For information on all Food Distribution programs (and on food distributed in child nutrition programs), see the USDA Foods home page. Here you can access regulations, information on available commodities, and links to other agencies concerned with USDA Foods distribution.

National Level Summary Tables

Fiscal Years 1969-2024

• Cost of Food Distribution Programs
  Nutrition Services Incentive Program (NSIP, formerly Nutrition Program for the Elderly), Food Distribution on Indian Reservations (FDPIR), Commodity Supplemental Food (CSFP), Emergency Food Assistance (TEFAP)
  • PDF
  • Excel
• Participation (FDPIR and CSFP) or Meals Served (NSIP)
  • PDF
  • Excel

State Level Tables

Fiscal Years 2020-2024

• FDPIR (participation) - PDF | Excel
• CSFP (participation) - PDF | Excel
• TEFAP (food costs) - PDF | Excel

The USDA’s Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) Participant Access Study is a two-part study series designed to provide insight into the current geographic coverage and density of WIC retailers¹ across the United States and to assist states in ensuring they are providing adequate participant access to WIC foods in their communities.

• Key Findings
• Why
• How

Key Findings

Retailer participation in WIC declined between 2015 and 2020, but has remained steady through 2022.

• In FY 2022, there were 40,377 WIC retailers (i.e., grocery stores, referred to as “vendors” in WIC). Among these WIC retailers, over two-thirds were super stores or supermarkets. Other retailer types, such as grocery stores or convenience stores, were less common.
• Although the total number of WIC retailers decreased by 15% (from about 47,000 to 40,000) between FY 2015 and FY 2022, most reductions occurred prior to FY 2020. Around 80% of this decline was attributed to smaller retailers. It is important to note that this decline occurred in the period leading up to the 2020 WIC Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) mandate.

 

More than half of WIC-eligible families have convenient access to a WIC retailer but some still lack access.

• This study explored whether WIC-eligible families have convenient access to a WIC retailer based on USDA definitions of access.¹ In FY 2022, 55% of census tracts² had convenient access to a WIC retailer. On average, census tracts had convenient access to 2.3 WIC retailers.
• Among the 50 states and DC, we estimate that 2.1 million WIC-eligible families did not have convenient access to a WIC retailer in FY 2022. This represents nearly half (45%) of the WIC-eligible population.
• Just over one-third (34%) of WIC-eligible families living in census tracts with high social vulnerability³ lacked convenient access to a WIC retailer.

 

Some optional state policies are associated with lower convenient access to WIC retailers.

• In FY 2022, thirty-four state agencies (38%) imposed limiting criteria,⁴ which determine the maximum number and distribution of retailers authorized. State agencies use these criteria to limit the number of stores they authorize so they can effectively manage, oversee, and review their authorized retailer population. Some examples of limiting criteria include vendor/participant ratio and vendor/geographic area (e.g., number per mile or ZIP code).
• The average number of WIC retailers within convenient access to WIC-eligible census tracts was consistently lower in areas with limiting criteria. Among the 50 states and D.C. using limiting criteria, there were 1.4 WIC retailers within convenient access, on average, compared with 2.1 retailers in states without limiting criteria (Figure 3a).
• Nearly all state agencies (98%) used optional vendor selection criteria⁴ (e.g., requirements regarding specific hours of operation, proof of authorization as a SNAP retailer, and requirements to stock a full range of foods in addition to WIC foods), in addition to required vendor selection criteria, when determining which retailers to authorize in FY 2022.
• State agencies that used optional selection criteria had slightly higher average numbers of retailers within convenient access to WIC-eligible census tracts than states without these criteria. States adding requirements for retailers to stock a full range of foods (i.e., full-service grocery stores) were the only exception among the 50 states and D.C.; states that used this additional criterion had fewer retailers within convenient access to a census tract, on average, than states that did not (1.6 compared to 2.4 retailers) (Figure 3b).

Why FNS Did This Study

WIC state agencies are responsible for authorizing and overseeing retailers that accept WIC food benefits. They must establish selection criteria that dictate the qualifications for retailers that may be authorized, in accordance with federally mandated criteria. Federal regulations (7 CFR 246.12) require state agencies to authorize a sufficient number and distribution of retailers to ensure adequate participant access to supplemental foods. In 2022, we observed a decline in the number of WIC authorized retailers since 2015 and, in response, issued a policy memorandum to encourage state agencies to assess their WIC retailer populations and “ensure that the appropriate number and distribution of vendors are authorized to support participants’ access to supplemental foods”. This study was conducted to understand the current geographic coverage and density of WIC retailers across the United States and how state agency policies and the composition of retailers may affect participant access to supplemental foods.

How FNS Did This Study

• To map and analyze the geographic distribution of WIC and SNAP retailers across the U.S., the study team obtained administrative data that described retailer locations, store types, and WIC state agency retailer selection policies from the following FNS data sources: The Integrity Profile (TIP), Food Delivery Portal (FDP), Store Tracking and Redemption System (STARS), and WIC State Plan data. To supplement the FNS administrative data sources and capture variation in urbanicity, food access, and social vulnerability, data were obtained from the Centers for Disease Control (CDC), Economic Research Service (ERS), and the American Community Survey (ACS).
• This study explored two primary measures of food access: 1) Convenient access, a proximity-based measure defined as the availability of at least one WIC retailer within a one-mile driving distance in urban areas and a 10-mile driving distance, and 2) Average number of WIC vendors within convenient access of a census tract to differentiate between different levels of access to WIC.
• The study examined these measures overall and by a variety of census tract-level characteristics, including by urbanicity; low-income; and social vulnerability status.

Suggested Citation

Sarah Bardin, Tracy Vericker, Addison Larson, Dory Thrasher, and Nathan Chesterman (2025). WIC Participant Access Study: Part 1; Final Report. Prepared by Mathematica, Contract No. 12319819A0006. Alexandria, VA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, Office of Evidence, Analysis, and Regulatory Affairs, Project Officer: Kathryn Knoff. Available online at: https://www.fns.usda.gov/research/wic/participant-access-vendors-part1.

