Testing the Hypothesis, Part 1

The opportunity I chose to pursue was the issue that food banks face when running out of supplies to provide the many people that rely on them in times of crisis, like when natural disasters strike, or governments shut down.

The who: Food banks in the United States that are non-federally funded (all of them)

The what: Food banks are unable to sustain themselves while providing provisions to large numbers of people in a very short time period, or in times of need.

The why: It is not feasible to obtain that much food at such a low cost that it will not put the food banks out of commission.

I believe that this problem may be solved by either the government or private organizations sanctioning larger portions of money for these types of banks.

Testing the who: Is the amount already allotted for this higher than I’m thinking?

Testing the what: How much food is considered “the bare minimum” to survive for a given family size, and how is that gauged?

Testing the why: Is there a way to obtain more food that we aren’t already doing?

After interviewing a select few, I came to the conclusion that there are large strides we can make in solving this issue, such as getting more private organizations to allocate more of their budgets towards keeping these pantries alive. Additionally, we could try to get some of the food banks in low-income areas with large populations federally subsidized. Some advocate to raise the minimum gross monthly income that qualifies individuals for food bank assistance, however, this seems like it would only cause more people who need food to go hungry. I learned during my research that food banks aren’t funded by the government at all, which I didn’t know before. They are all privately funded.