“Statewide Network News”
A quarterly publication of the Statewide Emergency Food and Anti-Hunger Network,
a project of The Center for Food Action
Summer 2006
CFA/SEFAN
192 W. Demarest Ave., Englewood, N. J., 07631
201-569-1804
www.cfanj.org
www.sefan.org
CFA Executive Director: Patricia Espy
SEFAN Project Director: Adele LaTourette
Project Associate & Editor: Barbara Bielawski
Coordinator of Outreach & Education: Lisa Pitz
Pantry Link Program Manager: Susan Koscielny
IN THIS ISSUE. . .
7th Statewide Hunger Survey
ü More People Seeking Food
ü Profile of Providers
ü About The Survey
WE ARE GRATEFUL TO THE DEDICATED WORKERS AT EMERGENCY FOOD PROGRAMS ACROSS THE STATE WHO TOOK THE TIME TO ANSWER SEFAN’S 7TH HUNGER SURVEY. THANK YOU FOR HELPING US PRESENT A PICTURE OF HUNGER IN NEW JERSEY TO THE PUBLIC AND TO POLICY MAKERS.
State's Emergency Food Providers
See More People Seeking Food
Food pantries, soup kitchens and shelters serving meals saw more people needing food assistance in 2005 than they did in 2004 according to the 324 providers who responded to SEFAN’s 7th Statewide Hunger Survey. Almost 65 percent of the emergency food sites reported an increase in services provided, while 5 percent said they provided about the same number of services, and 30 percent reported a decrease in services provided.[1] Regrettably, the reports of decreases in services didn’t mean there was less hunger in New Jersey. Many of the providers who reported fewer “meals served” or “food packages distributed” said these reductions were primarily caused by program cutbacks due to shrinking resources.
“We try to be careful with our limited resources, as we have less and less available. . .and there are more and more people that need assistance.” (Middlesex County)
“We ran out of food several times during the months of June through October 2005. Because of this we only serve the people once a month. Also, the quality and quantity of the food from the federal government has changed.” (Monmouth County)
Highlights from the SEFAN Survey
¨ Persons served by food pantries increased an average of 11%.
¨ Food packages distributed by pantries increased an average of 18%.
¨ 68% of food pantries reported an increase in the number of families with children served; 55% reported an increase in the number of senior citizens served.
¨ Persons served by soup kitchens and shelters serving meals increased an average of 4.3%.
¨ Meals served by soup kitchens and shelters serving meals increased an average of 6.6%.
¨ 60% of soup kitchens and 50% of shelters reported an increase in the number of immigrants served.
When asked why people came for food, providers’ top reasons included: low-paying jobs, unemployment, lack of affordable housing, inadequate government benefit programs, high utility costs, high medical and health care costs, and physical and mental health problems.
“Many of the people we serve have to make difficult choices between food and everyday necessities like utilities, rent and medical costs. Many of the families we serve are working. Unfortunately having a job in New Jersey does not guarantee food on the table for their families. Low wages and slim benefits put our clients at risk, on a regular basis, of being homeless and in a crisis situation. The food pantry provides much-needed help in stretching clients’ food dollars and offers support with other necessities to help a family get through a difficult time or make it to the next month.” (Essex County)
Emergency food providers help a wide range of people. Individuals and families needing short-term help during a crisis continue to rely on pantries and soup kitchens. Another group of people—those who can’t meet all their basic needs—are showing up in ever-increasing numbers. Food assistance programs report serving more elderly people living on fixed incomes; more families with children, and more working people who are still poor.
“We actually call it supplemental food. It is not emergency food for most clients.
Reason #1: paying so much of income for rent, not enough left for food. Reason #2: lack of adequate health care and prescription coverage. If serious illness strikes, [it] wipes family out.” (Morris County)
While these responses from over 300 emergency food providers from across the state do not represent the experience of all New Jersey providers, they do agree with reports from people who attended SEFAN’s recent series of five regional conferences for emergency food staff and volunteers. They also fit with findings from America’s Second Harvest’s (A2H) recent nationwide survey. Sixty-eight percent of pantries, 63 percent of kitchens, and 49 percent of shelters in New Jersey reported that there had been an increase since 2001 in the number of clients who come to A2H emergency food program sites.
