Amber Thomas

HCA 450

April 29, 2014

Food Insecurity

Many people do not understand the hunger crisis in the United States. Food

insecurity is defined as “the limited or uncertain availability of nutritionally adequate

and safe foods or limited or uncertain ability to acquire acceptable foods in socially

acceptable ways” (Jung, 2013), which therefore means many families have to go without

food or have nutritionally undesirable food available to them. America is one of the

richest countries in the world, yet according to the World Hunger Education Service

food insecurity affects over 17.2 million households (49 million people), which is 14.5%

of the overall population (2011) (see Appendix A). Food insecurity is related to many

issues, such as developmental problems in children and malnourishment, and is also

caused by many social and political factors. Food insecurity is a complex problem that

cannot be linked to one direct cause or solution, and drastically affects a large portion of

the United States population. It is a serious problem that needs to be addressed by many

different outlets, politically, environmentally, and socially.

Based on a household’s severity of food insecurity the USDA has made different

ranges to describe different levels of food insecure households. High food security is

households with no reported indications of food-access problems or limitations.

Marginal food security is when there has been one or two reported indications of

anxiety over food sufficiency or shortage of food in the house, but overall there is little

or no indication of changes in diet or food intake of those household members. Food

insecurity is defined as households that during the year are uncertain of having, or is

unable to acquire, enough food to meet the needs of the household because they have

insufficient money or other resources for food, this affects 14.5% of the population (17.6

million households). Within food insecurity is low food security and very low food

security. Low food security reports show that these households obtained enough food to

avoid “substantially disrupting their eating patterns or reducing food intake by using a

variety of coping strategies, such as eating less varied diets, participating in Federal food

assistance programs, or getting emergency food from community food pantries” (Jensen,

2012). Low food security affects about 8.8% of the food insecure population, or about

10.7million households in the U.S. And lastly, there is very low food security, which

reports multiple indications of disrupted eating patterns and reduced food intake by

household members. Very low food security affects 5.7% of the food insecure

population, or in other words about seven million United States households (see

Appendix B). Among the households who fall under food insecure, 80% of them had

children under 18 living within that household, and in 10% of those households with

children, only the adults were food insecure, in the other 90% all members were

reported as food insecure, with 1.2% of households reporting one or more child

experiencing reduced food intake and disrupted eating patterns at some point. Those

suffering from food security have to deal with a variety of concerns. They are generally

worried about if they will run out of the food that they have bought, the food they

bought actually did not last as long as it was intended to, they cannot afford balanced

meals, they have cut meal sizes or skipped meals, they have cut or skipped meals for 3+

months, they are hungry but do not eat, they have lost weight due to their food

insecurity, they do not eat for whole day(s) at a time, and have not eaten for whole days

at a time for 3+ continuous months (Jensen, 2012). Like stated before, 17.2 million

households are food insecure. That breaks down to 49 million people living in food

insecure households and 977,000 being children who experienced very low food

security.

The next question is who exactly is food insecure in the United States? The

prevalence of food insecurity varies considerably among household types. However,

rates of food insecurity are shown to be higher than the national (14.5 percent) average

for certain groups. These groups include all households with children (20%),

households with children under the age of six (20.5%), households with children headed

by a single woman (35.4%), households with children headed by single men (23.6%),

African American households (24.6%), Hispanic households (23.3%), and low-income

households with incomes below 185% of the poverty threshold (34.3%) (see Appendix

C). There is also a similar, but slightly different pattern for very low food security. These

include households with a higher average than that of the national average for very low

food security (which is 5.7%) and are households with children headed by a single

woman (12.7%), women living alone (7.5%), men living alone (7.3%), African American

households (10.4%), Hispanic households (7.4%), households with incomes below 185

percent of the poverty line (14.5%), and households located in principle cities of

metropolitan areas (6.7%) (“USDA ERS- FOOD,” 2013) (see Appendix D). The biggest

prevalence of food insecurity are for those living in poverty, minority populations have a

higher rate of poverty, which makes those suffering from any level of food insecurity

mostly minorities within with the United States.

