Food for Thought Food Assistance a needs Assessment Geelong, Victoria

The open ended questions included in the Survey prompted discussion regarding operational procedures and challenges from the providers and distributors. Below are the main discussion topics raised:

• 
  Need to move towards donation through planning versus donation to avoid wastage
  
• 
  More variety, predictability and quantity of food supplied
  
• 
  Comprehensive and effective networks already exist, they can be extended further
  

• 
  Criteria for accessing vouchers and/or food parcels varies widely from once a week to once every 6 months, confusing for clients
  
• 
  Numerous agencies have some type of accredited training or on the job training linked to their food assistance programs
  
• 
  Volunteer petrol reimbursement
  
• 
  Need for more fresh food
  
• 
  Lack of coordinated data collection
  
• 
  Volunteer induction/training could be improved,
  
• 
  Cost of man hours, resources, garbage removal especially in welfare agencies
  

The survey results showed that distributors garner their food from a variety of sources including Foodbank Victoria (n=2), Fare Share (n=2), supermarkets/wholesalers (n=2), bakeries (n=3), local farmers (n=3), catering companies (n=1) and prisons (n=1). The highest food group compositions represented in the garnered food are fresh fruit and vegetables along with non perishables. All 3 distributors (100%) stated that they would like to access more food and they listed fresh produce, meat and dairy as the main items required. They spoke of how dairy products & meat are scarce commodities to obtain. Storage space and speed/accessibility of food pick up were noted as concerns by distributors.

The interview with Veracity/AGB revealed how AGB provides a warehouse from which Second Bite run their operations valued at an estimated $15, 000 per annum. They have 10 staff and 100-150 students working/volunteering in roles that aid Second Bite operations per year and provide a good model of linking food assistance with accredited training that is running currently in the region.

They run registered training courses from the site which include

• 
  Certificate II Warehouse Operations
  
• 
  Certificate III Warehouse Operations
  
• 
  Certificate IV Warehouse Operations
  

5, 152 People attended provider agencies for food assistance in the week 25^th-29^th November 2013 providing the equivalent of 7, 091 meals. Of the clients presenting for food assistance there were 2, 985 males and 2, 167 females. The ages of these people are shown in Figure 5. The largest group represented were <30 years of age (n=2, 519).

It was recorded that3, 113 sole persons attended agencies for food assistance during the week. 64 Groups presented of whom 38% were Newly Arrived and Refugee Groups (n=24). There were 1, 338 families who presented and of these 63% were single parent families (n=849)

During the Census week distributors garnered 51, 045 kg of produce. The composition of this garnered food was:

• 
  Dairy Total =4, 141kg, 8%
  
• 
  Meat & Other Protein Total = 1831kg, 4%
  
• 
  Fruit & Vegetables = 24, 963kg = 49%
  
• 
  Cereal & Grains =7076kg = 13%
  
• 
  Processed & Prepared Food =13034 kg = 26%
  

Although no distributors nominated the Culturally Specific food grouping it was noted that some of these foods (rice, cooking oils, vegan and hilal products) would certainly be covered within the other classification categories.

The participating agencies have been plotted on the map in Figure 7. The locations of the distributors are shown in blue and the providers are shown in red. Interviews with representatives from the two areas noted as voids showed that work has started in addressing the lack of services in the Bellarine Peninsula with meetings between Bellarine Community Health and community representatives. Golden Plains Shire is addressing food security in its new Health Plan and a representative from the Shire has been added to the GFAN communication network.

Clients attending providers for food assistance came from at least 29 different postcodes and at least 6 people came from out of the region (Caramut, Footscray, Melbourne & Frankston). Majority of the recorded clientele came from the 3214 postcode (36.6%) incorporating Norlane, Corio and North Shore. With the postcodes of 3216 (Marshall, Grovedale, Belmont, Highton, Waurn Ponds) and 3219 (Newcomb, Whittington, Breakwater, East Geelong, St Albans Park, Thomson) also having high representation.

Project participants were asked to complete a Feedback Questionnaire regarding their experience with the Project. Feedback was mostly positive. Issues raised by participants as areas for further investigation included:

• 
  More examination of the process involved in getting to the final product (meal)
  
• 
  Examination of social inclusion and food culture issues
  
• 
  Determining repeat visitations when counting people attending food assistance
  
• 
  Reason for need and client’s background specifically allowance recipients (i.e Newstart, disability pension)
  
• 
  An interest to learn from how other agencies run their programs
  

At the GFAN Leadership meeting in September 2013 when the Project Proposal was handed out and feedback sought the group discussed issues they deemed to be important when looking at the local food assistance network now and in the future. The issues that they raised included:

• 
  The importance of recognizing the social determinants leading to people being food insecure, not just using food relief as a “bandaid”.
  
