[House Hearing, 111 Congress]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
HEARING TO REVIEW THE FOOD
DISTRIBUTION PROGRAM ON INDIAN RESERVATIONS
=======================================================================
HEARING
BEFORE THE
SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEPARTMENT OPERATIONS,
OVERSIGHT, NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY
OF THE
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS
SECOND SESSION
__________
JUNE 23, 2010
__________
Serial No. 111-53
Printed for the use of the Committee on Agriculture
agriculture.house.gov
U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
57-927 WASHINGTON : 2010
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
For Sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office
Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; (202) 512�091800
Fax: (202) 512�092104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402�090001
COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE
COLLIN C. PETERSON, Minnesota, Chairman
TIM HOLDEN, Pennsylvania, FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma, Ranking
Vice Chairman Minority Member
MIKE McINTYRE, North Carolina BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia
LEONARD L. BOSWELL, Iowa JERRY MORAN, Kansas
JOE BACA, California TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois
DENNIS A. CARDOZA, California SAM GRAVES, Missouri
DAVID SCOTT, Georgia MIKE ROGERS, Alabama
JIM MARSHALL, Georgia STEVE KING, Iowa
STEPHANIE HERSETH SANDLIN, South RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas
Dakota K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas
HENRY CUELLAR, Texas JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska
JIM COSTA, California JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio
BRAD ELLSWORTH, Indiana ADRIAN SMITH, Nebraska
TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota DAVID P. ROE, Tennessee
STEVE KAGEN, Wisconsin BLAINE LUETKEMEYER, Missouri
KURT SCHRADER, Oregon GLENN THOMPSON, Pennsylvania
DEBORAH L. HALVORSON, Illinois BILL CASSIDY, Louisiana
KATHLEEN A. DAHLKEMPER, CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming
Pennsylvania THOMAS J. ROONEY, Florida
BOBBY BRIGHT, Alabama
BETSY MARKEY, Colorado
FRANK KRATOVIL, Jr., Maryland
MARK H. SCHAUER, Michigan
LARRY KISSELL, North Carolina
JOHN A. BOCCIERI, Ohio
SCOTT MURPHY, New York
WILLIAM L. OWENS, New York
EARL POMEROY, North Dakota
TRAVIS W. CHILDERS, Mississippi
WALT MINNICK, Idaho
______
Professional Staff
Robert L. Larew, Chief of Staff
Andrew W. Baker, Chief Counsel
April Slayton, Communications Director
Nicole Scott, Minority Staff Director
______
Subcommittee on Department Operations, Oversight, Nutrition, and
Forestry
JOE BACA, California, Chairman
HENRY CUELLAR, Texas JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska,
STEVE KAGEN, Wisconsin Ranking Minority Member
KURT SCHRADER, Oregon STEVE KING, Iowa
KATHLEEN A. DAHLKEMPER, JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio
Pennsylvania CYNTHIA M. LUMMIS, Wyoming
TRAVIS W. CHILDERS, Mississippi
Lisa Shelton, Subcommittee Staff Director
(ii)
C O N T E N T S
----------
Page
Baca, Hon. Joe, a Representative in Congress from California,
opening statement.............................................. 1
Prepared statement........................................... 3
Fortenberry, Hon. Jeff, a Representative in Congress from
Nebraska, opening statement.................................... 5
Peterson, Hon. Collin C., a Representative in Congress from
Minnesota, prepared statement.................................. 6
Witnesses
Concannon, Hon. Kevin W., Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition,
and Consumer Services, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Washington, D.C................................................ 6
Prepared statement........................................... 8
Joseph, Jr., Hon. Andrew, Council Member, Confederated Tribes of
the Colville Reservation; Chairman, Health Subcommittee,
Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians; Chairman, Northwest
Portland Area Indian Health Board, Portland, OR................ 21
Prepared statement........................................... 22
Merriman, Norma, Group Leader, Cherokee Nation Human Services,
Tahlequah, OK; accompanied by Jerry Snell, Director of Family
Assistance; and Bud Squirrel, Food Distribution Manager........ 24
Prepared statement........................................... 25
Submitted Material
Goforth Parker, Ph.D., R.N., Judy, Administrator, Nation Division
of Health, The Chickasaw Nation, submitted statement........... 39
Goodwin, Gloria, Secretary, National and Regional Board of
Directors, National Association of Food Distribution Programs
on Indian Reservations, submitted statement.................... 42
Newsom, Roxanna, President, National Association of Food
Distribution Programs on Indian Reservations, submitted paper.. 48
Rose, Ahniwake, Policy Analyst, Health and Education, National
Congress of American Indians, submitted statement and fact
sheet.......................................................... 44
Roy, Susie, Food Distribution Director, Leech Lake Band of
Ojibwe; Member, Board of Directors, National Association of
Food Distribution Programs on Indian Reservations, submitted
statement...................................................... 44
HEARING TO REVIEW THE FOOD
DISTRIBUTION PROGRAM ON INDIAN RESERVATIONS
----------
WEDNESDAY, JUNE 23, 2010
House of Representatives,
Subcommittee on Department Operations, Oversight,
Nutrition, and Forestry,
Committee on Agriculture,
Washington, D.C.
The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10:00 a.m., in
Room 1300, Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Joe Baca
[Chairman of the Subcommittee] presiding.
Members present: Representatives Baca, Dahlkemper,
Fortenberry, and Lummis.
Staff Present: Claiborne Crain, Tyler Jameson, John Konya,
James Ryder, Lisa Shelton, Pam Miller, Mary Nowak, Jamie
Mitchell, and Sangina Wright.
OPENING STATEMENT OF HON. JOE BACA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN
CONGRESS FROM CALIFORNIA
The Chairman. The hearing of the Subcommittee on Department
Operations, Oversight, Nutrition, and Forestry to review the
Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations will come to
order. With that, I will begin with opening statements.
I am Congressman Joe Baca from southern California,
representing the 43rd Congressional District. After I make my
opening statement I will turn to the Ranking Member, Mr.
Fortenberry from Nebraska, to give his opening remarks. And any
other Members, as they show up this morning, we will allow them
an opportunity to make some remarks if they wish so. If not,
then we will turn to the witnesses.
Good morning, and thank you for being here before the
Subcommittee to examine the Food Distribution Program on Indian
Reservations. For many months, I have hoped to hold this
hearing to take a closer look at the FDPIR program, which in my
opinion, does not get enough attention. It is unfortunate, but
a fact of life is that the squeaky wheel gets the grease here
in Washington, D.C.: out of sight, out of mind. And while the
tribes have continued to work hard for their communities, they
are, unfortunately, not always given the attention they deserve
from Congress.
With that said, we are long overdue in reviewing the
effectiveness of this program. In fact, we went back and looked
at the official records and could not find--and I state, could
not--find a hearing that focused exclusively on Food
Distribution Program on Indian Reservations at any time in the
recent past. So your comments are even more important.
Not to make you fearful, but you are representing many
other tribes that are not here, so your statements today are on
behalf of many others are very much interested in assuring that
we address the needs of the many tribes throughout the nation.
And your comments will also be taken into consideration as we
look at reauthorization of the 2012 Farm Bill.
We look forward to hearing from our excellent witnesses on
the range of issues that concern the Food Distribution Program
on Indian Reservations.
We all know that access to wholesome and nutritious foods
affects health, particularly among children and low-income
populations. The First Lady, Michelle Obama, has done a great
job of bringing much attention to the needs of better nutrition
across America. But as we look across America, we must look at
our reservations and the impact it is having on the tribes.
In the most recent farm bill, Congress made it a priority
to strengthen and modernize the nutritional programs like SNAP
and TEFAP which affect millions of Americans. But we must not
overlook the Federal nutrition program that serves our tribal
communities.
Sadly, the rate of diabetes in these communities is at 17
percent, almost double the rate of the rest of the population.
There is a direct correlation between poor nutrition, obesity,
and the onset of Type 2 diabetes. Proper nutrition and health
among Native American populations should be a top priority for
the Federal Government, as well as every taxpayer and every
individual, because the higher the cost of obesity due to a
lack of good nutrition, we all ultimately end up paying the
price.
That is why we are here; to get answers to so many
questions: what can we do to stay more informed on unique
circumstances of each tribal community; how can we work
together to better understand the issues like geographical
isolation? We all know what happened with the storms last year
on many reservations where you couldn't even get in. There are
chronic health problems and cultural concerns. What method
works to improve nutrition and health in tribal communities?
And what methods do not work?
What are the language barriers? What changes, if any, need
to be made to the existing Food Distribution Program on Indian
Reservations to improve its effectiveness? These are just a few
of those critical questions that we hope to answer at today's
hearing.
Again I want to thank you for your willingness to
participate in today's hearing. It is part of history. You are
making history and we are creating the kind of awareness and
the dialogue and collaboration that is needed. We are here to
listen and to learn so that we can make good policy choices. We
owe it to you and to our country to act to the best of our
ability.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Baca follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Joe Baca, a Representative in Congress from
California
Good morning, and thank you for being here before this Subcommittee
to examine the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations.
For some months now, I have hoped to hold this hearing to take a
close look at a program that--in my opinion--does not get enough
attention.
It is an unfortunate fact of life that the squeaky wheel usually
gets the grease in Washington, D.C.
And while the tribes have continued to work hard for their
communities, they are unfortunately, not always given the attention
they deserve from Congress.
With that said, we are long overdue in reviewing the effectiveness
of this program.
In fact, we went back and looked at the official records and could
not find a hearing that focused exclusively on FDPIR at any time in the
recent past.
So, your comments are even more important, as we anticipate farm
bill reauthorization in 2012.
We look forward to hearing from our excellent witnesses on the
range of issues that concern FDPIR.
We all know that access to wholesome and nutritious foods affects
health--particularly among children and low-income populations.
First Lady Michelle Obama has done a great job of bringing much
needed attention to the need for better nutrition across America.
In the most recent farm bill--Congress made it a priority to
strengthen and modernize nutrition programs like SNAP and TEFAP, which
affect millions of Americans.
But we must not overlook the Federal nutrition programs that serve
our tribal communities.
Proper nutrition and health among Native American populations
should be a top priority of the Federal Government.
That's why we are here today.
What can we do to stay more informed on the unique circumstances of
each tribal community?
How can we work together to better understand issues like
geographic isolation, chronic health problems, and cultural concerns?
What methods work to improve nutrition and health in tribal
communities; and what methods do not work?
What changes, if any, need to be made to the existing FDPIR program
to improve its effectiveness?
These are just a few of the critical questions we hope to answer at
today's hearing.
Again, I thank all of you for your willingness to participate in
today's hearing.
It is important that you share your candid thoughts with us so we
can make good decisions about this program.
We are here to listen and to learn so we can make good policy
choices.
We owe it to you and to the country to serve to the best of our
ability.
I am now pleased to yield to our Ranking Member, Rep. Jeff
Fortenberry, for his opening comments.
Attachment
I am now pleased to yield to our Ranking Member, Representative Jeff
Fortenberry from Nebraska, for his opening comments.OPENING STATEMENT
OF HON. JEFF FORTENBERRY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM NEBRASKA
Mr. Fortenberry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for holding this hearing
today to review the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations. I
appreciate the witnesses' time and look forward to the testimony on
this important subject.
This program does operate differently than the Supplemental
Nutrition Assistance Program--SNAP, as we call it--which allows
participants to purchase almost any food item from an authorized food
retailer with an electronic benefit transfer card, EBT. Instead, the
Food Distribution Program provides participants with a monthly food
package to help them maintain a nutritionally balanced diet.
While both SNAP and the Food Distribution Program have the same
goal of providing access to healthy food, the manner in which each
program achieves that goal is quite different, as the Chairman pointed
out.
As we begin this process of reauthorizing the farm bill and
nutrition programs, I am hopeful today that the witnesses will share
with us what is working well in the Food Distribution Programs and what
changes may actually need to be considered.
Chairman Baca and I have both spent a great deal of time, together
and separately, discussing health and wellness initiatives, and agree
that balanced nutrition is the key to a healthier America.
This Subcommittee has held a number of hearings to discuss the
causes, ramifications, and potential solutions to the rising rate of
obesity across the country. I am always interested in learning about
innovative approaches that encourage a healthy lifestyle that includes
nutritious diet and increased physical activity.
Seven out of every ten deaths in this country are caused by a
chronic condition, and the top four killers are heart disease,
diabetes, cancer and strokes. These are largely lifestyle-related
diseases. They could be prevented or better managed, and in some cases
even reversed through healthy lifestyle changes. The Food Distribution
Program can be a part of this solution by providing a nutritionally
balanced food package that includes quality, fresh, desirable foods
that appeal to the participants in the program as well.
I look forward, again, to hearing from our witnesses today to learn
more about how the program has actually been operating and, again, what
has been successful and what we might seek to change in the 2012 Farm
Bill.
Again, Mr. Chairman, thank you for your leadership on this issue.
And I look forward to the insights that we learn together today.
The Chairman. Thank you very much for your comments and your
continued concern as we address this issue and many other issues in
this Committee, as well.
I am going to request that other Members submit their opening
statements for the record.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Peterson follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Collin C. Peterson, a Representative in
Congress from Minnesota
Thank you, Chairman Baca, for calling today's hearing. I am glad we
are here to discuss the Federal Food Distribution Program on Indian
Reservations (FDPIR). This is the first hearing of the House
Agriculture Committee focused primarily on FDPIR and issues related to
food distribution on Indian Reservations. So, we are long overdue to
have a productive and frank conversation about how this program is
working.
Today, I hope we can take a look at the FDPIR and how it is working
for the Native American populations it is intended to serve. One of
this Committee's many responsibilities is oversight, and we need to
ensure that both the beneficiaries of FDPIR and the American taxpayer
are being well-served. As the Committee begins to consider the 2012
Farm Bill, we are taking a look at many of the programs under the
Committee's jurisdiction to be sure that we are spending available
money as effectively as possible, and today's hearing is exactly the
type of conversation we need to have.
Most people agree that FDPIR needs some improvements. And so, we
need to hear from those who use FDPIR to help us assess the current
situation and consider possible changes. I want to thank our witnesses
for testifying today and sharing their views and expertise, because is
absolutely critical to that conversation.
Chairman Baca, thank you again for holding today's hearing, and I
look forward to the testimony.
The Chairman. At this time we would like to turn it to our
first witness. We would like to welcome Honorable Kevin
Concannon, Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition, and Consumer
Services, U.S. Department of Agriculture in Washington, D.C.
Mr. Concannon, please begin when you are ready.
STATEMENT OF HON. KEVIN W. CONCANNON, UNDER
SECRETARY FOR FOOD, NUTRITION, AND
CONSUMER SERVICES, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, WASHINGTON,
D.C.
Mr. Concannon. Thank you very much. Good morning and thank
you, Mr. Chairman and Ranking Member Fortenberry, and Members
of the Committee, for this opportunity to discuss the Food
Distribution Program on Indian Reservations, or as we refer to
it, FDPIR.
I am pleased to be here today to give an overview of this
important USDA program that fulfills a vital need serving low-
income Native Americans who live on or near reservations. FDPIR
is an alternative to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
Program and is authorized under the Food and Nutrition Act of
2008. The program provides packages of nutritious USDA foods on
275 Indian Reservations, pueblos, rancherias and Alaska Native
Villages. Five state agencies and 99 Indian Tribal
Organizations, or ITOs, provide this assistance to an average
of 90,000 participants each month.
How the program works. Today's FDPIR is an updated, modern
version that is attuned to nutritional goals, and purchases
food specifically for the food package, rather than relying on
surplus items. And I think that is really important.
USDA ships foods to the ITOs and state agencies based on
their orders from a list of more than 100 available foods.
These agencies store and distribute the food, determine
applicants' eligibility, and provide nutrition education to
recipients. ITOs have latitude to decide how to set up their
food delivery system to be responsive to participant needs in
their communities, including pickup from a local warehouse,
delivery to a central location within the community, store-like
locations or, as I saw last week up in Minnesota, even routes
that may be 150 miles in terms of range that are delivered from
a central location.
President Obama's budget for this program for Fiscal Year
2011 is $110 million, which breaks out to be approximately $73
million for food purchases and approximately $37 million for
administrative funding.
The food package provides a variety of food items to
participating households to help meet their nutritional needs.
It is reviewed on an ongoing basis for its nutritional profile
and customer satisfaction by the FDPIR Food Package Review Work
Group, which includes representatives of the tribally and
state-appointed FDPIR directors, USDA procurement specialists,
nutrition and health experts from the Food and Nutrition
Service, the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and
the Indian Health Service.
One clear focus of this work group has been to reduce fat,
sugar, and sodium levels and to improve food package appeal and
convenience to recipients. As a part of the strategic plan of
the Department of Agriculture to encourage local and regional
food production, FNS is continuing to explore how traditional
foods important to many Native communities can be incorporated
into FNS' nutrition assistance programs.
