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….

So, the Government need to pay for free copies of Jack Munroe's books then?

They're not fancy, they're not glamorous, but they tell you how to make things for as cheap as possible.

This is really difficult but I think you need to start moving the long term users off your books. If they are struggling with debt they need to declare bankruptcy. If they are addicted to alcohol/drugs long term then they may need to reach rock bottom before they make changes - the food bank might be enabling them to continue.

Can you cut the cost of what you provide at all - do you need to provide fresh protein, surely a tin of tuna or baked beans would suffice? Can you prioritise children/pregnant women for more nutritious food and give everyone else more basic stuff?

Tins of tuna are pretty pricey these days

It’s only going to get worse which means less help for all who come to you I guess.

thank you for helping those in need x

If you keep them basic and repetitive won't it mean people are less likely to use them if they don't need them?

I guess it's tricky as you don't want to suck all the joy out people's lives at a time of need. But keep non essentials like ketchup to a minimum

What I would do is state something along the following lines.. (see below) to try and wean off the long term user, while instituting some sort of ration criteria applicable to all users so that long term don’t feel too targeted. I wouldn’t block them completely straight off as this will cause a headache - what you want is to say “our policy is changing”, give them advance notice of them being given less and potentially eventually cut off. And recommend as many other sources of support as possible.

Dear Foodbank User,

We are writing to inform you of some changes to the service we are able to provide.

Demand has increased in the local area and we feel obligated to try and support everyone in need as best we can.

Unfortunately, a change of policy is now required to facilitate provision for new users.

From X date we will only be able to provide food parcels on a two weekly basis for those who have used the service in excess of one year.

For those who have used the service beyond two years we will have to withdraw support for a period of six months from X date.

For all customers items such as X, X, and X will be limited to X per customer and X and X will be limited in quantity to XKg per person. (Or say For all customers some items will have to be limited in their amount, please see the attached list for reference).

The Foodbank is a short term emergency service and resources are limited so must be directed to those in most urgent need.

Our policy will be reviewed on a six monthly basis.

We appreciate that you may still be facing challenging circumstances and we remain dedicated to supporting the whole community as best we can.

In the event that you require further support than what we are able to provide please see the attached list of other local food banks, benefits support etc etc.

Kind regards,

Lovely Foodbank People

The UK Food Bank Alliance was formed in 2004.

You seem to be implying that the root cause is likely to be poor budgeting, but it's a bit difficult to budget when there's nothing to budget with. In many cases the root cause will be inadequate pay or failures on the part of the benefits system. I agree advice on all these things should be available, but not in the way you've suggested, which feels like blaming the person for the predicament they are in.

This is interesting because I was always led to believe food banks were only issued a week's worth of food, as a one-off, which I always thought was a bit mean as if you were so desperate as to need a food bank, then a week's worth of food wasn't going to go far.
With your dilemma I guess it depends on what criteria people are being referred by, and whether this is being checked week by week. Eg someone referred due to non payment of benefits should surely only need at most six weeks of food.

Also I would bring in financial screening if at all possible to help you prioritise.

We have a larder system which for a £4 donation for A year you can have items of your choice ,fruit ,veg a full bag full for £1 and for £3 10 items ie pasta sauce ,tea coffee cereal etc for £3.This is food share.All donations raised go back to the pot for more buying power.This gives people anyone regardless of income a chance to buy cheap good food which they choose and saves good healthy food going to landfill.This gives everyone a feeling of control and not charity.

I volunteer at a foodbank that sounds quite similar to yours. It is a tricky one. We have a number of rules - first no one gets a weekly parcel - the best they can have is fortnightly. We give a "basics" parcel that ought to supply the best part of a weeks food plus a choice of protein and veg etc on top. After 2 months they only get the basics and after 3 months they need a re referral and will only get the fortnightly basics for the next 3 months. SO they can have fortnightly support from us for 6 months. During that time we will refer them whereever we can for dug/alchohol/debt support. They then cannot be re-referred for another 3-6 months depending on the situation - we are likely to be "kinder" on a re referral from a family with children than a single person with alcohol issues.

I’d be fundraising, not dropping people in need. Have you approached your local authority? Looked into government grants? Approached local businesses? ASDA have a fight hunger campaign where they donate to food banks for example.

This seems very sensible

Tbf to the OP @tartanbaker she has answered a lot of these questions already.

They have limited storage.

They have a benefits expert on board.

