Problem Definition and Background
The Food Stamp Program, now recognized as Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), is a United States program meant to provide food assistance to low-income Americans and families. According to the research (Nestle, 2019), the United States Department of Agriculture controls the SNAP program to help needy people buy healthy food. The food stamp benefits are accessed through electronic benefit cards, which accumulate benefits based on the family’s income and size. According to Twersky (2019), although the Food Stamp Program is the most extensive federal nutrition program, there is uncertainty about its effectiveness in improving food insecurity for millions of Americans.
The Food Stamp Program is considered an essential part of U.S. safety precautions for food security, with a general perspective showing that the program has supported many low-income families and individuals. However, a growing pool of research shows that the program’s methods are inadequate in providing adequate meals to numerous low-income families (Twersky, 2019). Although most of the ineffectiveness is attributed to the delivery of insufficient benefits, the program is criticized by many Americans due to the unfairness and disadvantages evident in seeking eligibility and receiving benefits. The specifics of eligibility and receiving benefits are based on income and household size, which does not necessarily account for all aspects in determining the need for the program’s help (Twersky, 2019).
Stakeholder Analysis
The primary stakeholders of the Food Stamp Program are low-income individuals and families. The program uses eligibility requirements through an application process to determine benefit levels necessary to meet low-level income individual needs (Pak & Kim, 2019). Many low-income individuals and families have failed to receive benefits or even gain eligibility due to the program’s fairness program’s fairness. Most eligible individuals also receive insufficient benefit levels since the specifics used by the program to determine their level of need do not depict the exact requirement levels (Twersky, 2019). Due to the documentation requirements, the complex application process is also a barrier for many eligible individuals. Low-income individuals are the stakeholders most affected by the issues of a complex application process and unfair benefit levels.
The American taxpayer is a significant stakeholder in the Food Stamp Program since the program is funded with taxpayer dollars (Nestle, 2019). Although the program positively improves food security, most taxpayers have argued that it is too expensive because it does not reach the intended individuals. According to the research (Pak & Kim, 2019), there is a growing perspective that there are better ways to address food security than implementing most of the taxpayer dollars into a half-measure program.
The aspects of the program also affect retailers, farmers, and food producers. The program affects the cost of food and the demand for food products (Pak & Kim, 2019). The program’s emphasis on low-cost food impacts the market by lowering the cost of food products and reducing the profits returning to farmers and food producers (Nestle, 2019). Although retailers benefit from increased sales, fraud and administrative costs reduce their benefit from the program.
Problem presentation
According to (Gundersen et al., 2019), most Food Stamp Program recipients are still food insecure due to the indifference to food prices across the country that must be adjusted to reflect the specific differences in different areas. According to the research (Gundersen et al., 2019), the current SNAP per meal cost is $1.86, which fails to consider the highest average of $4.41 from Oregon and the lowest average of $1.60 from Maverick, Texas. The difference in the average meal price in the country for a low-income but food-secure household is not considered in determining benefit levels for program-targeted individuals. Despite the perceived success of the Food Stamp Program, over 37 million Americans lived in households where food was insecure in 2018 (Gundersen et al., 2019). In 2017, 50.1% of eligible SNAP recipients and 23.4% of eligible non-recipients were food insecure (Gundersen et al., 2019).
Although the Food Stamp Program has existed since the 1960s, an extensive pool remains of eligible recipients who have failed to participate. Jolliffe et al. (2019) analysis showed that 30% of individuals eligible for the Food Stamp Program are not participating. Along with the lack of awareness and limited information, the complexity of eligibility criteria, exclusion errors, and the history of cuts in other programs have contributed to the lack of participation (Jolliffe et al., 2019). Fraud cases from individuals misrepresenting specific information and abuse of power from the organization’s members have increased the ratio of exclusion errors.
Proposed Solutions
Improve education and outreach: The limited reach of the Food Stamp Program is influenced by a lack of awareness and limited information on the program (Pak & Kim, 2019). The lack of information and a complex process reduce the intended effectiveness of the program by reducing participation numbers. With an improved outreach and education initiative, the program can increase awareness to needy people on their eligibility and application specifications. Further education on the application process and specifics of benefits eligibility can lessen the program’s complexity for individuals.
Changes in the application process: According to the research (Jolliffe et al., 2019), the program’s application and benefits eligibility process impacts the application numbers and influences a negative perspective of the program. Lessening the complicated program processes will improve the program’s impact and ensure that most low-income individuals with food security issues can apply for benefits. According to Pak & Kim (2019), the program also needs changes in benefits rendering to ensure it accounts for differences in food prices in different locations.
Increasing Funding: The Food Stamp Program ensures that food benefits reach the neediest of low-income individuals. However, specifics such as employment status, income level, and family size might portray an ineligible status even with significant food security issues. Jolliffe et al. (2019) stipulate that with increased funding, the program can shift to providing extensive support by reaching individuals with significant and minor food security issues. According to Jolliffe et al. (2019), ensuring that even individuals with minor food security issues are catered for would proportionally double the impact of the Food Stamp Program.
