Why Food Insecurity Still Exists in America

The United States has more than enough food in aggregate and one of the world’s most sophisticated food systems. Yet food insecurity persists year after year. The reason is not a single failure. It is a set of reinforcing pressures that keep many households one missed paycheck, one medical bill, or one rent increase away from running out of food.

This inaugural episode invites listeners to step back and look honestly at how our food system evolved. From the agricultural breakthroughs that made the United States a global breadbasket, to the birth of food banking as a way to distribute surplus, the system did what it was designed to do. But the world changed—and the conversation didn’t keep up.

Food Secure Nation exists to change that conversation.

This show begins with a simple but uncomfortable truth: food insecurity is something we created—and therefore something we can solve. Not with slogans. Not with blame. But with better thinking, better alignment, and better courage.

In America, 42 million people live with food insecurity. Not because we lack food—we waste nearly 40% of what we produce—but because access, systems, and priorities don’t line up. Hunger is visible. Food insecurity is quieter, more complex, and far more consequential.

Food insecurity touches everything:

  • A child’s ability to learn
  • A parent’s health and mental well-being
  • A worker’s productivity
  • A community’s stability

And yet, we often talk about it as if it’s someone else’s problem—or worse, a personal failure. It’s neither.

This is not a show about charity. It’s about responsibility. Not about guilt, but possibility.

Not about having all the answers but about asking better questions—together.

We believe dignity matters. Nutrition matters. Consistency matters. And solutions only work when they meet people where they are, without judgment. Solving food insecurity isn’t about doing more of the same; it’s about doing the right things, at the right level, with the right partners.

Our commitment is simple: to bring forward the evidence, the voices, the wisdom, and the urgency needed to prove that food insecurity in America can be solved—and to invite anyone who cares about their community, their workforce, their children, or their future to be part of that work.

Because hunger may be loud—but food insecurity is quieter, deeper, and more dangerous.

And when we know better, we can do better. That’s how we build a Food Secure Nation.

What the numbers say (recent years)

  • Roughly 12 to 14% of U.S. households (over 15 million households, about 40 million people) have experienced food insecurity in recent years.
  • The rate rose sharply after pandemic-era supports tapered and inflation surged: 10.2% (2021) to 12.8% (2022) to 13.5% (2023).
  • More than half of food-insecure households include a full-time worker, showing this is also a working-family issue.

SNAP participation reduces the likelihood of being food insecure by about 30%, but many eligible households are not enrolled, and benefits can fall short by month-end.

 

What it would mean to solve this

“Solved” means that every person can reliably obtain enough nutritious food in every season and region, including when shocks hit. In practice, that would look like:

  • Food insecurity becomes rare, not cyclical. Rates do not spike with recessions, disasters, or policy rollbacks.
  • Disparities narrow and then disappear. Households with children, single-parent families, and Black, Hispanic, and Native American households are no longer systematically more at risk.
  • Support systems catch people quickly. Short-term hardship does not become long-term instability.

 

Why it persists: a system that reinforces itself

Food insecurity is best understood as a set of linked loops. Low resources reduce food purchasing power. Food insecurity then increases stress and worsens health, which can reduce work capacity and raise expenses, deepening the original problem. Safety net programs counteract this loop, but gaps in access, adequacy, and coordination limit their ability to offset the pressures fully.

The evidence points to a consistent set of persistent barriers:

  • Low income and low wages: Households cut food first when money is tight.
  • High essential expenses: Housing, utilities, transportation, and healthcare costs force trade-offs.
  • Safety net gaps and shortfalls: Under-enrollment, eligibility limits, and benefit adequacy issues persist.
  • Administrative burden and stigma: Complex processes deter enrollment and consistent use.
  • Unequal burden across communities: Rates remain higher among Black, Hispanic, and Native American households.
  • Physical access barriers: Distance and transportation can make affordable, nutritious food harder to reach.
  • Fragmented governance: Programs seem to create gaps and diffuse accountability.

