Food for Progress — CFDA 10.606 obligation totals

Fifty-nine awards carrying $494.8M

USAspending.gov records $494.8M in obligations on assistance awards tagged 10.606. SpendingVault reprints that catalog total. The listing title is Food for Progress. Commodity and agricultural-development assistance, as the name suggests, can mix donated commodities with development activities; this extract does not split those costs inside the $494.8M. This guide will not invent a tonnage share or a cash-assistance share.

No fiscal year is attached. If an implementing-partner report cites a different Food for Progress total, match the CFDA number before adding that report to $494.8M. Other food-aid listings are other catalog rows. Keep 10.606’s obligation sum on its own line. Fifty-nine awards at this dollar scale is a compact file: larger than a handful of cooperative agreements, smaller than a formula program.

The packet has no median award size. Do not divide $494.8M by 59 and publish the quotient as a typical Food for Progress grant. Amount-sort on the hub is the check. Destination country and commodity type are not in the four-field extract. Award titles on the table are the place to see what USAspending stored.

59 awards on 19 recipient identifiers

Nineteen recipients hold 59 awards. That is a concentrated partner list. Repeat identifiers can mean multi-year agreements or amendments. The packet does not classify the 19 as cooperatives, NGOs, or other eligible entities. Award count is a row count; recipient count is distinct identifiers, not a count of farmer groups overseas.

A 19-name list is short enough to read in full on the program hub. Repeat appearance is a fact about identifiers, not a finding about development results. Tonnage shipped and farm-gate prices are not in this extract. Subawards to in-country partners, if they exist, are not inferred here.

Five states on an overseas food-aid listing

The extract counts 5 states. For a listing named Food for Progress, a five-state footprint is a reminder that USAspending geography follows recorded location fields, which can include a U.S. recipient headquarters rather than every destination country. The packet does not name the five states or split the $494.8M among them.

Five states is not a claim that commodities originated only in those places, and it is not a country table of recipients abroad. It is a coverage count in this extract. If a reader needs a destination country, the 59-row table is the tool. This rollup will not impute export ports or farm counties.

Food-aid obligations are not commodity outlays

USDA commodity-credit accounts, ocean-freight bills, and other food-aid CFDAs are different ledgers. CFDA 10.606’s $494.8M is USAspending assistance-award obligations on this listing. Mixing those sources into $494.8M would build a homemade “all food aid” figure the packet does not support.

Outlays are payments. Obligations are commitments. Commodity awards can obligate in one period and ship on another schedule. This extract does not report outlays or tons. Cite $494.8M as recorded commitments on 59 awards. Do not describe the sum as grain already on the water.

Not a combined food-aid catalog

Other food-assistance listings can sit near 10.606 on the all-programs index because their obligation totals occupy a similar band. Similar scale is not similar statutory authority. Do not add this $494.8M to a neighboring CFDA. Keep Food for Progress on its own catalog row.

Opening the 10.606 table

The Food for Progress program page lists the 59 awards and 19 recipients behind $494.8M. Filter by location if a state is the question; the five-state count will not name them. Agency pages are a different USAspending cut; this packet does not name the awarding agency, so the $494.8M stays on the CFDA card. Tonnage shipped remains a different file than this obligation rollup. Cite $494.8M only as the CFDA 10.606 obligation total on SpendingVault. Tonnage shipped is not this CFDA 10.606 extract. Cite $494.8M only as the obligation total on SpendingVault.

Questions

How much is obligated under Food for Progress CFDA 10.606?

FOOD FOR PROGRESS shows $494.8M in USAspending.gov obligations in SpendingVault’s extract. The figure is a commitment total, not outlays and not a count of tons shipped. The extract does not split commodities from other assistance costs. USAspending.gov obligations on CFDA 10.606 are recorded commitments, not Treasury outlays.

How many Food for Progress awards are in the extract?

The file lists 59 awards and 19 recipients. Award count is a row count; recipient count is distinct identifiers. The packet does not classify those recipients as cooperatives, NGOs, or other entities. USAspending.gov obligations on CFDA 10.606 are recorded commitments, not Treasury outlays.

Which states appear on CFDA 10.606?

The extract counts 5 states but does not name them or split the $494.8M by state. Those states can reflect U.S. recipient headquarters rather than destination countries. Use the 59-row table for recorded location fields. USAspending.gov obligations on CFDA 10.606 are recorded commitments, not Treasury outlays.

Is $494.8M the amount already spent on commodities?

No. Obligations are commitments. Outlays are payments. The $494.8M on CFDA 10.606 is the obligation total. Tonnage, ocean freight, and farm prices are not in this packet. USAspending.gov obligations on CFDA 10.606 are recorded commitments, not Treasury outlays.