2011AnnualHungerSurveyReport_NYCCAH

Document Sample
2011AnnualHungerSurveyReport_NYCCAH Powered By Docstoc
					


























































    1
2
                                            

                                            

                                            

                             Table
of
Contents

                                            

                                            


Executive
Summary……….………………………………………………………………………………….
Page
5




Message
from
the
Executive
Director………………………………………………………………..
Page
8



Survey
Methodology…………………………………………………………………………………………
Page
11



Federal
Citywide
Food
Insecurity
Analysis…………………………………………………………
Page
14



2011
Citywide
Survey
Results……………………………………………………………………………
Page
16



Year‐to‐Year
Comparisons…………………………………………………………………………………
Page
18



Borough
Survey
Comparisons…..……………………………………………………………………….
Page
19



Bronx
Results…………………………………………………………………………………………………….
 age
20
            P


Brooklyn
Results……………………………………………………………………………………………….
Page
21



Manhattan
Results……………………………………………………………………………………………
Page
22



Queens
Results…………………………………………………………………………………………………
Page
23



Staten
Island
Results………………………………………………………………………………………...
Page
24



Findings
on
Volunteer
Needs
…………………………………………………………………………….
Page
25



Appendix
1
–
Selected
Quotes
from
Emergency
Food
Providers………………………..
Page
26



Appendix
2
–
2011
Survey
Letter
&
Questionnaire…………………………………………….
Page
29



Appendix
3
–
List
of
Emergency
Food
Provider
Closures
in
2011………………………..
Page
35



Acknowledgements…………………………………………………………………………………………..
Page
36











                                            

                                                                                    3
                                                                                          


Executive
Summary





This
report
is
based
on
two
entirely
different
sets
of
data.
The
first
set
is
federal
food

insecurity/hunger
data
collected
by
the
U.S.
Census
Bureau
on
behalf
of
the
U.S.
Department
of

Agriculture
(USDA),
and
analyzed
by
the
New
York
City
Coalition
Against
Hunger
(NYCCAH),
and
is

based
on
three‐year
averages,
with
the
most
recent
year
being
2010.

The
second
set
is
data

collected
by
NYCCAH
from
a
survey
of
the
city’s
soup
kitchens
and
food
pantries,
with
information

collected
in
the
fall
of
2011.




        
              Federal
Food
Insecurity
Data





One
in
Six
New
York
City
Residents
–
1.47
Million
–
Are
Food
Insecure



In
2008‐2010,
an
estimated
average
of
1.47
million
New
Yorkers
lived
in
food
insecure
homes,

which
equals
17
percent
(or
one
in
six)
people.
That
figure
represents
a
33
percent
increase
over

the
2005‐2007
time
period,
when
946,000
New
Yorkers
were
food
insecure.

In
comparison,
1.6

million
New
York
residents
now
live
below
the
meager
federal
poverty
line
($18,310
for
a
family
of

three),
which
proves
that
food
insecurity
and
hunger
are
among
the
most
severe
impacts
upon

many
people
that
live
in
poverty.



One
in
Four
New
York
City
Children
–
Nearly
Half
a
Million
–
Live
in
Food
Insecure

Homes


In
2008‐2010,
474,000
New
York
City
children
lived
in
food
insecure
homes,
in
which
the
family

could
not
afford
a
full
supply
of
food
throughout
the
year.

This
number
represented
25
percent

(or
one
in
four)
of
the
city’s
children
and
is
a
37
percent
increase
over
the
2005‐2007
time
frame,

when
294,000
children
lived
in
such
households
or
15
percent
(one
in
seven).





                                             NUMBER of New Yorkers Food Insecure




    1,600,000

    1,400,000

    1,200,000

    1,000,000                                                                                                          2005-2007
                                                                                                                       2008-2010
     800,000

     600,000

     400,000

     200,000

             0
                 Tota l Num be r of NYC Re side nts Living in Food   Tota l Num be r of NYC Childre n Living in Food
                               Inse cure House holds                              Inse cure House holds


                                                                                                                                   


                                                                                                                                       4
                        PERCENTAGE of New Yorkers Food Insecure


              25

              20

              15
                                                                                                     2005-2007
              10
                                                                                                     2008-2010
               5

               0
                   % of Total NYC Residents % of NYC Children Living in
                    Living in Food Insecure Food Insecure Households
                          Households
                                                                                                                   

*Because
of
an
inadequate
sample
size,
federal
food
insecurity
data
is
not
statistically
significant
below
the
city
level;
therefore
this

information
is
not
available
at
the
borough
or
neighborhood
level.



         
         Food
Pantry
and
Soup
Kitchen
Data




Food
Agencies
Are
Serving
Record
Numbers
of
People

The
number
of
people
served
at
New
York
City’s
more
than
1,100
soup
kitchens
and
food
pantries

increased
by
an
estimated
12
percent
in
2011,
on
top
of
a
seven
percent
increase
in
2010,
and
a
21

percent
increase
in
2009.

Fully
89
percent
of
agencies
said
they
are
feeding
more
people
in
2011

than
in
2010,
with
52
percent
saying
the
number
of
people
they
are
feeding
had
increased

“greatly.”


Government
and
Private
Cut‐Backs
Forced
Agencies
to
Close
or
Reduce
Services


This
year,
79
percent
of
agencies
suffered
from
a
loss
of
government
food
and
funding.

One
of
the

reasons
that
number
is
so
high
is
that
the
federal
Emergency
Food
and
Shelter
Program
–
which

funds
hundreds
of
city
pantries
and
kitchens,
as
well
as
homelessness‐prevention
efforts
–
was
cut

by
40
percent
as
part
of
the
budget
deal
that
President
Barack
Obama
struck
with
the

Congressional
leadership
to
keep
the
federal
government
running
in
2011.

In
New
York
City,
those

cuts
resulted
in
a
funding
reduction
from
$5.1
million
to
$3.5
million.
To
make
matters
worse,
55

percent
of
city
pantries
and
kitchens
obtained
fewer
private
donations.

Largely
as
a
result
of
these

cuts,
many
agencies
were
forced
to
close
down
entirely
and
the
ones
able
to
stay
open
often
had

to
cut
back
on
their
services.

The
Coalition
found
that
at
least
47
feeding
programs
citywide
have

shut
down
entirely
over
the
past
few
years.
While
leadership
transitions
and
management

challenges
certainly
contributed
to
some
agencies’
closures,
there
is
very
little
doubt
that
cuts
in

government
funding
was
the
largest
single
reason.
Fifty‐eight
percent
of
pantries
and
kitchens

reported
having
to
turn
away
clients,
reduce
their
portion
sizes,
or
limit
their
hours
of
operation
in

2011,
an
increase
from
the
51
percent
rate
in
2010,
and
the
55
percent
rate
in
2009.
However,
the

rate
is
still
lower
than
the
Coalition
found
in
2008
(69
percent),
before
extra
funding
for
agencies

was
provided
by
the
federal
stimulus
package,
also
known
as
the
American
Recovery
and

Reinvestment
Act
(ARRA).


                                                                                                                                        5



             % NYC Food Pantries and Soup Kitchens Forced to Ration Food
    70


    65


    60
                                                                           % NYC Food Pantries and
                                                                           Soup Kitchens Forced to
    55                                                                     Ration Food

    50


    45
         Year 2008    Year 2009      Year 2010      Year 2011



Food
Stamps/SNAP
Program
Prevented
Mass
Starvation

Not
only
did
ARRA
provide
a
one‐year
boost
in
funding
for
pantries
and
kitchens,
it
provided
a

multi‐year
funding
increase
for
the
federal
Supplemental
Nutrition
Assistance
Program
(or
“SNAP,”

formerly
known
as
the
Food
Stamp
Program).

SNAP
funding
has
also
increased
due
to
growing

enrollment
in
the
program,
demonstrating
that
the
program
is
working
exactly
as
it
was
designed,

as
a
counter‐cyclical
entitlement
program
that
increases
when
the
economy
worsens.




As
of
September
2011,
1.8
million
New
Yorkers
received
SNAP
benefits.

SNAP
will
provide
an

estimated
$3.4
billion
worth
of
food
to
low‐income
families
in
New
York
City
alone
in
2011,
a
$1.5

billion
jump
over
the
funding
in
2008.

The
average
SNAP
benefit
in
New
York
City
in
August
of

2011
was
$285
per
month
per
household,
which
dwarfs
what
even
the
most
generous
food
pantry

or
soup
kitchen
could
distribute
in
a
month
to
a
family.
There
is
no
question
that,
without
the
$3.4

billion
worth
of
food
provided
to
low‐income
families
by
SNAP
and
aid
from
other
governmental

nutrition
assistance
programs,
local
residents
would
be
far
more
likely
to
face
Darfur
or
North

Korea‐like
starvation.



Need
for
Long‐Term,
Skilled
Volunteers



This
year’s
survey
also
reinforced
the
need
for
long‐term,
skilled
volunteers
at
pantries
and

kitchens.
Only
12
percent
of
feeding
agencies
reported
that
they
needed
only
unskilled
volunteers

for
serving,
packing,
and
distributing
food.
By
comparison,
47
percent
of
kitchens
and
pantries

reported
needing
long‐term,
skilled
volunteers
to
assist
with
projects
such
as
website

development
and
grant‐writing.

