The CEO of Philabundance Food Bank says President Donald Trump’s “Big Beautiful Bill” will have some ugly consequences for Philadelphia’s most vulnerable families.
The legislation, passed earlier this month, includes deep cuts to spending on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, which could affect millions of Americans who rely on it. Almost 2 million Pennsylvania residents, including 55,000 people in and around Philadelphia, stand to lose their SNAP benefits under these changes.
That will worsen many measures of food insecurity, including childhood hunger rates, said Philabundance’s CEO, Loree Jones-Brown. Philadbundance serves many of the more than 600,000 people in the area who face food insecurity.
“What’s really upsetting and concerning is that the numbers are already high, and then we have this,” she said.
Food banks across the region have already seen cuts to state and federal programs this year — including the Local Food Purchasing Assistance Program, which helped food banks to purchase produce and other items from Pennsylvania farmers.
Jones-Brown said that for many families, food banks like Philabundance “fill in the gaps” between what they need and what SNAP provides. Cutting SNAP will widen that gap dramatically.
“For every meal that a food bank provides, SNAP provides, like, nine meals,” she said. “So we definitely are a part of the charitable food network and are a social safety net. We’re there for emergencies, and we really help people when they have ‘more month than money,’ ” meaning they will run out of resources before their benefits re-set with a new month.
Specific changes
So, what exactly is changing for the SNAP program? There will be several differences, said University of Tennessee Associate Professor of Social Work Dr. Stacia West.
“The first thing [we will see] is a shift of the fiscal responsibility for SNAP administration and benefit payment from the federal government down to the states,” she said.
With these changes, states would now be responsible for 5% of benefit costs beginning in fiscal year 2028, and 75% of administrative costs. Currently, benefits are 100% federally funded, and states cover only half of administrative costs.
“In the state of Pennsylvania, that’s going to equal about $125 million on top of an already operational deficit that we have for social services in the state,” West said.
Pennsylvania Governor Josh Shapiro has expressed concerns about the state’s ability to handle cuts to this program. In a recent news conference, the governor said, “Pennsylvania can’t backfill those cuts.”
West said another part of the changes is a shift in work requirements.
“The second piece of the legislation moves work requirements, which were already in place from the age of 54, all the way up to the age of 64,” she said. “So previously, when you were over 54 years old, you were not having to meet that monthly work requirement of exactly 80 hours per month. Now, we’re seeing that move up to age 64.”
Most parents with children ages 14 or older will also face new work requirements – requiring at least 20 hours of work each week to maintain benefits. Many parents are currently exempt from work requirements until their children are 18.
The Trump administration claims that rescinding work waivers would increase participation in the labor force and reduce dependency on federal aid. However, the U.S. is generally considered to be at or very near full employment, and West said this rationale for changes will likely not have the intended effect.
“We don’t have a problem with people in poverty not working,” she said. “What we have is a labor market that is unfriendly to people that have various other responsibilities, including elder care or care of children.”
Instead, she said, “if we were to invest in the infrastructure that allowed people to work full time and have better-paying jobs, then that would actually be a more efficient way to make SNAP less costly.”
According to The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, families with children, older adults and military veterans could be especially affected by these cuts as they often face various barriers to employment and labor markets.
Also, SNAP is often just partial assistance for families, and does not cover the full cost of their groceries. These cuts may make that gap bigger.
“For a single adult with two kids in Philadelphia, we can estimate their monthly food cost without SNAP, just our average grocery store run, is about $900,” she said. “The average SNAP benefit in the state of Pennsylvania is about $462 for that same size family. So we’ve got a pretty sizable gap there. What we’re talking about with these cuts is just increasing that gap more.”
Hunger getting worse
For food banks and those seeking food, SNAP cuts could also affect hunger rates.
The definition of hunger is changing, Jones-Brown explained — especially as rising costs in other parts of a family’s budget make food costs even more of a burden.
“The face of hunger is actually changing and expanding in this alarming and concerning way,” she said, adding that more dual-income households could find themselves in need of food assistance.
People often “have a stereotype” around what hunger looks like, but she emphasized hunger can affect many more people than one may think.
Changes to other government programs, such as Medicaid, will likely impact low-income households and increase the pressure on funds for food, said George Matysik, executive director of Share Food Program, a local food bank.
“Share Food Program has already seen a 120% increase in need and folks coming to us since January of 2022,” he said. “If we’re also gonna see cuts from the federal government to programs like SNAP, but also to programs like Medicaid that have real impacts on the folks that we serve, indirectly we’re gonna see that need continue to grow for organizations like ours.”
Jones-Brown said cuts to all of these services can fall onto vulnerable populations – specifically, schoolchildren.
“When kids don’t get access to fresh, healthy food they need early on, from babies to adolescents, we see things like babies’ brains not developing properly,” she said. “We see children not being able to pay attention in school, and that affects behavior, but also academic performance. We see mood shifts in children … Some of the research shows that it can even lead to things as bad as mental health issues and suicidal ideations.”
Moving forward
What strategies are hunger and food insecurity experts implementing?
Experts agreed the approach moving forward would need to be “multi-dimensional,” and would have to involve innovative strategies from all branches of government and nonprofits.
“We absolutely are cost shifting,” said Jones-Brown, of Philabundance. “We’re thinking about where and how we can be more efficient in other areas. How do we do more with less? Because we really do want to maintain that quantity and quality for our neighbors.”
Matysik said food banks will likely be relying more heavily on donations and outside funders.
“At Share Food Program, more than ever, we are gonna be needing to rely on the charity of others to help us get through this moment,” he said. “With this huge increase and need of folks that we’re needing to serve, we need to be able to source more donations. We need to be able to get more trucks on the road to get the products out to the folks that need it. All of that costs money for us.”
West explains there needs to be help from state and local leaders to weather these changes.
“Where the federal government is falling short, we’re seeing mayors, city council leaders, those sorts of folks step up with innovative programming that [aims to] meet the needs of the community,” she said. “And I think that’s absolutely what will happen here. I think there’s a place now, more than ever before, for philanthropy to be hyperlocal and investing in our community-based organizations.”
Even so, Jones-Brown said the situation has her feeling uneasy.
“I definitely believe that we have government officials at every level that care about people and care about food banks, but I just don’t see how it’s possible that they can make up for those gaps,” she said. “We’re going to be talking with them and trying to hear what plans they have, but I’ve not yet heard a solution to make up for those gaps.”