As Congress debates federal spending reductions, one program under consideration for cuts is the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program-Education (SNAP-Ed). Officially known as the USDA’s National Nutrition Education and Obesity Prevention Grant Program, SNAP-Ed is the educational component of the broader SNAP program..Although it represents less than 0.5 percent of the overall SNAP budget, SNAP-Ed has played a meaningful role in supporting healthier dietary behaviors and lifestyle habits among low-income individuals and families. Reducing or eliminating its funding would likely affect the program’s ability to deliver nutrition education and community-based support, potentially reversing progress already made in chronic disease prevention and public health equity.
SNAP-Ed offers free nutrition education, cooking demonstrations, and workshops on topics including food safety, budgeting, and physical activity. Beyond direct education, the program also supports broader community initiatives—for example, public health campaigns and partnerships with local institutions to improve access to nutritious food and environments that encourage active living.
Despite its relatively modest budget, less than half a billion dollars annually, SNAP-Ed broadly reaches approximately 90 million low-income Americans, amounting to a cost of about $5.15 per person each year. The program is designed to promote long-term health outcomes and cost savings by encouraging preventive health behaviors and reducing risk factors for chronic illnesses such as diabetes and heart disease.
Over the last three decades, SNAP-Ed has become the largest federally funded nutrition education initiative in the United States. In 2022, it directly served 1.8 million individuals through its education programs and collaborated with more than 29,000 community organizations at over 300,000 sites across the country. The program targets populations most at risk for diet-related health disparities, including children, older adults, and communities of color.
A key aspect of SNAP-Ed’s effectiveness is its community-based model. Rather than operating in isolation, the program partners with schools, local food retailers, public health agencies, and other institutions to improve the environments in which people make food and lifestyle decisions. This might include assisting schools in offering healthier meals, working with corner stores to stock fresh produce, or supporting safer spaces for physical activity.
Research has affirmed the program’s outcomes. A 2024 review published in the Journal of Nutrition Education and Behavior highlighted the effectiveness of SNAP-Ed’s use of standardized evaluation frameworks to track behavioral changes such as increased fruit and vegetable consumption, improved food resource management, and more regular physical activity. The study also pointed to the program’s network of federal, state, and local partnerships as a major factor in its reach and sustainability.
SNAP-Ed has also demonstrated its adaptability during public health emergencies. In Flint, Michigan, during the lead water crisis, SNAP-Ed supported residents with nutrition information that could mitigate lead absorption and collaborated with local agencies on food safety education. During the COVID-19 pandemic, the program provided communities with information on health guidelines, helped address food supply issues, and supported continuity of education during lockdowns.
In New York State, SNAP-Ed is implemented by a network of regional and community-based organizations, including the Cornell Cooperative Extension. The program operates in both urban and rural settings—working in schools, farmers markets, food banks, and community centers—to provide education and increase healthy food access. With New York experiencing high rates of chronic illnesses linked to poor nutrition, SNAP-Ed plays a strategic role in public health efforts aimed at prevention.
While the demand for SNAP-Ed services has increased, the program’s funding has remained flat for more than a decade. Much of its continued impact has relied on the commitment and efficiency of state and local partners. Further funding reductions could limit services in areas already experiencing food insecurity and healthcare access challenges.
Nutrition experts and public health professionals have raised concerns about the potential consequences of such cuts. In her blog, Food Politics, Dr. Marion Nestle, Paulette Goddard Professor of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health Emerita at New York University, wrote that “the cost of this program is roughly half a billion dollars a year, not even a rounding error in the federal budget. Cutting it does no good for anyone, undercuts the MAHA (Make America Healthy Again) agenda, and is thoughtless and unnecessary.”
As policymakers evaluate federal spending priorities, understanding the evidence-based outcomes and cost-effectiveness of SNAP-Ed is essential. At a time marked by rising food insecurity and chronic disease rates, programs like SNAP-Ed offer scalable, community-driven solutions that address the root causes of poor health outcomes.
