E N D
USDA Southwest Region Task Force MeetingSouth Padre Island, TexasDecember 5, 2006 Answers to Summer Food Challenges:An advocate’s perspectiveDecember 5, 2006Celia Hagert, Senior Policy Analysthagert@cppp.org900 Lydia Street - Austin, Texas 78702Phone (512) 320-0222 x110 – fax (512) 320-0227 - www.cppp.org
Overview • Barriers • A four-pronged approach to overcoming barriers • Outreach & Education • Partnerships/volunteers • Research & Technical assistance • Legislative • Model programs/strategies • Food for People – Eureka, CA • Texas’ transportation grants • Mercy Hospital – Independence, KS • Idaho’s Simplified Summer Food Program • Kentucky’s comprehensive outreach program • DC Hunger Solutions – partnerships with foundation • The role of advocacy
Barriers • Lack of sponsors, sites • Lack of awareness • Limited funding • Paperwork/administrative burden (real and perceived) • Transportation problems • “Not on my campus” – when schools don’t reach out to the greater community/close early • Not enough partnerships (or, lack of buy-in)
Outreach & Education • Comprehensive outreach strategies work best • Outreach to every potential partner is critical: • Media • Sponsors • Sites • Parents/kids • Communities (philanthropic, nonprofit, local government) • Business leaders • Outreach must start early, never end
Outreach & Education – Media Strategies • Write an op-ed piece for a local newspaper • Encourage editorials (see Houston Chronicle editorials) • Place announcements in community newsletters, bulletins, etc. • Produce PSAs for television and radio • Advertise on public transportation, billboards, and/or grocery bags • Create a toolkit with tips for sites/local groups about working with the media, creating advertisements, door-knockers, etc. • Encourage elected officials to visit a site, and alert the media. • “Summer food kick-off” events with fun activities are an effective way to garner media attention • Find a famous spokesperson (NYC uses sports celebrities from the Yankees and the Mets)
Outreach & Education – Sponsors/Sites • Hold a statewide conference and invite new and potential sites/sponsors • Targeted outreach to potential sponsors through local briefings (food banks sponsored in TX) • Ask educational associations (i.e., school boards, teachers, principals, etc.) to put you on the agenda at statewide meetings • Work through nonprofit umbrella groups (United Ways, religious organizations, food banks, community health centers, etc.) • Develop special web site (track hits/users)
Outreach & Education – Parents/Kids/Communities • Ask schools to send home weekly flyers starting in May (PTAs can be big help) • Post information on PTA/school web site • Get PARDs, YMCAs, and any sites with free swimming pools to post information • Get information to families through homeless, food, health providers (churches, food pantries, free clinics, etc.) • Locate other places where kids are in care during summer, ask for their help • Develop special web site (track hits/users) • Door-to-door in high need, underserved areas – piggy back on other outreach
Partnerships • With corporations (funding, in-kind, transportation) • Between schools and nonprofits (extend summer food beyond summer school) • Between hospitals and schools • Between senior centers and children’s centers • Volunteers are critical – does your state have a centralized hotline for volunteer opportunities? • Intra- and interagency partnerships
Research/Technical Assistance • Survey sponsors/sites – particularly when they drop out • Track participation (ADP, meal) by type of sponsor/month of service/type of meal to evaluate reasons for increases or decreases • Track use of websites/toll-free hotlines (i.e., how did you hear about the program?) • From monitoring to technical assistance – state agencies can make it easier for sponsors
Funding/Legislative • State mandate – State law requiring that all or certain schools offer the Summer Food Service Program (SFSP) • Reporting requirement – State law that state, schools or districts convene advisory group, and/or report participation or reasons for nonparticipation in the SFSP • State funding – State funds for one purpose or another related to the SFSP
State Mandates/Reporting • 7 states have mandates (TX, CA, FL, MD, MO, OH, WA) • Mandate generally based on: • % of FRP kids (TX, FL, MO, WA) • If offer summer school, must participate (MD, OH, CA) • California has reporting requirement in Seamless Program • Requires schools to keep track of children who receive free lunches but are not enrolled in summer school • Data used to improve performance
State Funding • 10 states provide funding (TX, NY, CA, OH, WA, OR, MD, VT, MN, DC) • Types of funding • Per meal supplement (CA, MN, NY, OR, TX, VT, WA) • Start-up/expansion grants (add sites, extend program later in summer) – CA, DC, MA, WA) • Outreach (DC, MA, OH, TX) • Incentives: # of meals served (WA) • Activities/transportation (VT, DC)
Food for People – Eureka, CA • Addresses transportation/rural barriers • A partnership among Food For People (food bank), Humboldt County Transit Authority, and UPS • Food bank approached HTA/UPS for help with high transportation costs to rural areas. • HTA community college routes not as busy during the summer, added SFSP sites • UPS was already part of food bank’s gleaning program with similar delivery routes.