¹ Convenient access is a USDA Economic Research Service proximity-based measure defined as the availability of at least one WIC retailer within a one-mile driving distance in urban areas and a 10-mile driving distance in rural areas.
² A census tract is defined by the United States Census Bureau as “a small, relatively permanent statistical subdivision of a county delineated by a local committee of census data users for the purpose of presenting data. Census tracts nest within counties, and their boundaries normally follow visible features, but may follow legal geography boundaries and other non-visible features in some instances, Census tracts ideally contain about 4,000 people and 1,600 housing units.”
³ Social vulnerability refers to the demographic and socioeconomic factors (such as poverty, lack of access to transportation, and crowded housing) that adversely affect communities that encounter hazards and other community-level stressors.
⁴ Per federal regulation, the state agency may establish criteria to limit the number of stores it authorizes. The state agency must apply its limiting criteria consistently throughout its jurisdiction. Any vendor limiting criteria used by the state agency must be included in the State Plan in accordance with § 246.4(a)(14)(ii).
⁵ Per federal regulation, vendor selection criteria are established by the state agency to select individual vendors for authorization consistent with the requirements in § 246.12(g)(3) and (g)(4). Optional selection criteria are those criteria that states choose to implement in addition to what is required in accordance with § 246.12(g)(3) and (g)(4).

Under the leadership of Secretary Brooke Rollins, the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) is committed to strengthening strategies to encourage healthy choices, healthy outcomes, and healthy families, along with clarifying program requirements for our state agency partners. In support of these goals, this memorandum provides guidance to TEFAP state agencies on requirements for public posting of TEFAP information at 7 CFR 251.4(l). Each state agency must post a list of eligible recipient agencies (ERAs) that have an agreement with the state agency on a publicly available webpage. In addition, state agencies must post the state’s uniform statewide eligibility criteria on a publicly available webpage. The public posting of ERAs and uniform statewide eligibility criteria must be implemented by Oct. 31, 2025. State agencies are encouraged to implement these provisions before that deadline.

ERAs that have an Agreement with the State Agency

TEFAP regulations at 7 CFR 251.4(l) require each state agency to post a list of ERAs that have an agreement with the state agency on a publicly available webpage. At a minimum, this list must include the name, address, and contact telephone number of all ERAs that have an agreement with the state agency. State agencies must update this list annually but are encouraged to update it more frequently as needed.

FNS recognizes that state agencies may identify a compelling public safety reason to forgo posting an ERA address publicly; for example, for a domestic abuse shelter. In such circumstances and without divulging sensitive or confidential information, the state agency should submit general information to their FNS regional office regarding why the location should be exempted from the publicly available list posted online. FNS will work with state agencies on a case-by-case basis for ERAs in this situation.

State Agency Option to Post Additional ERA Information

State agencies may choose to exceed the above minimum posting requirements to support public awareness. While state agencies are not required to post information about ERAs that have agreements with other ERAs, states have the option to publish this information online. State agencies may also choose to include additional information about ERAs on the webpage, such as operating hours, the areas served by the ERA, links to ERA websites, and distribution site addresses. In addition, state agencies may develop tools to aid eligible individuals in accessing the program, for example by establishing a searchable tool to identify aid based on zip code.

Posting TEFAP Statewide Eligibility Information

TEFAP regulations at 7 CFR 251.5(b) require each state agency to establish uniform statewide criteria for determining the eligibility of households to receive USDA Foods for home consumption, including requirements for demonstrating income and residency. Per 7 CFR 251.4(l), state agencies must post this uniform statewide eligibility criteria to a publicly available webpage. This information must be updated on an annual basis or whenever changes to eligibility criteria are made. Additional guidance on establishing criteria and methods for determining the eligibility of households to receive TEFAP can be found in Participant Eligibility in TEFAP (revised).

State agencies should contact their respective FNS regional office with any questions about this memorandum.

Sara Olson
Director
Policy Division
Supplemental Nutrition and Safety Programs

In alignment with Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins’ priorities to encourage healthy choices, healthy outcomes, and healthy families and connect America’s farmers to nutrition assistance programs, the USDA Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) is revising the CSFP Maximum Monthly Distribution Rates to reflect the foods currently available in the program.

These revised guide rates, outlined in Attachment A, will be effective on Sept. 1, 2025 and remain in effect until further notice. There are no changes to the maximum amounts of foods that may be distributed in each food package category. CSFP state agencies should use the guide rates in conjunction with the latest CSFP Foods Available List.

Thank you for your commitment to providing one of our nation’s most vulnerable populations with nutritious, minimally processed American grown and produced foods to support their health and well-being.

Attachment A - CSFP Maximum Monthly Distribution Rates

These rates are effective Sept. 1, 2025 until further notice.

Summary

This notice sets forth the interpretation that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) uses for the term “Federal public benefit” as used in Title IV of the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA), PL 104–193, 8 USC 1611. In doing so, this notice supersedes any prior interpretation in any notice or other document issued by any USDA agency. This notice also describes and preliminarily identifies the USDA programs that provide “federal public benefits” within the scope of PRWORA.

Supplementary Information

Summary

This notice announces the surplus and purchased foods that the Department expects to make available for donation to states for use in providing nutrition assistance to the needy under The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) in fiscal year (FY) 2025. The foods made available under this notice must, at the discretion of the state, be distributed to eligible recipient agencies (ERAs) for use in preparing meals and/or for distribution to households for home consumption.

Supplementary Information

In accordance with the provisions set forth in the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 (EFAA), 7 USC 7501, et seq., and the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, 7 U.S.C. 2036, the Department makes foods available to states for use in providing nutrition assistance to those in need through TEFAP. In accordance with section 214 of the EFAA, 7 USC 7515, funding for TEFAP foods is allocated among states according to a formula that accounts for poverty and unemployment levels within each state. Section 214(a)(1) of the Act requires that 60 percent of each state's allocation be based on the number of people with incomes below the poverty level within the state; and Section 214(a)(2) requires that the remaining 40 percent be equal to the percentage of the nation's unemployed persons within the state. State officials are responsible for establishing the network through which the foods will be used by ERAs in providing nutrition assistance to those in need and for allocating foods among those ERAs. States have full discretion in determining the amount of foods that will be made available to ERAs for use in preparing meals and/or for distribution to households for home consumption.

