The USDA has multiple ways that mobile farmers markets can benefit from programs and learn how to accept EBT. check out the how to's on this easy to use website:
http://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/retailers-0
There are also ways that Farmers' Market can subsidize purchases of SNAP users and obtain grant money up to $100,000.00 to pay for the wireless point of sale devices and advertise, market, and locate culturally appropriate food in underserved areas check it out below
http://www.ams.usda.gov/AMSv1.0/fmpp
Saturday, August 9, 2014
The Mobile Farmers' Market
San Antonio Fresh has the unique opportunity in partnering with an existing social enterprise developed by fellow social worker and UTSA MBA Shaun Lee. Shaun developed this concept in 2012 during his master's program and it came to be in 2013.
http://truckintomato.com
What I learned from taking a homeless mother shopping
Check out this blog post about how far your dollar goes purchasing certain foods click the link below
http://www.babble.com/best-recipes/what-i-learned-after-taking-a-homeless-mother-grocery-shopping/
http://www.babble.com/best-recipes/what-i-learned-after-taking-a-homeless-mother-grocery-shopping/
Wednesday, July 30, 2014
Issue Brief
August 2014
About this Issue Brief
This is an issue brief based on research prepared in an Advanced Policies Social Work class at the University of Texas at San Antonio’s Department of Social Work.
Prepared by,
Bryce Boddie, Danny Covarrubio, Mark Dye, Kristin Lopez, Amanda Mendez, and Jimmy Trinh
For more information and to view all research and citations please visit:
www.safresh.blogspot.com
Introduction
Over the last 5 years there has been an emphasis on promoting positive health throughout various initiatives and legislation such as Let’s Move! (2010), The Affordable Health Care Act (2010), and a temporary increase in Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits through the American Recovery & Reinvestment Act of 2009.
In 2014 Congress passed the Farm Bill, now the Agriculture Act of 2014, which reauthorized the SNAP program for five years, set goals of providing SNAP reform, and set out to strengthen the food assistance program over time. More importantly the two-year bipartisan effort provided approval and strong encouragement of state initiated strategies (pilot and incentive programs) aimed at increasing benefits for recipients, retailers, and local economies.
The SNAP program as a whole has successfully provided assistance to about 47 million individuals nationwide and has maintained a less than 3% error rate, proving the program is both effective and efficient (Bolen, Rosenbaum, & Dean, 2014). According to The Texas Food Bank Network (2011) Texas SNAP beneficiaries in 2011 totaled approximately 4 million residents or 1 in 7 people. As for Bexar County the same year, 76% of the income-eligible population (312,929 individuals) received benefits from the SNAP program (Texas Food Bank Network, 2011).
Scope of the issue
In 2011, the 24% of income eligible Bexar county residents who did not receive SNAP benefits resulted in over $144 million in SNAP money unused and an estimated economic loss of $259 million (Texas Food Bank Network, 2011). There are more than 10 farmers’ markets located around the city of San Antonio. Not all of those farmers’ markets accept EBT or are in proximity to underserved neighborhoods. It is the ultimate goal of the campaign to reduce obesity among SNAP participants in Bexar county through opportunities for healthier eating. This campaign also aims to benefit mobile farmers’ markets and the local community at large through the reinvestment of increased SNAP purchasing power in the local economy.
Low income neighborhoods, legislative districts, and states have high obesity rates with obesity being linked to low income, low education, minority status, and poverty (Drewnowski, 2009). Obesity is an economic issue (Drewnowski, 2009). Low-income, urban communities are disproportionately affected by obesity, placing Bexar County SNAP beneficiaries at significant risk of the negative consequences for this nationwide epidemic (Zachary et al., 2013). Obesity is linked to health problem such as cardiovascular disease and diabetes, which also disproportionately affect low-income neighborhoods (Zachary et al., 2013).
Researchers have identified the following barriers to healthy eating: geographic access, cost, taste, culture, limited resources, time, and quality of local food outlets (Zachary et al., 2013). Consumption of refined grains, added sugars, added fats commonly found in snacks, beverages, and fast food options have been linked to rising obesity rates in the United States (Drewnowski, 2009). These foods cost less than healthier options, putting minorities and those living in poverty at a disadvantage (Drewnowski, 2009). Taste, cost, and convenience drive food choices (Drewnowski, 2009). Thus, low cost, high palatability foods which are energy dense and nutrient poor often meet these criteria (Drewnowski, 2009). The high palatability of these low cost, energy dense foods may, in fact, mediate the relationship between poverty and obesity (Drewnowski, 2009).
Research shows that grocery purchasing behavior in low-income urban environments is based on a complex set of factors that goes beyond preference, including the need to make cost-effective choices (e.g., bulk purchases, optimization of sales, minimal transportation and waste) and the influence of the supermarket environment (e.g., price-centered labeling, displays, and store layout) (Zachary et al., 2013). “In 2012, about 12% of Bexar County’s low income population ha[d] limited access to health foods/[did] not live close to a grocery store, compared to 9% of the population of Texas. In 2012, over half (52%) of the restaurants in Bexar County were fast food, the same proportion as in Texas overall.” (Health Collaborative, 2013, pg. 43).
