|
|
USDA is proud to announce FY2010
Hunger-Free Communities Grants
Awards
|
Click on the name of any
organization in the image
below
to learn more about their
project.
|
|
|
|
Background
|
In FY 2010, USDA appropriated $5
million in grant funding for
purposes authorized by the Food,
Conservation, and Energy Act of
2008 in the section entitled
Hunger-Free Communities.
The grants were available to
food and nutrition organizations,
which include state and local
governments and non-profit
organizations that collaborate
with local organizations for
projects that assess community
hunger problems and/or develop
new resources to achieve
Hunger-Free Communities.
These Grants offer an
opportunity for the selected
grantees in partnership
with other organizations in
their communities to
improve access to nutritious
food through research, planning,
and implementation of hunger
relief activities.
Learn more here.
|
|
Implementation Grant Awards FY2010
|
The four implementation grantees
will use the awarded funds to
implement hunger-relief
activities to end hunger in
their defined communities.
1. |
Centro del Obrera Fronterizo
-
El Paso, TX ($110,065)
|
|
The Chamizal neighborhood, also
known as South Central El Paso,
is one of the poorest urban
areas in the nation (The
Enduring Challenge of
Concentrated Poverty in America,
2008). Almost 60% of the area’s
residents live below the poverty
line, about 56% of them women. The median income is $11,362,
and almost one in five residents
of the Chamizal neighborhood is
unemployed. La Mujer Obrera will
leverage its community-operated
Mexican marketplace, Mercado
Mayapán, to increase access to
fresh, affordable foods;
administer a culturally relevant
nutrition education campaign for
food service workers and
families; and, increase
coordination among organizations
with a stake in the local food
system through improved
referrals and the establishment
of a Food Policy Council.
Specifically, La Mujer Obrera
will: |
|
1. |
Increase access to fresh
produce by: |
|
|
a. |
Engaging
with local farmers to
increase produce items
at Mercado Mayapán. |
|
|
b. |
Addressing
transportation barriers
through neighborhood
mobile markets. |
|
|
c. |
Incentivizing participation
in nutrition education programs. |
|
2. |
Increase Latino youth, single-parent families, and seniors’ nutrition knowledge and food preparation self-efficacy by: |
|
|
a. |
Offering culturally appropriate nutrition education that builds on the assets of the traditional Mesoamerican diet. |
|
|
b. |
Conducting nutrition education by leveraging existing community events at Mercado Mayapán. |
|
3. |
Build long term community capacity to address hunger and strengthen the local food system by: |
|
|
a. |
Providing workforce training to employees of food service programs serving low income Chamizal residents to enhance food-purchasing and preparation skills. |
|
|
b. |
Serving as a local site for referrals and application assistance to increase participation in existing nutrition assistance programs. |
|
|
c. |
Establishing a Food Policy Council, whose first year efforts will be piloted in the Chamizal neighborhood as the foundation for a region-wide council.
|
2. |
United Way of King
County - Seattle, WA
($987,380)
|
|
King County, WA, has a population of roughly 1.9 million people and contains city, suburban, and rural communities that are diverse in terms of ethnicity, culture, and level of income. The regional high cost of living keeps many diverse families at risk of never escaping poverty. Visits to King County Food Banks have increased by 21% between 2007-2009. King County has the lowest SNAP participation rate among eligible people in the State. Only 11% of eligible children participate in Summer Food Service Programs. The United Way of King County project will focus on 4 of 12 initiatives described in the Hunger Relief Now! Plan, thereby reducing hunger among low-income children, senior citizens, immigrants, and refugees. These four initiatives are: |
|
1. |
Expand Bridge to Basics –
an innovative program that
trains multilingual volunteers
and deploys them throughout the
community to connect eligible
families with the Washington
Basic Food Program (SNAP) and
other public benefits. |
|
|
a. |
Recruit B2B volunteers three times each year and provide training via WithinReach. |
|
|
b. |
Deploy volunteers to outreach locations throughout the community. |
|
|
c. |
WithinReach AmeriCorps Team provides support to volunteers at each site. |
|
2. |
Increase participation in Summer Meal Programs by: |
|
|
a. |
Increasing site locations through the provision of mini-grants for startup and administration costs. |
|
|
b. |
Implement a Summer Meal Outreach Campaign. |
|
|
c. |
Working with local partners to provide safe methods of travel for children to access the sites; |
|
|
d. |
Extending site days and hours to accommodate the needs of families. |
|
|
e. |
Improving program quality through examining nutritional quality and appeal of served foods. |
|
3. |
Launch two regional coalitions to implement local community based strategies to increase food security among low income children, seniors, and immigrants and refugees. |
|
|
a. |
South King County Child Nutrition Collaborative – focusing on increasing food security for low income children in South King County through outreach at key low-income housing complexes and partnering with school districts, local school districts and service providers to address SBP, CACFP, and nutrition education. |
|
|
b. |
Rainier Valley Consortium – focusing on increasing food security among low income children, seniors and immigrants and refugees through Community Kitchens, nutrition education, and mini-grants for community-based initiatives. |
|
4. |
Increase public awareness and support for Hunger Relief strategies through strategic activities during the yearly Hunger Action Week.
