Proposed Changes to Thrifty Food Plan Could Dramatically Increase Poverty

As Republicans in Congress continue to consider potential benefit cuts and eligibility changes for SNAP, researchers at the Center on Poverty and Social Policy at Columbia University have modeled the potential impacts of rolling back SNAP’s Thrifty Food Plan. Spotlight spoke with research analyst Anastasia Koutavas, who produced the analysis along with Research Director Sophie Collyer and Director of Policy Megan A. Curran. The transcript of the conversation has been lightly edited for length and clarity.

Why don’t we start by explaining exactly what the Thrifty Food Plan is.

Absolutely. The Thrifty Food Plan is one of four USDA food plans, which essentially estimate the cost of preparing food at home. The Thrifty Food Plan is an important one because it’s the lowest costing of the four and it also serves as a basis for SNAP benefit levels. The food plan is determined monthly, and the Thrifty Food Plan in June directly translates to the maximum benefit amounts for SNAP in the following year.

Prior to 2021, the methods for determining the food plan—what foods are incorporated, how the costs are calculated, things like that—hadn’t been updated aside for cost-of-living adjustments since 2006. And so, the 2021 update to the Thrifty Food Plan was a comprehensive revision of the methods for determining the costs of preparing food at home for families on a constrained budget. It took into account things like changes in household consumption patterns, changes in dietary guidelines and needs, and even changes in food prices.

I know there’s not a lot of clarity in terms of what the administration and Congress want to do on SNAP, but it’s pretty clearly being targeted for major cuts. And that would include the Thrifty Food Plan potentially, correct?

There are quite a few different ideas that have been discussed, and one is rolling back that update to the Thrifty Food Plan that went into effect in 2022. But other ideas that have been discussed include not necessarily rolling back the 2021 update, but making sure it’s not updated again going forward. If no changes were made, the food plan would be set for an update in the next two to three years, but this would halt any future changes except adjustments for inflation.

Other ideas that have been discussed for SNAP include extending work requirements to families with younger children and increasing the age range of people who would be eligible for work requirements, bringing in some older populations. Another potential change would be shifting the cost of distributing benefits to the states. Currently, SNAP is a federally funded program, but there’s been discussions about giving more financial responsibility to states, which could really affect eligibility and the ability of states to effectively distribute SNAP benefits.

In your analysis, you’re assuming that the Thrifty Food Plan is rolled back?

Yes. The scenario model is that the 2021 update to the Thrifty Food Plan would be rolled back and the impact of that.

And what were the major impacts you feel would happen based on your research?

Rolling back the Thrifty Food Plan would definitely increase poverty. SNAP is a resource that is accounted for in the Supplemental Poverty Measure. And as such, we’re able to track how changes in SNAP would affect poverty rates. We’re seeing that rolling back the Thrifty Food Plan would affect all SNAP recipients, not just those who are receiving the maximum benefit amount. It would have an effect across the distribution of recipients, resulting in about a 6% increase in poverty nationally. That translates to over 2 million Americans living below the poverty line.

For children, we’re seeing even greater effects, with a prediction of around a 10% increase in child poverty. This translates to an additional 800,000 children living below the poverty line. We’re also seeing slightly greater effects in rural areas versus urban areas. And if we’re focusing on the population that is receiving SNAP specifically, the relative impacts will be greater. Among SNAP recipients specifically, we’re projecting an 11% increase in poverty or a 13% increase for children.

And just a little bit more on the geographical disbursement. Did you find that a handful of states would see more severe effects than others?

The distribution of SNAP is different across states, but we do find that states like Iowa, West Virginia and Mississippi would be some of the states with the greatest impacts.

What about nutritional impact? Is that something that you get into in this paper at all, given that the administration also is on a crusade on that front?

That’s a really great question and unfortunately, it’s not something that we have tackled in this analysis. But it’s a super important question given that the Thrifty Food Plan update was meant to be more inclusive of current nutritional and dietary guidelines. We’re not sure how these proposed changes would translate on that score, but prior research has shown that SNAP improves health outcomes and also lowers healthcare costs.

Any other findings that you would want to highlight from the analysis?

There are lots of potential changes being discussed, but it’s hard to see how see how reductions in benefits or eligibility changes would not affect recipients and directly impact people who receive SNAP. I really want to stress that the change to the Thrifty Food plan that we’re modeling here would be something that would affect all SNAP recipients—and over 40 million Americans currently receive SNAP on a monthly basis. So, it’s important to remember that these policy changes really do have tangible impacts on those who are receiving them.