There are many negative health implications for children and adults experiencing

food insecurity. The first being malnourishment. Micronutrient deficiencies are very

common in individuals lacking proper nutrition; micronutrients are chemicals or

substances (vitamins and minerals) that are required in trace amounts for proper

development and growth. These deficiencies are most commonly deficiencies of vitamin

A, B, C, and D, calcium, foliate, iodine, iron, and zinc. According to the Agriculture and

Consumer Protection Department vitamin and mineral deficiencies have a “significant

impact on human welfare and on the economic development of communities and

nations. These deficiencies can lead to serious health problems, including reduced

resistance to infectious disease, blindness, lethargy, reduced learning capacity, and in

some cases, to death” (“Household Food Security,” 2010). Vitamin A deficiencies are

most common in young children, and if left untreated, it can lead to blindness and death.

Iron deficiency is the most common dietary deficiency worldwide, and even more

common for those with food insecurities. Iron deficiency leads to anemia, which

“significantly contributes to maternal and neonatal deaths” (“Household Food Security,”

2010). Severe iodine deficiencies can lead to lower IQs, stillbirth, and birth defects.

Micronutrients are huge contributors to our health that are very commonly overlooked,

and deficiencies in micronutrients are extremely detrimental to ones overall health.

Malnutrition leads to many other physical impairments as well. Fatigue and

illness are also a major concern for food insecure children. Food insecure children are

more vulnerable to infections, and end up being hospitalized with illnesses that their

food secure peers fight off successfully with their stronger immune systems, or with

help of the primary care available to them (“Child Nutrition and,” 2012). They are also at

a higher risk for chronic health conditions such as anemia and asthma, and just in

general a higher frequency of illness and developmental and growth problems than their

peers. Other physical symptoms of hunger from food insecurity are gastrointestinal

distress, dizziness, frequent headaches, hypersensitivity to noise, light, and cold,

reduced strength, and poor motor control. Another area of malnutrition is consuming

foods that are not nutritionally valuable. Fast food and unhealthy processed foods are

usually what struggling families can afford, but do not provide the nutrients people

need. Toddlers that live in households suffering from food-insecurity are 3.4 times more

likely to be obese at age 4 than others their age because of the lack of nutritional value

from the food that they are provided with and consume (“Child Nutrition and,” 2012).

While physical impairments lead to poor health outcomes, there are also emotional and

cognitive problems associated with being food insecure and hungry.

Children growing up in food-insecure families are also at a higher risk for

emotional, cognitive, and behavioral challenges. They have a higher risk of truancy and

tardiness to school, and if they are in class they may experience an increase in

behavioral problems such as fighting, hyperactivity, aggression, anxiety, mood swings,

and bullying. Data also suggests that, by third grade, children who have been “food

insecure in kindergarten saw a 13% drop in their reading and math test scores

compared to their food-secure peers” (“Child Nutrition and,” 2012). One astonishing

statistic from The National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey suggests that food

insecure teens are more likely to have repeated a grade and missed more school days

compared to their food secure peers. More than “40% of teens living in food-insecure

households had repeated a grade, as compared with 20.7% of food-secure teens” (“Child

Nutrition and,” 2012). As children grow older their behavioral problems associated with

being food-insecure are likely to increase, with teenagers being twice as likely to have

been suspended than their peers, they have a harder time getting along and making

friends with their peers, and overall are four times as likely to have no friends, all

stemming from living in a food-insecure family (“Child Nutrition and,” 2012). All of this

leads to them being four times more likely than their peers to require mental health

counseling. School can be very challenging for children growing up in food-insecure

households because impaired concentration, lack of friendships, reduced alertness and

comprehension, and overall poor judgment, which is highly likely to carry over into their

adult lives as well (“Hunger and Food,” 2011). Families as a whole suffering from hunger

and food insecurity are more likely to suffer from emotional distress, depression, and

feelings of alienation from society. Feelings of alienation stem from the lack of control

over how they feed themselves and their family, and their constant reliance upon the

charity of others and state programs such as SNAP and WIC. This is considered a forced

giver-receiver relationship, and it alienates the hungry from the rest of society, which

makes individuals feel shame and distress about their food insecurity. Many are working

as hard as they can to provide for their family, but simply cannot. The “working-poor” is

a term being used for a large part of society because of low wages paid to those working

part and full-time positions. Even those working 40+ hours per week cannot provide the

necessities for their family on minimum wage incomes.

