Dear << Test First Name >>, 

This summer has seen a groundswell of advocacy from bipartisan city and state officials against Trump administration policies. As the Trump Administration and Congressional Republicans continue to shift more responsibility to states — from cutting Medicaid reimbursements, to gutting FEMA and the Department of Education, to rolling back Clean Air Act regulations — these leaders have become increasingly critical messengers in making the case against the unsustainable impacts these policies will have on communities. Let’s dig into two examples. 

OMB Proposed Rule Politicizing Federal Grant Funding Draws Flood of Opposition Comments 

On May 29, the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) proposed a rule that would, if finalized, fundamentally reshape how federal agencies, including USDA, administer grants. It would require senior political appointees to sign off on every discretionary award based on alignment with “presidential policy priorities,” prohibit the use of federal funds in ways that support what the Trump administration labels “unlawful DEI” and “gender ideology,” and expand the criteria for applicant-risk review so agencies may consider broad, undefined, and vague terms, such as “questionable practices.” 

At the close of the comment period on July 13, the Federal Register showed nearly 500,000 largely negative comments. Joining a broad array of advocates, bipartisan city and state officials made it clear that this rule would throw budgets for public services into doubt while cementing Trump’s efforts to use his control over billions of federal dollars to force organizations into line with his agenda. 

Congressional leaders on both sides of the aisle have taken note. Senator Susan Collins (R-ME) said, “I don’t think in my time that I’ve been privileged to serve in the Senate, that I have ever seen a rule, a proposed rule, generate that many negative comments.” The Senate, in an overwhelmingly bipartisan vote, passed a Continuing Resolution (CR) before lawmakers left town for the August recess that would fund the government until December 11 and prohibit the administration from finalizing the proposed rule until that date. This CR will now move to the House for consideration. Ultimately, legal action will likely be needed to stop the Trump administration from finalizing this rule, but the messages as to why it would be so harmful seem to be landing with lawmakers. 

Senate Farm Bill Fails to Advance Out of Committee 

On August 6, the Senate Agriculture Committee voted 10-11 along party lines against Chairman John Boozman’s (R-AR) Farm Bill legislative text. This result came thanks to tireless advocacy from coalitions like National Young Farmers, who made clear to leadership and down-dais Democrats that the proposed bill would not help small and mid-sized farmers navigate the current agriculture crisis, nor invest in programs to reduce food and nutrition insecurity. 

In this case, a bipartisan group of 210 U.S. mayors also sent a letter urging senators to delay the steep SNAP administrative and program cost shifts included in H.R. 1 ahead of the Senate Ag Committee Farm Bill vote. Republican Mayor of Columbia, South Carolina, Daniel Rickenmann, who signed the letter, told Politico’s Morning Agriculture (paywalled) that: 

“I had heard the number would be somewhere around $148 million a month to provide the full [SNAP] benefits across the state. We had our food banks, even the business community, worried about employees and families in the community, trying to figure out how we do it. I don’t believe there’s a resource for us to make up that type of funding at the state level. Costs continue to be pushed down from the federal level to the state level to the local level. We can’t tax our way out of this. You’re talking about creating more problems than you’re solving. ” 

While just one anecdote, these comments are a good example of effective base building across differences and political parties. This is work that takes time and investment, but is ultimately how to change narratives and build consensus. Chairman Boozman has expressed his intention to bring the Farm Bill text back to the Ag Committee for a vote in September, meaning advocacy for a durable, bipartisan Farm Bill must not let up. Working with city and state officials on both sides of the aisle and equipping them with research and talking points to push back against SNAP cuts will be key. 

In Case You Missed It

Before you read on for more important policy developments and how advocates are responding, I want to re-up a few exciting happenings at SAFSF.

• We have launched an open call to SAFSF Members to partner with us and host Critical Conversations in 2027. Together, we will create catalytic conversations that strengthen relationships, spark collaboration, and grow investment in resilient, just, and democratic food systems. This series takes the place of the Forum until February 2028. Submit your idea by September 15!

• Sign-ups open Monday, August 31 for our second cohort of SAFSF’s Integrated Capital Community of Practice. If you are interested and want more information, please join us Tuesday, September 29 for a “Report Back” featuring reflections from Cohort 1 participants. 