With regard to Native communities, we already possess the
authority to purchase traditional foods. Incorporating these
more culturally appropriate foods will improve farm income
within the reservation communities.
Complementing the foods offered in the FDPIR are several
nutrition education initiatives. We are working with tribal
communities and other health organizations to continue to
understand the health and nutritional challenges facing those
who receive FDPIR services such as--as the Chairman has noted--
the high rates of overweight, obesity and diabetes found among
American Indians.
We have awarded approximately $1 million each year to
Indian Tribal Organizations in grants for nutrition education
since 2008, and I witnessed one of those again last week when I
was in Minnesota. These have included individual nutritional
counseling, cooking demonstrations, nutrition classes,
dissemination of information on how to use and store USDA foods
that are part of the Indian tribal food distribution programs.
Funds for administrative costs in FDPIR have been a concern
for the Indian Tribal Organizations. In 2005, FNS convened a
funding work group comprised of FNS staff, state and ITO
representatives, which resulted in a funding methodology that
allocates funding based on the number of FDPIR participants and
the number of programs in each of the seven FNS regions of the
country.
Another important enhancement for FDPIR was $5 million in
the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act funding last year to
purchase equipment and improve facilities. Funds were used for
the purchase of trucks, warehouse equipment, needed upgrades or
repairs to heating and cooling systems, roofing, and even
warehouse structures.
FNS remains committed to meeting its responsibilities as
identified in President Obama's memorandum regarding tribal
consultation and collaboration. Secretary Vilsack, our
Secretary, has an action plan for the Department of Agriculture
with regard to tribal consultation. To those ends, FNS is
working with Department officials to develop a plan to actively
engage with tribal governments in consultation regarding this
very feeding program.
Looking forward, it is clear that FDPIR continues to
fulfill an important place in the Federal food safety net. It
combines extensive reach into Indian Country with the
opportunity for local administration. Yet we are always looking
for ways to improve the program. We will continue to work
closely with partners such as ITOs, state agencies, and
Congress to ensure that we are doing all we can to assist the
Native American community.
And I thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I
look forward to answering any questions that you may have.
Thank you very much.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Concannon follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Kevin W. Concannon, Under Secretary for
Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services, U.S. Department of Agriculture,
Washington, D.C.
Good morning, and thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member
Fortenberry, and Members of the Committee, for the opportunity to
discuss the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR).
I am pleased to be here today to give an overview of this important
USDA program that fulfills a vital need to serve low-income Native
Americans who live on or near reservations. FDPIR is an alternative to
the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly the Food
Stamp Program) and is authorized under Section 4(b) of the Food and
Nutrition Act of 2008. The Program provides food packages of nutritious
USDA foods on 275 Indian Reservations, pueblos, rancherias, and Alaska
Native Villages. Five state agencies and 99 Indian Tribal Organizations
(ITOs) provide this assistance to approximately 90,000 participants
each month.
History of FDPIR
The FDPIR was born from the Needy Family Program, which predated
the Food Stamp Program and utilized surplus food donations while
operating in many counties and Indian Reservations in the 1960s and
1970s. With the effort to make the Food Stamp Program available
nationwide in the 1970s, there was also an effort to phase out the
Needy Family Program. Several tribes that were operating that program,
however, were reluctant to move toward food stamps because stores that
accepted food stamps were not always conveniently located and may not
have offered products at affordable prices. The Food Stamp Act of 1977
afforded low-income households on reservations the option of
participating in either the Food Stamp Program or FDPIR; if they so
choose, participants are actually able to switch between the two
programs each month according to their need and preference. However,
access to healthy and affordable food remains limited in or on many
reservations.
How FDPIR Works
Today's FDPIR is an updated, modern program that is attuned to
nutritional goals and purchases food specifically for the food package
rather than relying on surplus items. USDA ships food to the ITOs and
state agencies based on their orders from the list of available foods.
These agencies store and distribute the food, determine applicant
eligibility and provide nutrition education to recipients. FDPIR
operates on established Indian reservations, which are located mostly
in the West, Midwest, and Southwest and are often very rural. There are
a number of ways that participants can obtain their food packages,
including pick up from a local warehouse, delivery to a central
location within the community, or from ``store locations'' at some
reservations. ITOs have latitude to decide how to set up their food
delivery system to be responsive to participant needs in their
community. USDA provides administrative costs to administering ITOs and
state agencies to support program delivery. The President's budget for
this program for Fiscal Year 2011 is $110 million which breaks out to
approximately $72.9 million for food purchases and about $37.1 million
for administrative funding.
FDPIR Food Package
FDPIR provides a variety of food items to participating households
to help meet their nutritional needs. Included in the food package are:
frozen meats, canned meats, fresh and canned fruits and vegetables,
juices, peanuts and peanut butter, vegetable oil, soups, pastas, rice,
cereals, cheese, beans, flour, and low-fat bakery mix.
The food package is reviewed on an on-going basis for its
nutritional profile and customer satisfaction by the FDPIR Food Package
Review Work Group that includes representatives of the tribally- and
state-appointed FDPIR directors, procurement specialists from the Farm
Service Agency and the Agricultural Marketing Service, and nutrition
and health experts from the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), the
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and the Indian Health
Service.
A clear focus of the work group has been to reduce fat, sugar, and
sodium levels and to improve food package appeal and convenience to
participants. We are very proud of the FDPIR Food Package Review Work
Group and what this partnership has accomplished so far. The Work Group
is considering more improvements to the food package, such as more
fruits, vegetables, meats, reduced-fat dairy products, and whole grain
selections.
One recent item under consideration for the FDPIR food package is
bison. This item has been popular with tribes. However, due to its
higher cost, bison has only been offered with specific Congressional
appropriation. In recent discussions with the FDPIR Food Package Review
Work Group, the possibility of offering this on a seasonal basis has
been discussed, and we are working to see if this can be accommodated.
As we come closer to a resolution, we will be advising the Committee of
our progress.
Over the past several years, all USDA foods--including those
offered under FDPIR--have been subject to nutritional review and the
items in the package now have reduced sodium, sugar, and fat content.
FNS is guided in this effort by the Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
Before leaving the discussion of the food package, I want to
explain something we call DOD Fresh. Started as a pilot in October
1995, in cooperation with the Department of Defense (DOD), the program
allows DOD to supply fresh fruit and vegetables directly to schools.
Due to its success, DOD Fresh was expanded to include purchases for
FDPIR, thereby allowing the programs to order fresh fruits and
vegetables using DOD purchasing agents. About 91 percent of FDPIR
programs are enrolled in this option, allowing for a variety of fruits
and vegetables probably not available any other way. Households may
select the fresh produce in lieu of the canned fruits and vegetables
when they pick up their monthly food package.
To give an example of the fresh produce offered through DOD Fresh,
some recently added selections include more apple varieties, asparagus,
avocado, Brussels sprouts, cauliflower, cherries, seedless grapes,
honeydew melon, kiwis, Romaine lettuce, nectarines, plums, and
radishes.
FNS is working with other USDA agencies to encourage local and
regional food production as part of the overarching strategic plan of
the Department. FNS is exploring how traditional foods important to
many Native communities can be incorporated into FNS' nutrition
assistance programs. With regard to Native communities, we already
possess the authority to purchase traditional foods. Incorporating
these more culturally appropriate foods will improve farm income within
reservation communities.
Food Package Quality
The 2008 Farm Bill required USDA to review the nutritional quality
of the food package provided for FDPIR, comparing its content to
scientific standards including the Dietary Guidelines for Americans and
nutrition benefits under SNAP. We also made comparisons to the Dietary
Reference Intakes (DRIs), the Thrifty Food Plan nutrient standards and
the Healthy Eating Index--2005. To quote from the summary of the FDPIR
Food Package Nutritional Quality: Report to Congress:
The FDPIR food package provides a nutritious variety of foods,
and sufficient calories to meet the energy needs of most
sedentary individuals and many moderately active children.
While, similar to American diets in general, there is room for
improvement in the quantities of fruits, vegetables, low-fat
dairy products and whole grains, the nutritional content of the
package is considerable. Individuals consuming FDPIR foods in
the quantities provided would achieve a HEI-2005 score of 81
out of 100, considerably better than Americans in general (58
out of 100) and SNAP participants (52 out of 100). The efforts
of the FDPIR Food Package Review Work Group, a partnership
between FNS and the American Indian community to improve the
food package, have contributed to the package's quality.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ The entire report can be found at http://www.fns.usda.gov/oane/
menu/Published/FoodDistribution/FDStudies.htm.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Web-Based Ordering
FNS is currently in the midst of major system changes that will
affect the ordering process for our program operators. In the coming
months, FNS and other agencies will be transitioning to Web-Based
Supply Chain Management (WBSCM). WBSCM is an initiative to replace the
aging Processed Commodity Inventory Management System (PCIMS) and
satellite systems including USDA's Electronic Commodity Ordering System
(ECOS). WBSCM is a commercial off-the-shelf system featuring standard
e-commerce food order entry, real-time order and shipment status,
online viewing of shipment documents, and an integrated enterprise
supply chain system. It will make doing business with USDA easier by
increasing collaboration, data and information visibility, efficiency,
and improving service to customers, suppliers, and business partners
through a seamless, efficient supply chain.
WBSCM is slated to go live at the end of this month (June 2010).
This will impact FDPIR because FNS must temporarily stop most food
ordering in mid-June. FNS has been preparing FDPIR ITOs and state
agencies for this transition by providing training sessions on the new
system and encouraging all ITOs and state agencies to order the foods
they need to serve full food packages to participants in advance of the
mid-June cutoff date. Ordering through the new system will start at the
beginning of July.
Nutrition Education Materials
Complementing the foods offered in the FDPIR are several nutrition
education initiatives. We are working with Tribal communities and other
health organizations to continue to understand the health and
nutritional challenges facing those who receive FDPIR services.
American Indians in general face high rates of over weight, obesity,
and diabetes. Our concern over these diet-related illnesses is linked
to our broader concerns with the obesity epidemic. Strengthening FDPIR
is one of the many steps USDA will be taking to contribute the
Administration's goal of solving the problem of childhood obesity
within a generation. Over 16 percent of American Indian and Alaska
Native adults served by the Indian Health Service have been diagnosed
with diabetes, about twice the rate found in U.S. non-Hispanic whites.
Diabetes-related mortality for these groups is about three times the
national rate. In addition, up to 75 percent of American Indians are
lactose intolerant, potentially limiting their use of low-cost dairy
products containing lactose and presenting a challenge in delivering
adequate calcium, potassium and vitamin D.\2\ We at USDA want to be
sure that our programs are responsive to concerns about diet-related
illnesses.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ FDPIR Food Package Nutritional Quality: Report to Congress--
Summary, Food and Nutrition Service, Office of Research and Analysis,
November 2008. http://www.fns.usda.gov/oane/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
We understand that we need to be part of the solution and. USDA is
committed to ensuring that we have materials and support for increasing
nutrition awareness and effecting wise food choices. We provide FDPIR
participants with information about nutrition and suggestions for
making the most nutritious use of USDA foods. Available materials
include:
USDA food fact sheets that provide storage, preparation
tips, nutrition information, and recipes are accessible on the
FNS website: www.fns.usda.gov/fdd/programs/fdpir/cfs_fdpir.htm.
``A River of Recipes: Native American Recipes Using
Commodity Foods''--A collection of tried and true recipes
submitted by program participants (accessible on the website
at: www.fns.usda.gov/fdd/recipes/hhp/fdpir-cookbk_river1.pdf).
Also, we are developing another book containing 40 culturally
relevant recipes using USDA foods along with photographs and
graphics. Some of these recipes were submitted to us by program
participants.
In FY 2010, we distributed seven different nutrition education
videos in DVD format to each ITO and state administering FDPIR. The
videos can be shown to program participants in waiting areas, during
nutrition education classes and special events, and in other venues.
Topics covered include how to analyze food labels, eating healthy
portion sizes, and choosing healthy beverages.
In FY 2007, we initiated a FDPIR NutritionTalk Listserv. The
listserv plays a role in promoting open communication and an exchange
of information between tribal communities, USDA, and other agencies and
organizations that provide diverse nutrition education, materials,
resources, and/or health-related services to participants in FDPIR.
Administering agencies are responsible for providing nutrition
education to participants. Federal administrative funding is available
for these activities, which can include individual nutrition
counseling, cooking demonstrations, nutrition classes, and the
dissemination of information on how USDA foods may be used to
contribute to a nutritious diet and on the proper storage of USDA
foods. In FY 2008-2010, we awarded nutrition education grant funds
totaling approximately $1 million each year to ITOs. These grants were
created to enhance the nutritional knowledge of participants and to
foster positive lifestyle changes for eligible household members
through intensive, integrated nutrition education interventions.
Additionally, we are currently working in conjunction with USDA's
Food and Nutrition Information Center to develop a nutrition education
training module for FDPIR staff providing nutrition education to
recipients. The module will be available via the Internet. It will
provide tips on making nutrition education fun, advice on serving low-
literacy recipients, and information on reading food labels, nutrient
basics, food safety, and other topics. We are also developing a
depository site where nutrition education and technical assistance
materials for FDPIR recipients, and best nutrition education practices
can be shared by ITOs and states. FNS is committed to working with
Tribal governments to ensure that the administrative and delivery
mechanisms for FDPIR ensure to the greatest extent possible the dignity
and self-worth of those receiving package benefits.
Administrative Costs
Funding for administrative costs in FDPIR has been a concern for
the ITOs and, in 2005, FNS convened a FDPIR Funding Work Group
comprised of FNS staff and representative of the tribally- and state-
appointed Program Directors to develop a funding methodology that would
be fair and easy to understand.
This was a large and difficult undertaking--bringing divergent
perspectives together to solve a common problem. The result was a
funding methodology that allocates funding among the FNS Regional
Offices, with 65 percent of the funds allocated based on each Regional
Office's share of the national number of FDPIR participants, and 35
percent allocated according to the number of FDPIR programs in the
region. Each Regional Office continues to negotiate with individual
FDPIR administrators on the approval of their annual program budgets,
within the amount of funds allocated to the Regional Office.
Another important enhancement for FDPIR was $5 million in American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act (Recovery Act) funding last year to
purchase equipment and improve facilities. Funds were used for the
purchase of trucks and warehouse equipment and needed upgrades or
repairs to heating and cooling systems, roofing, and warehouse
structures.
Comparison to SNAP
I mentioned earlier that FDPIR was intended to be an alternative to
SNAP. In fact, household eligibility is very similar between the two
programs. For example, under both programs, a household's net monthly
income must be less than 100 percent of the Federal Poverty Guidelines.
However, under SNAP, states have options like waiver authority (where,
for example, the requirement for face-to-face interviews could be
waived), categorical eligibility, and other rules allowing for
flexibility. In FDPIR, the original design goal was to keep the income
and resource limits at the same level as SNAP so that most households
would be eligible for both programs. Month-to-month switches between
the programs are allowed. The more complex features in SNAP were not
carried over to FDPIR so that the program would be easier to
administer. The benefit delivered also makes the two programs differ.
In SNAP, as household income rises, the amount of SNAP benefit
decreases up to the minimum allotment. In FDPIR, there is no benefit
reduction from the full food package amount, making the food package a
better deal for those with net monthly incomes close to the income
limit.
There are also practical and cost limits to what is available for
delivery in FDPIR. While USDA does work continuously to improve the
healthfulness and variety of the foods we offer, large grocery stores
can offer thousands of items that can be purchased with SNAP Electronic
Benefits Transfer (EBT) cards; this variety of food choices is one
widely reported reason that households switch from FDPIR to SNAP. Under
the Recovery Act, the law raised the Thrifty Food Plan allotment by
13.6 percent starting in April 2009, giving households in SNAP
increased purchasing power and improving the comparative attractiveness
of SNAP to FDPIR.
Future Considerations
As we move forward, we will continue to look for opportunities to
support the nutrition needs of Native Americans, not only through FDPIR
but our other nutrition programs as well. For example, we are currently
exploring strategies for encouraging greater use of traditional native
foods through the school meals program. The 2008 Farm Bill gave schools
greater flexibility to preferentially purchase locally-produced
unprocessed agricultural projects. USDA is now working with Bureau of
Indian Affairs and Bureau of Indian Education to improve school lunch
offerings in BIA schools, while encouraging farm-to-school market
opportunities for farmers and ranchers, increasing access to
traditional foods, and implementing the First Lady's `Let's Move'
initiative focused on reducing childhood obesity within BIA schools.
