How to help those facing food insecurity – CNN

Report on SNAP Benefit Delays and Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: Social Protection Systems and Food Security

Disruptions to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), a key social protection system in the United States, are creating significant food security challenges for approximately 42 million beneficiaries. This situation directly undermines progress toward several United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly those concerning poverty, hunger, and health.

Analysis of Impact on SDG 2: Zero Hunger

The delay in SNAP benefits poses a direct threat to the achievement of SDG 2, which aims to end hunger, achieve food security, and improve nutrition. The immediate consequences include:

• Increased Food Insecurity: Millions of individuals and families reliant on the program face an imminent risk of food shortages and hunger.
• Vulnerability of Older Adults: As observed by community organizations, older adults are among the most affected, with many being forced to skip meals.
• Reliance on Emergency Food Programs: The failure of this primary support system increases the strain on emergency food providers, which are not equipped to substitute for large-scale federal programs.

Interlinkages with SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being)

The cessation of SNAP benefits creates a cascading crisis that impacts other fundamental development goals. For low-income households, particularly seniors, the loss of food assistance forces a series of critical trade-offs that exacerbate poverty and threaten health.

1. Deepening Poverty (SDG 1): The loss of benefits forces individuals to reallocate already scarce financial resources, pushing them further into poverty. They must often choose between food and other essential expenses like rent.
2. Compromised Health (SDG 3): The choice between purchasing food and necessary medication is a stark reality for many. This directly jeopardizes the health and well-being of vulnerable populations, contradicting the core tenets of SDG 3.

Case Study: JASA Corporation, New York

The Jewish Association Serving the Aging (JASA) in New York City provides a clear illustration of the on-the-ground impact. The organization reports firsthand the severe consequences for the older adults it serves.

• SNAP as a Vital Lifeline: JASA CEO Gayle M. Horwitz emphasized that for low-income seniors, SNAP is the primary defense against hunger, differentiating between a full refrigerator and empty cupboards.
• Devastating Consequences of Cuts: The organization witnesses daily how benefit cuts force seniors to make impossible choices, highlighting that there is no adequate substitute for the program’s support in achieving food security and well-being.

National Response and Community-Based Interventions

In response to the crisis, charitable organizations and community initiatives across the country are mobilizing to provide assistance. Impact Your World has compiled a list of organizations actively fundraising to support those affected by SNAP delays. While these efforts are critical for immediate relief, they underscore the systemic importance of robust social protection programs like SNAP in the long-term pursuit of the Sustainable Development Goals.

• For information on organizations providing assistance, see the resources compiled by Impact Your World.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

The article primarily addresses issues related to the following Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs):

• SDG 2: Zero Hunger: This is the most central SDG discussed. The article’s main focus is on the “delay in SNAP benefits,” which is causing “millions of Americans to worry about having enough to eat” and facing “food insecurities.” The quote from JASA CEO explicitly mentions the program being the “difference between a full fridge and empty cupboards” and that cuts lead to “older adults forced to skip meals.” These are direct manifestations of hunger and food insecurity.
• SDG 1: No Poverty: The article connects directly to poverty by highlighting that the SNAP program is a lifeline for “low-income older adults.” The disruption of these benefits exacerbates their financial vulnerability, forcing them to “choose between buying food, medication, and paying rent.” This illustrates how a lack of social protection impacts people living in or on the verge of poverty.
• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being: While not the primary focus, this goal is implicitly connected. The article notes that seniors are forced to choose between “buying food, medication, and paying rent.” The inability to afford medication due to prioritizing food or rent directly impacts their health. Furthermore, food insecurity and malnutrition (“skipping meals”) have severe negative consequences for the health and well-being of individuals, especially older adults.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

Based on the article’s content, the following specific SDG targets can be identified:

1. Target 2.1: By 2030, end hunger and ensure access by all people, in particular the poor and people in vulnerable situations… to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round.
   • Explanation: The article directly addresses this target by describing how a disruption in the SNAP program threatens food access for a vulnerable population (“low-income older adults”). The mention of “42 million Americans” relying on the program and now “facing food insecurities” and being “forced to skip meals” clearly relates to the goal of ensuring access to sufficient food for all.
2. Target 1.3: Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all… and by 2030 achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerable.
   • Explanation: The SNAP program is a “nationally appropriate social protection system” designed to support the poor and vulnerable. The article highlights the critical role of this system by referring to it as a “vital lifeline.” The problems arising from the “delay in SNAP benefits” demonstrate the importance of maintaining such systems to protect vulnerable populations, which is the core of this target.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

Yes, the article mentions or implies information that can be used as indicators to measure progress:

1. Indicator for Target 2.1 (Indicator 2.1.2: Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity in the population):
   • Explanation: The article explicitly uses the term “food insecurities.” It provides qualitative evidence of this condition by describing people worrying about “having enough to eat,” facing “empty cupboards,” and being “forced to skip meals.” These descriptions are direct measures of the prevalence and severity of food insecurity among the affected population.
2. Indicator for Target 1.3 (Indicator 1.3.1: Proportion of population covered by social protection floors/systems):
   • Explanation: The article provides a specific number for this indicator by stating, “Around 42 million Americans rely on the food assistance program.” This figure represents a measure of the population covered by this specific social protection system (SNAP), directly relating to the goal of achieving substantial coverage for the vulnerable.

4. Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: cnn.com