Everyone who needs support should have it. People who need support in the long term should be helped via other agencies though, it’s awful to think that the benefit system has hit a point where people still go hungry even while receiving help through it. Universal credit should pay enough that families can afford the basics of running a home. People with dependancy issues such as drugs should be able to access other support. Food banks should be for emergencies while other help is applied for.

Obviously you need to watch out for the feckless undeserving poor and their tendency to develop a "dependancy" on things like food. 😞

Back in the real world though, my feeling would be to keep supporting your current clients to the fullest extent possible, and if new people apply beyond your capacity to help, say "sorry, we can't help". You know your current clients, you have structures in place that are working with them, you're doing what you can to improve a shitty situation. There's no way you're going to be able to go that for ALL the hardship of society, so there's going to be a line that appears somewhere, and that will be determined by circumstances.

If you really can't accept that, you could maybe put some resources into launching a major fundraising drive to expand your capacity, or set up another foodbank to take new applicants.

Foodbanks may have started out intending to be temporary, but they're now an accepted part of society and have become permanent and normalised. Enough people accept that as a feature of the kind of society they want to live in, that it's not going to change any time soon. So all you can do is work out the scope and limits of what your particular organisation can do within that.

You have my deepest respect.

As long as they need help (but with a strategy to help new families). Possibly using vouchers rather than goods if funds can be raised to support that (given no need for storage).
So so hard

Op in answer to your first question it should be short term help two years definitely isn't short term. My own answer would be 3 weeks but the rules that @londonmummy1966 has described make lots of sense.

Things will get worse before they get better, increasing costs mean more people needing help and less people able to donate. Your current model isn't sustainable.

There is something seriously wrong with the wealth distribution in the UK that food banks are even a thing.

I feel embarrassed that I need to point this out to posters on this thread as I'm surprised people can't work this out for themselves but what a lot of people criticising long term food bank users fail to grasp is that many of these families work. Too often it is the case that foodbanks are a charity subsidising big companies that are paying the minimum (not the living) wage and then big dividends to shareholders or are subsidising private landlords charging rents that are unaffordable leaving their tenants in poverty and unable to feed their chidlren. Often its not the "feckless" poor but the greedy capitalists who are screwing families over and making foodbanks a necessity. I'm in London and the quadruple whammy of London rents, low pay, high childcare (as the nurseries have to pay high rents too) and cost of living increases is tipping families with 2 working parents into desperate circumstances

Most of our local food banks have a limit to length of referral
minimum is 3 parcels
maximum is 6-8 weeks
but you can re refer

Having worked with food banks for years in the US I think there are two different tacks to take and both are good things to do in the absence of a proper social safety net -

1. You can be the go to place for urgent, stop gap help. This allows a people to not slip through the crack when one bad incident is about to send them spiralling into debt or the like. A couple of months of groceries when their benefits have been temporarily stopped or they’re just being moved to being paid in areas or something like that. You should be able to help more people, but it’s shallower help. There will be people you stop serving who will then go hungry and who will need help more than new people you take on, but it’s a good way to stop things getting worse for more people.

2. You can commit to families and see them through until they don’t need help anymore. This is deeper help for those families you do serve. It tends to be better for the hard to serve and the more vulnerable - those with a lot of issues who find it hard to access other services, who are likely to be targeted more often for theft or assault, those with significant mental health challenges that they are unable to manage well, etc. You will serve fewer people, but more likely to be serving people who have fewer reserves or networks to draw on. It’s more challenging, but tends not to be done by as many.

What (I think) is not that great is having a mid-term arbitrary cut off (like 2 years!). Because then you are plunging families into chaos again in order to pick up more families who you will keep a float for another 2 years before dropping them. It’s not a short stop gap that lets you serve lots of families and stops many of them falling into more dire circumstances, but it also doesn’t ensure the people you do help are back on their feet.

In any case - I’d just like to say you’re fantastic for caring enough to do this and to think about what you’re doing.

I volunteered at a food bank in one of the most deprived areas in the UK. When it first set up self referrals were allowed but after a short time organisers became aware of some people using the service that local agencies knew their need was not genuine so, at that point, they agreed to work with the local council so all applications had to come through them, children's centres, schools, surgeries, etc. They had limits on how many parcels were allowed over time, partly to reduce dependency but also to be able to meet demand.

I think there are always some people who will take however much anyone will give them, whether through genuine need, through powerlessness/dependency or just through greed. No agency can support them all indefinitely