FNS remains committed to meeting its responsibilities as identified
in the Presidential Memorandum regarding Tribal Consultation and
Collaboration, and the Secretary's Action Plan for the Department with
regard to implementation of E.O. 13175. We recognize the
responsibilities USDA and FNS hold with regard to Tribal governments
and their citizens and we respect the government-to-government
relationship. USDA's Strategic Plan additionally recognizes and
incorporates these important responsibilities. To those ends, FNS is
working with Department officials to craft a plan to actively engage
with Tribal governments in consultation with regard to FDPIR. We would
be glad to brief the Committee at a future date concerning the outcomes
of those consultation sessions.
Looking forward, it is clear that FDPIR continues to fulfill a
unique place in the Federal food safety net. No other nutrition
assistance program combines the reach into Indian Country with the
opportunity for local administration. Yet we are always looking to
improve the program and will continue to work closely with partners
such as ITOs, state agencies, and Congress to ensure that we are doing
all we can to assist the Native American community.
Thank you for the opportunity to testify today. I look forward to
answering any questions that you may have.
The Chairman. Thank you very much for your testimony this
morning.
Before I begin with the questions, I would like to welcome
Kathy Dahlkemper from Pennsylvania to our Committee.
With that, I will begin with some of the questions. We will
have 5 minutes, and then at the end of 5 minutes I will turn it
over to other Members here to ask additional questions.
Under Secretary, one of the questions that I have is
pertaining to diabetes. With the high rate of diabetes among
Indian populations, is there a way to combine the nutritional
goals of FDPIR with the health needs of those with diabetes?
Mr. Concannon. Mr. Chairman, yes, indeed. And again, I was
fortunate to fly up to Minnesota last week to observe firsthand
an Ojibwe Reservation's efforts and initiatives in the FDPIR
program. And while I was there, I also got to meet
representatives from the Indian Health Service, from the tribal
leadership itself, and from the FDPIR program operated in those
communities; in this case, White Earth. And they had a specific
focus on education, both preventive education to prevent
diabetes, and they showed me some very culturally aligned, very
appropriate versions of the food, My Food Pyramid that had been
adopted--or adapted, I should say--to the tribal community. It
was a tepee-shaped MyPyramid that showed in each of the
categories of MyPyramid the specific FDPIR foods and where they
fit in: the grains, the fresh vegetables, et cetera. And they
showed me some, again, efforts that they make with families
when they come in. And I was particularly pleased to see the
engagement with the Indian Health Service and the commitment of
the tribal leadership itself on the nutrition education side.
They were very much aware of it. This was an outstanding
example to see it firsthand.
So I know, as I mention in my testimony, when we select the
foods for this, we have participation from that advisory group
from the Centers for Disease Control that has a pretty
significant initiative, as it pertains to diabetes in the
Indian community. We link our education funds, and, in fact, a
person, a Native representative who was there last week, who is
actually part of the SNAP education program. So, in this
particular community, there is a lot of integration of the
various education efforts, recognizing the terrific challenges
that are there with the very high rates of diabetes that you
mentioned in your statement.
The Chairman. Thank you. Have there been any studies that
have been done? Because we should look at nutrition and
diabetes and the effects on our children and adults, and on the
life span of individuals on our reservations.
Mr. Concannon. I am not directly aware myself. I know there
have been studies done by us under CDC auspices around diabetes
in the Native Community, but I am unaware directly. I will have
that checked out in terms of life span. But I would expect it
would adversely affect life expectancy, just because of those
very high rates.
The Chairman. Right. A lot of our children are dying a lot
sooner because of obesity. That has led to a lot of interest
around the issue of nutrition and changing the culture in terms
of eating. I know that you addressed that in part of your
testimony, that we need to begin to change the culture of what
we eat. It doesn't mean that we can't eat some of the same
food, but we have to eat in moderation. It impacts us. And it
impacts the type of food distribution on our reservations, too.
Mr. Concannon. You know, Mr. Chairman, I appreciate your
reference to the food that is distributed on the reservations.
I took the occasion to spend some time in the warehouse of this
tribal organization, and the warehouse manager, as well as the
FDPIR director for the tribal community, were pointing out to
me the individual items that are now available through FDPIR.
And as I mentioned in my testimony, it is no longer the surplus
food program that it was when it started back in the 1970s. The
food has been markedly improved in terms of less sodium, less
sugar. There is much more focus on nutritious foods, more whole
grains.
And the staff in the warehouse pointed that out to me as
they were filling orders for individual families. Less salt,
for example, in the canned vegetables that were available. They
brought me into the freezer to show me the fresh produce that
is available through the Department of Defense as part of the
FDPIR program, which are additions to the program in recent
years. So we know the food package is getting healthier.
But I was also reminded by a tribal nurse that they have
the same challenges in tribal communities that the rest of the
country has with young people not exercising enough. We spend
too much time watching television, playing computer games,
working on computers. And interestingly enough, this particular
tribal community had a program they run in the summertime, a
camp that is very much focused on nutrition, but also activity.
But you have to physically be active.
The Chairman. Okay, thank you. You mentioned at the
beginning of your testimony, if I am correct, that in the food
distribution allocation for 2011, the President has allocated
$110 million. Is that correct?
Mr. Concannon. Yes, sir.
The Chairman. Is that enough for food distribution on our
reservations in light of the high unemployment, and in light of
the economic situation that we are in right now?
Mr. Concannon. That is a fair question to ask. But it
reflects our best belief that this will be adequate to cover
the needs, because there has been a slight decline in the
actual number of FDPIR recipients because, as I think you and
the Ranking Member realize, Native Americans have the option of
either participating in FDPIR program or in the SNAP program.
And I have asked internally at FNS that in the next year,
whereas we are now developing our research agenda, that we look
at the interaction between SNAP and the FDPIR program.
I believe that some individuals are moving from FDPIR over
to the SNAP program because, in the stimulus bill, if you will
recall, the average monthly benefit in SNAP was increased, and
that same increase was not accorded to the FDPIR program. So I
believe there are individuals who are making decisions to move
into SNAP.
Of the 40 million people in the U.S. currently on the SNAP
program, 1.4 million of that 40 million identify themselves as
Native Americans.
Personally, that's unfortunate because the FDPIR program
offers a particularly relevant and healthy set of food choices.
But, its average monthly value may be viewed as less than
should that family be on the SNAP program in areas where they
have access to other food stores. And in many places, as I
think the Chairman and Members are aware, tribal communities
are located in isolated regions, and they don't have good
access to supermarkets. They are in virtual ``food deserts,''
as the term has come to be used.
The Chairman. What can be done to create the awareness of
what is available to many of our tribes in the reservations?
This is money that has already been allocated in our past farm
bill. Yet, there is lack of participation. Individuals are
still not applying and utilizing the SNAP program the way they
should be.
It is not like it is going to cost the state or the
reservations or anyone additional dollars. These are dollars
that are already allocated that are just sitting there that are
not being used.
What do we need to do to educate our communities and create
the kind of awareness that will make our tribes a lot
healthier? What can be done, either through education programs,
awareness programs, outreach programs?
Mr. Concannon. Well, Mr. Chairman, I think clearly one of
the areas in which more effort and more focus has to be devoted
is to communicate to the tribal communities that the food
package, the 100+ foods that are available through the FDPIR,
indeed, are not the surplus commodities of old. It is a much
improved food package. And we suffer, frankly, from the sort of
stereotype or the legacy of that old-line surplus food program.
These are much healthier foods. And I know that is an area
that we are very interested in, in basically communicating a
more up-to-date brand, if you will, on the fact that these
foods are healthier, they have less salt, less sugar. You no
longer can purchase or receive certain commodities in this
because they were out of compliance with the dietary
guidelines.
Interestingly enough, Congress directed the Food and
Nutrition Service in the 2008 Farm Bill to assess the health
quality in the FDPIR food package. And four measures were used.
Those were the dietary guidelines for all Americans, the
MyPyramid, the thrifty food plan that we rely upon, and the
healthy eating index that has been developed by the Center for
Nutrition Policy and Promotion.
And interestingly enough, the food package available in the
FDPIR program received a composite score of 81. The food that
the average American eats in all income levels received a score
of 58. And the SNAP program participants received a score of
52. So actually, this program, FDPIR, both on the basis of the
foods available and the foods selected by recipients, has moved
much further in the direction of better nutritional eating.
So part of it is our goal to overcome the stigma, if you
will, of the history of the past program. But also, we need to
make sure that we keep the program in alignment in terms of
eligibility and benefits with the SNAP program because that has
historically been the intent of Congress: to make sure that
this program parallels the SNAP program.
The fact that with the stimulus additions to SNAP, SNAP may
be viewed in certain communities across the country as more
financially beneficial than the FDPIR. And I think that would
be an important area to look at in the reauthorization of the
next farm bill.
The Chairman. Thank you very much.
At this time, I would like to turn it over to our Ranking
Member, Mr. Fortenberry.
Mr. Fortenberry. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
I am very interested in the last comment you made, because
it is related to what I have been interested in finding out.
Whether or not there is a correlation with this subset of food
delivery program, as a part of our larger nutritional programs
to improved outcomes in health, reduced costs, while we are
protecting vulnerable persons. It is more than just us talking
about how effective this is, this program that is being
delivered, how it is meeting the mandate of Congress. Can it be
viewed as a trial subset of a paradigm shift potentially, in
the way in which all nutrition programs are potentially
effective and then delivered? So can you speak to that?
Have you run any studies that, again, try to look at this
methodology and compare it to other methodologies of food
distribution, measured by improved healthcare outcomes, reduced
costs, as well as the proper protection for vulnerable persons?
Mr. Concannon. Mr. Fortenberry, I understand your question.
To my knowledge, I don't think there are any current studies
that incorporate all of those elements. I am very mindful that
we are about to award a healthy eating pilot that Congress
authorized in the last farm bill that is intended to test
creating incentives for individuals enrolled in the SNAP
program to purchase more fruits and vegetables. And we are very
interested in that.
And actually, earlier this week I had a meeting with a
coalition of organizations that are deeply committed to locally
grown foods, but also encouraging low-income folks to have
better access to farmers markets and healthier foods. And I
know there are private sector initiatives that we are watching
very closely through organizations like Wholesome Wave, where
they are creating additional incentives for people to buy
healthier foods.
I am also mindful that one of the largest food chains in
the country is tracking very carefully the purchases made under
the SNAP program. And they indicate to me that purchases made
by the SNAP enrollees aren't significantly different from the
rest of us. And so I think that brings us back to the need to
do a better job of both educating and nudging people in the
direction of eating healthier.
The Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion is part of
our mission area at USDA that I have responsibility for. And I
was reminded months ago by the director that only two percent
of Americans--unfortunately, only two percent of Americans--
fully adhere to the dietary guidelines for all Americans. And
even though we intellectually may know we should eat better,
not enough people really live up to that. And I think it is a
challenge for us.
We have lots of professional nutritionists and dieticians,
but we are also beefing up our capacity with more behaviorists,
more people who have some understanding. I am confident that
the supermarket chains know what motivates us to pick up an
item from one shelf versus the other. And we don't have that
corresponding knowledge capacity on the Federal level. I think
we need to develop more of that.
And we are also, currently, very actively involved in the
recommendations of the Dietary Guidelines, the next version
which will come out late this year, 2010. And there are no
surprises in it. It suggested all of us consume too much
sodium, too much sugar, too much fat, not enough vegetables,
not enough whole grains. There are the basic things. So we are
very interested in trying to redirect people back to fewer
processed foods and eating healthier.
Mr. Fortenberry. Well, that is a commendable goal that we
share as well. And part of the answer that you gave to my
direct question actually touches upon some of the hearing
topics that we have held in other formats. It strays a bit from
our topic today, but I understand you are trying to give a
holistic answer to the overview of this question.
But I do think we have an opportunity here to think about
what I proposed earlier; that if this program could be analyzed
further to see if it meets that threefold test of, again, as a
novel program, basically improving healthcare outcomes,
reducing costs as compared to other delivery mechanisms, as
well as protecting vulnerable persons, we should think through
that more carefully.
I think that, if you would, Mr. Secretary, I think that is
a recommendation I would like to give you to take back to the
Department. We may have a data set available here that, again,
could give us evidence of how to shift some of the nutrition
programs to meet that threefold test, which I think we all
share.
Let me ask you another quick question. If the tribe grows
fruits and vegetables, or has livestock production, or grows
other commodities, could these products actually become part of
the Food Distribution Program, again, enhancing the option for
locally grown foods and creating more vibrant local economies
through agricultural entrepreneurship?
Mr. Concannon. Thank you. I believe we have that authority
now from a prior, more recent farm bill. Its access has been
very limited to date, in part because of the challenges of if
you have too much variation across the country in those 100+
foods, is it going to be a challenge to track? But it is a
direction we want to go both as an agency, and we recognize, to
your point, fresher local foods plus helping the economy, we do
two goods things in the process.
Mr. Fortenberry. Thank you very much. That is all I have,
Mr. Chairman.
The Chairman. Thank you very much. Now I would like to turn
it over to the gentlewoman from Pennsylvania, Mrs. Dahlkemper.
Mrs. Dahlkemper. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. Thank
you Mr. Concannon. I want to follow up on Mr. Fortenberry a
little bit here and ask you about the nutrition education
portion of the FDPIR program, and maybe if you could tell me
how that compares to SNAP recipients' nutrition education.
Mr. Concannon. Yes. As I mentioned in my testimony, the
program now expends about $1 million a year through the tribal
organizations focused on nutrition education, with the FDPIR
program specifically. And the tribal community that I recently
visited actually had adapted a number of the MyPyramid graphics
to a tribal, culturally, appropriate sort of applications.
One was literally a tepee shape--each panel on it reflected
one of those triangles currently on the MyPyramid. So they do
education. In this case, they do education with children who
appear to be overweight. They run a camp as part of their
summer camp.
Mrs. Dahlkemper. Mr. Concannon, can you compare that to me,
for example, to a culturally specific group in an inner city,
here in Washington? I guess I am just trying to find out if
some of the improvements that we are seeing through this
program have more to do with having a cohesive group culturally
who you are able to work with on this nutrition education
versus a SNAP program here in Washington, D.C., in which you
have people from all over, different cultures, whether they are
white, African American, Hispanic, from many other countries.
And so I am just wondering if you think that there is any
correlation with the fact that you have a very specific subset
of people that you are dealing with.
Mr. Concannon. I don't have any evidence that I am aware of
or can point to saying that the nutrition education focused in
these communities is more effective than SNAP education,
generally. But I am aware that it is very much tailored across
the country in these tribal communities.
During the visit that I made, one of the educators was paid
for through FDPIR education. But there was also a SNAP Ed
representative there as well. And she said, ``I am paid for by
SNAP Ed. I work with the schools in terms of their nutrition
education as well as here.''
So I guess what I would say is there was a much more
cohesive, coordinated effort in the tribal community than we
often see in urban areas, or in other parts of the country.
Mrs. Dahlkemper. I think as we look forward, and if we are
going to look into this and the effectiveness, that is
obviously one of the factors.
I wanted to ask you a little bit about the fruits and
vegetables brought in, the supply chain on that, how difficult
that is to get into these fairly remote areas; because,
obviously, that is one of the issues why we have the program
versus SNAP.
And then is there any incentive for local production, and
how that then is tied into the program? Because, obviously, I
think that is very important in terms of the culture and the
foods that the individuals are accustomed to eating.
Mr. Concannon. Yes. To your first question, we rely upon
the Department of Defense actually, the same contract that we
piggyback on, so to speak, nationally, for distribution of
fresh fruits and vegetables. And in this tribal visit I saw
them firsthand. The tribal leadership told me they were
demanding and making sure that the products they received met
their standards. They referred to the first delivery not
meeting their standards. They sent them back and they said,
``We haven't had that problem since.'' So they were very
positive about the fruits and vegetables on that question.
And as far as the supply chain, we are about to make
changes in how communities can order electronically. We are
about to convert to a web-based ordering system that will be
effective the 1st of July, a couple of weeks from now, that
actually will allow communities to order today for delivery
within the next few days. Right now in our system, they have to
order weeks ahead on the fresh fruits and vegetables. So we are
making changes that will be better and easier.
Mrs. Dahlkemper. Do they all have the capability for that
web-based ordering?
Mr. Concannon. I believe they do. Yes.
Mrs. Dahlkemper. That is good. Well, thank you very much. I
appreciate it.
And the other question, I have is about local production
and if there are incentives to do any local production of food
on the reservation?
Mr. Concannon. There is authority for us to do that. I
don't think we have done enough of it, to be perfectly frank
with you. I think there is interest in the community. Wild
rice, for example, as a purchase that is grown locally. And one
of the challenges we have in that regard is balancing the
average cost. Some of these locally produced items, like bison
meat or wild rice, in this case, cost more.