In 2012, 29.3% of adults in Bexar county were classified as obese. These rates disproportionately affect minority groups, with 33% of Hispanics being obese versus 26% of whites. Thirty-two percent of Bexar county residents with less than a high school education were classified as obese this same year, opposed to only 26% among college graduates. The highest rates were found among residents with annual incomes between $25,000 and $49,000 (39%) (Health Collaborative, 2013).
If unaddressed, the obesity epidemic will only continue to grow. Projections indicate that from 2006 to 2040, obesity in Texas will increase from approximately 4.8 million to 14.7 million people, roughly a 300% increase (Potter, 2013). Unfortunately, this increase disproportionately affects minorities with a projected five-fold increase for Hispanic Texans, growing from less than two million to a population of approximately ten million (Potter, 2013). Conversely, the population of white Texans considered obese is only projected to grow from roughly two million individuals to three million, a 50% increase (Potter, 2013).
nationwide epidemic (Zachary et al., 2013). Obesity is linked to health problem such as cardiovascular disease and diabetes, which also disproportionately affect low-income neighborhoods (Zachary et al., 2013).
Researchers have identified the following barriers to healthy eating:
geographic access, cost, taste, culture, limited resources, time, and quality of local food outlets (Zachary et al., 2013). Consumption of refined grains, added sugars, added fats commonly found in snacks, beverages, and fast food options have been linked to rising obesity rates in the United States (Drewnowski, 2009).
These foods cost less than healthier options, putting minorities and those living in poverty at a disadvantage (Drewnowski, 2009). Taste, cost, and convenience drive food choices (Drewnowski, 2009). Thus, low cost, high palatability foods which are energy dense and nutrient poor often meet these criteria (Drewnowski, 2009). The high palatability of these low cost, energy dense foods may, in fact, mediate the relationship between poverty and obesity (Drewnowski, 2009).
Research shows that grocery purchasing behavior in low-income urban environments is based on a complex set of factors that goes beyond preference, including the need to make cost-effective choices (e.g., bulk purchases, optimization of sales, minimal transportation and waste) and the influence of the supermarket environment (e.g., price-centered labeling, displays, and store layout) (Zachary et al., 2013). “In 2012, about 12% of Bexar County’s low income population ha[d] limited access to health foods/[did] not live close to a grocery store, compared to 9% of the population of Texas. In 2012, over half (52%) of the restaurants in Bexar County were fast food, the same proportion as in Texas overall.” (Health Collaborative, 2013, pg. 43).
In 2012, 29.3% of adults in Bexar county were classified as obese. These rates disproportionately affect minority groups, with 33% of Hispanics being obese versus 26% of whites. Thirty-two percent of Bexar county residents with less than a high school education were classified as obese this same year, opposed to only 26% among college graduates. The highest rates were found among residents with annual incomes between $25,000 and $49,000 (39%) (Health Collaborative, 2013).
If unaddressed, the obesity epidemic will only continue to grow. Projections indicate that from 2006 to 2040, obesity in Texas will increase from approximately 4.8 million to 14.7 million people, roughly a 300% increase (Potter, 2013). Unfortunately, this increase disproportionately affects minorities with a projected five-fold increase for Hispanic Texans, growing from less than two million to a population of approximately ten million (Potter, 2013). Conversely, the population of white Texans considered obese is only projected to grow from roughly two million individuals to three million, a 50% increase (Potter, 2013).
Importance of advocacy for individuals, the community, and society at large
As previously mentioned, the SNAP program provides over
78 billion dollars in assistance to over 47 million people
50% of which are children (Blumenthal et al, 2013).
In the last decade, the use of SNAP benefits has increased by 158% resulting in increased rates of food insecurity.
Historically, food insecurity was characterized by underweight, deprived, starved children, however, this landscape has changed. As Blumenthal et al. (2013), point out, “food insecurity in America increasingly coincides with obesity and diets of inadequate quality for optimal health.” (p. 2). It is this lack of optimal health and increased obesity that is being addressed by the San Antonio Fresh campaign. Obesity is often a lifelong struggle resulting in individuals plagued with chronic illnesses such as hypertension, heart disease, and diabetes. As noted by Browning and Ludwig (2010), policy makers need to make a concerted effort to not only address the issue of obesity as it pertains to those served by the SNAP program, but also the long term cost of treating chronic illness and the subsequent impact on quality of life
Advocatiing for More
In order to improve health outcomes of SNAP users in Bexar county, San Antonio Fresh aims to provide educational awareness, and federally available incentives to help mobile farmers’ markets accept SNAP benefits and locate in underserved areas.
