This study sought to describe racial disparities in food insecurity, food pantry use, and barriers to and experiences with food pantries during the first year of the COVID-19 pandemic. We surveyed 2928 adults in Massachusetts regarding food access in the year before and during the first year of the pandemic. Weighted multivariable logistic regression models assessed racial differences in barriers to and experiences with pantry use during the pandemic. Black and Latino adults experienced the highest prevalence of food insecurity and pantry use. Additionally, Black and Latino adults reported more barriers to, but less stigma around, pantry use compared to White adults. Latino adults were less likely to know about pantry hours/locations and encounter staff who spoke their language. Black and Latino adults were also more likely to find pantry hours/locations inconvenient and have difficulty with transportation. The COVID-19 pandemic resulted in increased food insecurity, and food access inequities persisted. Programmatic policies to improve pantry access in communities of color could include increasing the hours/days that pantries are open, increasing bilingual staff, providing transportation or delivery, and creating multilingual public awareness campaigns on how to locate pantries.

Background/Objectives: Many individuals facing food insecurity make tradeoff decisions between spending money on food or other basic needs. In addition, many engage in coping strategies to stretch food budgets or make food last longer. There is limited data on how participation in food assistance programs is associated with use of tradeoffs or coping strategies among households experiencing food insecurity. Methods: A secondary analysis of 2021, 2022 and 2023 cross-sectional state-wide survey on food access, including questions on use of tradeoffs and coping mechanisms, and participation in food assistance programs (Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, school meals or food pantries). Prevalences of tradeoffs and coping strategies by food assistance use were determined. Multivariable logistic regression models determined odds of tradeoffs and coping strategies reported by food-insecure households. Results: Overall, 85% of respondents reported making any tradeoffs and 90% reported any coping strategy use in the prior year. Any food assistance program participation was associated with higher prevalences of making any tradeoff compared to not participating in food assistance programs (89% vs. 78%, p < 0.001) and a higher prevalence of engaging in any coping strategy (92% vs. 84%, p < 0.001). Food assistance participation was associated with increased odds of making any tradeoff (OR 1.82 95% CI 1.39, 2.39) or any coping strategy (1.85, 95% CI 1.22, 2.80). Conclusions: Meeting food assistance program income eligibility requirements is likely a marker of poverty that extends beyond food insecurity. Food assistance is necessary but insufficient to meet family needs.