Issue: The U.S. Government set an objective of

reducing the rate of food insecurity of the Nation’s

households to half of its 1995 level by 2010. Is progress

through 2000 on track to reaching this target? What

factors will affect success in achieving it? 

Background: At the World Food Summit in 1996, the

United States, along with 185 other countries, adopted the

“Rome Declaration,” which begins with this commitment:

We pledge our political will and our common and

national commitment to achieving food security for

all and to an ongoing effort to eradicate hunger in

all countries, with an immediate view to reducing

the number of undernourished people to half their

present level no later than 2015.

U.S. planning and commitments toward reducing the global

incidence of undernutrition have focused primarily on

improving food security in low-income countries, where the

vast majority of the world’s undernourished people live.

However, the U.S. Government also committed itself to

reducing food insecurity at home. Undernourishment as a

result of poverty is rare within the United States, but food

security—assured access by all people at all times to

enough food for active healthy lives—has not yet been

achieved. A nationally representative food security survey

conducted in 1995, before the World Food Summit, indicated that about 12 percent of U.S. households were food

insecure, including 4 percent in which one or more household members were hungry at times during the year

because of the households’ food insecurity. 

The U.S. Government, as a part of its response to the

World Food Summit, set an objective of reducing the

prevalence rate of food insecurity in the Nation by half—

to 6 percent—by 2010. 

The objective, adopted as part of the Department of

Health and Human Services’ Healthy People 2010 initiative, sets a more stringent standard for the United States

than that of the Rome Declaration. First, the condition 

it addresses, food insecurity, is a less severe condition

than undernourishment, the condition addressed by the

specific objective of the Rome Declaration. Second, the

target date for achieving this objective is 2010, which is 5

years before the World Food Summit target.

Findings: In this issues brief, we assess progress toward

the objective of reducing by half the prevalence rate of

food insecurity among U.S. households. We first describe

the methods used to measure and monitor the food security of the Nation’s households. Then, drawing on data

from the annual USDA-sponsored food security surveys,

we track prevalence rates of food insecurity and hunger

from 1995 through 2000. We compare these statistics to

the Healthy People 2010 targets, and explore the extent to

which the strong economic growth during the period may

have been responsible for the improvements in food security. Finally, we describe characteristics of food-insecure

households to identify population groups that will need to

be given more attention in order for the United States to

achieve the Healthy People 2010 objective.

Measuring and Monitoring Food Security

USDA monitors the food security of the Nation’s households through an annual, nationally representative food

security survey. The survey is conducted for USDA by

the U.S. Census Bureau as an annual supplement to its

United States

Department of

Agriculture

Economic 

Research

Service

Reducing Food Insecurity in the 

United States: Assessing Progress 

Toward a National Objective

Mark Nord and Margaret Andrews

Food Assistance and Nutrition Research Report Number 26-2 May 2002

IN FOOD ASSISTANCE
Reducing Food Insecurity in the United States: Assessing Progress Toward a National Objective / FANRR-26-2

2

monthly Current Population Survey (CPS)—the same

survey that provides data for the Nation’s monthly unemployment statistics and annual poverty rates. A nationally

representative sample of about 40,000 households

responds to questions about food expenditures, use of

Federal and community food programs, and whether they

are able to consistently meet their food needs.

Each household’s food security status is assessed by a

series of 18 questions that ask about behaviors and experiences known to characterize households that are having

difficulty meeting their food needs. The questions cover a

wide range of severity of food insecurity. For example, the

questions about the least severe levels of food insecurity

ask whether respondents worried that their food would run

out before they got money to buy more and whether they

could afford to eat balanced meals. At midrange are questions on reducing food intake, such as whether adults in

the household cut the size of meals or skipped meals

because there was not enough money for food. Questions

about the more severe levels of food insecurity ask whether

children skipped meals because there was not enough

money for food, and whether adults did not eat for a whole

day because there was not enough money for food. Each

question asks whether the condition or behavior occurred

during the previous 12 months and specifies a lack of

money or other resources to obtain food as the reason for

the condition or behavior. Voluntary fasting or dieting to

lose weight are thereby excluded from the measure.

Interviewed households are classified into one of three

categories—food secure, food insecure without hunger,

food insecure with hunger—based on the households’

responses to all items. Households whose members answer

“Yes” to 3 or more of the 18 food security questions are

classified as food insecure. At a minimum, food-insecure

households have affirmed all of the following three items

or else items indicating more severe conditions:

• They worried whether their food would run out

before they got money to buy more.

• The food they bought did not last, and they did not

have money to get more.

• They could not afford to eat balanced meals.

Households classified as food insecure with hunger have

affirmed, in addition to the previous three items, both of

the following items or else items indicating more severe

conditions:

• Adults ate less than they felt they should.