So in order to accommodate that, we would have to reduce
other items in the package and we haven't figured out how to
balance both goals. But we definitely want to encourage more
local production, more local foods. And one of the areas we may
be able to link that up with are the school-based programs.
We are encouraging farmers to grow at scale. If they know
they are going to get an order from the school system as well
as from the USDA FNS, for example, then we think it is more
likely we would be able to both produce sufficient quantities
but also price. Price is an issue.
Mrs. Dahlkemper. Can you do that scale in terms of across
the whole program? You know, where one group could produce the
bison, for example, and then that would be utilized throughout
the whole system with that economy of scale that you are
looking for?
Mr. Concannon. My understanding on the bison, it is
occasionally made available, but for the most part it is a
price issue. And I don't know. I will have that question
researched.
Mrs. Dahlkemper. Thank you very much. I yield back.
The Chairman. Thank you very much. I have some additional
questions that I am going to ask, and then if any other
individuals here would like to ask any additional questions
they are also welcome.
While I am happy to hear that FNS is moving forward with
new technology advancement, like the Web-Based Supply Chain
Management System, I do have some concerns as to how this
transition will affect the FDPIR.
As you are aware, many of the tribal communities and
reservations that take part in FDPIR are extremely rural areas.
Do these areas all currently possess broadband infrastructure
necessary to effectively use the web-based ordering system?
Mr. Concannon. I don't believe that they all have broadband
at this point. But, I think they have it, in the program area
access to the Web, to be able to request foods. And the intent,
obviously, is to make it easier for the tribal communities.
Rather than several weeks where they have to plan now, this
will allow them on a quick turn-around, within a matter of
days, to order these foods. So it is on hold, and there has
been a lot of work done for this very time period we are in.
The Chairman. Well, how do we plan on accommodating these
tribes or these organizations that lack the appropriate
Internet access technology?
Mr. Concannon. The program directors, I am advised, are
able to order even if they don't have a full range of current
electronic capacity.
The Chairman. I hope that we can continue to do that until
everybody becomes modernized and has the kind of technology to
make sure we provide the same kind of service.
Let me ask as a follow-up question, I understand that one
significant difference between SNAP and FDPIR is high
administrative costs associated with food storage and
transportation, that participating tribes and states must
absorb in FDPIR. What has been the reception from states and
tribal organizations with regards to the 2005 working group
decision to change the administrative funding formula?
Mr. Concannon. I know it has been negotiated. As I mention
in my testimony, it is a portion, those administrative funds,
about $37 million in the upcoming year, that are apportioned by
the USDA regions and then apportioned to tribal organizations
or states based on the number of FDPIR enrollees in that area.
And, formulas are always challenging, but I believe it is
working.
The Chairman. Okay. And how does USDA coordinate the
efforts of FDPIR to serve nutritional foods with the efforts of
Indian Health Services and other agencies that look after the
health of Native Americans?
Mr. Concannon. Mr. Chairman, we have an advisory group that
advises us on this. And that advisory group includes
representatives from the Native American FDPIR providers. But
it also includes a representative from the Centers for Disease
Control and Prevention and also a representative from the
Indian Health Service. So the intent is to reflect the best
science, if you will, across the government.
But I have also mentioned in my testimony that we are
committed. The President has issued an Executive Order and the
Secretary has made it unequivocally clear to us, the various
mission areas within USDA, of his commitment to do tribal
consultation on these matters. And that is an area that we
haven't done as well as we should have in the past. We are in
the process right now of devising a plan that extends across
all the mission areas within USDA to do tribal consultation on
matters such as the engagement with tribes in FDPIR.
The Chairman. Okay, thank you. One final question: What
steps can be taken, either by USDA or Congress, to improve the
public image of the USDA's commodity foods?
Mr. Concannon. I certainly believe that, as I mentioned, we
suffer under a stigma of the past in that regard. I think
better branding, really making it clear, in the same way we
communicate changes and improvements to these tribal
communities of the healthier package that it represents. I
think a number of things can be done that way, certainly. But
first, importantly, education to the affected communities that
it is not your commodities program of old. It is a better
program.
The Chairman. Thank you. At this time I will turn it over
to Mr. Fortenberry.
Mr. Fortenberry. The only thing I would like to add is an
answer to the Chairman's questions: Is it improving health care
outcomes? Is it helping reduce costs? And is it protecting
vulnerable persons? I think if we get an answer to all of those
things, the appropriate benefit costs compared to other
delivery systems, this will market itself and, again, perhaps
become a type of paradigm shift in the way in which we think
about delivering nutritional programs as social safety nets.
Mr. Concannon. Thank you.
The Chairman. With that, that concludes our questions of
the Under Secretary, so thank you very much for your testimony
this morning. Thank you.
At this time, we would like to welcome our next panel.
Thank you. We have Honorable Andy Joseph, Chairman of the
Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board, Tribal Council
Member, Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation, and
Chairman of the Health Committee of the Affiliated Tribe of
Northwest Indians, Portland, Oregon.
And then we have Norma Merriman, Group Leader, Cherokee
Nation Human Services.
Mr. Joseph, you may begin when you are ready.
STATEMENT OF HON. ANDREW JOSEPH, Jr., COUNCIL
MEMBER, CONFEDERATED TRIBES OF THE COLVILLE
RESERVATION; CHAIRMAN, HEALTH SUBCOMMITTEE,
AFFILIATED TRIBES OF NORTHWEST INDIANS; CHAIRMAN, NORTHWEST
PORTLAND AREA INDIAN HEALTH BOARD, PORTLAND, OR
Mr. Joseph. My name is ``Badger'' in my language. I am a
councilman from the Confederated Tribes of the Colville
Reservation. As you stated my different titles, I also am an
Executive Committee Member of the National Indian Health Board.
Good morning, Chairman Baca and Ranking Member Fortenberry.
Thank you for allowing me to give this testimony today. I am
here on behalf of ATNI and represent the 57 tribes from the
States of Alaska, California, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon,
and Washington.
The United States has a Federal trust responsibility that
is based on numerous treaties and active Executive Orders.
These legal instruments cede millions of acres of land to the
U.S. in exchange for certain reserved rights and basic
provisions that include programs such as the Food Distribution
Program on Indian Reservations. The Food Distribution Program
on Indian Reservations is very important for Indians and, in
many cases, it is the sole source of food for Indian people
that live on isolated Indian reservations.
The fact is that Indian people live in desperate poverty
and are among the poorest in the United States, 25 percent of
Indians in the U.S. live at or below poverty level, and this
rate is substantially higher on Indian reservations. As an
example, for Indian reservations in South Dakota, as many as 44
percent of Indians live below the poverty level. In the seven
poorest counties in the U.S., five consist of Indians that make
up the majority of the population.
This poverty causes food insecurity and leads to other
medical and public health issues, as well as affecting the
learning ability of our Indian children when participating in
the educational system.
The drastic shift from help subsistence and traditional
foods to foods high in sugar, starch, and fat created a
healthcare crisis in Indian Country. High obesity and diabetes
have resulted in a kind of cardiovascular disease, the number
one killer in Indian Country.
Because of these reasons, it is critical that this program
be continued and improved and provide quality nutritional
products. If this program is reduced or eliminated, it would
have a devastating impact on the food security of Indian people
throughout the United States.
Our recommendations: One, for decades USDA's answer to
tribal questions for the inclusion of healthier and more
traditional native foods in the Food Distribution Program food
packages has been that the program has insufficient funds. The
FDPIR is a crucial program for Indian tribes, and it is
imperative that Congress provide increased funding needed to
improve the nutritional content of the food packages and offset
rising transportation and maintenance costs.
Two, tribes have always been concerned about efforts to
establish a more equitable methodology for allocating the FDPIR
administrative funds among the Independent Tribal Organizations
and state agencies, with many voicing concerns about the
potential funding cuts and some proposed provisions to protect
against funding cuts. Again, it is critical that Congress
provide adequate funding for the FDPIR, so that such
administrative issues do not reduce the level of food and
services provided to American Indians and Alaska Native people.
Three, integration of health promotion and disease
prevention, along with the nutritional counseling, should be
incorporated with the FDPIR, along with increased funding to
carry out these functions. This would assist to address the
high rates of obesity, diabetes in tribal communities.
Four, many tribes have requested and support including
traditional food choices such as Indian corn, bison, smoked
salmon, accounting for differences among tribes as permanent
items in the food package.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee. And I
remain ready to answer any questions to provide additional
information.
One thing I would like to include, on my reservation, we
did a survey, and 37 percent of our youth in the nine school
districts on our reservation, 37 percent from K-8 were at the
pre-diabetic stage. And you know, this program would help. The
nutritionists really do a good job on helping teach our people
how to use these foods also.
[The prepared statement of Mr. Joseph follows:]
Prepared Statement of Hon. Andrew Joseph, Jr., Council Member,
Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation; Chairman, Health
Subcommittee, Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians; Chairman,
Northwest Portland Area Indian Health Board, Portland, OR
Good morning, Chairman Baca, Ranking Member Fortenberry, and
distinguished Members of the Committee. My name is Andrew Joseph, Jr.,
and I serve as a Tribal Council Member for the Confederated Tribes of
the Colville Reservation. I also serve as the Chairman of the Northwest
Portland Area Indian Health Board, which serves as the Health
Subcommittee for the Affiliated Tribes of Northwest Indians. I am
pleased to provide views on the ``Food Distribution Program on Indian
Reservations'' on behalf of ATNI's Health Subcommittee and the
Confederated Tribes of the Colville Reservation.
Background on ATNI
Founded in 1953, ATNI represents 57 tribal governments from Alaska,
California, Idaho, Montana, Nevada, Oregon, and Washington. As the
Subcommittee may be aware, ATNI and its member tribes in the Pacific
Northwest have been outspoken supporters about the manner in which the
Federal Government administers its Federal trust responsibility and
resources that emanate from that fact. ATNI has established its Health
Subcommittee comprised of Northwest Tribal leaders, health directors,
and technical staff to monitor health issues that affect Northwest
Tribes including food nutrition programs. ATNI's support for advocacy
is grounded in its commitment to maintaining the integrity of the
Federal trust responsibility that is based upon the historical cession
of millions of acres of ancestral lands by the tribes. Against this
backdrop, ATNI appreciates this opportunity to provide its views on the
Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR).
Discussion on the FDPIR
The Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR)
program is administered by the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), an
agency of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The FDPIR is administered
locally by either Indian Tribal Organizations (ITOs) or a state
government agency. Currently, there are approximately 271 tribes
receiving benefits under the FDPIR through 99 ITOs and five state
agencies. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) purchases and
delivers commodities to the ITOs or state agencies based on their
selection from a list of available foods. These administering agencies
store and distribute the food, determine applicant eligibility, and
provide nutrition education to recipients. USDA provides the
administering agencies with funds for program administrative costs.
For Indian Country, the FDPIR is more than a supplemental program,
in many cases it is the sole source of food for low income American
Indian and Alaska Natives (AI/AN) people living on or near
geographically isolated reservations. According to census data,
approximately 1.5% of the United States population is comprised of AI/
AN people. Poverty disproportionately affects AI/AN people, with
approximately 25% living with an income at or below poverty level. The
median income of AI/AN in the U.S. is just over $30,000, relative to
the median income of $41,000 for all Americans. The rate of poverty is
substantially higher on Indian reservations. As an example, on Indian
reservations in South Dakota as many as 44% of AI/AN people live below
the poverty level. In fact, in the seven poorest counties in the
nation, five consist of AI/AN people that make up the majority of the
population. This stands to reason that AI/AN people are affected by
poverty and food insecurity at a greater rate than most in America. The
consequence of these poor economic standards is that 43% of AI/AN
children under the age of 5 are also living in poverty. This poverty
causes food insecurity that leads to other medical and public health
issues, as well as affects the learning ability of our Indian children
when participating in the educational system.
Historically, food packages have included what remains of Federal
commodity programs, such as bleached flour, sugar, potatoes, corn, and
butter. The immediate and drastic shift from healthy subsistence and
traditional foods to foods high in sugar, starch and fat created an
epidemic of obesity and diabetes across Indian Country. Overall, AI/ANs
have the highest age-adjusted prevalence (percent) of diabetes among
all U.S. racial and ethnic groups. It has been documented that over 16%
of all AI/AN adults have diabetes and that AI/AN mortality from
diabetes is 4.3 times higher than the general U.S. population. Even
though Type-2 diabetes used to be rare in individuals under the age of
40, the prevalence (percent) of diabetes among AI/ANs aged 25-34 years
increased 112% from 1994-2004. Because of this it is imperative that
food assistance to Indian tribes be improved to deliver healthier
alternatives to improve health for tribal members receiving foods from
FDPIR.
The FDPIR is a critical program that assists to meet the
nutritional needs of many AI/AN people. While access to grocery stores
in many parts of the country have improved, the remote distances and
the lack of reliable and economical transportation for most AI/AN
people continues to be a barrier to accessing grocery stores and
nutritional food sources. In most instances if the FDPIR were to be
reduced or eliminated it would have a devastating impact on the food
security of large numbers of eligible families residing on Indian
reservations and risk starvation.
Recommendations to Improve the FDPIR
1. Given the importance of this program to Indian Country, tribal
leaders have long stressed the importance of following
appropriate government-to-government protocols and respecting
existing treaty agreements when making changes to FDPIR.
2. For decades the USDA's answer to Tribal requests for the
inclusion of healthier and more traditional Native foods in the
FDPIR food packages has been that the program has insufficient
funds. The FDPIR is a crucial program for Indian tribes, and it
is imperative that Congress provide increased funding needed to
improve the nutrition content of food packages and offset
rising transportation and maintenance costs.
3. Many tribes have suggested the need for improvements in the
quality of the food package to ensure that it meets dietary
guidelines and for improvements in delivery to ensure that food
products are distributed before their expiration dates.
4. Tribes have always been concerned about efforts to establish a
more equitable methodology for allocating FDPIR administrative
funds among the Independent Tribal Organizations (ITO) and
state agencies, with many voicing concerns about potential
funding cuts and some proposing provisions to protect against
funding cuts. Again, it is critical that Congress provide
adequate funding for the FDPIR so that such administrative
issues do not reduce the level of food and services provided to
AI/AN people.
5. Integration of health promotion and disease prevention along
with nutritional counseling should be incorporated with the
FDPIR along with increased funding to carry-out these
functions. This will assist to address the high rates of
obesity and diabetes in Tribal communities.
6. Many tribes have requested and support including traditional
food choices such as Indian corn, bison, and smoked salmon
(etc., accounting for differences among tribes) as permanent
items in the food package.
Conclusion
Given the improved state of health most Americans are benefiting
from, the lingering health disparity among AI/ANs is troubling. Food
insecurity, poverty and health problems continue to disproportionately
affect AI/AN people. Food assistance programs continue to be a key
factor in building healthy and economically strong communities.
Strengthening Federal nutrition programs requires enhancing and not
reducing benefits.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Committee, and I remain
ready to answer any questions or provide additional information you may
require.
The Chairman. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. At this
time I would like to call on Norma Merriman for her testimony.
You may begin.
STATEMENT OF NORMA MERRIMAN, GROUP LEADER,
CHEROKEE NATION HUMAN SERVICES, TAHLEQUAH, OK;
ACCOMPANIED BY JERRY SNELL, DIRECTOR OF FAMILY
ASSISTANCE; AND BUD SQUIRREL, MANAGER, FOOD
DISTRIBUTION PROGRAM
Ms. Merriman. Good morning, Chairman Baca, Ranking Member
Fortenberry, and Members of the Committee. Thank you for
allowing us to be here today. I bring the thanks of the
Cherokee Nation Principal Chief Chad Smith for convening this
hearing on a service program that is of vital importance to
Cherokee people and Indian Country as a whole, as Mr. Joseph
has so eloquently described.
I am Norma Merriman. I am the Group Leader for Cherokee
Nation Human Services which is a social service branch of our
tribe. I am accompanied today by Mr. Jerry Snell, Director of
our Family Assistance Programs, and Mr. Bud Squirrel, who is
the Food Distribution Manager for our tribe.
The Cherokee Nation appreciates the opportunity to submit
testimony regarding the Food Distribution Program on Indian
Reservations. I would like to take just a moment to give you an
overview of the Cherokee Nation Food Distribution Program. Our
program consists of 52 members in staff, including store
managers, clerks, warehouse workers, inventory, data personnel,
nutrition aids, and truck drivers.
The Cherokee Nation currently operates five food
distribution centers at strategic locations throughout the
Nation's 14 county jurisdiction. In addition to these strategic
hubs, the Nation also operates seven tailgate sites where food
is delivered to the most remote communities on a monthly basis.
At this time, our Food Distribution Program currently serves
approximately 10,000 participants every month.
Chairman Baca, you have received our written testimony
prior to these proceedings, and I would request that our
testimony be entered into the record of the hearing. And to
that end, I would simply summarize our statements this morning.
