The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

November 19, 2018 – December 29, 2023 R45408

The Emergency Food Assistance Program
December 29, 2023
(TEFAP): Background and Funding
Kara Clifford Billings
The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) is a federal food distribution program that
Analyst in Social Policy
supports food banks, food pantries, soup kitchens, and other emergency feeding organizations

serving low-income Americans. Federal assistance takes the form of federally purchased
commodities—including fruits, vegetables, meats, and grains—and funding for administrative

costs. Food aid and funds are distributed to states using a statutory formula that takes into
account poverty and unemployment rates. TEFAP is administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Food
and Nutrition Service (FNS).
TEFAP was established as the Temporary Emergency Food Assistance Program by the Emergency Food Assistance Act of
1983. The Emergency Food Assistance Act continues to govern program operations, while the Food and Nutrition Act
authorizes funding for TEFAP’s entitlement commodities. TEFAP also incorporates bonus commodities, which are
distributed at USDA’s discretion throughout the year to support different crops using separate budget authority. A smaller
amount of discretionary funding is appropriated annually to cover administrative and distribution costs under Emergency
Food Assistance Act authority. Along with TEFAP’s usual sources of aid, additional commodities and administrative funds
have been distributed through TEFAP in recent years as a result of USDA’s use of the Commodity Credit Corporation and
supplemental appropriations from COVID-19 pandemic response laws. In FY2022, federal spending on TEFAP was
approximately $1.6 billion.
FNS coordinates the purchasing of commodities and the allocation of commodities and administrative funds to states, and
provides general program oversight. State agencies—often state departments of health and human services, agriculture, or
education—determine program eligibility rules and allocations of aid to feeding organizations (called recipient agencies).
States often task food banks, which operate regional warehouses, with distributing foods to other recipient agencies. TEFAP
aid makes up a modest proportion of the food and funds available to emergency feeding organizations, which are reliant on
private donations as well.
TEFAP is the primary federal program supporting emergency feeding organizations. Other related food distribution programs
focus on specific subpopulations; for example, the Federal Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA’s) Emergency Food
and Shelter Program distributes food to organizations serving homeless individuals and USDA’s Commodity Supplemental
Food Program distributes food to organizations serving older individuals with low incomes.
TEFAP is typically amended and reauthorized through farm bills. Most recently, the 2018 farm bill (P.L. 115-334) extended
funding for TEFAP’s entitlement commodities through FY2023. The law also funded new projects aimed at facilitating
donations from farmers and other agricultural producers, processors, and distributors to emergency feeding organizations.
Recent program developments include the program’s use in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, grants aimed at expanding
TEFAP’s reach into underserved areas, and TEFAP’s receipt of trade mitigation commodities.
Congressional Research Service

link to page 6 link to page 6 link to page 30 link to page 10 The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

Introduction
The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP; previously the Temporary Emergency Food
Assistance Program) provides federally purchased commodities and a smaller amount of cash
support to food banks, food pantries, soup kitchens, shelters, and other types of emergency
feeding organizations serving low-income households and individuals.1 Commodities include
fruits, vegetables, meats, and grains, among other foods.2 In addition to serving individuals,
TEFAP’s domestic commodity purchases support the agricultural economy by reducing supply on
the market, thereby increasing food prices. TEFAP is administered by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture’s (USDA’s) Food and Nutrition Service (FNS).
TEFAP was established under the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 in an effort to dispose
of government-held agricultural surpluses and alleviate hunger in the wake of a recession and
declining food stamp benefits.3 Since then, TEFAP has evolved into a permanent program that
operates in all 50 states, the District of Columbia, and four U.S. territories.4 The program was
most recently reauthorized by the 2018 farm bill (P.L. 115-334).
At the federal level, TEFAP is administered by FNS in collaboration with USDA’s purchasing
agency, the Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS). At the state level, TEFAP is administered by a
state distributing agency designated by the governor or state legislature; generally, these are state
departments of health and human services, agriculture, or education. Federal commodities and
funds may flow through the state or directly to feeding organizations (called recipient agencies)
based on how the state structures the program.5 States will often task food banks with processing
and distributing food to local feeding organizations. Food banks typically operate regional
warehouses and distribute food to other organizations rather than to households directly.6 Figure
1 depicts the flow of commodities and funds through TEFAP.

1 The 1990 farm bill (P.L. 101-624) removed “Temporary” from the program title.
2 USDA, FNS, “USDA Foods Available List for The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) FY2023,” April
2023, https://www.fns.usda.gov/tefap/usda-foods-available-list-tefap.
3 See Appendix C for further legislative history.
4 Puerto Rico, the U.S. Virgin Islands, the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands, and Guam. Throughout
this report, the term states includes these other jurisdictions. For an explanation of appropriated mandatory funding, see
CRS Report RS20129, Entitlements and Appropriated Entitlements in the Federal Budget Process.
5 Consistent with statute and regulations, this report uses the term recipient agency to describe organizations receiving
TEFAP support. Emergency feeding organizations are the most common type of recipient agency.
6 See “Program Administration” for further discussion of federal, state, and local roles. C. Cabili, E. Eslami, and R.
Briefel, White Paper on the Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), prepared by Mathematica for the Office of
Policy Support, Food and Nutrition Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, August 2013, https://www.fns.usda.gov/
white-paper-emergency-food-assistance-program-tefap.
Congressional Research Service

1

link to page 26 link to page 28 link to page 30

The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

Figure 1. Flow of Foods and Funds through TEFAP

Source: Adapted from USDA, FNS, White Paper on the Emergency Food Assistance Program, 2013.
a. States may distribute food to recipient agencies directly or task recipient agencies with food distribution to
other recipient agencies. States often delegate this responsibility to food banks.
TEFAP is part of a larger web of federal food assistance programs.7 Some of these programs
provide cash assistance while others primarily distribute food. TEFAP foods may reach
individuals who do not qualify for other food assistance programs or supplement the assistance
that they receive through other programs. Related federal programs include the Federal
Emergency Management Agency’s (FEMA’s) Emergency Food and Shelter Program, which,
among its other services for homeless individuals, provides food through shelters, food banks,
and food pantries.8 In addition, USDA’s Commodity Supplemental Food Program distributes
monthly food packages to low-income elderly individuals through local organizations, which can
include food banks and pantries.9 The Farmers to Families Food Box Program, which USDA
operated from May 2020 to May 2021, provided funds to suppliers to prepare food boxes for
distribution to food banks and other nonprofit organizations serving households in need during
the COVID-19 pandemic.10
This report begins by describing available data on the population using emergency food
assistance. It goes on to discuss the TEFAP program, including its administration at the federal,
state, and local levels, eligibility rules, and funding structure. The report concludes with a
summary of TEFAP’s role in disaster response and recent reauthorizations. Appendix A lists total
TEFAP funding from the program’s inception in 1983 to present; Appendix B lists TEFAP
funding by state; and Appendix C provides a brief legislative history of TEFAP.
Definitions
Emergency feeding organizations (EFOs): “The term ‘emergency feeding organization’ means a public or
nonprofit organization that administers activities and projects (including the activities and projects of a charitable
institution, a food bank, a food pantry, a hunger relief center, a soup kitchen, or a similar public or private
nonprofit eligible recipient agency) providing nutrition assistance to relieve situations of emergency and distress
through the provision of food to needy persons, including low-income and unemployed persons.”
Common types of EFOs:
•
Food banks: “The term ‘food bank’ means a public or charitable institution that maintains an established
operation involving the provision of food or edible commodities, or the products of food or edible

7 See CRS Report R42353, Domestic Food Assistance: Summary of Programs.
8 For more information, see CRS Report R42766, The Emergency Food and Shelter National Board Program and
Homeless Assistance.
9 For more information, see CRS Report R42353, Domestic Food Assistance: Summary of Programs.
10 For more information, see CRS Report R46681, USDA Nutrition Assistance Programs: Response to the COVID-19
Pandemic.
Congressional Research Service

2

link to page 8 The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

commodities, to food pantries, soup kitchens, hunger relief centers, or other food or feeding centers that, as
an integral part of their normal activities, provide meals or food to feed needy persons on a regular basis.”
•
Food pantries: “The term ‘food pantry’ means a public or private nonprofit organization that distributes
food to low-income and unemployed households, including food from sources other than the Department of
Agriculture, to relieve situations of emergency and distress.”
•
Soup kitchens: “The term ‘soup kitchen’ means a public or charitable institution that, as an integral part of
the normal activities of the institution, maintains an established feeding operation to provide food to needy
homeless persons on a regular basis.”
Source: Section 201A of the Emergency Food Assistance Act (codified at 7 U.S.C. §7501)
The Demand for Emergency Food Assistance
According to an analysis of Current Population Survey (CPS) Food Security Supplement data by
USDA’s Economic Research Service (ERS), an estimated 7.3 million households (5.6%) obtained
emergency food from a food bank, food pantry, or church in 2021, down from a recent high of 8.7
million households (6.7%) in 2020, but still higher than in recent years (see Figure 2). A smaller
proportion of the population used soup kitchens: approximately 438,000 households (0.3%) in
2021 and 451,000 households (0.4%) in 2020.11 These are likely underestimates of the population
using emergency food assistance—particularly soup kitchens—because the CPS uses address-
based sampling and therefore does not fully capture households that are homeless or in tenuous
housing arrangements. In addition, the CPS Food Security Supplement excludes households with
incomes above 185% of the federal poverty guidelines who do not report any indications of food
insecurity on screening questions.12 For comparison, a survey by Feeding America, a nonprofit
membership and advocacy organization, estimated that approximately 15.5 million households
accessed its network of feeding organizations in 2013 (the same year, ERS estimated that 6.9
million households obtained emergency food). The Feeding America network represents a large
segment of emergency feeding organizations nationwide.13 A more recent (2021) survey by
Feeding America found that when charitable food assistance is defined more broadly to include
receiving free groceries or free meals from organizations such as food banks, food pantries,
churches, Meals on Wheels, and shelters, approximately 53 million individuals reported receiving
assistance.14

