Low-income Hoosiers are about to get a whole lot hungrier.
At least, that’s the concern of state advocates and national researchers focused on combatting food insecurity after Congress decided to cut funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, earlier this month.
“We anticipate that folks will start penny pinching and seeking alternate sources even before the cuts come online. But I think we’ll also see a lot of folks who just decide, ‘My gosh, you already made me do all this paperwork and it’s basically a pittance. I’m not making enough money at work; I don’t have time to jump through these hoops,’” said Mark Lynch, the director of advocacy at the Indy Hunger Network. “I think that’s our biggest fear: that hunger will increase for all of those reasons.”
The latest estimate projects that the federal government will save between $5.7 billion and $6 billion each year on SNAP, starting in fiscal year 2028 because it is shifting some costs to states. New work requirements for recipients, which start two years earlier, will trim federal spending by another $68.6 billion.
That delayed impact will prolong uncertainty for the experts, but means that millions of enrollees won’t feel the brunt of the cuts until after the critical midterm elections — which some critics say is a political calculation to retain a Republican majority in Congress. However, it will take states some time to implement the new changes required under the federal budget bill.
Some of the savings come from shifting the cost to states and penalizing states with error rates above 6% — which also includes underpayments.
“I think a lot of people are very concerned about this because they’re putting states in a very difficult bind,” said Erica Kenney, an associate professor of public health nutrition at Harvard University’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health.
“… Lowering the error rates to 6% means that you need to have some really stronger policies going on,” Kenney continued. “But then, at the same time, they’re going to cut the funding that states get from the federal government for the administrative agencies. So you’re giving these state agencies less resources to address the errors and then punishing them if the errors are too high.”
Kenney and fellow Harvard associate professor of public health, Cindy Leung, emphasized the importance of SNAP and shared their concerns about funding cuts.
“I don’t think there is much out there if you don’t have SNAP. SNAP is irreplaceable. SNAP is the only nutrition assistance program that is under (the U.S. Department of Agriculture) that targets all Americans,” Leung said. “… SNAP has been the main line of defense against poverty and hunger for decades.”
Indiana has 588,184 SNAP beneficiaries across 281,112 households, as of April 2025.
More about SNAP
Previous research indicates that SNAP reduces food insecurity by 30% — and has an even bigger impact on those with severe need, the Harvard experts shared.
Other programs, such as the Women, Infant and Children program or free and reduced price lunches at schools, target specific populations. The latter, however, could also shrink if SNAP enrollment is reduced because local enrollment is used to funnel dollars into the program.
An estimated 38% of SNAP households work and simply don’t make enough to feed their families, said Leung. Those who don’t work include the elderly, those with disabilities and children.
Often, SNAP is used as a last resort because the paperwork poses a barrier, Leung said, and is used for just a few months during times of extreme poverty.
“… People only get SNAP if they’ve really exhausted their other resources — they don’t have any more money in their savings account, they don’t have family or friends that they can ask to borrow money, they can’t find other employment,” Leung said. “When we’ve talked to people on SNAP, we’ve heard continuously that SNAP is a lifesaver. That SNAP has helped them out when they were in their most dire situation.”
Having a well-fed community also reduces the prevalence of chronic disease and cognitive impairment for older adults. During the COVID-19 pandemic, states expanded their SNAP programming and reported drops in food insecurity — only to reverse those gains once eligibility and benefits tightened up again.
SNAP reduces healthy care expenditures and medical costs for participants — even reducing emergency room visits, Kenney added. By getting more and better access to food, pregnant mothers birth babies with higher birth weights, setting their children up for healthier lives.
“Because of past historical events, I really worry about what health disparities and what food insecurity is going to look like in this country,” Leung said.