• We kicked off the third Indigenous Food Systems Community of Practice at the First Nations Development Institute Food Sovereignty Summit this week in Suquamish, Washington. 

• SAFSF Executive Director Clare Fox and I will be at New York Climate Week to connect with partners and kick off a two-year initiative to build funder strategy and alignment around institutional procurement. We’ll be hosting an invite-only meeting in partnership with Builders Vision, which you can learn more about here. Let us know if you’ll be in New York! We’d love to connect. 

• Finally, if you’re a funder and your organization has initiated or increased funding for policy advocacy and movement building in 2026, please add your name to our policy funding challenge. It cannot be overstated how important it is to fund this work every single year—joining the challenge signals to both peer funders and movement partners that you are committed to this work. 

This month, we are shining a spotlight on a new SAFSF member, The Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation. Their Vice President of Programs, Marisa Castuera Hayase, was a guest on The Thirty Percent Project for a conversation on community-driven philanthropy that prioritizes long-term systemic change over short-term interventions.

Marisa oversees a $150 million grant portfolio of grant-making for The Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation in Hawai’i, Baltimore, Pennsylvania, and Israel.  In this interview, Marisa emphasizes the deep interdependence between food systems, housing, and the workforce, advocating for ownership models where those most affected by issues lead the solutions. By focusing on “ʻāina-based” organizations—those that view land stewardship as a critical component of healthcare and economic resilience—she illustrates how supporting holistic programs can successfully address chronic health conditions while fostering intergenerational community well-being. With a family and current history in Hawai’i, she draws on the Hawaiian concept of kīpuka: areas of vegetation spared by lava flows that become starting points for natural regeneration.

The Harry and Jeanette Weinberg Foundation provided an impressive 249-acre grant of land to MA’O Organic Farms, awarded early catalytic funding to Lahaina Community Land Trust, recognized the need to provide funding support for backbone organizing with the Hawai’i Good Food Alliance, and so much more. Listen in for an SAFSF shoutout!

Lawsuit Challenges Unlawful Attempt to Defund the CDFI Fund

On August 14, Inclusive Action for the City and CAMEO Network filed suit against the U.S. Department of the Treasury and the Office of Management and Budget over withheld funding for the Community Development Financial Institutions (CDFI) Fund. Congress appropriated $324 million for CDFI award programs in FY 2025 and again in FY 2026, but roughly $289 million remains undistributed and will permanently expire on September 30, 2026. CDFIs are a key source of affordable capital for small businesses, including farms and food enterprises, in communities traditional lenders often overlook. Represented by Democracy Forward, the plaintiffs are asking the court to act quickly so the funds reach lenders before the deadline.

House Farm Labor Bill Seeks to Expand Exploitative H-2A Program 

On June 30, House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn “GT” Thompson (R-PA-15) introduced the Securing Agriculture’s Workforce Act (SAWA), the latest attempt to overhaul the H-2A guestworker program. This bill would allow H-2A workers to qualify for year-round agricultural work, expand the types of agricultural work that qualify, including reforestation, aquaculture, and livestock work, as well as lower labor costs for farmers and wages for workers. 

While introduced with bipartisan support and endorsements from 400 agricultural groups, including the American Farm Bureau Federation, at least four Republican lawmakers have withdrawn support amid conservative pressure that calls the SAWA an “amnesty” measure. That’s because the bill establishes an H-2A visa pathway for current unauthorized agricultural workers who otherwise meet requirements. Farmworker advocacy organizations, however, point out the real issue: that this bill only serves to expand a fundamentally exploitative program. The United Farm Workers and UFW Foundation warn that SAWA would codify recent farmworker wage cuts, let employers charge workers for housing, and displace U.S. farmworkers from stable jobs. 

A new report copublished by the UCLA Chicano Studies Research Center and the UCLA Latino Policy and Politics Institute examining the growth of the H-2A program in Washington State shows the extent to which local farmworkers have been disproportionately impacted. Drawing on dozens of interviews and surveys, including with many Familias Unidas por la Justicia members, author Rosa María Navarro found that local farmworkers, particularly women, described fewer job opportunities, shorter workweeks, reduced pay, and rising housing and food instability. To address these issues, Navarro recommends expanding labor protections for farmworkers, improving statewide data collection on the farm labor force, closing H-2A loopholes, strengthening oversight of local recruitment requirements, and investing in emergency rental assistance programs for all workers facing economic hardship. 