11 The U.S. Census Bureau conducts the CPS Food Security Supplement annually with funding from USDA’s
Economic Research Service (ERS). Households utilizing food pantries in 2021 included 19.3 million individuals, and
households utilizing soup kitchens included 864,000 individuals. Food pantry use was defined as “receiving emergency
food from a church, food pantry, or food bank.” A. Coleman-Jensen, M.P. Rabbitt, C.A. Gregory, and A. Singh,
Statistical Supplement to Household Food Security in the United States in 2021, AP-105, U.S. Department of
Agriculture, Economic Research Service, September 2022, pp. 18-19, https://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/pub-
details/?pubid=104662; and A. Coleman-Jensen, M.P. Rabbitt, C.A. Gregory, and A. Singh, Statistical Supplement to
Household Food Security in the United States in 2020, AP-091, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research
Service, September 2021, pp. 22-23, https://www.ers.usda.gov/webdocs/publications/102072/ap-091.pdf?v=2176.1.
12 It is, however, possible that some households with incomes over 185% of poverty that did not get flagged as food
insecure used emergency feeding organizations. That would not be captured in these estimates.
13 Feeding America’s network includes 200 food banks and 60,000 food pantries, according to FeedingAmerica.org,
Our Network, http://www.feedingamerica.org/our-work/food-bank-network.html. In 2000, Feeding America’s network
included 80% of emergency feeding organizations according to J.C. Ohls et al., The Emergency Food Assistance
System—Findings From the Provider Survey, prepared by Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. for the Food and Rural
Economics Division, Economic Research Service, USDA, October 2002, p. 2, https://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/
pub-details/?pubid=46507.
14 Feeding America, “Charitable Food Assistance Participation Measurement,” June 2022,
https://www.feedingamerica.org/research/charitable-food-access.
Congressional Research Service

3

The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

The ERS findings for 2020 and 2021 track with other data indicating increased use of emergency
feeding organizations during the COVID-19 pandemic. An analysis by the Urban Institute, a
nonprofit research organization, found that 19.7% of nonelderly adults received free food from
food banks, food pantries, churches, shelters, and similar organizations in December 2020, up
from 13.2% in December 2019.15
Data on the number of TEFAP food recipients are not available, in part because TEFAP
commodities are mixed in with other commodities provided by emergency feeding organizations
and because of “the transient nature of participation.”16
Figure 2. Households Using Emergency Feeding Organizations, 2008-2021

Source: CRS graphic based on data contained in statistical supplements to Household Food Security in the United
States, USDA Economic Research Service, for 2008-2021.
Notes: Number and percentage of households who reported that they received emergency food from a food
pantry, food bank, or church in the last 12 months. This may be an underestimate of the number of households
using food pantries due to the fact that the Census’s Current Population Survey (CPS) Food Security Supplement
focuses on households with incomes under 185% of the poverty guidelines and excludes homeless individuals and
underrepresents those in tenuous housing arrangements.
Characteristics of Emergency Food Recipients
Food insecurity is common among households using emergency feeding organizations.17
According to the ERS analysis, 57% of households using emergency feeding organizations could
be categorized as food insecure in 2021, meaning they had difficulty providing enough food for

15 Elaine Waxman, Poonam Gupta, and Dulce Gonzalez, “Charitable Food Use Increased Nearly 50 Percent from 2019
to 2020,” Urban Institute, March 2021, https://www.urban.org/sites/default/files/publication/103825/charitable-food-
use-increased-nearly-50-percent-from-2019-to-2020_0.pdf.
16 USDA, FNS, Nutrient and MyPyramid Analysis of USDA Foods in Five of Its Food and Nutrition Programs,
prepared by Westat for the Office of Research and Analysis, January 2012, p. 3-84, https://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/
default/files/ops/NutrientMyPyramid.pdf.
17 Food security focuses on economic and access-related factors associated with an individual’s ability to purchase food
or otherwise obtain enough to eat, as opposed to hunger, which is considered a physiological condition. For more
information on the differences between food insecurity and hunger, see CRS Report R42353, Domestic Food
Assistance: Summary of Programs.
Congressional Research Service

4

The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

all of their members at times during the year due to a lack of resources.18 Roughly half of these
households experienced very low food security, meaning that the food intake of some household
members was reduced and normal eating patterns were disrupted due to limited resources.
According to the ERS analysis, in 2021 households obtaining emergency food from a food bank,
pantry, or church were more likely to have incomes below 185% of poverty compared to other
respondents (62% vs. 20%), and to include children (35% vs. 28%).19 According to the 2014
Feeding America survey, individuals using meal programs (e.g., soup kitchens and shelters) were
generally single-person households and were more likely to be homeless. In 2013, just over 70%
of households using the Feeding America network of meal programs had a single member and
nearly 34% were homeless or living in temporary housing.20
In addition, emergency feeding organizations may act as a safety net for food insecure households
who are ineligible for or do not participate in other federal food assistance programs. For
example, in the case of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), households may
have an income too high to qualify for assistance but still experience difficulty purchasing food,
or they may fail to meet other program eligibility rules.21 Among households using feeding
organizations affiliated with Feeding America’s network, a little more than half (55%) reported
receiving SNAP benefits in 2013.22
Characteristics of Emergency Feeding Organizations
The most recent census of emergency feeding organizations was conducted in 2000 by USDA’s
ERS (USDA proposed conducting a more current study of TEFAP agencies in its FY2024 budget
justification to Congress).23 ERS found that there were approximately 400 food banks; 32,700
food pantries; and 5,300 soup kitchens in the United States in 2000. These organizations were
reliant on both private and public donations, including TEFAP support. According to the survey,
TEFAP foods comprised 14% of foods distributed by the emergency food assistance system and
TEFAP administrative funds comprised 12% to 27% of organizations’ operating costs in 2000.24
However, this proportion may fluctuate from year to year.

18 A. Coleman-Jensen, M.P. Rabbitt, C.A. Gregory, and A. Singh, Statistical Supplement to Household Food Security
in the United States in 2021, AP-105, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, September 2022,
pp. 18-19, https://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/pub-details/?pubid=104662.
19 Ibid.
20 Nancy S. Weinfield et al., Hunger in America 2014, Feeding America, prepared by Westat and the Urban Institute,
August 2014, pp. 91, 100-102, http://help.feedingamerica.org/HungerInAmerica/hunger-in-america-2014-full-
report.pdf.
21 For more information on SNAP eligibility, see CRS Report R42505, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program
(SNAP): A Primer on Eligibility and Benefits.
22 Nancy S. Weinfield et al., Hunger in America 2014, Feeding America, prepared by Westat and the Urban Institute,
August 2014, http://help.feedingamerica.org/HungerInAmerica/hunger-in-america-2014-full-report.pdf.
23 J.C. Ohls et al., The Emergency Food Assistance System—Findings From the Provider Survey, 16-2, prepared by
Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. for the Food and Rural Economics Division, Economic Research Service, USDA,
October 2002, https://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/pub-details/?pubid=46507. While Feeding America published a
study in 2014 of its network of feeding organizations (discussed in this report), it is not a nationally representative
sample of organizations. For USDA’s proposal, see p. 35-102 to p. 35-103 of USDA, Office of Budget & Program
Analysis, 2024 USDA Explanatory Notes – Food and Nutrition Service.
24 J.C. Ohls et al., The Emergency Food Assistance System—Findings From the Provider Survey, 16-2, prepared by
Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. for the Food and Rural Economics Division, Economic Research Service, USDA,
October 2002, https://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/pub-details/?pubid=46507; see pp. 133-134 for TEFAP’s
proportion of foods and pp. 45, 77, 110 for its proportion of operating costs.
Congressional Research Service

5

link to page 21 link to page 17 link to page 12 The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

Most food banks in the ERS survey were secular, nonprofit organizations, while the majority of
food pantries and soup kitchens were nonprofit organizations associated with a religious group.25
Food banks were likely to be affiliated with a national organization, including Feeding America
(previously Second Harvest), United Way, Foodchain, Salvation Army, the Red Cross, and
Catholic Charities.26 All types of emergency feeding organizations were dependent on
volunteers.27
Program Administration
Federal Role
FNS is responsible for allocating TEFAP aid to states (see “State Allocation Formula”) and
coordinating the ordering, processing, and distribution of commodities. Specifically, FNS decides
which foods will be available in the USDA Foods catalog and allocates entitlement aid and
administrative funds to states. States and recipient agencies then place orders for certain
quantities and types of commodities (discussed under “Types of Foods”) based on their
entitlement allocation. FNS collaborates closely with USDA’s purchasing agency—the
Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS)—to process and fulfill the orders.28 AMS and FNS also
collaborate to purchase and distribute bonus commodities throughout the year that are not based
on state requests but rather USDA’s discretion to support different crops. Selected vendors deliver
both entitlement and bonus commodities to state-selected distribution points.29
FNS also issues regulations and guidance and provides general oversight of states’ TEFAP
operations. FNS provides oversight by reviewing and approving state TEFAP plans, which are
documents that outline each state’s operation of TEFAP. States are required to submit
amendments to the plan for approval “when necessary to reflect any changes in program
operations or administration as described in the plan, or at the request of FNS, to the appropriate
FNS Regional Office.”30 FNS also conducts management reviews of state agency operations.31
State Role
TEFAP is administered at the state level by an agency designated by the governor “or other
appropriate State executive authority” that enters into an agreement with FNS.32 States most
commonly administer TEFAP through a health and human services, agriculture, or education
department.33 State agencies administering TEFAP are responsible for creating eligibility and
other program rules (see “Eligibility Rules for Individuals and Households”), which are outlined

25 Ibid., pp. 16, 50.
26 Ibid, p. 81.
27 Ibid, pp. 39, 72, 108.
28 C. Cabili, E. Eslami, and R. Briefel, White Paper on the Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), prepared by
Mathematica for the Office of Policy Support, Food and Nutrition Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, August
2013, https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/TEFAPWhitePaper.pdf.
29 Section 203B of the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 (codified at 7 U.S.C. §7505); 7 C.F.R. §251.4.
30 Section 202A of the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 (codified at 7 U.S.C. §7503).
31 USDA, Office of Inspector General (OIG), COVID-19—Oversight of the Emergency Food Assistance Program—
Final Report, August 18, 2023, https://usdaoig.oversight.gov/reports/inspection-evaluation/covid-19-oversight-
emergency-food-assistance-program-final-report.
32 7 C.F.R. §251.2.
33 USDA, FNS, TEFAP State Contacts, https://www.fns.usda.gov/contacts.
Congressional Research Service