Some states, like Texas, are already shifting their food insecurity programming in response to SNAP funding cuts. The Lone Star State opted out of a program that feeds families during the summer months because of the cost associated with federal funding uncertainty, according to the Texas Tribune. Cost also played a role in Indiana’s decision to withdraw from the program, also known as SUN Bucks, which deposited a small amount of money onto parents’ benefit cards.
“The decision by the Braun administration not to do SUN Bucks was really the first time that money was taken out of pockets in a very real way,” said Lynch. “We saw families more engaged with summer feeding programs which — good on the state of Indiana — they expanded.”
Still, Lynch said one location outside of Marion County had a two-hour pickup line for summer meals. Fortunately, organizers had enough food but “that’s a pretty good example of what’s going to happen if, across the board, there are 15-20% SNAP cuts for Hoosiers.”
Notably, SNAP doesn’t cover a participant’s full food budget, often covering between two to three weeks of food purchases.
But advocates and researchers alike had concerns about whether non-SNAP programs could effectively close the gap in food insecurity left by cuts, Kenney said.
“SNAP is just really, really effective. The charitable food system is there (and) I think we’re going to see a lot more people relying more on the charitable food system — they’re going to have to,” Kenney said. “I’m sure we’re going to see a lot of very good-hearted, kind-hearted people stepping up and trying to volunteer and help their communities through the charitable food system. But I don’t think it’s going to be enough to counteract the cuts that we’re seeing.”
Indiana opted to keep state funding for food banks flat during the next biennium at $2 million, the rare budget line item that didn’t get slashed following a dismal revenue forecast. This week the Indiana State Department of Agriculture, led by Lt. Gov. Micah Beckwith, announced how the $2 million would be disbursed to Indiana food banks.
What about SNAP-Ed?
One portion of SNAP will be eliminated this September: the SNAP Education line item worth $536 million.
Indiana’s $7.4 million portion is used to fund education programming like cooking classes, guides to budgeting and nutrition-dense recipes.
But the biggest impact could be the loss of a statewide app known as Community Compass that maps out food pantries, stores accepting food benefits and more. First launched in Marion County, a statewide funding boost expanded the app’s boundaries to include all Hoosiers back in 2021.
“All of that comes from SNAP-Ed dollars,” Lynch said. “… we have no idea where (more funding) is going to come from.”
The Indiana Department of Health said it paid Indy Hunger Network $118,847.11 for the Community Compass for federal fiscal year 2025. Plans for the future of the app, however, are uncertain.
Other SNAP-Ed programming, such as that provided by Purdue University’s Extension Service, will also be impacted, though it’s unclear how many staff could lose their positions.
Lynch highlighted other uses, including the Cooking Matters program that uses community kitchens at senior living facilities, jails, women’s shelters and apartment complexes to teach cooking skills and hand out groceries.
“In a perfect world, Congress comes back … and maybe they’ll try to bring that (funding) back up in some type of other legislation,” said Lynch, citing some support for SNAP-Ed among Republicans. “… At this point, the law has been passed. And we’re going to see ramifications from that are going to be devastating to rural, urban and suburban families all throughout Indiana.”
When asked, Leung said she didn’t have a sense of how this aligned with the Make America Healthy Again agenda, as promoted by U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr.
“It does seem very counterintuitive when you eliminate nutrition education funding … because people need to have the knowledge and the awareness as well as the accessibility to healthy foods in order to be healthy and live a healthy lifestyle,” Leung said.
Lynch put it more plainly when speaking about the movement on a state level.
“You’re talking about Making Indiana Healthy Again and, boy, losing those SNAP-Ed dollars is not going to make that happen.”
Kenney noted that SNAP-Ed planning resources are also available to everybody, regardless of whether or not they have federal funding.
“I’m just really worried. I’m worried about what’s going to happen to a lot of households — worried about kids, in particular, but households in general,” summarized Kenney. “This is the largest cut SNAP has ever seen in its history…”
“I think SNAP is undergoing some historically unprecedented changes,” added Leung. “… This is going to have ramifications long past the current administration.”