• Adults cut the size of meals or skipped meals in 3 or

more months.

The Baseline: 1995

Based on the first food security survey, conducted in April

1995, USDA estimated that 12 percent of U.S. households

(11.8 million households) were food insecure, including 4

percent (4.2 million) classified as food insecure with

hunger. The general food security objective adopted by

Healthy People 2010 is to “increase food security among

U.S. households and in so doing reduce hunger.” The

specific food security objective is to reduce the prevalence

rate of food insecurity by half, to 6 percent, by 2010.1

Although no specific target was set for reducing the prevalence of hunger, the general objective implies a commensurate reduction in hunger. In this issues brief, we track

progress on both statistics, assuming a target of reducing

the prevalence rate of hunger to 2 percent by 2010.

Progress: 1995-2000

Food insecurity and hunger declined from 1995 through

2000 (fig. 1).2 The year-to-year deviations from a consistent

downward trend included a substantial 2-year cycle that is

believed to result from a seasonal influence on the measurement of food security prevalence rates. The CPS food security surveys over this period were conducted in April in

odd-numbered years and August or September in evennumbered years. The measured prevalence of food insecurity was consistently higher in the August/September

1The Healthy People 2010 objective is actually worded in terms of

food security—to increase food security from 88 percent to 94 percent

of households. A note clarifies that this target represents a “6 percentage point improvement (50 percent decrease in food insecurity; consistent with the U.S. pledge to the 1996 World Food Summit).”

2Because of changes in screening procedures used to reduce respondent burden in the food security surveys, prevalence rates from 1995

to 1997 are not directly comparable with those from 1998 to 2000. In

other USDA reports, prevalence rates have been made comparable

across years by editing data for all years in accordance with a common screen, more stringent than that actually in use in any year. Here,

however, a different approach has been used. Since the Healthy

People 2010 objective uses as a baseline the unadjusted 1995 prevalence rate, we use unadjusted statistics for 1995 and for 1998-2000.

Fortunately, changes in screening caused only negligible differences

in prevalence estimates at the national level for 1995 compared with

1998-2000. Prevalence rates for 1996 and 1997, however, did require

adjustment to be comparable. These were adjusted from the “common

screen” prevalence rates by multiplying them by the average ratio of

unadjusted-to-adjusted prevalence rates for 1998-2000. Analyses were

replicated using common-screen-based prevalence rates for all years

to assure that findings were not affected by use of this approach.
Reducing Food Insecurity in the United States: Assessing Progress Toward a National Objective / FANRR-26-2

3

collections, suggesting a seasonal response effect.3 To avoid

any possible bias arising from this seasonal effect, we

assess progress from April 1995 to April 1999 rather than 

to September 2000 (the most recent data available). Food

insecurity declined from 11.75 percent in 1995 to 10.06

percent in 1999, a decline of 1.69 percentage points. This

amounted to 0.4 percentage points per year, which is just

the annual reduction required to achieve the Healthy People

2010 objective. Over the same 4-year period, the hunger

rate fell from 4.15 percent to 2.97 percent, a decline of 1.18

percentage points, or almost 0.3 percentage points per year.

This rate of decline (in percentage points) would result in

reducing the rate of hunger to half of the 1995 level several

years before 2010. To assess these changes more rigorously,

statistical methods (regression analysis) were used to adjust

for the seasonal variation. These analyses confirmed that

progress on reducing the rate of food insecurity was on

target through 2000, and progress on reducing the rate of

hunger was somewhat ahead of target.

The declines in food insecurity and hunger from 1995

through 2000 were widespread and general, affecting

almost all regions and types of households. The declines

were largest for some of the most economically disadvantaged groups, especially for single women with children

and for Blacks and Hispanics.

Although this preliminary analysis is encouraging, the

improvements in food security from 1995 through 2000

are not likely to continue without a break into the

following decade. Most—perhaps all—of the reduction in

food insecurity from 1995 through 2000 and about half of

the reduction in hunger can be accounted for by rising

incomes over the period. These rising incomes, resulting

primarily from the strong economic growth of the late

1990s, are likely to have stagnated or declined as a result

of the recession of 2001. 

The association of food insecurity with income remained

almost unchanged in 1999 compared with 1995 (fig. 2;

comparison is made with 1999 rather than with 2000 to

avoid possible seasonality bias). In both years, the rate of

3Beginning in 2001, data are being collected in early December of

every year, which will avoid further problems of seasonality effects in

interpreting annual changes.

What does it mean to be food secure? Food

insecure? Food insecure with hunger?

Food security for a household means access by all

members at all times to enough food for an active,

healthy life. Food security includes at a minimum 

(1) the ready availability of nutritionally adequate and

safe foods, and (2) an assured ability to acquire acceptable foods in socially acceptable ways (that is, without

resorting to emergency food supplies, scavenging,

stealing, or other coping strategies).