6

The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

in state plans approved by FNS.34 They are also responsible for selecting and overseeing recipient
agencies.
Federal regulations allow states to delegate a number of responsibilities to recipient agencies,
including selecting and subcontracting with other recipient agencies.35 States often delegate the
ordering and distribution of USDA Foods to regional food banks, which receive foods and make
deliveries to other recipient organizations, such as food pantries.36 According to a 50-state
analysis conducted by Feeding America in 2020, nearly all states reported that commodities were
delivered by vendors directly to recipient agencies (often to food banks for distribution to other
organizations).37 States cannot delegate their responsibility to set eligibility rules or oversee
recipient agencies.38
States must review at least 25% of recipient agencies contracting directly with the state (e.g., food
banks) at least once every four years, and at least one-tenth or 20 (whichever is fewer) of other
recipient agencies each year.39 If the state finds deficiencies in the course of review, the state
agency must submit a report with the findings to the recipient agency and ensure that corrective
action is taken.
Local Role
Organizations that are eligible for TEFAP aid are referred to as recipient agencies in the
Emergency Food Assistance Act. According to the statute, recipient agencies are public or
nonprofit organizations that administer
• emergency feeding organizations,
• charitable institutions,
• summer camps or child nutrition programs,
• nutrition projects operating under the Older Americans Act of 1965, or
• disaster relief programs.40

34 Individual state plans are often available on the state agency’s website that administers TEFAP. A list of state
agencies that administer TEFAP is available at https://www.fns.usda.gov/contacts. According to Section 202A of the
Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 (codified at 7 U.S.C. §7503), state plans must include eligibility rules.
35 7 C.F.R. §251.2, 7 C.F.R. §251.5; C. Cabili, E. Eslami, and R. Briefel, White Paper on the Emergency Food
Assistance Program (TEFAP), prepared by Mathematica for the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition
Service, Office of Policy Support, August 2013, https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/
TEFAPWhitePaper.pdf.
36 Feeding America, The Emergency Food Assistance Program: State Guide, February 2020,
https://feedingamericaaction.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Resource_Feeding-America-TEFAP-State-by-State-
Guide.pdf; Washington State Department of Agriculture, The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP):
Distribution National Survey 2015, AGR 609-574. Per Section 202A of the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983
(codified at 7 U.S.C. §7503), state plans must describe how the state will give recipient agencies an opportunity to
provide input on the commodities selected.
37 Washington State Department of Agriculture, The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Distribution
National Survey 2015, AGR 609-574. Larger states often reported multiple, regional warehouses while smaller states
sometimes had one central warehouse.
38 7 C.F.R. §251.5.
39 7 C.F.R. §251.10.
40 Section 201A of the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 (codified at 7 U.S.C. §7501).
Congressional Research Service

7

The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

The first category of organizations—emergency feeding organizations—receive priority under
TEFAP statute and regulations and the majority of TEFAP aid.41 Emergency feeding organizations
are defined as public or nonprofit organizations “providing nutrition assistance to relieve
situations of emergency and distress through the provision of food to needy persons, including
low-income and unemployed persons.”42 They include food banks, food pantries, soup kitchens,
and other organizations serving similar functions.
Recipient agencies are responsible for serving and distributing TEFAP foods to individuals and
households. As discussed above, they may also have additional responsibilities as delegated by
the state agency; for example, food banks may be tasked with distributing food to subcontracted
recipient agencies like food pantries and soup kitchens, which in turn distribute foods or serve
prepared meals to low-income individuals and families.
Recipient agencies must adhere to program rules. For example, they must safely store food and
comply with state and/or local food safety and health inspection requirements.43 Recipient
agencies must also maintain records of the commodities they receive and a list of households
receiving TEFAP foods for home consumption.44 There are also restrictions on the types of
activities that can occur at distribution sites. Recipient agencies must ensure that any unrelated
activities are conducted in a way that makes clear that the activity is not part of TEFAP and that
receipt of TEFAP foods is not contingent on participation in the activity.45 Activities may not
disrupt food distribution or meal service and may not be explicitly religious.46 In addition,
recipient agencies may not engage in recruitment activities designed to persuade an individual to
apply for SNAP benefits.47
Eligibility Rules for Individuals and Households
Under broad federal guidelines, states set eligibility rules for individuals and households
participating in TEFAP. Eligibility rules differ for organizations distributing commodities directly
to households (e.g., food pantries) and organizations providing prepared meals (e.g., soup
kitchens). States must develop income-based standards for households receiving foods directly,
but cannot set such standards for individuals receiving prepared meals. However, organizations
serving prepared meals must serve predominantly needy persons, and states “may establish a
higher standard than ‘predominantly’ and may determine whether organizations meet the

41 Section 203B of the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 (codified at 7 U.S.C. §7505) gives states the option to
give emergency feeding organizations priority. When they cannot meet the full demand of all eligible recipient
organizations, states must give priority to emergency feeding organizations according to TEFAP regulations (7 C.F.R.
§251.4). The statement that emergency feeding organizations receive the majority of TEFAP aid is based on CRS
communication with the Food and Nutrition Service in September 2018.
42 Section 201A of the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 (codified at 7 U.S.C. §7501).
43 7 C.F.R. §250.14.
44 7 C.F.R. §251.10.
45 Ibid.
46 Ibid; USDA, FNS, Further Clarification on the Prohibition Against Explicitly Religious Activities As Part of TEFAP
and CSFP Activities, FD-142, November 28, 2016, https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/fdd/FD-142-
Prohibition-Religious-Activities.pdf.
47 USDA, FNS, Prohibition of SNAP Recruitment and Promotion Activities by FDPIR and TEFAP Administering
Agencies, Policy Memorandum No. FD-143, May 2017, https://www.fns.usda.gov/usda-foods/prohibition-snap-
recruitment-and-promotion-activities-fdpir-and-tefap-administering-agencies.
Congressional Research Service

8

The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

applicable standard by considering socioeconomic data of the area in which the organization is
located, or from which it draws its clientele.”48
Income eligibility rules for households receiving TEFAP foods directly vary by state. Many states
limit income eligibility to household incomes at or below 185% of the poverty guidelines.49 Some
states also confer household eligibility based on participation in other federal and state programs
(known as categorical eligibility).50
Federal regulations require that individuals receiving food directly live “in the geographic
location served by the State agency at the time of applying for assistance.”51 However, length of
residency cannot be a criterion. States may also create additional rules for households’ receipt of
TEFAP foods, such as requiring a signature at the time of receipt, or limiting the number of times
households can get food in a certain period.52
Funding and Appropriations
TEFAP’s Authorizing Laws
The Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983: governs TEFAP operations and authorizes discretionary
funding for administrative costs (codified at 7 U.S.C. §7501-7516)
The Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (previously the Food Stamp Act): Section 27 authorizes mandatory
funding for TEFAP commodities (entitlement commodities) (codified at 7 U.S.C. §2036)
Federal assistance through TEFAP is primarily provided in the form of USDA-purchased
domestic agricultural commodities (USDA Foods). A smaller amount of assistance is provided in
the form of cash support for administrative and distribution costs.
There are two types of TEFAP commodities: entitlement commodities and bonus commodities
(described further in the sections to follow). Funding for entitlement commodities is considered
appropriated mandatory spending, meaning that the authorizing law sets the level of spending but
an annual appropriation is needed to provide funding.53 Funding for bonus commodities is not
included in the TEFAP appropriation and is instead provided by separate USDA budget authority.
These funds are used by USDA for bonus commodity purchases for the program throughout the

48 7 C.F.R. §251.5.
49 Examples include Arizona, Hawaii, Indiana, Iowa, Massachusetts, Nevada, New Mexico, and Wisconsin. Individual
state plans can usually be found on the state agency’s website that administers TEFAP. A list of state agencies that
administer TEFAP is available at https://www.fns.usda.gov/contacts. For a summary of state policies as of February
2020, see Feeding America, The Emergency Food Assistance Program: State Guide, February 2020,
https://feedingamericaaction.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Resource_Feeding-America-TEFAP-State-by-State-
Guide.pdf.
50 See page 10 of Feeding America, The Emergency Food Assistance Program: State Guide, February 2020,
https://feedingamericaaction.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Resource_Feeding-America-TEFAP-State-by-State-
Guide.pdf.
51 7 C.F.R. §251.5(b); Feeding America, The Emergency Food Assistance Program: State Guide, February 2020,
https://feedingamericaaction.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/Resource_Feeding-America-TEFAP-State-by-State-
Guide.pdf.
52 See individual state plans for state-specific eligibility rules, which can usually be found on the state agency’s website
that administers TEFAP. A list of state agencies that administer TEFAP is available at https://www.fns.usda.gov/
contacts. For a summary of state policies as of February 2020, see Feeding America, The Emergency Food Assistance
Program: State Guide, February 2020, https://feedingamericaaction.org/wp-content/uploads/2021/04/
Resource_Feeding-America-TEFAP-State-by-State-Guide.pdf.
53 For an explanation of appropriated mandatory spending, see CRS Report R44582, Overview of Funding Mechanisms
in the Federal Budget Process, and Selected Examples.
Congressional Research Service

9

link to page 14 link to page 23 The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

year. TEFAP’s administrative funds are discretionary spending and require an annual
appropriation.54
As shown in Table 1, TEFAP spending totaled more than $1.6 billion in FY2022—over $500
million of which was temporary aid provided under pandemic response laws (discussed further in
“COVID-19 Pandemic Response”).
Table 1. TEFAP Spending, FY2022
Spending
Category
($ in millions)
Entitlement foods
465.4
Administrative (storage and distribution) funds
136.2
Bonus foods
517.0
Farm to Food Bank Projects
7.5
Reach and Resiliency Grants
39.4
COVID-19 pandemic response funding provided by the CARES
500.0
Act (P.L. 116-136) (used for entitlement foods and administrative
funds)
Total
1,665.5
Source: USDA, Office of Budget & Program Analysis, 2024 USDA Explanatory Notes – Food and Nutrition Service,
p. 35-137.
Notes: Table displays food and administrative funds made available to states and USDA bonus purchases. State
funds are after conversion of any entitlement commodity funds to administrative funds, and administrative funds
to commodity funds, and include any entitlement food and administrative funds that states carried over from the
prior fiscal year.
Commodity Food Support
Entitlement Commodities
Mandatory funding for TEFAP commodities is authorized by Section 27 of the Food and
Nutrition Act (codified at 7 U.S.C. §2036). The act authorizes $250 million annually plus
additional amounts each year in FY2019 through FY2023 as a result of amendments made by the
2018 farm bill (P.L. 115-334). In FY2019, the additional amount was $23 million; for each of
FY2020-FY2023, the additional amount is $35 million. The base funding of $250 million is
adjusted for food price inflation in accordance with USDA’s Thrifty Food Plan, which was
updated in 2021.55 Appropriations may also provide additional discretionary funding for
commodities beyond the levels set in the Food and Nutrition Act.