We have looked at the effects of food insecurity on the individual, but what

impact does it have on the rest of the country? Recent reports suggest that rising rates of

hunger and food insecurity in the United States is costing the American economy billions

of dollars every year, because of a “widespread financial ripple effect” (Eichler, 2011).

The healthcare bills, missed days of work due to the effects of hunger, and the expense of

state food programs really adds up. Food insecurity contributes to various nutrition and

non-nutrition problems such as nutrient intake, physical and mental health problems,

poor chronic disease management, medication non-adherence, and increased healthcare

service use, which increases healthcare spending. If people cannot afford the basic

necessity of food, they cannot afford to pay their healthcare bills either. The healthcare

cost burden of food insecurity can be estimated by calculating the costs of managing

adverse health outcomes associated with food insecurity. When determining the cost we

must look at both direct and indirect costs. Direct costs are medical expenditures for

diagnosis, treatment, continuing care, rehabilitation, “as well as non-medical

expenditures caused by diseases directly related to food insecurity” (Jung, 2013). Major

categories of medical expenditures include hospitalizations, outpatient clinical care,

healthcare professionals, medications, and rehabilitation. Indirect costs could include

the loss of “resources and/or productivity incurred as a result of food insecurity-related

morbidity and mortality” (Jung, 2013). According to the Center for American Progress,

the annual cost of hunger and food insecurity is about 167.5 billion dollars in the United

States. $130.5 billion illness costs are linked to hunger and food insecurity, $19.2 billion

is liked to poor educational outcomes and lower lifetime earnings from food insecure

individuals, and $17.8 billion is linked to charitable contributions to address hunger and

food insecurity in America (“Economic Impact,” 2013). That is a huge, unnecessary,

annual bill that shows food insecurity not only affects those struggling with it on a daily

basis, but also the country, and economy, as a whole.

Now that we know what food insecurity is, who is food insecure, and the negative

health implications of food insecurity, it is important to look at the reasons for food

insecurity within the United States. We are a nation of wealth and overabundance, but

yet millions are hungry and living in food insecure households. To get a good

understanding of why this is we need to look at food distribution, political practices,

agricultural practices, environmental factors, economic factors, and lack of access to

food. Many of these issues are associated and connected to one another as well.

Food distribution is a huge problem in the United States. Current production of

food exceeds our population requirements, but millions are still food-insecure and

hungry. This clearly shows that the distribution of food and access to food is a problem.

Many people who are food-insecure are living in poverty and/or are unemployed or

underemployed. Recent studies have found that people with nonstandard work

arrangements are more likely to be food insecure than those who have full-time jobs

(Jensen, 2012). Nonstandard workers can be those who hold multiple jobs, work only

part-time, have varied/inconsistent work hours, or are unemployed. This leads to lower

incomes and is also correlated to those individuals living at or below the poverty line.

Lower incomes also affect the type of food a household can purchase, because of where

they live. Many grocery stores located in low-income areas do not have the fresh and

nutritious food available that stores in more affluent areas have. The distribution of food

to grocery stores is correlated with the price of food, making low-income families less

likely to even have healthy options available for them to purchase. Unemployment,

therefore, is associated with decreased access to food, which leads to food insecurity and

poor nutritional choices when food is available to them.

Access to food, although it relates to food distribution, has more to it. Assistance

to those suffering from food-insecurity is in need. A major problem with SNAP benefits

is that it does not reach everyone who is suffering. Three out of ten people eligible for

SNAP are not enrolled in the program. And in some states the income requirements are

set so low that hundreds of thousands of working poor households do not even qualify,

even though it is desperately needed (Spencer, 2009). This further limits their access to

food. Many of those who are participating in SNAP or another program such as WIC do

not receive enough to support their family members throughout the whole month, and

are scared of running out of food before the benefits for the next month kick in. This

leads to unhealthy diets and families purchasing and relying more heavily on cheaper

stable foods to try and make ends meet for the month. These people have access to food,

but it is not sufficient access, which leads to food insecurity.

Access to food brings up other concerns as well. Food deserts are a major

problem, and many people do not even know what this problem is or that it exists. Food

deserts are areas where inhabitants cannot access affordable and good-quality food.