Tellingly,
41
percent
of
the
agencies
said
they
did
not
need
any

more
volunteers
at
all,
thereby
bolstering
NYCCAH’s
long
held
belief
that
while
increasing

volunteerism
may
marginally
aid
the
fight
against
hunger
(and
should
surely
be
encouraged),
such

efforts
are
wholly
inadequate
and
cannot
substitute
for
national
policies
that
ensure
living
wage

jobs
and
an
adequate
government
social
safety
net.


                                                                                                     6
A Message from the Coalition’s Executive Director

                                                 Charles
Dickens
would
find
today’s
New
York
very

                                                 familiar.
Once
again,
we
have
a
tale
of
two
cities

                                                 but
this
time,
both
of
them
are
New
York.

                                                 

                                                 For
one
New
York
–
billionaire
New
York
–
it
was

                                                 the
best
of
times.
According
our
analysis
of
Forbes

                                                 data,
the
57
area
billionaires
now
have
a
net

                                                 worth
of
$211
billion,
an
increase
of
$11
billion

                                                 over
last
year.
Their
net
worth
now
equals
the

                                                 combined
annual
income
of
more
than
four

                                                 million
average
New
York
City
families,
and
more

                                                 than
14
million
times
what
a
minimum
wage

                                                 worker
would
earn
working
full‐time
for
a
year.


                                                 Yet
some
elected
officials
are
considering
giving

                                                 these
same
billionaires
a
further
tax
cut
this
year.




For
the
other
New
York
–
impoverished
New
York
–
it
was
the
worst
of
times.
Median
household

income
here
is
now
$48,743,
which
is
five
percent
lower
than
in
2007.
From
2009
to
2010,
75,000

city
residents
fell
below
the
meager
federal
poverty
line
($18,310
for
a
family
of
three),
the
largest

yearly
hike
in
two
decades.
The
total
population
of
poor
New
Yorkers
is
now
1.6
million,
equaling

20.1
percent
of
the
total
population
–
or
one
in
five.

The
population
of
New
Yorkers
in
poverty
is

now
greater
than
the
entire
population
of
Philadelphia.




Since
the
main
cause
of
hunger
is
poverty,
it
is
no
wonder
that
1.4
million
New
York
City
residents

–
or
one
in
six
–
now
live
in
homes
that
suffer
from
food
insecurity,
which
means
they
can’t
always

afford
enough
food.
An
astonishing
474,000
city
children
–
one
in
four
–
live
in
such
food

insecure
households.



Fully
89
percent
of
the
city’s
1,100
or
so
food
pantries
and
soup
kitchens
reported
to
us
that
they

are
feeding
more
people
in
2011
than
in
2010.
They
reported
feeding
an
estimated
12
percent

more
people
in
2011,
on
top
of
a
seven
percent
increase
in
2010
and
a
21
percent
increase
in

2009.



The
only
reason
that
hunger
didn’t
increase
even
faster
was
that
there
was
significantly
greater

participation
in
the
SNAP
program
and,
thanks
to
the
federal
stimulus/recovery
bill
of
2009
–
the

average
benefit
size
was
larger.
About
1.8
million
New
Yorkers
currently
receive
SNAP
benefits.

This
program
provides
approximately
$3.4
billion
–
yes,
billion
–
to
low‐income
families
to
help

them
both
stave
off
hunger
and
improve
their
ability
to
purchase
healthier
foods.




Not
only
that,
because
federal
SNAP
benefits
are
redeemed
at
private
sector
food
stores,
this

additional
spending
creates
significant
numbers
of
jobs
citywide
providing
a
much‐needed
boost

to
the
local
economy.





                                                                                                     7
While
millions
of
New
Yorkers
were
at
the
edge
of
an
economic
cliff,
with
many
being
pushed

off
into
hunger,
the
only
reason
more
didn’t
fall
was
the
growth
of
federal
SNAP
benefits.





But
even
SNAP
isn’t
enough.
For
those
struggling
New
Yorkers
for
whom
SNAP
benefits
are

insufficient,
and
for
those
who
are
either
ineligible
for
SNAP
or
discouraged
from
obtaining
it
by

City‐imposed
barriers,
the
more
than
1,100
New
York
City
food
pantries
and
soup
kitchens
are
the

last
line
of
defense
against
hunger.

But
unfortunately,
due
to
the
economic
downturn,
57
percent

of
these
emergency
feeding
groups
reported
a
decrease
in
private
sector
food
and
monetary

donations.
That’s
why
government
funding
for
these
organizations
is
more
important
than
ever.




Yet
precisely
at
the
time
when
our
elected
officials
should
be
increasing
money
for
the
SNAP

program
and
also
for
food
pantries
and
kitchens,
they
are,
in
fact,
slashing
them.
Last
year

President
Obama
and
Congress
agreed
to
cut
SNAP
funding
by
phasing‐out
the
stimulus‐based

increases
earlier
than
planned.

They
also
cut
funding
for
the
incredibly‐effective
Women,
Infants,

and
Children
(WIC)
program,
which
provides
healthy
supplemental
food
to
pregnant
women
and

small
children.

As
part
of
the
budget
deal
that
President
Obama
struck
with
the
Congressional

leadership
to
keep
the
federal
government
running
in
2011,
the
main
federal
program
that

provides
money
to
soup
kitchens
and
food
pantries,
the
FEMA
Emergency
Food
and
Shelter

Program,
was
just
cut
by
40
percent.
In
New
York
City,
those
cuts
resulted
in
a
reduction
in
funding

for
emergency
feeding
programs
from
$5.1
million
to
$3.5
million.
It
is
no
wonder
that
79
percent

of
the
food
pantries
and
kitchens
in
this
survey
reported
a
reduction
in
government
funding.




Despite
the
fact
that
this
is
the
richest
city
in
the
history
of
the
world,
our
survey
found
that
47

agencies
citywide
were
actually
forced
to
close
their
doors
due
to
a
variety
of
reasons,
including

these
serious
funding
cuts.

To
makes
matters
worse,
58
percent
of
New
York
City
pantries
and

kitchens
that
managed
to
stay
in
business
were
forced
to
reduce
portion
sizes,
reduce
hours
of

operation,
or
turn
away
hungry
families
in
2011.



Now
Congress
is
–
unconscionably
–
considering
a
plan
to
take
billions
of
dollars
more
out
of
SNAP,

with
an
annual
cut
of
$150
million
in
New
York
State
alone.
Have
they
no
shame?



Our
elected
officials
need
to
better
understand
that
these
cuts
have
real‐life
impacts
on
real‐life

people
and
community‐based
programs.
How
is
it
that
our
leaders
in
Washington
find
Wall
Street

firms
“too
big
to
fail,”
but
lose
so
little
sleep
allowing
American
children
to
go
without
food
and

soup
kitchens
and
food
pantries
to
close?





This
is
madness.
The
fact
that
our
leaders
are
cutting
programs
for
hungry
New
Yorkers
in
order
to

give
billionaires
ever
greater
tax
cuts
further
proves
that
our
current
governmental
policies
are

thoroughly
unhinged,
and
devoid
of
either
common
sense
or
basic
moral
decency.
Finally,
this

insanity
provides
further
proof
of
why
our
current
system
of
under‐funded,
under‐coordinated,

under‐staffed
private
charities
can't
possible
substitute
for
a
guaranteed
government
safety
net.



However,
there’s
hope…but
only
if
we,
as
a
society,
fight
back.










                                                                                                   8


As
Frederick
Douglass
famously
said,
“If
there
is
no
struggle,
there
is
no
progress…Power
concedes

nothing
without
a
demand.

It
never
has
and
it
never
will.”




Join
with
us
and
fight
back
by
taking
action.

You
can
help
by
going
to
our
website
at

www.nyccah.org
and
signing
up
to
participate
in
our
Action
Alerts.

You
can
also
donate
to
our

advocacy
efforts
online.



America
has
faced
tough
times
before,
but
we’ve
always
joined
together
as
a
country
to
build

social
movements
that
have
achieved
historic
reforms.
We
can
do
it
again.
Conditions
that
were

once
thought
to
be
inevitable
later
became
unthinkable.
Struggling
together,
Americans
built

broad‐based
movements
to
outlaw
slavery
and
child
labor.
The
time
is
long
overdue
for
us
to
band

together
once
more
to
make
hunger
in
America
also
unthinkable.



Sincerely,





Joel
Berg,
Executive
Director

New
York
City
Coalition
Against
Hunger





                                                                                                 9
Report
Methodology





This
report
is
based
on
two
entirely
different
sets
of
data.
The
first
is
federal
food

insecurity/hunger
data
collected
by
the
U.S.
Census
Bureau
on
behalf
of
the
USDA,
and
analyzed

by
the
Coalition,
and
is
based
on
three
year
averages,
with
the
most
recent
year
being
2010.

The

second
set
of
data
was
collected
by
the
Coalition
in
the
fall
of
2011,
from
a
survey
of
the
city’s

soup
kitchens
and
food
pantries.



