Skip to main content
Back to Top

SSRC Library

The SSRC Library allows visitors to access materials related to self-sufficiency programs, practice and research. Visitors can view common search terms, conduct a keyword search or create a custom search using any combination of the filters at the left side of this page. To conduct a keyword search, type a term or combination of terms into the search box below, select whether you want to search the exact phrase or the words in any order, and click on the blue button to the right of the search box to view relevant results.

Writing a paper? Working on a literature review? Citing research in a funding proposal? Use the SSRC Citation Assistance Tool to compile citations.

  • Conduct a search and filter parameters as desired.
  • "Check" the box next to the resources for which you would like a citation.
  • Select "Download Selected Citation" at the top of the Library Search Page.
  • Select your export style:
    • Text File.
    • RIS Format.
    • APA format.
  • Select submit and download your citations.

The SSRC Library includes resources which may be available only via journal subscription. The SSRC may be able to provide users without subscription access to a particular journal with a single use copy of the full text.  Please email the SSRC with your request.

The SSRC Library collection is constantly growing and new research is added regularly. We welcome our users to submit a library item to help us grow our collection in response to your needs.


  • Individual Author: Finegold, Kenneth; Pindus, Nancy M.; Wherry, Laura; Nelson, Sandi; Triplett, Timothy; Capps, Randolph
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2005

    This report, prepared for the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, reviews existing data sources and prior research on six programs operated by the Department that provide food assistance to American Indians living on or near reservations. The purpose of the review is to help identify future research needs and opportunities to exploit administrative data systems and recurring national surveys. The programs covered are the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR), the Food Stamp Program (FSP), the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), the National School Lunch Program, the School Breakfast Program, and the Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP). Research topics of continuing importance include the impacts of reservation food assistance on health and nutrition, the characteristics that make nutrition education effective on reservations, the dynamics of program participation, and the contribution of tribal administration to program coordination. (Author abstract)

    This report, prepared for the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, reviews existing data sources and prior research on six programs operated by the Department that provide food assistance to American Indians living on or near reservations. The purpose of the review is to help identify future research needs and opportunities to exploit administrative data systems and recurring national surveys. The programs covered are the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR), the Food Stamp Program (FSP), the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), the National School Lunch Program, the School Breakfast Program, and the Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP). Research topics of continuing importance include the impacts of reservation food assistance on health and nutrition, the characteristics that make nutrition education effective on reservations, the dynamics of program participation, and the contribution of tribal administration to program coordination. (Author abstract)

  • Individual Author: Isaacs, Julia; Andrews, Margaret S.
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2008

    This study compares the Food Stamp Program (FSP) with eight other public assistance programs across four measures of program effectiveness—administrative costs, error payments, program access, and benefit targeting. The comparison includes two other USDA nutrition assistance programs, three cash assistance programs, and three programs providing noncash benefits other than food or nutrition assistance. Results show that the FSP and the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) present contrasting patterns. The EITC program has lower administrative costs and higher program access rates than the FSP, but the FSP is more successful in limiting overpayments. Missing information makes it hard to generalize across the other programs, but there is some evidence suggesting that programs with higher errors have lower administrative costs. Low administrative costs also appear to be inversely associated with good program access for recipients. Also, programs that are more highly targeted tend to have higher benefit delivery costs. (author abstract)

    This study compares the Food Stamp Program (FSP) with eight other public assistance programs across four measures of program effectiveness—administrative costs, error payments, program access, and benefit targeting. The comparison includes two other USDA nutrition assistance programs, three cash assistance programs, and three programs providing noncash benefits other than food or nutrition assistance. Results show that the FSP and the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) present contrasting patterns. The EITC program has lower administrative costs and higher program access rates than the FSP, but the FSP is more successful in limiting overpayments. Missing information makes it hard to generalize across the other programs, but there is some evidence suggesting that programs with higher errors have lower administrative costs. Low administrative costs also appear to be inversely associated with good program access for recipients. Also, programs that are more highly targeted tend to have higher benefit delivery costs. (author abstract)

  • Individual Author: Logan, Christopher; Klerman, Jacob Alex
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2008

    The total cost of State administrative expenses (SAE) in the Food Stamp Program (FSP) was $5.5 billion in FY 2007. (On October 1, 2008, the Food Stamp Program will change its name to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP). While the Federal Government pays 100 percent of the cost of food stamp benefits, SAE are shared about 50/50 between the States and the Federal Government. These costs vary substantially between States. While the national average SAE was $469 per case in FY2007, State averages ranged from $169 in South Carolina to $1,169 in California. This study examines the feasibility of assessing causes of variation in SAE by addressing two fundamental sets of questions: Is it possible to measure SAE consistently across States to credibly assess the degree of variation? Are alternative ways to measure SAE needed? If so, what level of effort is needed? Can SAE variation be explained in the absence of a controlled experiment? If yes, what are the alternative approaches? Which are recommended? (author abstract)

