Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Top Stories

Prescribing Produce, Powering Markets: How D.C. Is Rethinking Food Access As Health Policy

Prescribing Produce, Powering Markets: How D.C. Is Rethinking Food Access As Health Policy

hand holding vegetables

Credit: dcgreens.org

In Washington, D.C., where neighborhood lines often map onto life expectancies, food insecurity has become a pressing public health issue. Wards 7 and 8, with only three full-service grocery stores, sharply contrast with affluent Ward 3’s 15 outlets. That access disparity correlates with a staggering 15-year life expectancy gap between some ZIP codes east of the Anacostia River and wealthier areas to the northwest. This inequality reflects what public health experts call the social determinants of health – non-medical factors, such as access to nutritious food, that shape physical well-being.

A recent survey by the Capital Area Food Bank found food insecurity at 37% overall, disproportionately affecting Black residents in D.C., where four in 10 have struggled to access adequate food. “Where you live in the city profoundly determines your food insecurity and, in turn, your health outcomes,” said Luisa Furstenberg-Beckman, manager for the Produce Rx program at nonprofit D.C. Greens.


As federal nutrition aid is stalled by red tape and grocery deserts persist, local civic-minded organizations are responding with inventive, community-centered approaches. I had the opportunity to speak with two: D.C. Greens and FRESHFARM, each tackling the crisis from different angles with emerging evidence of impact.

Produce Rx: D.C. Greens’ Health-Care Approach

Founded in 2009, D.C. Greens pioneered D.C.’s produce-prescription model in 2012, integrating nutrition directly into health care. Under their Produce Rx program, USDA SNAP-certified providers at 17 clinics prescribe fresh fruits and vegetables to Medicaid patients diagnosed with chronic diet-related illness. Participants receive debit-style cards, loaded monthly ($80–$120 based on household size) for use at approved stores and markets across D.C.

The clinical framing is important: “We are at the intersection of healthcare and food access,” said Furstenberg-Beckman. “Food is medicine” in both preventing and treating conditions like diabetes and hypertension. A mid-year check-in allows providers to measure progress through A1C levels, BMI, and blood pressure.

Early results are encouraging, with 35% of participants showing measurable improvement, according to an internal clinical evaluation. In 2024 alone, 96% used their cards, collectively spending over $750,000 on fresh produce. After enrollment, 85% reported improved food security, and 83% felt more confident in affording healthy meals. The program also provided participants with the flexibility to incorporate various types of produce into their diets. “When people have the money to try new things, they’re able to increase the variety of what they choose,” Furstenberg-Beckman shared, describing a patient who tried kale for the first time – and loved it.

Besides direct impact, D.C. Greens advocates for systemic change. Executive Director Eric Angel emphasizes that the organization uniquely combines advocacy with service, using participant data to push a Medicaid 1115 waiver that would fund produce prescriptions as reimbursable health services. “We have the infrastructure with debit cards and health care partners – we just don’t have the funds to scale it up,” Angel said, calling current federal support for such programs “an idea whose time is coming, but hasn’t fully come.” Until Medicaid pays for nutritious food, the program depends on grants and local philanthropy, both resources that limit scale.

Produce Plus: FRESHFARM’s Community Markets Model

Where D.C. Greens embeds nutrition within clinics, FRESHFARM embeds it within communities, focusing on farmers markets and local food economies. The nonprofit’s flagship Produce Plus program distributes $40 monthly electronic credits to 8,000+ eligible residents from June to September. Cards work at 63 farmers markets and farm stands citywide, including many in low-access neighborhoods. This runs in parallel to federal programs like SNAP and the WIC/Senior Farmers Market Nutrition Program, which in D.C., offer just $30–$50 per year.

Nick Stavely, FRESHFARM’s Director of Incentive Programs, describes Produce Plus as “a triple investment in nutrition, local farmers, and healthy food retail.” In 2024, participants redeemed $990,000 in benefits, a 13% increase over the previous year. A third-party evaluation showed that 98% reported healthier eating habits, echoing national research that links produce incentives to improved diet, blood pressure, and glucose control.

A key advantage is local economic impact. Farmers receive full reimbursement, providing a consistent revenue source that sustains and expands markets. FRESHFARM digitized the process in 2022, moving from paper tokens to prepaid cards. Stavely reported that 58% of families used at least 80% of their funds, and one-third used everything. The program’s value also lies in the user experience. Multilingual outreach, market staff called “champions,” and participant feedback loops have built trust and seamless access.

Demand, however, outstrips funding. In 2024, 35% of eligible applicants (4,717 people) were placed on a waitlist. The program relies on D.C. council budget approvals each year, and while advocacy led to a modest increase in slots last year, many still go unserved. “More people want to participate every year, and the number we can serve is capped by funding,” Stavely acknowledged.

Overlapping Strategies, Shared Hurdles

Despite differing delivery methods, both D.C. Greens and FRESHFARM are addressing the same core challenge: unlocking equitable access to fresh food in neighborhoods that have been historically cut off from it. Their approaches, ranging from clinical integration to community markets, complement each other and underscore the broader truth that food insecurity is best addressed through multi-sector collaboration. Both programs partner with local government, healthcare systems, farmers, and vendors to build ecosystems of support.