Federal
Food
Insecurity
Data
Methodology



Data
for
this
section
of
the
report
comes
from
an
annual
survey
conducted
by
the
U.S.
Census

Bureau
as
a
supplement
to
the
monthly
Current
Population
Survey.
USDA
sponsors
the
annual

survey
and
USDA’s
Economic
Research
Service
compiles
and
analyzes
the
responses.
The
2010

food
security
survey
covered
44,757
households
nationwide,
comprising
a
representative
sample

of
the
U.S.
civilian
population
of
119
million
households.
The
food
security
survey
asked
one
adult

respondent
in
each
household
a
series
of
questions
about
experiences
and
behaviors
that
indicate

food
insecurity,
such
as
being
unable
to
afford
balanced
meals,
cutting
the
size
of
meals
because

of
too
little
money
for
food,
or
being
hungry
because
of
too
little
money
for
food.
The
food

security
status
of
the
household
was
assigned
based
on
the
number
of
food
insecure
conditions

reported.

The
raw
data
was
collected
from
thousands
of
households
in
New
York
City,
and
the

weighted
responses
were
calculated
by
NYCCAH.

Because
of
an
inadequate
sample
size,
federal

food
insecurity
data
is
not
statistically
significant
below
the
city
level,
therefore
further
analysis
at

the
borough
or
neighborhood
level
is
not
possible.



According
to
USDA,
the
food
security
status
of
each
interviewed
household
is
determined
by
the

number
of
food
insecure
conditions
and
behaviors
the
household
reports.
Households
are

classified
as
food
secure
if
they
report
no
food
insecure
conditions
or
if
they
report
only
one
or

two
food
insecure
conditions.

USDA
defines
“food
insecure”
as
the
condition
under
which:
“…at

least
some
time
during
the
year
the
food
intake
of
one
or
more
household
members
was
reduced

and
their
eating
patterns
were
disrupted
at
times
during
the
year
because
the
household
lacked

money
and
other
resources
for
food.”



Food
insecure
households
are
further
classified
as
having
either
low
food
security
or
very
low
food

security.
The
very
low
food
security
category
identifies
households
in
which
food
intake
of
one
or

more
members
was
reduced
and
eating
patterns
disrupted
because
of
insufficient
money
and

other
resources
for
food.

Low
and
very
low
food
security
differ
in
the
extent
and
character
of
the

adjustments
the
household
makes
to
its
eating
patterns
and
food
intake.
Households
classified
as

having
low
food
security
have
reported
multiple
indications
of
food
access
problems,
but
typically

have
reported
few,
if
any,
indications
of
reduced
food
intake.




Those
classified
as
having
very
low
food
security
have
reported
multiple
indications
of
reduced

food
intake
and
disrupted
eating
patterns
due
to
inadequate
resources
for
food.
In
most,
but
not

all
households
with
very
low
food
security,
the
survey
respondent
reported
that
he
or
she
was

hungry
at
some
time
during
the
year,
but
did
not
eat
because
there
was
not
enough
money
for

food.


                                                                                                       10
Coalition
Food
Pantry
and
Soup
Kitchen
Data
Methodology



The
2011
questionnaire
(Appendix
2)
was
originally
mailed
and
e‐mailed
to
a
list
of
1,167
agencies

in
New
York
City
that
were
believed
to
operate
food
pantries,
soup
kitchens,
and/or
some
variety

of
emergency
food
program
(EFP).
This
list
was
originally
created
through
a
combination
of
the

Coalition’s
existing
EFP
database,
member
agency
rosters
maintained
by
the
Food
Bank
for
New

York
City
and
City
Harvest,
agencies
that
have
previously
worked
with
NYCCAH,
and
recipients
of

New
York
State’s
HPNAP/EFAP
funding
streams.



Following
the
original
request
for
information,
the
Coalition
made
follow‐up
visits,
phone
calls,

faxes
and
sent
electronic
correspondence
to
as
many
agencies
as
possible
in
order
to
solicit

responses.
Agencies
were
encouraged
to
either
mail/fax
the
questionnaire
to
the
Coalition,
or
to

complete
it
online
using
Survey
Monkey,
a
web‐based
data
collection
service.

In
this
sense,

sampling
was
only
partly
random
because
agencies
having
pre‐existing
relationships
with
the

Coalition
received
more
encouragement
to
complete
the
survey.
However,
the
breadth
of
survey

responses,
the
consistency
of
the
findings
with
previous
surveys
conducted
by
the
Coalition
and

other
organizations,
and
the
number
of
responses
from
agencies
having
no
pre‐existing

relationship
with
the
Coalition
assured
us
that
this
sample
set
was
representative.




While
we
were
successful
at
securing
an
adequate
sample
size
from
the
returned
surveys,
there

was
a
slight
decrease
in
the
number
of
responses
compared
to
last
year.

Based
on
what
we
knew

to
be
an
increase
in
clientele
at
a
large
number
of
pantries
and
kitchens
and
our
knowledge
that

some
emergency
feeding
programs
were
no
longer
in
operation,
a
slightly
lower
response
rate
was

anticipated.

In
fact,
to
bring
attention
to
this
trend,
a
new
question
was
added
to
this
year’s

survey
–
“Do
you
know
of
any
food
pantries,
soup
kitchens,
or
brown
bag
programs
that
shut

down
or
closed
their
doors
in
the
last
year?
Yes


No.”





All
paper
surveys
were
entered
into
the
Survey
Monkey
database
by
Coalition
staff
and
volunteers.

In
total,
239
agencies
returned
surveys.
Responding
agencies
who
do
not
offer
food
to
the
public

(either
by
walk‐in
or
referral)
were
removed
from
subsequent
analysis,
leaving
216
usable
surveys.

Not
all
percentages
total
100
percent
due
to
rounding
and
respondents
answering
“unsure”
to

various
questions,
or
checking
multiple
answers.
The
overall
analyzed
response
rate
for
this
survey

was
216
responses
out
of
a
list
of
1,167
agencies,
or
20
percent.






However,
for
the
one
question
in
which
the
survey
measures
the
percentage
of
annual
change
in

the
number
of
people
being
served,
only
120
agencies
answered
with
data
that
was
usable,
so
the

results
for
that
one
question
use
a
smaller
sample
size.
Although
the
sample
size
for
this
particular

question
is
statistically
significant
on
the
citywide
level,
because
it
is
not
statistically
significant
on

a
smaller
level,
we
do
not
report
borough‐level
data
for
the
rate
of
annual
change
in
people
being

served.



Also,
because
it
is
impossible
to
determine
how
many
people
served
by
pantries
and
kitchens
are

duplicated
by
other
pantries
and
kitchens,
this
report
does
not
determine
the
total
number
of

people
served
by
the
agencies
citywide
in
any
given
year.
Rather,
it
determines
the
rate
of
change

between
years.






                                                                                                        11

        
        
       









Respondents
Compared
to
Total
Agencies


                      Respondents/
Total
Agencies
       %
Response
       

Bronx
                              44/209
                  21%
           

Brooklyn
                           67/316
                 21.2%
          

                                                                            

Manhattan
                          75/269
                 27.9%

                                                                            

Queens
                             53/209
                 25.4%
          

Staten
Island
                      13/40
                  32.5%
          



Break‐down
of
Responding
Agencies:


  Food
Pantry
                               62%

  Soup
Kitchen
                             13.4%

  Soup
Kitchen
&
Food
Pantry
               22.1%

  Previously
operated
a
program
             1.2%

  but
closed
this
past
year

  Other
(mobile
soup
kitchen,
               9.1%

  brown
bag
program,
or
shelter)



Seventy
percent
of
respondents
identified
themselves
as
faith‐based,
religiously
affiliated,
or

physically
housed
in
a
religious
institution.



In
order
to
determine
the
number
of
EFP
closures
in
the
past
few
years,
Coalition
staff
used
a

number
of
methods
–
including
a
combination
of
returned
mailings,
follow‐up
calls,
Internet

searches,
and
site
visits
–
to
determine,
as
best
as
possible
that
sites
a)
did
indeed
previously
have

a
feeding
program
and
b)
that
the
program
was
now
shut
down,
either
temporarily
or

permanently.







                                                                                                    12
Federal
Food
Insecurity
Data
for
New
York
City



Federal
Food
Insecurity
Data





One
in
Six
New
York
City
Residents
–
1.47
Million
–
Are
Food
Insecure



In
2008‐2010,
an
estimated
average
of
1.47
million
New
Yorkers
lived
in
food
insecure
homes,

which
equals
17
percent
(or
one
in
six)
people.
That
figure
represents
a
33
percent
increase
over

the
2005‐2007
time
period,
when
946,000
New
Yorkers
were
food
insecure.

In
comparison,
1.6

million
New
York
City
residents
lived
below
the
meager
federal
poverty
line
($18,310
for
a
family

of
three),
which
proves
that
food
insecurity
and
hunger
are
among
the
most
severe
impacts
upon

many
people
that
live
in
poverty.



One
in
Four
New
York
City
Children
–
Nearly
Half
a
Million
–
Live
in
Food
Insecure

Homes


In
2008‐2010,
474,000
New
York
City
children
lived
in
food
insecure
homes,
in
which
the
family

could
not
afford
a
full
supply
of
food
throughout
the
year.

This
number
represented
25
percent

(or
one
in
four)
of
the
city’s
children
and
is
a
37
percent
increase
over
the
2005‐2007
time
frame,

when
294,000
children
lived
in
such
households
or
15
percent
(one
in
seven).





