Data from the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES 1999-2004) provide a comprehensive picture of the nutrient intakes, diet quality, and food choices of Food Stamp Program participants. Data are presented for FSP participants, income-eligible nonparticipants, and higher income non-participants, broken out by age and gender.
The Low-Cost, Moderate-Cost, and Liberal Food Plans outline nutrient-dense foods and beverages, their amounts, and associated costs that can be purchased on three successively higher budgets, each supporting a healthy diet through nutritious meals and snacks at home. The Low-Cost, Moderate-Cost, and Liberal Food Plans are used by various federal and state agencies and the court system.
The report draws on data for households participating in the Food Stamp Program under normal rules and thus does not include information about those who received disaster assistance after the Gulf Coast hurricanes in September and October 2005.
The Thrifty Food Plan, a fundamental part of the U.S. food guidance system and the basis for maximum food stamp allotments, has been revised by USDA’s Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion, with assistance from USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service, Economic Research Service, and Agricultural Research Service. The TFP provides a representative healthful and minimal cost meal plan that shows how a nutritious diet may be achieved with limited resources. The plan assumes that all purchased food is consumed at home.
Because of concerns about poor diet, overweight, and obesity among low-income Americans, there is considerable interest in using federal nutrition assistance programs to promote healthy choices. Some argue that food stamp recipients should be prohibited from using their benefits to buy foods with limited nutritional value (commonly described as “junk” foods). The Food Stamp Act currently places few limits on the use of food stamp benefits, as long as they are used to buy food to eat at home. The idea of restricting the use of food stamp benefits may be appealing on its face. However, upon closer examination, serious concerns emerge regarding the feasibility and rationale for the proposed restriction.
This report provides a summary of the process undertaken and recommendations made by the CACFP Paperwork Reduction Work Group.