In summary, the Cherokee Nation supports the following
propositions: Proposition A, excluding household funds held in
educational savings accounts; Proposition B, clarification
regarding the resource exclusion for qualified retirement
accounts; Proposition C, clarifying the application of SNAP net
income standards to FDPIR; D, excluding combat pay.
Mr. Chairman, it is well recognized that, historically,
Native Americans have the highest record of service per capita
when compared to any other ethnic group in the United States in
our military services. So aligning FDPIR and SNAP provisions
regarding combat pay is simply a necessity.
Additionally, we want to emphasize our strong support for
parity between SNAP and FDPIR funding. We also recommend the
following actions be taken under consideration by this
Committee.
First, a tribal liaison be named to enhance communication
between Food and Nutrition Services and the FDPIR National
Association. This action will be a major step to assure FDPIR
representation is at the table when SNAP and FDPIR concerns are
being discussed and negotiated. I think you, Chairman Baca,
when you talked about the squeaky wheel, this would allow us to
squeak a little better if we could do this.
Second, consideration should be given to increasing
cultural foods in the food package, such as salmon, wild rice,
buffalo and blue corn, to name a few.
Third, that Food and Nutrition Services consider allowing
tribes to carry over, at a minimum, five percent of their
annual FDPIR administrative appropriations, which would be very
helpful, I know, to our tribe.
In conclusion, we would like to acknowledge the initiative
on the part of the Committee to provide low-fat and low-sodium
food choices in the FDPIR food packages. These additions
address the epidemic of diabetes, hypertension, and heart
disease in the Native population by providing healthy choices.
Once again, thank you for convening this hearing and for
allowing the Cherokee Nation to comment on these important
issues. Thank you.
[The prepared statement of Ms. Merriman follows:]
Prepared Statement of Norma Merriman, Group Leader, Cherokee Nation
Human Services, Tahlequah, OK
Chairman Baca, Ranking Member Fortenberry, Members of the
Committee, I bring the thanks of Cherokee Nation Principal Chief Chad
Smith for convening this hearing on a service program that is of vital
importance to Cherokee people and Indian Country as a whole. My name is
Norma Merriman and I am the Group Leader for Cherokee Nation Human
Services. I am accompanied by Jerry Snell, Director of Family
Assistance, and Bud Squirrel, Food Distribution Manager. The Cherokee
Nation appreciates the opportunity to submit testimony regarding the
Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR).
Overview of Cherokee Nation Food Distribution Program
The Cherokee Nation Food Distribution Program consists of 52 staff
members including store managers, clerks, warehouse workers, inventory
and data personnel, nutritionists and truck drivers. The Cherokee
Nation currently operates five food distribution centers (FDCs) at
strategic locations throughout the Nation's 14 county jurisdiction. In
addition to these strategic ``hubs'', the Nation also operates seven
tailgate sites where food is delivered to the most remote communities
on a monthly basis.
The Food Distribution Program currently serves approximately 10,000
participants every month and has been one of the largest, most
successful FDPIR programs in Indian Country. The Cherokee Nation was
the first FDPIR to implement the ``grocery store'' concept where
clients are allowed to shop at their leisure in a retail environment.
Our patrons enjoy the convenience of choosing their products like
everybody else instead of receiving boxes of food from the back of a
truck.
The Cherokee Nation currently has one additional FDC in planning
that will be built and fully operational in 2011. The Nation also has a
long-term plan to develop three more strategically located FDCs so that
all clients in the 14 county jurisdiction are no more than thirty
minutes away from a distribution center. This will eliminate the need
for tailgate sites altogether.
Recommendations for Proposed Rule Changes
The Cherokee Nation appreciates the opportunity to comment on the
following proposed rule changes governing the FDPIR. I would like to
preface our comments by generally expressing our support for
streamlining the regulations governing the Supplemental Nutrition
Assistance Program (SNAP) and the FDPIR. In April 2009, USDA increased
the SNAP benefits for their participants an average of $20 per client
by using funds provided by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
of 2009. Unfortunately, there was not a corresponding pro rata increase
for FDPIR participants. The Cherokee Nation is enthused by this hearing
and the proposed rule changes as they present a great opportunity to
improve parity of these two programs and allow greater access to
nutrition assistance for Indian Country.
Proposition A: Excluding Household Funds Held in Education Savings
Accounts from Consideration as a Resource
Education has always been a major priority to the Cherokee Nation.
We have a vested interest in the education of our citizens as evidenced
by the many scholars and leaders that adorn our history. The Nation is
very supportive of this measure as it would encourage the higher
education of our citizens and provide greater ability for those
citizens in impoverished and needy communities to pursue greater levels
of self-reliance.
Proposition B: Clarification Regarding the Resource Exclusion for
Qualified Retirement Accounts
The Nation is supportive of provisions protecting the retirement
accounts of our citizens and ensuring that those funds are not
interpreted to be a detriment to their access to the FDPIR. In addition
to improving access, allowing resource exclusion for properly setup and
administered retirement accounts will undoubtedly encourage our
citizens to save for retirement regardless of their financial status
and participation in the FDPIR.
Proposition C: Clarifying the Application of SNAP Net Income Standards
to FDPIR
The Nation supports equitable consideration for both SNAP and
FDPIR, and is supportive of the provision to consider net income, as
opposed to gross income, as the qualifying standard to participate in
the FDPIR. The Nation appreciates this clarification as it will provide
consideration for pre-tax deductions from salaries and reduce confusion
around standards of enrollment in the program. Similar to proposition
B, this proposal will increase the willingness of our citizens to
establish deductions in their payroll to provide for their retirement.
Proposition D: Excluding Combat Pay from Income
Aligning FDPIR and SNAP provisions regarding combat pay is simply a
necessity. Some of our Cherokee service members come from impoverished
communities and while they are compensated for their service overseas;
their pay is simply not on par with the risks they face during
deployment. The Cherokee Nation appreciates this consideration for
military personnel as it will help to provide assistance to military
families while their loved ones serve abroad.
Proposition E: Amending the Dependent Care Deduction
Allowing participants to claim the full cost of their dependent
care deductions would be a welcome benefit. The nature and intent of
the FDPIR and the Cherokee Nation Food Distribution Program is
primarily focused on the care and protection of Indian families.
Naturally there is a strong emphasis on nutrition and healthy rearing
of our Indian children. Removing regulatory language focused on
dependent care would be a welcome adjustment to the current policy and
this provision would inevitably improve the health and well-being of
many of our Nation's children.
Mr. Chairman, once again I thank you for convening this hearing and
allowing the Cherokee Nation to express comment on a highly successful
program that helps to improve the lives of Indian people on a daily
basis. The Cherokee Nation is committed to FDPIR and appreciates your
interest and enthusiasm for the program. We are dedicated to elevating
our indigent and impoverished communities so that they may adequately
pursue our declaration of designed purpose to become a happy, healthy
Nation through our initiatives in jobs, language and community. The
FDPIR is an essential element to improving the wellness of our most
needy population and we appreciate your regard for the importance of
this issue.
This concludes my testimony. Should you require further information
on any of the Cherokee Nation's programs and services, I invite you to
contact the Cherokee Nation Washington Office, [Redacted].
The Chairman. Thank you very much for your testimony.
First of all, USDA is seeking public comment on the
proposed rule, regarding the counting of education accounts,
retirement accounts, and combat pay. The comment period is open
until June 28th, next week. Comments should be submitted at the
USDA and FNS. So with that, I would like to thank you.
This proposed rule that should become final later this year
will make all of the adjustments in reference to the proposals
that you mentioned. These changes make FDPIR in line with the
SNAP eligibility, so hopefully that will be done.
I will begin with some questions. Chairman Joseph, you
mentioned that the poverty level in South Dakota is 44 percent
and the national poverty level is about 25 percent. When you
average it out, the poverty level amongst the Food Distribution
Program on Indian Reservation is probably, if you average them
out, it is about 35, 30 percent overall poverty level, below
poverty level? Which means almost everyone is eligible,
basically, within that area, yet, how many are actually even
taking advantage of the FDPIR or SNAP program within Indian
Reservations?
And Mr. Fortenberry has continued to be a strong advocate
in the area of obesity and the cost to our consumers and
others; and if we can provide adequate nutrition and food, then
we are reducing our costs overall. Ultimately, we end up paying
in the long run because of either heart conditions, diabetes,
the high cost of healthcare.
So on one hand we want to make sure that, as Mr.
Fortenberry says, on being cost effective so that in the long
run, it is a savings.
But let me ask you this question, Mr. Joseph. According to
the experts at the Congressional Research Service, the average
person enrolled in the FDPIR receives about $55 per month in
commodity assistance. From your experience working with various
tribes in the Northwest, is this an adequate amount of food
assistance?
Mr. Joseph. I would say that it isn't. You know, a lot of
our people are living in poverty. You know, when I was a young
man and I was raising my three younger children, being able to
help them grow up, a lot of times we would run short on some of
the commodities, foods that we would be getting from our Food
Distribution Program, and we had to rely on some of our own
foods that we gather. We still have some places where we gather
our traditional foods, our roots and our berries, and we would
have to really rely on those as much as we could.
Currently our tribe is working with the conservation
program to set aside some of our traditional lands that we
gather some of these foods, our roots and berries. Before it
was moved to the reservation, a lot of these sites where our
people were actually from, we were moved onto the reservations
and there are not big food sources out there that grow
naturally, the different bitter roots and the different berries
that we gather. Some of our choice hunting grounds were taken.
Earlier, in the testimony I heard, the cost for including
bison and salmon, different things like that. It is a little
more expensive. But to me it would save more lives because it
is more natural to our physical body and what we intake. And
that would save a lot more lives.
Bison, they are a leaner animal and chemically our bodies
take it better. The same with the salmon. Our people lived off
of salmon in the Northwest, and it is something that we really
need. The gardens too, if we work with, through the EQIP
program, if there could be more funding in EQIP for equipment
to grow our own gardens, I think that would really help.
The Chairman. Thank you. In your testimony you mention, Mr.
Chairman, the need of improvement of deliveries in the FDPIR to
ensure that food products are distributed before their
expiration dates. In your experience, is it common for food
that has expired to be delivered to tribal communities through
FDPIR? If this is indeed the case, it is a shameful failure on
the part of the Federal Government. Can you respond to that?
Mr. Joseph. Well, my tribe is a timber tribe, and right now
we had to lay off a lot of our people. And, just the
transportation to go out to go to the food distribution site to
pick up the food is a hardship.
And, if it was funded more where some of these foods could
be distributed out to our members, some of our elders that use
the program that are raising their children and grandchildren,
can't afford to come in and pick up their supply like they
normally would. So I guess if that part could be used to help
distribute the foods, it probably wouldn't be expiring.
The Chairman. Ms. Merriman, can you please give us some
additional details as to how the Cherokee developed the system
and how it operates for the average Cherokee and FDPIR
recipients that integrate the innovative grocery concept that
you mentioned in your testimony?
Ms. Merriman. We do a couple of things, and I hope I am
answering your question correctly. One of the things that we do
monthly is that we have nutrition aids who assist in providing
nutritional recipes using the food distribution foods,
specifically to make tasty meals and nutritious meals, to show
people how they can be used and encourage them to eat in a more
healthy way. They even make samples so that when the people
come in to get their food packages, there will be samples there
so it is not just merely a recipe laying out, because some of
us might not pick that up.
We also do a monthly calendar showing when certain things
will be happening in the program. And also there are
nutritional recipes on that calendar.
I would like to ask that Mr. Bud Squirrel, who operates the
daily operation of our food distribution, join me if that is
all right with you. I believe he can be more specific than I,
since I am kind of the boss and he does the everyday stuff.
The Chairman. All right.
Mr. Squirrel. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Approximately in
1980 the Cherokee Nation did a 25 year plan on how we were
going to set up our deliveries of the different services that
we offered, and food was included. Health and other social
services was included. And we picked out certain communities in
the Cherokee Nation area such as Bonita, Nowata--I know you are
not familiar with these places but just to name a few--
Sallisaw, Stilwell, that were geographically located where
there was a density of population that would justify building
something there that is kind of a one-stop service center for
the different services that we offered.
And that is how this concept came into being, to develop a
grocery store where they could come in and not have to drive
more than 30 minutes or 30 miles. We developed 60 mile radiuses
with the center being in the middle of this territory. And we
currently have five of these. We would like to have eight. We
are going to build a sixth one this fall which will be in
operation in 2011, which will leave us a couple of centers
short. And these are in conjunction with our health centers and
other social service provision centers.
So that is where the concept got started. And what we do is
we bring in the clients to an area where they fill out their
applications, make sure they are eligible, certify them. Then
we give them a list of the items, the foods that they are
eligible for--we currently have 79 items that we provide--and
give them a list of what they are eligible for. Then they just
go into the store, the adjoining store, and get them a cart or
two--if they are a big family they will need two or three
carts--and just go down the aisles. This list is kind of
configured so the aisle of the first four items are on aisle
one, the next items, they are all coordinated where you just go
up and down these aisles. And then you will check out on your
way out.
And we have computerized scanning systems also. Instead of
doing it on a manual basis, writing down everything they decide
to take, they are checked out, they are scanned when they go
out the door. So that is how the stores, the grocery store
concept was developed about 30 years ago.
The Chairman. In some of these areas it becomes so
difficult for many of these individuals to go to these stores
to get what they need. What is being done to make sure that we
reach some of these areas where they don't have the
transportation? And what can be done in terms of the delivery
to make sure that nutrition is also provided to some of these
families that don't have a mode of transportation and need the
services, or, if weather conditions impact receiving the kind
of nutrition that they need.
Mr. Squirrel. We utilize what we call Community Health
Representatives, CHR program, that is funded through the Human
Health Service. There may be a community transportation system
that goes through that area and brings them to our centers to
pick up their food on a monthly basis. Or as a last resort, we
have a system where they can call in to us and tell us that
there is no way, ``I don't have any friends or family that can
take me either, I can't drive, I am almost bedridden.'' And we
will make a list of these and wait until the last week of the
month when we are not so busy and we can spare the staff. We
send them out to do home deliveries to these people. So they
can get on the list and we do home deliveries.
The Chairman. But that is waiting towards the end. When are
they eligible to receive it? Is it the beginning of the month?
Are they waiting a week or 2? Are they trying to survive on
what they have, until someone goes there?
Mr. Squirrel. That is correct; they get it once a month. We
try to make sure they get it every 4 weeks. Once we get them on
the schedule, they usually stay on the schedule and then we try
to do it every 4 weeks. So it is just 4 weeks, or once a month.
We don't make them wait 50 days. So it is a regular interval.
There is a 30-31 day interval in between.
The Chairman. Ms. Merriman, in your experience working with
Human Services with the Cherokee Nation, do people frequently
switch between SNAP and FDPIR? If so, how does that complicate
administering the program?
Ms. Merriman. They do switch. And I want to echo what Mr.
Concannon said earlier: that when we had this disparity arise
between SNAP and FDPIR's first funding recently, people did
switch. And of course any time people switch, it is more
difficult on staff and on that person because they have to do
more paperwork, they have to go to a different location. As far
as what the volume is of people switching back and forth, I
would probably have to ask Mr. Squirrel to respond to that, but
we have seen that recently.
Mr. Squirrel. That volume has not been drastic, but it has
been noticeable. I would think out of the 10,000 people that we
serve a month, probably a couple of hundred a month switched
over. And we can tell it in our monthly totals, the total
number of clients served every month when we do a final count.
So they have impacted our program noticeably.
The Chairman. A question to any one of you three up there
now. In your opinion, what effects is the nutritional,
educational component of FDPIR? Do we need to do more? What is
the level of awareness? What else can be done? Do we need to do
it differently? If so, how? Do we need to utilize other
individuals in assuring that the FDPIR qualified people are
aware of SNAP or other programs? In your opinion, do you feel
that it is effective, the educational program component, or do
we need to do something else?
Mr. Joseph. I would say that it is really important. Our
nutritionists do these trainings where they teach our young
parents. In Indian Country, we have some really young parents
that need to learn how to prepare these meals. As a former
boarding school student, we weren't really raised in the home
where we could watch our mothers do the cooking.
So to me, it is really important that that kind of training
come back into our families. And as they are young mothers or
fathers, some of them are single parents, they might be able to
pass this training on to their children. And that would be a
real benefit. And to me I think that it would save a lot of our
people's lives and make us live a lot longer. Thank you.
Mr. Squirrel. If I may, sir. I think the initiative is on
the right track. All of the things that they mention, the
demonstrations, the recipes that we do and the screenings that
we do. The only thing that I might suggest, with the money that
we get at the Cherokee Nation with the amount of people that we
serve per month, we have only two nutrition aides on staff.
