1

Early Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Fiscal Year 2020: 

Characteristics of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program 

Households 

Abstract

During the COVID-19 pandemic the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), among other programs, helped 

support low-income families in the United States weather the negative economic effects of the pandemic. The U.S. 

Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) annually reports on the demographic and economic 

characteristics of SNAP households using Quality Control (QC) data—a nationally representative sample of SNAP 

administrative data. For fiscal year (FY) 2020, these data were split between the prepandemic period (October 2019 

through February 2020) and the early pandemic months (June through September 2020)—providing a snapshot of how 

SNAP households’ circumstances changed in the first months of the pandemic. 

This analysis finds that there was an increase in the proportion of households reporting zero gross income, a decrease 

in the proportion of households with income from earnings, and an overall decrease in average gross income. Average 

gross income for households with children fell more than for other household groups. Regular SNAP benefits fell on 

average, but with the addition of Emergency Allotments (EA), average monthly benefits increased, especially for 

households with children or employed individuals. When regular SNAP benefits and EA are combined with cash income,

these two FNS benefits were sufficient to move nearly 40 percent of SNAP households above the poverty level and, 

thus, increase food budgets for low-income households during a time of general economic hardship in the United States.

Key Findings

Finding #1: Due to supplemental changes in sources of income, average gross income remained statistically 

unchanged while net income rose.

Finding #2: The percentage of SNAP households reporting earnings fell. The percentage reporting zero gross income 

rose.

Finding #3: Monthly Unemployment Insurance income, averaged across all SNAP participants, increased nearly 

fivefold in the early pandemic, from $8.70 to $42.80.

Finding #4: The proportion of households receiving either the minimum or maximum benefit increased in the early 

pandemic period.

Finding #5: An overall decrease in deductions was driven primarily by the average earned income and shelter 

deductions.

Finding #6: Average household size did not significantly change overall or for any subgroups.

Finding #7: Except for households with children, all subgroups saw an increase in average gross income.

Finding #8: On average, the increase in net income led to a fall in non-EA SNAP benefits.

Finding #9: Households received an average of nearly $115 in EA each month, but amounts received varied by 

household composition.

Finding #10: When added to cash income, regular SNAP and EA moved nearly 4-in-10 households out of poverty.

Research Brief November 2022
2

(1) Introduction

SNAP is the Nation’s largest food assistance program and provided benefits to an average of over 21.6 million low-income 

households each month, at a cost of around $113.4 billion in fiscal year (FY) 2021 (Food and Nutrition Service, 2022). In 

March 2020, at the onset of the COVID-19 pandemic in the United States, Congress passed the Families First Coronavirus 

Response Act (FFCRA) (Public Law 116-127), which authorized Emergency Allotments (EA) to increase SNAP households’

monthly benefits to the maximum amount for their household size. At the same time, FNS waived Quality Control (QC) 

review requirements from March to May 2020. Passage of the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (P.L. 116-260)

subsequently extended the QC review waiver until June 30, 2021. 

Suspension of QC review requirements created a unique situation with the QC data collected in FY 2020. Complete data 

were collected for the first 5 months of the fiscal year, October 2019 to February 2020 (hereafter called the 

prepandemic period). Very few States collected data from March to May 2020, so those months are not examined in this 

report. However, all but six State SNAP agencies—California, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Maine, Maryland, and 

New York—completed QC reviews between June and September 2020 (hereafter called the early pandemic period). 

Analysis by Cronquist and Eiffes (2022) determined that sample sizes for the initial 5 months were sufficient for 

producing precise estimates of SNAP caseload characteristics for the prepandemic period. Although FNS was unable to 

provide its usual level of oversight of the sampling procedures, and State agencies were not required to perform face-toface interviews with applicants, Cronquist and Eiffes determined that the sample sizes and reliability of the June to 

September data were sufficient for producing equivalent estimates for the early pandemic period. Thus, FNS can 

compare SNAP caseload characteristics of the prepandemic and early pandemic periods for States that reported data in 

both periods (hereafter referred to as all States, unless otherwise specified).

This report supplements the Characteristics of SNAP Households: Fiscal Year 2020 annual report (Cronquist & Eiffes, 2022)

with a descriptive analysis of the differences between the prepandemic and early pandemic periods of FY 2020, focusing 

on key characteristics of interest at the household level. 

This report is organized as follows: the next section provides background on the economic challenges of the period shortly 

after the declaration of the pandemic and a brief description of the methods; the third section examines differences 

between the two periodsfor all SNAP householdsin States that reported data in both periods; the fourth section examines 

those same differences for select household subgroups; the fifth section looks at the impact of EA during the early 

pandemic; and the final section summarizes the findings.

