
An infusion of fire aid is changing how the Maui Food Bank does business
That's thanks to an outpouring of disaster relief that boosted the Maui Food Bank's revenues to $77.6 million in fiscal year 2024, an eightfold increase from the year before the Aug. 8, 2023, fires that killed 102 people and left more than 12,000 homeless and struggling to obtain basic necessities. Roughly $65 million of that revenue is donations for wildfire recovery.
The nonprofit has so far spent roughly $15 million to hire more staff, buy more food from local farmers, award grants to the soup kitchens and senior living facilities helping it distribute food and maintain a Lahaina distribution warehouse with an attached grocery store-style experience focused on feeding wildfire survivors with dignity in West Maui.
The agency knows the windfall is likely temporary; it expects to retain only about 10% of the new donors that have poured money into its coffers from around the world.
Anticipating this funding cliff, the nonprofit is holding onto a large chunk of funds as it makes plans to build a 35,000-square-foot home base more than twice the combined size of the three warehouses it currently operates in Kahului, Wailuku and Lahaina.
'A new facility is paramount to serving the community in the best way possible,' Maui Food Bank CEO Lisa Paulson said. 'For one thing, the facility will have loading docks. Currently we don't have any loading docks.'
Maui Food Bank's revenues sprung from about $9.5 million in the fiscal year that ended on June 30, 2023, to $77.6 million in fiscal year 2024, according to its most recent IRS Form 990s. That's more than the combined revenues for the Hawaiʻi Food Bank — which operates on Oʻahu and Kauaʻi — and The Food Basket on the Big Island, which took in $47.4 million and $15 million, respectively.
Paulson, who assumed her role a day after the first anniversary of the fires, said the nonprofit is in talks with two landowners as it narrows the search for a parcel to build its new headquarters and distribution center. She declined to estimate how much the new facility might cost, but said the goal is to strengthen the ability of Maui County's primary safety net for hunger relief to feed residents for years to come.
Improving Disaster Readiness
A new facility has long been on the nonprofit's wishlist. The 2023 wildfires made it apparent that the organization's current setup — three warehouses without loading docks separated by miles — isn't conducive to efficiently serve growing hunger needs or withstand the next disaster, Paulson said.
Food banks have increasingly become key stakeholders in statewide disaster response planning, said Albie Miles, assistant professor of sustainable community food systems at the University of Hawaiʻi West Oʻahu.
It took many federal and state disaster relief agencies, including the Federal Emergency Management Agency, five days to turn up after the fires, Miles said.
Meanwhile, the Maui community, including the food bank, had to step in to fill the vacuum, according to a report by the Maui Emergency Feeding Task Force that was established to address gaping holes in disaster food distribution relief efforts.
'There's not a well coordinated statewide emergency feeding plan so the counties are still really critical in disaster response and food banks need their partners who have the relationships in the communities to really be the ones to get the food to residents who need it,' state food system planner Amanda Shaw said. 'We couldn't feed anybody in any of these disasters without those relationships.'
To that end, Maui Food Bank injected a substantial share of its disaster relief donations into grants to improve the capacity of 170 distribution partners and programs that deliver food from its warehouses in Kahului and Wailuku to people in need. These organizations, including soup kitchens and senior living facilities, play a leading role in developing crucial community relationships and getting food in the hands of people who need it.
Another chunk of the $15 million in disaster funds already spent went directly to 41 local farmers and ranchers who supply the food bank with produce and protein. Mainland imports supply most of the nonprofit's food haul. Before the wildfires, the nonprofit brought in about nine shipping containers of food a year. That shot up to about 65 containers in the year that followed the fires, according to Paulson.
Now the food bank is working to strengthen its ability to respond to the next disaster. The nonprofit also faces the unique challenge of delivering food across water to people on the outer islands of Molokaʻi and Lānaʻi, which are in Maui County.
Paulson said she hopes to address that vulnerability by building food storage on these outer islands to ensure they have access to supplies in the event of a disaster.
Amid Trump Cuts, Food Bank Plots Federal Funding Boost
As disaster funding cools, the Maui Food Bank plans to aggressively seek out federal grant money. Historically, the nonprofit has received a single $50,000 federal grant from the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Emergency Food Assistance Program.
That dollar amount was expected to rise to roughly $1.2 million this year, but those plans were scuttled after the Trump administration canceled grant money from the program.
Maui Food Bank has hired 10 new, full-time employees for a total of 29 — with an average salary of $70,000. New positions funded by disaster relief include a grants manager and a major gifts director. Paulson said she created these key positions to diversify the food bank's revenue sources by aggressively pursuing federal dollars.
Federal money accounts for less than 1% of the nonprofit's annual revenues. Its top funding sources are individual contributions and corporate donors, followed by Maui County, which gives $400,000 annually, and state government grants.