However, policy and funding ceilings throttle their full potential. D.C. Greens awaits federal approval for its Medicaid waiver, while FRESHFARM hinges on municipal budget cycles and year-to-year support. Neither program is yet benefiting from federal nutrition incentive programs, such as USDA’s GusNIP, which could extend federal backing to local produce incentives and drive sustainability.

Why It Matters, and What Comes Next

Innovations in treating food as a core component of health are emerging nationwide. Research from Harvard Medical School shows that produce prescriptions can reduce clinical risk markers while reducing healthcare costs. Meanwhile, communities across the country are adopting nutrition incentive programs similar to Produce Plus. However, the success of local innovation depends on policy integration and stable funding.

In D.C., where structural inequity aligns with health disparities, these programs prove what’s possible. As Furstenberg-Beckman said, “When we support folks in accessing healthy food, we’re supporting so many health outcomes – physical, mental, emotional.” Stavely notes that local farmers also benefit, as these programs create jobs, reinvest money in underserved neighborhoods, and foster stronger connections between residents and food producers.

The challenge now is scaling these efforts beyond pilots and across seasons, zip codes, and demographic groups. Expanding Medicaid coverage for nutrition, securing multi-year funding for incentive programs, and integrating produce access into broader healthcare and wellness policy could bridge the gap between interventions and system-level change.

Conclusion: From Pilot to Policy

The stories of Produce Rx and Produce Plus are more than local innovations; they are building blocks for systemic change. By bringing fresh food into clinics and neighborhoods, embedding dignity into service delivery, and centering the economic well-being of local producers, these programs model what community-based solutions can look like at scale.

They also offer particularly civic value: when public resources, nonprofits, and healthcare systems align around a shared goal – ensuring that fresh produce is simply available and affordable – health inequities can begin to shift. D.C.’s experience provides a template for targeted, data-driven, human-centered policy that treats fresh food as a fundamental right rather than a luxury.

The work continues. Healthier grocery access, broader reimbursement structures, and expanded nutritional incentives must now flow from demonstration to mainstream. If these models succeed, they could not only narrow life expectancy gaps in D.C. but also reshape how cities nationwide address the vital connection between food, health, and equity.

Bennett Gillespie is a student at Duke University and a council member of the Duke Program in American Grand Strategy. He is also an intern with the Fulcrum.

The Fulcrum is committed to nurturing the next generation of journalists. To learn about the many NextGen initiatives we are leading, click HERE.

Please help the Fulcrum's NextGen initiatives by donating HERE!

Read More

Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making
Mount Rushmore
Photo by John Bakator on Unsplash

Following Jefferson: Promoting Inter-Generational Understanding Through Constitution-Making

No one can denounce the New York Yankee fan for boasting that her favorite ballclub has won more World Series championships than any other. At 27 titles, the Bronx Bombers claim more than twice their closest competitor.

No one can question admirers of the late, great Chick Corea, or the equally astonishing Alison Krauss, for their virtually unrivaled Grammy victories. At 27 gold statues, only Beyoncé and Quincy Jones have more in the popular categories.

Keep ReadingShow less
A close up of the Immigration and Customs Enforcement badge.

Trump’s mass deportations promise security but deliver economic pain, family separation, and chaos. Here’s why this policy is failing America.

Getty Images, Tennessee Witney

The Cruel Arithmetic of Trump’s Immigration Crackdown

As summer 2025 winds down, the Trump administration’s deportation machine is operating at full throttle—removing over one million people in six months and fulfilling a campaign promise to launch the “largest deportation operation in American history.” For supporters, this is a victory lap for law and order. For the rest of the lot, it’s a costly illusion—one that trades complexity for spectacle and security for chaos.

Let’s dispense with the fantasy first. The administration insists that mass deportations will save billions, reduce crime, and protect American jobs. But like most political magic tricks, the numbers vanish under scrutiny. The Economic Policy Institute warns that this policy could destroy millions of jobs—not just for immigrants but for U.S.-born workers in sectors like construction, elder care, and child care. That’s not just a fiscal cliff—it is fewer teachers, fewer caregivers, and fewer homes built. It is inflation with a human face. In fact, child care alone could shrink by over 15%, leaving working parents stranded and employers scrambling.

Meanwhile, the Peterson Institute projects a drop in GDP and employment, while the Penn Wharton School’s Budget Model estimates that deporting unauthorized workers over a decade would slash Social Security revenue and inflate deficits by nearly $900 billion. That’s not a typo. It’s a fiscal cliff dressed up as border security.

And then there’s food. Deporting farmworkers doesn’t just leave fields fallow—it drives up prices. Analysts predict a 10% spike in food costs, compounding inflation and squeezing families already living paycheck to paycheck. In California, where immigrant renters are disproportionately affected, eviction rates are climbing. The Urban Institute warns that deportations are deepening the housing crisis by gutting the construction workforce. So much for protecting American livelihoods.

