So it would seem, based on this Washington Post article from a couple days ago, that is, if your impression of food banks is (as mine was) organizations that collect canned and other shelf-stable food from the public via food drives and drop-off sites, to give to the needy. According to that article, well, that’s not true at all.
“Keep your canned goods. There are better ways to help feed the poor.” That’s the headline, and the article starts off with the statement that canned foods are no good because “large share of nonperishable items are loaded with excess sodium, sugar and other chemicals to maintain flavor and longevity.” Really? Sure, spaghettios have a lot of sodium, but it’s not inherent to the canning process itself.
The article then cites the usual statistics on food deserts and food pantry use, then tells of an innovator, Patrick O’Neill, who has created an online “virtual food drive” where donors can select specific “healthy” items — “apples, sweet potatoes, brown rice” are mentioned as examples — which are then purchased by his organization and delivered to the needy. The site, “Amp Your Good,” consists of links to various groups’ “food drives” — one such drive is asking people to virtually donate items such as the following: packages of mixed produce, basic produce staples such as apples, onions, broccoli, “healthy” staples such as olive oil, whole wheat pasta, and traditional proteins of peanut butter and canned meats. But: the odd thing is that the items were all substantially more expensive than their purchase prices at my local Aldi — e.g., $14.85 for a 3-pack of 18-oz jars of peanut butter, when that’s currently retailing for less than $5.00, or $11 for a 6-lb bag of onions, when I paid $5 for a 5-lb bag just yesterday. So either O’Neill has built in a healthy profit margin for himself, or this is a matter of paid staff rather than volunteers doing all the work of buying and delivering the food, and the prices build in the cost of paying the staff.
But what got me is this: the article concludes by quoting a Feeding America spokesman, Ron Fraser.
Ross Fraser, spokesman for Feeding America, said in recent years food banks have started prioritizing providing healthier, nutrient-rich foods to families. Most of the food collected by food banks is actually donated from manufacturers, farmers, retail stores and the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Only about 5 percent comes from traditional food drives, he said.
Because food banks can also purchase food wholesale at a significant discount, most would prefer cash over food donations because they can stretch that money further and it’s far less labor-intensive than sorting cans.
Still, Fraser said the benefits of organized food drives are that they raise awareness about hunger. If a child helps a parent put together a bag of goods to donate, it can be a teaching moment.
Only 5% comes from food drives? They’d rather have cash, and don’t want to sort cans? (Which sounds like it’s paid staff doing the sorting, rather than asking volunteers to help.) And they’d just as soon get rid of food drives entirely except that it’s useful for getting their message of “hunger!” out there so that they can collect cash donations and maintain support for government programs?
And what about all that food donated from “manufactures, farmers, [and] retail stores”?
According to this Chicago Tribune article, they’re not simply doing it out of the goodness of their heart, but because of “enhanced tax deductions” that were renewed with the latest spending bill. (I tried mightily to find more details, but came up empty.) What exactly this means isn’t exactly clear, but it seems to be a matter of subsidizing the harvesting costs in a manner that extends beyond the notion of deducting the value of goods donated — but how generous these subsidies are, and to what extent this is just an indirect way of the federal government paying for the food, isn’t stated.
“Farmers want to do the right thing, but it’s hard when it costs more to donate than to leave the food in the field,” she said.
In Chicago, it could mean an infusion of fresh produce from sources like Gotham Greens, which opened its rooftop greenhouses in the Pullman neighborhood in October. Using hydroponic technology, the urban “agribusiness” operates four rooftop facilities year-round — three in New York City and one in Chicago.
As with any food manufacturer, the goal of Gotham Greens is to sell products and make money, said Viraj Puri, its CEO. But the company also donates produce and money to food banks.
Of the 10 million heads of lettuce and other greens that the Pullman greenhouse expects to grow in 2016, between 5,000 and 10,000 heads will be donated to the Greater Chicago Food Depository, Puri said.
Going forward, Puri expects the amount of donated food to more than double because of the added tax deductions that will help cover the cost of production. “It will certainly incentivize us to do more,” Puri said.
What of our local food bank, the Greater Chicago Food Depository, which seems to be the “parent company” of sorts for all the local food pantries? According to their annual report,
50% of their funding came from individual donors, 18% from corporations and foundations, 22% from agencies and the government, and 10% elsewhere.
46% of food delivered was shelf-stable, 35% fresh produce, and 19% protein.
73% of their food was provided to its recipients via food pantries, 8% via “mobile response to underserved communities” (that is, delivering by truck), and the remainder via soup kitchens, community centers, etc.
But here’s the kicker: 44% of food was donated, 23% came directly from the government, 32% was purchased — and how much came from food drives?
1%.
One frickin’ percent.
Now, providing fresh produce to the poor may be a worthy endeavor, though, knowing how often I end up throwing it away, even though I have far more time available to cook the veggies or tear up a salad than a poor working family, one hopes that the food isn’t going to waste once delivered to its recipients. (Plus: brown rice? I’ve tried it.)
But are they’re moving towards higher-cost ways of providing food, then they shouldn’t be telling prospective donors that more food (or more cash) is urgently needed to prevent hunger.
And what of the claims that I hear that in the summer it’s all the more important to donate our food to food pantries because the cupboards are bare? Is the GCFD stingy with how it allocates its donations, so that some food pantries are well-stocked and others aren’t, even though their website implies that they stock all the Cook County pantries? Or are we being lied to?
UPDATE:
Here’s how my local food pantry describes itself:
With the exception of a slight cost for a staff person overseeing the pantry, Wheeling Township’s Food Pantry is funded almost entirely with donations from the community — food items and cash donations are received regularly.
Does this mean that the GCFD’s claims of providing for, well, Greater Chicago, aren’t really the case, and that when it allows for a search for local food pantries from its website, and implies that its funds support those pantries, that’s not really the case?
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In