Overview of U.S. International Food Assistance
link to page 1 
December 31, 2018
Overview of U.S. International Food Assistance
The U.S. government administers multiple international
foreign operations (SFOPS) appropriations bills. U.S.
food assistance programs that aim to alleviate hunger and
international food assistance outlays have fluctuated over
improve food security around the world. Some of these
the past 10 years (Figure 1). Outlays increased in FY2008
programs provide emergency assistance to people affected
and FY2009, partly due to commodity price increases
by conflict or natural disaster. Other programs provide non-
during the global food price crisis of 2007-2008. Outlays
emergency assistance to help communities improve
subsequently decreased in the years after FY2009 as
agricultural productivity and strengthen local food systems.
commodity prices receded. An increase in outlays between
This In Focus provides an overview of international food
FY2013 and FY2016 was in part in response to increased
assistance programs, including legislative authority,
demand for food assistance owing to conflicts in Syria and
funding trends, statutory requirements, and select potential
Yemen and the Ebola epidemic in West Africa.
issues for Congress.
In-Kind vs. Cash-Based Assistance Funding
International Food Assistance Delivery
FFP Title II, which delivers primarily in-kind aid, has
The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)
comprised the bulk of U.S. international food assistance
and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) administer
outlays since the mid-1980s. More recently, cash-based
U.S. international food assistance programs. These agencies
EFSP assistance has increased from a 10% share of total
provide assistance through two distinct methods—in-kind
outlays in FY2010 to a 30% share in FY2016. During that
and cash-based. In-kind aid involves purchasing U.S.
same period, FFP Title II outlays decreased from 75% to
commodities and shipping them to regions in need. Cash-
57% of total outlays.
based assistance provides recipients with direct cash
transfers, food vouchers, or locally and regionally procured
Figure 1. U.S. International Food Assistance Outlays
food (LRP). Under LRP, food comes from the country or
FY2007-FY2016
region where it is to be distributed rather than from the
United States.
Legislative Authority
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 has reauthorized these
programs in periodic farm bills, most recently in the
Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-334).
These programs provide primarily in-kind aid or, in the case
of Farmer-to-Farmer, technical assistance.
The Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (FAA, P.L. 87-195)
provides statutory authority for the cash-based Emergency
Source: Figure created by CRS using data from USAID, U.S.
Food Security Program (EFSP). Congress first authorized
International Food Assistance Report, for years FY2007-FY2016.
EFSP in the Global Food Security Act of 2016 (P.L. 114-
Notes: “Other” includes Farmer-to-Farmer, Bil Emerson
195) and reauthorized the program through 2023 in the
Humanitarian Trust, the LRP pilot program, and the inactive Section
Global Food Security Reauthorization Act of 2017 (P.L.
416(b) program. Data for FY2017 is not available.
115-266). EFSP provides cash-based assistance. It is often
used in conditions when in-kind aid cannot arrive quickly
Statutory Requirements
enough, when in-kind aid could potentially disrupt local
markets, or when food assistance is targeted to conflict
In-kind food aid programs authorized by the FFPA share a
zones where it is unsafe to operate.
number of statutory requirements. Certain of these
requirements are listed below.
Funding
Congress funds international food assistance programs
All agricultural commodities are to be U.S. commodities
through annual agriculture appropriations and state and
(7 U.S.C. §1732(2)).
https://crsreports.congress.gov
link to page 2 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
the European Union—have converted primarily to cash-
be shipped on U.S.-flag vessels (46 U.S.C. §55305; 46
based assistance. U.S. reliance on in-kind aid is
U.S.C. §55314).
controversial due to its potential to disrupt local markets
and generally higher cost compared with procuring food
Organizations or foreign governments receiving U.S.
locally. At the same time, in-kind aid creates demand for
commodities are to publicize that food aid is from the
U.S. commodities and avoids problems associated with
American people (7 U.S.C. §1733(f)).
unreliable suppliers and poor infrastructure in recipient
The United States will not provide food aid if (1) the
countries that may hinder the efficiency and efficacy of
recipient country lacks adequate storage facilities to
cash-based assistance.
prevent spoilage or (2) food aid distribution would
Another potential issue for Congress is agricultural cargo
substantially interfere with domestic markets in the
preference (ACP). ACP refers to the statutory requirement
recipient country (7 U.S.C. §1733(a); 7 U.S.C.
that at least 50% of U.S. food aid commodities must ship on
§1733(b)).
U.S.-flag vessels. Proponents of ACP assert that it
The requirements listed above do not apply to EFSP, which
contributes to maintaining a U.S.-flag merchant marine to
has statutory authority in the FAA. Table 1 summarizes key
provide sealift capacity during wartime or national
elements of U.S. international food assistance programs.
emergencies. Opponents contend that ACP can raise
transportation costs and lengthen delivery times.