|
3. |
Governor's
Office for Children
- Baltimore, MD
($923,812)
|
|
Although Maryland is one of the wealthiest states in the nation, 9.6% of households in Maryland (or 1 in 10) face a constant struggle against hunger (2008 USDA food insecurity data). The high cost of living in Maryland contributes to the struggle many families face to pay their housing, transportation and utility bills. These same families must make choices that often lead to hunger and poor nutrition. Many children go without meals and parents wonder if they will have enough food to last until their next paycheck. Childhood hunger is influenced by a combination of three deficits: resources, access and information. The Governor’s Office for Children (GOC), on behalf of the Partnership to End Childhood Hunger in Maryland (The Partnership), is awarded a two-year implementation grant.
GOC proposes to work with applying partners Catholic Charities, Maryland Department of Human Resources (DHR), Maryland Food Bank, Maryland Hunger Solutions, Maryland State Department of Education (MSDE), and SHARE Food Network on behalf of the Partnership. Each of these partners is an active member of the Partnership to End Childhood Hunger in Maryland. The Partnership serves as the Food Policy Council for the State of Maryland and the eight target Counties and is well-suited to implement the Creating Hunger-Free Communities in Maryland by Meeting the Growing Need in Eight Target Counties project described in the proposal. The eight target Counties are Allegany, Anne Arundel, Caroline, Carroll, Dorchester, Frederick, Garrett and Montgomery. The proposed scope of work will implement strategies outlined in the Plan to End Childhood Hunger in Maryland by 2015 and will tailor implementation to the specific needs of the target community.
The three focus areas of the proposed work are: |
|
1. |
Focus Area A: Increasing access to and information regarding the Food Supplement Program (FSP). |
|
|
a. |
Conducting trainings on Maryland’s Service Access and Information Link (SAIL); |
|
|
b. |
Expanding FSP outreach efforts; |
|
|
c. |
Publishing and disseminating information regarding the FSP; |
|
|
d. |
Improving implementation of the FSP; and |
|
|
e. |
Improving Direct Certification between the FSP and School Meals. |
|
2. |
Focus Area B: Increasing participation in school and out-of-school time nutrition programs |
|
|
a. |
Conducting outreach to increase participation;. |
|
|
b. |
Providing intensive technical assistance to address implementation challenges; and |
|
|
c. |
Using local resources to improve the quality of food served through afterschool and summer programs sponsored by the Maryland Food Bank. |
|
3. |
Focus Area C: Expanding access to nutritious food for families with children. |
|
|
a. |
Creating a network of farms and gleaning cooperatives which will provide unused produce to soup kitchens, pantries, shelters and other CBO and outreach programs; |
|
|
b. |
Providing education resources so that Maryland families have the knowledge, skills, and motivation to make healthy food choices; and |
|
|
c. |
Expanding innovative buying clubs that stretch families’ food budgets.
