Continuing with my Older Americans Act informational series, this week I'm going to focus on how OAA budget cuts at the national level affected local Senior Nutrition programs. Last week's overview of Senior Nutrition services can be found here.
There are lots of zeros involved in this discussion (we are talking about millions, billions and trillions of dollars), but at the end I am including some graphs that starkly illustrate the results of the Budget Control Act and sequestration cuts on Senior Nutrition Programs.
This information isn't top secret; this is a public program paid for by our tax dollars and the included charts were part of a packet provided at a committee meeting open to the public. This is all part of the public record.
Some Historical Funding History
From FY2006 to FY 2010, OAA funding steadily increased from $1.783 billion to $2.328 billion, an overall increase of 31% over that time period. ARRA provided an additional $220 million to OAA programs in FY 2009. OAA funding for FY 2010 also included $225 million special one time only funding (OTO)to serve low income seniors affected by the recession.
To put this amount of money into perspective, a December 2014 report by the Congressional Research Service estimates the over $1.6 TRILLION spent on military and support operations in the middle east in the last 15 years, with $815 billion spent on "Operation Iraqi Freedom" & "Operation New Dawn". That averages out to $54 billion per year. Twenty five times the cost of providing funding for funding to help older Americans in need of assistance - when total OAA funding was at its highest point.
After the 2010 midterms when the Republicans gained control of Congress and began slashing budgets appropriations for OAA programs decreased. OAA program funding is part of "discretionary funding" in the budget, so the Budget Control Act and sequestration effected programs targeting seniors.
In early 2013 the OMB estimated a FY 2013 spending reduction of $122 million from the FY 2012 level, including an 8.2% ($121 million) reduction in discretionary spending and a 7.6% ($1 million) reduction in mandatory spending for "Aging Services Programs" which included all non-Title V (Title V = Senior Employment) OAA programs as well as several other non-OAA programs administered by the Agency on Aging.
Results of Funding Cuts on Nutrition Programs
I snipped some comments from testimony provided at the June 19, 2013 Senate Health, Education, Labor and Pensions Committee on Primary Health and Aging Hearing on "Reducing Senior Poverty and Hunter: The Role of the Older Americans Act."
“Funding for OAA has not kept pace with inflation or population growth for decades. […] In 2009, in order for OAA funding to simply catch up with the growth in the senior population and the costs of services over the past decade, it would have had to be increased by at least 12% a year for several years. Since then, OAA appropriations have continued to lag behind the rising costs of fuel, commodities, and wages, while the nation’s senior population, as well as demand for OAA services, has continued to grow.”
--- Howard Bedlin, Vice President, Public Policy and Advocacy, National Council on Aging
“[…] sequestration, which is devastating senior nutrition across the country. In California, we are losing 750,000 meals. At Senior Community Centers, our share of sequester is over $200,000 which puts 70,000 meals at risk. Please end it as soon as possible. Exempt those programs which clearly serve the most vulnerable of our society, such as the OAA nutrition programs. We have gone from being providers of meals to arbiters of who goes hungry and that is wrong.”
--- Paul Downy, President, National Association of Nutrition and Aging Services Programs & President/CEO of Senior Community Centers in San Diego
“let’s delve into the driving reasons why reauthorizing, strengthening and providing adequate funding for the Older Americans Act is a necessity:
The need is severe. [emphasis orig] We are merely scratching the surface on meeting the needs of an exponentially increasing hungry senior population as the gaps widen between need/demand and availability/affordability. Since the onset of the recession, the number of seniors struggling with hunger has increased in 44 states […]. Nationally, there are 8.3 million seniors currently struggling with hunger. We are providing nutritious meals to only 2.5 million. […] nearly 6 million American seniors are still in need of reliable, nutritious meals. While the infrastructure exists to fill that gap, the resources fall substantially short.
[…]
‘Real’ funding levels (adjusted for inflation) for OAA Nutrition Programs have decreased 18% from 1992 to 2012. At the same time, the population over 60 has increased 34%.
[…] the impact of the sequester on OAA Nutrition Programs has added another $51 million in reductions to these programs for the remainder of 2013.”
[...]
"Impact of the sequester on seniors per Meals on Wheels survey of member programs that receive federal funding via the OAA:
• Almost 70% are cutting number of meals served
• Over 70% are establishing wait lists for the first time or adding to existing wait lists
• More than half are reducing the number of seniors being served
• 40% are eliminating staff positions
• Almost 40% are reducing the number of days they deliver meals
• 25% are reducing the number of days open for congregate sites
• 1 in 6 programs are closing congregate sites or home delivered meal programs altogether"
--- Ellie Hollander, President and CEO, Meals on Wheels Association of America
The following charts are what OAA funding cuts look like at the local level. The blue line is shows the actual monthly meal count, and the light gray line is the average over time. Any time the variation in meal count changes in a statistically significant amount, the average is replotted. You can see the bump up resulting from the stimulus funds, and then the steep cuts after the Republicans entered Congress at the beginning of 2011. The average we are at now, is close to where we were ten years ago - prior to the economic downturn and the expansion of the senior population.
A simpler way of looking at it based on average meals per month based on fiscal year totals follows. Ignore the initial low point at the beginning of the chart. It isn't related to funding issues - it is just a result of a change in data collection and storage tools 10 years ago. As you can see, service delivery is back to, even slightly below, 2005-2006 (Bush2 era) levels.
Sadly, these sorts of cuts seem to effect lower income areas hardest of all. These nutrition grants require 10% matching local funds. As you can imagine, it is harder for a lower income area to come up with those funds, especially in the midst of an recession. Even if normal (non-stimulus) funding levels are increased, the result is that the grantee needs to collect more matching funds (dollar wise) from local sources.
Information and Assistance in Finding Services
If you or someone you know is interested in finding out what services are available in your area, the a good place to start is with the AOA's State and/or Area Agency on Aging finder. The best place to start is generally with a program/service called "Information and Assistance" which will provide staff to answer your questions and provide assistance with locating and accessing OAA programs and services in your area.