Background 

To encourage Supplemental Nutrition 

Assistance Program (SNAP) participants to shop 

at farmers markets, various organizations are 

providing financial incentives to participants 

when they redeem SNAP benefits at 

participating farmers markets. This study 

describes the roles that different types of 

organizations play in designing and 

implementing SNAP-based incentive programs 

(SBIPs), including how they choose markets for 

the incentive and evaluate the success of the 

programs they fund. 

Methods 

Between February and June 2013, 141 

representatives from 103 organizations involved 

in administering SBIPs at farmers markets were 

interviewed by telephone. Fourteen 

organizations also provided self-evaluation data 

on 222 farmers markets operating SBIPs with 

USDA Food and Nutrition Service waivers. 

Descriptive analyses were performed to assess 

general market characteristics and to examine 

SNAP redemptions and incentives redeemed. 

Social network analysis was used to understand 

how the various types of organizations 

interacted in the implementation and support of 

SBIPs at participating farmers markets. 

Findings 

Organizations involved in implementing 

SBIPs can be grouped into four types based 

on their primary functions: 

 Funders of the incentive 

 Coordinators who develop and establish 

the SBIP 

 Supporters who provide support services 

for implementation and outreach 

 Operators who implement SBIPs in farmers 

markets. 

However, many organizations were also 

involved in secondary functions. Funders 

participated in identifying financial resources 

and marketing and outreach. The other 

organization types engaged in identifying 

funding sources, marketing and outreach, 

providing technical assistance and training, and 

program operations. 

For most organizations, involvement in SBIPs 

was not their sole activity. Most reported 

allocating 25 percent or less of their overall 

operating budget for SBIPs. SBIP activities 

undertaken by organizations tended to align well 

with one or more of the organizations’ missions 

of increasing access to healthy foods, improving 

health outcomes, addressing social inequity, 

and/or improving the local economy. 

Most SBIPs relied on partnerships and 

collaborations across organization types. 

Decisions regarding with whom to collaborate 

tended to be driven by geography, mission 

alignment, history with SNAP, and 

implementation capacity. Some organizations 

used an application process to select partner 

organizations, but the rigor of the process varied. 

Most Funder organization representatives 

reported having a formal application process, but 

an informal or invitational selection process was 

used if there was a limited applicant pool in the 

geographic area of interest. 

Sustained funding was cited as the greatest 

challenge to implementing SBIPs.

Organizations relied on multiple sources of 

funding to implement SBIP-related activities 

including philanthropic donations, foundations, 

grants, and vendor fees. Excess demand for 

limited resources and funder fatigue were 

challenges. In response, some representatives 

reported making program changes such as 

reducing the incentive amount and the duration 

of the incentive period, along with increasing 

fundraising activities. 

FARMERS MARKET INCENTIVE PROVIDER STUDY 

(SUMMARY)

Food and Nutrition Service, Office of Policy Support March 2014 
Page 2 

Staffing and accounting were also cited as 

major challenges to SBIP implementation. 

Coordinator and Support organizations 

mentioned training farmers market staff and 

working with volunteer-run markets as 

challenges. Funder organizations reported that 

the use of multiple forms of currency and of 

token systems were challenging for accounting. 

Most farmers markets were seasonal, and the 

duration of the market season varied. Over 

70 percent of markets that reported operating 

times were open for 3 months to 8 months, 20 

percent were open for 9 months to 12 months, 

and about 9 percent were open for less than 3 

months in 2012. About 65 percent of these 

markets reported offering incentives throughout 

the market season. 

The amount of SNAP benefits and incentives 

redeemed varied widely. Analysis of the 

market-level data for SNAP transactions and 

SBIP redemptions at Coordinator-supported 

markets in calendar year 2012 show that the 

mid-point or median for the number of SNAP 

transactions at each market was 140, and the 

annual median for SNAP and SBIP redemptions 

was $1,122 and $565, respectively. 

Redemptions and incentive volumes tended to 

grow with the duration that the SBIP had been in 

operation. Newly SNAP-authorized farmers 

markets had lower median SNAP and SBIP 

redemption amounts than markets that had been 

SNAP-authorized for more than 3 years. 

Most organizations collected, analyzed, 

disseminated, or used program data to assess 

program reach and guide future 

implementation, but fewer than 10 percent of 

the organizations conducted formal 

evaluations. Typically, organizations used the 

value of SNAP and incentive redemptions to 

assess program impact. Representatives from all 

four types of organizations also reported 

engaging in informal discussions with SNAP 

clients and vendors about their experience with 

the program. 

The purpose and use of collected data varied by 

organization type. Whereas Operator 

organizations collected data primarily for 

reporting purposes and for increasing 

community support, Funder, Coordinator, and 

Support organizations used data to assess 

progress towards meeting their overall goals and 

to secure additional funding. Coordinator and 

Support organizations also used data for 

advocacy and policy discussions. 

SNAP misuse was not seen as a major issue in 

these farmers markets. About 80 percent of 

the representatives interviewed indicated that 

SNAP misuse was not a major issue. Those 

representatives who perceived it to be an issue 

cited unintentional misuse (vendor errors) more 

than intentional misuse (SNAP participants 

sharing tokens with non-participants). 

While the close-knit, self-policing nature of 

farmers markets was seen as the biggest 

deterrent to misuse and fraud, education about 

SNAP was seen as the most important way to 

reduce unintentional misuse. Technological 

solutions, such as moving away from the token 

system, were seen as the best ways to reduce 

intentional misuse. 

For More Information 

Melissa King, Sujata Dixit-Joshi, Keith 

MacAllum, Michael Steketee, and Stephen 

Leard. Farmers Market Incentive Provider 

Study. Prepared by Westat for the U.S. 

Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition 

Service, March 2014. Available online at 

www.fns.usda.gov/research-and-analysis

USDA is an equal opportunity provider and employer.