Nonprofits urge $100M baseline for Community Food Connection as HRA outlines voucher pilot to expand choice
Loading...
Summary
HRA described a CFC pilot to test voucher/credit models enrolling 400–600 households and signaled a proposed FY27 baseline increase for Community Food Connection; providers and advocates urged a $100M baseline, restored SNAP‑Ed funding, and expanded home‑delivered meals to meet rising pantry demand as federal SNAP cuts loom.
Administration witnesses described the Community Food Connection (CFC) network as a core city resource supporting more than 700 pantries and community kitchens, and outlined a prospective pilot that would enroll 400–600 households and test voucher‑ or credit‑based models for emergency food assistance.
“CFC funds a network of more than 700 food pantries and community kitchens across the city,” an HRA/DSS witness told the committee, and the administration proposed increasing the CFC baseline to $69.4 million in its FY27 preliminary budget. The agency also said it issued a challenge‑based procurement to invite vendors to design a scalable participant‑centered pilot (likely voucher or credit based) and expects to start the pilot in FY27 after selecting a contractor.
Provider requests: Multiple witnesses representing large emergency‑food providers urged a much larger baseline—$100 million annually—to stabilize the emergency food network in light of rising pantry visits and looming SNAP cuts. Judy Secon (New York Common Pantry), Jerome Nathaniel (City Harvest), Greg Silverman (West Side Campaign Against Hunger) and others described record demand (millions of meals and tens of millions of pounds distributed) and asked the council to prioritize baseline support, capacity grants and bridge funding for SNAP‑Ed programs eliminated at the federal level.
Pilot design and evaluation: DSS said the pilot’s first year would start with $1 million in direct food assistance and roughly 25% additional funding for administrative costs; the Office of Evaluation and Research will collect aggregate, not individual, purchasing data to measure what participants buy and how the model complements brick‑and‑mortar pantries. If successful, the pilot could be extended and scaled in years two and three.
Allocation mechanics and supplier relationships: Officials described a two‑allocation fiscal model for CFC (split across two six‑month allocations), supplemental allocations when new funds are available, and a contracted vendor (identified in testimony as H. Schreyer/Shrier) that supplies many fresh and dry items, with stated halal and kosher options. Eligibility criteria for new CFC partners include being established at least four months, DOHMH food permits and 501(c)(3) status.
Why it matters: Providers said SNAP reductions will drive tens or hundreds of thousands to rely more heavily on pantries; they stressed that CFC flexibility and culturally appropriate options (halal/kosher) are vital. The city’s proposed FY27 funding increase would bolster the system but providers said the scale should be larger to meet anticipated demand.
Next steps: HRA said it will provide follow‑up on procurement timelines, targeted neighborhoods for the pilot, vendor selection, and specific voucher levels; the committee asked for additional data on provider requests, FY25–FY27 spending and the pilot start date.
