Send cash to Americans missing their SNAP food benefits – GiveDirectly

Report on Emergency Cash Transfers to Address SNAP Payment Disruption

Executive Summary

This report details a collaborative initiative between the non-profit organization GiveDirectly and the technology company Propel to mitigate the adverse effects of a U.S. government shutdown on food security and poverty. The suspension of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) has jeopardized the well-being of millions of low-income American families. In response, this program provides direct, unconditional cash transfers to the most vulnerable households. The initiative directly contributes to several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), primarily SDG 1 (No Poverty), SDG 2 (Zero Hunger), SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities), and SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals).

Crisis Analysis and Alignment with Sustainable Development Goals

Threats to SDG 2: Zero Hunger

The suspension of SNAP payments represents a significant setback for achieving Zero Hunger within the United States. SNAP is a critical component of the social safety net, supporting one in eight Americans.

• An estimated 4.1 million users missed their scheduled SNAP deposits on November 1, a figure that increases daily as the shutdown continues.
• Data indicates that half of these households had less than $10 remaining in their benefit accounts, placing them at immediate risk of food insecurity.
• Affected families report facing choices between skipping meals or turning to already over-burdened food pantries, directly undermining food security and nutritional stability.

Impact on SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities)

The sudden loss of food assistance exacerbates poverty and deepens existing inequalities. For families living with extremely low income, SNAP benefits are essential for financial stability. The termination of this support pushes them further into poverty, forcing impossible financial decisions that threaten their overall well-being. This initiative targets the most economically disadvantaged households, aiming to reduce the immediate financial inequality created by the lapse in government support.

Programmatic Response and Implementation Model

A Partnership for the Goals (SDG 17)

This emergency response is facilitated by a strategic partnership between GiveDirectly and Propel. This collaboration leverages the distinct strengths of each organization:

1. GiveDirectly: A non-profit with extensive experience and a proven model for delivering direct cash transfers efficiently and securely to those in need.
2. Propel: A technology company whose application is used by millions of SNAP recipients, providing a direct and trusted channel to identify and communicate with affected families.

This public-private partnership exemplifies the collaborative approach required to achieve the SDGs, particularly in crisis situations.

Methodology for Aid Distribution

The program employs a targeted, rapid-response model to ensure aid reaches those most in need without delay.

• Identification: Propel’s data infrastructure is used to identify households that have missed their scheduled SNAP payments in real-time.
• Targeting: To maximize impact, the program focuses on households with children that receive the maximum SNAP allotment, a key indicator of extremely low income and high vulnerability. This aligns with the goals of reducing poverty (SDG 1) and inequality (SDG 10).
• Delivery: Eligible families receive a one-time, unconditional cash transfer of $50. Funds are delivered securely and immediately through the Propel application, minimizing administrative friction.
• Principle of Unconditionality: In line with GiveDirectly’s core principles, recipients have complete autonomy over how the funds are used. This respects their dignity and allows them to address their most urgent needs, whether for food, medicine, or other essentials, contributing to both SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being).

Program Funding and Efficacy

Funding Structure

The initiative was launched with a foundational commitment of $1 million from Propel, which enabled the immediate disbursement of funds starting November 1. The program’s continuation and expansion rely on external donations. The more funds raised, the more families can be supported for the duration of the SNAP disruption.

Proven Efficacy

The model of using direct cash transfers through the Propel platform has been successfully deployed in previous disaster response scenarios. This established track record ensures that donations are utilized in a rapid, efficient, and trusted manner to provide immediate relief and support the overarching goal of ensuring no one is left behind.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals in the Article

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

• SDG 1: No Poverty

  The article directly addresses poverty by focusing on “the poorest families” and those with “extremely low income” who rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). The loss of these benefits pushes vulnerable families deeper into poverty, making it difficult to afford basic necessities.

• SDG 2: Zero Hunger

  This is the central theme of the article. The campaign title itself mentions sending “emergency cash to families at risk of hunger.” The text repeatedly highlights the consequences of missed SNAP payments, such as families having to “skip meals,” “running out of food entirely,” or turning to “strained food banks.” The entire initiative is designed to prevent hunger.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  The article highlights the disproportionate impact of a government shutdown on the most economically vulnerable segment of the population. By focusing on low-income families who receive the maximum SNAP allotment, the issue underscores how systemic failures exacerbate inequality. The intervention by GiveDirectly and Propel is a targeted effort to mitigate this inequality by providing a safety net for a specific, disadvantaged group.

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

1. Target 1.3: Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all, including floors, and by 2030 achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerable.

   The article is centered on the failure of a key national social protection system (SNAP). It states that “1 in 8 Americans depend on” this program, demonstrating its role in providing a social protection floor. The government shutdown represents a disruption to this system, and the emergency cash fund is a temporary measure to fill the gap, directly relating to the implementation and reliability of such systems for the vulnerable.

2. Target 2.1: By 2030, end hunger and ensure access by all people, in particular the poor and people in vulnerable situations, including infants, to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round.

   The article explicitly details how the interruption of SNAP payments directly threatens food access for millions. The quote from a parent, “I have children that need to eat. It terrifies me that they might go hungry,” perfectly encapsulates the threat to year-round food security for vulnerable people, which this target aims to eliminate.

3. Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status.

   The loss of SNAP benefits is a form of economic exclusion for the country’s poorest families. The article notes that the emergency fund targets households receiving the “maximum SNAP allotment,” a proxy for the most economically disadvantaged. The program’s goal is to provide immediate cash to ensure these families are not excluded from the ability to purchase essential goods like food, thereby promoting their short-term economic inclusion during a crisis.

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

• Indicators for Target 1.3 (Social Protection):

  The article provides data points that serve as indicators for the coverage and failure of social protection systems. The statement that “1 in 8 Americans depend on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)” is a direct measure of the program’s reach. Furthermore, the figure that “an estimated 4.1 million users missed their SNAP deposits on November 1” serves as a clear indicator of a breakdown in this social protection system.

• Indicators for Target 2.1 (End Hunger):

  While not using official statistical terms, the article implies indicators of food insecurity. Reports that many families “will need to skip meals or turn to food pantries” are qualitative indicators of increased hunger and lack of access to sufficient food. The parent’s testimony about the fear of their children going hungry is an anecdotal but powerful indicator of food insecurity at the household level.

• Indicators for Target 10.2 (Inclusion/Inequality):

  The article uses the “maximum SNAP allotment” as a “key indicator of extremely low income” to identify its target population. This serves as a proxy for measuring the economic status of the most vulnerable group. The number of families with children receiving these maximum benefits who are then reached by the emergency cash program can be used as an indicator of progress in providing support to this economically excluded group.

4. Summary of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: givedirectly.org