(2) The Immediate Economic Impact of the COVID-19 Pandemic and Methods of Analysis

The COVID-19 pandemic caused economic hardship throughout the United States, negatively affecting low-income 

households in the months immediately following the March 2020 Federal declaration of a public health emergency. The 

Federal Reserve estimated that 13 percent of all adults lost or were furloughed from a job in March and April 2020, with 

low-income workers being the most likely to lose a job (Zabek & Larrimore, 2020). In an April 2020 Federal Reserve survey,

only 37 percent of respondent mothers reported they could cover a $400 expense with cash, credit, or savings (Lloro, 

2021). Based on historical data before the pandemic, the Census Bureau estimated the employment-to-population ratio

(the percentage of the U.S. population actively employed) would have been 61.3 percent by April 2020. However, the 

actual ratio was only 51.5 percent, meaning it fell by an equivalent of 9.9 individuals per 100 below Census estimates

(Udalova, 2021). Overall, 26.4 million people experienced unemployment at some point during 2020—12.9 million more 

than in 2019—and those with a GED or less than a high-school diploma were more likely to report pandemic-induced 
3

unemployment and reduced labor hours and earnings a full year after the pandemic officially began in the United States

(Auginbaugh & Rothstein, 2022; Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2021). 

A serious possible outcome of general economic hardship is food insecurity. In early May 2020, 1-in-10 adults reported 

not having enough food to eat often or sometimes within the past 7 days (Hodges, Jones, & Toossi, 2021). This is consistent 

with USDA’s Economic Research Service estimate of around 10.5 percent of households reporting food insecurity in 2020. 

However, this percentage was unchanged from their previous estimate of food insecurity in 2019 (Coleman-Jensen, 

Rabbitt, Gregory, & Singh, 2021). This suggests that impacts on food security were relatively muted.

The pandemic’s toll also affected social services. After 6 years of decline, USDA’s inflation-adjusted spending on food and 

nutrition assistance programs reached its highest point ever in FY 2020 (Toossi, Jones, & Hodges, 2021). Additionally, 

average SNAP participation from April to September 2020 increased by nearly 5 million and monthly average redemptions 

of EBT benefits (when including Pandemic-EBTi with SNAP) increased 86.4 percent, compared to the same period the 

previous year (Jones, 2021; Toossi, Jones, & Hodges, 2021). Meanwhile, State and local governments saw a $61 billion 

reduction in revenues in the second quarter of calendar year 2020 compared to the same period in 2019, causing some 

States to implement staffing reductions and furloughs (Government Accountability Office, 2021). Additionally, many 

organizations supporting low-income communities reported “significant disruptions” to their operations, including the 

closure of offices and use of alternative work models (Kaplan, 2020). Federal flexibilities were offered in response to these 

difficult circumstances.

State SNAP agencies utilized increased administrative flexibilities offered by Congress through the FFCRA, including 

adjustments to interview requirements, extended certification periods, and changes to reporting requirements (Center 

for Budget and Policy Priorities, 2021; Food and Nutrition Service, 2019). In March 2020, FNS helped ease pandemicrelated operational strains by waiving SNAP State agency QC regulatory requirements, a policy that Congresssubsequently

extended until July 2021. Thus, few States undertook normal QC review procedures from March to May 2020. However, 

from June to September of 2020, most State agencies completed QC reviews and reported QC data to FNS. Of the 53 State 

SNAP agencies (including the District of Columbia, Guam, and the U.S. Virgin Islands), all except California, Delaware, 

District of Columbia, Maine, Maryland, and New York continued to conduct QC reviews during this later period.

Analysis conducted by Mathematica Policy Research—on behalf of FNS—demonstrated that the prepandemic data were 

reliable, precise, and reasonable when compared against previous years of QC data, although standard errors were higher 

due to a lower sample size (Franckle, Vigil, & Leftin, 2021, p. 1). The annual report, Characteristics of Supplemental 

Nutrition Assistance Program Households: Fiscal Year 2020, presents full descriptive statistics of the SNAP caseload using 

the entire available QC sample for both the prepandemic and early pandemic periods (Cronquist & Eiffes, 2022). Because 

data are not available for all States in the early pandemic period, the Characteristics report does not directly compare 

household characteristics during those periods.

This supplementary analysis uses the FY 2020 QC data for the prepandemic period—October 2019 to February 2020—and 

the early pandemic period—June to September 2020—for States that reported data in both periods. To make estimates 

for both periods comparable, States that did not report data during the early pandemic period are excluded from the 

prepandemic sample in this report. Therefore, estimates in the following tables and figures will not match those in the

Characteristics of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Households: Fiscal Year 2020 report. For ease of 

interpretation, this report focuses on percentage and average changes between the 2 periods in these 47 States. 

