Bill Overview
Title: Tools for Ensuring Access to Meals Act
Description: This bill requires the Research, Demonstration, and Evaluation Center for the Aging Network to carry out and evaluate a pilot program to address food insecurity and hunger among older adults and adults with disabilities.
Sponsors: Sen. Casey, Robert P., Jr. [D-PA]
Target Audience
Population: Older adults and adults with disabilities
Estimated Size: 60000000
- The bill focuses on food insecurity and hunger among older adults.
- The target population includes adults with disabilities.
- According to the UN, there are approximately 1 billion people globally aged 60 and over.
- The World Health Organization states that about 15% of the world's population lives with some form of disability, which includes adults with disabilities.
- Food insecurity is a widespread issue among these groups, particularly in less developed regions.
Reasoning
- The policy targets older adults and adults with disabilities, who are often at higher risk of food insecurity due to fixed incomes and mobility issues.
- A budget limitation means the program might not be able to serve everyone, thus varying impacts among individuals.
- Cost considerations include logistics, staff salaries, food sourcing, and potential infrastructure enhancements for means testing and service delivery.
- An estimated 60 million people fall into the target category in the U.S., so the program's capacity must be prioritized to reach the most vulnerable.
- Geographical differences and local infrastructure will influence effectiveness, so assessments should span urban to rural environments.
- Wellbeing scores can be influenced not only by access to food but by related social and mental health factors.
Simulated Interviews
retired teacher (rural Tennessee)
Age: 70 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 10.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I worry about making my food budget last the whole month.
- This program sounds like it could really help me out.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
disabled veteran (urban California)
Age: 60 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 5.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Access to better food through this program would help me manage my health better.
- Programs like these should ensure they're accessible online for people like me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 2 |
unemployed due to disability (suburban Ohio)
Age: 45 | Gender: other
Wellbeing Before Policy: 3
Duration of Impact: 3.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm desperate for any programs that can help with food security.
- It seems like a good idea, but I hope it's not too bureaucratic.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 3 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 2 |
| Year 3 | 5 | 2 |
| Year 5 | 4 | 1 |
| Year 10 | 3 | 1 |
| Year 20 | 3 | 1 |
retired farmer (rural Kansas)
Age: 82 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 5/20
Statement of Opinion:
- We grow our own vegetables, so we wouldn't be affected much by this.
- It's a good initiative, but not relevant for us.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
semi-retired accountant (urban New York)
Age: 68 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 7
Duration of Impact: 1.0 years
Commonness: 9/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm lucky to not worry much about food, but I know many others who suffer.
- The program should focus on people without any support systems.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 7 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 5 |
disabled with part-time work (suburban Florida)
Age: 52 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 4
Duration of Impact: 7.0 years
Commonness: 8/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Affordable and nutritious meals are crucial for my health maintenance.
- It could be a game-changer if it's accessible for people like me.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 3 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 2 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 1 |
retired mechanic (rural Nebraska)
Age: 78 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 5
Duration of Impact: 8.0 years
Commonness: 7/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm on the waitlist for Meals on Wheels, another program might fill the gap.
- Important that it targets areas like ours with poor services.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 2 | 8 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 8 | 4 |
| Year 5 | 9 | 3 |
| Year 10 | 8 | 3 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 2 |
retired nurse (urban Chicago)
Age: 66 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 2.0 years
Commonness: 11/20
Statement of Opinion:
- This could relieve some of the financial pressures on me.
- Volunteering shows me the extent of need in the community.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 10 | 5 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 4 | 3 |
retired oil worker (suburban Texas)
Age: 76 | Gender: male
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 0.0 years
Commonness: 6/20
Statement of Opinion:
- I'm more worried about my health than food access at this point.
- I support it if it doesn't raise my taxes.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 5 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 6 |
| Year 20 | 6 | 6 |
social worker (urban Seattle)
Age: 58 | Gender: female
Wellbeing Before Policy: 6
Duration of Impact: 4.0 years
Commonness: 10/20
Statement of Opinion:
- Programs like this are crucial, but they often fall short on reaching diverse communities.
- I'm concerned about the administrative costs eating into resources for food.
Wellbeing Over Time (With vs Without Policy)
| Year | With Policy | Without Policy |
|---|---|---|
| Year 1 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 2 | 7 | 6 |
| Year 3 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 5 | 7 | 5 |
| Year 10 | 6 | 4 |
| Year 20 | 5 | 4 |
Cost Estimates
Year 1: $150000000 (Low: $120000000, High: $180000000)
Year 2: $130000000 (Low: $100000000, High: $160000000)
Year 3: $120000000 (Low: $90000000, High: $150000000)
Year 5: $110000000 (Low: $80000000, High: $140000000)
Year 10: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Year 100: $0 (Low: $0, High: $0)
Key Considerations
- The pilot program's results will influence decisions for a potential nationwide implementation.
- Integration with existing food assistance programs can amplify impact.
- Coordination with local government agencies will be crucial for successful implementation and data collection.