These survey highlights are expanded upon in the following sections.
Food Pantries
Most of the pantries that responded to the survey count the number of people served. However, some count the number of food packages distributed. As a result, we report on both categories in Tables 1 and 2. [2] The county-level information in the tables needs to be viewed cautiously as the number of respondents from each county varies considerably.
Most counties reported overall average increases in services. A few counties showed overall average decreases in “persons served” or “food packages distributed.” Unfortunately, reports of decreases in services didn’t necessarily mean that a smaller number of people were hungry. Many of the pantries that reported decreases in services said they were the result of program cutbacks due to decreases in resources. Some noted that additional food programs opened up in the area or that there were demographic changes in the geographic area served, i.e., gentrification causing poor to move.
Ø A pantry in Hunterdon County had to close for four months due to lack of resources.
Ø A pantry in Atlantic County stopped giving food packages to single adults and referred them to a soup kitchen.
Ø A pantry in Morris County cut the number of days it was open each week from 4 to 2.
In 2005 people came to pantries an average of 14 times. Although some clients come to food pantries because of a crisis, more are coming on a regular basis because they don’t have the resources to meet all of their basic needs—food, utilities, housing, health care, transportation, child care. People often have to choose between paying the rent or the utility bill and buying food.
“The majority [of clients] are working poor who do not earn high enough wages to provide for all of their household needs. They use our pantry to supplement the food they purchase themselves from their earned income. The next largest number of client households are those who are on fixed incomes, often on SSD or Welfare, who also cannot make ends meet each month. They use our pantry to supplement the food allowance they receive from Food Stamps which is often inadequate to last the entire month. They will get canned goods and dry goods at our pantry and then use their Food Stamp allotment to purchase fresh items such as dairy and meat products they need that are not routinely available at our pantry. . .The demand for our pantry services has increased over 70% in the past three years.” (Burlington County)
Pantries in 16 counties reported that they turned people away “sometimes” or “often” because of lack of food. Rather than turn people away, some pantries put less food in the packages or limited the number of times people could come for food each month.
Ø “We reduced the number of meals [in packages] from 15 to 12.” (Camden County)
Ø “During the last 6 months we have received less food – less meat – and for the first time couldn’t give to everyone. Used to give 2 good-sized boxes, now 1 small box.” (Salem County)
Ø “Never turn people away, but that doesn’t mean we had a lot to give them at times.” (Morris County)
Soup Kitchens and Shelters Serving Meals
Similarly to food pantries, most of the soup kitchens and shelters serving meals that responded to the survey count the number of people served. However, some count the number of meals served. Both categories are covered in Tables 3 and 4. As stated above, the county figures in the tables should be viewed as more suggestive than definitive given variations in the number of respondents from each county.
Most counties reported overall average increases in “persons served” or “meals served.” However, some posted overall average decreases. Again, this often reflected cutbacks in service due to declines in resources.
Seven counties—Burlington, Cumberland, Essex, Hudson, Morris, Passaic and Union--had meal sites that reported turning people away due to lack of food. Providers reported that in 2005 people came to soup kitchens an average of 74 times per year.
Meal programs tend to serve single adults and people without access to cooking facilities. They may be homeless, living in rooming houses, unemployed, ineligible for food stamps, on General Assistance, or waiting for SSI approval due to physical or mental disability.
Ø “Many of our soup kitchen clients live in boarding houses and only have a microwave (if that). Ours may be their only meal, or at least hot meal, of the day. They also do not receive enough in food stamps.” (Monmouth County 6 day a week lunch program)
Ø “I think many if not most of our “guests” come to our program because they have no where to turn and struggle with mental health issues. Thus they have a difficult time maintaining a job, etc. They need some kind of supervised group home or a similar situation. Some live on the street, others manage an apartment but do not have enough financial resources to purchase food as well.” (Essex County 3 day a week lunch program)
Ø “[Sunday meal program] helps seniors with a healthy meal that doesn’t use their meager funds and with companionship. Many are very lonely and at a gathering like our Sunday suppers it’s perhaps the only chance they have to socialize. We also provide each guest with a take home bag containing a juice drink, an apple and a peanut butter sandwich. . .” (Ocean County 2 Sundays a month supper program)
Changes in Who Comes for Food
At various meetings throughout the year staff from emergency food sites told SEFAN about seeing more of certain client groups, such as the elderly or veterans, seeking help with food. So a new question was added to the survey asking providers whether or not they were seeing more of, about the same number of or less of six client groups: families with children, immigrants, children, senior citizens, people with jobs and veterans.[3] Charts 1 and 2 portray the changes in food pantry and soup kitchen client groupings.