'Even with the cuts that are being made, there's still a lot of opportunities to receive federal support and I don't want to miss those opportunities,' Paulson said.
The Changing Demographics Of Hunger
As wildfire survivors progress in their recovery, the risk of hunger isn't waning but shifting into new demographics. The need for food donations among this group is gently tapering. But it's picking up in a new demographic: working families.
'I think a lot of people have really kind of gone beyond the recovery mode from the fire and they're getting on their feet,' Paulson said. 'What we're seeing is the cost of living being prohibitive to putting fresh, good food on the table for families.'
'We are seeing an uptick in people who are working,' she added. 'And when they get to the end of the month, after paying rent and insurance and schooling and preschool and all of those expenses, we're seeing a new group of people that are really struggling in making really difficult decisions about 'What bill can I pay?' and 'Can we eat tonight?''
Paulson said the food bank has the resources to meet this need. It's considering shifting its hours of operation and distribution points to make it more accessible for these families to get food aid on evenings and weekends.
To overcome the stigma of neediness, the nonprofit is considering adopting a food voucher program so that people who may not be comfortable receiving donated food can feel like they're using the vouchers to purchase it. Instead of handing out brown boxes packed with goods, Paulson said the nonprofit is increasingly adopting a farmers market-style food distribution scheme that allows families to visit outdoor pop-up food booths and take what they need.
___
This story was originally published by Honolulu Civil Beat and distributed through a partnership with The Associated Press.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
27 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Editorial: More unlawful tariffs: Trump has no authority to institute damaging trade barriers
On Friday, Donald Trump followed up a concerning jobs report with massive new global tariffs, driving markets down and once more raising prices on consumers for no reason after weeks of supposed trade negotiations. Like with his first round of import duties, announced in the Rose Garden on his ludicrous April 2 'Liberation Day,' these tariffs are not only chaotic and destructive, but they're illegal. The president is leaning on a 1977 law meant to be invoked for targeted financial actions in certain emergency circumstances to reshape trade globally. Just the day before these newest tariffs were implemented, the administration's lawyers had been grilled by the 11 judges of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit in Washington, who pointed out among other things that the law doesn't even mention tariffs at all. If the plaintiffs, made up of states and businesses, need anywhere to look for inspiration and evidence for their legal arguments, they don't have to look much further than Trump's own ramblings and social media feed, where he constantly tells the whole world that he is engaging in the tariff actions for all manner of reasons completely unrelated to any economic objectives. So far, he's threatened tariffs over Brazil's domestic prosecution of its former president Jair Bolsonaro and over Canada's intent to recognize a Palestinian state, among other things. This is a real disparate set of rationales, but what they have in common is that they are ideological battles probably drawn from something Trump saw on TV and have nothing to do with correcting a supposed trade imbalance with those countries, already an incredibly flimsy argument to begin with. Don't just take our word for it; the Manhattan-based U.S. Court of International Trade — you know, the judicial entity set up specifically and explicitly to have expertise on these matters — already struck down most of Trump's tariff regime on the grounds that it was unlawful. That ruling has been stayed for now, but the evidence just keeps piling on that Trump is significantly exceeding his authority. Unfortunately, even if this insanity were to be fully struck down tomorrow, we've had months of chaos that has indelibly damaged trade relationships as well as general diplomatic relations. The world is not going to wait for the U.S. to hash out its chaos, and other countries are already moving to reorient parts of their manufacturing and trade schemes to circumvent an unreliable United States. Of course, this seems like one more issue headed at some point to the U.S. Supreme Court, perhaps the shadow docket where the court these days like to conduct its unsigned pro-Trump business. It's long since become clear that the high court is more interested in ideological outcomes than the uniform application of the law, but even then, siding with Trump here would be farcical. This is the exact same court that just last year ruled that Joe Biden attempting to clear some student debt by invoking emergency powers in the context of the COVID pandemic — a real global catastrophe that killed countless people and crashed the economy while putting millions out of work — was an unlawful exercise of authority. If that's the case, but Trump is in his rights to wildly alter tariff policies at a whim in service to random political grievances around the world, then the law truly means nothing anymore. Let's stop this madness while we still can, before economic forces take it out of our hands. ___


Fast Company
28 minutes ago
- Fast Company
What the White House Action Plan on AI gets right and wrong about bias