Surplus Foods

Surplus foods donated for distribution under TEFAP are Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) foods purchased under the authority of section 416 of the Agricultural Act of 1949, 7 USC 1431 (section 416) and foods purchased under the surplus removal authority of section 32 of the Act of Aug. 24, 1935, 7 USC 612c (section 32). The types of foods typically purchased under section 416 include dairy, grains, oils, and peanut products. The types of foods purchased under section 32 include meat, poultry, fish, vegetables, dry beans, juices, and fruits.

Approximately $262 million in surplus foods acquired in FY 2024 are being delivered to states in FY 2025. Surplus foods currently scheduled for delivery in FY 2025 include almonds, apples, applesauce, asparagus, cheese, dates, figs, fish, grape juice, grapefruit, hazelnuts, milk, peaches, pears, pecans, pistachios, plums, potatoes, strawberries, and walnuts. Other surplus foods may be made available to TEFAP throughout the year. The Department would like to point out that food acquisitions are based on changing agricultural market conditions; therefore, the availability of foods is subject to change.

Purchased Foods

In accordance with section 27 of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, 7 USC 2036, the Secretary is directed to purchase an estimated $462.25 million worth of foods in FY 2025 for distribution through TEFAP.

For FY 2025, the Department anticipates purchasing the foods listed in the following table for distribution through TEFAP. The amounts of each item purchased will depend on the prices the Department must pay, as well as the quantity of each item requested by the states. Changes in agricultural market conditions may result in the availability of additional types of foods or the non-availability of one or more foods listed in the table.

FY 2025 USDA Foods Available List for the Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP)

Key

 Fruits

• Apples, Braeburn, Fresh
• Apples, Empire, Fresh
• Apples, Fuji, Fresh
• Apples, Gala, Fresh
• Apples, Granny Smith, Fresh
• Apples, Red Delicious, Fresh
• Apples, Fresh
• Apple Juice, 100%, Unsweetened
• Apple Slices, Unsweetened, Frozen (IQF)

• Applesauce, Unsweetened, Canned (K)
• Applesauce, Unsweetened, Cups, Shelf-Stable
• Apricots, Halves, Extra Light Syrup, Canned
• Blueberries, Highbush, Unsweetened, Frozen
• Cherry Apple Juice, 100%, Unsweetened
• Cranberry Apple Juice, 100%, Unsweetened
• Cranberries, Dried, Individual Portion
• Grape Juice, Concord, 100%, Unsweetened

• Grapefruit Juice, 100%, Unsweetened
• Fruit and Nut Mix, Dried
• Mixed Fruit, Extra Light Syrup, Canned
• Oranges, Fresh
• Orange Juice, 100%, Unsweetened
• Peaches, Freestone, Slices, Frozen
• Peaches, Sliced, Extra Light Syrup, Canned
• Pears, Bartlett, Fresh

• Pears, Bosc, Fresh
• Pears, D'Anjou, Fresh
• Pears, Fresh
• Pears, Extra Light Syrup, Canned (K)
• Plums, Pitted, Dried
• Raisins, Unsweetened, Individual Portion
• Raisins, Unsweetened
• Strawberries, Whole, Unsweetened, Frozen (IQF)

Dairy

• Cheese, American, Reduced Fat, Loaves, Refrigerated
• Cheese, Cheddar, Yellow, Shredded, Refrigerated
• Cheese, Cheddar, Yellow, Chunks, Refrigerated

• Milk, 1%, Shelf-Stable UHT
• Milk, 1%, Individual Portion, Shelf-Stable UHT
• Milk 1% Fresh

• Milk, Skim, Fresh Yogurt, High-Protein, Vanilla, Chilled (K)Milk, Skim, Fresh
• Yogurt, High-Protein, Vanilla, Chilled (K)

• Yogurt, High-Protein, Blueberry, Chilled (K)
• Yogurt, High-Protein, Strawberry, Chilled (K)

Vegetables

• Beans, Green, Low-sodium, Canned (K)
• Beans, Green, No Salt Added, Frozen
• Carrots, Diced, No Salt Added, Frozen
• Carrots, Sliced, Low-sodium, Canned
• Corn, Whole Kernel, No Salt Added, Canned (K)
• Corn, Cream Style, Low-sodium, Canned
• Corn, Whole Kernel, No Salt Added, Frozen

• Mixed Produce Box, Fresh
• Mixed Vegetables, 7-Way Blend, Low-sodium, Canned
• Peas, Green, Low-sodium, Canned
• Peas, Green, No Salt Added, Frozen
• Potatoes, Dehydrated Flakes
• Potatoes, Round, Fresh

• Potatoes, Russet, Fresh
• Potatoes, Sliced, Low-sodium, Canned
• Pumpkin, No Salt Added, Canned
• Spaghetti Sauce, Low-sodium, Canned
• Spinach, Low-sodium, Canned
• Sweet Potatoes, Fresh

• Tomato Juice, 100%, Low-sodium
• Tomato Sauce, Low-sodium, Canned
• Tomato Sauce, Low-sodium, Canned (K) (H)
• Tomato Soup, Condensed, Low-sodium, Canned
• Tomatoes, Diced, No Salt Added, Canned
• Vegetable Soup, Condensed, Low-Sodium, Canned

Legumes

• Beans, Black, Low-sodium, Canned
• Beans, Black-eyed Pea, Low-sodium, Canned
• Beans, Black-eyed Pea, Dry
• Beans, Garbanzo, Canned (K)

• Beans, Great Northern, Dry
• Beans, Kidney, Light Red, Low-sodium, Canned
• Beans, Kidney, Light Red, Dry
• Beans, Lima, Baby, Dry

• Beans, Pinto, Low-sodium, Canned
• Beans, Pinto, Dry
• Beans, Refried, Low-sodium, Canned

• Beans, Vegetarian, Low-sodium, Canned
• Lentils, Dry
• Peas, Green Split, Dry

Protein Foods

• Alaska Pollock, Fillets, Frozen
• Alaska Pollock, Whole Grain Breaded Fish Sticks, Frozen
• Almonds, Natural, Whole, Shelled
• Atlantic Haddock, Fillet, Frozen
• Atlantic Ocean Perch, Fillet, Frozen
• Atlantic, Pollock, Fillet, Frozen
• Beef, Canned/Pouch
• Beef, Fine Ground, 85% Lean/15% Fat, Frozen