Of the 210 pantries that responded to this question, 142 (68%) said they were seeing more families with children, 61 (29%) said they were seeing about the same number of families with children, and 7 (3%) said they were seeing fewer families with children.
Of the 200 pantries that responded to this question, 109 (55%) said they were seeing more senior citizens, 78 (39%) said they were seeing about the same number of senior citizens, and 13 (7%) said they were seeing fewer senior citizens.
Of the 28 soup kitchens that responded to this question, 17 (61%) said they were seeing more immigrants, 10 (36%) said they were seeing about the same number of immigrants, and 1 (3%) said there were seeing fewer immigrants.
Some providers commented on the changes they were seeing.
Ø “We have many families where both spouses are working but just can’t make ends meet. We also have many seniors who cannot survive on social security and other state assistance.” (Middlesex County)
Ø “Our veterans are really struggling to make ends meet. They come to us to get as much food as they can – and then see what else they can do with the money they have left. This is no way to live!” (Essex County)
Ø “Many are immigrants in low income jobs.” (Union County)
Supplemental or Emergency Food Providers?
Comments from emergency food providers throughout this report indicate that they are increasingly being asked to provide food on a regular basis to compensate for economic and societal problems such as unemployment, low wages, lack of health benefits, lack of affordable housing, and inadequate government benefits.
“We originally were set up as a “crisis” food pantry, but there are regulars who have come to rely on our Food Pantry. We are even sent folks from state agencies such as welfare, who put people into their system but cannot help them immediately. New Jersey is an expensive state to live in. When people have trouble making ends meet, something has to give. . .and what can be cut back on but food. . .” (Middlesex County)
“People can’t make ends meet; their food stamps have been cut or denied due to federal government anti-poverty guidelines. People have lost their jobs and used up their unemployment benefits. There are people out there who are willing to work but can’t find a job. People are coming into the food pantry asking for a job.” (Monmouth County)
Despite the enormous efforts of emergency food providers to feed the hungry, charities and nonprofit organizations cannot maintain the role of providing long-term food assistance to growing numbers of poor and hungry people.
“Churches and charities are straining to serve rising requests for food from their food pantries and soup kitchens, especially from working people,” according to Bread for the World, www.bread.org.
The New Jersey Anti-Hunger Coalition (NJAHC) worked for the past two years to raise awareness about hunger in the state and to gain support for the addition of a $10 million line item in the state budget for the purchase of nutritious food to be distributed to New Jersey’s emergency food community through the network of six food banks.[4]
Recognizing the extent of the problem, Governor Jon Corzine and the legislature included $4 million for hunger relief in the FY2007 state budget. The Department of Agriculture’s food distribution program will get $3 million to purchase approximately 4.7 million pounds of “food rich in nutrients.” Another $1 million capital investment will be used to increase providers’ capacity to store and preserve perishable food. According to SEFAN director Adele LaTourette who also coordinates the work of the coalition, “This is a great start towards helping the thousands of people who are hungry and the emergency food providers who struggle to feed them.”
Conclusion
New Jersey’s emergency food providers have shared information about the services they are providing. They have also commented on the situations that bring people to food pantries, soup kitchens and shelters. It is up to advocates around the state to support efforts to end hunger. These efforts include strengthening the emergency food assistance system, protecting the federal nutrition programs from cutbacks, and working to eliminate conditions that cause hunger--poverty, low wages, lack of health benefits, inadequate governmental benefits, lack of affordable housing.
Profile of Emergency Food Providers that Completed Surveys
Type of Provider:
76% of respondents were food pantries.
15% of respondents were soup kitchens.