Food insecurity is the limited or uncertain availability

of nutritionally adequate and safe foods or limited or

uncertain ability to acquire acceptable foods in socially

acceptable ways. 

Hunger is the uneasy or painful sensation caused by a

lack of food. [Or] the recurrent and involuntary lack of

access to food.

Definitions are from the American Institute of Nutrition,

Life Sciences Research Office (Andersen, 1990).

Hunger, as measured in the U.S. food security 

survey and described in this issues brief, refers only to

involuntary hunger that results from not being able to

afford enough food. People are not counted as “hungry” for these statistics if they were hungry only

because they were dieting to lose weight, fasting for

religious reasons, or just too busy to eat.

1995 2000 2005 2010

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

Figure 1—Prevalence rates of food insecurity 

and hunger compared with Healthy People 

2010 objectives

Percent of households

Target, food insecure

Actual, food insecure

Target, hunger

Actual, hunger

Note: Prevalence rates for 1996 and 1997 were adjusted for screening 

differences in order to be comparable to the unadjusted rates for 1995 

and 1998-2000. 

Source: Calculated by ERS based on data from Current Population 

Survey Food Security Supplements.
Reducing Food Insecurity in the United States: Assessing Progress Toward a National Objective / FANRR-26-2

4

food insecurity was around 45 percent for households

with the lowest incomes, fell to about 23 percent for

households with incomes around the poverty line, fell to

below 10 percent for households with incomes twice the

poverty line, and fell to near zero for households with

incomes around 4 times the poverty line. In both years,

there was a great deal of variation (not depicted in fig. 2)

in the food security of households with the same income.

Many households with low incomes remained food

secure, while a few households with relatively high

annual incomes experienced periods of food insecurity.

On average, however, households at the same income

level (adjusted for household size and inflation) were

equally likely to be food insecure in 1995 and in 1999.

The lowest income households may even have been

slightly more food insecure in 1999 than in 1995.

Rising income was also a major factor in reducing the

hunger rate from 1995 to 2000. However, the hunger rate

fell more rapidly during this period than can be accounted

for by rising incomes alone. Across the entire low-income

range, households with similar incomes (adjusted for

household size and inflation) had lower rates of hunger 

in 1999 than in 1995 (fig. 3). Analysis not shown here

suggests that about half of the reduction in the hunger 

rate from 1995 to 2000 can be accounted for by improved

incomes. Further research is needed to understand the

other reasons for the decline in the hunger rate. Important

contributors may include other economic factors such as

increased labor-force participation, improved job availability and employment stability, and public assistance

program factors such as employment-focused cash

welfare, increased receipt of earned-income tax credits,

and increased outreach in food assistance programs.

Economic factors are likely to have been adversely

affected by the recession in 2001, whereas improvements

due to program factors are more likely to persist.

Prospects: 2000-2010

Achieving the targeted improvements in food security by

2010 will require:

• Renewed economic growth—especially improved

employment and income opportunities for less

skilled workers.

• Improved employment opportunities and increased

income of single mothers with children.

• Maintenance of a strong nutrition safety net.

Economic growth, with its improvements in employment

and income, is essential to improving food security. The

recession of 2001 will likely have resulted in rising rates

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0

Figure 2—Prevalence rates of food insecurity 

by income, 1995 versus 1999

Food insecurity rate (percent of households)

1999

1995

Note: Predicted prevalence rates are based on logistic regressions 

of food insecurity on household cash income as a ratio to the Federal 

poverty line (entered as a third-order polynomial). Regression 

analyses were conducted separately for 1995 and 1999.

Source: Calculated by ERS based on data from Current Population 

Survey Food Security Supplements, April 1995 and April 1999.

Income (ratio to poverty level)

0

5

10

15

20

25

Figure 3—Prevalence rates of hunger by income, 

1995 versus 1999

Hunger rate (percent of households)

1999

1995

Note: Predicted prevalence rates are based on logistic regressions 

of hunger on household cash income as a ratio to the Federal 

poverty line (entered as a third-order polynomial). Regression 

analyses were conducted separately for 1995 and 1999.

Source: Calculated by ERS based on data from Current Population 

Survey Food Security Supplements, April 1995 and April 1999.

Income (ratio to poverty level)

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0
Reducing Food Insecurity in the United States: Assessing Progress Toward a National Objective / FANRR-26-2

5

of food insecurity and hunger in 2001,4 and renewed

economic growth will be essential in order to achieve the

Healthy People 2010 objectives. Food insecurity and

hunger are heavily concentrated among low-income

households (figs. 4 and 5). Aspects of economic growth

that improve employment and income opportunities for

less skilled workers—who are disproportionately represented in low-income households—are especially important for improving food security. 