But the real cost isn’t measured in dollars. It’s measured in broken families, empty classrooms, and quiet despair. The administration has deployed 10,000 armed service members to the border and ramped up “self-deportation” tactics—policies so harsh they force people to leave voluntarily. The result: Children skipping meals because their parents fear applying for food assistance; Cancer patients deported mid-treatment; and LGBTQ+ youth losing access to mental health care. The Human Rights Watch calls it a “crueler world for immigrants.” That’s putting it mildly.

This isn’t targeted enforcement. It’s a dragnet. Green card holders, long-term residents, and asylum seekers are swept up alongside undocumented workers. Viral videos show ICE raids at schools, hospitals, and churches. Lawsuits are piling up. And the chilling effect is real: immigrant communities are retreating from public life, afraid to report crimes or seek help. That’s not safety. That’s silence. Legal scholars warn that the administration’s tactics—raids at schools, churches, and hospitals—may violate Fourth Amendment protections and due process norms.

Even the administration’s security claims are shaky. Yes, border crossings are down—by about 60%, thanks to policies like “Remain in Mexico.” But deportation numbers haven’t met the promised scale. The Migration Policy Institute notes that monthly averages hover around 14,500, far below the millions touted. And the root causes of undocumented immigration—like visa overstays, which account for 60% of cases—remain untouched.

Crime reduction? Also murky. FBI data shows declines in some areas, but experts attribute this more to economic trends than immigration enforcement. In fact, fear in immigrant communities may be making things worse. When people won’t talk to the police, crimes go unreported. That’s not justice. That’s dysfunction.

Public opinion is catching up. In February, 59% of Americans supported mass deportations. By July, that number had cratered. Gallup reports a 25-point drop in favor of immigration cuts. The Pew Research Center finds that 75% of Democrats—and a growing number of independents—think the policy goes too far. Even Trump-friendly voices like Joe Rogan are balking, calling raids on “construction workers and gardeners” a betrayal of common sense.

On social media, the backlash is swift. Users on X (formerly Twitter) call the policy “ineffective,” “manipulative,” and “theater.” And they’re not wrong. This isn’t about solving immigration. It’s about staging a show—one where fear plays the villain and facts are the understudy.

The White House insists this is what voters wanted. But a narrow electoral win isn’t a blank check for policies that harm the economy and fray the social fabric. Alternatives exist: Targeted enforcement focused on violent offenders; visa reform to address overstays; and legal pathways to fill labor gaps. These aren’t radical ideas—they’re pragmatic ones. And they don’t require tearing families apart to work.

Trump’s deportation blitz is a mirage. It promises safety but delivers instability. It claims to protect jobs but undermines the very sectors that keep the country running. It speaks the language of law and order but acts with the recklessness of a demolition crew. Alternatives exist—and they work. Cities that focus on community policing and legal pathways report higher public safety and stronger economies. Reform doesn’t require cruelty. It requires courage.

Keep ReadingShow less
Just the Facts: Impact of the Big Beautiful Bill on Health Care

U.S. President Donald Trump takes the stage during a reception for Republican members of the House of Representatives in the East Room of the White House on July 22, 2025 in Washington, DC. Trump thanked GOP lawmakers for passing the One Big Beautiful Bill Act.

Getty Images, Chip Somodevilla

Just the Facts: Impact of the Big Beautiful Bill on Health Care

The Fulcrum strives to approach news stories with an open mind and skepticism, striving to present our readers with a broad spectrum of viewpoints through diligent research and critical thinking. As best we can, we remove personal bias from our reporting and seek a variety of perspectives in both our news gathering and selection of opinion pieces. However, before our readers can analyze varying viewpoints, they must have the facts.

What are the new Medicaid work requirements, and are they more lenient or more restrictive than what previously existed?

Keep ReadingShow less
U.S. Constitution
Imagining constitutions
Douglas Sacha/Getty Images

A Bold Civic Renaissance for America’s 250th

Every September 17, Americans mark Constitution Day—the anniversary of the signing of our nation’s foundational charter in 1787. The day is often commemorated with classroom lessons and speaking events, but it is more than a ceremonial anniversary. It is an invitation to ask: What does it mean to live under a constitution that was designed as a charge for each generation to study, debate, and uphold its principles? This year, as we look toward the semiquincentennial of our nation in 2026, the question feels especially urgent.

The decade between 1776 and 1787 was defined by a period of bold and intentional nation and national identity building. In that time, the United States declared independence, crafted its first national government, won a war to make their independence a reality, threw out the first government when it failed, and forged a new federal government to lead the nation. We stand at a similar inflection point. The coming decade, from the nation’s semiquincentennial in 2026 to the Constitution’s in 2037, offers a parallel opportunity to reimagine and reinvigorate our American civic culture. Amid the challenges we face today, there’s an opportunity to study, reflect, and prepare to write the next chapters in our American story—it is as much about the past 250 years, as it is about the next 250 years. It will require the same kind of audacious commitment to building for the future that was present at the nation’s outset.

Keep ReadingShow less