Potential Issues for Congress
More Information
U.S. international food assistance has relied predominantly
For more information, see CRS Report R45422, U.S.
on in-kind aid since its origins in the 1950s. Many other
International Food Assistance: An Overview.
major donors—such as Canada, the United Kingdom, and
Table 1. U.S. International Food Assistance Programs
FY2016
Statutory
Outlays (in
Govt.
Program
Description
Authority
Funding
millions)a
Agency
Food for Peace
In-kind donations to be distributed directly to
FFPA
Agriculture $1,788.5
USAID
Title II
recipients or sold on local markets to fund
approp.
development projects.
Bil Emerson
A reserve of U.S. commodities or funds that can
FFPA
Mandatory
$0c
USDA
Humanitarian
supplement FFP Title II when Title II funds alone
approp.b
Trust (BEHT)
cannot meet emergency food 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.
non-profit organizations provide technical assistance
to farmers in developing countries.
Food for Progress
In-kind donations sold on local markets to fund
FFPA
Mandatory
$161.4
USDA
agricultural or economic development projects in the
approp.b
recipient country.
McGovern-Dole
In-kind donations to school feeding programs and
FFPA
Agriculture $226.0
USDA
International Food
pregnant or nursing mothers and technical assistance
approp.
for Education and
to help governments in recipient countries establish
Child Nutrition
national school feeding programs.
Emergency Food
Cash-based assistance (direct cash transfers,
FAA
SFOPS
$941.1
USAID
Security Program
vouchers, or locally procured food) provided when
approp.
in-kind aid cannot arrive quickly enough or may
disrupt local markets or when it is unsafe to operate
in conflict zones.
Source: Compiled by CRS
Notes: FFP = Food for Peace; FFPA = Food for Peace Act of 1954, as amended; Approp. = appropriations; FAA = Foreign Assistance Act of
1961, as amended; USAID = U.S. Agency for International Development; USDA = U.S. Department of Agriculture.
a. Outlays after FY2016 are not available. For current appropriations, contact Alyssa Casey.
b. 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.
c. USDA did not use BEHT funds in FY2016.
IF11059
Alyssa R. Casey, 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 | IF11059 · VERSION 2 · NEW
December 31, 2018
Overview of U.S. International Food Assistance
The U.S. government administers multiple international
foreign operations (SFOPS) appropriations bills. U.S.
food assistance programs that aim to alleviate hunger and
international food assistance outlays have fluctuated over
improve food security around the world. Some of these
the past 10 years (Figure 1). Outlays increased in FY2008
programs provide emergency assistance to people affected
and FY2009, partly due to commodity price increases
by conflict or natural disaster. Other programs provide non-
during the global food price crisis of 2007-2008. Outlays
emergency assistance to help communities improve
subsequently decreased in the years after FY2009 as
agricultural productivity and strengthen local food systems.
commodity prices receded. An increase in outlays between
This In Focus provides an overview of international food
FY2013 and FY2016 was in part in response to increased
assistance programs, including legislative authority,
demand for food assistance owing to conflicts in Syria and
funding trends, statutory requirements, and select potential
Yemen and the Ebola epidemic in West Africa.
issues for Congress.
In-Kind vs. Cash-Based Assistance Funding
International Food Assistance Delivery
FFP Title II, which delivers primarily in-kind aid, has
The U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID)
comprised the bulk of U.S. international food assistance
and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) administer
outlays since the mid-1980s. More recently, cash-based
U.S. international food assistance programs. These agencies
EFSP assistance has increased from a 10% share of total
provide assistance through two distinct methods—in-kind
outlays in FY2010 to a 30% share in FY2016. During that
and cash-based. In-kind aid involves purchasing U.S.
same period, FFP Title II outlays decreased from 75% to
commodities and shipping them to regions in need. Cash-
57% of total outlays.
based assistance provides recipients with direct cash
transfers, food vouchers, or locally and regionally procured
Figure 1. U.S. International Food Assistance Outlays
food (LRP). Under LRP, food comes from the country or
FY2007-FY2016
region where it is to be distributed rather than from the
United States.
Legislative Authority
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 has reauthorized these
programs in periodic farm bills, most recently in the
Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-334).
These programs provide primarily in-kind aid or, in the case
of Farmer-to-Farmer, technical assistance.
The Foreign Assistance Act of 1961 (FAA, P.L. 87-195)
provides statutory authority for the cash-based Emergency
Source: Figure created by CRS using data from USAID, U.S.