54 Funding for TEFAP’s entitlement commodities is typically contained in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program (SNAP) account and appropriations for administrative costs is typically contained in the Commodity
Assistance Program account of annual appropriations acts.
55 Amounts are adjusted using the Thrifty Food Plan (TFP), a USDA-calculation that estimates the cost of purchasing a
nutritionally adequate low-cost diet. The TFP is the cheapest of four diet plans meeting minimal nutrition requirements
devised by USDA. USDA calculates the cost of the TFP each year to account for food price inflation; additionally, in
2021 USDA reassessed the contents of the TFP (often thought of as a market basket of goods), which resulted in an
increase to TEFAP entitlement commodity funding starting in FY2022. USDA, FNS, “The Emergency Food
Assistance Program (TEFAP): Thrifty Food Plan (TFP) Adjustment of TEFAP Funding,” FNS-GD-2021-0086, August
16, 2021.
Congressional Research Service

10

link to page 16 link to page 16 link to page 21 The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

Historically, appropriations laws have allowed states to convert a portion of their funds for
entitlement commodities into administrative funds.56 In past years, states were allowed to convert
10% of funds; FY2018 and FY2019 appropriations acts increased the proportion to 15%, and
FY2020-FY2023 appropriations acts increased the proportion to 20%.57 States typically exercise
this option; for example, in FY2022, states converted $49.4 million out of a possible $80 million
in eligible funds.58 States are also allowed to carry over entitlement commodity funds into the
next fiscal year.59
Within USDA, FNS works closely with AMS to determine which entitlement foods are available
for TEFAP and considers input from state and local agencies (discussed further in the “USDA
Food Purchasing, Ordering, and Delivery Process” section). According to statute, USDA must,
“to the extent practicable and appropriate, make purchases based on (1) agricultural market
conditions; (2) preferences and needs of States and distributing agencies; and (3) preferences of
recipients.”60
Bonus Commodities
Bonus commodities are purchased at USDA’s discretion throughout the year using separate
budget authority. USDA’s purchases of bonus commodities are based on agricultural surpluses or
other economic problems, as raised by farm and industry organizations and assessed by USDA’s
own commodity experts. The amount and type of bonus commodities that USDA purchases for
TEFAP fluctuates from year to year, and depends largely on agricultural market conditions. States
and recipient agencies are not required to accept bonus foods. The level of bonus commodities
within TEFAP has fluctuated substantially over time (see Figure 3).
USDA’s purchases of bonus commodities stem from two authorities: Section 32 of the Act of
August 24, 1935 and the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC).61 Section 32 is a permanent
appropriation that sets aside the equivalent of 30% of annual customs receipts to support the farm
sector through the purchase of surplus commodities and a variety of other activities.62 The CCC is
a government-owned entity that finances authorized programs that support U.S. agriculture. Its
operations are supported by USDA’s Farm Service Agency. The CCC has permanent, indefinite
authority to borrow up to $30 billion from the U.S. Treasury to finance its programs.63
Section 32 has historically financed TEFAP commodities to a greater extent than the Commodity
Credit Corporation.64 Unlike CCC support, which is normally limited to price-supported
commodities (such as milk, grains, and sugar), Section 32 is less constrained in the types of

56 States may also convert any amount of administrative funds into food funds, but this happens to a lesser extent.
57 For FY2002-FY2008, states were allowed to convert $10 million of entitlement commodity funds into administrative
funds. For FY2009-FY2017, states were allowed to convert 10% of entitlement commodity funds into administrative
funds.
58 USDA, Office of Budget & Program Analysis, 2024 USDA Explanatory Notes – Food and Nutrition Service, p. 35-
137.
59 This has occurred since FY2015 as a result of a provision in the 2014 farm bill (P.L. 113-79).
60 Section 27 of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (codified at 7 U.S.C. §2036(b)).
61 For Section 32 purchasing authorities, see Section 32 of the act of August 24, 1935 (P.L. 74-320). For CCC
purchasing authorities, see Section 5 of the CCC Charter Act. The Secretary’s authority to donate such commodities to
TEFAP is established by Section 17 of the Commodity Distribution Reform and WIC Amendments Act Of 1987.
62 For more information, see CRS Report RL34081, Farm and Food Support Under USDA’s Section 32 Program.
63 For more information, see CRS Report R44606, The Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC).
64 CRS communication with the Food and Nutrition Service in September 2018.
Congressional Research Service

11

The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

commodities that may be provided, and can include meats, poultry, fruits, vegetables, and
seafood.
USDA’s Recent Use of the Commodity Credit Corporation
In recent years, USDA has used CCC authority to distribute additional commodities through
TEFAP.65
In 2018 and 2019, the Trump Administration announced two trade aid packages aimed at assisting
farmers impacted by retaliatory tariffs, using CCC authority.66 The first trade aid package,
announced in August 2018, included $1.2 billion in purchases of commodities for distribution to
TEFAP and other domestic food assistance programs.67 The second trade aid package, announced
in May 2019, provided another $1.4 billion for such purposes.68 In total, USDA distributed $1.1
billion worth of trade mitigation foods through TEFAP in FY2019 and $1.2 billion in FY2020.69
USDA provided a smaller amount of funding for organizations’ operational expenses associated
with storing and distributing trade mitigation foods.70
In FY2023, the Biden Administration allocated $943 million in CCC aid for TEFAP, which was
intended to help organizations “address supply chain challenges and elevated food costs” (food
deliveries occurring in FY2023 and FY2024).71 In November 2023, USDA announced another
round of CCC aid ($943 million) for the same purpose, with deliveries starting in FY2024.72 Both
rounds of aid included a smaller amount of funding for organizations’ operational costs.
USDA Food Purchasing, Ordering, and Delivery Process
The processes for procuring and delivering USDA Foods are based on federal law, regulations,
and agency policy. The process described in this section is specific to TEFAP, but similar
processes are used for other federal nutrition assistance programs that use USDA Foods.

65 For more information on the CCC, see CRS Report R44606, The Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC).
66 For more information, see CRS Report R45310, Farm Policy: USDA’s 2018 Trade Aid Package; and CRS Report
R45865, Farm Policy: USDA’s 2019 Trade Aid Package.
67 For more information, see CRS Report R45310, Farm Policy: USDA’s 2018 Trade Aid Package; and CRS Report
R45865, Farm Policy: USDA’s 2019 Trade Aid Package. USDA, “USDA Announces Details of Assistance for
Farmers Impacted by Unjustified Retaliation,” press release, August 27, 2018, https://www.usda.gov/media/press-
releases/2018/08/27/usda-announces-details-assistance-farmers-impacted-unjustified. The largest purchases announced
include pork, sweet cherries, apples, pistachios, dairy, and almonds.
68 USDA, “USDA Announces Support for Farmers Impacted by Unjustified Retaliation and Trade Disruption,” press
release, May 23, 2019, https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2019/05/23/usda-announces-support-farmers-
impacted-unjustified-retaliation-and.
69 USDA, FNS, “FY2023 USDA Explanatory Notes – Food and Nutrition Service,” p. 35-134, https://www.usda.gov/
sites/default/files/documents/35-2023-FNS.pdf.
70 USDA, FNS, “Trade Mitigation Program Eligible Recipient Agency Operational Funds,” January 14, 2020,
https://www.fns.usda.gov/usda-foods/trade-mitigation-program-eligible-recipient-agency-operational-funds; and
USDA, FNS, “Terms and Conditions for Funds Available for Storage and Distribution of Food Purchase Distribution
Program Foods,” December 5, 2019, https://www.fns.usda.gov/tefap/terms-and-conditions-funds-available-storage-
and-distribution-food-purchase-distribution.
71 USDA, FNS, “Conditions for Funds Available for the Storage and Distribution of Commodity Credit Corporation
(CCC) USDA Foods,” February 3, 2023, https://www.fns.usda.gov/tefap/conditions-funds-available-storage-
distribution-ccc-foods.
72 USDA, FNS, “FY 2024 Commodity Credit Corporation TEFAP Funding,” November 30, 2023,
https://www.fns.usda.gov/tefap/fy24-ccc-funding.
Congressional Research Service

12

The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

The process starts with determining what foods will be available. In the case of entitlement
commodities, FNS and AMS work together to determine a list of foods for the fiscal year that will
be procurable by USDA and usable by emergency feeding organizations.73 In the case of bonus
commodities, AMS determines which foods it will purchase on an ongoing basis throughout the
year based on the needs of producers.
State agencies, in consultation with emergency feeding organizations, place orders via the USDA
Foods catalog (in some cases, state agencies delegate this responsibility to food banks).74 They
use their allocated entitlement funds to choose foods from a list that includes meats, eggs, grains,
fruits, vegetables, beans, nuts, and milk. They can also opt to receive preselected bonus foods, if
available. (Types of entitlement and bonus foods available are discussed further in the next
section of this report.) Most foods show up in the catalog on a quarterly basis; others are only
available in the catalog at certain times of the year (e.g., fresh whole apples).75
Once organizations make their selections, AMS publishes a solicitation via an online system,
which “describes USDA’s needs in terms of the product, volume, delivery destination (city/State)
and delivery window, and invites approved vendors to submit offers to fill the demand.”76 Pre-
approved vendors may respond to the solicitation and then AMS reviews the offers and awards
contracts. Per the terms of the contract, a vendor may deliver food to a state warehouse, directly
to a food bank or emergency feeding organization, or to a food processor (if the state or food bank
opts to use a portion of their entitlement funds for this purpose).77 Once the product has been
delivered, AMS pays the vendor.78 Depending on the product, it takes roughly two to five months
from solicitation through delivery.79
Types of Foods
USDA-purchased agricultural products (USDA Foods) in TEFAP include a variety of products,
such as meats, eggs, vegetables, soup, beans, nuts, peanut butter, cereal, pasta, milk, and juice.80
Most foods are nonperishable and ready for distribution when delivered to states, although some
foods, such as some meat, dairy, and fresh produce, require refrigeration.81 USDA has made
efforts in recent years to increase kosher and halal USDA Foods and raise awareness of available
options.82 States (and sometimes designated recipient agencies) select entitlement commodities
from a catalog of USDA Foods.