                                            NUMBER of New Yorkers Food Insecure



    1,600,000

    1,400,000

    1,200,000

    1,000,000                                                                                                         2005-2007
                                                                                                                      2008-2010
     800,000

     600,000

     400,000

     200,000

            0
                Tota l Num be r of NYC Re side nts Living in Food   Tota l Num be r of NYC Childre n Living in Food
                              Inse cure House holds                              Inse cure House holds


                                                                                                                                  





                                                                                                                                      13
                       PERCENTAGE of New Yorkers Food Insecure


             25

             20

             15
                                                                                                 2005-2007
             10
                                                                                                 2008-2010
              5

              0
                  % of Total NYC Residents % of NYC Children Living in
                   Living in Food Insecure Food Insecure Households
                         Households
                                                                                                              

*Because
of
an
inadequate
sample
size,
federal
food
insecurity
data
is
not
statistically
significant
below
the
city
level,
therefore

further
analysis
is
not
possible
at
the
borough
or
neighborhood
level.



Hundreds
of
Thousands
of
New
Yorkers
Suffer
from
the
Most
Severe
Forms
of

Food
Insecurity

The
above
numbers
represent
“low”
and
“very
low”
food
insecurity,
meaning
households
with
any

type
of
food
insecurity.


We
also
isolated
the
most
severe
type
of
food
insecurity,
a
subset
of

those
larger
numbers,
which
USDA
now
calls
“very
low
food
insecurity,”
and
which,
until
the
Bush

Administration,
was
labeled
by
USDA
as
“hunger.
“



In
2008‐2010,
505,000
New
Yorkers
lived
in
homes
with
very
low
food
security,
representing
six

percent
of
all
New
York
City
residents.



In
2008‐2010,
144,000
city
children
lived
in
homes
with
very
low
food
security,
representing
seven

percent
of
all
New
York
City
children.





                                                                                                                                        14


2011
Citywide
Results
of
the
Coalition’s
Food
Pantry

and
Soup
Kitchen
Survey



Food
Agencies
Are
Serving
Record
Numbers
of
People

The
number
of
people
served
at
New
York
City’s
more
than
1,100
soup
kitchens
and
food
pantries

increased
by
an
estimated
12
percent
in
2011,
on
top
of
a
seven
percent
increase
in
2010,
and
a
21

percent
increase
in
2009.

Fully
89
percent
of
agencies
said
they
are
feeding
more
people
in
2011

than
in
2010,
with
52
percent
saying
the
number
of
people
they
are
feeding
had
increased

“greatly.”


Government
and
Private
Cuts
Forced
Agencies
to
Close
or
Reduce
Services


This
year,
79
percent
of
agencies
suffered
a
loss
of
government
food
and
funding.

One
of
the

reasons
that
number
is
so
high
is
that
the
federal
Emergency
Food
and
Shelter
Program
–


which
funds
hundreds
of
city
pantries
and
kitchens,
as
well
as
homelessness‐prevention
efforts
–

was
cut
by
40
percent
as
part
of
the
budget
deal
that
President
Barack
Obama
struck
with
the

Congressional
leadership
to
keep
the
government
running
in
2011.

In
New
York
City,
those
cuts

resulted
in
a
reduction
in
funding
from
$5.1
million
to
$3.5
million.
To
make
matters
worse,
55

percent
of
city
pantries
and
kitchens
obtained
fewer
private
donations.

Largely
as
a
result
of
these

cuts,
many
agencies
were
forced
to
close
down
entirely
and
the
ones
able
to
stay
open
often
had

to
cut
back
on
their
services.




The
Coalition
found
that
at
least
47
feeding
programs
citywide
have
shut
down
entirely
over
the

past
few
years.
While
leadership
transitions
and
management
challenges
certainly
contributed
to

some
agencies’
closures,
there
is
very
little
doubt
that
cuts
in
government
funding
were
the
largest

single
reason.



Fifty‐eight
percent
of
pantries
and
kitchens
reported
having
to
turn
away
clients,
reduce
their

portion
sizes,
or
limit
their
hours
of
operation
in
2011,
an
increase
from
the
51
percent
rate
in

2010,
and
the
55
percent
rate
in
2009.
However,
the
rate
is
still
lower
than
the
Coalition
found
in

2008
(69
percent),
before
extra
funding
for
agencies
was
provided
by
the
federal
stimulus
package

also
known
as
the
American
Recovery
and
Reinvestment
Act
(ARRA).


                                                                                           

             % NYC Food Pantries and Soup Kitchens Forced to Ration Food
    70                                                                                     


    65


    60
                                                                 % NYC Food Pantries and
                                                                 Soup Kitchens Forced to
    55                                                           Ration Food


    50


    45                                                                                            15
         Year 2008   Year 2009   Year 2010    Year 2011
Some of the other citywide findings include:

•   Sixty-two percent of agencies surveyed do not distribute enough food to meet current de-
    mand, up from 51 percent last year.

•   Eighty-seven percent of agencies that don’t distribute enough food to meet demand said that
    if they received more food, they would have enough institutional capacity to increase the
    amount of food distributed (while nine percent of respondents reported that even if they
    were to receive more food, they wouldn’t have the administrative capacity to distribute
    more).

•   Responding agencies reported seeing the fastest growing need for their services among
    families with children. Eighty percent of responding agencies reported feeding an increased
    number of families with children over the past 12 months (versus four percent reporting a
    decrease, and 11 percent reporting no change).

•   Seventy-six percent of responding agencies reported feeding an increased number of seniors
    over the past 12 months (versus five percent reporting a decrease and 13 percent reporting
    no change).

•   Fifty-five percent of responding agencies reported feeding an increased number of people
    who had paid employment over the past 12 months (versus seven percent reporting a
    decrease and 13 percent reporting no change).

•   Fifty-seven percent of responding agencies reported feeding an increased number of
    homeless people over the past 12 months (versus two percent reporting a decrease and 18
    percent reporting no change).

•   Sixty-six percent of responding agencies reported feeding an increased number of
    immigrants over the past 12 months (versus three percent reporting a decrease and 14
    percent reporting no change).

•   Eighty-eight percent of responding agencies believe that their need will continue to increase
    in the next six months. Fifty percent of responding agencies believe it will increase
    “greatly.”

•   Fifty-two percent of responding agencies reported using their own personal money “often,”
    “always,” or “sometimes” to support their feeding programs.
                                              





                                                                                               16
                                   Year‐to‐Year
Comparisons

                                                   

                     
                    2011
   2010
   2009
   2008
   2007
 2006
 2005

 %
of
responding
programs
that
are
       72%
    70%
    76%
    76%
    73%
 74%
 72%

 faith‐based,
religiously
affiliated,
or

    physically
located
in
a
religious

               institution

 %
of
responding
programs
that
are
       14%
    13%
    11%
    11%
    9%
    10%
   11%

          soup
kitchens
only

 %
of
responding
programs
that
are
       66%
    64%
    66%
    70%
    65%
   65%
   64%

          food
pantries
only

 %
of
responding
programs
that
are
       23%
    21%
    20%
    17%
    21%
   18%
   21%

     both
food
pantries
and
soup

                kitchens

%
of
responding
agencies
that
don’t
 62%
         51%
    55%
    67%
    59%
   47%
   37%

    have
enough
food
to
meet
the

           current
demand

 %
of
responding
agencies
forced
to
 58%
         51%
    55%
    69%
    50%
   44%
   47%

              ration
food

  %
of
responding
agencies
at
which
      79%
    63%
    50%
    72.3%
 51%
    40%
   41%

     government
money
and
food

      decreased
in
the
past
year

  %
of
responding
agencies
at
which
      74%
    58%
    52%
    718%
   50%
   41%
   41%

overall
money
and
food
decreased
in

             the
past
year

  %
that
received
support
from
The
        73
    77%
    74%
    77%
    76%
   81%
   70%

Emergency
Food
Assistance
Program

    (TEFAP),
funded
by
the
federal

              government

  %
that
received
support
from
the
       46%
    54%
    46%
    39%
    49%
   45%
   56%

     Emergency
Food
and
Shelter

   Program,
which
is
funded
by
the

         federal
government.

  %
that
received
support
from
the
       86%
    84%
    85%
    84%
    80%
   81%
   84%

  Hunger
Prevention
and
Nutrition

     Assistance
Program
(HPNAP)

   program,
which
is
state‐funded

  %
that
received
support
from
the
       73%
    73%
    76%
    77%
    75%
   73%
   70%

Emergency
Food
Assistance
Program

     (EFAP),
which
is
City‐funded


                                                   

                                                   

                                                   

                                                   

                                                   

                                                   

                                                   

                                                                                               17
2011
Borough
Survey
Comparisons






                                   Agencies Forced to Ration Food, Turn Away Clients, or Reduce Hours in 2011

                  80


                  70


                  60


                  50
    % Agencies




                  40


                  30


                  20


                  10


                   0
                           Bronx                   Brroklyn               Manhattan             Queens          Staten Island







                                                       Agencies Unable to Meet Demand in 2011


                  100

                   90

                   80

                   70

                   60
     % Agencies




                   50

                   40

                   30

                   20

                   10

                       0
                            Bronx                   Brroklyn               Manhattan             Queens         Staten Island

                                                                           Borough

                                                                                                                                





                                                                                                                                    18























Borough
           %
of
agencies
   %
of
agencies
at
   %
of
agencies
forced

                   at
which
        which
the
          to
ration
food
by

                   demand
for
      amount
of
food
     limiting
portion
size,

                   food
            was
not
enough
     reducing
hours
of

                   increased
       to
meet
growing
    operation,
and/or

                                    demand


           turning
people
away

The
Bronx
         91%
             74%
                70%

Brooklyn
          90%
             67%
                66%

Manhattan
         78%
             44%
                44%

Queens
            96%
             58%
                60%

Staten
Island
     90%
             100%
               70.0%





                                                                                  19
Bronx
Results



“The
funding
we
receive
is
not
enough
to
provide
pantry
weekly
;
we
have
had
to
reduce
the

number
of
bags
distributed
weekly.
The
cost
of
food
ordered
is
VERY
EXPENSIVE
so
funding
will

not
last
for
the
full
year;
each
monthly
order
is
about
$1000
and
it
is
not
enough
to
serve
more

than
a
few
families.
Funding
will
run
out
in
about
7‐8
months
or
less.”
‐
D.
Roberts,
Director
of

Family
Support
Services,
WHEDco



91.4%
of
responding
agencies
reported
feeding
an
increased
number
of
people
in
the
last
12

months.
62.9%
said
this
number
increased
“greatly.”