Food Security Program (EFSP). Congress first authorized
International Food Assistance Report, for years FY2007-FY2016.
EFSP in the Global Food Security Act of 2016 (P.L. 114-
Notes: “Other” includes Farmer-to-Farmer, Bil Emerson
195) and reauthorized the program through 2023 in the
Humanitarian Trust, the LRP pilot program, and the inactive Section
Global Food Security Reauthorization Act of 2017 (P.L.
416(b) program. Data for FY2017 is not available.
115-266). EFSP provides cash-based assistance. It is often
used in conditions when in-kind aid cannot arrive quickly
Statutory Requirements
enough, when in-kind aid could potentially disrupt local
markets, or when food assistance is targeted to conflict
In-kind food aid programs authorized by the FFPA share a
zones where it is unsafe to operate.
number of statutory requirements. Certain of these
requirements are listed below.
Funding
Congress funds international food assistance programs
All agricultural commodities are to be U.S. commodities
through annual agriculture appropriations and state and
(7 U.S.C. §1732(2)).
https://crsreports.congress.gov
link to page 2 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
the European Union—have converted primarily to cash-
be shipped on U.S.-flag vessels (46 U.S.C. §55305; 46
based assistance. U.S. reliance on in-kind aid is
U.S.C. §55314).
controversial due to its potential to disrupt local markets
and generally higher cost compared with procuring food
Organizations or foreign governments receiving U.S.
locally. At the same time, in-kind aid creates demand for
commodities are to publicize that food aid is from the
U.S. commodities and avoids problems associated with
American people (7 U.S.C. §1733(f)).
unreliable suppliers and poor infrastructure in recipient
The United States will not provide food aid if (1) the
countries that may hinder the efficiency and efficacy of
recipient country lacks adequate storage facilities to
cash-based assistance.
prevent spoilage or (2) food aid distribution would
Another potential issue for Congress is agricultural cargo
substantially interfere with domestic markets in the
preference (ACP). ACP refers to the statutory requirement
recipient country (7 U.S.C. §1733(a); 7 U.S.C.
that at least 50% of U.S. food aid commodities must ship on
§1733(b)).
U.S.-flag vessels. Proponents of ACP assert that it
The requirements listed above do not apply to EFSP, which
contributes to maintaining a U.S.-flag merchant marine to
has statutory authority in the FAA. Table 1 summarizes key
provide sealift capacity during wartime or national
elements of U.S. international food assistance programs.
emergencies. Opponents contend that ACP can raise
transportation costs and lengthen delivery times.
Potential Issues for Congress
More Information
U.S. international food assistance has relied predominantly
For more information, see CRS Report R45422, U.S.
on in-kind aid since its origins in the 1950s. Many other
International Food Assistance: An Overview.
major donors—such as Canada, the United Kingdom, and
Table 1. U.S. International Food Assistance Programs
FY2016
Statutory
Outlays (in
Govt.
Program
Description
Authority
Funding
millions)a
Agency
Food for Peace
In-kind donations to be distributed directly to
FFPA
Agriculture $1,788.5
USAID
Title II
recipients or sold on local markets to fund
approp.
development projects.
Bil Emerson
A reserve of U.S. commodities or funds that can
FFPA
Mandatory
$0c
USDA
Humanitarian
supplement FFP Title II when Title II funds alone
approp.b
Trust (BEHT)
cannot meet emergency food 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.
non-profit organizations provide technical assistance
to farmers in developing countries.
Food for Progress
In-kind donations sold on local markets to fund
FFPA
Mandatory
$161.4
USDA
agricultural or economic development projects in the
approp.b
recipient country.
McGovern-Dole
In-kind donations to school feeding programs and
FFPA
Agriculture $226.0
USDA
International Food
pregnant or nursing mothers and technical assistance
approp.
for Education and
to help governments in recipient countries establish
Child Nutrition
national school feeding programs.
Emergency Food
Cash-based assistance (direct cash transfers,
FAA
SFOPS
$941.1
USAID
Security Program
vouchers, or locally procured food) provided when
approp.
in-kind aid cannot arrive quickly enough or may
disrupt local markets or when it is unsafe to operate
in conflict zones.
Source: Compiled by CRS
Notes: FFP = Food for Peace; FFPA = Food for Peace Act of 1954, as amended; Approp. = appropriations; FAA = Foreign Assistance Act of
1961, as amended; USAID = U.S. Agency for International Development; USDA = U.S. Department of Agriculture.
a. Outlays after FY2016 are not available. For current appropriations, contact Alyssa Casey.
b. 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.
c. USDA did not use BEHT funds in FY2016.
IF11059
Alyssa R. Casey, 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 | IF11059 · VERSION 2 · NEW