73 For the FY2023 list, see USDA, FNS, “USDA Foods Available List for The Emergency Food Assistance Program
(TEFAP) FY2023,” April 2023, https://www.fns.usda.gov/tefap/usda-foods-available-list-tefap.
74 7 C.F.R. §250.10; 7 C.F.R. §251.2(i).
75 See “AMS CPP Procurement Schedule” at https://www.ams.usda.gov/selling-food/solicitations.
76 USDA, AMS, “How the Process Works,” https://www.ams.usda.gov/selling-food/how-process-works.
77 7 C.F.R. §250.11.
78 USDA, AMS, “How the Process Works,” https://www.ams.usda.gov/selling-food/how-process-works.
79 See “AMS CPP Procurement Schedule” at https://www.ams.usda.gov/selling-food/solicitations.
80 USDA, FNS, “USDA Foods Available List for The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) FY2023,” April
2023, https://www.fns.usda.gov/tefap/usda-foods-available-list-tefap.
81 C. Cabili, E. Eslami, and R. Briefel, White Paper on the Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), prepared by
Mathematica for the Office of Policy Support, Food and Nutrition Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, August
2013, https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/TEFAPWhitePaper.pdf. USDA added mixed fresh produce
boxes to its TEFAP offerings in 2021 following the completion of the separate Farmers to Families Food Box Program.
For more information, see USDA, FNS, “TEFAP Fresh Produce,” March 30, 2021, https://www.fns.usda.gov/tefap/
fresh-produce.
82 USDA, Office of Budget & Program Analysis, 2024 USDA Explanatory Notes – Food and Nutrition Service, p. 35-
136.
Congressional Research Service

13

The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

In contrast, USDA selects bonus foods based on market conditions. In FY2022, bonus food
purchases included “pears, dates, raisins, hazelnuts, great northern beans, grapefruit, oranges,
pink salmon, Alaska pollock, chicken, pistachios, grapes, haddock, perch, Atlantic pollock,
plums, nectarines, peaches, bison, sweet potatoes, almonds, figs, walnuts, sweet cherries,
rockfish, shrimp, and whiting.”83
Research has shown that TEFAP foods are relatively nutritious compared to foods in the average
American diet. According to a 2012 USDA study, TEFAP entitlement and bonus foods delivered
to states in FY2009 scored 88.9 points out of a possible 100 points on the Healthy Eating Index—
a measure of compliance with federal dietary guidelines—compared to 57.5 points scored by the
average American diet.84 Keeping in mind that TEFAP foods are generally meant to supplement
diets, the study also found that these foods would supply 81% of fruits, 69% of vegetables, 98%
of grains, 171% of protein, 36% of dairy, 84% of oils, and 39% of the maximum solid fats and
added sugars recommended for a 2,000-calorie diet.85 In addition, a 2023 study compared
TEFAP’s list of available foods in FY2022 with the Healthy Eating Research Nutrition
Guidelines for the Charitable Food System, which classify foods as green (choose often), yellow
(choose sometimes), or red (choose rarely) based primarily on the amount of saturated fat,
sodium, and added sugars they contain.86 The study found that 59% of TEFAP foods were in the
green category, 36% were in the yellow category, and 3% were in the red category (2% were not
ranked because they were condiments or cooking staples).87
Administrative Cash Support
TEFAP provides funds to cover state and recipient agency costs related to processing, storing,
transporting, and distributing USDA-purchased commodities, as well as administrative costs
related to determining eligibility, training staff, recordkeeping, and other activities.88
Administrative funds can also be used to support states’ food recovery efforts.89

83 USDA, Office of Budget & Program Analysis, 2024 USDA Explanatory Notes – Food and Nutrition Service, p. 35-
136.
84 Federal dietary guidelines refer to the 2010 USDA Food Patterns, which are based on the Dietary Guidelines for
Americans. USDA, FNS, Nutrient and MyPyramid Analysis of USDA Foods in Five of Its Food and Nutrition
Programs, prepared by Westat for the Office of Research and Analysis, January 2012, pp. 3-76–3-84,
https://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/ops/NutrientMyPyramid.pdf.
85 USDA, FNS, Nutrient and MyPyramid Analysis of USDA Foods in Five of Its Food and Nutrition Programs,
prepared by Westat for the Office of Research and Analysis, January 2012, https://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/
ops/NutrientMyPyramid.pdf.
86 Healthy Eating Research, Healthy Eating Research Nutrition Guidelines for the Charitable Food System, March
2020, p. 11.
87 M.F. Gombi-Vaca and M.B. Schwartz, “Evaluation of US Department of Agriculture Foods Programs for
Households Using Nutrition Guidelines for the Charitable Food System,” Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and
Dietetics, 2023.
88 Section 204 of the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 (codified at 7 U.S.C. §7508).
89 Section 203D and Section 204 of the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 (codified at 7 U.S.C. 7§507). Also see
C. Cabili, E. Eslami, and R. Briefel, White Paper on the Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), prepared by
Mathematica for the Office of Policy Support, Food and Nutrition Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, August
2013, https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/TEFAPWhitePaper.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

14

The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

The Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 authorizes $100 million to be appropriated annually
for administrative costs.90 In FY2023, appropriators designated $92 million in discretionary
funding for TEFAP administrative funds, up from approximately $80 million in recent years.91
The Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 also authorizes up to $15 million to be appropriated
for TEFAP infrastructure grants (and this authority was extended by the 2018 farm bill). Funds
were last appropriated for these grants in FY2010.92 In 2021, USDA announced $100 million in
American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA; P.L. 117-2) funding for new Reach and Resiliency grants that
include infrastructure improvements (discussed below).93
The statute specifies that administrative funds must be made available to states, which must in
turn distribute at least 40% of the funds to emergency feeding organizations.94 However, states are
required to match whatever administrative funds they keep. As a result, states typically send
nearly all of these funds to emergency feeding organizations.95
States can convert any amount of their administrative funds to food funds, but this happens to a
lesser extent than the conversion of food funds to administrative funds.96
Other Funding
Farm to Food Bank Projects
The 2018 farm bill (§4018 of P.L. 115-334) authorized projects to support the harvesting,
processing, packaging, and/or transportation of raw or unprocessed commodities from
agricultural producers, processors, and distributors to emergency feeding organizations—termed
Farm to Food Bank Projects by USDA. The law provided $4 million in annual mandatory
funding for the projects from FY2019 to FY2023 and required at least a 50% nonfederal match. It
also required states to include a plan of operations for Farm to Food Bank Projects in their state
TEFAP plans in order to receive funding. The law gave USDA discretion to determine how funds
would be allocated to such states; through rulemaking published in October 2019, USDA
established that funds would be allocated the same way as current TEFAP entitlement funds:

90 Section 204 of the Emergency Food Assistance Act Of 1983 (codified at 7 U.S.C. §7508).
91 “Explanatory Statement Submitted by Mr. Leahy, Chair of the Senate Committee on Appropriations, Regarding H.R.
2617, Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023,” Congressional Record, vol. 168, book 3, p. S7829 (December 19,
2022). The amount was $81 million in FY2022 and $79.6 million in FY2021 and FY2020, according to the committee
reports accompanying the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2022 (P.L. 117-103), Consolidated Appropriations Act,
2021 (P.L. 116-260), and the Further Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2020 (P.L. 116-94).
92 USDA, FNS, The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) General Infrastructure Grant,
https://www.fns.usda.gov/emergency-food-assistance-program-tefap-general-infrastructure-grant; Section 209 of the
Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 (codified at 7 U.S.C. §7511a).
93 USDA, “USDA to Invest $1 Billion to Purchase Healthy Food for Food Insecure Americans and Build Food Bank
Capacity,” June 4, 2021, https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2021/06/04/usda-invest-1-billion-purchase-
healthy-food-food-insecure-americans.
94 Section 204 of the Emergency Food Assistance Act Of 1983 (codified at 7 U.S.C. §7508). States may count funds
they spend on direct expenses of emergency feeding organizations toward this requirement.
95 For the percentage of administrative funds distributed to recipient organizations by state, see USDA, FNS,
“Percentage of TEFAP Administrative Funds Passed Through from State Agencies to Emergency Feeding
Organizations: FY2021,” https://www.fns.usda.gov/tefap/percentage-tefap-administrative-funds-passed-through-state-
agencies-emergency-feeding.
96 USDA, Office of Budget & Program Analysis, 2024 USDA Explanatory Notes – Food and Nutrition Service, p. 35-
136.
Congressional Research Service

15

link to page 21 link to page 21 link to page 21 link to page 26 link to page 30 The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

based on state’s shares of households in poverty and unemployed persons (see “State Allocation
Formula”).97
FNS awarded Farm to Food Bank funds to 19 states in FY2020, 24 states in FY2021, 29 states in
FY2022, and 28 states in FY2023 that submitted plans to implement projects.98 Projects typically
focus on setting up state-level infrastructure to facilitate relationships between agricultural donors
and feeding organizations, rescuing or gleaning commodities, processing foods into end products,
and distributing foods through food bank networks. Some states used funds to support statewide
initiatives, while others have funded specific projects carried out by a single organization or
group of organizations. Likewise, some projects support various agricultural sectors while others
focus on specific commodities (e.g., blueberries and cheese). In many cases, federal funding is
supporting pre-existing state and local initiatives.99
Reach and Resiliency Grants
In June 2021, the Biden Administration announced its intent to use $100 million in ARPA funds
for infrastructure grants for emergency feeding organizations.100 FNS issued a Request for
Applications for a first round of Reach and Resiliency grants in December 2021 that explained
that the grants would be awarded competitively to TEFAP state agencies to expand the program
into remote, rural, tribal, and low-income areas currently underserved by TEFAP.101 Funds may be
used for needs assessments, equipment and supplies, building and warehouse renovations, mobile
distribution infrastructure, staff training, and outreach to underserved populations, among other
activities. FNS awarded $39 million to 38 states in June 2022 for the first round of Reach and
Resiliency grants, and $58.5 million to 40 states in a second round of awards in June 2023.102
Funding Trends
Figure 3 displays TEFAP funding for administrative costs, entitlement commodities, and bonus
commodities from the program’s inception (FY1983) to FY2022 in constant (inflation-adjusted)
dollars (see Appendix A for specific dollar amounts). Available TEFAP funding reached a recent
high in FY2020 as a result of additional funding for entitlement commodities and administrative
costs provided by COVID-19 pandemic response acts and the Trump Administration’s trade
mitigation program. Previously, spending was highest around the time of the program’s inception,
when TEFAP served as a means for disposing of large stockpiles of government-held
commodities (for further legislative history, see Appendix C).