Next year we hope to be able to get at least one more. We call
them nutrition aides. They are not certified, they are not
college educated. They are just their own peers that have been
taught to go out and talk to their neighbors, sometimes their
own families, on how to wisely use these foods as far as
nutritional value and benefit is concerned.
So, I think there is not enough. We are putting a Band-Aid
on a hemorrhage. We need something that is a little bit more
effective. And to do that, maybe to double that $1 million
nationwide to $2 million, something like that; which probably
is insignificant money when it comes to where I am sitting
today, but that would help us to do twice as much from what I
can tell. Thank you.
The Chairman. Okay. Thank you very much.
Mr. Joseph. Could I add one more thing to that? I believe
it would be saving the government a whole lot of money from
doing amputations for diabetics and for having to have our
people doing open-heart surgeries, which costs the government a
whole lot more money, nationally, for our people.
And, as you know, the Indian Health Service is only funded
at about 50 percent of what its real need is, based on a
comparison of other Federal programs. A Federal penitentiary
inmate receives twice the amount of healthcare per capita than
a Native American.
Anyway, we are all here to try to save the government a lot
of tax money, and prevention would be a big part of that.
Nutrition is a big part of the overall health plan. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you very much for your testimony and
response to the questions. And this is what we are all trying
to do right now, is look at preventive measures and also look
at services that need to be provided to promote longer and
healthier lives, along with how we can reduce our cost, and
improve the quality of life for many of our youth and our
adults, as well.
And that is what Mr. Fortenberry has constantly been
striving and pushing for; the effects it has and the costs. But
if we do more preventive care, we actually end up reducing our
costs in the long run.
So thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. At this time I will
turn it over to our Ranking Member, Mr. Fortenberry.
Mr. Fortenberry. Mr. Chairman, your comments were very
germane following up on what Mr. Joseph was speaking of, which
is part of the core issue here. When we think about nutritional
programs, we are clearly trying to protect persons who are in a
vulnerable or fragile position.
But to think about the larger policy implications on health
care, on local economies, on the preservation of, as you
suggested, traditional tribal recipes in a traditional culture,
is I think an appropriate finding for this hearing. I think
that Committee hearings should be about looking at difficulties
and solving problems and the technical aspects of delivery, and
a lot of the things we talked about today.
But in this regard, you as tribal leaders, potentially, can
be very, very helpful in terms of leading this program's effect
on multiple-policy objectives.
Mr. Joseph, you also talked about the difficulties, given
that reservation land is not often--is sometimes not the same
land that people originally arranged to find their food
sources, and so it would be a little bit difficult to fully
integrate the traditional or original Native American diet into
a food distribution program.
With that said, however, if there is a willingness on your
part to think creatively, and the Under Secretary had mentioned
earlier, the very eager openness in the Department to the idea
of combining policy objectives to ensure that, when possible,
local food production is integrated into food distribution so
that we are achieving, again, a winner on a lot of different
levels, creating more local economic opportunity, increasing
nutritional delivery of foods in a most convenient and
efficient manner, and again protecting vulnerable persons with
the core part of the program.
So I would encourage you as well to--although this hearing,
this is a bit beyond the parameters of what we originally
intended for the hearing, I think this is an opportune time to
think creatively. We all have the problem; we are all in
government and tend to stovepipe programs and define them by
narrow outcomes, but how they can be more fully integrated to
meet these multiple objectives of protection of people,
increased healthcare outcomes and a strengthening of local
economic opportunities.
So I just want to leave that comment with you all, and I
appreciate your testimony today. I am glad the Under Secretary
is still here to hear this. And he did indicate earlier an
eagerness on the Department to look at meeting those
objectives, and potentially it is possible through this
program. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you. Mrs. Lummis from Wyoming.
Mrs. Lummis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I would like to
expand a little more, if I could, with all three of you about
the FDPIR versus SNAP in terms of why a clientele would choose
FDPIR over SNAP when the Food Distribution Program provides
fewer benefits than SNAP. Could you enlighten me about why that
occurs, anyone?
Mr. Joseph. The Food Distribution Program, the way it is
packaged, probably would have a little longer shelf life. When
I used to use the program with my family, sometimes we could
get certain types of foods in one program. It would be like,
kind of like a storage for when you really needed that type of
food. And then you switch, I guess, over to the SNAP.
Our people probably would want to have a little more choice
on what their intake is. My kids really loved the cheese, and
they craved that stuff. But, in the store system, there might
be a different type of cheese that they would use for different
ingredients. I think it is a combination of just the choice and
having something a little bit different would be my guess.
Mrs. Lummis. Thank you.
Mr. Squirrel. On my reservations, if I may, on some
reservations it is the only option, realistically, insofar as
your decent grocery store may be 120 miles away. Economically
it is the main option, the only option on the reservation
because of the remoteness.
Another thing that we have already established is that it
is nutritionally better. If you recall, the scores were like 81
for the foods that we have in our program and SNAP got a 52, I
believe. I have read that a few times before, and I proudly
mention that to anybody that will listen to me.
The other thing is Native Americans identify with this
program, they grew up with it. I remember it when I was a
little kid. I was one of the people that was too remote or too
poor to even afford to go and get commodities because it was 30
miles away. And back then they only had four, five or six
things that you could pick up. But, we didn't have a car. My
mother wouldn't drive, couldn't drive, and my father was off
working wherever he could. So we didn't have a way to go over
there to get it. So we were too poor to get commodities. Now,
what does that tell you?
Another thing is it is a social get-together nowadays for
people. I can hear elderly, ``I will see you next month on the
23rd,'' whenever they leave our stores. They get to see family
and friends. We get 50 to 140, 150 families a month come
through these stores. And it is kind of a social get-together
for them. They look forward to it. It is a one-stop shopping
for them. They come and get their groceries, they go to Wal-
Mart to get other things they need, then they go stop by the
clinic or whatever. So they try to plan it all in 1 day so it
only costs them $12.50 for gas, instead of going 4 days and
paying $50 a month for gas. So that is the way it goes at the
Cherokee Nation.
Ms. Merriman. I am going to talk about the other side,
about people who may choose SNAP over FDPIR. Young people don't
cook like our families used to. And if you use FDPIR, you would
need to cook for a lot of the items in the food package, which
we know that usually means it is more nutritious and well
balanced, especially if they are cooking the food in the food
package. So I think that is one thing with maybe some of our
younger families.
Also, I think their children may want the tastier, which
are usually fattier and more sugary, saltier-type things that
they would get under the SNAP program. That is not a good
choice, but that is what some people choose, want, or desire.
I think there is still some misinformation. I think this
was mentioned a little earlier, but maybe not in this aspect.
When the program first started, it was not unusual if you were
driving on some of the back roads to see some of the items that
people were given without choice dumped, because they would
become wormy or they just could not use that much meal or
flour. And, you are not supposed to give that to anybody else
or sell it. So it is much different now. I think still there
are people who believe that that is still the way, that you
don't have a choice.
And I know Mr. Squirrel in our program has been in the
trenches for a long time and fought for choice and for labeling
of food so that they don't look like mystery meat or, really
pale some kind of labels; that now they are more lively. Tony
the Tiger is there and other things.
I think there are some of those things that would have
people going to SNAP versus FDPIR. We always try to encourage
people in our other social service programs to try FDPIR
because we know that it is going to be healthier for them.
Mr. Joseph. I might add one more thing. In food
distribution some of our people would get the buffalo burger,
and we don't have that in our stores. So to me, a lot of them
would probably be wanting to get as much of the buffalo as they
can, to have something different; then they might switch over
to SNAP, to get something else versus the buffalo. But, they
really crave that meat because it is lower in fat and it is
actually healthier for our bodies.
Mrs. Lummis. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I think in a year and
a half in Congress, those are the most practical responses to
any question I have ever asked, so thank you. It is a pleasure
listening to you. I yield back.
The Chairman. Thank you very much. And we want to thank all
of you for your testimony. And I appreciate Chairman Joseph,
when you talked about your family and others. I know what it
was like because my family also received the commodities. And I
remember us having to go to get them when I was in New Mexico
to get commodities during that period of time as a young child.
And because of the lack of education that we had, we knew that
the commodities that we received versus SNAP--and that is a
problem that we have even now, is to begin to educate. We know
there is a better opportunity, because now you can eat a lot
healthier.
At that point we knew what we were going to get, so we
always made sure that we had a lot of tortillas and frijoles
and some of the other good food that I loved eating.
I want to ask one final question, and any one of the three
of you can answer. Do you think that FDPIR eligibility
guidelines should take into consideration some of the expenses
such as heating costs, electric bills, medical expenses that
are not currently allowable deductions, and if so, can you
elaborate on that?
Mr. Joseph. I live up in the Northwest and the temperatures
get really cold and learned through e-mails that the area in
the Dakotas had the severe weather this past year, even over on
the coast, on the coastline we have had some severe weather.
And so the heating and transportation costs are really extreme.
And when all of a sudden you get laid off from work, like
probably around a thousand of the members of my tribe, due to
the housing market experienced a real hardship. And like I
said, some of our elders trying to raise grandchildren on a
fixed income, they are really low income, and heating expenses,
and just trying to get the kids to school and everything is a
real hardship. And if there could be some guidelines to waive
some of those for some of our people it would help bring up our
children a lot healthier. And to me I think that should really
be looked at. Thank you.
Ms. Merriman. I would concur. We all know that the cost of
utilities and medical care are very high and not going down. So
I believe there really should be some consideration in looking
at those issues. And I appreciate you bringing those up.
I don't know if Mr. Squirrel wants to add to that, but I
know we see that all the time.
Mr. Squirrel. I think we should support it. The only thing
I would add is I am a person that believes very strongly in
equity, parity. So I would suggest that these be considered for
a SNAP program, any program that is funded by Agriculture to be
considered for SNAP or WIC, or any of the programs that are
administered by the Department of Agriculture. Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you. This concludes our hearing for
today, but is there anything that any one of you would like to
state in how we could better provide better coordination, look
at the services that we need that we are providing now, and
then what can we possibly do as we look at reauthorization of
the 2012 Farm Bill as it pertains to nutrition?
Are there any additional comments that any one of you would
like to make at this point, just for the record, in areas that
we should begin to look at? I know that on both sides we are
very much interested in having improvements in these areas, and
how can we best provide the services that are being cost
effective. Under the PAYGO legislation, as we try to comply
with that, do we have the funds? Are there areas that we need
to provide some services? So if any of you would like to make a
statement, any additional statement at this point.
Mr. Squirrel. Yes, I would like to respond to that. But
first I would like to tell you that the Cherokee Nation program
is in better shape in the last 2\1/2\ years than it has been
the previous 22 years because of the funding formula that they
developed 2\1/2\ years ago.
The Chairman. Well, Jeff and I weren't on the program
before, and we have been on there so that is why it has
improved.
Mr. Fortenberry. Very well said.
Mr. Squirrel. Anyway, sometimes we were the leading program
in the United States as far as the number of clients served,
and sometimes we were number two. But whenever the funding
program came along, it increased our annual budget by $1
million.
So at that time with disparity, there wasn't funding even
though we were the leaders in service and serviced a number of
clients, but that change put us in great shape. But we still
have a couple of frustrations. And this one has been mentioned.
The reason our client participation has been going down
since April of 2009 is because some of those people that have
the option of choosing us or SNAP; they went to SNAP, and they
would come in and tell me why. ``You know, it is $20, it is $80
a month more for my family.'' And I would tell them, ``I don't
blame you, that is a good decision for you and your family.'' I
would support that. So they would come in and kind of apologize
for switching programs.
And these are only the ones that have the option to. Some
reservations don't have the option because there is not a store
within a reasonable distance. So there was a disparity there.
But if we had gotten some kind of pro rata increase in the
number of items that we could offer, we could have been
competitive and kept our clients.
But the second one is the fact that we are not allowed to
carry over any of our funds at the end of the year. If I have a
couple hundred thousand dollars left, I have to give it back
and get looked at as a bad financial manager, because I
couldn't get rid of all my money to the penny. If we could
carry over, I could carry over that $200,000 and combine it
with the next year's money and be able to buy a new truck or a
new freezer, or something like that. A tractor-trailer rig
costs $220,000, by the time you get all the amenities that you
need on there, like a freezer, a refrigerator trailer and that
sort of thing. So that would allow us to buy major equipment
that we need maybe every 6, 8, 10 years, if we could have
carry-over and combine it with 2 years' worth of money. Thank
you.
Mr. Joseph. I would say, if there could be more work with
the Department of Agriculture and getting tribes funding for
those little rototillers or tractors that could help our people
actually farm some of the fresh produce to mix in with the Food
Distribution Program, I think it would help.
Actually you have to get some physical labor in doing that;
and that would promote some physical activity. And training, if
there are training sources for our young people to learn how to
be farmers, to grow their own produce, it would be good.
Protecting our natural food sources is another thing I
would like to really see. I was talking with a lady earlier,
and on some of the coastal waters, you see the oil spill that
is out there, and we want to protect our water, our foods that
come from those areas also. My wife is from Port Gamble
S'Klallam Tribe, and they really rely on their oyster beds and
the clams and different foods that they gather on the coast.
And we would want to do everything we can to protect that and
those food sources.
Anything that we could do to, preserve our root digging
grounds. We are working with the conservationists to set aside
some of these grounds and keep them safe from people that might
be spraying weeds or running cattle out there and grazing in
some of these areas where our natural foods grow. If we can
protect those lands and set some aside, that would really help.
Thank you.
The Chairman. Thank you very much. I appreciate your
testimony this morning. And I know that there is a lot of work
that we still need to do in a lot of the areas as to how we can
improve on nutrition and services in the areas. And I know that
we talked about also farming fresh fruits and vegetables and
having our own gardens, too. As we look at even providing
training, we must make sure that water is available. And that
is something that we need to begin to start looking at as we
begin to cultivate our own land. As I mentioned to the Ranking
Member here, it becomes a U.S. product. It is not coming from
somewhere else, but it is actually being produced here in the
United States versus something that we are buying at our
grocery stores that we don't know where it is coming from. And
the safety of it too.
So thank you very much. I would like to thank each of our
witnesses for your participation in today's hearing and your
thoughtful testimony, your knowledge, your ideas, your
expertise. I hope it will be used by Congress to find better
policy solutions for improving nutrition health of America's
tribal communities.
We all know the importance of the links between nutrition
and health. We must do all we can to make sure that FDPIR
programs and other tribal programs are more effective.
Again, I want to thank the witnesses and the Members for
their time today. With that, I would like to adjourn the
meeting. So at this time, under the rules of the Committee, the
record of today's hearing will remain open for 10 calendar days
to receive additional materials and supplemental materials,
written responses from the witnesses, to any questions posed by
Members.
The hearing of the Subcommittee on Department Operations,
Oversight, Nutrition and Forestry is now adjourned. Thank you
very much for coming.
[Whereupon, at 11:50 a.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.]
[Material submitted for inclusion in the record follows:]
Submitted Statement By Judy Goforth Parker, Ph.D., R.N., Administrator,
Nation Division of Health, The Chickasaw Nation
Mr. Chairman and members of the Subcommittee, thank you for your
invitation to present testimony today. My name is Judy Goforth Parker,
Ph.D., R.N., administrator for Chickasaw Nation Division of Health. In
this capacity, I oversee the operations of all of the health programs
and facilities within the Chickasaw Nation. This includes, but is not
limited to, Carl Albert Indian Health Facility in Ada, OK, satellite
clinics in Ardmore, Tishomingo, Durant, and Purcell, OK as well as the
wellness facilities and nutrition programs. I served as a legislator
for the Chickasaw Nation for fifteen years. I am pleased and honored to
be invited to testify today. I bring you greetings from Governor Bill
Anoatubby of the Chickasaw Nation.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman, for your commitment to ensuring the
viability, strength and quality of federal nutrition programs, many of
which have benefited the American Indian tribal governments and their
citizens.
The Chickasaw Nation has administered a number of USDA nutrition
programs for many years, including four of those addressed in the Farm
Bill. We serve over 10,000 individuals and work with approximately 95
farmers, all benefiting from either the Chickasaw Nation Food
Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR), the SNAP Nutrition
Education Program, Senior Farmers' Market Nutrition Program or the
Summer Food Program.
Background Information Regarding Factors in Health of Native Americans
Poverty disproportionately affects the Native American population,
with some 25% living with an income at or below poverty level. The
consequence of these poor economic standards is that 43% of Native
American children under the age of 5 are also living in poverty.
With poverty being the principal factor causing food insecurity,
the Native American community suffers from a much higher incidence of
food insecurity and hunger than the general population. In fact, on
average, rates of food insecurity in Indian communities are twice as
high those of the general U.S. population. Nearly one in four Native
American households is hungry or on the edge of hunger. Food insecurity
and hunger take a serious toll on the health and well-being of the
Native American community. These circumstances, which include the
inability to afford nutritionally adequate and safe food or the ability
to acquire acceptable foods in socially acceptable ways, can profoundly
impair physical and mental health status.
