To ask how long you think food banks should support people for?

[tartanbaker]

I help to run an independent food bank, & we currently support over 100 families. We are nearing our capacity (in terms of numbers we can help) due to limited storage etc, but there are new people applying all the time. We give people food every week, and some families have been registered with us for about 2 years now. They are still needy, and we all know that things are going to continue being tough for the foreseeable future, so my question is…if you were to donate to a food bank, how would you want them to use your food/money? Continuing to help everyone for as long as they ask for help, even though it might mean turning others away? Or telling existing families who rely on you that you can’t help them any more because you are going to help new people now? It’s so hard, and an ongoing debate we are having, and I’d be really interested to hear other people’s opinions. Both options seem really tough….

Sweet sweet summer child you have absolutely no clue, have you considered how much people are having to pay for rent and now energy, everything has gone up, benefits barely have, so if people were already struggling how do you suppose getting less money is going to help?

I think you face really tough choices here
As an aside what is currently most requested/ short on supply ? I'd like to donate to mine again shortly, but having read this would like to know what's most requested

The priority is people who are waiting for their first benefit payments who are I. A temporary emergency- but if that doesn't apply to the new people applying, I would probably turn away all new applications and just keep going with the existing people. Would do a reassess of each person's situation every 6 months though, especially if there are other places you can signpost to. Eg, if they're elderly and you suspect are coming for the company -places like red cross/rvs etc do those cheap communal dinners.

If pensioners can't afford bills its usually because they're not getting all their entitlements. If people can't afford food because they are servicing debt, they need their debts rescheduled. I agree with you, the government has greater responsibility, but in the meantime, its better to help them to address the cause of their hardship with what is available, support them to apply for benefits, reduce debt repayments.

@5128gap unfortunately - and of course I can’t splash our clients’ details across Mumsnet - there is a core of people we serve who really are stuck, chronically stuck, and no amount of debt or benefit review will sort it. They are not coming to us for shits and giggles, they are waiting (sometimes in the rain) and queuing up an hour before we open because they worry that someone else will get the last cauliflower or yoghurt.

Without wanting to sound like a bitch, there's also a "learned helplessness" (that quote about give a man a fish and he eats for a day, teach him to fish and he eats for life) that one wouldn't want to encourage.

And can I just blame the fucking cunting tories and those that vote for them

I think you’re a little naive if you can’t think of any circumstances where this may happen, and can’t understand where the pp is coming from. I’ve taken my ex best friend food shopping before because she had nothing in for her little girl for her weekend contact, she’d normally go to the food bank but it was closed that day. I also paid for a taxi there and back. Before we got into the taxi to take her home she went into the off-licence and bought herself 2 bottles of red wine. If the food bank had been open that day she’d had still have got the free food and used the money she did have for wine. So yes, people do choose to use them to free up money for other ‘lifestyles’.

I don't think you can stop helping people who have been coming for a long time. Maybe you could put a rule in place such as if a family hasn't used you in three months then their space will be given to another family? So hard.

I support our food bank by giving something most weeks even if just a couple of tins of soup. I see how people can become reliant however, inflation is set to hit 10 percent, this is not only food but household bills.there is a local church and they have surplus food twice a week for anyone that needs it.always a long queue. Not helping by stupid comments from tory mps of letting the poor eat cheap cake! I think you may have to turn new people away .it socks but what can u do.they may be able to access a new one

Both options are really tough. I'm in the "don't take away help from people who need it when they've got it" camp, but I don't envy you at all.

I’m a community support worker in one of the most deprived areas in the uk, so yes.

Thank you for asking - for us, tuna, corned beef, tinned ham, pasta, cereals, tinned meat dishes. But you are honestly best to ask your local food bank , as every one will have different needs. I’m going to be a bit tough here too, and say that treats are lovely but don’t feed a family, so I would personally always ask for things that can be be made into meals.

Honestly, while as an organisation you clearly mean well, it sounds like your set up is conducive to clients becoming too reliant on your offering.

Perhaps you can build partnerships with some other groups/organisations that can help work with your clients on the "chronic" issues they are facing that are keeping them returning to you - whether that's debt, substance abuse etc.

Im sure I'll have a thousand people challenging me on this, but maybe there's a solution whereby people can access 3 "full" offerings in a fixed period (eg your choice based current model, and perhaps then introduce a "crisis" offering to people coming more - a loaf of bread, pint of milk and a couple of tins or something. If some of your repeat visitors are families with children, I'd be contacting social services as a family needing foodbank support for 2 years plus probably needs serious help.