• Beef, Fine Ground, 85% Lean/15% Fat, Frozen, LFTB OPT, Frozen
• Beef Stew, Canned/Pouch
• Catfish, Fillets, Farm-Raised, Frozen
• Catfish, Filets, Wild-Caught, Frozen
• Chicken, Boneless Breast, Frozen
• Chicken, Canned
• Chicken, Drumsticks, Frozen
• Chicken, Pouch

• Chicken, Split Breast, Frozen
• Chicken, Whole, Frozen
• Eggs, Fresh
• Egg Mix, Dried
• Peanut Butter, Smooth
• Peanut Butter, Smooth (K)
• Peanut Butter, Smooth, Individual Portion

• Peanuts, Roasted, Unsalted
• Pork, Canned/Pouch
• Pork, Ham, Frozen
• Salmon, Pink, Canned
• Salmon, Pink, Canned (K)
• Turkey, Deli Breast, Sliced, Frozen
• Walnut, Pieces

Grains

• Bakery Mix, Low-fat (K)
• Cereal, Ready-to-Eat
• Cereal, Wheat Farina, Enriched
• Crackers, Unsalted
• Cornmeal, Yellow
• Flour, All Purpose, Enriched, Bleached

• Flour, White Whole Wheat (WG)
• Grits, Corn, White
• Grits, Corn, Yellow
• Oats, Rolled, Quick Cooking (WG)
• Pasta, Egg Noodles

• Pasta, Macaroni, Enriched
• Pasta, Macaroni (WG)
• Pasta, Macaroni and Cheese
• Pasta, Rotini (WG)
• Pasta, Spaghetti, Enriched

• Pasta, Spaghetti (WG)
• Rice, Brown, Long-Grain, Parboiled (WG)
• Rice, Medium Grain
• Rice, Long Grain
• Tortillas, Frozen (WG)

Oils

Oil, Vegetable

Other

• Soup, Cream of Chicken, Condensed, Reduced Sodium
• Soup, Cream of Mushroom, Condensed, Reduced Sodium

This webinar introduces and describes the purposes of the two USDA databases available for K-12 product manufacturers to publish their product data: Child Nutrition Database and the USDA Foods Database. We discuss how to publish product information to each database and walk through basic scenarios using the Industry Guide to Publishing K-12 Product Data decision tree. Guides for publishing to each database and contact information for additional support are also provided.

On March 15, 2025, President Trump signed the Full-Year Continuing Appropriations and Extensions Act, 2025 (PL 119-4), which provides $425 million for the Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP) for fiscal year (FY) 2025. Based on this funding level and available resources, the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) is issuing a final national caseload allocation of 707,000 slots for the 2025 caseload cycle (Jan. 1, 2025 to Dec. 31, 2025). This final national caseload level ensures that resources are sufficient to provide full food packages to participants throughout the caseload cycle. FNS is allocating final caseload and administrative grants for 2025 to CSFP state agencies, including Indian Tribal Organizations (ITOs) and U.S. territories, as provided below.

Final Caseload Assignments

In accordance with CSFP regulations at 7 CFR Part 247, base caseload for the 2025 caseload cycle for all currently participating state agencies is equal to the higher of (1) average monthly participation for FY 2024 or (2) average monthly participation for the last quarter of FY 2024. CSFP regulations further provide that for each CSFP state agency, calculated base caseload for 2025 cannot be greater than total assigned caseload for 2024.

As stated above, total estimated resources available to the program in FY 2025 are sufficient to support a national caseload level of 707,000 slots, which is 12,013 less than the national calculated base caseload amount of 719,013. Accordingly, FNS has reduced each CSFP state agency’s base caseload figure on a pro rata basis to correspond to the reduction required nationally. All participating CSFP state agencies are subject to this caseload reduction.

Participation Reductions

Reductions in calculated base caseload will result in some state agencies having participation that exceeds their 2025 caseload assignment. In accordance with program regulations and to ensure sufficient program resources are available to serve CSFP participants throughout the year, state agencies should take action to ensure participation does not exceed final assigned caseload on an average monthly basis across CY 2025.

All state agencies are expected to review current participation levels, and if participation is above assigned caseload, reduce participation to their new caseload assignment. State agencies should first work with local agencies to forgo certification of new applicants if the number of applicants exceeds the local agency’s caseload level. In these circumstances, regulations at 7 CFR 247.11 require local agencies to maintain waiting lists of individuals who apply for the program with information to contact the applicant if caseload space becomes available. Program regulations further require that CSFP local agencies notify applicants of their eligibility, ineligibility, or placement on a waiting list within 10 days from the date of application. Applicants who cannot be certified should receive referrals to other assistance programs.

If necessary, state agencies may further direct local agencies to forgo recertification of current participants to align with the CY 2025 caseload allocation. In accordance with CSFP regulations, written notice at least 15 days before the effective date of discontinuance must be provided before removing individuals from the program. Individuals removed from CSFP should receive referrals to other assistance programs. FNS recommends that state agencies contact their FNS regional office prior to removing any current participants from CSFP.

Caseload Use and Food Orders in 2025

It is crucial that state agencies manage caseload and USDA Foods in the most efficient manner possible. State agencies are required to accurately track and maintain appropriate inventory levels at the state level. Regulations at 7 CFR Part 250 prohibit CSFP state level inventories from exceeding three (3) months on-hand without approval from FNS.

FNS regional offices (ROs) closely monitor states agencies’ year-to-date participation levels and food orders. FNS ROs will reduce food orders to ensure that state agencies do not exceed their assigned caseloads or over-order USDA Foods.

Administrative Grant per Assigned Caseload Slot

The Agriculture and Consumer Protection Act of 1973 (PL 93-86), as amended, mandates an administrative grant per assigned caseload slot to be adjusted each FY to reflect inflation. The mandatory grant per assigned caseload slot for FY 2025 is $103.48.

CSFP state agencies should address questions to their respective FNS regional office.

Melissa Abelev, PhD
Associate Administrator
Supplemental Nutrition and Safety Programs

Attachment

Attachment A - 2025 CSFP Caseload and Administrative Funding

This page is updated annually to provide income guidelines for state agencies to use in determining the eligibility of households to receive USDA Foods for home consumption in TEFAP.