Many low socioeconomic households live in areas, where they have plenty of food but

none of it is healthy. They can be in urban neighborhoods or rural towns, and instead of

supermarkets and grocery stores they are surrounded by fast food restaurants and

convenience stores, or no food options at all. This lack of access contributes to a poor

diet “and can lead to higher levels of obesity and other diet-related diseases, such as

diabetes and heart disease” (“Food Deserts,” n.d.). There are about 6500 food deserts in

the United States currently, and about 75% of them are urban and 25% are rural (see

Appendix E). About 2.3 million households live more than one mile from a supermarket,

and an additional 3.4 million live between one-half to one mile from a supermarket but

do not have access to a vehicle to go to those supermarkets and transport their

purchases (“Hunger and Food,” 2011). This leaves many people forced to shop at smaller

stores such as 7-Eleven, or to travel long distances, usually on public transportation, to

obtain food for themselves and their families.

Political, agricultural, and environmental factors are closely connected. Political

agendas supporting industrial agriculture are related to soil degradation and erosion,

which negatively affects not only the United States’ food security, but the global food

security as well (“Food Security & Food,” 2014). There is also an increase in commodity

crops instead of food crops (particularly corn, wheat, and soy), which yields more junk

food, fast food, and cheaper options that do not have high nutritional value. The United

States overproduces commodity crops in part because of government subsidization, and

a lack of promotion of healthful foods by the government. These subsidized cheap foods

are what many low-income families have access to. Small farmers who do produce

vegetables and healthful options cannot compete with less expensive, subsidized,

industrial farming. There is also an increased demand for biofuels right now, which is

primarily produced from corn and soy, which has further decreased the amount of

viable land used for food production. Development in general has led to the loss of

farmland and pastureland, which affects our availability of healthy food options at a

reasonable price. Politically, the United States does not have policies that support food

crops. This has led to environmental concerns and agricultural changes in how food is

produced. All this contributes to food insecurity, and if the food people are able to obtain

at reasonable prices is not healthy, it leads to more health concerns having to do with

micronutrient deficiencies, and chronic conditions associated with high fat, unhealthy

foods.

Other economic and political contributors are the rise in food prices over the last

several years. Increases in food costs “generally mean increases in the food insecure”

(“Food Security & Food,” 2014) for a few reasons. Those who are already food insecure

and then see an increase in food prices really struggle. If they are receiving state

assistance such as SNAP, their benefits do not go up just because food prices went up,

and neither do their already low incomes, making increased food prices a huge burden.

It can also push those who were barely making it over the brink, and cause a family to

become food insecure when they weren’t before, because their budgets just do not

stretch far enough to cover the excess cost. Food insecurity is obviously a very complex

issue with many contributing factors, and it cannot be narrowed down to one direct

cause, but no matter the reason it has devastating effects.

Since there is not a sole cause of food insecurity, there is also not just one

solution. It’s a complex issue that is going to have to be solved through a variety of

measures. The solution to end food insecurity would be to eliminate poverty and the

income gap in the United States; however, other aspects of food insecurity may be more

immediately solvable. One is sustainable agriculture. The use of genetically modified

organisms (GMOs) has become a central way for big companies to produce food, and

these large companies also own patents to food seeds, making it hard for small farmers

to stay in business. With high amounts of fertilizers, pesticides, fossil fuels, and intensive

irrigation required for industrial agriculture, it is very expensive, degrades the

environment in numerous ways, and in the long run will increase global food insecurity

when the environment cannot handle it anymore. Focusing more on small farms with

sustainable agricultural practices can actually increase yield and lower food costs. With

sustainable agriculture we can also focus on improving agricultural biodiversity.

Industrial agriculture relies on monocropping, “in which one genetic type of crop is

planted on large tracts of land, while sustainable farms frequently plant a genetically

diverse array of both crop type and species” (“Food Security & Food,” 2014).

Monocropping increases crop susceptibility to both pests and diseases, which has led to

several historical famines and crop decimations. Enhancing biodiversity through

sustainable agricultural practices can protect communities from food insecurity

associated with both crop loss and decreased yield.