97 USDA, FNS, “The Emergency Food Assistance Program: Implementation of the Agriculture Improvement Act of
2018,” 84 Federal Register 52997 October 4, 2019, https://www.federalregister.gov/documents/2019/10/04/2019-
21665/the-emergency-food-assistance-program-implementation-of-the-agriculture-improvement-act-of-2018. For more
information on Farm to Food Bank Projects, see USDA, FNS, “The Emergency Food Assistance Program Farm to
Food Bank Project Grants,” https://www.fns.usda.gov/tefap/farm-to-food-bank-project-grants.
98 USDA, FNS, “The Emergency Food Assistance Program Farm to Food Bank Project Grants,” December 1, 2022,
https://www.fns.usda.gov/tefap/farm-to-food-bank-project-grants.
99 USDA, FNS, “FY 2022 Farm to Food Bank Project Summaries,” https://www.fns.usda.gov/tefap/fy-2022-farm-food-
bank-project-summaries.
100 USDA, “USDA to Invest $1 Billion to Purchase Healthy Food for Food Insecure Americans and Build Food Bank
Capacity,” June 4, 2021, https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2021/06/04/usda-invest-1-billion-purchase-
healthy-food-food-insecure-americans.
101 USDA, FNS, “The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) Reach and Resiliency Grants: Fiscal Year 2022
Request for Applications (RFA),” CDFA 10.568, December 6, 2021.
102 USDA, FNS, “TEFAP Reach and Resiliency Grant Initiative,” https://www.fns.usda.gov/tefap/reach-resiliency-
grant.
Congressional Research Service

16

link to page 26

The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

Figure 3. TEFAP Funding, FY1983-FY2022

Source: CRS calculations using USDA, FNS Congressional Budget Justifications for FY1983-FY2024. Amounts
are in FY2022 dol ars, adjusted for GDP inflation by CRS using Office of Management and Budget (OMB),
“Historical Tables: Table 10.1—Gross Domestic Product and Deflators Used in the Historical Tables: 1940–
2028.”
Notes: Graph displays food and administrative funds made available to states and USDA bonus purchases.
Graph does not include Farm to Food Bank Project or Reach and Resiliency Grant funding. For additional notes,
see Table A-1.
State Allocation Formula
TEFAP’s entitlement commodity and administrative funds are allocated to states based on a
statutory formula that takes into account poverty and unemployment rates.103 Specifically, USDA
calculates each state’s share of the total national number of households with incomes below the
federal poverty level and each state’s share of the total national number of unemployed
individuals. A state’s share of households in poverty is then multiplied by 60% and its share of
unemployed individuals is multiplied by 40% to calculate the state’s share of TEFAP
commodities and funds. For example, if a state has 4% of all households in poverty and 2% of all
unemployed individuals, it would receive (4% x 60% = 2.4%) + (2% x 40% = 0.8%) = 3.2% of
TEFAP funds.104 As noted previously, states may carry over any extra food or administrative
funds for one fiscal year (e.g., from FY2022 to FY2023).

103 7 C.F.R. §251.3(h). Administrative funds use the same formula as commodities according to Section 204 of the
Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 (codified at 7 U.S.C. §7508).
104 This explanation draws upon Appendix B of C. Cabili, E. Eslami, and R. Briefel, White Paper on the Emergency
Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), prepared by Mathematica for the Office of Policy Support, Food and Nutrition
Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, August 2013, https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/
TEFAPWhitePaper.pdf.
Congressional Research Service

17

The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

State Funding
States must match any administrative funds that are not allocated to emergency feeding
organizations or expended by the state on behalf of such organizations.105 In practice, most states
use 80% to 100% of their administrative funds to support emergency feeding organizations,
resulting in a small state match requirement.106
Beyond the state match, 14 states reported supplying additional state funds “to support the
TEFAP program either directly or indirectly” in a national survey conducted by the Washington
State Department of Agriculture in 2015.107
There is also a maintenance of effort requirement in TEFAP, meaning that states cannot reduce
their own funding or commodity support for recipient agencies below the level that they were
supporting such organizations at the program’s inception or FY1988 (when the maintenance of
effort went into effect)—whichever is later.108
Role of TEFAP During Disasters and Emergencies
There are two main ways TEFAP can be deployed in disaster response: (1) transferring TEFAP
foods to disaster response organizations for distribution to households (Disaster Household
Distribution programs) and (2) adjusting TEFAP program rules and/or distributing additional aid
through TEFAP. Both of these approaches have been used during the COVID-19 pandemic
(discussed in the next section).
During a presidentially declared disaster or emergency, USDA may approve state requests to
operate Disaster Household Distribution programs and repurpose USDA Foods (largely from
TEFAP) for direct distribution to households in areas affected by an emergency or disaster.109
USDA later replenishes or reimburses TEFAP and federal nutrition assistance programs for the
reprogrammed foods.110 Disaster Household Distribution facilitates faster distribution to
households by reducing administrative requirements (e.g., removing eligibility determinations);
however, it temporarily results in lower USDA Foods inventory for TEFAP and other federal
nutrition assistance programs. USDA authorized Disaster Household Distribution using TEFAP
foods in several states in recent years, including during the COVID-19 pandemic.111

105 Section 204 of the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 (codified at 7 U.S.C. §7508).
106 USDA, FNS, “Percentage of TEFAP Administrative Funds Passed Through from State Agencies to Emergency
Feeding Organizations: FY2021,” https://www.fns.usda.gov/tefap/percentage-tefap-administrative-funds-passed-
through-state-agencies-emergency-feeding. Note that territories are exempted from the matching requirement if it is
under $200,000 (7 C.F.R. §251.9).
107 Washington State Department of Agriculture, The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Distribution
National Survey 2015, AGR 609-574.
108 Section 215 of the Emergency Food Assistance Act of 1983 (codified at 7 U.S.C. §7516).
109 7 C.F.R. §250.69; USDA, FNS, Food Distribution Division, “USDA Foods Program Disaster Manual,” revised
September 2017, https://fns-prod.azureedge.net/sites/default/files/fdd/disaster-manual.pdf; USDA, FNS, “USDA Foods
Disaster Assistance,” https://www.fns.usda.gov/disaster/usda-foods-disaster-assistance. Note that households cannot
receive both disaster SNAP benefits and disaster USDA Foods. USDA Foods for household consumption are most
often obtained from inventories intended for TEFAP, the Commodity Supplemental Food Program, and the Food
Distribution Program on Indian Reservations.
110 7 C.F.R. §250.69(g).
111 For example, foods intended for TEFAP were used for disaster response in Florida, Texas, and Puerto Rico
following Hurricanes Irma, Harvey, and Maria in 2017. For a list of FNS’s disaster response by state, see USDA, FNS,
“State by State FNS Disaster Assistance,” https://www.fns.usda.gov/disaster/state-by-state.
Congressional Research Service

18

link to page 24 The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

Additional foods may also be distributed through TEFAP to aid in disaster and emergency
response, and additional flexibilities may be provided. Congress may provide supplemental
funding for disaster or emergency feeding through TEFAP, as was the case during the COVID-19
pandemic and during hurricanes and wildfires in recent years.112 In addition, USDA and/or states
may adjust certain program rules during a disaster or emergency (e.g., by amending state plans).
COVID-19 Pandemic Response
The COVID-19 pandemic response included both transferring TEFAP foods to Disaster
Household Distribution programs and distributing a higher volume of foods and funds through
TEFAP.113
During the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic, USDA authorized some states’ requests to
use TEFAP foods for Disaster Household Distribution. Following the presidential emergency
declaration for COVID-19, USDA approved requests from 21 states, Guam, and 33 tribal nations
to repurpose TEFAP foods for Disaster Household Distribution.114 These approvals had different
timeframes but typically ended by July 2020.
There was also additional federal aid distributed through TEFAP as a result of funding provided
by COVID-19 pandemic response acts. Specifically, supplemental appropriations for TEFAP
entitlement foods and administrative funds were provided by the Families First Coronavirus
Response Act (FFCRA; P.L. 116-127) ($400 million), the CARES Act (P.L. 116-136) ($450
million), and the Consolidated Appropriations Act, FY2021 (P.L. 116-260) ($400 million). In
addition, the Biden Administration decided to use another $500 million in CARES Act funds for
TEFAP entitlement purchases and administrative funds and $100 million in ARPA funds for
Reach and Resiliency grants (discussed previously).115 These amounts and authorities are shown
in Table 2.
During the pandemic, USDA also encouraged states to make policy changes within TEFAP to
facilitate food distribution, such as expanding eligibility rules for participants and waiving
signature requirements for the receipt of TEFAP foods.116

112 For example, the Bipartisan Budget Act of 2018 (P.L. 115-123) provided $24 million in supplemental funding for
TEFAP commodities and administrative funds to jurisdictions that received a major disaster or emergency declaration
related to the consequences of Hurricanes Harvey, Irma, and Maria or wildfires in 2017.
113 For further discussion of the use of TEFAP in responding to the COVID-19 pandemic, see CRS Report R46681,
USDA Nutrition Assistance Programs: Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic.
114 USDA, FNS, “Disaster Household Distribution,” June 11, 2020, https://www.fns.usda.gov/usda-foods/covid-19-
disaster-household-distribution.
115 USDA, FNS, “The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Allocation of Supplemental Food and
Administrative Funds from Division B of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES Act),”
FNS-GD-2021-0083, August 4, 2021.
116 USDA, FNS, “Questions and Answers related to COVID-19 and the Emergency Food Assistance Program
(TEFAP),” May 22, 2020, https://www.fns.usda.gov/tefap/covid-19-qas; USDA, Office of Inspector General (OIG),
COVID-19—Oversight of the Emergency Food Assistance Program—Final Report, August 18, 2023,
https://usdaoig.oversight.gov/reports/inspection-evaluation/covid-19-oversight-emergency-food-assistance-program-
final-report.
Congressional Research Service

19

link to page 24 link to page 24 link to page 24 link to page 24 link to page 24 The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

Table 2. COVID-19 Response Funding for TEFAP
Budget
Authority
Authority (in order of
(millions of
enactment)
Description
Timeframe
dollars)
Families First Coronavirus
Supplemental funding for TEFAP entitlement
Made
400
Response Act (FFCRA; P.L. 116-
foods, up to $100 mil ion of which could be
available to
127), Division A, Title I,
used for administrative costs.a
states in
“Commodity Assistance
FY2020
Program”
CARES Act (P.L. 116-136),
Supplemental funding for TEFAP entitlement
Made
450
Division B, Title I, “Commodity
foods, up to $150 mil ion of which could be
available to
Assistance Program”
used for administrative costs.b
states in
FY2020
CARES Act (P.L. 116-136),
Funding for USDA "to prevent, prepare for,
Made
500
Division B, Title I, “Office of the
and respond to coronavirus by providing
available to
Secretary”
support for agricultural producers.” USDA
states in
used $500 mil ion for supplemental TEFAP
FY2022
entitlement foods, up to $100 of which could
be used for administrative funds.c
Consolidated Appropriations
Supplemental funding for TEFAP entitlement
Made
400
Act, 2021 (P.L. 116-260),
foods, up to $80 mil ion of which could be
available to
Division N, Title VII, Section
used for administrative costs.d
states in
711
FY2021
American Rescue Plan Act of
Funding for USDA “to make loans and grants Made
100
2021 (ARPA; P.L. 117-2), Title I,
and provide other assistance to maintain and
available to
Section 1001(b)(4)
improve food and agricultural supply chain
states in
resiliency.” USDA designated $100 mil ion
FY2022 and
for TEFAP Reach and Resiliency grants.e
FY2023
Total

