest, Southwest, and West Arizona, California, Illinois, Ohio, Texas, Wisconsin Examination of State Legislative Policies/Systems State and county SNAP administration Monthly Program Reports (April-November 2013/8 Months) 50+ interviews with food bank staff across all levels Outreach workers, program directors, food bank executives External Data From Other Sources: USDA, local media reports, state/county websites, external research literature, etc. FEEDING AMERICA + PARTNER NAME PARTNERSHIP DISCUSSION / 13 /

14 A Balance of Internal and External Factors Shape Program Implementation & Outcomes Internal Factors Leadership Resources Program Model Community Partner Relationships Long-Term Planning Use of Performance Measurement and Evaluation External Factors Population Density Geography County & State Administration Community Partner Opportunities Relationship with SNAP Agency Public Awareness and Stigma FEEDING AMERICA + PARTNER NAME PARTNERSHIP DISCUSSION / 14 /

15 Aggregate SNAP Outreach and Application Results during Case Study Period Short Term Program Outcomes Client Applications Assisted and Submitted = 8% of total clients reached =24% of total clients prescreened =55% of total clients deemed eligible for benefits * In total, 8 of 9 food banks reported program data used for this diagram. One food bank did not report monthly program data and therefore it is not represented in this diagram. ** One of eight food banks did not report total outreach counts, thus this food bank was not included in the outreach category of this diagram. However, this food bank reported data for all other categories in the diagram. FEEDING AMERICA + PARTNER NAME PARTNERSHIP DISCUSSION / 15 /

16 Five Key Findings from Case Study Evaluation 1. Trickle Down Effect: Local and state political and policy conditions influence SNAP outreach, as conducted by member food banks 2. Information Sharing: County and state agencies are gatekeepers of information that influence program outcomes 3. Leadership and Board Buy-In: Consensus about the value of SNAP outreach, as part of the food bank s mission, is key to program funding, and long-term planning 4. Program Capacity: Number of staff & level of staff knowledge, volunteers, and funding sources are critical for program sustainability 5. Population Density: Reaching people in need is a key programmatic goal, but geographic location creates opportunities/boundaries FEEDING AMERICA + PARTNER NAME PARTNERSHIP DISCUSSION / 16 /

17 Key Takeaways 57% of Member Food Banks have incorporated SNAP outreach and application assistance as a strategy to best assist clients with accessing economic benefits. Food banks face challenges: Stigma is still widely held toward SNAP Access to outcome data is limited Changing policy environment for SNAP (2014 Farm Bill) Unique population and geographic challenges (rural outreach) Food banks face opportunities: Building relationships with clients Multi-service provision and referrals to local partners for other services. Collaboration with state and local governmental agencies. Recent legislation and systems that have made SNAP more accessible FEEDING AMERICA + PARTNER NAME PARTNERSHIP DISCUSSION / 17 /

18 Conclusion: Next Steps SNAP Outreach Multi-Site Case Study Evaluation is the first of its kind conducted in Feeding America Network A Full Evaluation Report, with Comparative Analysis, will be completed in September 2014 Executive Summary to be released in September 2014 FEEDING AMERICA + PARTNER NAME PARTNERSHIP DISCUSSION / 18 /

19 Thank you! Shana Alford Director of Evaluation NAWRS Conference Rhode Island, August 2014 FEEDING AMERICA + PARTNER NAME PARTNERSHIP DISCUSSION / 19 /