Per 7 CFR 251.5(b), each TEFAP state agency must establish uniform statewide criteria for determining eligibility for USDA Foods for home consumption. This eligibility criteria must include maximum income-based standards at or between 185 percent to 300 percent of the U.S. Federal Poverty Guidelines (Poverty Guidelines) published annually by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). 

To find your state's TEFAP income eligibility guidelines, please contact your state agency.

2025 Income Guidelines

48 Contiguous States, District of Columbia and Puerto Rico

Alaska

Hawaii

This memorandum transmits the 2025 Income Guidelines (IGs) for state agencies and ITOs in determining the eligibility of individuals applying to participate in CSFP. These guidelines should be used in conjunction with CSFP regulations at 7 CFR Part 247, which establish household income limits.

Per 7 CFR Part 247.9(b), state agencies must use a household income limit at or below 150 percent of the Federal Poverty Income Guidelines (Poverty Guidelines) published annually by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). The 2025 IGs in the attached tables contain the maximum income limits by household size to be used for eligibility determinations in CSFP. State agencies and ITOs may choose to maintain income limits at 130 percent of the Poverty Guidelines, and as such, the 130 percent annual income amounts are also included in this memorandum.

To establish annual income limits of 150 percent, the Poverty Guidelines are multiplied by 1.50, and the results are rounded up to the next whole dollar. To establish annual income limits of 130 percent, the Poverty Guidelines are multiplied by 1.30, and the results are rounded up to the next whole dollar. From these results, weekly and monthly income limits are calculated. The first table contains the income limits for households residing in the 48 contiguous states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. Separate income limits for Alaska and Hawaii are established and published annually by HHS, which are reflected in the second and third tables.

Pursuant to program regulations, CSFP state agencies and ITOs must implement the 2025 IGs immediately upon receipt of this memorandum. The guidelines remain in effect until notification of the CSFP IGs for 2026.

CSFP regulations at 7 CFR Part 247.9(d)(1) define “income” as gross income before deductions for such items as income taxes, employees’ social security taxes, insurance premiums, and bonds. Income exclusions are listed in Parts 247.9(d)(2) and (d)(3) and via policy memoranda available online at the Food and Nutrition Service’s (FNS) website. State agencies and ITOs may also authorize local agencies to consider the household’s average income during the previous 12 months and current household income to determine which more accurately reflects the household’s status, in accordance with 7 CFR Part 247.9(d)(4).

Per 7 CFR 247.9(b) and FD-159: Federal and State Programs Conferring CSFP Income Eligibility, state agencies may accept as income-eligible for CSFP benefits any applicant who documents that they are certified as fully eligible for any of the following federal programs: The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), The Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR), Supplemental Security Income (SSI), The Low-Income Subsidy Program (LIS), or the Medicare Savings Programs (MSP). Stage agencies may also accept, as evidence of income within the state agency’s CSFP guidelines, documentation of the applicant’s participation in state-administered programs not specified in the regulations that routinely require documentation of income, provided that the programs have income eligibility guidelines at or below the state agency’s CSFP threshold.

State agencies and ITOs should direct any questions they may have regarding the 2025 IGs to their respective FNS regional offices.

Sara Olson
Director
Policy Division
Supplemental Nutrition and Safety Programs

Attachment

• 2025 Income Guidelines

This memorandum transmits information on 2025 TEFAP Income Eligibility Guidelines (IEGs) for state agencies to determine the eligibility of households to receive USDA Foods for home consumption in TEFAP.

Per 7 CFR 251.5(b), each TEFAP state agency must establish uniform statewide criteria for determining eligibility for USDA Foods for home consumption. This eligibility criteria must include maximum income-based standards at or between 185 percent to 300 percent of the U.S. Federal Poverty Guidelines (Poverty Guidelines) published annually by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS). State agencies may propose use of income-based standards above 300 percent of the Poverty Guidelines with supporting rationale, subject to approval by FNS. FD-120, Participant Eligibility in TEFAP, provides additional information on this process.

TEFAP state agencies should update their income standards to reflect the 2025 Poverty Guidelines upon receipt of this memorandum. For state agency reference, the attached tables contain the Poverty Guidelines and annual household income limits at 185 percent of the Poverty Guidelines. To establish annual income limits of 185 percent, the Poverty Guidelines are multiplied by 1.85, and the results are rounded up to the next whole dollar. From these results, weekly and monthly income limits are calculated. State agencies may use a similar process to determine income limits at their established thresholds. The first table includes the income limits for households residing in the 48 contiguous states, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico. Separate income limits for Alaska and Hawaii are established and published annually by HHS, reflected in the second and third tables.

State agencies should direct any questions they may have regarding the 2025 TEFAP IEGs to their respective FNS regional offices.

Sara Olson
Director
Policy Division
Supplemental Nutrition and Safety Programs

Attachment

• Income Guidelines 2025

February 13, 2025

Dear State, Tribal, Territory, and Local Government Partners,

First, thank you for your tireless work serving our most vulnerable families and communities. The scale and scope of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA, Department) 16 nutrition programs is vast, and their mission, critical. However, each of these programs is funded by the generosity of the American taxpayer; men and women who expect programs across every federal agency to be executed with integrity and accountability.

I write you today to share my guiding principles regarding nutrition programs, and to encourage states to partner with us as innovative collaborators and policy incubators. Gone are the days of the status quo; today starts a new chapter for the Department, states, territories, tribal communities, and each who render or receive nutrition programs.

Therefore, you have my commitment to:

• Prioritize timely and satisfactory customer service.
• Support state innovation through approvals of waivers and pilot projects.
• Clarify statutory, regulatory, and administrative requirements.
• Take swift action to minimize instances of fraud, waste, and program abuse.
• Develop and implement modernized systems.
• Associate access to SNAP benefits with clear expectations that those who can work, do.
• Create new opportunities to connect America’s farmers to nutrition assistance programs.
• Encourage states to choose policy options that protect both participants and the taxpayer.
• Strengthen strategies to encourage healthy choices, healthy outcomes, and healthy families.
• Improve federal dietary policy to align with science, not politics.
• Infuse each nutrition program with new energy and vision.

Each of these principles are catalysts for change and will allow us to better serve families across the country.