1,850
Source: CRS, based on the referenced laws and USDA funding announcements (cited below).
Notes: Amounts made available are not necessarily the amounts expended by states.
a. USDA, FNS, “Additional Information on FY 2020 Funding Sources for TEFAP,” FNS-GD-2020-0091, June
12, 2020.
b. USDA, FNS, “The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Allocation of Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and
Economic Security Act Supplemental Appropriations,” FNS-GD-2020-0052, April 4, 2020.
c. USDA, FNS, “The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Allocation of Supplemental Food and
Administrative Funds from Division B of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security Act (CARES
Act),” FNS-GD-2021-0083, August 4, 2021.
d. USDA, FNS, “FY 2021 Food and Administrative Funding for The Emergency Food Assistance Program,”
February 16, 2021.
e. USDA, FNS, “USDA Foods from Farm to Plate: Household Highlights, December 2021,” December 22,
2021.
Farm Bill Reauthorization
TEFAP is typically amended and reauthorized through farm bills. The 2018 farm bill (P.L. 115-
334) extended TEFAP’s funding authorization and increased funding for entitlement commodities
Congressional Research Service

20

The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

through FY2023.117 The law also authorized Farm to Food Bank Projects (discussed previously)
and provided $4 million in annual mandatory funding for such projects through FY2023. In
addition, the 2018 farm bill required states to include, in their TEFAP state plans, a plan to
provide emergency feeding organizations and other recipient agencies with the opportunity to
provide input on commodity preferences and needs (e.g., in regard to USDA Foods), such as
through a state advisory board. In addition, the law required USDA to issue guidance outlining
best practices to minimize food waste of commodities donated by non-USDA entities.118
Prior farm bills have also increased funding for TEFAP’s entitlement commodities, including in
2014 (P.L. 113-79) and 2008 (P.L. 110-246). The 2014 farm bill also required USDA to develop a
plan to increase purchases of Kosher and Halal foods and allowed TEFAP funds to be spent over
two fiscal years.

117 For further discussion, see CRS Report R45525, The 2018 Farm Bill (P.L. 115-334): Summary and Side-by-Side
Comparison.
118 USDA issued guidance regarding this provision on August 15, 2019; USDA, FNS, “Best Practices to Minimize
Food Waste of Privately Donated Foods to The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) State Agencies and
Emergency Feeding Organizations,” August 15, 2019, https://www.fns.usda.gov/tefap/best-practices-minimize-food-
waste.
Congressional Research Service

21

link to page 27 link to page 27 The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

Appendix A. TEFAP Funding, FY1983-FY2022
Table A-1. Total TEFAP Funding, FY1983-FY2022
(constant [inflation-adjusted] FY2022 dollars in millions)
Disaster and
Trade
Annual
Annual
COVID-19
Mitigation
Fiscal
Administrative
Entitlement
Bonus
Foods and
Foods and
Year
Funds
Foods
Foods
Funds
Funds
Total
1983
132
-
2,184
-
-
2,316
1984
126
-
2,586
-
-
2,712
1985
138
-
2,354
-
-
2,492
1986
119
-
2,007
-
-
2,125
1987
115
-
1,950
-
-
2,066
1988
111
-
1,198
-
-
1,309
1989
107
343
290
-
-
740
1990
104
331
248
-
-
683
1991
100
303
178
-
-
581
1992
86
290
163
-
-
539
1993
84
298
197
-
-
578
1994
73
218
89
-
-
380
1995
71
116
63
-
-
249
1996
53
85
25
-
-
164
1997
71
222
50
-
-
343
1998
78
169
184
-
-
431
1999
77
149
180
-
-
405
2000
71
161
264
-
-
496
2001
71
158
507
-
-
736
2002
85
211
268
-
-
563
2003
91
198
368
-
-
656
2004
88
190
345
-
-
622
2005
84
187
221
-
-
491
2006
88
180
93
8
-
368
2007
78
175
78
-
-
332
2008
74
237
231
-
-
542
2009
115
437
486
a
-
1,038
2010
155
296
443
a
-
895
2011
88
285
294
-
-
666
2012
81
297
372
-
-
750
2013
78
298
276
7
-
659
Congressional Research Service

22

link to page 27 link to page 27 link to page 27 link to page 27 The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

Disaster and
Trade
Annual
Annual
COVID-19
Mitigation
Fiscal
Administrative
Entitlement
Bonus
Foods and
Foods and
Year
Funds
Foods
Foods
Funds
Funds
Total
2014
82
318
355
-
-
755
2015
87
386
358
-
-
832
2016
91
376
359
-
-
826
2017
96
343
310
-
-
749
2018
102
325
349
27
-
803
2019
165
283
447
0
1,175
2,070
2020b
149
100
780
660
1,299
2,989
2021b
168
339
742
421
-
1,669
2022b,c
136
465
517
500
-
1,619
Source: CRS calculations using USDA, FNS Congressional Budget Justifications for FY1983-FY2024. Amounts
are in FY2022 dol ars, adjusted for GDP inflation by CRS using Office of Management and Budget (OMB),
“Historical Tables: Table 10.1—Gross Domestic Product and Deflators Used in the Historical Tables: 1940–
2028.”
Notes: Subtotals may not sum to totals due to rounding. Table displays food and administrative funds made
available to states and USDA bonus purchases. State funds are after conversion of any entitlement commodity
funds to administrative funds, and administrative funds to commodity funds, and include any entitlement food and
administrative funds that states carried over from the prior fiscal year.
a. In FY2009 and FY2010, entitlement food and administrative fund amounts include supplemental American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act (ARRA) funding. ARRA included $100 mil ion in TEFAP commodity funding
and $50 mil ion in TEFAP administrative funding that was distributed in FY2009 and FY2010. An additional
$28 mil ion in ARRA funds were reprogrammed as TEFAP administrative funds in FY2010.
b. Table does not include Farm to Food Bank Project funding (for award amounts, see USDA, FNS, “The
Emergency Food Assistance Program Farm to Food Bank Project Grants,” December 1, 2022,
https://www.fns.usda.gov/tefap/farm-to-food-bank-project-grants).
c. Table does not include FY2022 Reach and Resiliency grant funding (for award amounts, see USDA, FNS,
“Reach and Resiliency Grant Initiative,” March 14, 2023, https://www.fns.usda.gov/tefap/reach-resiliency-
grant).
Congressional Research Service

23

link to page 29 link to page 29 link to page 29 The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

Appendix B. TEFAP Spending by State, FY2022
Table B-1. TEFAP Expenditures by State, FY2022

Disaster
Annual
Annual
Foods and
Administrative
Entitlement
Administrative
Fundsa
Foodsa
Bonus Foods
Fundsb
Total
Alabama
$2,181,440
$5,387,164
$7,792,463
$7,834,317
$23,195,385
Alaska
286,636
810,711
1,271,750
1,615,573
3,984,670
Arizona
3,566,548
6,323,016
12,849,390
12,594,499
35,333,453
Arkansas
797,552
5,433,548
5,627,083
5,541,670
17,399,853
California
21,531,202
44,761,982
66,209,824
61,715,000
194,218,008
Colorado
1,647,363
8,763,942
9,231,649
8,008,714
27,651,668
Connecticut
926,647
3,463,122
3,583,363
4,096,753
12,069,886
Delaware
197,038
1,105,109
2,769,826
2,546,860
6,618,833
DC
237,055
1,566,272
660,147
383,771
2,847,246
Florida
6,248,120
29,636,451
35,004,018
35,056,192
105,944,781
Georgia
3,828,735
11,358,173
16,314,179
17,052,976
48,554,063
Hawaii
370,701
1,781,630
1,090,285
1,441,887
4,684,502
Idaho
657,353
2,082,247
2,184,924
1,852,510
6,777,034
Il inois
3,017,139
19,249,508
18,227,488
19,392,548
59,886,683
Indiana
1,444,395
8,902,446
10,719,211
10,847,251
31,913,303
Iowa
576,866
2,585,512
3,611,806
4,643,180
11,417,365
Kansas
1,042,975
2,514,845
3,599,674
4,034,524
11,192,018
Kentucky
2,024,067
4,573,117
8,041,846
7,584,523
22,223,553
Louisiana
3,026,758
7,739,571
8,201,273
9,742,087
28,709,689
Maine
280,922
1,404,215
2,922,146
2,219,872
6,827,155
Maryland
2,511,120
8,222,959
1,711,104
2,045,270
14,490,453
Massachusetts
2,261,967
12,820,927
8,068,378
6,909,251
30,060,523
Michigan
4,529,339
9,185,141
17,172,126
19,711,858
50,598,464
Minnesota
1,523,101
6,496,604
5,194,667
4,499,106
17,713,478
Mississippi
1,002,116
3,460,180
5,612,055
5,553,807
15,628,158
Missouri
1,285,049
5,727,671
7,931,538
9,266,401
24,210,658
Montana
652,142
1,585,912
1,390,712
1,673,449
5,302,215
Nebraska
644,907
1,234,213
2,207,106
2,110,545
6,196,771
Nevada
1,133,996
5,532,162
6,647,865
5,698,429
19,012,451
New Hampshire
176,043
1,143,237
1,738,817
1,368,309
4,426,407
New Jersey
4,735,067
8,503,356
12,356,686
11,249,139
36,844,249
New Mexico
1,388,363
2,708,826
5,504,916
4,763,859
14,365,964
Congressional Research Service

24

link to page 29 link to page 29 link to page 29 link to page 29 The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