 

What’s changing now and the questions worth watching

Recent years have shown how quickly food insecurity can move when policy and prices change. Several changes are reshaping the landscape:

  • Policy whiplash as a driver: What happens when temporary supports expire, and which supports become durable over time?
  • The post-2021 SNAP benefit baseline is higher due to the Thrifty Food Plan update, but does it keep pace with local costs and end-of-month gaps?
  • Summer nutrition: With Summer EBT beginning in 2024 and more states adopting universal free school meals, will child food hardship stabilize outside the school year?
  • Access is evolving: SNAP online purchasing is now nationwide, but will delivery reach rural areas and households with limited digital access?
  • National ambition meets local execution: The federal goal to end hunger by 2030 is a strong signal, but which actors are accountable for measurable progress and equity in outcomes?

 

Why this matters for the conversation

If food insecurity were only about food supply, it would already be solved. The hard part is the system: income, costs, access, program design, and resilience through shocks. Bring your view of what is most underestimated, what is working, and where the real trade-offs show up in practice.

Dignity: Why it is important and what we mean when we say we want to improve dignity for the people served by our work.

Dignity refers to the inherent worth and value of every individual. It’s one of the core ethical principles outlined by the National Association of Social Workers (NASW), emphasizing that:

  • Every person deserves respect regardless of their background, circumstances, or choices.
  • Cultural and ethnic diversity must be honored, recognizing that dignity looks different across communities.
  • Self-determination is key—clients should be empowered to make their own choices and take control of their lives.
  • Balancing individual and societal needs is part of the role; social workers must navigate tensions between personal rights and broader social responsibilities in a respectful, ethical way.

Ultimately, dignity means treating people not just as clients or cases, but as whole human beings with stories, strengths, and the right to be heard and valued.

Spending time on this issue will help:

  • Program staff – support their ideas/tendencies toward greater dignity even if it costs more.
  • Public relations staff – provide language to tell the whole story of the people we serve.
  • Fund raising staff – deliver compelling case points.
  • Executive leadership – Provide compelling rationale for board members, donors, and team members for investing in activities that provide greater dignity; support organizational values; provide transparency and live by example.
  • Board of Directors – deliver clarity about values
  • Grant reviewers – uphold values common to many grant makers
  • Funders of food security efforts – deliver set of ideas and specific ways to make a difference

 

Values: Curiosity, Integrity
4-part food security scorecard: Access, Utilization, Stability

Why Dignity Works

Builds Trust: People are more likely to engage with services and follow through when they feel respected.

Reduces Trauma: Dignity-centered environments minimize psychological harm, which supports long-term recovery and reintegration.

Encourages Responsibility: Empowering individuals fosters accountability and personal growth.

Improving dignity in food distribution isn’t just about what’s given—it’s about how it’s given.

Here are some powerful, research-backed recommendations to help your team elevate the experience for those you serve:

Build Trust Through Relationships

  • Engage personally: Go beyond transactions. Regularly check in with community partners and recipients to understand their evolving needs.
  • Ask, don’t assume: Involve the community in shaping the distribution model. What do they want? What feels respectful to them?

 

Offer Choice and Cultural Relevance

  • Provide options: Let people choose from available foods rather than handing out pre-packed bags. This fosters autonomy and respect.
  • Honor cultural preferences: Include foods that reflect the cultural backgrounds of your recipients. This affirms identity and dignity.

 

Shift from Quantity to Quality

  • Focus on emotional and practical value: Dignity includes how food makes people feel—safe, respected, and cared for—not just how much they receive.
  • Include fresh and familiar items: Fresh produce, recognizable brands, and even occasional comfort foods can make a big difference.

 

Create Welcoming Environments

  • Design with dignity in mind: Set up distribution spaces that feel inviting, not clinical. Avoid long lines or public exposure that may feel stigmatizing.
  • Train volunteers in empathy: A warm greeting and respectful tone go a long way in preserving dignity.

 

Use Data to Serve Better

  • Combine feedback with mapping tools: Use GIS or similar data to identify underserved areas and tailor your outreach accordingly.
  • Track preferences and outcomes: Monitor what foods are most appreciated and adjust your sourcing accordingly.

How KBDB Produces Trustworthy Insight

Know Better Do Better (KBDB) is a learning-and-doing community focused on ending food insecurity in the United States. We help changemakers make better decisions by researching, analyzing and presenting widely available information in appropriately curated and tailored formats.