We have a historic opportunity to improve nutrition programs to better serve individuals who need additional support. Our shared goal should be to lift millions of Americans out of dependency and into hopeful futures and unimagined possibilities. It will require tireless energy and new and innovative approaches to long-ignored problems. But you have always been the greatest “laboratories of democracy,” and I am confident that the best ideas will come from you. I strongly encourage you to pilot creative solutions that could become the model for other states, and indeed for the nation.

The Department stands ready to serve you through technical assistance and dialogue. Together, we will find the bold and sustainable solutions that deliver effective programs to our most vulnerable families. I sincerely look forward to working closely with you and your teams, collaborating with you as we take a comprehensive look at these programs, visiting your communities, and putting America  on a path to growth, opportunity, and innovation to dramatically improve the lives of our citizens.

Sincerely,

Brooke L. Rollins
Secretary
U.S. Department of Agriculture

This memorandum provides guidance regarding the eligibility of ITOs and other Tribal entities to participate in TEFAP and to outline several best practices for working with ITOs and other Tribal entities in TEFAP.¹ TEFAP regulations at 7 CFR 251.4(k) encourage TEFAP state agencies and eligible recipient agencies (ERAs) to expand or implement TEFAP distributions in Tribal areas. This in turn will strengthen the emergency food assistance network in Indian Country. ITOs and other Tribal entities are important partners in reaching underserved populations with emergency food assistance; and while they cannot enter into direct agreements with USDA to distribute USDA Foods through TEFAP, they may be eligible to participate as ERAs.

ITO Eligibility to Participate in TEFAP as State Agencies

In accordance with Section 203B of the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983, as amended, TEFAP regulations at 7 CFR 251.3(i) define a state agency as the unit of state government "designated by the Governor or other appropriate state executive authority" which enters into a food distribution agreement with USDA. Because ITOs are not states, they cannot be units of state government. ITOs are not eligible to enter into direct agreements with USDA to distribute USDA Foods through TEFAP and are therefore precluded from serving as state agencies in TEFAP.

ITO and other Tribal Entities’ Eligibility to Participate in TEFAP as Eligible Recipient Agencies

The federal definition of a TEFAP eligible recipient agency (ERA) can be found at 7 CFR 251.3(d). The definition incorporates both public and private organizations and specifies that private organizations must have a “tax-exempt status under the Internal Review Code (IRC).” Both public and private ITOs and other Tribal entities that provide food assistance to individuals in need and that meet the definition at 7 CFR 251.3(d) are eligible to enter into agreements with state agencies or other ERAs (i.e., food banks) to serve as TEFAP ERAs. A specific 501(c)(3) status is not required for private organizations to participate; and private organizations may have a tax-exempt status outside of a 501(c)(3) status. Many ITOs and other Tribal entities are also Tribal governments or agencies of Tribal governments and are therefore public organizations. A tax-exempt status is not required for public organizations to participate in TEFAP.

Organizational Eligibility Determinations

State agencies must ensure that determinations for ITOs and other Tribal entities to participate in TEFAP are only made based on the state agency’s criteria for organizational eligibility outlined in the state agency’s plan (7 CFR 251.6(a)(3)) and the priority systems outlined at 7 CFR 251.4(h). If an ERA application is commingled with another application, such as one to distribute non-USDA Foods, the nonapplicable criteria must not be utilized when determining organizational eligibility to participate in TEFAP.

State agencies should contact their respective FNS regional office with any questions about this memorandum.

Sara Olson
Director
Policy Division
Supplemental Nutrition and Safety Programs

Appendix A

Best Practices for Working with ITOs and Other Tribal Entities in TEFAP

Understand history and context.

Many ITOs and other Tribal entities have a complicated relationship with governmental and nonprofit entities. Ensure that involved state agency staff and ERAs have, at minimum, a basic understanding of Native American history and Tribes’ historical interactions with governmental and nonprofit entities. If resources allow, invest in Tribal competency training for state agency and/or ERA staff who will work with ITOs or other Tribal entity.

Learn more about the ITO or Tribal entity.

To the greatest extent you can, learn about the ITO or Tribal entity’s history, geographical boundaries (if applicable), demographics, cultural norms, values, and language practices. For ITOs, learn whether the ITO is a Tribe, a Tribal advocacy group, a consortium of Tribes, as well as if a Tribe is federally recognized, state recognized, or non-federally or -state recognized. Many ITOs and Tribal entities have publicly available webpages that can help state agency/ERA staff familiarize themselves with the ITO or Tribe and determine who to contact.

Leadership structures and processes also differ from ITO to ITO. Feel free to ask ITO representatives questions to enhance your understanding of how the ITO operates. Ensure state agency/ERA staff have a basic understanding of how the governing body of the ITO functions and which department or agency within the ITO may be involved with emergency food assistance. Note that it is often better to contact staff within these departments or agencies first before reaching out to Tribal leadership. ITO staff may decide to refer issues to Tribal leadership if warranted.
Many ITOs are also familiar with or participate in other federal programs administered by USDA such as the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR) and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC), as well as other federal programs administered by USDA and other federal agencies. If the ITO operates FDPIR, the ITO’s FDPIR representative may be a good starting point given their understanding of how a food distribution program works and ITO storage and transportation capabilities.

Build relationships.

Speak with the ITO or Tribal entity about your organization, what TEFAP is, your goals for the partnership, the TEFAP resources available for the collaboration, and the ITO or Tribal entity’s emergency food assistance needs. Determine whether there is an interest in collaboration. This may require multiple meetings and conversations which should be focused on building trust and establishing a relationship with the ITO or Tribal entity as an equal collaborator and partner.

If you do not hear back from the ITO or Tribal entity after reaching out, you may need to try a different method of reaching out, reach out multiple times, or locate a better point of contact. If there is hesitation to collaborate, focus on identifying the ITO or Tribal entity’s concerns and remedying them. Ensure that you are listening to the ITO or Tribal entity and engaging in meaningful dialogue.

Engage in Tribal consultation if desired or requested by the ITO.

Establish a formal consultation relationship between the state agency and the involved Tribes to discuss TEFAP matters that will affect the Tribes and their citizens, if the ITO requests it. For example, Tribes may want to consult about the frequency of TEFAP distributions, the location of the distributions, the types of USDA Foods that will be distributed, whether the ITO will act as a distribution site for another ERA, or act as an ERA itself, etc.