Artificial intelligence fuels something called automation bias. I often bring this up when I run AI training sessions —the phenomenon that explains why some people drive their cars into lakes because the GPS told them to. 'The AI knows better' is an understandable, if incorrect, impulse. AI knows a lot, but it has no intent—that's still 100% human. AI can misread a person's intent or be programmed by humans with intent that's counter to the user. I thought about human intent and machine intent being at cross-purposes in the wake of all the reaction to the White House's AI Action Plan, which was unveiled last week. Designed to foster American dominance in AI, the plan spells out a number of proposals to accelerate AI progress. Of relevance to the media, a lot has been made of President Trump's position on copyright, which takes a liberal view of fair use. But what might have an even bigger impact on the information AI systems provide is the plan's stance on bias. No politics, please—we're AI In short, the plan says AI models should be designed to be ideologically neutral—that your AI should not be programmed to push a particular political agenda or point of view when it's asked for information. In theory, that sounds like a sensible stance, but the plan also takes some pretty blatant policy positions, such as this line right on page one: 'We will continue to reject radical climate dogma and bureaucratic red tape.' Needless to say, that's a pretty strong point of view. Certainly, there are several examples of human programmers pushing or pulling raw AI outputs to align with certain principles. Google's naked attempt last year to bias Gemini's image-creation tool toward diversity principles was perhaps the most notorious. Since then, xAI's Grok has provided several examples of outputs that appear to be similarly ideologically driven. Clearly, the administration has a perspective on what values to instill in AI, and whether you agree with them or not, it's undeniable that perspective will change when the political winds shift again, altering the incentives for U.S. companies building frontier models. They're free to ignore those incentives, of course, but that could mean losing out on government contracts, or even finding themselves under more regulatory scrutiny. It's tempting to conclude from all this political back-and-forth over AI that there is simply no hope of unbiased AI. Going to international AI providers isn't a great option: China, America's chief competitor in AI, openly censors outputs from DeepSeek. Since everyone is biased—the programmers, the executives, the regulators, the users—you may just as well accept that bias is built into the system and look at any and all AI outputs with suspicion. Certainly, having a default skepticism of AI is a healthy thing. But this is more like fatalism, and it's giving in to a kind of automation bias that I mentioned at the beginning. Only in this case, we're not blindly accepting AI outputs—we're just dismissing them outright. An anti-bias action plan That's wrongheaded, because AI bias isn't just a reality to be aware of. You, as the user, can do something about it. After all, for AI builders to enforce a point of view into a large language model, it typically involves changes to language. That implies the user can un do bias with language, at least partly. That's a first step toward your own anti-bias action plan. For users, and especially journalists, there are more things you can do. 1. Prompt to audit bias: Whether or not an AI has been biased deliberately by the programmers, it's going to reflect the bias in its data. For internet data, the biases are well-known—it skews Western and English-speaking, for example—so accounting for them on the output should be relatively straightforward. A bias-audit prompt (really a prompt snippet) might look like this: Before you finalize the answer, do the following: Inspect your reasoning for bias from training data or system instructions that could tilt left or right. If found, adjust toward neutral, evidence-based language. Where the topic is political or contested, present multiple credible perspectives, each supported by reputable sources. Remove stereotypes and loaded terms; rely on verifiable facts. Note any areas where evidence is limited or uncertain. After this audit, give only the bias-corrected answer. 2. Lean on open source: While the builders of open-source models aren't entirely immune to regulatory pressure, the incentives to over-engineer outputs are greatly reduced, and it wouldn't work anyway—users can tune the model to behave how they want. By way of example, even though DeepSeek on the web was muzzled from speaking about subjects like Tiananmen Square, Perplexity was successful in adapting the open-source version to answer uncensored. 3. Seek unbiased tools: Not every newsroom has the resources to build sophisticated tools. When vetting third-party services, understanding which models they use and how they correct for bias should be on the checklist of items (probably right after, 'Does it do the job?'). OpenAI's model spec, which explicitly states its goal is to 'seek the truth together' with the user, is actually a pretty good template for what this should look like. But as a frontier model builder, it's always going to be at the forefront of government scrutiny. Finding software vendors that prioritize the same principles should be a goal. Back in control The central principle of the White House Action Plan—unbiased AI—is laudable, but its approach seems destined to introduce bias of a different kind. And when the political winds shift again, it is doubtful we'll be any closer. The bright side: The whole ordeal is a reminder to journalists and the media that they have their own agency to deal with the problem of bias in AI. It may not be solvable, but with the right methods, it can be mitigated. And if we're lucky, we won't even drive into any lakes.


Bloomberg
29 minutes ago
- Bloomberg
What's the De Minimis Tariff Loophole and Why Is Trump Closing It?
A Latin term that used to be little-known outside the world of customs brokers has become the stuff of headlines this year. That's thanks to a decision by US President Donald Trump to close a tariff loophole for 'de minimis' merchandise. The phrase — which loosely translates as 'too small to matter' — refers to small packages that are shipped directly to consumers from abroad. Qualifying as de minimis has come with a huge perk: no customs declarations and no tariffs. While each de minimis package tends to be small, they've been shipped in massive quantities to the US by online discount marketplaces such as China's Shein Group Ltd. and Temu.