Photo: UFW Foundation News

DHS Public Charge Rule Deepens Fear and Uncertainty Among Immigrants and Mixed-Status Families

The Department of Homeland Security (DHS) released a final public charge rule in July that rescinds the Biden-era regulation defining when an immigrant may be denied a green card or visa for being “likely to become a public charge.” Rather than replacing that definition, the rule removes it from federal regulations entirely and leaves interpretation to the discretion of the USCIS, which says further guidance will follow. Advocates warn the ambiguity alone will chill participation: for two decades, immigration officials assured families that using SNAP, WIC, and other nutrition programs would not jeopardize their status. The Food Research & Action Center states that the rule disregards comments from FRAC and 724 other organizations, and urges Congress to pass the LIFT the BAR Act to restore access for lawfully present immigrants.

Supreme Court Sides with Monsanto in Pesticide Preemption Decision 

In a 7-2 ruling, the Supreme Court sided with chemical maker Monsanto in Monsanto Co. v. Durnell, ruling that the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) shields pesticide manufacturers from being held accountable in state courts when their products fail to warn of cancer risks. This decision is a major loss for farmers, farmworkers, and rural residents who have developed non-Hodgkin lymphoma and other cancers after long-term exposure to chemicals. 

As Emma Newton, Director of Organizing, Food, Agriculture and Rural Economies at State Innovation Exchange (SiX), writes, the decision is also a direct assault on states’ ability to protect their residents and abandons judicial precedent. But states have clear avenues for recourse. They can ban the use and sale of dangerous pesticides like Paraquat, and explore policies that reduce the risk of pesticide exposure in communities. They can also support bipartisan momentum for legislative change at the federal level. 

Representatives Anna Paulina Luna (R-FL-13), Chellie Pingree (D-ME-1), Thomas Massie (R-KY-4), Rosa DeLauro (CT-03) introduced the Americans vs. Poisonous Pesticides Act, which would amend the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) to preserve state failure-to-warn claims that are consistent with federal pesticide misbranding standards and prevent manufacturers from using EPA registration or label approval as a complete defense against those claims.

For more information on the pesticide industry’s multi-front strategy to win broad legal immunity, review the recording and key takeaways of the webinar co-hosted by SAFSF, Funders for Regenerative Agriculture (FORA), Health and Environmental Funders Network, and Ursa Collective this past April. Our organizations are also collaborating on an invite-only session during New York Climate Week. Corporate Power and Agrochemicals: Coordinating Funder Strategies and Leverage Points will examine how agrochemical corporate power shapes food, farming, climate, biodiversity, public health, and farmer livelihoods, as well as opportunities for greater coordination across key sectors.                                                                         

Photo: Tayfun Coskun/Anadolu via Getty Images/ The Guardian

Federal Court Invalidates SNAP Food Restriction Waivers in Five States 

A federal judge ruled in Aragon v. Rollins that USDA cannot prohibit Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) participants in five states from purchasing certain foods with their SNAP benefits. Specifically, the court found that USDA’s approval of SNAP food restriction waivers for Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Tennessee, and West Virginia was a violation of the Administrative Procedures Act (APA). This ruling, however, does not affect the 17 other states with similarly approved waivers unless USDA withdraws them or a court separately invalidates them. For more details on why the court ruled against USDA in this case and what advocates should know, see this resource from the Food Research & Action Center (FRAC). The Trump administration has appealed the ruling. 

Without guidance from the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services, however, it remains unclear what the ruling means for disbursement of the Trump administration’s Rural Health Transformation Fund. Half of the $50 billion fund is set up as baseline funding based on rural factors and other qualifications. States compete for the remaining $25 billion through SNAP waivers, reinstating the presidential fitness test, requiring nutrition education in medical schools, and other Trump administration priorities.