If we had more sustainable agricultural practices we could focus on policy

changes as well. Right now government policy encourages industrial farming by

subsidizing those foods, making them cheaper, more available options. If we have more

sustainable farming and locally produced food, we could increase incentives for local

farmers and markets where fresh, healthful food is available, and increase community

food security. By expanding healthful food options, policy could be changed to increase

the acceptance of “food stamp (SNAP) benefits at local food outlets such as farmers’

markets, and improve access to healthful food and increase consumption of fruits and

vegetables” (“Food Security & Food,” 2014). Community gardening, home gardening,

and urban farming are other ways in which sustainably grown, local food can be used to

improve food security and increase the consumption of healthy food. SNAP benefits have

already been expanded to allow participants to buy seeds and edible plants, which just

further increases the potential “for urban agriculture and home gardening to help

alleviate food insecurity” (“Food Security & Food,” 2014).

There are many competing forces to this solution, and it is best to look at them all

through a PEST analysis. The major political forces associated with this solution are the

big industrial farming companies. Big corporations have a lot of political sway, because

they have the financial resources to make it easy for policies, such as food subsidizing, to

be passed. These policies support those corporations and industrial farming, and

continue to discourage sustainable agricultural practices. However, sustainable

agriculture makes sense economically. Buying locally stimulates local economies and

boosts the incomes of small local farmers, while also increasing consumers’ access to

fresh, affordable produce (“USDA ERS- FOOD,” 2013). Sustainable agriculture also yields

more product than industrial farming, which has the potential to decrease the cost of

foods. With decreased food costs more people can afford healthy options, which

ultimately would lower the percentage of food insecure households. Environmentally it

also makes sense. By using less pesticides, fossil fuels, and GMOs we are being more

responsible with our environmental resources and preserving our limited natural

resources. The social and cultural implications are obviously enormous for sustainable

agriculture. First and foremost by buying locally and supporting local farms it maintains

a communities livelihood, and would decrease the number of food deserts in the

country. Farmers markets are typically outside, which means that a local grocery store

or market is not needed for a farmers market to be present. Also, members of a

community are coming together to help each other stay in business while decreasing the

food insecurity rate. It improves the access to healthy options for families, which will

improve their overall health, which contributes to their ability to contribute to society.

Advancements in technology also make it possible for smaller farms to be just as

efficient as large industrial farms, but with better community values in mind. With this

analysis one can see that there are major political factors that will make switching from

industrial farming to sustainable agriculture a difficult process because of the power

large corporations have, but the benefits of sustainable farming far outweigh those of

industrial farming, and it should be pursued for the benefit of the entire country.

Another solution is to improve and expand national nutrition programs and

SNAP. Improvements would be to ensure that states work to enroll eligible people in

these programs. Some people do not know they are eligible or do not know how to

enroll. State policy needs to make sure that information is circulated appropriately so

that eligible people know how to enroll. Benefits also need to be more realistic and

measure what households actually need to buy an adequate amount of healthful foods

(Brewer, 2004). This could also be linked back to increased acceptance of using SNAP at

farmers markets to be able to obtain healthy food options. A major issue with the SNAP

program is that it needs to find a way to allow people to receive the benefits without

forcing them to forfeit the opportunity to save. When a family member gets a decent job

they should be able to keep their benefits for an extended amount of time to ensure they

have saved enough money and had the job for a long enough time period to be able to

provide for their family without SNAP, before SNAP is revoked from them.

After completing a force field analysis there seem to be many advantages to

improving SNAP benefits and the way the program runs. One of the biggest is that it

would increase the use of SNAP benefits on healthier food options for families. By

allowing recipients to shop at farmers markets people are able to buy food usually at a

lower price, and to buy food that is of high quality nutritionally. This would lower

instances of food insecurity by allowing people to purchase more with the benefits they

receive, and be able to meet dietary needs because they have access to healthier options.

People would also feel less insecure about finding a better job, because there would not

be an immediate threat of losing their benefits. In the long run this will benefit the

individual family, and also lower the cost of the SNAP program because people will find

more secure jobs, stop using SNAP, and actually stay off of SNAP. However, there are

also downsides to expanding the program. Obviously the program is already running on

a budget that is spread thin, and by expanding it the government must come up with

more money, money that it truly does not have at this point in time. If the program lets

people continue to receive benefits for an extended amount of time after achieving a

new job, they run the risk of people taking advantage of the system and driving up more

unnecessary costs. Because of this the government would have to implement stronger

regulation of SNAP benefits to make sure people are not taking advantage of the system,

which would also be an additional administration cost. While this solution would

obviously be helpful for many people, when looking at the pros and cons, it may not

actually be the most sustainable and helpful option available.