References to “all” SNAP households in this report refer to all SNAP households in the 47 States for which data are available
4

in both periods. Additionally, because SNAP eligibility is determined based on monthly characteristics, estimates below 

are monthly averages.

Point estimates, standard errors, and differences between the two periods are reported in the tables below. Estimates of 

statistical significance are indicated in the tables using asterisks, with a p-value of 0.10 being the minimum significance 

level noted. Significance levels for univariate analyses are calculated using Welch’s unequal variance t-test for Tables 1, 2, 

4, 6, 7, 8, and 9 and Z-test of proportions for Tables 3 and 5.

(3) Differences in Income Between Prepandemic and Early Pandemic Periods for All SNAP Households

Table 1 provides a general picture of the SNAP caseload for the prepandemic and early pandemic periods. The first row 

shows that average monthly SNAP participation increased by over 2.6 million households in the States reporting in both 

periods—going from 14.82 prepandemic to 17.41 million early pandemic. Average household size did not significantly 

change. The small decline in average gross income was 

not statistically significant, but income net of deductions 

(more detail below) rose nearly $30 between the two 

periods. Average SNAP benefits (excluding EA benefits) 

and the percentage of SNAP households living at or below 

poverty fell.

Table 1: Comparison of Headline SNAP Statistics, Prepandemic vs Early Pandemic (FY2020)

Prepandemic Period Early Pandemic Period Difference†

Variable

Mean 

Values SE

Mean 

Values SE

Monthly Participation (millions)†† 14.82 N/A 17.41 N/A 2.59

Household Size 1.98 0.02 1.96 0.02 -0.02

Monthly Gross Income ($) 881.27 8.20 876.54 13.40 -4.73

Monthly Net Income ($) 414.98 5.91 444.45 10.15 29.47*** 

Monthly Non-EA Benefit Amount ($) 231.08 2.18 225.65 3.09 -5.44**

% at or below the poverty level 81.37 0.44 79.39 0.68 -1.97***

* = p<0.10; ** = p<0.05; *** = p<0.01; †Differences are rounded and may not match column differences; ††These data are from 

the FNS National Data Bank and only include States reporting in both periods.

Key Finding #1: Due to supplementary

changes in sources of income, average gross 

income remained statistically unchanged 

while net income rose.
5

The distribution of SNAP households by monthly gross income 

(all income measures in this report are monthly unless

otherwise stated) was similar between the two periods, with 

the exception of a noticeably higher percentage of zeroincome households during the early pandemic. Figure 1 shows 

the proportional distribution of SNAP households by $200-

per-month increments of gross income (before deductions) 

for both periods. Both distributions show peaks at both the 

zero and $601–$1,000 gross income ranges. The share of 

households with zero gross income rose from 19 percent to 22 

percent. The proportion of households with incomes of $1–

$1,000 per month were generally similar between the two 

periods. However, a slightly higher percentage of households 

had gross incomes of $801–$1,000 in the early pandemic 

and a slightly lower percentage had incomesin the $601–$800 

range. The higher income tail of the distributions shows little 

difference between the two periods.

Table 2 shows the change in the distribution of households by poverty groups. There were only two changes that were 

statistically significant: an approximately 3-percent increase in those at zero percent of the poverty line and an 

approximately 5-percent decrease in those between 51–100 percent of the poverty line. This aligns with what is seen in 

Figure 1, which shows an increase in the percentage of households reporting zero income in the early pandemic.

Figure 1: Proportional Distribution of SNAP 

Households by Monthly Gross Income (FY2020)

Table 2: Proportion of SNAP Households by Poverty Groups (FY2020)

Prepandemic Period Early Pandemic Period Difference†

Household Poverty Group

% of SNAP 

HHs

Standard 

Error

% of SNAP 

HHs

Standard 

Error

0% of Poverty Line 19.24% 0.43% 22.19% 0.70% 2.95%**

1-50% of Poverty Line 16.53% 0.41% 16.64% 0.60% 0.11%

51-100% of Poverty Line 45.60% 0.55% 40.56% 0.80% -5.04%***

101-130% of Poverty Line 12.27% 0.37% 12.80% 0.55% 0.53%

130% or more of Poverty Line 6.37% 0.29% 7.81% 0.47% 1.45%

* = p<0.10; ** = p<0.05; *** = p<0.01; †Differences are rounded and may not match column differences

