An Oklahoma man made people attend a “ghost story” (read: sermon) before getting USDA food boxes. Then he let them take up to 30 at a time.

The ticketed sermon system highlights the pitfalls of a disorganized, multibillion-dollar food aid plan now entering its 10th month of operation. Rather than expand food stamps or use existing federal food aid channels to get food to people in need during the pandemic, the Trump administration last May conjured a brand-new program out of thin air. In the early days of Covid-19, the Farmers to Families Food Box didn’t seem like such a bad idea: USDA hired distributors to purchase produce, meat, and milk; assemble the food into boxes; then deliver them to pantries as part of a “truck to trunk” operation that simultaneously supported farmers who had suddenly lost business and families that had suddenly lost income.

But the agency left it to distributors—skilled in purchasing vegetables but often inexperienced in the world of food aid—to ensure that the nonprofits who received their boxes were following the rules. Some organizations went to heroic lengths to get food to people who needed it, often at their own expense. Others like Hardison’s operation have handed out aid in a slapdash fashion, often without verifying recipients’ needs, and even going so far as to use the program to spread religious beliefs. Almost one year later, it’s not clear the agency’s efforts to strengthen program oversight have done much to discourage bad actors.  

The problems with the Farmers to Families program started before the first food box ever reached a pantry. USDA selected some contractors with no experience in food distribution, including Yegg, Inc., a company that had previously advertised itself as a financial services provider and was later accused of sending $3 million worth of milk to itself. The agency axed a $40 million contract with another company, California Avocados Direct, before it even began assembling boxes. Gaping distribution holes soon became evident, too: The entire state of Maine was excluded from the first round of contracts.

Once distribution began, some food pantries reported that food was rotting in boxes or that the boxes themselves were falling apart. In some cases, promised boxes simply failed to materialize. In others, food banks incurred tens of thousands of dollars of expenses in trucking and labor costs after distributors refused to deliver boxes to individual pantries.

These hiccups had consequences. In the first round of distribution, as car lines at food banks snaked for miles in some areas, more than 1,000 counties received no boxes, even while small churches in rural areas welcomed up to nine truckloads per day. 

Last fall, we reported that the Jehovah’s Witnesses were limiting distribution to those who attended religious services, and encouraging members to take boxes regardless of need. Elsewhere, churches boasted “free food” giveaways on Instagram, with “no questions asked.” There was a massive disconnect between the program’s intent—getting free food quickly to people who needed it while also supporting farmers—and the program’s reality, which looked increasingly like a free for all. 

Members of Congress took note, and the Government Accountability Office recommended USDA evaluate the program in September. The House Select Subcommittee on the Coronavirus Crisis began investigating the food box program over the summer, and the Trump administration eventually tightened requirements for distributors seeking to contract with the agency. Yet the program remains largely intact and ridden with inequities, including these new allegations of discrimination. On January 19, the day before inauguration, the Trump administration announced contractors for a fifth round of food box distribution set to run through April. 

Some of the most basic problems first reported nearly a year ago persist. In mid-February, the failure of a New Jersey-based distributor to deliver boxes to Vermont food banks prompted demands for an investigation by the state’s congressional delegation. Hardison’s proselytizing and flagrant disregard for box-per-family limits, intended to make sure everyone gets food, echo reporting we published in September. And while Hardison brags of multiple truckloads he’s received, Facebook groups dedicated to the program are still flooded with requests from people who are hoping to find food boxes near home. The need for emergency food aid has not abated, but the multibillion-dollar food box program, now in its fifth round, continues to deliver help unevenly. 

Despite the issues, newly sworn-in Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack told Politico on Wednesday that he was convinced the boxes delivered fresh food to a number of areas, “remote areas in particular,” that might not have received vegetables and fruit otherwise. In response to our questions, the agency said it was reviewing the food box program. “Reports like these are one reason why USDA is currently assessing this program to determine its future,” wrote USDA spokesperson Matt Herrick in an email. “The food box effort served some communities well, but continues to face challenges in others, and so as part of our assessment, we are gathering feedback from distributors, nonprofits, and the individuals in communities where assistance is provided in rural and urban areas alike to learn what worked and didn’t.” Herrick added that the agency retains the right to end distributor contracts if it finds issues with performance.

Meanwhile, the program’s shortcomings are immediately detrimental to those who have been counting on it to deliver fresh food.

“The families that need these boxes are already struggling and having a really difficult time,” Stotts, the Oklahoma volunteer, said. “When you put a bunch of hoops and hurdles for people to go through … we miss the people that really need the help, and that’s unfortunate.”