Aside from more sustainable options, we need to look at America’s economy. As

of October 2011 the country had 6.3 million fewer jobs since the start of the recession in

December 2007, and the use of SNAP benefits dramatically increased (Milam, 2013).

However, we are seeing the economy slowly start to recover, and with that we need to

see better jobs for people. By creating jobs that can actually sustain a family (by

providing a livable wage) we will see a decline in food insecure households, and a

decline in the use of SNAP leaving the funds that are available accessible to those who

truly need it. Again, a PEST analysis can look at all of the factors to this solution. Right

now, employers are hesitant to employ full-time workers with the implementation of the

Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, because they have to provide some type of

healthcare benefits to their full-time employees. This could mean that more employers

are looking to hire only part-time employees, making it difficult for people to find a job

that will provide a livable wage with full-time hours. However, this could be overcome if

the economic factors are looked at. If employees receive better pay and are able to move

out of that food-insecure level their health would improve, which would decrease their

medical costs and healthcare utilization, and would also save employers a lot of money

from costs associated with lost productivity from being sick and unhealthy from food

insecurity. Socially and culturally livable wages will improve the family units. Children

suffering from food insecurity have a variety of developmental and behavioral problems,

which is a burden for the entire family. By being more financially sound, and not being

food insecure, more than just financial benefits will come for families. According to the

Livestrong Foundation, the benefits of a stronger family unit are huge for the emotional

and social help of its members (Ipatenco, 2014). However, many people that are food

insecure and not financially stable also do not have an education or advanced skills

desirable in the workforce. Technology has become so advanced that many of the jobs

people in food insecure households are qualified for, are already automated due to

technology, making it hard for them to qualify for the limited quantity of jobs available.

There are also solutions that specifically target ending child hunger, which would

help alleviate the burden of food insecurity on the adults in a family. Increasing support

for the existing 205 Food Banks in the country, through youth-based programs such as

the Boys and Girls Club and Camp Fire, by accessing federal funds and establishing

“Backpack Buddies” programs inside the youth-based community programs (by 2015).

Backpack Buddies programs provide children with food on weekends and during

summer vacations from school to ensure they are being fed outside of school (“The Four

Point,” 2013). Farm-to-Table policies would also ensure that children are not only being

fed at school, but they are being fed nutritious food so they are meeting their

micronutrient needs. Farm-to-Table policies at school would also promote sustainable

agriculture that was previously talked about. While the benefits of these youth based

solutions are obvious, they are also hard to obtain. Many of the organizations that run

these programs are non-profit organizations and do not have the budgets to be able to

expand and reach the amount of children coming from food insecure homes. While

looking to acquire more federal funds seems like a great plan, it is not a truly viable

option. The federal budget is already stretched as far as it can go, and with the passage

of the FARM Bill SNAP benefits are already being cut, meaning they do not have to funds

to help expand these non-profits, especially if they already do not have the funds to help

the food insecure people directly.

Looking at all of the pros and cons of each proposed solution, one stands out as

the best option, and that is focusing on sustainable agriculture practices and increasing

the acceptance of SNAP benefits being used at local farmers markets. Sustainable

agriculture is best for the environment and the people of this country. It stimulates local

economies and increases the amount of affordable healthy foods available to low-income

food insecure households, while decreasing the number of food deserts. Without having

to worry about buying processed staple food items they can focus on improving their

health, while at the same time supporting their local communities and environments, it

is truly a win-win for everyone.