• 
  Logistical problems associated with door to door food delivery but also the benefit of the insight that comes along with it.
  
• 
  Ageing volunteers lifting heavy food hampers.
  
• 
  Lack of storage capacity for food.
  
• 
  People being turned away from agencies (approx 50 a day) due to lack of capacity.
  
• 
  Interest in programs running in synergy to reach more people.
  
• 
  Keen interest to adopt a model approach but important to keep agencies own ethos and values.
  

1) Minimart – expanding to open a second minimart. This could help solve transport issues. The group also cited voucher usage as easier than food distribution and more dignified. People can select their own food preferences.

2) Centralised warehouse for bulk food distribution in the region. Potentially with a training component attached to it for young people and refugees

A power point presentation of the preliminary Project findings was conducted at both GFAN Leadership and GFAN General Membership meetings. The presentation acted as a launching point for discussion of the group’s interpretation and feedback towards the Project findings.

The main result that attracted attention was the move towards a centralized warehouse model. It was acknowledged that the logistics and operational details will take some time to finalise. Some members of the group suggested changes to how the Project Recommendations were structured so that moving towards the centralized warehouse model took priority and progress towards this goal was not hindered by focusing on other less pressing issues. The meetings ended with agencies setting out to analyse Project findings and hypothesise how their agency’s operational activities will be affected by adopting a new model. When the group reconvenes it is expected that agencies will have selected certain priorities for action from the Project Recommendations

Guidance was sought at the Leadership meeting regarding the gap in the Survey data related to the 12 providers unable to provide estimates for their food program operating costs. The group concurred that the proposed $19, 000 per annum average was an appropriate estimate.

The purpose of this research project was to enhance the effectiveness and future direction of Emergency Food Assistance Services in the Geelong Region. The project methodologies were selected to scope existing services, provide a local evidence base and develop a common set of data that can be used to monitor the supply and demand of food assistance in the region. By analyzing the results of the 5 methodologies the emergent themes seem to cluster around 4 classifications: Demand, Supply, Client Profile and Future Directions.

Food assistance provides an estimated 368, 732 meals per year in the Geelong region.

53 providers and 3 distributors providing 102 programs across Geelong are involved with food assistance offering a wide range of food programs including vouchers, food parcels, prepared meals, food co-ops, subsidized meals and a minimart.

Programs employ 225 paid staff (12 full time, 213 part time) but rely heavily on a volunteer workforce (997 volunteers). Reported concerns for food insecurity are supported by evidence from the provider survey results that local demand for food assistance is persistent and continues to rise.( 64% of agencies reported an increase in client numbers in the past year; 34% of agencies report over15% increase.) This increase in demand was also highlighted via participant feedback when it was noted that some providers have to turn clients away due to lack of resources.

These programs cost at least $2, 499, 197 per annum to operate plus an in kind contribution of $3, 073, 319 per annum totally approximately $5.5 million. The cost in man hours and resources of running these programs was noted as an issue especially by welfare agencies. Local food assistance providers need more resources to meet demand. Providers must be supported with storage resources especially for fresh food. This is consistent with findings in the Literature Review with many services and programs moving toward a one stop shop type of arrangement for the storage and distribution of emergency food. One that has collective ownership and responsibility, provides a central storage and distribution point and can provide business and educational opportunities for sustainable funding..

Spatial Mapping of Food Agencies across the Geelong region shows the spread of outlets correlates well, with no significant gaps for Decile1& 2 SEIFA areas of disadvantage. Postcode analysis of clients receiving food assistance during the Census week also confirms appropriate targeting with the greatest number of client presentations coming from postcodes with recognised locational disadvantage. This is supported by literature findings that the strongest predictor of food assistance usage is low income.

Demand changes relative to the cohort using the service, supply must respond to demand. In speaking to participating providers it became apparent that even though they were receiving food assistance supplies they may not always be suitable to the clientele that access their services. This issue is raised in the literature with a coordinated approach (via some type of logistic program/ordering system) as the best way to try and ensure that supply is congruent to demand. Through an effective communication system it may be possible for members within the network to exchange excess supplies of food they do not require in exchange for another agency’s surplus.

Supply

As it has been shown the demands being placed on local food assistance providers are increasing. It is troublesome then that the survey results showed that 59% of providers have to refuse food donations, mostly fresh produce, due to lack of storage capacity. This is a worrying finding as it clear from the Literature Review that it is imperative that clients of food assistance are supplied with highly nutritional food especially fresh produce.

