April 20, 2026 Plumpy’Nut has become one of the most recognizable tools in the fight against severe acute malnutrition among young children around the world. Plumpy’Nut is one brand of the broader food type called “Ready to Use Therapeutic Food”, or “RUTF.” RUTFs have been a key topic in recent articles in Hunger Notes; nonprofits have used RUTFs in the Sudan, Gaza, Haiti, Afghanistan and in other countries in need.
In the United States, one of the leading producers is Edesia, the Rhode Island–based nonprofit that manufactures Plumpy’Nut and related products for UNICEF, the World Food Programme, and NGO partners, while also participating in a wider global network of therapeutic food producers.
Following are selections from WHES’ interview with Ms. Maria Kasparian, Edesia’s Executive Director in 2023, about Edesia and now head of Strategic Partnerships. The interview highlights several of these trends: rising interest in alternative formulations using ingredients such as soy, corn, chickpea, or millet; debate over procurement rules; the slow pace of agency adoption; and growing recognition that the challenge is not only making therapeutic food, but also building efficient supply chains that can deliver it where children need it most.
WHES: Thank you so much for taking time out to talk with us today. What should our readers know about Edesia?
Kasparian: One of Edesia’s mandates is to educate and advocate global nutrition. We have school field trips, work with senators, channel our programming through Scouting America, and we do advocacy work in DC.
We produce in the US, taking with PL 480 (Food Aid) funds. We are producing 1.2 million packets of Plumpy’Nut each day. Edesia has had a ticker of how many children that our products have reached since we started producing in March 2010 – and distributing through partners. Today we are at 19.9 M children reached with full treatments. Our goal is to reach a total of at least 10 M more children within 2023 and 2024.
We’re also part of the “PlumpyField network” of partners in ten partners, spanning Madagascar, India, and other countries. We work to help these producers in other countries, such as Ethiopia and Haiti. For instance, we support Meds and Foods for Kids in Haiti. There are now 22 producers worldwide of RUTF, and each uses slightly different formulations.
WHES: Do all the producers of Ready to Use foods follow the same formulae?
Kasparian: Across the 22 suppliers of foods, there are no two formulas that are identical. But as long as we meet the robust recommendation, we’re okay.
Even within the PlumpyField Network, there are tweaks. There are differences, depending on what’s available locally. For example, you have to achieve certain omega-3 to omega-6 balance with the fats. You need to do that. The vegetable oils are important. You can get different kinds of vegetable oils depending where you are. There might be some variety there. You might have different forms of milk powder available. You might have different forms of whey available that have different amounts of protein. You’ve got to balance the formulas, depending on what ingredients you have available. But they’re very similar. We’ve actually done taste tests where we meet and have everybody’s and we blindly try to guess whose is who. So, they’re a little different, but the difference is small. But the formulations do vary a little bit. There will be a greater degree of difference with those outside the network formulations are.
WHES: Thank you. So, how do donors specify what they want or accept new ideas for specialty foods to address malnutrition?
Kasparian: Well, the Interagency oversight group (UNICEF and WFP) have discussed for many years, having a common standard. It’s the long game. Over time, things do get accepted. Governments and the U.N. don’t move quickly. So generally, though, progress does happen. It just happens slowly. You keep pushing, and over time, things do improve. So you must continue innovating.
The Tufts Food Aid Quality Review study comparing the effectiveness of different foods looked at RUTF (compared Corn Soy Blend or CSB+ with fortified vegetable oil (CSB+ w/oil), Corn soy whey blend (CSWB) with fortified vegetable oil (CSWB w/oil), and Super Cereal Plus with amylase (SC+A)) for the treatment of moderate malnutrition. The cost-effectiveness was similar between the products, and caregivers had a slightly lower of their own opportunity costs when using RUTF. The main conclusion was that NGOs/programmers should pick the products that would be most appropriate for their contexts.
WHES: Is it only about the formula of the food composition?
Kasparian: The ecosystem is not only about making RUTF, but also about improving the supply chain. Customs fees for incoming fees mean that local production is not necessarily cheaper. You know, it’s cheaper to get our foods from here to South Sudan than it is from Khartoum to South Sudan. As well, we’re shipping a lot to Somalia right now.
WHES: Has demand grown for your RUTF?
Kasparian: We have doubled the numbers of kids getting treatment. Most of it goes to Africa, over 70%. Our main goal is to reach more kids. The price of RUTF was going down significantly before the Covid-19 pandemic. As background, 70% is the cost of the ingredients. In 2005 a box of RUTF cost $55 but we brought that down to $35 a box in 2019.
WHES: How is it working with UNICEF and WFP?
Kasparian: One of the barriers we face is the way that Unicef and WFP work together. They work differently and in different places.
WHES: How do you relate to other producers in other countries?
Kasparian: We are a U.S.-based producer. We’re a non-profit U.S.-based producer, and that we care a lot about having a good balance of what’s coming from the U.S. and what is coming from local and regional procurers, and that balance is really important. And we do various things to support these
suppliers in other countries. We work particularly closely with Meds and Food for Kids in Haiti. We help them with their formulations. We just help them to get their codex, upgraded codex specification in order. We help them with procurement of raw materials. We help them troubleshoot from a maintenance engineering perspective.
WHES: Edesia has a history going back to Tanzania, right?
Kasparian: Yes. Before we set up a factory in the U.S., we established one in Tanzania, which, unfortunately, is no longer operational, but was, for about five years. Thus, our experience kind of went that way. Our founder, Navyn Salem, has family roots in Tanzania. Her father and three generations of the family are Indians who lived in Tanzania for a period of time. Ms. Salem’s father was born and raised in Tanzania before he came to the U.S. on a USAID scholarship for college. This leads me to another interesting part of the story: USAID is really responsible for Edesia’s existence. Her father, and therefore she, would not be in the U.S. if not for USAID. The U.S. factory, Edesia, was an afterthought to Tanzania because, at the time, USAID’s Food for Peace, was looking to have RUTF and RUSF suppliers in the U.S. because they wanted to be able to use the Title II PL-480 funds for nutrition-specific commodities like RUTF, RUSF. Which, at the time, this is 2008, 2009, at the time, no one was making in the U.S. And there was a push to improve the food aid basket of what was coming out of the U.S. And to take more vulnerable groups into account and to add these nutrition-specific commodities. So, they kind of approached us and others to say, hey, can you do this in the U.S.?
WHES: Do you engage much with the public here in the U.S.?
Kasparian: Our factory doors are open. We have school field trips come through. We have senators and congresspeople whenever we can. We have Scouting America, Rotary Clubs, and the like. And then we also do advocacy work in D.C. around global nutrition.