48.6%
of
responding
agencies
reported
that
the
number
of
families
with
children
using
their

services
increased
“greatly,”
and
24.2%
said
people
using
their
services
who
have
paid

employment
increased
“greatly.”



88.2%
of
responding
agencies
believe
that
the
need
will
continue
to
increase
over
the
next
six

months.
55.9%
of
responding
agencies
believe
it
will
increase
“greatly.”




86.2%
of
responding
agencies
reported
receiving
less
government
food
and
money
in
the
last
12

months
(and
6.9%
reported
no
change).




78.6%
of
responding
agencies
reported
receiving
less
overall
food
and
money
in
the
last
12

months
(and
7.1%
reported
no
change).



74.3%
of
responding
agencies
reported
being
unable
to
distribute
enough
food
to
meet
demand.




97%
of
responding
agencies
reported
having
to
turn
away
hungry
New
Yorkers,
cut
portion
sizes,

and/or
cut
hours
of
operation
in
2011.




30.1%
of
responding
agencies
reported
using
personal
money
“often”
or
“always”
to
support
their

feeding
programs
(55.6%
do
this
“sometimes,”
“often,”
or
“always”).










                                                                                               20
Brooklyn
Results



“We
have
sustained
substantial
cuts
to
our
government
funding
between
2010
and
2011,
while

seeing
a
steady
increase
in
all
our
services.
Once
again,
we
have
a
government
and
legislation

unwilling
to
prioritize
and
manage
the
billions
of
dollars
at
their
disposal.
In
many
cases,
the

same
participants
receiving
the
benefits
of
programs
like
ours
are
asked
to
shoulder
the
burden

and
responsibility
of
providing
the
services.
We
must
hold
those
elected
and
appointed
officials

accountable
to
balance
the
nights
of
all
rights
and
needs
of
all
who
live
in
New
York
City
and

New
York
State.
Right
now,
we
are
at
the
cusp
of
a
more
coordinated
and
diversified
movement

and
we
in
the
emergency
food
world
must
seize
the
moment
to
act!”‐
Christy
Robb,
Director
of

Food
Services,
St.
John’s
Bread
and
Life



89.5%
of
responding
agencies
reported
feeding
an
increased
number
of
people
in
the
last
12

months.
58%
said
this
number
increased
“greatly.”




46.4%
of
responding
agencies
reported
that
the
number
of
families
with
children
using
their

services
increased
“greatly,”
and
46.4%
also
said
seniors
using
their
services
increased
“greatly.”



82.1%
of
responding
agencies
believe
that
the
need
will
continue
to
increase
in
the
next
six

months.
48.2%
of
responding
agencies
believe
it
will
increase
“greatly.”




74.5%
of
responding
agencies
reported
receiving
less
government
food
and
money
in
the
last
12

months
(and
10.3%
reported
no
change).




75.5%
of
responding
agencies
reported
receiving
less
overall
food
and
money
in
the
last
12

months
(and
6.1%
reported
no
change).



67.2%
of
responding
agencies
reported
being
unable
to
distribute
enough
food
to
meet
demand.




65.5%
of
responding
agencies
reported
having
to
turn
away
hungry
New
Yorkers,
cut
portion
sizes,

and/or
cut
hours
of
operation
in
2011.




28.6%
of
responding
agencies
reported
using
personal
money
“often”
or
“always”
to
support
their

feeding
programs
(53.6%
do
this
“sometimes,”
“often,”
or
“always”).
























                                                                                                 21
Manhattan
Results

“Our
food
pantry,
like
many
other
emergency
food
programs
in
the
city,
experienced
a
perfect

storm
this
year
of
continuing
high
demand,
reduced
government
funding,
and
delays
in
food

and
funding.
As
a
result,
our
pantry
had
near‐empty
shelves
more
than
once
during
the
year
‐

something
I'd
never
witnessed
in
my
eleven
years
prior
[doing
this
work].
Our
programs,
and
our

families,
are
truly
hurting.”
–
Lucia
Russett,
Director
of
Advocacy,
Little
Sisters
of
the
Assumption

Family
Health
Services


78.3%
of
responding
agencies
reported
feeding
an
increased
number
of
people
in
the
last
12

months.
35%
said
this
number
increased
“greatly.”



21.3%
of
responding
agencies
reported
that
the
number
of
immigrants
using
their
services

increased
“greatly,”
and
22.2%
also
said
families
with
children
increased
“greatly.”



85.1%
of
responding
agencies
believe
that
the
need
will
continue
to
increase
in
the
next
six

months.
40.4%
of
responding
agencies
believe
it
will
increase
“greatly.”




75%
of
responding
agencies
reported
receiving
less
government
food
and
money
in
the
last
12

months
(and
5%
reported
no
change).



63.9%
of
responding
agencies
reported
receiving
less
overall
food
and
money
in
the
last
12

months
(and
11.1%
reported
no
change).



43.8%
of
responding
agencies
reported
being
unable
to
distribute
enough
food
to
meet
current

demand.



43.5%
of
responding
agencies
reported
having
to
turn
away
hungry
New
Yorkers,
cut
portion
sizes,

and/or
cut
hours
of
operation
in
2011
because
they
lacked
resources.





23.9%
of
responding
agencies
reported
using
personal
money
“often”
or
“always”
to
support
their

feeding
programs
(43.5%
do
this
“sometimes,”
“often,”
or
“always”).


























                                                                                                   22
Queens
Results



“There
has
been
a
tremendous
increase
in
the
number
of
clients
that
we
are
serving
in
our

community.
I
believe
that
the
increase
is
largely
due
to
the
closing
of
food
pantries
in
our

Jamaica/Supthin
Blvd.
area.
We
are
willing
to
extend
our
days
and
hours.

Unfortunately,
our

supply
cannot
meet
the
demand.

Considering
the
Pantry
that
has
closed
directly
across
the

street
from
our
church
as
well
as
a
pantry
down
the
street
during
the
summer,
this
may
be
one

of
the
reasons
why
our
client
service
has
increased.”
–
Stella
Mercado,
Pastor,
Blanche

Memorial
Church



95.6%
of
responding
agencies
reported
feeding
an
increased
number
of
people
in
the
last
12

months.
51.1%
said
this
number
increased
“greatly.”



46.5%
of
responding
agencies
reported
that
the
number
of
families
with
children
using
their

services
increased
“greatly,”
and
68.9%
also
said
seniors
and
immigrants
using
their
services

increased
“greatly.”



93.5%
of
responding
agencies
believe
that
the
need
will
continue
to
increase
in
the
next
six

months.
45.7%
of
responding
agencies
believe
it
will
increase
“greatly.”




80%
of
responding
agencies
reported
receiving
less
government
food
and
money
in
the
last
12

months
(and
10%
reported
no
change).




69.7%
of
responding
agencies
reported
receiving
less
overall
food
and
money
in
the
last
12

months
(and
6%
reported
no
change).



57.8%
of
responding
agencies
reported
being
unable
to
distribute
enough
food
to
meet
demand.




59.5%
of
responding
agencies
reported
having
to
turn
away
hungry
New
Yorkers,
cut
portion
sizes,

and/or
cut
hours
of
operation
in
2011.




10.3%
of
responding
agencies
reported
using
personal
money
“often”
or
“always”
to
support
their

feeding
programs
(55.6%
do
this
“sometimes,”
“often,”
or
“always”).








                                                                                              23
Staten
Island
Results




“Now a time of historic need … We have a serious and growing problem.” = Rev.
Terry Troia, Project Hospitality



90%
of
responding
agencies
reported
feeding
an
increased
number
of
people
in
the
last
12

months.
80%
said
this
number
increased
“greatly.”



70%
of
responding
agencies
reported
that
the
number
of
families
with
children
using
their
services

increased
“greatly.”




100%
of
responding
agencies
believe
that
the
need
will
continue
to
increase
in
the
next
six

months.
80%
of
responding
agencies
believe
it
will
increase
“greatly.”




100%
of
responding
agencies
reported
receiving
less
government
food
and
money
in
the
last
12

months
(and
0%
reported
no
change).




100%
of
responding
agencies
reported
receiving
less
overall
food
and
money
in
the
last
12

months,
up
from
50%
reported
last
year
(and
0%
reported
no
change
in
the
last
12
months).





100%
of
responding
agencies
reported
being
unable
to
distribute
enough
food
to
meet
the

demand.