0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25%

$4,001+

$3,801–4,000

$3,601–3,800

$3,401–3,600

$3,201–3,400

$3,001–3,200

$2,801–3,000

$2,601–2,800

$2,401–2,600

$2,201–2,400

$2,001–2,200

$1,801–2,000

$1,601–1,800

$1,401–1,600

$1,201–1,400

$1,001–1,200

$801–1,000

$601–800

$401–600

$201–400

$1–200

$0

Prepandemic Period Early Pandemic
6

We can better grasp how income changed in the first months of the 

pandemic by examining sources of income. Income can be roughly 

categorized into two types: earned income (income from employment)

and unearned income (income from nonemployment sources such as 

Social Security, Supplemental Security Income [SSI], and unemployment 

insurance [UI]). Table 3 and Figure 2 compare income by earned and 

select unearned sources. Averages shown are calculated across all households regardless of whether they received income 

from a particular income source.

Average earned income in SNAP households dropped by about 

$20 between the two periods. The decline in earned income is 

reflective of the general reduction in employment levels across 

the United States in the beginning months of the public health 

emergency, especially among low-income Americans 

(Auginbaugh & Rothstein, 2022; Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2021; 

Zabek & Larrimore, 2020). This is corroborated by the -2.61-

percentage point decline in the proportion of SNAP households 

reporting earnings during the early pandemic (Figure 3).

In contrast, average unearned income in SNAP households rose 

by about $15. It is worth noting that the increase in unearned 

income did not fully offset the decline in earned income, 

resulting in a small net decrease in gross household income.

Table 3: Key Sources of Monthly Gross Income Across All SNAP Households (FY2020)

Prepandemic Period Early Pandemic Period Difference†

Source of income

Mean 

Income ($) SE

Mean 

Income ($) SE

Total Gross Income†† 881.27 8.20 876.54 13.40 -4.73

Total Earned 348.96 8.28 329.04 11.80 -19.92***

Total Unearned income††† 532.34 6.08 547.56 10.14 15.22***

Social Security Income 298.91 5.37 293.85 8.05 -5.06

Unemployment insurance income 8.70 1.50 42.80 4.85 34.11***

Workers compensation income 0.81 0.27 1.23 0.71 0.42

Supplemental Security Income 153.32 3.47 142.23 5.17 -11.10***

Temporary Assistance for Needy 

Families Income

9.15 0.69 6.89 0.71 -2.26*

General Assistance Income 3.83 0.34 3.20 0.61 -0.63

* = p<0.10; ** = p<0.05; *** = p<0.01; †Differences are rounded and may not match column differences; ††Gross income is slightly 

lower than the sum of all earned and unearned income because nine States exclude child support payments from gross income, 

see (Cronquist & Eiffes, 2022, p. 41); †††Not all sources of unearned income are listed in the table.

Figure 2: Average Monthly SNAP Household Income, 

by Source of Income (FY2020)

$0 $250 $500 $750 $1,000

Total Gross Income

Total Earned Income

Total Unearned Income

Social Security

Unemployment Insurance

Workers Compensation

SSI

TANF

Prepandemic Period Early Pandemic

Key Finding #2: The percentage 

of SNAP households reporting 

earnings fell. The percentage 

reporting zero gross income rose.
7

Turning to specific sources of unearned income, average monthly Social Security, SSI, Temporary Assistance for Needy 

Families Income (TANF), and General Assistance (GA) all 

decreased in the early pandemic (Table 3). Average Social 

Security and GA income decreased by relatively small amounts 

and neither of these changes were statistically significant. The 

largest decline was in SSI by about $11. These changes largely 

reflected changes in the size and composition of the SNAP 

caseload. The proportion of SNAP households composed only of 

working-age adults—who are generally not eligible for Social 

Security, SSI, or TANF—increased significantly during the early 

pandemic period (see Table 6).

In addition to the decline in SSI, the increase in average net income is largely driven by the large increase in UI income.

Average UI income increased by nearly fivefold, going from $8.70 prepandemic to $42.80 in the early pandemic. This 

$34.11 increase was the greatest source of increase in unearned income for SNAP households. This reflects both the 

decrease in employment and work hours for low-income households (Zabek & Larrimore, 2020), a fall in the proportion 

of employed SNAP households with earnings (see Figure 3), and the 

Federal Government’s supplementation of State UI programs during 

the pandemic through the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic 

Security (CARES) Act of 2020 (P.L. 116-136). Thus, the average UI 

amount increased as more people became eligible for the program 

and subsequently received higher payment amounts—the average UI 

benefit increased by nearly $300 per month amongst those who 

received it.

ii

Despite the rise in UI benefits, the program still accounted for a relatively small proportion (roughly 8 percent) of average

unearned income across all households in the early pandemic period. Social Security comprised the largest portion of 

average unearned income in both periods (approximately 56 percent prepandemic and 54 percent in the early pandemic 

period), and SSI comprised the second largest source (approximately 29 prepandemic and 26 percent in the early 

pandemic period). Together, Social Security, SSI, and UI accounted for 87 percent of unearned income in the early 

pandemic. When including earned income, these three programs still account for nearly 55 percent of gross income.