We want to increase availability of fresh fruits and vegetables in low income areas to improve health outcomes of the residents. A mobile farmer’s market is a great way to do this. Truckin’ Tomato is an already existing mobile farmers’ market developed to serve high quality produce, and locally sourced goods around Bexar County. San Antonio Fresh will help walk Truckin’ Tomato through the process to accept EBT (electronic balance transfer) at their mobile locations, making it easier for some residents to be able to buy food. We will also help Truckin’ Tomato with access to the Farmers’ Market Promotional Program (FMPP). The Farmers’ Market Promotional Program is facilitated by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), and the office of Agricultural Marketing Services.
Section 5 of the Farmer-to-Consumer Direct Marketing Act of 1976, Public Law 94-463, as amended by Section 10003 of the Agricultural Act of 2014, Public Law 113-79. The authorization covers two competitive grants, the Farmers Market Promotion Program (FMPP), a no-match grant, under CFDA number 10.168; and Local Food Promotion Program (LFPP), a 25 percent matching grant, under CFDA number 10.172. (Catalog of Federal Domestic Assistance, 2014).
This program is designed to increase domestic consumption of and access to locally produced agricultural products. The minimum grant available is $15,000 with a maximum of $100,000.
In partnership with the Truckin’ Tomato, United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), the Food and Nutrition Service Program (FNS), Farmers’ Market Promotional Program, Salud America, Bexar County Metropolitan Health, San Antonio Food Bank, and the Food Policy Council of San Antonio we want to help Truckin’ Tomato accept EBT and locate in underserved areas.
By providing the proper steps and information needed San Antonio Fresh Will encourage Truckin’ Tomato to accept EBT. Further, our advocacy efforts will inspire others to advocate for fresh fruits and vegetable availability for underserved communities. This campaign is designed to educate farmers’ markets to co
Challenges to developing a successful advocacy campaign
One of the biggest challenges of this advocacy campaign is going to be navigating the USDA SNAP retail application process. The process could take up to 45 days to obtain the rights. According to the USDA qualifications for retailers Truckin’ Tomato exceeds the expectations of the USDA to qualify as a retailer.
————A second challenge will be obtaining a Farmers’ Market Promotional Program grant to pay for the wireless EBT equipment so that Truckin’ Tomato can accept payments and educate, market, and locate in underserved areas. This grant could also offset cost for the customers, to discount produce for underserved areas.
————La Cultura, the underserved areas cultural food tendencies have to be taken into consideration when locating in certain areas. Cultural appropriate produce is important for this to go a long way in San Antonio
————At some point, this program could expand to provide the opportunity for smaller, local farmer’s markets to accept SNAP benefits for this program. The technical capital and expertise required to gain access to those funds may provide a challenge. If farmer’s markets are able to overcome these technical barriers, this could result in an increase in small neighborhood markets vying for a portion of the funds, possibly straining fruit and vegetable suppliers to provide enough product to all participating retailers.
————Ultimately, San Antonio Fresh will address only a slice of the obesity issue. Recommended areas for further advocacy to facilitate access to healthy food choices include agricultural subsidies, pricing policies, regulatory action, and consumer education (Drewnowski, 2009). Broader issues such as the value of the minimum wage and declining neighborhood resources have also been identified areas for improvement as related to the economic factors contributing to obesity (Drewnowski, 2009). Broader going mobile and moving into underserved areas. With the money available from the USDA the Farmers’ Market Promotional Program mobile farmers’ markets will be more likely to accept EBT and locate in underserved areas around the city of San Antonio.
References
Agricultural Act of 2014, Public Law 113-79, 113 Congress, (2014). Retrieved from
Blumenthal, S., Hoffnagle, E., Leung, C., Lofink, H., Jensen, H., Foerster, S., & Willett, W.
(2013). Strategies to improve the dietary quality of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) beneficiaries: An assessment of stakeholder opinions. Public health nutrition, 1-10.
Bolen, E., Dean, S., & Rosenbaum, D., (2014). Summary of the 2014 farm bill nutrition title: Includes bipartisan improvements to SNAP while excluding harsh house provisions. Center on Budget Policy Priorities. Retrieved from http://www.cbpp.org/cms/?
Brownell, K. D., & Ludwig, D. S. (2011). The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, soda, and USDA policy: who benefits?. Jama, 306(12), 1370-1371.
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. (2014). Who does SNAP reach? Retrieved from http://
Drewnowski, A. (2009). Obesity, diets, and social inequalities. Nutrition Reviews, 67(1), S36-
S39. doi:10.1111/j.1753-4887.2009.00157.x
Feeding America http://feedingamerica.org/hunger-in-america/hunger-studies/map-the-meal-gap.aspx.
Health Collaborative. (2013). 2013 Bexar county community health assessment report. Retrieved
Potter, L. B. (2013). Demographic characteristics and trends, Texas and Bexar county. Retrieved
Texas Food Bank Network. (2011). Snap participation rates and benefits lost, 2011. Retrieved
Zachary, D., Palmer, A. M., Beckham, S. W., & Surkan, P. J. (2013). A framework for
understanding grocery purchasing in a low-income urban environment. Qualitative Health Research, 23(5). 665-678. doi: 10.1177/1049732313479451
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)