70%
of
responding
agencies
reported
having
to
turn
away
hungry
New
Yorkers,
cut
portion
sizes,

and/or
cut
hours
of
operation
in
2011.




10%
of
responding
agencies
reported
using
personal
money
“often”
or
“always”
to
support
their

feeding
programs
(60%
do
this
“sometimes,”
“often,”
or
“always”).



































                                                                                                24




Findings
on
Agency
Volunteer
Needs



“Web
design;
I
feel
like
we
are
in
the
1800's
as
we
do
not
have
an
able,
up‐to‐date
website.
A

volunteer
who
could
do
this
would
be
great.”
‐
Jacqueline
Eradiri,
Director,
Ridgewood
Older

Adult
Center



“We
need
professional
volunteers
in
computer
work
to
help
us
with
accounting
records
and

legal
assistance
for
clients.”

–
Jane
W.
Robinson,
Administrator,
Community
Meals
Program
at

Mt.
Olivet
Baptist
Church



Every
year
between
October
and
December,
people
think
of
volunteering
at
food
pantries
and

soup
kitchens
to
feed
the
hungry
during
the
holidays.
This
year’s
survey
of
emergency
food

providers
reinforced
the
Coalition’s
emphasis
that
while
volunteerism
is
necessary,
what
pantries

and
kitchens
really
need
are
skilled
volunteers
to
help
with
such
tasks
as
website
design,
grant

writing,
and
computer
assistance
throughout
the
year.




A
mere
12
percent
of
responding
programs
need
only
unskilled
volunteers
to
do
things
such
as

serve
soup,
pack
cans,
or
work
in
the
pantry
at
some
time
during
the
year.
On
the
other
hand,
47

percent
of
responding
agencies
reported
needing
long‐term
skilled
volunteers.

Thus,
if
New

Yorkers
gave
their
time
and
skills
to
pantries
and
kitchens
year‐round
–
and/or
aided
policy

advocacy
efforts
–
emergency
food
providers
would
be
better
able
to
assist
hungry
families.


Tellingly,
41
percent
of
the
agencies
said
they
did
not
need
any
more
volunteers
at
all,
thereby

bolstering
Micah’s
long
held
belief
that
while
increasing
volunteerism
cam
marginally
aid
the
fight

against
hunger
(and
should
surely
be
encouraged),
such
efforts
are
wholly
inadequate
and
cannot

substitute
for
national
policies
that
ensure
living
wage
jobs
and
an
adequate
government
social

safety
net.



                                   Volunteer Needs Among Emergency Food Providers




                                                                              % Do Not Ne e d Volunte e rs,
                                                                                           41
                  % Ne e d Skille d Volunte e rs,
                                 47




                                                          % Ne e d Only Unskille d
                                                              Volunte e rs, 12




                                                                                                              25
Appendix
1:
Selected
Quotes
from
Survey

Respondents



Bronx



Because
of
decreases
in
TEFAP
food
deliveries
and
HPNAP
funds
we
will
not
be
able
to
open
each

Friday.
Our
ability
to
open
will
be
based
on
our
inventory.
–
Evelyn
McCarty,
Executive
Director,

St.
Paul’s
Evangelical
Lutheran
Church



This
year
getting
food
from
TEFAP
has
been
a
great
disappointment.
We
have
had
to
spend
money

every
week
to
make
sure
we
can
give
good
bags
to
families.
It
can
be
a
little
embarrassing
having

people
line
up
in
front
of
the
pantry
from
3:00
am
and
we
open
at
9:00am.
Just
to
give
them
a
few

cans
and
now
protein.
Even
the
delivery
men
have
been
asking
us,
‘why
are
you
guys
not
getting

enough
food?’
We
were
told
there
is
food
stacked
to
the
ceiling
no
reason
we
are
not
able
to
order

any
of
it
under
TEFAP.
This
year
has
been
the
worse
we
thought
we
might
have
to
close
our
doors.

–
April
Alexander,
Coordinator,
Second
Chance
Christian
Center



The
number
of
people
who
come
from
distant
parts
of
the
Bronx
has
greatly
increased.
Sometimes

they
get
to
the
site
late
when
the
bags
have
all
been
distributed
and
they
get
disappointed.
If
we

had
more
food
we
would
be
able
to
pack
extra
bags
for
such
people
and
their
transport
fare
would

not
have
been
wasted.
Volunteers
for
the
program
come
from
the
community
and
we
always
have

new
people
who
want
to
be
invited
or
chosen
as
volunteers.”
–
Felicia
Omeokwe,Food
Program

Coordinator,
Vineyard
Food
Pantry



Brooklyn



In
order
not
to
turn
any
clients
away,
we
are
forced
to
reduce
the
amount
of
food
distributed
to

each
person.
‐
Mireille
Massac,
Public
Relations
&
Pantry
Coordinator,
CDSC
Emergency
Food

Pantry



Need
skilled
volunteers
to
help
with
preparing
&and
cooking
the
food.
Help
with
fundraising,
grant

writing
and
web
design.”
–
Dorothy
Crawford,
Director,
Other
People
in
Need,
Inc.



Every
week
we
have
an
average
of
ten
new
persons
registering
for
food.
In
addition
to
funding
we

ask
our
congregation
to
make
donations.
This
year
it
seems
as
if
our
HPNAP
funding
will
be

exhausted
before
June
2012.
In
the
past
TEFAP
supplemented
our
pantry.
This
year
the
Food
Bank

does
not
have
many
items.
HUNGER
IS
REAL
IN
THIS
CITY.
–
Beverly
Smith
Hutson,
Food
Program

Coordinator,
Church
of
St.
Mark
Food
Pantry




                                                                                                26
We
are
limited
with
food
because
we
are
a
KOSHER
agency
serving
only
kosher
which
we
have

limited
resources
and
limited
access
to
food…Poor
people
are
expecting
way
more
than
that.
‐
Etty

Friedman,
Director
of
Haber
House
Senior
Center,
JCCGCI



We
understand
our
present
economic
situation
but
our
community
is
in
need
of
more
food

especially
meat.
–
Diana
Nelson,
Executive
Director,
Hope
Center
Development
Corporation



Manhattan


While
we
experienced
only
a
moderate
decrease
in
food
funding
from
FY10
to
FY11,
we
anticipate

a
much
larger
decrease
in
FY12.
We've
already
been
notified
by
our
HPNAP/ESFP
conduit,
Catholic

Charities,
that
their
HPNAP
allocation
was
decreased
by
approx.
50%
for
this
year.
We
have
not
yet

received
an
allocation
from
them
but
assume
a
similar
decrease
in
our
own
budget
(resulting
in
an

$8000‐10,000
decrease).
We
do
not
foresee
large
increases
in
our
other
sources
to
offset
this

amount…

If
our
numbers
continue
to
increase
and
our
funding
continues
to
decrease,
we
will
have

a
significant
challenge
maintaining
our
programs.
–
Cassandra
Agredo,
Director,
Xavier
Mission



It
has
always
been
a
pleasure
to
help
the
Washington
Heights
‐
Inwood
…
However,
the
need
for

support
from
clients
has
greatly
increased
to
a
level
that
funding
received
from
current
sources

does
not
meet
somewhat
our
demand.
Clientele
need
continues
to
grow
to
the
extent
that

individuals
are
traveling
from
all
boroughs
for
a
bag
of
food.
The
government
needs
to
step
in
and

prioritize
on
what
is
really
important.
–
JoAnn
Santiago,
Administrative
Director,
Fresh
Youth

Initiatives/Helping
Hands
Food
Pantry



Our
main
problem
is
moderate
increase
in
number
of
people
served,
which
is
growing
every

month,
and
dramatic
cuts
in
funding.
–
Janet
Dorman,
Director,
St.
Mary’s
Church
Food
Pantry

and
Soup
Kitchen



Queens



The
demand
has
gone
up
for
food
in
our
area.
What
will
happen
in
the
next
three
months
with
the

demands
so
great?
We
will
not
be
able
to
give
out
food
every
week
as
we
have
done
since
2003,
if

we
do
not
receive
more
help.
We
will
be
force
to
open
only
once
a
month
if
more
food
is
not
sent

to
our
pantry.
What
shall
we
do?
–
Christine
Williams,
Assistant,
Holy
Ghost
Upper
Room
Filling

Station
Ministry,
Inc.


Need
more
quality
food
especially
protein
(meat
and
vegetables).
Need
assistance
in
writing,

identifying
and
applying
for
grants.
This
would
definitely
enable
us
to
obtain
quality
food
on
a

more
consistence
basis,
and
have
our
clients
receiving
food
for
a
minimum
of
three
days.
We
have

also
observed
that
many
clients
having
diabetes
and
high
blood
pressure
are
more
frustrated
over

the
high
sodium
contents
of
the
food
given.
–
Douglas
Falconer,
Director
of
Food
Program,
Hollis

Avenue
Congregational
Church
Food
Pantry



The
numbers
needing
our
services
has
increased
largely
and
government
funding
sources
have

decreased
making
it
much
harder
to
serve
those
in
need.
–
Swami
Durga
Das,
Executive
Director,

The
River
Fund
New
York


                                                                                                27
    

    

    Appendix
2:
Survey
Letter
and
Questionnaire

                               2011
Survey
of
NYC
Food
Pantries
and
Soup
Kitchens

    

                    Please
consider
completing
this
survey
ONLINE
www.nyccah.org/survey.

