link to page 1 
March 25, 2022
Overview of U.S. International Food Assistance
The U.S. government administers international food
Reauthorization Act of 2017 (P.L. 115-266). EFSP provides
assistance programs that aim to alleviate hunger and
market-based assistance in emergency contexts.
improve food security around the world. Some of these
Funding
programs provide emergency assistance to people affected
Congress funds U.S. international food assistance programs
by conflict or natural disaster. Other programs provide
through annual Agriculture appropriations and through
nonemergency assistance to help communities improve
annual Department of State, Foreign Operations and
agricultural productivity and strengthen local food systems.
Related Programs (SFOPS) appropriations. U.S.
This In Focus provides an overview of U.S. international
international food assistance outlays have fluctuated over
food assistance programs, including legislative authority,
the FY2011-FY2020 period (Figure 1). An increase in
funding trends, statutory requirements, and selected issues
outlays between FY2016 and FY2020 was in part a
for Congress.
response to increased demand for food assistance, owing to
International Food Assistance Delivery
conflicts in Syria, South Sudan, Somalia, and Ethiopia. In
The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)
2020, Congress provided for an increase of over $1 billion
and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) administer
in EFSP funds in response to the Coronavirus Disease 2019
U.S. international food assistance programs. These agencies
(COVID-19) pandemic.
primarily provide assistance through two distinct
FFP Title II, which delivers primarily in-kind aid,
methods—in-kind aid or market-based assistance. In-kind
historically has comprised the bulk of U.S. international
aid involves purchasing U.S. commodities and shipping
food assistance outlays since the mid-1980s. In recent
them to countries and regions in need. Market-based
years, market-based EFSP assistance has increased from
assistance provides recipients with direct cash transfers,
10% of total outlays in FY2011 to 57% in FY2020. During
food vouchers, or food purchased in the country or region
this same period, FFP Title II outlays decreased from 71%
in which it is to be distributed (local and regional
to 35% of total outlays.
procurement, or LRP).
Legislative Authority
Figure 1. U.S. International Food Assistance Outlays
FY2011-FY2020
The Food for Peace Act of 1954 (FFPA; P.L. 83-480),
commonly referred to as “P.L. 480,” provides statutory
authority for most international food assistance programs.
These programs include Food for Peace (FFP) Title II, the
Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust, Farmer-to-Farmer (also
known as FFP Title V), Food for Progress, and the
McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and
Child Nutrition Program. Congress most recently
reauthorized these programs through FY2023 in the
Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-334).
These programs provide in-kind aid and, in the case of
Farmer-to-Farmer, technical assistance.
Congress established the Local and Regional Procurement
(LRP) Program as a pilot program in the 2008 farm bill
(P.L. 110-246) and permanently authorized it in the 2014
farm bill (P.L. 113-79). Under the LRP program, USDA
Source: CRS using data from USAID and USDA, U.S. International
purchases food in the country or region where it is to be
Food Assistance Report, for years FY2011-FY2020; and USAID,
distributed rather than buying food of U.S. origin. USDA
Emergency Food Security Program Report, for years FY2011-FY2020.
typically has used the cash-based LRP program to
Notes: “Other” includes Farmer-to-Farmer, Bil Emerson
supplement in-kind assistance for activities under
Humanitarian Trust, and the inactive Section 416(b) program.
McGovern-Dole.
The Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (FAA; P.L. 87-195)
Statutory Requirements
provides statutory authority for the market-based
In-kind food aid programs authorized by the FFPA share a
Emergency Food Security Program (EFSP). Congress
number of statutory requirements, including the following:
amended the FAA to authorize EFSP via the Global Food
All agricultural commodities are to be U.S.
Security Act of 2016 (P.L. 114-195). Congress reauthorized
commodities, unless otherwise noted (7 U.S.C.
the program through FY2023 in the Global Food Security
§1732(2)).
https://crsreports.congress.gov
link to page 2 link to page 2 link to page 2 link to page 2 Overview of U.S. International Food Assistance
At least 50% of the gross tonnage of U.S. food aid is to
principally to market-based assistance. U.S. delivery of in-
be shipped on U.S.-flag vessels (46 U.S.C. §55305; 46
kind aid generally has higher cost compared with market-
U.S.C. §55314).
based approaches. At the same time, in-kind aid supports
Organizations or foreign governments receiving U.S.
demand for U.S. commodities and avoids potential
commodities are to publicize that food aid is from the
problems associated with unreliable suppliers and poor
American people (7 U.S.C. §1733(f)).
infrastructure in recipient countries that may hinder the
The United States will not provide food aid if (1) the
efficiency and efficacy of market-based assistance.
