Not many food banks produce detailed reports about the level of food insecurity throughout their service areas, but the ones that do cite numerous benefits. With the USDA ceasing publication of its annual household food security report, the question of whether more food banks should fill the information gap by getting into the data-gathering business is bubbling up.

The Capital Area Food Bank and the Greater Boston Food Bank may be the most prominent in investing in data projects aimed at understanding the depth and breadth of food insecurity in their areas. In June, the Greater Boston Food Bank released its fifth annual Food Access Report, which surveyed 3,000 adults across the state. In September, Capital Area Food Bank released its sixth annual Hunger Report, which queried 3,700 adults in seven surrounding counties and cities. 

While food banks have Feeding America’s Map the Meal Gap data available to them, those that conduct their own research say they value having data that is more timely, more comprehensive, and more reflective of the issues occurring on the ground in their service areas. These and other benefits, along with the information gap caused by the USDA report’s demise (the final one was published on Dec. 30th), is raising the possibility of more food banks investing in data and research. 

“The food bank network itself is a tremendous data engine,” noted Emily Engelhard, Vice President of Research & Insights at Feeding America during a recent webinar hosted by the Duke Sanford World Food Policy Center. She added, “More and more food banks are looking to invest in statewide population surveys so that they can start to fill the gap around understanding food insecurity.”

The Capital Area Food Bank and the Greater Boston Food Bank offer a roadmap of sorts. Capital Area Food Bank did not think when it started collecting data in 2019 that it would do so every year. “But the data was so informative to guide our own work, as well as to so many others across the community, we realized that we really needed to do it annually,” said Radha Muthiah, President and CEO.  

In addition to shedding light on total need and priorities related to cultural food, data from its Hunger Report has helped Capital Area Food Bank adjust its mission. In 2023, for example, the report found that food-insecure people are more than twice as likely to suffer from diet-related chronic disease as those who are food-secure. Not only was that information “incredibly helpful” to various healthcare partners, but the food bank could also identify the number of people suffering from, say, diabetes at the census track level, helping it to inform specific healthcare partnerships. “The hunger report has given us a lot of information to be really targeted,” Muthiah said.

The Greater Boston Food Bank’s annual report has allowed it to gain insights into issues like the barriers and facilitators to food access, the impact of food insecurity on emergency room visits, hospitalizations and costs, and the impact of the cliff effect. “We use it for philanthropy, advocacy and programmatic changes,” said Dr. Lauren Fiechtner, Senior Health and Research Advisor at Greater Boston Food Bank and Director of Nutrition at Mass General Brigham for Children, during the Duke Sanford webinar. She added, “It helps us mobilize our resources in the best possible way.”

Both food banks rely on very large data sets. They incorporate the 18 questions that the USDA has traditionally asked in its annual food-security survey (see more here), as well as additional ones. This year, Capital Area Food Bank, which partners with NORC at the University of Chicago to conduct its survey, asked about 50 questions in total, Muthiah said. 

Greater Boston Food Bank teams with Mass General Brigham for Children and other partners to conduct its survey, and relies on its Health and Research Council to provide guidance. While the USDA funded the first three years of Greater Boston Food Bank’s survey, it is now fundraising to cover costs.

Conducting such comprehensive surveys can be pricey. At Capital Area Food Bank, most of the $400,000 or so it spent this year came from paying a $10 to $15 incentive fee to respondents, with up to three-quarters of the total amount covered by sponsors. Muthiah called the return on that investment high, “given the information that we get from it, how we’re able to market and share this information, and what it can generate in terms of support to the food bank.” She added, “Even if it didn’t pay for itself, it positions us as a thought leader on this issue, which is important to us.”

Should food banks be doing more to collect more comprehensive data on food insecurity? Feeding America thinks so. Strengthening local data collection capability across the food bank network is one part of an overall plan Feeding America has in place to respond to the demise of the USDA report. “How can we support [food banks], whether it be providing tools and playbooks for working with other researchers, working with funders, and having some consistency around data collection,” said Engelhard of Feeding America. “That’s on the runway right now.” 

Muthiah agrees that Feeding America, working with known and established research entities, has an “excellent opportunity” to address the national information gap. “There’s a vacuum that’s been created and I think that should be filled,” she said. “We do need to have good national data to operate as food banks.” – Chris Costanzo

Like what you’re reading?
Support Food Bank News

This article was made possible by the readers who support Food Bank News, a national, editorially independent, nonprofit media organization. Food Bank News is not funded by any government agencies, nor is it part of a larger association or corporation. Your support helps ensure our continued solutions-oriented coverage of best practices in hunger relief. Thank you!