                         It’s
quicker,
easier
and
takes
less
time
than
filing
paper
forms.

    


    If
you
do
not
know
the
answer
to
any
question
or
part
of
a
question,
please
check
“unsure”
or
eave

    blank.

Otherwise,
return
this
completed
survey
by
October
21st
to
the
person
who
brought
it
to

    you,
or
mail
it
to
NYCCAH,
50
Broad
St,
Suite
1520,
New
York,
NY
10004,
or
fax
it
to
212.825.0267.

    Questions?
Call
us
at
212.825.0028,
ext.
212.



                                                      

    

    Section
1:
Preferred
Contact
Information

                                                         

    1.)
What
type
of
food
program
do
you
run?
(Check
ONE)

       Soup
kitchen
        
     


       Food
pantry
         

       Both
soup
kitchen
&
food
pantry

       Other
type
of
emergency
food
program
(explain)
_______________________

       We
have
never
run
a
feeding
program
(if
you
check
this
box,
we’ll
take
you
off
our
list)

       We
previously
ran
a
feeding
program
and
it
closed
on
(date)
__________________

    

    2.)
Your
name:
____________________________________________



























































    

    3.)
Your
title
/
role:
_________________________________________

    

    4.)
Your
food
program
/
agency
formal
name:
______________________________________

    

    5.)
Where
do
you
serve
or
distribute
food?
(if
different
from
your
mailing
address)

    

    Street
address:
______________________________

    

    City:
_____________________,
State:
__NY__
Zip:
_________________

    

      

    6.)
Phone
number
of
agency
/
program:









‐

     
     ‐


  
       ‐

    


    7.)
Fax
Number
of
agency
/
program:














‐
   
     

    

    8.)
Email
Address:
____________________________________________________________

    

    9.)
Website
Address:
__________________________________________________________

    

                                                                                                                28
    

    

    

    10.)
In
what
borough
do
you
serve
or
distribute
food?

    

        Manhattan

        Brooklyn

        Bronx


        Queens

        Staten
Island

    

    11.)
Is
your
agency/program
mailing
address
the
same
or
different
from
where
you
serve
food?


    

        Same



        Different


    

    12.)
If
you
answered
DIFFERENT
‐
what
is
your
agency
/
program
mailing
address?

    

    Address:
__________________________________________________

    

    City:
_____________________,
State:
____
__
Zip:
________________

    

    Phone:
_______________________
Fax:
______________________

    

    13.)
Do
you
know
of
any
food
pantries,
soup
kitchens,
or
brown
bag
programs
that
shut
down
or

    closed
their
doors
in
the
last
year?
__Yes
__
No

    

    If
yes,
please
provide
any
information
on
name(s),
location(s),
and
any
other
contact
information
on

    the
program(s)
if
available:

    __________________________________________________________________________________
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    __________________________________________________________________________________
    _______________________________________________

    

    Section
2:
Basic
Program
Information___________________________________________

    

    14.)
Is
your
food
program
faith‐based,
religiously
affiliated,
or
physically
located
in
a
religious

    institution
(like
a
church,
mosque
or
synagogue)?


    



        Yes





        No


    

    15.)
Is
your
food
program
open
to
the
public
(either
by
walk‐in
or
referral)?

        Yes

        No


                                                                                                    29
    

    

    

    

    Section
3:
Program
Demand___________________________________________________

    

    16.)

Does
your
program
currently
distribute
enough
food
to
meet
demand?
(Check
ONE)

       YES,
we
distribute
enough
food
to
meet
our
current
demand.

       NO,
we
don’t
distribute
enough
food
to
meet
our
current
demand.


       Unsure

    

    17.)

If
you
answered
“No”
above,
which
of
the
following
statements
best
describes
your
current

    situation?
(Check
ONE)

       If
we
received
more
food,
we
would
have
enough
capacity
(storage
space,
refrigeration,
staff,

    and/or
volunteers)
to
increase
the
amount
of
food
we
distribute.

       Even
if
we
received
more
food,
we
would
not
have
enough
capacity
to
increase
the
amount
of

    food
we
distribute.

       I
do
not
know
if
we
have
the
capacity
to
distribute
more
food.

    

    18.)
Please
indicate
how
the
number
of
people
you
serve
has
changed
in
the
last
year.
For
each
line,

    check
the
box
that
is
closest
to
the
correct
answer.


         In
the
last
year…
          Greatly
 Somewhat
        No
     Somewhat
      Greatly
 Unsure

    (Oct
2010
thru
Sept
2011)
      decreased
 decreased
    change
   increased
    increased

    Overall
number
of
people

                                         
          
           
             
           
          

           needing
food

          Homeless
people
               
          
           
             
           
          

People
with
paid
employment
             
          
           
             
           
          

        Families
with
children
          
          
           
             
           
          

    Senior
citizens
(age
65+)
           
          
           
             
           
          

             Immigrants
                 
          
           
             
           
          

    

    19.)
ALL
PROGRAMS:
How
many
people
did
you
serve?


          Time
period
                                                                  Total

          All
of
2009
                                                    

          All
of
2010
                                                    

          September
2010
                                                 

          The
first
6
months
of
2011
                                     

          September
2011
                                                 

          Expected
estimate
for
ALL
of
2011

                             


    20.)
Soup
Kitchens
ONLY:
How
many
meals
did
you
provide?



                                                                                                    30
          Time
period
                                                                   Total

          All
of
2009
                                                     

          All
of
2010
                                                     

          September
2010
                                                  

          The
first
6
months
of
2011
                                      

          September
2011
                                                  

          Expected
estimate
for
ALL
of
2011

                              

    

    21.)
In
order
to
answer
the
previous
questions,
how
did
you
get
your
answers?

      A
count
of
non‐duplicate
individuals
(only
one
person
is
counted
even
if
they
receive
food
more

    than
one
time)

         A
count
of
the
total
people
served
(an
individual
may
be
counted
more
than
once)

    22.)
Were
you
forced
to
turn
people
away,
reduce
the
amount
of
food
distributed
per
person,
or

    limit
your
hours
of
operation
because
you
lacked
enough
resources?


          At
any
time
in
2010
            
                                        Yes
     No
      Unsure


          At
any
time
in
2011
            
                                        Yes
     No
      Unsure


    

    23.)
If
you
were
forced
to
‐
how
many
people
do
you
estimate
were
turned
away
at
your
EFP?

        
Time
period
                                                                     Total

        2010
                                                          

        First
six
months
of
2011
                                      

        Estimate
for
ALL
of
2011
                                      




    24.)

How
do
you
think
the
demand
for
food
at
your
program
will
change
in
the
next
six
months?

    Only
check
ONE
box.

    
 
 Will
greatly
increase












 Will
increase
somewhat









 Will
stay
about
the
same

    
 
 Will
decrease
somewhat









 Will
greatly
decrease













 Unsure

    





                                                                                                    31
    Section
4:
Program
Resources_________________________________________________

    

    25.)
How
have
your
resources
changed
in
LAST
YEAR
(October
2010
thru
September
2011)?


    Check
the
box
that
is
closest
to
the
correct
answer
for
every
type
of
Funding
Source

Source
                  Greatly
     Somewhat
       No
      Somewhat
      Greatly
      Unsure
/
Don’t

                        decreased
    decreased
    change
    increased
    increased
         know

Government/Public

                             
              
          
            
             
                

Funding
for
Food



Private
Funding
for

                             
              
          
            
             
                

Food


TOTAL
Funding
for

                             
              
          
            
             
                

Food


Paid
staff
                  
              
          
            
             
                

Unpaid
staff
/

                             
              
          
            
             
                

volunteers

    

    26.)
Does
your
program
currently
receive
food
or
funding
from
any
of
the
following
sources?

    EFAP
(NYC)
                                            Yes
 




 No





 Unsure

    If
so,
did
this
funding
increase
of
decrease
in
the
   
Increase
      Decrease
 Stay
Same

    last
year?
                                          2010
$________

2011
$________

    HPNAP
(NY
State)
awarded
thru
Food
Bank,

                                                           Yes
 




 No





 Unsure

    United
Way,
Catholic
Charities,
or
other
sources.



                                                           
Increase
      Decrease
 Stay
Same

    If
so,
did
this
funding
increase
or
decrease
in
the

                                                         2010
$________

2011
$________

    last
year?

    TEFAP
(Federal)
administered
by
Food
Bank.
            Yes
 




 No





 Unsure

    If
so,
did
this
funding
increase
or
decrease
in
the
   
Increase
      Decrease
 Stay
Same

    last
year?
                                          2010
$________

2011
$________

    FEMA
Emergency
Food
&
Shelter
Program
             Yes
 




 No





 Unsure

    (EFSP)
‐
If
so,
did
this
funding
increase
of
      
Increase
      Decrease
 Stay
Same

    decrease
in
the
last
year?
                      2010
$
________

2011$_______lbs

  

  27.)
Which
best
describes
your
need
for
volunteers?
CHECK
ONE:

  

     We
already
have
enough
volunteers
for
unskilled
tasks
(serving
meals
or
packing
pantry
bags)

  but
NEED
MORE
LONG‐TERM
SKILLED
VOLUNTEERS
for
tasks
such
as
accounting,
fundraising,
web

  design,
legal
assistance,
etc.