|
4. |
United Way of New York
City
- New York City, NY
($2,000,000)
|
|
Of the 8.3+ million people living in New York City proper, over 1.55 million live below the federal poverty line, with numbers steadily increasing. The United Way of New York City plans to partner with the New York City Hunger Free Communities Consortium, consisting of AARP New York, City Harvest, Council of Senior Centers and Services of New York City, Food Bank for New York City, Metropolitan Council for Jewish Poverty, New York City Coalition Against Hunger, New York City Department for the Aging, New York City Department of Education Office of School Food, and Public Health Solutions to implement its proposed plan. This project has a particular focus on aiding the especially vulnerable populations of households with children, working poor, and senior citizens. The proposed project includes a four-pronged approach to working collaboratively towards a Hunger-Free Community in NY through four objectives: |
|
1. |
Creating and implementing a
comprehensive marketing,
communications, organizing, and
outreach plan to increase
participation in government and
private nutrition assistance and
anti-poverty programs
(including, but not limited to
SNAP, WIC, school meals, food
pantry and soup kitchen foods,
senior center meals, and Meals
on Wheels) by bridging the
traditional silos that separate
these programs. |
|
2. |
Improving the referral network to free food resources by: |
|
|
a. |
Collaborating with both government and community-based partners to have coordinated, updated information streams to key referral and application assistance hubs. These will include ACCESS NYC (the City’s online applications system) as well as each of the members of the Hunger Free Consortium; and. |
|
|
b. |
Key partners will help to build the capacity of and provide training for community-based and faith-based organizations to assist in the benefits of pre-screening and application capabilities of food pantries and soup kitchens. |
|
3. |
Engaging in outreach to
promote participation in school
breakfast, particularly
through adoption of in-classroom
or grab-and-go breakfast service
in schools, ongoing parent
engagement, and the creation of
dynamic outreach materials for
community members and
decision-makers; and |
|
4. |
Creating a NYC Food Policy
Council in collaboration
with the current NYC Food Policy
Task Force. |
|
|
Planning and Assessment
Grant Awards FY2010
|
The 10 planning and assessment
grantees will research and
assess the hunger and food
insecurity in their communities
and create a plan to achieve a
hunger-free community.
|
1. Community Services
Planning Council -
Sacramento, CA ($99,396) |
Sacramento County is a very
diverse, urban area with a
population of 1.4 million.
A significant project need is
demonstrated through preliminary
data. The proposed Hunger
Hits Home 2011 project seeks to
achieve three objectives: (1)
survey low income individuals to
assess the extent, causes, and
consequences of food insecurity
in Sacramento County; (2)
interview organizations
operating within Sacramento
County’s food systems to
determine the capacity of the
systems and the amount of
coordination and collaboration
that is occurring among and
between the organizations; and
(3) engage stakeholders to
review our findings and develop
an action plan that will move
Sacramento County toward a
hunger free community.
|
2.
Cornell Cooperative Extension of
Niagara County -
Lockport, NY ($96,175) |
Niagara County, located in the
upper Northwest corner of New
York State, has a population of
approximately 215,000 and covers
523 square miles. Niagara
County is predominately a rural,
agrarian community.
Preliminary data collected
suggests a significant need, but
one that is unquantifiable and
thus difficult to understand or
address. The assessment will
consist of (i) a survey of a
representative sampling of the
County’s population to assess
the extent of hunger; (ii) focus
groups to delve into the causes
of hunger; (iii) resource
mapping of existing services in
the County to identify gaps and
potential opportunities; (iv)
evaluation of the availability
and accessibility of healthy
foods; and (iv) examination of
the local food production and
distribution system in order to
determine the flow of
locally-produced products.
|
3.
Cornell Cooperative Extension of
Oneida County - Oriskany,
NY ($100,000) |
Utica and its metropolitan
statisical area (MSA) were
identified in the New York State
Division of Housing and
Community Renewal’s 2009 “Mohawk
Valley Regional Report” as one
of the poorest of New York
State’s cities. This fact
is substantiated by Census 2000
results. Primary
deliverables for the project
include an analysis of the
extent and causes of hunger in
the community and a plan to
achieve a hunger-free community
within the Utica/Oneida County
foodshed area. There will be
three key stages undertaken by
the grant applicants in
fulfillment of the Model 1
Planning and Assessment
activities of this USDA
Hunger-Free Communities Grant.
This proposal presumes that upon
award of this USDA grant the
first Stage ONE activity of the
grantees will be to convene a
Food Policy Working Group.
This Working Group will
establish preliminary goals,
membership, and target outcomes
for its first year of operation.
It will serve as coordinator of
Stage TWO research and
associated outreach activities.
At Stage THREE, the Food Policy
Council will be formalized based
upon the initial operations,
methods, intentions, and
membership of the Working Group.
The processes of these
developmental efforts will be
inclusive and participatory,
with the aim of building
ownership for the project and
implementation capacity amongst
partners.
|
4.
Food Bank Coalition of San Luis
Obispo County - Paso
Robles, CA ($99,561) |
San Luis Obispo County is a
rural county located on
California’s Central Coast, with
a population of approximately
265,000 residents. The
county spans over 3,000 square
miles and includes more than 20
towns and unincorporated
communities with populations
ranging from 18 to 45,000.
The economy is driven by tourism
and agriculture, sectors which
rely on low-wage workers.