Food should be a basic human right for all. Food should also be grown, produced,

and distributed fairly. Focusing solely on food security without addressing how the food

is produced will not solve the problem. Continuing to produce food that is cheap,

subsidized, and unhealthy may provide enough food for people, but it will not keep them

healthy. As a society we need to look at options that will address food insecurity, but

that also address keeping people healthy. Sustainable agriculture will ultimately yield

more food, and provide food that is actually healthy for people to consume. Food

insecurity is devastating for families and is associated with many other adverse effects

that directly influence a person’s life. Children should be able to able to consume foods

that will promote their physical development and learning in school, and not have to

worry about being malnourished. Parents should not have to skip meals and endanger

their health to provide for their family. No one should have to wonder where their next

meal is coming from, and no one in this day and age should have to die of hunger and

starvation. Our society needs to take action now to end food insecurity. There is plenty

of food and resources for everyone, and how we use and distribute them needs to be

addressed immediately. Overall, it costs our nation more to ignore hunger and food

insecurity than it does to address and eliminate the problem.

References

Brewer, J. (2004, June 3). A blueprint to end hunger. End Hunger. Retrieved April 28,

2014, from http://www.endhunger.com/Blueprint.pdf

Child Nutrition and Obesity. (2012, January 1). Children's Defense Fund. Retrieved April

28, 2014, from http://www.childrensdefense.org/policy-priorities/childrens-health/child-nutrition/

Economic Impact. (2013, January 1). No Kid Hungry. Retrieved April 28, 2014, from

http://www.nokidhungry.org/problem/economic-impact

Eichler, A. (2011, October 6). Hunger, Food Insecurity Cost The Country $167 Billion

Every Year: Study. The Huffington Post. Retrieved April 28, 2014, from http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2011/10/06/hunger-food-insecurity-cost_n_998193.html

Food Deserts. (n.d.). Agricultural Marketing Service - Creating Access to Healthy,

Affordable Food. Retrieved April 29, 2014, from http://apps.ams.usda.gov/fooddeserts/foodDeserts.aspx

Food Security & Food Access. (2014, January 1). GRACE Communications Foundation.

Retrieved April 28, 2014, from http://www.sustainabletable.org/280/food-security-food-access

The Four Point Solution to Child Hunger in America. (2013, January 22).By 2015:

AMERICA. Retrieved April 28, 2014, from http://by2015america.wordpress.com/2013/01/22/the-four-point-solution-to-child-hunger-in-america/

Household food security & community nutrition: Micronutrients. (2010, January

1).Household food security & community nutrition: Micronutrients. Retrieved April 28, 2014, from http://www.fao.org/ag/agn/nutrition/household_micronutrients_en.stm

Hunger and food insecurity. (2011, November 7). National Coalition for the Homeless.

Retrieved April 28, 2014, from http://www.nationalhomeless.org/factsheets/hunger.html

Hunger in America: 2013 United States Hunger and Poverty Facts. (2011, November

22).Hunger Notes. Retrieved April 28, 2014, from http://www.worldhunger.org/articles/Learn/us_hunger_facts.htm

Ipatenco, S. (2014, February 6). The Benefits of Healthy Families. LIVESTRONG.

Retrieved April 28, 2014, from http://www.livestrong.com/article/147185-the-benefits-of-healthy-families/

Jensen, A. (2012, June 5). Food Insecurity More Common for Households With

Nonstandard Work Arrangements. Food & Nutrition Assistance. Retrieved April 28, 2014, from http://www.ers.usda.gov/amber-waves/2012-june/food-insecurity.aspx#.U13dIpibIqZ

Lee, J. (2013). Food insecurity and healthcare costs: Research strategies using local,

state, and national data sources for older adults. Advances in Nutrition: An International Review Journal, 4, 42-50.

Milam, S. (2013, February 15). SNAP (Food Stamps): Facts, Myths and Realities. Feeding

America. Retrieved April 28, 2014, from http://feedingamerica.org/how-we-fight-hunger/programs-and-services/public-assistance-programs/supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program/snap-myths-realities.aspx

Spencer, N. (2009, May 11). US: 12 million children face hunger and food insecurity.

WSWS. Retrieved April 29, 2014, from https://www.wsws.org/en/articles/2009/05/food-m11.html

USDA ERS - Food Security in the U.S.: Community Food Security. (2013, August 19).

USDA ERS - Food Security in the U.S.: Community Food Security. Retrieved April 29, 2014, from http://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-us/community-food-security.aspx#.U18JrpibIqY

Appendix A

Appendix B

Appendix C

Appendix D

Appendix E