USDA Ends Key Food Security Report, Leaving Advocates in the Dark – Food Tank

Report on the Termination of the USDA Household Food Security Survey and its Implications for Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: A Setback for SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) Monitoring

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has announced the termination of its Household Food Security annual report, a primary instrument for monitoring progress toward Sustainable Development Goal 2 (Zero Hunger) within the United States. For three decades, this report from the USDA’s Economic Research Service (ERS) has provided comprehensive data on food insecurity, serving as a critical resource for policymakers, researchers, and advocates dedicated to achieving food security for all.

Official Justification and Timeline

The USDA cited the termination as a cost-saving measure. In an official statement, the agency characterized the survey with the following points:

• Redundant
• Costly
• Politicized
• Extraneous

The final report, which will incorporate data from 2024, is scheduled for release in October 2025.

Impact on Policy Evaluation and SDG Accountability

The discontinuation of this report presents a significant challenge to tracking the nation’s progress on SDG 2. Anti-hunger advocates argue the decision will severely impede the ability to measure the effects of policy changes, such as recent cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), on vulnerable populations. This directly impacts accountability for targets within SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities).

Eric Mitchell, President of the Alliance to End Hunger, stated, “The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s decision to discontinue its annual survey tracking food security data is deeply troubling. By cancelling the survey, USDA is sending a signal that tracking and battling hunger is no longer a priority.”

Current Status of Food Insecurity in Relation to SDG 2 Targets

The most recent ERS data, which now serves as a critical baseline, illustrates the scale of the challenge in meeting SDG 2. The key findings include:

1. Households experiencing food insecurity: One in seven.
2. Total individuals affected: Approximately 47.4 million.
3. Children affected: Approximately 13.8 million.

Stakeholder Concerns and the Data Vacuum

The absence of this official data source raises concerns about the future of evidence-based policymaking aimed at eradicating hunger. Crystal FitzSimons, President of the Food Research & Action Center, noted, “Without data, we lose the opportunity to measure meaningful progress, track the need, and ensure policymakers have the insight to make decisions to keep our country healthy and strong.”

Stakeholders also challenge the USDA’s claim of redundancy. Karen Perry Stillerman, Deputy Director of the Union of Concerned Scientists, questioned this justification, affirming, “The USDA survey serves as the official data source of national food insecurity statistics.” The lack of a comparable alternative data source threatens the integrity of national efforts under SDG 17 (Partnerships for the Goals), which relies on robust data sharing.

The overarching concern is that the termination will obscure the problem rather than solve it. As FitzSimons concluded, “Ending data collection will not end hunger, it will only make it a hidden crisis that is easier to ignore and more difficult to address.” This undermines the principle of accountable and transparent institutions as outlined in SDG 16.

Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) Addressed

1. SDG 2: Zero Hunger

   • The article’s central theme is the measurement of hunger and food insecurity in the United States. It directly addresses the challenge of ending hunger by discussing the termination of the “Household Food Security annual report,” described as one of the country’s “most comprehensive tools for measuring hunger and food insecurity.” The article quantifies the problem by citing data from the report that “one in seven U.S. households experienced food insecurity,” affecting 47.4 million people.

2. SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

   • This goal, particularly its focus on data, monitoring, and accountability, is highly relevant. The article highlights the critical role of data in addressing societal problems. The termination of the USDA report is presented as a major setback for data collection, which advocates argue will make it “far more difficult to track the impacts of policy changes” and for “policymakers [to] have the insight to make decisions.” The article emphasizes that the report is the “official data source of national food insecurity statistics,” making its discontinuation a blow to the nation’s capacity to monitor progress on sustainable development.

Specific SDG Targets Identified

SDG 2: Zero Hunger

1. 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 directly relates to this target by focusing on the primary tool used in the U.S. to measure progress toward it. The “Household Food Security annual report” provides the data needed to understand the scale of food insecurity and hunger. The mention of recent cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and the report’s data on affected children (“13.8 million children”) further connects the discussion to ensuring food access for vulnerable populations.

SDG 17: Partnerships for the Goals

1. Target 17.18: By 2020, enhance capacity-building support to developing countries… to increase significantly the availability of high-quality, timely and reliable data disaggregated by income, gender, age, race, ethnicity, migratory status, disability, geographic location and other characteristics relevant in national contexts.

   • Although this target is framed for developing countries, its principle is universal and central to the article’s conflict. The article is about the dismantling of a key national capacity for data collection. The USDA report represents the “high-quality, timely and reliable data” necessary for monitoring food security. Its termination is a direct reduction in this statistical capacity, which, as advocates in the article state, means “we lose the opportunity to measure meaningful progress, track the need, and ensure policymakers have the insight to make decisions.”

Indicators for Measuring Progress

1. Indicator for Target 2.1: Prevalence of household food insecurity.

   • The article explicitly refers to the measurement that aligns with the official SDG indicator 2.1.2 (Prevalence of moderate or severe food insecurity). The USDA’s “Household Food Security annual report” is the instrument that provides this data. The article provides a specific data point from this indicator: “one in seven U.S. households experienced food insecurity,” which translates to “roughly 47.4 million people.”

2. Indicator for Target 17.18: The existence and continuation of a national, official data source for food insecurity statistics.

   • The article implies this indicator by focusing on the termination of a specific data-gathering tool. The value of the “long-running Household Food Security annual report” as the “official data source” is the core argument of the anti-hunger advocates. Its continuation or termination serves as a direct measure of the country’s statistical capacity and commitment to monitoring hunger, which is the essence of Target 17.18. The decision to “discontinue its annual survey” is a negative change in this indicator.

Summary Table of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators

Source: foodtank.com