By Anthony Hennen of The Center Square
Republished by Travels With The Post
(The Center Square) – Pennsylvania’s network of food banks and pantries to aid those in need is robust, but it faces continuing challenges. Transportation limits, a lack of volunteers, and unmet need still prove to be problems, particularly in rural areas.
A recent study published by the Harrisburg-based Center for Rural Pennsylvania estimates that 10% of Pennsylvanians lack access to adequate and affordable food. Food insecurity nationally, center Assistant Director Laura Dimino notes, spiked with COVID-19. Then it dropped below pre-pandemic levels.
“Nationally (as of 2022) the estimate of rural households with food insecurity is around 15%, and 12% in urban areas,” Dimino says. Now “we’re up a little bit again, probably due to inflation and other considerations.”
Poor families are getting squeezed. “In 2022, food prices increased by 9.9%, and in 2023, they increased by an additional 5.8%,” the center’s study notes. “Thus, families saw their benefits reduced as their purchasing power also plummeted.”
Researchers conducted interviews with 22 food banks, 35 partner agencies, and 65 food bank users. They found those who got food assistance had positive experiences using banks and pantries, and could obtain more than meals.
Pantries offer more than food
“For service recipients, pantries are not only a source of food but also a locus of anti-poverty assistance,” researchers wrote. Food banks also connect residents to other government assistance programs, along with help for rent, utilities, and transportation.
Much work remains to be done. Topping “the list of challenges is food banks and pantries’ need for increased funding to purchase more food (quantity) and fresher, more nutritious food (quality),” researchers wrote.
“Rural service recipients face barriers to obtaining the quality and quantity of food they need,” the study observes. Users face “limits around when (time), where (place), and how (distribution model) they can receive emergency food.”
Roughly half of the food comes through state and federal programs, with various eligibility requirements. The other half comes from private sources. The result is a complicated network of who can get what kind of help.
“Eligibility guidelines may be different across the board,” Dimino says. “When someone comes in, they need to figure out: Is this person or household eligible for only this food, or that food? A lot of people may not meet the poverty-level guidelines set up for some government programs,” so they may qualify only for only private donor food. “This creates a difficult distribution problem,” she adds.
If the state relaxed or eliminated those bureaucratic burdens, she said, it could make day-to-day work easier on the ground.
Getting food to remote communities has also been a challenge, the study notes. In some counties with higher need, average recipients may get much less food than better-off areas, the report also indicates.
Workers to organize, distribute, and run the banks are scarce in some places, as well. Some rural counties struggle to maintain a stable volunteer base to staff the food pantries.
“Due to these challenges and barriers, service recipients continue to face food insecurity, despite receiving emergency food,” the study acknowledges. “Fifty-two percent of interviewees told us they cut the size of their meals, skip meals, eat less than they should, or go hungry. Food banks also report that thousands of food-insecure residents in each county are not being served at all.”
Though the focus on food assistance tends to fall on children and young families, assistance programs for them means they may not be the most at risk.
“Not that children aren’t at risk, but, based on the interviews, it seems that seniors are probably more at risk,” Dimino says. “There’s a program, senior food boxes; there’s one estimate that only 10% of seniors in some locations are even taking advantage of it.”
Photo by Aaron Doucett on Unsplash, used under license