Attendees of SAFSF and GIH’s SNAP Working Group call in May on this subject will remember that SNAP participants consistently favor incentives for the purchase of fresh food rather than purchasing restrictions and that food restriction waivers also pose significant concerns for grocery retailers. Evaluations to determine how food restriction waivers impact public health are ongoing.

Contamination By Design – How an Industrial Food System has Driven the Cyclospora Outbreak

The Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy’s (IATP) Matt Kinsella-Walsh traces the largest documented cyclospora outbreak in U.S. history back to the structure of the produce industry itself. Chopped iceberg lettuce from a Taylor Farms processing plant has been identified as the source of the primary outbreak, but the piece argues that consolidation, deregulation, and farmworker conditions are what allowed contamination from likely a handful of fields to sicken thousands across the country. Vertically integrated grower-shippers aggregate harvests from many farms into a few central hubs; the four largest fresh-cut salad companies hold 54% of the North American market. Meanwhile, industry lobbying delayed the Food Traceability Rule to 2028, irrigation water testing has been replaced by self-certification, and steep CDC and FDA staffing cuts have hollowed out the agencies responsible for detection and inspection. Because cyclospora spreads through human feces, the piece also connects the outbreak to persistent sanitation failures in the fields, missing or unusable toilets, and piece-rate pay that penalizes bathroom breaks.

Public confidence reflects the strain: a Quinnipiac University national poll released in late July found 55% of registered voters have not much or no confidence in government oversight of food safety, with 30% reporting none at all.

New Landmark Dairy Bill Could Transform and Revitalize Dairy Sector

The Milk from Family Dairies Act, introduced by Senator Peter Welch (D-VT) and cosponsored by Senator Bernie Sanders (I-VT), would establish price floors based on scale of operation so family-scale dairies can cover their costs of production, better balance supply with domestic demand, reduce the sector’s overreliance on export markets, gradually scale down megadairies to restore competition, and invest in rebuilding regional dairy infrastructure. More than three dozen farmer advocacy and dairy groups, including the National Family Farm Coalition (NFFC), Farm Aid, Wisconsin Farmers Union, R-CALF, and the Northeast Organic Dairy Producers Alliance, have endorsed the bill. Fewer than 24,000 dairy farms remain in the U.S., a 40% loss since 2017.

SAFSF Environment & Climate Data Insights Report

Newly launched in 2026, our Data Insights reports explore funding trends within the SAFSF membership and the broader field. Each report draws on data we collect annually from our members. This first report, available to SAFSF members, looks at how environmental and climate funding is understood and deployed across the network, finding that environmental and climate funding is at a historic high, climate change remains a top priority for food and agriculture funders, commitment to racial equity and environmental funding tend to go together, and national funders are the most likely to fund in this area. 

This report is designed for SAFSF Members. If you are not currently a member, we would love to talk more about what membership could mean for you. Please reach out to Holly Hanes, Membership Manager, to get the conversation started.

NSAC and Prospect Partners Analyze Impacts of USDA Staffing Crisis 

Between January 2025 and January 2026, USDA lost approximately 20,000 employees, according to staffing data published by the US Office of Personnel Management. Every USDA agency was affected, and staff losses were spread across the entire nation. An analysis led by the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC) and Prospect Partners, finds that the majority of staff losses (~15,000) can be attributed to the so-called Deferred Resignation Program. Through a Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request, the analysis also confirms that over one-third of Farm Service Agency (FSA) local offices with FSA County employees at the beginning of 2025 experienced a net loss of staff by year’s end, with 42 offices ending the year with no FSA County employees. The Natural Resources Conservation Service (NRCS) also lost 23% of its staff between January 2025 and January 2026. These cuts significantly hinder USDA’s ability to provide direct services to farmers and ranchers. 

Since the report’s release, thousands of remaining USDA employees have received agency relocation letters in keeping with the department’s unpopular reorganization plan, despite a lawsuit filed by a coalition of federal employee labor unions, nonprofits, and local governments to put these plans on hold. 

NSAC continues to urge Congress to use every available tool to address this USDA staffing crisis and pass a bipartisan farm bill that restores the department’s capacity to serve farmers and rural communities. 

