The Congressional Record is a unique source of public documentation. It started in 1873, documenting nearly all the major and minor policies being discussed and debated.
“WIC ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS” mentioning the U.S. Dept of Agriculture was published in the House of Representatives section on pages H5246-H5247 on July 20, 2011.
The publication is reproduced in full below:
WIC ADMINISTRATIVE COSTS
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Chair recognizes the gentleman from California (Mr. Farr) for 5 minutes.
Mr. FARR. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to clarify a mischaracterization of the administrative costs of the supplemental nutrition program for Women, Infants and Children, commonly known as WIC.
It's interesting, you can come down here to the floor or speak in committee, and we are protected as Members of Congress to say anything we want. It isn't required that everything we say is factually correct. Sometimes those mischaracterizations, misstatements get into the record. And in this case, the complaint or the statement in subcommittee and full committee and even in debate here on the floor of the Agriculture appropriations bill, it was asserted that the administrative costs in this program are up to 40 percent of the total cost of WIC, this is a misstatement of fact, although it was included in the report language and it was adopted by the committee.
So I come today to point out that the 40 percent administrative cost claimed by the majority is based on selective data from a 2008 Brookings Institute report. It didn't come from the Department of Agriculture, which administers the program. The Brookings report collapsed several legislative mandated nonmonetary programs, including the education of nutrition, the requirement that we support and inform people on how to do proper breast feeding, other client services, issues like health care referrals, even immunization screenings, these were counted as administrative costs when they are mandated by us in Congress to be carried out. They are programmatic costs, and it wasn't proper for the Brookings report to include those as administrative costs.
Breast feeding, nutrition education, and immunization screening are vital programs which improve birth outcomes and reduce the incidence of health problems for WIC participants. They should not be categorized as administrative costs for the purpose of budgeting.
So today, I would like to point out in a recent letter to our Subcommittee on Agriculture Appropriations, of which I am the ranking member, from the Secretary of Agriculture, Secretary Vilsack, and I will include this letter at the end of my comments today, he notes that the food and nutrition service delivers its program management and actual administrative costs at a steady 9.09 percent rate, far less than the 40 percent purported in the Brookings Institute report and included in the committee report.
WIC is effective in improving the health of pregnant women, new mothers and their infants. I feel it is important to clarify that the WIC program is meeting its mission. It is meeting the law to safeguard the health of low-income women, infants, and children who are at nutrition risk by providing nutritional food and supplemental diets and information on healthy eating and referrals to other health care services.
As Members of Congress, we should not do the program any further disservice by erroneous figures being included in the report. So today, Mr. Speaker, I insert in the Record the letter from Secretary Vilsack pointing this out and to make the record clear that the WIC program is indeed being administered very soundly and fiscally conservatively.
U.S. Department of
Agriculture,
Washington, DC, July 14, 2011.Hon. Sam Farr,Ranking Member, Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural
Development, Food and Drug Administration and Related
Agencies, House of Representatives, Longworth House
Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Congressman Farr: Thank you for your work on behalf of the Department of Agriculture's (USDA) appropriations for fiscal year (FY) 2012. I appreciate the difficult decisions and choices that were before you and the Committee.
As identified in the Statement of Administration Policy, the Administration has serious concerns with H.R. 2112; however, I wanted to weigh in specifically on what I perceive as misstatements regarding administrative costs for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC). I understand that during full committee debate and on page 43 of the committee report, selected data from a 2008 Brookings Institute report were referenced, giving the impression that administrative costs in the WIC Program are over 40 percent of Federal expenditures for the program. The true figure is much lower.
Beyond simply providing assistance in the form of supplemental food benefits, WIC provides low-income mothers, infants, and children with other legislatively mandated non-monetary program benefits, including nutrition education, breastfeeding support, and other client services such as healthcare referrals and immunization screening, which improve birth outcomes and reduce the incidence of health problems for WIC participants. The Brookings Institute report collapses these important additional benefits under the category of administrative costs. However, these legislatively mandated program benefits provided to participants should not be classified as administrative costs.
For reference, I asked USDA's Food and Nutrition Service to provide me with a breakdown of the Federal cost of food benefits, non-monetary program benefits and administrative expenses for FY 2010. I am sharing this information with you to correct the record and so that you can share it with your colleagues:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Percentage of
Category Obligations obligations
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Supplemental Food Benefits........ $4,561,570,027 70.44%
Nutrition Services and Admin.
(NSA):
Additional Benefits:
Nutrition Education....... 418,437,331 6.46%
Breastfeeding Support..... 149,133,594 2.30%
Other Client Services..... 758,015,711 11.70%
Program Management............ 588,984,767 9.09%
-------------------------------------
Total Nutrition 1,914,571,403 29.56%
Services & Admin.
(NSA)................
-------------------------------------
Total Food and NSA.... 6,476,141,430 100.00%
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I consider the category of program management, which is 9.09 percent of total Federal obligations, to be the true measure of administrative costs needed to deliver the complete suite of benefits to WIC participants. This percentage has remained consistent over the past 5 years.
It is my hope that this will clear up any misunderstanding regarding administrative costs in WIC, and I look forward to working with you in the future. A similar letter is being sent to Congressmen Jack Kingston, Harold Rogers, and Norman Dicks.
Sincerely,
Thomas J. Vilsack,Secretary.
____________________