Food for People • HTA/UPS now deliver the meals to their rural sites along their regular routes, Food for People prepares the lunches, places them in coolers. • HTA/UPS delivers them to local sites for distribution, saving FFP >300 miles of driving every day. • The meal sites all offer programs or informal activities such as arts and crafts. • Paperwork is returned weekly inside one of the empty coolers. • Community volunteers or site staff return the coolers.
Food for People • Food for People loads meals onto UPS delivery trucks, which then deliver the meals to rural locations an hour outside the city. • UPS exchanges the coolers with lunches for the empties and completed paperwork from the day before. • Food bank staff them pick up the empty coolers from the UPS hub the next day when they drop off meals for that day’s delivery. • For more information: Jennifer Rishel - (707) 445-3166 (jrishel@foodforpeople.org)
Texas: A Tale of Two…Rural Areas • Two food banks with very different experiences • East Texas had huge success (341% increase in sites/62K meals served), while West Texas floundered (some days served fewer than 59 kids) • Factors affecting success: • 42 vs. 4 sites • Research before picking sites (ET went to where the kids already were) • ET Supplemented USDA grant to use school busses to take kids to the site • ET recruited famous soccer player to kick off program (“Kickin’ Hunger out of East Texas”)
Mercy Hospital – Independence, KS • Mercy Hospital used its mission of serving the community to start a summer program • Mercy Hospital sponsored the program and prepared the food in its kitchen • A public elementary school provided its custodian and its cafeteria as the feeding site • Hospital auxiliary volunteers and local church youth groups helped with food preparation at the hospital and site supervision at the school. • Youth volunteers gained experience in food preparation and working with the children.
Mercy Hospital – Independence, KS • The local Cooperative Extension Office provided enrichment activities at the SFSP site and brought in college students to supervise and interact with the children. • School bus company picked up children at three different sites and transported them to Mercy Hospital's summer program. • The public school system took over the program in 2005 • For more information: Amy Bain - (620) 332-3254abain@kansas.mercy.net
Idaho’s Simplified Summer Food Program • Idaho used the Simplified SFP to reduce paperwork, increase participation, improve program integrity & better train sponsors • Before and After:
Idaho’s Simplified Summer Food Program • Keys to Success: “I was a pest” – Linda Westphal, State Dep’t of Education • Emphasized rule simplification in outreach materials to sponsors • Comprehensive outreach combined with simplified program – at 19.2% Idaho has best participation rate among Lugar states (next highest is 15.7%)
Idaho’s Simplified Summer Food Program • Know the chain of command • First went to food service, then superintendent • Then went to mayor and PARD • Sent letters to every superintendent with list of eligible schools • Emphasized summer employment opportunities in food service • Extensive advertising • One-on-one training with sponsors during pre-approved visits (emphasize meal pattern, meal quality, portion size)
Kentucky Department of Education • Pairs sponsors with as many sites as possible by giving them lists of churches, libraries, extension agents, food stamp and WIC representatives, and migrant coordinators in the area. • Emphasis is on coordination with existing summer activities – the building blocks approach • Partners: libraries, senior centers, local law enforcement • In more than five counties, senior citizen centers sponsor SFSP meals along with the meals they already prepare for senior through Meals on Wheels. • Senior center vans deliver meals to multiple sites, record participation data; Local “homemakers” groups or college nutrition students serve as site supervisors • Half of KY’s sites are churches – encouraged to participate during the weeks they have vacation bible school or other events. • Libraries encouraged to serve as sites during the days they have summer reading programs. • Success with the SFSP has led to many libraries expanding their reading programs to additional days during the week.
DC Hunger Solutions – Rags to Riches • SFSP was failing • Mayor set up a task force to figure out how to increase/retain sponsors, sites, and participation. • Reached out to a wide variety of new sites, including churches, libraries, parks, and apartment buildings. • Advertisements placed in movies at theaters popular with kids. • Mayor’s office assumed a lot of work traditionally required of sponsors, i.e., assisting with paperwork and coordinating sponsors and sites. • Got foundations involved: many funders of local services now require grantees to be sponsors of sites. • When large foundations made SFSP a priority, smaller organizations more likely to participate.
Role of Advocacy • Supplement outreach/education efforts • Leverage new funding sources • Leverage new partnerships • Promote legislative/policy/funding solution
For More Information • Food Research and Action Center • http://www.frac.org/Out_Of_School_Time/index.html • http://www.frac.org/html/federal_food_programs/programs/sfsp.html • Summer Food Geo-Mapping - http://www.frac.org/html/federal_food_programs/programs/sfspGeoMappingIntro.htm