How much of Meals on Wheels' budget is spent on delivering meals versus overhead costs?

1. No single “delivery vs. overhead” number exists in the materials

The Meals on Wheels materials and news coverage in the provided set describe funding sources, program budgets and threats from federal cuts, but none publish a definitive, network-wide breakdown of the share of spending devoted specifically to delivering meals versus administrative or overhead costs; available sources do not mention a single national delivery-versus-overhead percentage ^{[2] [3]}.

2. Local programs vary — example: San Antonio’s budget and federal share

Local programs show concrete budget figures and funding mixes: Meals on Wheels San Antonio is described as having an annual budget of $16–18 million, with federal funding making up between a quarter and a third of that budget (roughly 25–33%) — useful for understanding local scale but not sufficient to infer national program cost structure ^[1].

3. Federal funding is central to operations, but that’s different from “overhead”

Meals on Wheels America’s fact sheet and public statements stress the dependence of many local programs on federal funding: 9 in 10 providers receive federal funding and over 60% of providers receive half or more of their total budget from federal sources ^[2]. Those figures speak to revenue sources and vulnerability to budget changes, but they do not map directly onto delivery-versus-overhead accounting ^[2].

4. National advocacy frames spending as mission-focused, not administrative waste

Meals on Wheels America’s public messaging emphasizes that federal dollars fund direct services (meals, social contact, safety checks) and warns that cuts would force reductions in services, waitlists or turning seniors away ^{[4] [5]}. That framing suggests the organization views most program spending as service delivery rather than avoidable overhead — but the sources do not quantify the split ^{[4] [5]}.

5. Budget pressures and cuts make overhead scrutiny more visible

Multiple sources highlight proposed federal cuts (including to Older Americans Act funding, SSBG, SNAP and Medicaid) and flat or reduced appropriations that leave programs operating with diminished buying power; Meals on Wheels America calls for increases to meet demand, implying that more revenue is needed for direct services rather than to cover excessive administrative costs ^{[6] [5] [4]}.

6. Where to look next for a precise delivery/overhead figure

For a precise split you would need local provider audited financial statements (e.g., Form 990s) or consolidated national accounting that distinguishes program service expenses from management/fundraising overhead; Meals on Wheels America points readers to annual reports and 990s on its financials page ^[3]. The provided sources show those documents exist but do not quote specific percentages for delivery vs. overhead ^[3].

7. Competing perspectives and implicit agendas

Meals on Wheels America and local programs emphasize program impact and the risk of cuts to services, which supports advocacy for more funding ^{[4] [7]}. News outlets and local providers emphasize the concrete scale of budgets and reliance on federal funds ^{[1] [8]}. Readers should note the advocacy motive: Meals on Wheels America’s communications are intended to preserve or increase funding and may downplay administrative spending debates while stressing client-facing needs ^{[4] [2]}.

8. Bottom line for readers seeking an answer

Available sources do not offer a national percentage dividing delivery of meals versus overhead; instead they provide local budget examples, national dependency statistics on federal funding, and advocacy warnings about cuts that would reduce service capacity ^{[1] [2] [4]}. To get the precise delivery-versus-overhead split for a specific program, consult that local provider’s audited financials or IRS Form 990 as referenced on Meals on Wheels America’s financials page ^[3].