I feel that food banks should be like the first responders - providing emergency ‘first aid’ to those who find themselves in desperate need and supporting them until more long term care and support can be provided. This I think the newly needy should be prioritised. It’s appalling that there are families that need to use food banks for years - that our welfare state is so broken.

I was under the impression that most food banks limited help already. I’ve heard it’s only three vouchers/referrals a few times which I always thought was harsh, but supporting people for up to two years plus is too much.

If people are dependent for that long, then something else needs to change for them to be truly helped, some other service needs to step in. Otherwise it’s encouraging and enabling an already bad situation to get worse.

I had to make a decision on this this morning.

I volunteer at a refugee charity, and a woman seeking asylum, who is in Home Office accommodation, has been asking us for food bank referrals fairly frequently for her family.

Today, I had to say that there were unfortunately a limit to the number of referrals we could make to food banks for each person, and tried to explore what other opportunities there were for them to find some money.

Asylum seekers get paid a pitiful amount to live on, and I felt like such a horrible person. I asked them questions (I hope) sensitively and politely, but I hated having to quiz them in the first place. But there isn’t an infinite amount of food or money, and there is excess demand.

So I completely get your dilemma. 😰

Going g to sound harsh here, but relying on food banks for a protracted period of time and thus blocking others in crisis getting help is ridiculous. Of course this isn't OK.

This shouldn't be happening in 2022!! Would a tightening of the criteria or a priority order solve both issues. It sounds like the deserving poor but I am not very good at writing it. As a mum I would always prioritise families with kids no matter how long they have been coming, it's great that you give people option but could you support more people if you just gave out a standard pack?

I didn't suggest for a moment they were. If you know your clients backgrounds you will know that needing to use a food bank is almost always indicative of an underlying need that may be alleviated to some extent with the provision of other forms of support. I'm not suggesting food banks stop issuing, I'm suggesting it should always be done as part of a fuller support offer.

Could you split the food into 2 sections

A basics....for those 2 years in ( so staple items you would see in a weekly shop)

And a full shop/donation ( the full works you would generally give out now)for a set period of time, then they go onto the 'basic' option

Gosh, imagine people being reliant on food of all things. There's a large segment of mumsnet that never fails to disgust me.

Sorry, not a reply to you as such, but just to say we send a weekly list to our clients so that they can choose what we pack for them. It felt really important to us to give people that choice so as to leave them with as much control and dignity as we could

On balance, if you need to choose, I think you will do more good by giving to new families, rather than turning new families away to continue giving to those who have received parcels for two years.

Amongst new families all (or virtually all) will be desperate, empty cupboards and no other options. Amongst those who have been receiving parcels for 2 years there will be some who are desperate and have no other options (and it is awful that they will lose out), and others who do have other (unpalatable) options but won't take those whilst they can get the parcels for free. I do have sympathy for all these people, but if a choice needs to be made I would prioritise being able to support new applicants, as I think thst will do the greatest good.

I can’t splash our clients’ details across Mumsnet - there is a core of people we serve who really are stuck, chronically stuck, and no amount of debt or benefit review will sort it.

But why? What is making them stuck ?
Obviously costs exceeding income but why:

• disabilities/caring for those with disabilities (inc mental health)
• large families?
• substance abuse?
• unemployment?
• gambling/other behavioural issues?

I can't think of anything where a foodbank is the only avenue of support. There are healthcare agencies, social services, addiction support, debt advisory services etc.

Will changing what you offer allow you to help more people? So not giving them a choice of protein that you then go and buy? It could allow you to allocate that money differently. Obviously it’s not a nice thing to do, but if adapting your offering could allow you to help more families I’d do that. That’s no help if it would just make no difference to what you can do though.

I think food banks are stuck between a rock and a hard place with this one. Our food bank take self referrals, and there are many families who have parcels every week and have been on the list for months/years. I get times are hard, but charities only have so much to give and at the moment a lot of people who used to afford to donate (myself included) just aren’t in a position to do so and the less donations the less parcels can be given out.
I have no idea what the answer is, but it’s a desperate situation for many and I am disgusted with the governor allowing this to happen.

Yes, thank you, that is one option we are looking at, to try & ‘wean people off’ needing us