Certainly, poverty also imposes barriers on transportation options.
Isolation and financial constraints have forced families in some rural
areas to rely on less expensive, often high-fat foods, and few fruits
and vegetables.
Paradoxically, at the same time that Native Americans experience
hunger and food insecurity, obesity has been declared an epidemic. Both
obesity and hunger can exist in the same families and the same
individuals within that family. A paper called, ``The Paradox of Hunger
and Obesity in America,'' developed by the Center on Hunger and Poverty
and the Food Research and Action Center, discusses this dilemma. Though
it sounds contradictory, those with insufficient resources to purchase
adequate food can still be overweight, for reasons that researchers are
now beginning to understand. It is especially so in many American
Indian communities and families. We need to better grasp this paradox
if we are to grapple with these parallel threats to the well-being of
so many, and avoid potentially damaging policy development in our food
assistance programs.
The fear of running out of food causes people to reduce the quality
of their diets and/or reduce the quantity of food they consume.
Therefore, the lack of adequate resources for food could result in
weight gain in several ways:
Low income families, in an attempt to stretch their food
dollars, consume lower cost foods with typically higher
calories to stave off hunger, affecting the overall energy
density of the diet;
Research shows that food insecure households are willing to
trade food quality for food quantity as a coping strategy;
after all, the stomach registers satiety rather than
nutritional value;
Obesity can be an adaptive response to periods when people
are unable to get enough to eat, as people tend to eat more
than they normally would when food becomes available, and, over
time, this cycle can result in weight gain; and
Physiological changes may occur to help the body conserve
energy when diets are periodically inadequate, basically
storing more calories as fat.
Both obesity and hunger/food insecurity require solutions that
include regular access to nutritionally adequate food. Suggestions that
food allocations in Federal nutrition programs should be reduced, on
the grounds that they contribute to obesity among the poor, are without
scientific merit.
While Native Americans have experienced certain declines in the
rates of anemia, growth stunting, underweight and maternal and infant
mortality over the last 25 years, there is still much work to be done.
Chronic diseases now account for six of the top ten leading causes of
death of Native Americans, with the epidemic of obesity and diabetes
affecting every community. Diabetes is most common among American
Indians at alarming rates throughout United States. Diabetes is a major
risk factor for cardiovascular disease in all Native American
populations, and cardiovascular disease is the leading cause of death
in this group. Of equal concern is the prevalence of obesity in Native
American children and adolescents, reported at almost 40%. This is
attributed to a number of factors, including the paradox described
earlier and reduced activity in lifestyles. It seems that parents are
not necessarily making the connection between childhood obesity and the
high health risks later in life.
Life expectancy has increased by 10 years since 1955 for American
Indians, leading to a rapid increase in the number of elders. The
incidence of food insecurity and hunger may be even more prevalent
among the elders as they are often left to raise their grandchildren,
resulting in their doing without as they struggle to make sure the
children are fed.
Nutrition and food assistance programs can help Native American
communities in addressing some of these devastating diseases. Health
promotion and disease prevention is key--gratefully, many USDA programs
are targeted toward this end.
I would contend, however, that guidance on proper selection and
preparation of foods is every bit as important as just making food
available. Education and empowering caretakers with the ability to make
healthy food choices are critical if Indian youth are to achieve the
successes available to the non-Indian population. Although SNAP
benefits have increased the total dollars spent on food in households,
the rate of obesity has increased as well--again, an education
challenge. If participants purchase higher priced but healthier foods
that were previously out of reach, programs could have a positive
effect on weight. Data indicates, however, that SNAP recipients do not
necessarily tend to purchase more fruits, vegetables and grains, quite
possibly because they still fear that possible shortfall at some point
each month. Nutrition education must accompany food benefits in every
food delivery venue.
The Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR) Today
The FDPIR program has seen a number of enhancements in recent years
through the addition of fresh fruits and vegetables, frozen chicken and
beef, as well as reduction or elimination of many of the high fat, high
sodium foods. Additionally, the recent increase in variety of fresh
fruits and vegetables, made available as a result of collaboration
between FNS and ITO representatives via the Food Package Review
Committee, is highly anticipated and should be available later this
summer. On an administrative front, the establishment of a long awaited
Funding Methodology in 2008 to assure fair and equitable funding to
programs across the country was another tremendous partnership endeavor
between FNS and tribal leaders. We are very grateful for these
advancements, allowing FDPIR to serve our clients in more meaningful
ways.
In our area, because we have very few reservations in Oklahoma,
eligible Native American families can access either the SNAP program or
the FDPIR at their convenience, as long as they are only enrolled in
one program at a time. We serve our Chickasaw Nation clients in a
friendly and attractive grocery store setting, for which we were
recognized with the 2000 USDA Pyramid of Excellence Award. We feel
strongly that families should be served with dignity and respect and
thus, we continue to expand the availability of FDP grocery stores
across our 13 county area. We constantly offer education to make
customers aware of the enhanced value of participating in the FDPIR,
including more total volume of food (80 lbs./person/month) and maximum
nutrient benefit of food choices, i.e., fresh produce rather than
canned, heart healthy substitutions.
Federal policy should encourage rather than discourage tribes from
taking their own creative initiatives. A rubber stamp approach will not
meet the needs of all tribes in Indian Country. Given the food
insecurity, poverty and health problems disproportionately affecting so
many Native Americans, it is only sensible that nutrition and food
assistance programs will continue to be a key ingredient in building
healthy communities. Tribes need to be allowed the flexibility to
implement programs in an innovative and culturally appropriate manner.
Recommendations for Further Enhancing FDPIR Effectiveness
We encourage the Subcommittee to provide policy changes and
adequate funding authorization that enables tribes to:
Continue to improve the nutritional quality of the food
package by offering foods with lower fat content, higher whole
grain content and lower sugar and sodium content. Foods that
are convenient to serve and culturally appropriate are key with
many families we serve today.
Provide a method in the SNAP (Food Stamp) Act for tribal
governments to directly access SNAP Nutrition Education (SNAP
NE) funds, just as individual state governments do. This
Federal Government-to-government partnership has been correctly
extended to most of our nutrition programs, i.e., FDPIR, WIC
and Farmers' Market Nutrition programs. The current posture of
forcing tribes to negotiate through the various state
department of human services/other agencies for SNAP NE is
contrary to the basic tenants of tribal sovereignty, and also
makes it more difficult to help families with special needs due
to extensive delays in approval decisions.
Provide more nutrition education monies to the FDPIR
grantees, as an alternate to tribes directly accessing SNAP NE
funds.
Provide infrastructure funding to facilitate one-time
funding needs for the FDPIR. Many needs of tribes in
administration of this program could be met if there was
opportunity to compete for infrastructure grants, much like
those provided in the WIC program, to address the periodic
equipment need, renovation of space to better meet client
needs, expansion of a warehouse or to create a grocery store
setting with a food demonstration kitchen for education, all of
which enhance program service delivery.
Allow Native American families living outside of tribal
reservations, but close to FDPIR distribution sites, to elect
to participate in the FDPIR rather than SNAP, recognizing that
they will likely receive far more nutrient-dense foods in the
80 lbs./person/month.
Recommend the USDA facilitate study of the causes for
decline in FDPIR participation over recent years. Decrease in
FDPIR caseload is of great concern. It appears that FDPIR is
losing many households to SNAP. It is our belief that the main
reason is the lack of restrictions on food items purchased with
SNAP funds. FDPIR continues to make great strides in improving
the nutritional value of the food package while there are no
nutritional requirements concerning the use of SNAP benefits.
It is of additional concern that the recent ARRA increase in
SNAP benefits, while seemingly a positive move, has resulted in
a direct impact in FDPIR households further leaving FDPIR for
SNAP, and ultimately consuming more convenient, low nutrient-
dense foods, perpetuating the advancement of chronic diseases
we hope to negate.
Barriers To Accessing Other USDA Nutrition Programs
There are significant barriers for many tribes to access some of
the very best nutrition and food assistance programs USDA offers,
including a number of those addressed in the farm bill: the Farmers'
Market Nutrition Programs, the SNAP Nutrition Education program and the
Summer Food Service Program. There are simply too many people in Indian
Country and on reservations who do not have the opportunity to
experience the health and economic benefits these programs offer.
I urge you to consider the following recommendations to eradicate
access barriers to USDA nutrition and food assistance programs and to
take the following actions:
Facilitate tribes' direct access, through a government-to-
government agreement, to participate in the Summer Food Service
Program and At-risk After School Snack Program, as recommended
above with the SNAP ED program. Both of these offer terrific
opportunities to address hunger for children in a meaningful
way. Again, only accessible through the state education
department and very limited in administrative funds, these
programs present an access challenge for tribes. The program
encourages partnering and community involvement for
administrative in-kind, but the training burden is high for
these individuals.
Expand funding for WIC and Senior Farmers Market Nutrition
programs to allow more tribes to participate in these programs.
Funding levels have varied little for several years, in spite
of the programs' tremendous popularity, thus preventing any new
applicants to participate. Only a handful of tribes in the
entire country currently have FMNP grants. This program helps
produce fruits and vegetables and addresses one of the primary
objectives of all nutrition education efforts today. The
Chickasaw Nation Senior Farmers' Market Nutrition Program (SR
FMNP) has brought a considerable infusion of potential funding
to growers in the area--over $1.5 million since inception, thus
creating opportunity for Native American farmers. Approximately
2,600 Native American low-income seniors benefit from
participation in our FMNP each year. Native American seniors
appreciate and utilize the FMNP benefits as evidenced by the
redemption rate of more than 80%.
Promote the recruitment and retention of registered
dietitians to support programs at the tribal level. Employing
nutrition professionals in the Native American nutrition
programs could help in developing culturally appropriate
nutrition education materials, shaping policy or counseling
program participants toward healthier choices.
Improve the use of information technology in nutrition
programs to enhance service delivery and program management.
Continue promoting breastfeeding as the method of choice for
infant feeding.
Update Meal Pattern Requirements in the Child and Adult Care
Food Program (CACFP) to be more congruent with current
nutrition recommendations and allow comparable substitutions
for fluid milk, i.e., yogurt or cheese. Cultured milk products
are often better tolerated by the Native American population.
Conclusion
Given the improved state of health enjoyed by many Americans, the
lingering health disparity among American Indians and Alaskan Natives
is troubling. Food insecurity, poverty and health problems continue to
disproportionately affect more than 65% of Native Americans.
Strengthening Federal nutrition programs continues to be a key factor
in building healthy and economically strong communities.
Investment by Federal nutrition programs in foods of high
nutritional quality and the educational support to assist families in
using those optimally is far less costly than funding care for the
chronic diseases many develop in the absence of sound nutritional
status. Nutrition education and provision of foods high in nutritional
value can do much to ward off hunger and food insecurity, as well as
combat increasing rates of obesity and diabetes. Improving the health
and food security of Native American families must ever be present in
the minds and hearts of Congress as it establishes policy and fulfills
the Federal trust responsibility to the native people.
Thank you, Mr. Chairman and Members of the Subcommittee. I remain
ready to answer any questions or provide more information you may need.
______
Submitted Statement By Gloria Goodwin, Secretary, National and Regional
Board of Directors, National Association of Food Distribution Programs
on Indian Reservations
6/20/10
Good morning, Members of Congress,
My name is Gloria Goodwin from Minnesota's White Earth Indian
Reservation. I've worked with Food Distribution for 28 years. I serve
on the National and Regional Board of Directors as Secretary for Food
Distribution Programs on Indian Reservations. Currently NAFDPIR
represents over 200 tribes in the Food Distribution Program. There are
115 agencies that distribute foods in FDPIR.
It's an honor to be able to advocate on behalf of the people that
access the program. My heart really goes out to the people.
I'd like to take this opportunity to thank Under Secretary Kevin
Concannon and his staff for visiting White Earth Reservation Food
Distribution Program to witness first hand how services are applied to
our people.
The Commodity feeding program has been in existence for more than
30 years. White Earth and Leech Lake Reservations in Minnesota were the
first programs to operate in 1979. White Earth served approximately
2,000 customers when the program began.
Participation has significantly declined since then.
Issues and concerns that I feel needs to be addressed:
1. Declining participation rates.
2. Inequities between SNAP & FDPIR.
3. Nutrition Education grant matching requirements.
4. Cultural food offerings.
5. The discontinuation of Butter.
6. Administrative dollars.
This program has a significant impact on our membership.
FDPIR participation continues to decline. The numbers will
tell you that this is a national trend. USDA recently
increased the SNAP benefits for participants on average of
$20 per household member using additional ARRA funds. This
caused a number of FDPIR participants to choose to switch
programs resulting in the decline in FDPIR participation.
Both programs are funded by USDA and should be governed by
the same policies regarding food benefits. Consumers are
often seen purchasing unhealthy food choices with SNAP
benefits, such as buying pizza, pop, potato chips, candy
and the list goes on. We've come a long way to make our
FDPIR food package healthy and nutritious. Products are now
much lower in fat, sodium and sugar. Labels are more
appealing and attractive. The stigma of the generic
government labels are a thing of the past.
There are many inequities between SNAP and FDPIR. We are
asking that guidelines increase and deductions expand in
parallel with our sister program, SNAP.
We need to invest more in Nutrition education and provide
an easier method to access funds. Many programs do not
staff Nutrition Educators and there is a great need for
tribes to employ full time FDPIR nutrition educators.
Nutrition Educators are vital assets to our programs. The
25% matching requirement is a common barrier for some
tribes. Program Directors are often intimidated by the
grant writing and reporting process, so we need to find
ways to make the process much easier. We need to make a
unified effort to encourage healthy eating and provide more
incentives to keep health care costs down. Customers need
to eat and live well. Diseases are prevalent on the
reservations. We recognize the health crisis of diabetes,
obesity and other health related issues that impact the
clients that we serve on a daily basis. Native Americans
suffer from the highest rate of diabetes in the nation and
the incidence of this disease has more than doubled in the
last two generations. We need to combat this ongoing
problem. We need to educate and encourage our clients how
to eat better. I ask that we examine waiving the 25% match
to make the process easier to access nutrition education
funds.
I believe we need additional food dollars to expand our
nutritional profile to include native foods such as wild
rice, bison, salmon and cranberries. Native foods provide
significant sources of high nutritional value. Native foods
can serve as a return to the traditional dietary habits
that can prevent the onset of diseases and expensive
medical costs. The food additions will enhance the variety
of foods which will encourage participants to apply and
reapply for commodity foods. Tribal cultures vary greatly
within each Region and sometimes within each State. As
cultures vary, so do food preferences.
Customers want their butter back. FNS Headquarters made a
decision to discontinue the butter product because of the
high fat content. This decision has been made without
Tribal consultation. Shortening has also been discontinued.
Customers now have a choice between low fat margarine and
vegetable oil--or--both for bigger households. Research
will prove that butter is better for you because it is a
natural product without all the additives. The low fat
margarine has limited uses and is not recommended for
baking. With education and encouragement to eat healthier,
butter is a healthier option when eaten in moderation.
I believe you recognize there is poverty in America and in many
instances our people are still the poorest of the poor.
This is a very good program that serves many tribes but it gets
increasingly difficult to deliver to our people because of
costs and availability of food product. This program serves as
the tribes most basic need which is Food.
And last but not least, additional discretionary dollars are always
a priority to effectively and efficiently administer programs.
We are seeking your assistance in resolving some of these issues to
better deliver the food package to some of the nation's poorest
people.
NAFDPIR's partnership with FNS has resulted in significant
improvements to the FDPIR food package and we look forward to continue
working together in the future to better service our customers. Thank
you for your time.
______
Submitted Statement By Susie Roy, Food Distribution Director, Leech
Lake Band of Ojibwe; Member, Board of Directors, National Association
of Food Distribution Programs on Indian Reservations
6/21/10
Good morning Committee Members,
My name is Susie Roy and I am from Minnesota, I am also the Food
Distribution Director for the Leech Lake Band of Ojibwe and the elected
President for the Midwest Region. I also sit on the board of the
National Association of Food Distribution Programs on Indian
Reservations (NAFDPIR) representing the Midwest Region.
Thank you for inviting me. This is an honor to be here, I must
admit that I am a little nervous here in front of all of you, but I am
going to do my best.
I feel that we have come a long ways with the Food Distribution
Programs on Indian Reservations since 1979 but we still have a long
ways to go to be able to provide quality service to our people.
Some of our reservations sit in remote areas with only one grocery
store or one convenience store and gas station and the business owners
can charge what they want for their products, this has been a big
concern as some of the low-income households can't afford to feed their
families healthy food items.