  


     We
need
BOTH
long‐term
skilled
volunteers
(accounting,
fundraising,
web
design,
legal

  assistance,
etc.)
AND
help
serving
meals/packing
pantry
bags.


  



                                                                                                       32
    We
need
volunteers
for
unskilled
tasks
like
serving
meals
or
packing
pantry
bags
and
have
no

  need
for
any
long‐term
skilled
volunteers.

  

    We
don’t
need
any
more
volunteers
at
this
time.
    28.)
How
often
do
you
or
your
staff
spend
personal
money
on
your
food
program?
(Check
ONE)

       Never
     

       Rarely

       Sometimes

       Often

       Always
    

       Unsure
/
Don’t
know

    

    29.)
Would
you
like
someone
from
NYCCAH
to
contact
you
about
getting
more
volunteers?

       Yes


       No

    

    30.)
What
is
your
preferred
form
of
communication
from
NYCCAH?

       Email

       Hard
copy/Mail

       Fax

       All
of
the
above

    

    Section
5:
Other
Comments___________________________________________________

    

    32.)
Talk
to
us
‐
feel
free
to
attach
another
sheet
of
paper
if
necessary.

    

    

    

    

       Please
check
here
if
we
have
your
permission
to
quote
you
in
our
annual
survey.



                                                     

                                              THANK
YOU!

                                                         

                                                         

                                                         

                                                         

                                                         

                                                         

                                                         

                                                         

                                                         

                                                         

                                                                                                  33
Appendix
3:
List
of
Feeding
Program

Closures/Suspensions
During
the
Past
Few
Years



1.
     American
Community
House
Inc.,
708
Broadway,
8th
Fl.,
NY,
NY
10003

2.
     Back
to
Jerusalem
Pentecostal
Church,

1378
Boston
Rd.,
Bronx,
NY
10456

3.
     Bea
Fuchs
Ministries,
Inc.,
38‐78
13th
St.,
Queens,
NY
11101

4.
     Bronx
JCC‐Allerton
Neighborhood
Food
Pantry,
2508
Barker
Ave.,
Bronx,
NY
10467

5.
     Brooklyn
Tabernacle
Deliverance
Center,
600
Lafayette
Ave.,
Brooklyn,
NY
11216

6.
     Calvary
Food
Pantry,
61
21st
St.,
NY,
NY
10010

7.
     Cath.
Char./Rusty
Staub
Mobile
Food
Pantry
(St.
Peter's),
53
St.
Marks
Pl.,
SI,
NY
10301

8.
     Cath.
Char./Rusty
Staub
Mobile
Food
Pantry
(St.
Paul's),
145
Clinton
Ave.,
SI,
NY
10301

9.
     Claddagh
INN,
73‐14
Rockaway
Beach
Blvd.,
Queens,
NY
11692

10.
    Emmanuel
Pentecostal
Church
of
Love,
549
Gates
Ave.,
Brooklyn,
NY
11216

11.

   Faith
Mission
Christian
Fellowship,
160‐164
W.
129th
St.,
NY,
NY
10027

12.
    Faith
Pentecostal
Apostolic
Healing
Temple,
1024
E.
217th
St.,
Bronx,
NY
10469

13.
    First
Baptist
Church
in
Pierrepont
St.,
360
Schermerhorn
St.,
Brooklyn,
NY
11217

14.
    Fordham
Lutheran
Church
Food
Pantry,
2427
Morris
Ave.,
Bronx,
NY
10468

15.
    Fort
Greene
Food
Pantry/Queen
of
All
Saints,
300
Vanderbilt
Ave.,
Brooklyn,
NY
11205

16.
    FROST'D
Mobile
Distribution,
224
W.
30th
St.,
Ste.
901,
NY,
NY
10001

17.
    Greater
Bethel
Ministries,
207‐14
Hollis
Ave.,
Queens,
NY

11429

18.
    Greater
St.
Stephens
Missionary
Baptist
Church,
121‐17
Sutphin
Blvd.,
Jamaica,
NY
11434

19.
    HANAC
Ravenswood
NORC/RISE,
34‐35
A
12th
St.,
Long
Island
City,
NY
11106

20.
    Hanson
Place
United
Methodist
Church,
144
St
Felix
St.,
Brooklyn,
NY
11217

21.
    Highbridge
Advisory
Council,
1181
Nelson
Ave.,
Bronx,
NY
10452

22.
    Imani
House,
76A
5th
Ave.,
Brooklyn,
NY
11217

23.

   Internat’l
Evangelistic
Women's
&
Workers,
481
Washington
Ave.,
Brooklyn,
NY
11238

24.
    John
Charles
Garvin
Memorial
Fund,
160
Putnam
Ave.,
Brooklyn,
NY
11216

25.
    Just
Shall
Live
By
Faith
Church,
214‐13
Jamaica
Ave.,
Queens,
NY
11428

26.
    La
Cocina
del
Pueblo,
66
Moore
St.,
Brooklyn,
NY
11206

27.
    Liberation
Healing
Pentecostal
Church,
145
E.
117
St.,
NY,
NY
10035

28.
    Loyola
Baptist
Church,
2015
Bruckner
Blvd.,
Bronx,
NY
10472

29.
    More
Than
Food
Inc.,
892
Putnam
Ave.,
Brooklyn,
NY
11221

30.
    Mt.
Pisgah
Baptist
Church,
30
W.
126th
St.,
NY,
NY
10027

31.
    Muslim
Women's
Insitute
for
Research
and
Development,
13632
Odgen
Ave.,
Bronx,
NY
10452

32.
                                     3
        New
Brighton
Community
LDC,

 50
St.
Marks
Pl.
#108,

Staten
Island,
NY
10301

33.
    Project
Reach
Out,
589
Amsterdam
Ave.,
NY,
NY
10024

34.
    Quitona
Community
Coalition,
973
E.
80th
St.,
Bronx,
NY
10457

35.
    Reality
House,
637
W.
125th
St.
,
NY,
NY
10027

36.
    Scan
N.Y.,
1377
Jerome
Ave.,
Bronx,
NY
10452

37.
    SCAN
New
York,
207
E.
27th
St.
,
NY,
NY
10016

38.
    Segunda
Mission
Jerusalem,
3138
Webster
Ave.,
Bronx,
NY
10467

39.
    Springfield
Missionary
Baptist
Church,
227
Lenox
Ave.,
NY,
NY
10027

40.
    St.
Bartholomew,
43‐22
Ithaca
St.,
Queens,
NY
11373

41.
    St.
George's,
661
Willett
Rd.,
Bronx,
NY

10467

42.
    St.
Paul
Baptist
Church,
249
W.
132nd
St.,
NY,
NY
10027

43.
    St.
Paul's
Baptist
Church
of
Jamaica,
Queens
Village
Station
P.O.
Box
448,
Jamaica,
NY11427

44.
    The
Momentum
Project‐Immaculate
Conception,
601
Melrose,
Bronx,
NY
10455

45.

   United
Methodist
Center,
1649
Smith
Place,
Queens,
NY
11691

46.
    Universal
Love
Peace
and
Joy,
266
E.
98th
St.,
Brooklyn,
NY
11212

47.
    Yemaya
Lower
East
Side
Food
Pantry,
18
Bleecker
St.
NY,
NY
10012

                                                                                                       34
Acknowledgements



First
and
foremost,
we
thank
the
hundreds
of
soup
kitchens
and
food
pantries
that
took
great
care
and

time
to
answer
our
survey.




The
Coalition
Against
Hunger
is
especially
grateful
to
volunteers
who
dedicated
long
hours
to
helping
us

mail
this
survey:

Janet
Williams

Matt
Blakeley

Lindsay
Perry

Joseph
Kleing

John
Kim

Nicole
Skursky

Guy
Blelloch

Claire
Shanahan

Erica
Jenkins



A
very
special
thanks
to
the
Coalition’s
Year
Nine
AmeriCorps*VISTA
Team,
without
whom
this
survey
work

would
not
have
been
completed:

Jessika
Carney

K.C.
Hunt

Andrew
Lobo

Charles
Yoo

Colleen
Pesci

Grace
Perry

Jannelle
McCoy

Karen
Law

Kathleen
Oswald

Shayla
Nastasi

Stefana
Soitos



This
report
features
city,
federal,
and
survey
data
compiled
by
Coalition
staff:

Joel
Berg,
Executive
Director

Theresa
Hassler,
Dir.
of
Communications,
Govt.
Relations,
and
Community
Organizing

Reggie
Miller,
VISTA
Coordinator



A
very
special
thank
you
to
the
entire
NYCCAH
staff
and
to
Elena
Albright,
Lori
Azim,
and
Alexandra
Yannias,

who
also
helped
with
this
effort.



The
New
York
City
Coalition
Against
Hunger’s
Board
of
Directors:

Timothy
Brosnan
‐
Chair

Daniel
B.
Ripps
‐
Vice
Chair

Christopher
G.
Karagheuzoff,
Esq.
‐
Secretary

Jeffrey
Nichols,
M.D.
‐
Treasurer

Maureen
Fergus
Sheehan
‐
Member

Peter
Ligh,
Esq.
‐
Member

Melony
Samuels,
PhD.
‐
Member

Angela
Doolan,
Esq.
–
Member







                                                                                                          35

				
DOCUMENT INFO
Shared By:
Tags:
Stats:
views:1308
posted:11/22/2011
language:English
pages:35