Preliminary data suggests a
significant project need. The
overall objective of the hunger
assessment research is to
identify the extent and causes
of hunger in San Luis Obispo
County, including assessing
household food security,
determining accessibility of
food resources, identifying low
availability and high cost food
areas, assessing community food
production resources, and
identifying other barriers to
food security.
|
5.
International Sonoran Desert
Alliance - Ajo, AZ
($63,000) |
Ajo, Arizona is one of the most
remote, rural towns in the
Southwest. It is 40 miles
north of the U.S./Mexico border.
With high rates of poverty,
unemployment, and infrastructure
challenges, it is classified as
a federal colonia. This
organization’s assessment goals
include: developing a clear
understanding of hunger in the
community rural region (extent,
locus, and causes),
understanding of the relation of
hunger to key health issues in
the community and rural region,
understanding of the nutritional
resources present and absent in
the community and rural region
and the extent to which the
community makes use of them, and
identifying sustainable
strategies being implemented by
other similar rural regions
specifically to address hunger.
|
6.
Marywood University -
Scranton, PA ($100,000) |
Situated at the northern edge of
Pennsylvania’s Coal Region,
Lackawanna County encompasses an
area of 465 square miles and is
comprised of both rural and
urban communities. The county
has a population of 208,801 (as
of 2009) and is located
northwest of the Pocono
Mountains. Increasing numbers of
residents have found themselves
with food insecurities due to
the loss of jobs in the county
and the recent budget impasse in
Pennsylvania that negatively
impacted direct service
providers. Research objectives
include obtaining statistical,
quantitative results from
residents in Lackawanna County,
conducting an availability and
affordable foods inventory, and
following up with selected
individuals and key informants
(residents, community leaders,
emergency food providers, food
assistance providers,
transportation supervisors) to
probe and explore those results
in more depth.
|
7. North County Community
Services - San Marcos,
CA ($100,000) |
The geographic scope of service
for the proposed assessment and
planning project includes
approximately 1,815 square miles
in the northern third of San
Diego County. According to
Census data, the 2006 estimated
population in the project area
was 623,208 or just over 20
percent of the total county
population. There are
between 25 and 40 miles of
separation between the San Diego
Metropolitan area and the
project target area of Northern
San Diego County.
Preliminary data suggests a
significant project need in this
area. This assessment and
planning project will measure
the extent of food insecurity in
Northern San Diego County,
assess causes of hunger,
evaluate the capacity of the
region’s food system and
identify workable solutions that
become part of a plan to
alleviate hunger in the region.
|
8. Poughkeepsie Farm
Project - Poughkeepsie,
NY ($99,311) |
Poughkeepsie is a riverfront
city of nearly 30,000 residents
in the Hudson Valley, a two hour
commuter train ride from New
York City. It is located
in border zone between
metropolitan New York City and
the agricultural regions of the
upper Hudson Valley. Preliminary
data suggests a significant
project need. The planned
assessment of food security will
document the extent of hunger in
the community and analyzes its
causes, outlining how the
community’s food systems
operate, how residents access
nutritious food in Poughkeepsie,
how food insecure residents make
decisions about what to eat and
what constrains those choices.
|
9. Rutgers, the State University
of New Jersey
- New Brunswick, NJ ($99,753) |
New Brunswick, New Jersey, is a
city with a diverse population
exceeding 48,000. High
proportions of city residents
suffer from socioeconomic
difficulties and other
preliminary data suggests a
significant project need.
This project aims to analyze and
interpret data that assess food
insecurity and related needs
within the city, characterize
the local food environment
including inventories of food
availability and pricing, and
catalog existing community
resources, programs and
services. It will use this
information to conduct a gap
analysis to identify the
information, resources, and
infrastructure needed to reduce
food insecurity among residents
of New Brunswick.
|
10. United Way of Passaic
County - Paterson, NJ
($100,000) |
Passaic County, New Jersey, is
an hourglass-shaped county of
approximately half a million
residents located in Northern
New Jersey. Passaic
County’s “downcounty” area
includes the densely populated
urban centers of Passaic and
Paterson, surrounded by
middle-class and working-class
suburban areas that vary in
their ethnic makeup and income
distribution. Preliminary
data suggests a significant
project need. Assessment
objectives include determining
the extent and severity of food
insecurity in all Passaic County
municipalities and among various
high-risk Passaic County
populations and determining
possible causes of food
insecurity in Passaic County. |
|
Last modified:
10/05/2012
|
|
|