The problem of inconsistent supply was seen through the fact that 72% of providers found some goods constantly in short supply. Most common shortfalls included dairy products, meat, fruit & vegetables and cooking oils. The inconsistent supply of these foods, especially staples, is resulting in agencies spending their own money to top up supplies.

Distributors also noted this inconsistency in supply in their survey answers. Dairy and meat were hard to acquire. This was also evident in the Data Collection Week Census as out of the total amount of food garnered meat and other proteins (4%) and dairy (8%) showed the lowest levels. There presents a potential opportunity that local organisations and businesses could come together to respond to this supply challenge and improve product availability. Distributors also mentioned the barriers of limited storage space and the time lost waiting for food pickups. This highlights the importance of a shared facility and a comprehensive transport system as noted in the literature.

After speaking with these organizations it is clear that many did not set out to run food programs but they acknowledge how closely linked food insecurity is with social exclusion and general wellbeing. This supports findings that food can contribute to community cohesion. One organization has even lost a section of their tea room as food boxes encroach on the space

Provider agencies rely heavily on the work of volunteers and the issue of an aging volunteer workforce was raised in both the participant feedback and the survey results as 58% of agencies had most of their volunteers aged 51 years and over.

The current study has established a baseline data set which will enable comparison of client usage patterns and trends in the future and help food assistance programs cater to their clientele’s requirements

Results from the Data Collection Census Week supported the findings in the Discussion paper that certain cohorts within the community are at risk of food insecurity. The strongest predictor of food assistance usage is low income and 72% of providers noted that more than half of their clientele were long term. This supports anecdotal observations that the incidence of food insecurity and the food assistance system is supporting chronic or episodic crisis rather than resolution of a single “one off” emergency situation.

The literature predicted that single parent families and CALD (Culturally & Linguistically Diverse) groups have a high prevalence of food assistance usage. This was seen in the Census data as 63% of the families attending were single parent families and 3 local agencies with targeted CALD food programs are reporting increased presentations by Newly Arrived and Refugee clients. Prior to this Project this was purely anecdotal and relatively unknown data. It has now been shown that 981 Newly Arrived and Refugees were settled in Geelong in the last year. ( Diversitat Geelong , 2014) and the Aug 2014 ABS figures note rates of Geelong region youth unemployment of 17.8 % (5.4.4%Increase) and 10.5 % Adult unemployment as the highest level in 15 years . (The Age 26/8/2014.) . Both these groups are at risk of increased prevalence of food insecurity. Literature supports rising unemployment and associated economic hardship as correlations with increased food insecurity and emergency food relief usage.

The GFAN network is currently providing community based food assistance programs which are recommended as the best level of approach in the literature. The Mapping and postcode analysis has shown that the provider programs are being directed at those most in need. The network already has some strong collaborations and resources in place which will be vital in guiding these programs forward.

Coordination of food assistance services can help promote additional social, economic, health and community benefits. A coordinated approach will help ensure that supply meets demand and is reflective of the cohort being serviced.

The large cost both financially and on man hours and resources placed on providers could be aided by a more efficient system. Currently food is being unpacked and sorted at each provider agency taking up valuable time and personnel. Centralisation via a common distribution warehouse, supported by modern technology practices is widely cited in the literature as best practice for the provision of food assistance. This could streamline the process making it more efficient for frontline providers.

Limited storage capacity has been noted as an inhibitor by providers and distributors alike. Food assistance needs to be adequate but also of high nutritional value to support people who are already at high risk of poor health outcomes. It is vital that organizations are supported with sufficient resources to provide adequate, nutritious and culturally appropriate food assistance to their clients. Food assistance provision in the future should reflect the community demographic taking into consideration health requirements such as gluten free, halal and support increasing numbers of CALD groups with culturally specific food.

In the Surveys some agencies explained how they link accredited training to their food assistance programs. The literature also cites linking accredited training to a centralised warehouse food assistance model is essential for sustainable funding. So for future development it is important to consider that accredited training courses are an important link to continuous, sustainable funding for whatever model is decided upon.

A successful food assistance model for the future relies on a combination of public and private involvement leveraging program resources way above the budgeted amount. The Literature Review raised the need for thorough strategic planning and collaboration between service providers and community groups. Ongoing data collection and evaluation should direct program development and local policies and will critical in lobbying for further funding. Success will requires community engagement and commitment. The literature has told how attracting community recognition and developing a strong brand around the food assistance network will help attract donations and volunteers.