We need to look at increasing our food package guide rates so
families that choose to participate on the Food Distribution Program
can have enough healthy foods to feed their families all month.
The eligibility guidelines are a big issue that also needs to be
looked at closely. The 20% standard deduction for earned income has
been there since 1979 we need to move the Food Distribution Program
along with inflation. We live in an area where in the winter months it
gets to 40 below zero sometimes and people have high heating cost,
electrical bills and medical expenses and these are not allowable
deductions for eligibility for the Food Distribution Program. Sometime
families are only $1 to $5 over the income guidelines. All Social
Security clients should also be automatically eligible.
The SNAP program continues to raise their benefits for clients to
purchase unhealthy food choices for their families this is a known fact
that they purchase pizzas, potato chips, pop, candy and other unhealthy
foods.
To increase our food packages to low income households on Indian
Reservations we would need to have an increase in our appropriated food
dollars.
With the healthy food packages we provide on the Food Distribution
Program we need a significant amount of Nutrition dollars to provide
each Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations with Nutrition
Educators on a daily basis.
I think that everybody in Indian Country has had a loss of a family
member to cancer or diabetes. We have a significant amount of Native
American people just on my reservation with diabetes and some of my own
family members. Diabetes is now being detected at an alarming rate in
young children on reservations.
Nutrition Educators need to start providing healthy choices now. A
handful of Food Distribution Programs might have access to Nutrition
Educators but not on a full time basis.
Nutrition funds should not be competitive for programs it should be
a given when it comes to nutrition, we should not have to compete over
funds with other programs.
Native foods for each region should be allowed on our food packages
they are high in nutrition for Native people.
I could go on and on but I will end here.
Thank you for giving me this opportunity to voice my concerns on a
very needed program on Indian Reservations.
______
Submitted Statement Ahniwake Rose, Policy Analyst, Health and
Education, National Congress of American Indians
Background of NCAI
The National Congress of American Indians (NCAI) is the oldest and
largest American Indian organization in the United States. In 1944,
NCAI was created by tribal leaders as a response to termination and
assimilation policies that threatened the existence of American Indian
and Alaska Native tribes. Since then, NCAI has fought to preserve the
treaty rights and sovereign status of tribal governments, while
ensuring that Indian people may fully participate in the political
system. As the most representative organization of American Indian
tribes, NCAI serves the broad interests of tribal governments across
the nation
American Indian and Alaska Native Economic Disparities
Many American Indian and Alaska Native families depend on the food
that is provided by the Food Distribution Program on Indian
Reservations (FDPIR). The economic situation on Indian reservations is
significantly challenging, resulting in many American Indians and
Alaska Natives having limited access to nutritious and quality foods.
Twenty-five percent of American Indians and Alaska Natives are living
in poverty, while 13% of the U.S. lives at or below the poverty
line.\1\ While the unemployment rate is reaching 9.5% for the overall
population, some tribal communities are suffering from a 70%
unemployment rate.\2\ Additionally, most reservations lack the
infrastructure and urban environment to attract business development.
As such, local grocery stores are unable to offer affordable, fresh,
and nutritious foods for the impoverished community they serve. In the
Sioux Standing Rock Reservation, for example, one grocery store serves
2.5 million acres. As a result, the cost of food increases, and the
variety of fresh produce is reduced.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ U.S. Census, 2000; Energy Information Administration, Energy
Use and Renewable Energy Development Potential on Indian Lands, 2000;
2006 GAO 06-189 Report, Challenges to Assessing and Improving
Telecommunications for Native Americans on Tribal Lands.
\2\ U.S. Census, 2000; Energy Information Administration, Energy
Use and Renewable Energy Development Potential on Indian Lands, 2000;
2006 GAO 06-189 Report, Challenges to Assessing and Improving
Telecommunications for Native Americans on Tribal Lands.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
To further complicate this situation, many American Indians and
Alaska Natives do not have the resources to maintain fresh and
nutritious foods within their homes. Fourteen percent on Indian people
do not have electricity, a necessity for refrigeration, freezing, and
cooking. An additional 13% do not have access to clean water, which
creates a hazardous obstacle for cleaning and cooking fresh foods.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ U.S. Census, 2000; Energy Information Administration, Energy
Use and Renewable Energy Development Potential on Indian Lands, 2000;
2006 GAO 06-189 Report, Challenges to Assessing and Improving
Telecommunications for Native Americans on Tribal Lands.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
On reservations, these economic challenges create additional
barriers to obtaining fresh produce and healthy foods. As a result,
American Indian and Alaska Native communities are suffering from the
highest rates of obesity and diabetes in the country.\4\ American
Indian and Alaska Native adults are 1.6 times more likely as White
adults to be obese, which is equivalent to 34% of American Indian and
Alaska Native adults and 21.3% of White adults.\5\ More alarming,
however, is the rapid proliferation of obesity among Native youth. More
than 39% of low-income American Indian and Alaska Native children ages
2 to 5 are overweight or obese.\6\ Also, the obesity rate among
American Indian and Native Alaskan 4 year olds is 31%, which is double
the obesity rate of their White counterparts.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ American Diabetes Association.
\5\ CDC 2005. Health Characteristics of the American Indian and
Alaska Native Adult Population: United States, 1999-2003. Advance Data
(356), Table 2.
\6\ Polhamus B., Dalenius K., Borland E., et al. Pediatric
Nutrition Surveillance 2006 Report. Atlanta: U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2007.
\7\ Anderson S.E. and Whitaker R.C. ``Prevalence of Obesity Among
U.S. Preschool Children in Different Racial and ethnic Groups.''
Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 163(4): 344-348, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
A natural result of obesity and poor eating habits is the
development of diabetes and other health complications. According to
the Indian Health Service (IHS) Diabetes Program, there was a 161%
increase in diabetes in young people aged 25 to 34 years of age, and a
110% increase in diabetes in youth between the ages of 15 to 19.\8\ The
Robert Wood Johnson Foundation also released a recent report that
highlighted a 68% increase of diabetes cases among American Indian and
Alaska Native adolescents over a 10 year period.\9\ These alarming
statistics result in Native people dying from diabetes at a rate of
189% higher than other Americans.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ IHS Diabetes Program Statistics.
\9\ Acton K.J., Burrows N.R., Wang J., et al. ``Diagnosed Diabetes
Among American Indians and Alaska Natives Aged < 35 Years--United
States, 1994-2004.'' Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 55(44):
1201-1203, 2006.
\10\ SAMHSA, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2003.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Benefits Obtained from FDPIR
For the past 20 years, FDPIR has been working to create a food
package that offers a variety of nutritious and healthy foods that meet
the dietary guidelines for Indian people. To support this endeavor, the
FDPIR Food Package Review Work Group was created to monitor customer
satisfaction and continually improve the food package by recommending
healthy, nutritious, and flavorsome foods. In comparison to the
Supplemental Nutritious Assistance Program (SNAP), another food program
that tribal members have the option of choosing, FDPIR scores 29 points
higher on the USDA's Healthy Eating Index. Out of 100, FDPIR scored 81,
the average American followed with 58, and SNAP participants trailed
with a rating of 52.\11\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ USDA FNS, Office of Research and Analysis, FDPIR Food Package
Nutritional Quality: Report to Congress, 2008.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Based on these nutrition statistics, some tribes are concerned that
SNAP participants are not spending their food stamps wisely. Instead of
choosing nutritious foods that will benefit their health and overall
well-being, they are opting for fast, processed, and unhealthy foods.
In addition, many SNAP participants are exhausting all of their food
benefits before the month expires.
In terms of convenience, many FDPIR programs have identified the
individuals who lack transportation. The Standing Rock Sioux tribe, for
example, offers home delivery to the elderly, the handicapped, and
those who lack transportation each month. Alternatively, SNAP is not a
realistic option for reservations where the only grocery store is
located a hundred miles away. Even for those reservations where a
grocery store is conveniently located, the food options are limited to
what is practical for a rural store to have delivered.
Improving the FDPIR
The following recommendations were gathered from tribal FDPIR
agencies and tribal leaders who have shared their concerns with NCAI.
NCAI, however, is still in the process of establishing a task force to
develop additional FDPIR policies recommendations.
Permanent implementation of traditional Native foods. Before
processed foods entered the diets of American Indians and Alaska
Natives, tribal communities lived from traditional hunting, fishing,
gathering and agriculture. By doing so, they had few diseases, and
maintained healthy and strong lives. Many tribal leaders have voiced
their support in returning to these traditional foods that encourage
healthy living and cultural sustainability. A major element is ensuring
that traditional foods are permanently included in FDPIR.
Encourage local food production and markets. Establishing and
supporting local food markets would support the local economy,
encourage the production and consumption of tribal traditional foods,
and offset additional costs for the delivery of fresh foods to rural
tribal communities.
Eliminate asset tests. USDA has traditionally aligned FDPIR rules
with those governing SNAP, both for administrative convenience and as a
matter of fairness. By maintaining parallel eligibility standards
between the two programs, USDA ensures that the program is a comparable
alternative to SNAP. Tribes, however, do not have the same option as
states to lift the asset test on eligibility. Further, it does not
ensure that American Indian and Alaska Native families living in states
that have lifted the asset test for SNAP, are free of an asset test
administered by FDPIR. If not addressed, FDPIR will be the only federal
nutrition program that requires an asset test as part of eligibility.
Interagency collaboration. While FDIPR remains an important food
source for Native communities, it is also important to seek
collaborative efforts with other government agencies that continuously
distribute food. For instance, the Bureau of Indian Affairs and Bureau
of Indian Education distribute school breakfasts and lunches to Native
students. Encouraging interagency collaboration with local producers
will assist in efforts to regularly secure healthy and nutritious foods
for Native communities.
Educate tribal communities. FDPIR still maintains a negative
stereotype from its establishment in the 1960's, thus many tribal
members are hesitant in returning. As a result, tribal communities need
specific outreach to inform them of the updated and modernized program.
The image of FDPIR needs to be changed, where it aligns with the
nutritious, healthy, and flavorsome foods it offers. Several tribes
have taken on this work themselves, presenting cooking demonstrations,
offering cooking classes, and producing cook books. Each of these
solutions provide a way for tribal members to become familiar with the
new food packages that are being provided, while teaching them skills
that will encourage a nutritious and healthy lifestyle. In addition,
many of the youth do not possess the skills to cook, so these are
educational skills for them to develop as well.
To ensure maximum outcomes for these innovative practices,
appropriate staff is needed to educate FDPIR participants. Recruiting
and retaining registered dieticians and nutrition professionals would
assist tribal communities by developing culturally appropriate
nutrition education materials, shaping policy, and counseling FDPIR
participants toward healthier choices.
Allow unused funds to be carried over to the next year and increase
funding. Additional funding would allow tribal programs to upgrade
facilities and purchase new equipment, such as trailers, trucks, and
freezers. These funds would also allow tribal programs to create
educational programs and hire additional staff.
Tribal Consultation
A unique government-to-government relationship exists between
federally-recognized tribes and the Federal Government. This
relationship is grounded in numerous treaties, statutes, and executive
orders, which reinforce the legal status of tribal governments. An
integral element of this government-to-government relationship is that
consultation occurs with Indian tribes. President Obama recently
reaffirmed this relationship with an Executive Memorandum, which
requires each federal agency to develop a plan to implement
consultation and coordination with Indian tribal governments as
required by Executive Order 13175.
Because FDPIR is administered by the U.S. Department of
Agriculture, tribal governments should be consulted before any changes
are made to the existing program. Moreover, FDPIR is a program that was
established to specifically meet the food shortage of Native people.
Conclusion
Although FDPIR has significantly improved, the alarming rates of
diabetes and obesity continue to grow within Indian Country. Therefore,
it is vital to address the need for fresh, healthy, and traditional
foods. As policies and recommendations are being considered, NCAI
encourages the Committee to seek further comments as needed.
Attachment
Diabetes and Obesity in Indian Country Fact Sheet
Diabetes
American Indians and Alaska Natives have the highest
prevalence of diabetes among all U.S. racial and ethnic
groups.\1\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\ American Diabetes Association.
In some American Indian and Alaska Native communities, more
than half of adults aged 18 and older have diagnosed diabetes,
with prevalence rates reaching as high as 60%.\2\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\ IHS Report to Congress, 2007.
Between 1990-2009, among American Indians and Alaska Natives
there was a 161% increase in diabetes in young people aged 25-
34 years and a 110% increase in diabetes in youth aged 15-19
years.\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\ IHS Diabetes Program Statistics.
Native people die from diabetes at a rate of 189% higher
than other Americans.\4\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\4\ SAMHSA, National Survey on Drug Use and Health, 2003.
American Indians and Alaska Natives are twice as likely to
be told by a physician that they have diabetes as their non-
Hispanic white counterparts.\5\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\5\ CDC 2005. Health Characteristics of the American Indian and
Alaska Native Adult Population: United States, 1999-2003. Advance Data
(356), Table 4.
In 2005, American Indian and Alaska Natives were 1.9 times
as likely as non-Hispanics white to die from diabetes.\6\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\6\ CDC 2007. Health United States, 2007. Table 29.
Over a 10 year period, the number of diabetes cases
increased by 68 percent among American Indian and Alaska Native
adolescents.\7\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\7\ Acton K.J., Burrows N.R., Wang J., et al. ``Diagnosed Diabetes
Among American Indians and Alaska Natives Aged < 35 Years--United
States, 1994-2004.'' Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report, 55(44):
1201-1203, 2006.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Obesity
More than 39% of low-income American Indian and Alaska
Native children ages 2 to 5 are overweight or obese.\8\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\8\ Polhamus B., Dalenius K., Borland E., et al. Pediatric
Nutrition Surveillance 2006 Report. Atlanta: U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 2007.
American Indian and Alaska Native adults are 1.6 times as
likely as White adults to be obese, which is equivalent to 34%
of American Indian and Alaska Native adults and 21.3% of White
adults.\9\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\9\ CDC 2005. Health Characteristics of the American Indian and
Alaska Native Adult Population: United States, 1999-2003. Advance Data
(356), Table 2.
A national survey found that 31.2 percent of American Indian
and Native Alaskan 4 year olds are obese. The obesity rate
among American Indians and Native Alaskans was higher than that
of any other racial or ethnic group studied and almost double
the rate among White 4 year olds.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\10\ Anderson S.E. and Whitaker R.C. ``Prevalence of Obesity Among
U.S. Preschool Children in Different Racial and Ethnic Groups.''
Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, 163(4): 344-348, 2009.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
______
Submitted Paper By Roxanna Newsom, President, National Association of
Food Distribution Programs on Indian Reservations
Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations
Farm Bill 2012
Position Paper
We greatly appreciate recent visits made to reservations: Secretary
Vilsack's visit to Chickasaw Nation and Under Secretary Kevin
Concannon's visit to White Earth Reservation. We want to point out that
``one size doesn't fit all''. There are vast geographical differences
between ITO's and for many of our citizens nothing has changed since
the inception of the program.
When comparing FDPIR to SNAP,* FDPIR is the healthier alternative.
With the epidemic proportions of Diabetes, Heart disease and obesity,
NAFDPIR submitted a resolution requesting establishment of a Food
Package Review Committee consisting of Program Directors, Tribal
Dietitians and FNS staff. This collaboration has resulted in
improvements in the food package, including a decrease in fat and
sodium and an increase in fresh produce. Whereas SNAP has no
restrictions on any foods purchased.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
* FDPIR Food Package Nutritional Quality: Report to Congress--
Summary, Food and Nutrition Service, Office of Research and Analysis,
November 2008. http://www.fns.usda.gov/oane/
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
FDPIR requests re-alignment of income guidelines based on the
poverty level since FDPIR operates only on reservations, near
reservations and Oklahoma where SNAP operates in all states. Separate
guidelines are offered for Alaska due to their economic status, and
according to Per Capita Personal Income by State and County, many
reservations are located in the lowest ranked areas.
The lack of affordable housing is forcing Tribal members to seek
housing in larger communities near reservations. The current 10,000
population cap regulation prohibits us from serving many Native
families that would benefit from FDPIR services. Although we have the
opportunity to submit a waiver to serve this eligible population the
process is cumbersome and determination is often inconsistent. If this
regulation was amended a majority of the programs currently have the
capability to provide services to these families.
Although the $1,000,000 Nutrition education grant has been
beneficial to programs awarded funds, the grant process is cumbersome
and inefficient. Many ITO's do not have the resources to successfully
apply for competitive grants. All regions have established Nutrition
Education committees providing NE resources to all ITO's in their
respective region; it would be more practical to allocate the funds to
regions by current funding methods with the exclusion of the 25% Tribal
match.
FDPIR requests our annual funding level be at 100% and eliminate
the 25% match.
FDPIR requests authorization to allow the carryover of
administrative funding as allowed in other FNS programs.