Consultation between Tribal governments and state agencies should be direct and involve two-way dialogue and feedback between elected Tribal leaders or their designees, and the highest-ranking state agency official involved in TEFAP administration at the state level (e.g., Commissioner of Agriculture). State agencies should work to identify the Tribes’ preferences regarding Tribal consultation including what program-related events and changes would trigger consultation, the key individuals with whom the Tribe wants the state agency to consult, preferred notice timeframes for consultation, and a convenient in-person or virtual location for consultation. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) – Tribal Consultation Guiding Principles document has additional best practices for state agencies carrying out Tribal consultation. The document is intended for SNAP state agencies but many principles in the document are also applicable for TEFAP state agencies.

Be flexible.

Understand that the state agency’s or ERA’s TEFAP distribution model may need to be tailored to meet the ITO or Tribal entity’s needs. Consider allowable flexibilities to distribution processes, such as those addressed in FD-149: Questions and Answers about Flexibilities in TEFAP to Streamline Distribution of Foods and Reduce Barriers to Participation.

Recognize Tribal independence and sovereignty.

Tribes are sovereign nations. Tribal leadership should be treated with the same respect you would show leadership of other governments. Understand that Tribal governments may have laws and regulations that may affect TEFAP distributions, such as laws related to who can enter Tribal lands or how data about program participants should be stored and shared. Lastly it may be helpful to familiarize yourself with indigenous food sovereignty principles, such as inclusion of traditional foods, and work to ensure that TEFAP distributions respect these principles as best possible. The Department of the Interior, Bureau of Indian Affairs’  is a good starting point for those unfamiliar with food sovereignty.

¹ This memo is intended to provide information on the eligibility of both Tribal organizations that are eligible to enter direct agreements with FNS to administer other FNS programs (e.g., federally recognized Tribes, Tribal consortiums, rancherias, pueblos, Alaska Native Villages, etc.) in addition to Tribal entities that are not eligible to enter into direct agreements with FNS to administer FNS programs (e.g., a Tribally managed nonprofit organization, a food pantry managed by and intended for Native people, etc.).

Summary

The Food and Nutrition Service is correcting a final rule that appeared in the Federal Register on Oct. 31, 2024. The document makes access and parity improvements in USDA's food distribution programs to support access for eligible populations and streamline requirements for program operators.

Dates

Effective Dec. 30, 2024.

Supplementary Information

In FR Doc. 2024-24966 appearing on page 87228 in the Federal Register of Thursday, Oct. 31, 2024, the following corrections are made:

1. § 247.5 [Corrected]

On page 87244, in the third column, in amendatory instruction 4, correct paragraphs (b)(15) through (17) to read as follows:

(b) * * *

(15) Ensuring that program participation does not exceed the state agency's caseload allocation on an average monthly basis;

(16) Making publicly available a list of all CSFP local agencies on a publicly available internet web page. The state agency must post the name, address, and telephone number for each local agency. The list must be updated, at a minimum, on an annual basis; and

(17) Posting the State Plan that is currently in use on a publicly available internet web page.

2. § 247.9 [Corrected]

i. On page 87245, in the first and second columns, in amendatory instruction 9 correct paragraphs (b)(1) and (d)(3)(xxiv) to read as follows:

(b) * * *

(1) The state agency may accept as income-eligible for CSFP benefits any applicant that documents that they are certified as fully eligible for the following federal programs: the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), the Low Income Subsidy Program, or the Medicare Savings Programs.

* * * * *

(d) * * *

(3) * * *

(xxix) Payments to the Assiniboine Tribe of the Fort Belknap Indian community and the Assiniboine Tribe of the Fort Peck Indian Reservation (Montana) (Pub. L. 98-124, sec. 5);

3. § 251.4 [Corrected]

On page 87250, in the first column, instruction 26 for § 251.4, correct instruction 26.f. to read as follows:

f. Removing the term “donated commodities” wherever it appears in paragraph (g) and adding in its place the term “USDA Foods”;

4. § 253.2 [Corrected]

On page 87254, in the first and second columns, in amendatory 36, correct the definitions of “Indian Tribal Organization (ITO) and “state agency” to read as follows:

* * * * *

Indian Tribal Organization (ITO) means:

(1) The recognized governing body of any Indian tribe on a reservation; or

(2) The tribally recognized intertribal organization which the recognized governing bodies of two or more Indian tribes on a reservation authorize to operate SNAP or a Food Distribution Program on their behalf.

* * * * *

State agency means:

(1) The agency of state government, including the local offices thereof, which enters into an agreement with FNS for the distribution of USDA Foods on all or part of an Indian reservation, and

(2) The ITO of any Indian tribe, determined by the Department to be capable of effectively administering a Food Distribution Program, which enters into an agreement with FNS for the distribution of USDA Foods on all or part of an Indian reservation.

(3) State agencies are also referred to as FDPIR administering agencies.

5. § 253.5 [Corrected]

On page 87255, in the first column, in amendment 39, correct the section heading to read as follows:

§ 253.5 State agency requirements.

6. § 253.6 [Corrected]

i. On page 87255, in the second column, in amendment 40, correct paragraphs (a)(2), (d)(3)(vii); and (e)(1) to read as follows:

* * * * *

(a) * * *

(2) Nonhousehold members. The following individuals residing with a household shall not be considered household members in determining the household's eligibility. Nonhousehold members specified in paragraphs (a)(2) (i) and (iv) who are otherwise eligible may participate in the program as separate households.

* * * * *

(d) * * *

(3) * * *

(vii) The earned income (as defined in paragraph (d)(2)(i) of this section) of children who are members of the household, who are students at least half time and who have not attained their eighteenth birthday. * * *

* * * * *

(e) Income deductions —(1) Earned income deduction. Households with earned income, as defined in paragraph (d)(2)(i) of this section, shall be allowed a deduction of twenty percent of their gross earned income. Earned income excluded under paragraph (d)(3) of this section shall not be considered earned income for the purpose of computing this deduction.