Dangerous Heatwaves: Message Insights for Health Communicators, Advocates, and Beyond

New message testing from the communications firm Burness, supported by the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, offers practical guidance for talking about extreme heat in ways that move people toward action. Drawing on a randomized trial with more than 24,000 U.S. adults, the guide recommends naming individual, collective, and policy solutions together. Messages that skip the systemic piece leave audiences seeing heat as a personal problem rather than one requiring government action. Economic and climate framings performed strongest, and plainspoken language outperformed clinical terms. A recent webinar recording and slides provide further information.

Agriculture’s Fossil Fuel Problem Isn’t Just in the Tractor

In a new piece, Jennifer O’Connor of Funders For Regenerative Agriculture (FORA) and Dr. David LeZaks of Ursa Collective argue that philanthropy’s focus on soil carbon and farmer practices misses the force holding industrial agriculture in place: its dependence on fossil-fuel-based fertilizers and pesticides and the consolidated corporate power built around selling them. The piece connects to the Fossil Fuel Economy Zine, a framework developed with Health and Environmental Funders Network (HEFN), the 11th Hour Project, EDGE Funders Alliance, and others to help funders see the toxic fossil economy as a whole. 

Regenerative Food Labels: What’s Behind the Claim?

A growing number of food labels claim to verify that foods are regeneratively grown. But there is no widely accepted definition of regenerative agriculture, and each label offers its own interpretation of what qualifies.  A new Friends of the Earth (FOE) report evaluates how ten labeling programs stack up in terms of phasing out harmful pesticides and synthetic fertilizers, building soil health, verifying farmer practices, and tracking products from farm to shelf. You can also watch FOE’s recent webinar, which covers the impact of pesticides on our food and health, as well as the report’s findings.

SiX Aquaculture Toolkit 

State Innovation Exchange and Don’t Cage Our Oceans have released a toolkit for state legislators working to protect coastal waters from industrial finfish net pen aquaculture, ocean-based operations that raise hundreds of thousands of carnivorous fish in submerged pens, discharging untreated waste, spreading disease to wild populations, and privatizing public ocean space through long-term leases. The toolkit distinguishes between such industrial finfish operations and values-based aquaculture like seaweed and bivalve farming.

The toolkit lays out the science, the federal landscape (including recent court decisions vacating Nationwide Permit 56 and the bipartisan Keep Finfish Free Act), and how states can use the Coastal Zone Management Act’s federal consistency provision to influence projects beyond their own waters. It also includes six legislative templates drawn from real examples, ranging from Alaska’s outright statutory ban to Oregon’s 2025 bill, Washington’s rulemaking process, a draft Massachusetts resolution, Maine’s municipal ordinances, and a sign-on letter to Congress. 

Landmark Study on Food Is Medicine

A randomized study published in JAMA Internal Medicine found that medically tailored meals built on traditional Navajo foods cut hospitalizations by more than 50% among heart failure patients in rural Navajo Nation, with heart failure-specific hospitalizations falling 71%. The MUTTON-HF trial was conducted by the American Heart Association’s Health Care by Food Initiative, the Perelman School of Medicine at the University of Pennsylvania, Mass General Brigham, and Navajo Nation partners. In a statement responding to the findings, Rockefeller Foundation President Dr. Rajiv J. Shah noted the foundation has pledged more than $100 million to Food is Medicine work since 2019, and pointed to projections that medically tailored meals could save $23.7 billion annually. 

SNAP: An Evidence-Based Program to Improve Food Security, Health, and Well-Being

FRAC’s new report synthesizes the research on SNAP’s effects across nutrition, physical and mental health, cognitive development, health care utilization, and costs, and examines how recent policy changes threaten those gains. More than 5 million people have lost SNAP benefits since H.R. 1 was enacted in July 2025, exceeding CBO projections, and the law expands work requirements, shifts costs to states, and eliminates eligibility for several categories of lawfully present immigrants. 

The report also flags the loss of USDA’s Household Food Security Report, the nation’s gold-standard measure of food insecurity for over 30 years, which leaves researchers and advocates without the data to evaluate these changes. Among the findings compiled: the Center on Poverty and Social Policy estimates that every $1 cut in SNAP benefits for families with children costs the nation $14 to $20, driven by poorer child health and lower future earnings.

Webinars

Convenings

Fellowships