Counter Cyclical Program in Worcester County, Massachusetts, 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 21 to 40 of 126
Recipients of Counter Cyclical Program from farms in Worcester County, Massachusetts totaled $256,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Counter Cyclical Program 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
21 | Robert And Margaret Moschini | Spencer, MA 01562 | $3,708 |
22 | W Norman Hertel | Fitchburg, MA 01420 | $3,657 |
23 | Sandstrom Dairy Farm | Jefferson, MA 01522 | $3,610 |
24 | Schultz Farm | Rutland, MA 01543 | $3,588 |
25 | James Casavant | Oxford, MA 01540 | $3,565 |
26 | William Davis Jr | Ware, MA 01082 | $3,374 |
27 | Richard P Adams | New Braintree, MA 01531 | $3,264 |
28 | David And Ruth Shepard | Warren, MA 01083 | $3,130 |
29 | Kurt Schuffels | Lancaster, MA 01523 | $3,123 |
30 | Podbelski Farm | Gilbertville, MA 01031 | $2,954 |
31 | Murdock Farm Dairy | Winchendon, MA 01475 | $2,802 |
32 | William & Wendy Rogers | Brimfield, MA 01010 | $2,742 |
33 | Mason Farm | Jefferson, MA 01522 | $2,722 |
34 | Manuel S Moreira | Lancaster, MA 01523 | $2,653 |
35 | Stanley Grigas | New Braintree, MA 01531 | $2,580 |
36 | David Kilbourn | South Lancaster, MA 01561 | $2,554 |
37 | Karl Heins | Westminster, MA 01473 | $2,545 |
38 | Coopers Hilltop Farm LLC | Rochdale, MA 01542 | $2,508 |
39 | Tufts Un Sc Vet Med | North Grafton, MA 01536 | $2,376 |
40 | Zajac Trust | Dudley, MA 01571 | $2,332 |
* USDA data are not "transparent" for many payments made to recipients through most cooperatives. Recipients of payments made through most cooperatives, and the amounts, have not been made public. To see ownership information, click on the name, then click on the link that is titled Ownership Information.
** EWG has identified this recipient as a bank or lending institution that received the payment because the payment applicant had a loan requiring any subsidy payments go to the lender first. In 2019, the information provided to EWG by USDA began to include the entity that received the payment, rather than the person or entity that applied for it, which was previously provided. This move to shield subsidy recipients from disclosure enables USDA to further evade taxpayer accountability. Six percent of subsidy dollars went to banks, lending institutions, or the Farm Service Agency.”