Interest, research, and expenditures on dietary supplements are growing very fast. Americans spent $8.2 billion in 1995 for vitamins, minerals, herbs and botanicals, and sports nutrition products. About half of all Americans reported at least some use of vitamins and minerals in response to recent surveys. The general goal of the study is to examine existing data that bear on a diverse set of pertinent issues.

In the past, the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) has relied on a series of large surveys to gather and compare information on food expenditures and food consumption among participants and non-participants to better understand the impacts of the Food Stamp Program (FSP) on the diet and nutritional status of program participants. Studies based on survey data, however, have a number of drawbacks, including the time and expense of collecting the survey data, sampling error, response bias, errors in respondent recall, and misinformation about what may have been purchased or consumed.

In this report, data from the NFSPS are used to address several important questions concerning food store access of low-income households, including: (1) At what kinds of stores do low-income households shop? (2) What distances do low-income households travel to reach those stores? (3) What transportation methods do they use to reach their food stores? (4) Do low-income households engage in careful shopping behaviors that can allow them to get the most out of the money and food stamp benefits they spend on food? and (5) In general, how satisfied are low-income Americans with their shopping opportunities?

To explore the suitability of off-line electronic benefits transfer (EBT) as an alternative to paper issuance and on-line EBT issuance systems, USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service has supported the Ohio Department of Human Services in expanding off-line EBT issuance to all Food Stamp Program recipients in the state. A pilot project in Dayton, Ohio and a demonstration of a combined WIC-EBT off-line system in Wyoming have clearly established the technical feasibility of off-line EBT for FSP benefit issuance. 

A fundamental issue in the design of the Food Stamp Program (FSP) is the form benefits should take. Advocates of the current coupon system argue that coupons are a direct and inexpensive way to ensure that food stamp benefits are used to purchase food. Coupon advocates contend that, despite some evidence of fraud and benefit diversion under the current system, food stamps are used largely to purchase food. In addition, they contend that coupons give household food budgets some measure of protection against other demands on limited household resources. Advocates of cashing out the FSP argue that the current system limits the food-purchasing choices of recipients and places a stigma on participation. Moreover, they cite the cumbersome nature and cost of coupon issuance, transaction, and redemption.

A fundamental issue in the design of the Food Stamp Program is the form the benefits take. From the inception of pilot programs in the early 1960s to the contemporary program, the vehicle of choice has been the food stamp coupon, a voucher that can be redeemed for food at authorized retailers. For nearly that same period analyses have considered the relative merits of cash--or, in practice, checks--as an alternative. Advocates of the current coupon system argue that coupons are a direct and inexpensive way to ensure that food stamp benefits are used to purchase food, that the unauthorized use of food stamps is relatively limited despite some evidence of fraud and benefit diversion, and that coupons provide some measure of protection to food budgets from other demands on limited household resources. Advocates of cash benefits argue that the current system limits the purchasing choices of participants; places a stigma on participation; does not prevent the diversion of benefits (as evidenced by the existence of illegal trafficking); and entails excessive costs for coupon production, issuance, transaction, and redemption.