recipient country lacks adequate storage facilities to
Another potential issue for Congress is agricultural cargo
prevent spoilage or (2) food aid distribution would
preference (ACP), the requirement that at least 50% of U.S.
substantially interfere with domestic markets in the
food aid commodities ship on U.S.-flag vessels. Proponents
recipient country (7 U.S.C. §1733(a); 7 U.S.C.
of ACP assert that it contributes to maintaining a U.S.-flag
§1733(b)).
merchant marine to provide sealift capacity during wartime
The requirements listed above do not apply to EFSP. Table
or national emergencies. Opponents contend that ACP can
1 summarizes key elements of U.S. international food
raise transportation costs and lengthen delivery times for
assistance programs.
food aid, ultimately decreasing the amount of food aid
Potential Issues for Congress
provided.
Congress could consider the role and effect that the current
The United States’ use of market-based assistance has
mix of market-based assistance, in-kind assistance, and the
increased significantly in recent years—EFSP is now the
ACP requirement have on achieving congressional
largest among all U.S. international food assistance
objectives for international food assistance programs.
programs in terms of annual outlays. At the same time, the
United States remains one of the few major donor countries
More Information
that continues to provide large quantities of in-kind aid.
For more information, see CRS Report R45422, U.S.
Most other major donors—such as Canada, the United
International Food Assistance: An Overview.
Kingdom, and the European Union—have converted
Table 1. Selected Key Elements of U.S. International Food Assistance Programs
FY2020
Govt.
Statutory
Outlays (in
Admin.
Program
Description
Authority Funding
millions)a
Agency
Food for Peace
In-kind food to be distributed directly to recipients.
FFPA
Agriculture
$1,733.3 USAID
Title II
approp.
Bil Emerson
A reserve of U.S. funds that can supplement FFP Title II
FFPA
Mandatory
$0b USDA
Humanitarian
when Title II funds alone cannot meet emergency food
approp.
Trust (BEHT)
needs.
Farmer-to-Farmer Short-term volunteer placements in which U.S.
FFPA
Agriculture
$15 USAID
(FFP Title V)
citizens from farming, agribusiness, universities, or
approp.
nonprofit organizations provide technical assistance to
farmers in developing countries.
Food for Progress In-kind donations sold on local markets to fund
FFPA
Mandatory
$144.7 USDA
agricultural or economic development projects in the
approp.c
recipient country.
McGovern-Dole
In-kind donations to school feeding programs and
FFPA
Agriculture
$215.0 USDA
International Food pregnant or nursing mothers and technical assistance to
approp.
for Education and
help governments in recipient countries establish national
Child Nutrition
school feeding programs.
Emergency Food
Market-based assistance (direct cash transfers, vouchers,
FAA
SFOPS
$288.0 USAID
Security Program or locally procured food) provided in emergency
approp.
contexts.
Source: Compiled by CRS using USAID and USDA, U.S. International Food Assistance Report, for years FY2011-FY2020; and USAID, Emergency
Food Security Program Report, for years FY2011-FY2020.
Notes: FFP = Food for Peace; FFPA = Food for Peace Act of 1954, as amended; Approp. = appropriations; FAA = Foreign Assistance Act of
1961, as amended; SFOPS = Department of State, Foreign Operations and Related Programs; USAID = U.S. Agency for International
Development; USDA = U.S. Department of Agriculture.
a. Outlays after FY2020 are not available. For current appropriations, contact CRS.
b. BEHT funds were not used in FY2020.
c. Authorizing legislation establishes mandatory funding. The borrowing authority of the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC) finances
program activities. The CCC is a government-owned financial institution overseen by USDA.
IF12067
Amber D. Nair, Analyst in Agricultural Policy
https://crsreports.congress.gov
Overview of U.S. International Food Assistance
Disclaimer
This document was prepared by the Congressional Research Service (CRS). CRS serves as nonpartisan shared staff to
congressional committees and Members of Congress. It operates solely at the behest of and under the direction of Congress.
Information in a CRS Report should not be relied upon for purposes other than public understanding of information that has
been provided by CRS to Members of Congress in connection with CRS’s institutional role. CRS Reports, as a work of the
United States Government, are not subject to copyright protection in the United States. Any CRS Report may be
reproduced and distributed in its entirety without permission from CRS. However, as a CRS Report may include
copyrighted images or material from a third party, you may need to obtain the permission of the copyright holder if you
wish to copy or otherwise use copyrighted material.
https://crsreports.congress.gov | IF12067 · VERSION 1 · NEW