This policy memorandum provides guidance for TEFAP state agencies on requirements related to protecting the confidentiality of TEFAP applicant and participant information and the identity of individuals making a complaint or allegation against an individual participating in or administering the program. All state agency and eligible recipient agency (ERA) staff and volunteers who will have access to confidential applicant and participant information should be made aware of and must follow these requirements.

Confidential Applicant and Participant Information Defined

TEFAP regulations at 7 CFR 251.10(c)(1) define confidential applicant and participant information as any information about an applicant or participant, whether it is obtained from the applicant or participant, another source, or generated as a result of a TEFAP application, certification, or participation, that individually identifies an applicant, participant, and/or their family members. Confidential applicant and participation information includes information provided during the intake process for TEFAP eligibility purposes (e.g., name, number of persons in the household, household income) in addition to information collected from TEFAP applicants and participants for purposes unrelated to TEFAP eligibility (e.g., date of birth, occupation, education level, household address). Applicant and participant information is confidential regardless of the original source and exclusive of previously applicable confidentiality provided in accordance with other federal, state, or local law.

Confidential applicant and participant information does not include anonymous, de-identified information obtained from TEFAP applicants or participants. De-identification of information involves removing links between data and the individuals or households with whom the data is associated. Prior to allowing the sharing of de-identified information obtained from or about TEFAP applicants and participants, state agencies and ERAs must ensure that the information or data has been de-identified to an extent that there is no reasonable basis to believe that the information can be used to identify a TEFAP applicant or participant, and the information being shared allows for anonymity of such individuals.

Limits on the Disclosure of Information Obtained from Applicants or Participants

TEFAP regulations at 7 CFR 251.10(c)(2) outline that state agencies and ERAs must restrict the use and disclosure of information obtained from TEFAP applicants or participants to persons directly connected with administration or enforcement of TEFAP. This could include state agency staff conducting management evaluations and ERA staff and volunteers who process TEFAP intake forms. With the consent of the participant, state agencies and ERAs may share information obtained from TEFAP applicants and participants with other health and welfare programs for use in determining eligibility in those programs, or for program outreach. However, the state agency must sign an agreement with the administering agencies of those health and welfare programs to ensure that the information will be used only for the specified purpose, and that the agencies receiving the information will not further share it. These requirements are not intended to limit the use of data sharing for eligibility purposes; they are intended to safeguard confidential information and protect the identity of TEFAP applicants and participants.

Obtaining TEFAP applicant and participant consent for information sharing purposes

State agencies and ERAs should explicitly obtain consent from TEFAP applicants and participants to share information with other health and welfare programs for program eligibility purposes or for program outreach purposes. Applicant and participant consent can be achieved by incorporating a written consent question or form into the intake or sign-in process at the ERA. The consent question/form must clearly list the other health and welfare programs that will receive the applicant or participant information, the specific applicant and participant information that will be shared, and should allow the applicant or participant to easily agree to or opt out of the data sharing. The consent question/form must also clearly indicate that the receipt of USDA Foods is not contingent upon a participant’s or applicant’s consent to share their information. For example:

“Your information (name, number of people in the household, household income information, and e-mail address) may be shared with the Community Veggie Program – a statewide program that provides nutrition assistance to individuals in need - for purposes of determining eligibility and program outreach for that program. By selecting “agree” below, you consent to the use of your information for this purpose. Your eligibility to receive USDA Foods through The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) is not dependent on providing consent to share your information. You can still receive food today if you disagree with the information sharing.”

Data sharing agreements

If state agencies want to share confidential applicant and participant information with other health and welfare programs for use in determining eligibility in those programs, they must sign agreements with those entities receiving the information to ensure that the information is only used for specified purposes and will not be shared further. These data sharing agreements should explicitly reference TEFAP confidentiality regulations at 7 CFR 251.10(c)(1) and (c)(2) and must outline how the other program(s) will protect the confidential applicant and participant information from being further shared. This should encompass both accidental and purposeful disclosure of the information. An agreement must be in place prior to sharing any applicant or participant information with another program.

Sign-in Sheets and Electronic Intake Systems

Confidentiality requirements in TEFAP are not intended to require ERAs to have a separate sign-in sheet for each TEFAP participant who visits a distribution site. Such a practice would be costly and time consuming for ERA staff. If applicable, TEFAP state agencies are encouraged to work with ERAs to devise policies or procedures to allow for the maintenance of one sign-in sheet while upholding TEFAP applicant and participant confidentiality. For example, in accordance with applicable state agency policies and procedures, ERA staff and volunteers overseeing the TEFAP intake process could cover up the name of all previous participants who signed in with an additional sheet of paper, leaving only the blank sign-in rows visible.

TEFAP confidentiality requirements are also not intended to prevent the use of electronic intake platforms. The use of electronic systems in TEFAP, including electronic intake platforms, is permitted as long as the systems are able to properly ensure the protection of applicant and participant information (both information used for TEFAP eligibility purposes and voluntarily provided information used for other purposes) and other program requirements at 7 CFR 251, such as record keeping. State agencies should ensure that any systems used by ERAs in their state or territory comply with confidentiality requirements prior to allowing/continuing to allow use of the system in the program. A review of the privacy policy associated with the system is critical in ensuring compliance with confidentiality requirements. State agencies should also ensure that electronic systems contain adequate safeguards to protect confidential applicant and participant information from accidental or purposeful disclosure. Developers or contractors who work on electronic intake systems may be given access to confidential TEFAP applicant and participant information for purposes of resolving system issues or errors, as those individuals may be considered persons directly connected with the administration or enforcement of the program. As with state agency and ERA staff, the developers and contractors should be made aware of and must follow all TEFAP confidentiality requirements.

The Identity of Persons Making Complaints or Allegations Against Individuals Participating in or Administering the Program

TEFAP regulations at 7 CFR 251.10(c)(3) require state agencies and ERAs to limit the disclosure of the identity of persons making a complaint or allegation against an individual participating in or administering TEFAP. State agencies and ERAs must protect the confidentiality, and other rights, of any person making allegations or complaints against another individual participating in, or administering TEFAP, except as necessary to conduct an investigation, hearing, or judicial proceeding, as applicable.

State agencies should contact their respective FNS regional office with any questions about this memorandum.

Sara Olson
Director
Policy Division
Supplemental Nutrition and Safety Programs