6% of respondents were shelters serving meals.
3% of respondents were in the “other” category.
Affiliation:
66% of the emergency food providers were affiliated with faith-based organizations.
Most of the other providers were non-profit, non-sectarian agencies, a few were public agencies.
America’s Second Harvest’s 2006 survey reported higher numbers of faith-based emergency food providers among their New Jersey respondents: 76% of pantries, 73% of soup kitchens, and 47% of shelters.
Size:
In this survey, a pantry or soup kitchen’s size was based on the number of hours per week the program was open. Small was defined as being open 1 – 9 hours; medium was defined as being open 10 – 19 hours; and large was defined as being open more than 20 hours per week.
49% of the pantries were “small”; 17% were “medium”; and 31% were “large.” 3% could not be classified due to lack of information.
65% of the soup kitchens were “small”; 6% were “medium”; and 27% were “large.” 2% could not be classified due to lack of information.
Bi-Lingual Staff:
33% of the sites had bi-lingual staff.
Spanish was spoken at 91% of the agencies with bi-lingual staff.
A variety of other languages were spoken: Arabic, Chinese, Creole, Farsi, French, Gallegos, German, Greek, Hebrew, Hungarian, Italian, Philipino, Polish, Portuguese, Russian, and Sign Language.
Volunteers:
49% of the sites relied entirely on volunteers.
America’s Second Harvest’s 2006 survey reported a high reliance on volunteers among their New Jersey respondents: 66% of the pantries and 45% of the soup kitchens reported no paid staff.
About the Survey
7th Statewide Hunger Survey 2006 (covering 2004 and 2005).
SEFAN sent surveys to 950 emergency food providers on the SEFAN newsletter mailing list in February 2006. There were 324 returns for a response rate of 34%. Survey replies came from all of the state’s 21 counties. The number of surveys returned varied among the counties.
Prior SEFAN surveys had return rates of 31% (1995), 30% (1998), 25% (2000) and 29% (2004).
Staff called sites that had incomplete and/or inconsistent information. Sometimes getting the correct information took several phone calls because emergency food programs have a variety of days and hours that they are open. Often, the person who completed the survey was not “on duty.”
Because of the sampling method (see below) the findings do not represent the experience of all providers in a county or in the state as a whole. They do, however, agree with anecdotal information and other studies about hunger and poverty.
How Providers Count
Emergency food providers count either the number of people served or the number of food packages and meals supplied. Those providers who count people usually count them each time they come for food. So the number of “persons” served is more similar to “services to people” than it is to distinct individuals. A small number of sites do count clients only once during the year despite the number of times they receive food. This data is usable as long as the site is using the same method of counting in the years being compared.
Sampling Method
The Statewide Emergency Food and Anti-Hunger Network (SEFAN) periodically surveys emergency food providers in the state. Prior studies were conducted in 1986, 1990, 1995, 1998, 2000 and 2004. Due to limited resources these surveys have used an “availability sampling” method. Surveys are mailed to all providers on the SEFAN newsletter mailing list. While efforts are made to encourage participation, SEFAN has no control over who actually responds. The first 10 agencies that return surveys receive $25 supermarket gift certificates.
The characteristics of respondents (program size, affiliation, staffing, etc.) are reported. These characteristics are compared with other studies (when available) to determine how similar the SEFAN survey participants are to the general population of emergency food providers in the state and in the nation.
Although research findings from “availability samples” cannot be generalized to the complete population being studied, they do provide useful information that can be shared with other anti-hunger advocates, policy makers, the public, and the emergency food network.
Technical Assistance
Ms. Susan Koscielny designed the EXCEL program, entered survey data, and contacted providers when additional information was needed. SEFAN was fortunate to have Susan’s assistance. She is also SEFAN’s Pantry Link Program Manager.
[1] Based on usable responses to survey questions 5 and 6.
[2] Average increases or decreases are used throughout this report. The average gives equal weight to each pantry’s numbers regardless of size. Thus, numbers from the larger pantries don’t overpower the data from the smaller pantries.
[3] There may be some overlap among these categories.
[4] New York allocates $24 million per year and Pennsylvania $17 million for hunger relief.