Disaster
Annual
Annual
Foods and
Administrative
Entitlement
Administrative
Fundsa
Foodsa
Bonus Foods
Fundsb
Total
New York
10,866,095
26,584,004
32,207,782
28,642,850
98,300,731
North Carolina
5,239,896
9,221,017
15,543,921
15,988,951
45,993,785
North Dakota
160,440
868,938
1,087,343
1,059,268
3,175,988
Ohio
5,566,264
11,468,014
19,136,479
18,227,771
54,398,529
Oklahoma
911,484
6,642,133
6,754,046
5,812,553
20,120,216
Oregon
1,808,435
6,518,326
7,015,254
4,808,293
20,150,308
Pennsylvania
6,177,349
11,416,978
22,373,462
24,721,947
64,689,736
Rhode Island
393,576
1,585,518
778,213
1,144,185
3,901,493
South Carolina
1,265,908
6,009,758
9,099,494
7,066,665
23,441,825
South Dakota
167,705
1,439,414
1,241,007
1,134,021
3,982,147
Tennessee
2,533,957
8,821,542
10,259,932
10,360,936
31,976,366
Texas
10,018,893
32,438,094
52,985,977
45,657,116
141,100,080
Utah
903,192
1,680,139
3,293,629
3,889,061
9,766,021
Vermont
107,059
640,586
1,359,964
478,276
2,585,884
Virginia
3,265,596
7,506,763
7,498,466
7,029,223
25,300,048
Washington
3,239,271
6,693,580
12,081,376
9,342,474
31,356,700
West Virginia
972,648
2,215,870
3,376,603
6,216,655
12,781,776
Wisconsin
2,555,412
6,259,725
6,098,598
6,075,001
20,988,736
Wyoming
151,504
645,334
840,812
523,955
2,161,604
Northern Mariana
0
219,050
0
207,075
426,125
Islandsc
Guam
63,326
227,028
194,099
648,446
1,132,899
Puerto Rico
4,025,248
12,846,132
7,513,137
5,010,244
29,394,761
Virgin Islands
105,610
206,289
426,098
426,808
1,164,806
Total
134,635,141
403,129,420
516,614,004
497,525,903 1,551,904,468
Source: Data acquired through CRS communication with USDA on June 15, 2023.
Notes: Table does not include FY2022 Reach and Resiliency grant funding (for award amounts, see USDA, FNS,
“Reach and Resiliency Grant Initiative,” March 14, 2023, https://www.fns.usda.gov/tefap/reach-resiliency-grant) or
Farm to Food Bank grant funding (for award amounts, see USDA, FNS, “FY 2022 Farm to Food Bank Project
Summaries,” November 10, 2021, https://www.fns.usda.gov/tefap/fy-2022-farm-food-bank-project-summaries).
Amounts may not sum to totals due to rounding and the fol owing: (1) entitlement food total includes $3.3
mil ion in spending on federal food procurement administrative expenses; (2) totals for administrative costs and
entitlement foods include anticipated adjustments of -$1.6 mil ion and $1.6 mil ion respectively.
a. Entitlement foods and administrative funds categories include funds carried over from FY2021. Table shows
expenditures after conversion of any entitlement commodity funds to administrative funds, and
administrative funds to commodity funds.
b. Disaster Foods and Administrative Funds category refers to COVID-19 response funding provided under
Division B, Title 1 of the CARES Act (P.L. 116-136).
c. USDA provided the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands with cash in lieu of commodities in
FY2022.
Congressional Research Service

25

The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

Appendix C. Legislative History of TEFAP
Program Inception119
In 1982, the Reagan Administration created a discretionary dairy distribution program to dispose
of stockpiles of CCC-purchased commodities (namely, cheese and butter). This effort occurred in
the aftermath of reductions in federal food assistance (e.g., food stamps) legislated in 1981 and
1982 and in the midst of an economic recession and concern over hunger and homelessness.
USDA distributed the foods to states, which selected recipient organizations.
As the program developed, there were requests for additional types of commodities such as flour,
rice, and nonfat dry milk that USDA had purchased and put in storage. In addition, there were
reports of local organizations declining foods because of a lack of storage and distribution
capacity. These and other factors prompted pressure for federal cash assistance as well as
increased variety and volume of foods. In 1983, Congress followed up with funding for grants to
help with distribution costs and legislative authority that created the Temporary Emergency Food
Assistance Program (TEFAP) (P.L. 98-8 and P.L. 98-92). Establishment of TEFAP helped reduce
federal commodity inventory and storage costs, provided an alternative source of food assistance
for low-income individuals, and supported an expanding network of charitable emergency
feeding providers that also drew food and resources from private sources.120
Changes to TEFAP’s Funding121
USDA continued to distribute large amounts of CCC-purchased foods (including cheese, butter,
nonfat dry milk, cornmeal, flour, honey, and rice) through FY1988. That year, CCC holdings
began to drop substantially because of changes in agricultural policies and the economy, and the
Reagan Administration indicated plans to phase out TEFAP. Instead, Congress authorized a
specific level of funding (starting at $120 million for FY1989) for USDA to buy commodities for
distribution through TEFAP, entitling the program to a minimum level of support regardless of the
level of federal commodity holdings (P.L. 100-435). The law also created a separate program to
buy commodities for soup kitchens and food banks not receiving TEFAP commodities
(mandatory funding was provided at $40 million for FY1989). The separate program was
established out of a concern that some food banks had trouble meeting TEFAP rules, and that
most commodities for emergency feeding were going to local agencies that distributed food
packages directly to individuals and families (e.g., food pantries), rather than to soup kitchens,
homeless shelters, and other organizations serving meals in congregate settings.
In 1990, the omnibus farm bill (P.L. 101-624) changed funding for TEFAP and the soup kitchen
program from appropriated mandatory to discretionary (dependent on annual appropriations

119 Adapted from CRS Report RL30164, The Emergency Food Assistance Program and Emergency Feeding Needs;
and CRS Issue Brief IB85095, Commodity Donations to the Poor: The Temporary Emergency Food Assistance
Program. (These reports are no longer available.)
120 Further discussion of the history and expansion of the emergency feeding network is in Doug O’Brien, Erinn Staley,
Stephanie Uchima, Eleanor Thompson, and Halley Torres Aldeen, The Charitable Food Assistance System: The
Sector’s Role in Ending Hunger in America, UPS Foundation and the Congressional Hunger Center, 2004,
https://www.hungercenter.org/wp-content/uploads/2012/10/The-Charitable-Food-Assistance-System-Americas-
Second-Harvest.pdf.
121 Adapted from CRS Report RL30164, The Emergency Food Assistance Program and Emergency Feeding Needs;
and CRS Issue Brief IB85095, Commodity Donations to the Poor: The Temporary Emergency Food Assistance
Program. (These reports are no longer available.)
Congressional Research Service

26

The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

decisions). The law also removed the word “Temporary” from the program title. Over the next
few years, funding for TEFAP declined, reaching an all-time low in FY1996. However, that same
year, the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act (PRWORA; P.L. 104-
193) reinstated appropriated mandatory funding ($100 million per year through FY2002) for
TEFAP’s entitlement foods, partly in an effort to provide a safety net for households losing access
to food stamps as a result of other provisions in the law. PRWORA also incorporated the soup
kitchen program into TEFAP.
Following these changes, funding generally increased in the late 1990s and early to mid-2000s.
There was another dip in appropriations in FY2006 and FY2007, but the 2008 farm bill raised
annual entitlement purchases to $250 million starting in FY2009 (indexed annually for food-price
inflation in later years).122 There were also supplemental funds available for TEFAP in FY2009
and FY2010 as a result of ARRA. In addition, the 2014 farm bill increased mandatory funding for
TEFAP’s entitlement commodities by a Congressional Budget Office (CBO)-estimated $125
million over five years.123 Total funding from FY2011 to FY2018 hovered around $600-$700
million annually.124
Recent Changes and Increases in Spending
As discussed in this report, there has been an influx of federal aid in TEFAP in recent years. The
2018 farm bill increased funding for TEFAP’s entitlement foods by a CBO-estimated $105
million over five years. It also provided mandatory funding of $4 million for each of FY2019-
FY2023 for new Farm to Food Bank Projects. These projects provide funds directly to local
organizations (in contrast to TEFAP’s traditional structure of federally purchased foods).
In August 2018, the Trump Administration announced an additional $1.2 billion for TEFAP bonus
purchases as part of its trade aid package.125 These and another round of purchases ($1.4 billion)
were distributed through TEFAP in FY2019 and FY2020.126 In FY2020- FY2022, TEFAP saw
another influx of aid as lawmakers aimed to use the program to address increased demand for
food assistance during the COVID-19 pandemic.127 In total, approximately $1.9 billion was
available for TEFAP in FY2019, approximately $2.7 billion was available for TEFAP in FY2020,
and approximately $1.6 billion was available in FY2021 and FY2022—more than double the
amounts available in recent prior years. It is unclear whether this level of spending is a new
normal for TEFAP, or whether it will return to previous levels.

122 See CRS Report RL33934, The 2008 Farm Bill: A Summary of Major Provisions and Legislative Action (available
to congressional clients upon request).
123 See CRS Report R43332, SNAP and Related Nutrition Provisions of the 2014 Farm Bill (P.L. 113-79).
124 USDA, FNS Congressional Budget Justifications for FY2008-FY2020, available at USDA, “Congressional
Justifications: Archived USDA Explanatory Notes,” https://www.usda.gov/obpa/congressional-justifications.
125 For more information, see CRS Report R45310, Farm Policy: USDA’s 2018 Trade Aid Package; and CRS Report
R45865, Farm Policy: USDA’s 2019 Trade Aid Package. USDA, “USDA Announces Details of Assistance for
Farmers Impacted by Unjustified Retaliation,” press release, August 27, 2018, https://www.usda.gov/media/press-
releases/2018/08/27/usda-announces-details-assistance-farmers-impacted-unjustified. The largest purchases announced
include pork, sweet cherries, apples, pistachios, dairy, and almonds.
126 USDA, “USDA Announces Support for Farmers Impacted by Unjustified Retaliation and Trade Disruption,” press
release, May 23, 2019, https://www.usda.gov/media/press-releases/2019/05/23/usda-announces-support-farmers-
impacted-unjustified-retaliation-and.
127 Nicholas Kulish, “‘Never Seen Anything Like It’: Cars Line Up for Miles at Food Banks,” April 8, 2020, New York
Times, https://www.nytimes.com/2020/04/08/business/economy/coronavirus-food-banks.html.
Congressional Research Service

27

The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP): Background and Funding

Author Information

Kara Clifford Billings

Analyst in Social Policy

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.

Congressional Research Service
R45408 · VERSION 10 · UPDATED
28

Download PDF

Download EPUB

Revision History

Dec. 29, 2023

HTML · PDF

1% changed

Jul. 11, 2023

HTML · PDF

3% changed

Jun. 15, 2022

HTML · PDF

3% changed