Food insecurity is complex. Evidence can be messy, incomplete, or contested. People deserve work that is careful with facts and careful with human dignity. This page explains how KBDB approaches research and synthesis, how we use AI responsibly, and the standards we apply before we share anything publicly.

 

What we do (and what we do not)

What KBDB does

  1. Produces evidence-first, dignity-first materials that support learning, planning, and better conversations
  2. Helps partners and members orient quickly to what the evidence shows, where it is uncertain, and what trade-offs exist
  3. Builds shared understanding across sectors working on food insecurity
  4. Leverage technology to share information, innovation, and better practices across communities
  5. Makes relevant information widely available to the AI universe to keep it accurate, updated, and appropriate for the field

 

What KBDB does not do

  1. Is not a technology company and does not build proprietary models or platforms
  2. Does not replace human judgment with automation
  3. Does not publish or present AI-generated content without human review
  4. Does not exist to persuade people into a single ideology; exists to support better decisions

 

Our lens on food insecurity

Across every Critical Topic, KBDB uses a consistent set of dimensions to avoid narrow explanations and to surface real-world trade-offs:

  1. Availability: Is there enough food?
  2. Access: Can people obtain it (cost, distance, time, transportation)?
  3. Utilization: Can food be safely used and converted into health (nutrition, preparation, health conditions)?
  4. Stability: Are conditions consistent over time, or disrupted by shocks?
  5. Agency: Do people have choice and control in how they meet their needs?
  6. Sustainability: Can progress last without creating new harm?

This lens does not “pick winners.” It helps us ask better questions and present clearer, more complete insight.

 

What “evidence-first” means at KBDB

Evidence-first means we do more than collect sources. We apply a consistent discipline to how claims are handled and how uncertainty is communicated.

In practice, that means:

  1. We start with baseline facts from credible, method-transparent sources whenever possible
  2. We separate what is known from what is inferred and what is debated
  3. We name uncertainty, limitations, and missing data instead of smoothing them over
  4. We avoid single-source conclusions when evidence is mixed or populations are undercounted
  5. We use language that respects the dignity of people experiencing food insecurity

 

From question to insight

KBDB’s work follows a repeatable, human-led approach designed to reduce blind spots and increase usefulness.

  1. Start with a real decision or question. We clarify who needs the insight, what it will be used for, and what would make it genuinely helpful.
  2. Define terms and apply our lens. We establish definitions, relevant dimensions, and the equity risks that matter for interpretation.
  3. Anchor in baseline facts. We begin with trusted reference sources that publish primary data, peer-reviewed research, audited oversight, or method-transparent analysis.
  4. Triangulate across different types of evidence. We draw from multiple types of evidence (data, research, program experience, lived experience research, and operational realities) to reduce blind spots and avoid false certainty.
  5. Use technology to assist synthesis. AI can help organize large volumes of material, summarize, draft structured outlines, and flag gaps or inconsistencies for review. These outputs are drafts, not decisions.
  6. Apply human judgment and review. Human leads interpret the evidence, assess limitations, choose framing, and decide what is appropriate to publish. Accountability stays with people.
  7. Publish with quality checks and date-stamped updates. We date-stamp and update materials as evidence changes. When topics evolve quickly, we revisit sources and revise accordingly.

KBDB uses AI as a behind-the-scenes support layer to improve consistency and efficiency. AI helps us move faster while reinforcing expectations for clarity, documentation, and discipline.

AI can help with:

  1. Organizing and clustering sources
  2. Summarizing and structuring drafts
  3. Highlighting gaps, contradictions, or missing context for humans to review

AI does not:

  1. Decide what KBDB believes, endorses, or publishes
  2. Replace subject matter expertise, community voices, or partner accountability
  3. Make judgments about people or communities
  4. Publish directly to members or the public

All outputs require human review before release.

 

Fairness, balance, and dignity safeguards

KBDB is politically agnostic and nonpartisan. Fairness does not mean every viewpoint is equally evidence-based. It means we apply a consistent evidence standard and clearly label what is fact, what is interpretation, and what is context.