    The total cost of State administrative expenses (SAE) in the Food Stamp Program (FSP) was $5.5 billion in FY 2007. (On October 1, 2008, the Food Stamp Program will change its name to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program or SNAP). While the Federal Government pays 100 percent of the cost of food stamp benefits, SAE are shared about 50/50 between the States and the Federal Government. These costs vary substantially between States. While the national average SAE was $469 per case in FY2007, State averages ranged from $169 in South Carolina to $1,169 in California. This study examines the feasibility of assessing causes of variation in SAE by addressing two fundamental sets of questions: Is it possible to measure SAE consistently across States to credibly assess the degree of variation? Are alternative ways to measure SAE needed? If so, what level of effort is needed? Can SAE variation be explained in the absence of a controlled experiment? If yes, what are the alternative approaches? Which are recommended? (author abstract)

  • Individual Author: Gundersen, Craig; Ziliak, James
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2014

    In 2012, nearly 16 million U.S. children, or over one in five, lived in households that were food insecure, which the U.S. Department of Agriculture defines as “a household-level economic and social condition of limited access to food.” Even when we control for the effects of other factors correlated with poverty, these children are more likely than others to face a host of health problems, including but not limited to anemia, lower nutrient intake, cognitive problems, higher levels of aggression and anxiety, poorer general health, poorer oral health, and a higher risk of being hospitalized, having asthma, having some birth defects, or experiencing behavioral problems. Many government programs aim explicitly to reduce food insecurity, including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the National School Lunch Program (NSLP), the School Breakfast Program (SBP), the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), and the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP). (Other social safety-net programs - for example, the Earned Income Tax...

    In 2012, nearly 16 million U.S. children, or over one in five, lived in households that were food insecure, which the U.S. Department of Agriculture defines as “a household-level economic and social condition of limited access to food.” Even when we control for the effects of other factors correlated with poverty, these children are more likely than others to face a host of health problems, including but not limited to anemia, lower nutrient intake, cognitive problems, higher levels of aggression and anxiety, poorer general health, poorer oral health, and a higher risk of being hospitalized, having asthma, having some birth defects, or experiencing behavioral problems. Many government programs aim explicitly to reduce food insecurity, including the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the National School Lunch Program (NSLP), the School Breakfast Program (SBP), the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC), and the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP). (Other social safety-net programs - for example, the Earned Income Tax Credit - can also help alleviate food insecurity by increasing household income.)

    The fact that food insecurity remains so high even though the government spent over $100 billion on the various federal food-assistance programs in fiscal year 2012 poses a significant policy challenge. Food insecurity rates remain stubbornly high for a number of reasons. One is that we don’t fully understand what causes food insecurity or how food assistance and other programs can help alleviate it. Food insecurity has been researched extensively, and this research has helped policy makers and program administrators better address the problem. However, relatively little research has looked at what causes food insecurity among children in the first place, or the effectiveness of public policies, especially on more severe forms of food hardship. In this policy report, we highlight new research that seeks to fill this gap. (author abstract)

  • Individual Author: Executive Office of the President of the United States
    Reference Type: Report
    Year: 2015

    The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is the cornerstone of U.S. efforts to alleviate hunger by supplementing the food budgets of low-income households. The large majority of SNAP recipients are children, working parents, elderly Americans, and people with disabilities. SNAP has also played an important role in lifting millions of people—especially children—out of poverty for the past five decades. This report provides an overview of the problem of food insecurity in the United States and the important role that SNAP plays in addressing it.

    A growing body of high-quality research shows that SNAP is highly effective at reducing food insecurity, and, in turn has important short-run and long-run benefits for low-income families. SNAP’s benefits are especially evident and wide-ranging for those who receive food assistance as children; they extend beyond the immediate goal of alleviating hunger and include improvements in short-run health and academic performance as well as in long-run health, educational attainment, and economic self-sufficiency.

    Despite...

    The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is the cornerstone of U.S. efforts to alleviate hunger by supplementing the food budgets of low-income households. The large majority of SNAP recipients are children, working parents, elderly Americans, and people with disabilities. SNAP has also played an important role in lifting millions of people—especially children—out of poverty for the past five decades. This report provides an overview of the problem of food insecurity in the United States and the important role that SNAP plays in addressing it.

    A growing body of high-quality research shows that SNAP is highly effective at reducing food insecurity, and, in turn has important short-run and long-run benefits for low-income families. SNAP’s benefits are especially evident and wide-ranging for those who receive food assistance as children; they extend beyond the immediate goal of alleviating hunger and include improvements in short-run health and academic performance as well as in long-run health, educational attainment, and economic self-sufficiency.

    Despite SNAP’s positive impact, food insecurity remains a serious problem for millions of American households—including nearly one in five households with children. In fact, a growing body of evidence suggests that the benefits are, if anything, too low to allow a family to purchase an adequate, healthy diet. One manifestation of this is the fact that the current level of benefits often cannot sustain families through the end of the month—causing children to go hungry and endangering their health, educational performance, and life chances. Recent research suggests that modestly higher benefit levels would lead to further reductions in food insecurity, and to a wide range of additional short-run and long-run health, educational, and economic benefits (author abstract)

Sort by

Topical Area(s)

Popular Searches

Source

Year

Year ranges from 2005 to 2018

Reference Type

Research Methodology

Geographic Focus

Target Populations