Hunger in America 2010 is the largest, most comprehensive study of domestic
emergency food assistance ever conducted. The study provides comprehensive and
statistically valid data on the national charitable response to hunger and the people
served by food pantries, soup kitchens, and shelters in the Feeding America network.

This report is based on independent research conducted on behalf of Feeding America
by Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. (MPR), a widely respected social policy research
firm based in Princeton, New Jersey. MPR is nationally recognized as a leader in the
field of human services research. Feeding America contracted with MPR to work with
185 network member participants who voluntarily agreed to collect data in their
communities.

All aspects of the study were overseen by an independent Technical Advisory Group
(TAG). The TAG was composed of noted social scientists, including demographers,
economists, survey research specialists and statisticians, who reviewed the survey
instruments, the analysis plan, and the final results.The TAG members’ impartiality,
broad range of expertise and regular critical oversight of the project was vital to
ensuring that the Hunger in America 2010 project adhered to the highest standards in
survey research.

There are two main data sources for Hunger in America 2010: client data and agency
data, both of which were collected in the late winter and spring of 2009. Both the client
and agency data collection instruments mirror the questionnaires used in the 2006
Hunger Study, with a few additional questions that were developed for the 2009 data
collection effort. Each of the participating food banks provided MPR with a list of all the
agencies in their service area, including information on what types of emergency food
programs they offer (pantry, kitchen, shelter or multi-program). Mathematica sampling
statisticians then drew initial samples from the agencies where the client interviews
were to take place.

In order to ensure data collection standardization across the country, MPR conducted
three regional, two-day in-depth training sessions for all participating food banks. Client
data was collected through face-to-face interviews with randomly selected recipients at
emergency feeding sites across the country. Approximately 61,000 individuals (77.0% of
eligible clients) offered to share their stories with us, including the circumstances of
what led them to the pantry, kitchen or shelter at which they were interviewed. Their
willingness to participate in this study makes it possible for us to better understand who
seeks emergency food assistance and why.

In addition, participating food banks also mailed surveys to their member agencies
seeking information about the services available to low-income Americans, and the
agencies' needs and stability. Approximately 50,000 surveys were mailed out and a little
more than 37,000 usable agency survey responses were returned, a 74% response rate.

MPR provided technical assistance with the implementation of the agency and client
surveys. MPR was responsible for data analysis and the writing of the national and local
reports, a process which occurred during summer and fall 2009.

More than 185 food banks in the Feeding America Network participated in the
hunger study. Collectively, they conducted 61,000 face-to-face client interviews,
and more than 37,000 agencies in the Network completed the agency survey.

The data in the national report is subject to a 90 confidence interval with a +/- 1.5
percentage points. Data specifically examining kitchens and shelters (and not
pantries) is subject to a margin of error due to sampling design of +/- 2.5 percentage
points because of the smaller number of these programs (the majority of emergency
food programs are pantries). As discussed in the full report, estimates may also be
subject to other forms of error, such as non-response error and measurement error,
which cannot be fully quantified in this study.

Standard errors at the individual food bank level are considerably higher, due to the
much smaller number of observations at this level. For example, the average
standard error across the network for the annual client count is 26.6% and 16.6% for
the weekly client count (the weekly client count standard error is lower because
there are fewer factors involved in calculating the unduplicated count at the weekly
level than at the annual level). These larger sampling errors mean that results at the
individual food bank must be interpreted with careful attention to this issue. The
larger standard errors at the food bank level are not uncommon for small area
surveys, and are a trade-off between the amount of data that can be collected under
such a detailed study design without being prohibitively expensive and
overwhelming to agencies and clients.

Become a hunger advocate, or donate food, funds and time to your local Feeding America Network food bank, food-rescue organization or the agencies they serve. To learn more, visit www.feedingamerica.org.

Hunger in America 2010 is the largest, most comprehensive study ever conducted on
emergency food distribution in the United States. While the annual USDA
household security report provides a snapshot of how many people are hungry and
food insecure in the United States each year, this study evaluates one of the most
important response mechanisms to hunger and food insecurity in the United
States—the charitable food distribution Network. The data gleaned from this report
will be used moving forward to support public policies, program implementation,
operations and other decisions that will greatly impact the future of food security
for low-income Americans.

We can end hunger in America, but no one can do it alone. We must continue to
collaborate in public-private partnerships with government officials and the
charitable food distribution network to protect safety-net Federal nutrition
programs and ensure that adequate, nutritious food is available through the
charitable distribution network for every person who needs help.

The elderly, with their particular vulnerability to poverty and their decreased mobility, are also especially at risk of hunger. Research shows that adequate nutrition is vitally important to quality of life in later years.