Safeguards we use include:

  1. Single credibility bar across narratives and viewpoints
  2. Checking who is missing from the data so we do not overgeneralize from incomplete or biased datasets
  3. Lived experience inclusion when stigma, access barriers, or undercounting are likely
  4. Conflict awareness so vendor claims or advocacy claims are validated before being treated as fact
  5. Clear labeling of uncertainty, debate, and limitations
  6. Dignity-first framing to avoid stigmatizing language and deficit narratives
  7. Extra review when content is ethically sensitive or high-risk

 

How we choose and maintain sources

KBDB relies on a curated mix of:

  1. Publicly available data
  2. Peer-reviewed research
  3. Program and policy documentation
  4. Lived experience research and other method-transparent qualitative work

We prioritize sources that are widely trusted, transparent about methods, and clear about limitations. We review sources regularly and update our materials when underlying evidence changes.

 

What people receive from KBDB

KBDB produces materials designed to be used, not admired. Examples include:

  1. Critical Topic Overviews: Plain-language summaries of what the evidence says, what is uncertain, and where trade-offs exist.
  2. Curated Source Packs: Short annotated bibliographies that help people orient quickly and read further.
  3. Role-specific briefs: Implications for program leaders, funders, healthcare, policy, and community delivery.
  4. Conversation prompts: Questions and framing that support respectful, productive dialogue across roles and viewpoints.
  5. Optional viewpoint context companions: Clearly labeled narrative context to support understanding of the environment, not persuasion.

 

A note on transparency

This page is meant to explain how KBDB works in a way that is useful to the public. It is not an inventory of internal tools, prompts, or partner materials. Some operational details are shared directly with partners when relevant, but we do not publish confidential workflows or partner-provided information.

 

Why this approach matters

Ending food insecurity requires better decisions, not louder arguments. KBDB exists to help people see the system more clearly, engage evidence with humility, and act with care for the people most affected.

If you want to partner with KBDB or learn more about our Critical Topics, you can explore our work and connect with our team:

  1. Explore Critical Topics: Food Security Forum
  2. Partner with KBDB: admin@kbdbhub.com or Contact Us
  3. Join the KBDB community: Contact Us

 

Last updated: January 1, 2026.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Donec mauris arcu, interdum sit amet est sit amet, imperdiet dapibus metus. Pellentesque sit amet enim ac mauris tempus dapibus vel a odio. Vestibulum eleifend libero tincidunt magna dignissim, vel laoreet elit dapibus.

Nulla convallis nunc vitae turpis vestibulum, vel accumsan libero feugiat. Pellentesque odio nulla, laoreet in lacinia a, bibendum quis ante. Nulla dignissim neque ac gravida dictum. Pellentesque orci erat, consectetur vitae diam id, sagittis blandit risus. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Nullam consequat, dui faucibus vehicula condimentum, enim neque gravida velit, eu mattis ante purus nec ante. Nulla dignissim mattis luctus.

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Donec mauris arcu, interdum sit amet est sit amet, imperdiet dapibus metus. Pellentesque sit amet enim ac mauris tempus dapibus vel a odio. Vestibulum eleifend libero tincidunt magna dignissim, vel laoreet elit dapibus.

Nulla convallis nunc vitae turpis vestibulum, vel accumsan libero feugiat. Pellentesque odio nulla, laoreet in lacinia a, bibendum quis ante. Nulla dignissim neque ac gravida dictum. Pellentesque orci erat, consectetur vitae diam id, sagittis blandit risus. Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit. Nullam consequat, dui faucibus vehicula condimentum, enim neque gravida velit, eu mattis ante purus nec ante. Nulla dignissim mattis luctus.

Gerry Brisson

Founding Partner, Changemaker

Ryan Hoyle

Founding Partner, Changemaker

Dr. Phil Knight

Founding Partner, Changemaker

Across America, communities face the toxic stress of food insecurity. Meanwhile, hardworking champions from every corner of the country, from nonprofits to farmers, are doing their very best to make a difference. But when you’re heads down, it becomes difficult to look up and see the whole picture.

That’s where Know Better Do Better comes in. We’re the changemakers uniting leaders, organizations, and everyday people to drive the informed conversations and credible solutions that will shape the next generation of impact. Whether you have a title, a degree, or just love for your neighbor, we’re here to help everyone maximize their impact in the fight to end this crisis once and for all. Let’s collaborate | make change | create a difference.