Single women with children have the highest rates of food

insecurity and hunger of all household types. In 2000, 31

percent of such households were food insecure, and they

comprised 25 percent of all food-insecure households (figs.

4 and 6). Bringing the rate of food insecurity of these

households down to the national average would, by itself,

achieve 40 percent of the remaining reduction in food insecurity required to meet the Healthy People 2010 objective.

Reducing food insecurity among these families will require

attention to factors that affect their income, such as barriers

to employment, access to good-quality child care, and

income support, while avoiding policies that create disincentives or barriers to marriage. 

The nutrition safety net maintained by USDA also plays

an important role in achieving the food security objectives of Healthy People 2010. Even in a strong economy,

job transitions, layoffs, and family disruptions can result

in temporary periods of low income and vulnerability to

food insecurity. Furthermore, the incomes earned by

some workers are not sufficient to meet the food needs of

4The CPS Food Security Survey was conducted in December 2001.

ERS will report results in late October 2002.

 Outside metropolitan area

 Not in central city

 In central city

 Inside metropolitan area

Area of residence:

Above 185 percent of poverty line

 130-185 percent of poverty line

 100-130 percent of poverty line

 Below poverty line

Household income:

 Hispanic

 Black non-Hispanic

 White non-Hispanic

Race/ethnicity of households:

 Household with elderly

 Man living alone

 Woman living alone

 More than one adult, no child

 Single woman with child

 Married couple with child

Household composition:

All households

0 10 20 30 40

Figure 4—Prevalence rates of food insecurity and 

hunger by selected household characteristics, 2000

Percent of households

Source: Calculated by ERS based on data from Current Population 

Survey Food Security Supplement, September 2000.

Food insecure 

with hunger

Food insecure 

without hunger

Figure 6—Household composition of food-insecure

households, 2000

Source: Calculated by ERS based on data from Current Population 

Survey Food Security Supplement, September 2000.

Married couples 

with children–26%

Men living 

alone–9%

Women living

alone–15% More than one

adult, no child–21%

Other households

with children–1%

Single men

with children–3%

Single women

with children–25%

Figure 5—Income of food-insecure households, 2000

Source: Calculated by ERS based on data from Current Population 

Survey Food Security Supplement, September 2000.

Income 100 to 130

percent of poverty

line–14%

Income 130 to 185

percent of poverty

line–13%

Income higher than

185 percent of poverty

line–29%

Income below

poverty line–44%
Reducing Food Insecurity in the United States: Assessing Progress Toward a National Objective / FANRR-26-2

6

all household members. USDA’s food assistance

programs—including the Food Stamp Program, the

National School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs,

and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for

Women, Infants, and Children (WIC)—help meet these

transitional and supplemental food needs. To maximize

the contribution of these programs in reducing food insecurity and hunger, it is important to assure that eligibility

criteria and benefit levels are appropriate and that households qualifying for the programs know they are eligible,

can readily access the programs, and are not embarrassed

to apply for them.

Summary: Through 2000, the United States made

encouraging progress in reducing the rate of domestic

food insecurity—progress that, if continued, would

achieve the objective of reducing food insecurity by half

from 1995 to 2010. The prevalence of hunger fell at a

rate more rapid than that required to achieve an equivalent target. However, both of these gains were largely the

result of improvements in income associated with the

strong economic growth of the late 1990s. To achieve the

targeted reductions in food insecurity and hunger will

require renewed economic growth along with particular

attention of policies and programs that affect employment

and earnings opportunities of households that are most

vulnerable to food insecurity—especially those with less

skilled or less educated workers and those headed by

single women with children. 

Information Sources:

Andersen, S.A. (ed.), “Core Indicators of Nutritional

State for Difficult to Sample Populations,” Journal of

Nutrition 120(11S):1557-1600. Life Sciences Research

Office, Federation of the American Societies for

Experimental Biology, for the American Institute of

Nutrition, 1990.

Economic Research Service Website, Food Security in

the United States, http://www.ers.usda.gov/briefing/foodsecurity

Food and Nutrition Service Website,

http://www.fns.usda.gov/fns for information on USDA’s

food assistance programs, and http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsec

for resources communities can use to improve food 

security.

Nord, Mark, Nader Kabbani, Laura Tiehen, Margaret

Andrews, Gary Bickel, and Steven Carlson. Household

Food Security in the United States, 2000. FANRR-21,

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research

Service, 2002.

http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/fanrr21

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national

origin, gender, religion, age, disability, political beliefs, sexual orientation, and marital or family status. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all

programs.) Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape,

etc.) should contact USDA’s Target Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD).

To file a complaint of discrimination, write USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights, Room 326-W, Whitten Building, 14th and Independence

Avenue, SW, Washington, DC 20250-9410 or call (202) 720-5964 (voice or TDD). USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.