Policy Solution Recommendations
The first policy recommendation is addressing the root cause of food insecurity. Despite significant funding and preceding improvements, the Food Stamp Program has failed to reach the expected levels (Seligman & Berkowitz, 2019). Although the success achieved cannot be assumed, economic policies that promote job creation, increase income and reduce inequality have a more significant impact when applied parallel to the program. One criticism of the Food Stamp Program is its role in government dependency, which might reduce the general individual input in earning income. According to the research (Seligman & Berkowitz, 2019), the best way to improve food security is to ensure stable income sources for most individuals and families through job opportunities and favorable income rates.
Another agenda of the Food Stamp Program was to improve healthy lives by ensuring all people, or most citizens, access healthy and affordable food products. However, the program fails to regulate the types of foods purchased or influence the choices of individuals receiving benefits. The proposed policy recommendation to improve the nutritional value of food assistance seeks to encourage and regulate the purchase of healthier foods by ensuring participants make informed decisions (Seligman & Berkowitz, 2019).
The accessibility and effectiveness of the program can be improved by expanding the eligibility criteria and reducing the complexities of the application process (Seligman & Berkowitz, 2019). The policy recommendation to improve the eligibility criteria is based on streamlining the application process, making it easier for eligible participants to apply and expanding the program’s reach.
Implementation Strategies
The first step in implementing solutions to the Food Stamp Program is concentrating on education and outreach to ensure that most individuals who can benefit from the program have the necessary information (Pollard & Booth, 2019). Collaborating with social media channels, community organizations, and schools is the best way to pass the program’s information. Information on the eligibility and application process of the program can be advertised through community events and educational workshops. Creating awareness, especially in communities with high levels of food insecurity, improves the impact of the Food Stamp Program.
After creating awareness and reaching a larger pool of probable benefit recipients, the next step is to lessen the application process and improve the eligibility probability. The only way to change the eligibility and application specifics is by reviewing the current process to identify barriers and areas that require improvement (Pollard & Booth, 2019). Online application portals and mobile-friendly interfaces can provide more accessible access points for individuals. Since the specifics of economics and food security keep changing, routine updates and improvements to the eligibility criteria and the application process can ensure continued improvement through different economic phases. After increasing the program’s reach, policy changes are necessary to increase the program’s funding and ensure that more low-income individuals with food security issues receive the necessary benefits.
Budgetary constraints are a significant barrier that might impact policy changes to increase funding due to the current perception that the program’s funding is misappropriated (Pollard & Booth, 2019). The best way to counter this barrier is to collaborate with the required authority to prioritize initiatives based on their impact on food security concerns. Changing the eligibility and application process might raise policy and regulatory constraints due to the legislative and regulatory changes required (Pollard & Booth, 2019). The only solution is to build support for policy reforms through building coalitions with stakeholders and advocating for the changes with sufficient evidence of proposed improvements.
Impact Assessment
Improved education and outreach will increase awareness among eligible low-income individuals (Pollard & Booth, 2019). The education and outreach will also improve understanding of the program specifics, leading to more potential beneficiaries. On the downside, the education and outreach programs might increase the administrative staff’s workload and the ratio of fraudulent applications. The changes in the application process will reduce exclusion errors, streamline the application process, and improve the benefit levels for recipients (Twersky, 2019). The changes in the application process and eligibility criteria would require extensive upgrades and maintenance, which would require staff and budget inputs. Increasing the program’s funding could provide better support for individuals with food security issues and expand the program’s reach (Twersky, 2019). Budget changes might cause financial strain on government budgets, raising opposition from taxpayers who already consider the program expensive.
References
Gundersen, C., Waxman, E., & Crumbaugh, A. S. (2019). An Examination of the Adequacy of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Benefit Levels: Impacts on Food Insecurity. Agricultural and Resource Economics Review, 48(3), 433–447. https://doi.org/10.1017/age.2019.30
Jolliffe, D., Margitic, J., & Ravallion, M. (2019, June 27). Food Stamps and America’s Poorest. National Bureau of Economic Research Working Paper Series. https://www.nber.org/papers/w26025
Nestle, M. (2019). The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP): History, Politics, and Public Health Implications. American Journal of Public Health, 109(12), 1631–1635. https://doi.org/10.2105/ajph.2019.305361
Pak, T.-Y., & Kim, G. (2019). Food stamps, food insecurity, and health outcomes among elderly Americans. Preventive Medicine, 130, 105871. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ypmed.2019.105871
Pollard, C. M., & Booth, S. (2019). Food Insecurity and Hunger in Rich Countries—It Is Time for Action against Inequality. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 16(10), 1804. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph16101804
Seligman, H. K., & Berkowitz, S. A. (2019). Aligning Programs and Policies to Support Food Security and Public Health Goals in the United States. Annual Review of Public Health, 40(1), 319–337. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-publhealth-040218-044132
Twersky, S. E. (2019). Restrictive state laws aimed at immigrants: Effects on enrollment in the food stamp program by U.S. citizen children in immigrant families. PLOS ONE, 14(5), e0215327. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0215327
write