Figure 3: Proportion of SNAP Households With 

Earned Income (FY2020)†

†The difference is statistically significant at the 0.05 level.

Table 4: Proportion of SNAP Households Receiving Minimum, Maximum, and Other Monthly Benefit Amounts 

(Excluding EA) (FY2020)

Prepandemic Period Early Pandemic Period Difference†

SNAP benefit level

Proportion of 

SNAP HHs SE

Proportion of 

SNAP HHs SE

Minimum benefit (%) 11.79 0.36 14.12 0.58 2.33*

Other benefit amounts (%) 53.63 0.55 49.30 0.82 -4.33**

Maximum benefit (%) 34.58 0.52 36.58 0.79 2.00*

Average Benefit Amount ($) 231.08 2.18 225.65 3.09 -5.44**

* = p<0.10; ** = p<0.05; *** = p<0.01; †Differences are rounded and may not match column differences

27.91% 25.30%

Prepandemic Period Early Pandemic

Key Finding #3: Monthly 

Unemployment Insurance income, 

averaged across all participants, 

increased nearly fivefold in the early 

pandemic, from $8.70 to $42.80.
8

There were also differences in the distribution of SNAP benefits over the two periods. Changes in the proportion of 

households receiving the minimum and maximum benefits (excluding EA) can be seen in Table 4, along with the average 

non-EA benefit amounts in the bottom row. The proportion of households receiving either the minimum or maximum 

benefit levels each increased by about 2 percent, and the proportion of households receiving other benefit amounts fell 

accordingly. At the same time, the average benefit amount per household fell by -$5.44. These changes are all statistically 

significant and indicate some polarization in SNAP household benefits to both the maximum and minimum during the 

early pandemic, which is consistent with the changes in 

the higher income distribution of SNAP households and

the increase in the proportion of households with zero 

gross income (see Figure 1).

Table 5 lists SNAP deductions and their average values for both periods. Average total deductions decreased by about $14 

from the prepandemic to early pandemic period. This overall decrease was driven primarily by the earned income and 

shelter deductions, which respectively fell by -$4.61 and -$6.23—both statistically significant. A decrease in the earned 

income deduction is expected given the decline in average earned 

income (Table 3). The decrease in the shelter deduction is mostly 

explained by a slight fall in the share of households claiming the 

deduction (from 70.70 to 69.11 percent). The changes in the other 

deductions were small and not statistically significant.

To summarize the analysis in this section, relative to the prepandemic period, the early pandemic had a higher proportion 

of households with zero income and a lower proportion reporting earned income. Overall, average gross income fell 

slightly due primarily to a large decrease in earned income, which was only partially offset by an increase in unearned 

income. Among unearned income sources examined in the analysis, UI saw the largest increase. The average deduction 

amount decreased, mainly due to decreases in the average earned income and shelter deductions. As a result, the average 

non-EA benefit declined by more than $5.

Table 5: Average Monthly Deduction Amount, by Deduction Type (FY2020)

Prepandemic Period Early Pandemic Period Change†

Deduction Type

Mean 

Amount ($) SE

Mean 

Amount ($) SE ($)

All Deductions 562.54 3.85 548.34 5.80 -14.20***

Dependent Care Deduction 9.87 0.80 8.70 1.18 -1.17

Medical Expense Deduction 10.58 0.65 9.17 0.81 -1.41

Earned Income Deduction 71.56 1.69 66.96 2.40 -4.61**

Shelter Deduction 294.79 2.95 288.56 4.71 -6.23**

Standard Deduction 172.31 0.18 171.48 0.26 -0.83

Homeless Shelter Deduction 0.67 0.09 0.46 0.12 -0.21

Child Support Deduction†† 4.49 0.58 4.55 0.82 0.06

* = p<0.10; ** = p<0.05; *** = p<0.01; †Differences are rounded and may not match column differences; ††States may exclude outgoing child support payments from income in lieu of a deduction. In FY 2020, nine States did so.

Key Finding #4: The proportion of households 

receiving either the minimum or maximum 

benefit increased in the early pandemic period.

Key Finding #5: An overall decrease in 

deductions was driven primarily by the 

earned income and shelter deductions.
9

(4) Differences Between Prepandemic and Early Pandemic Periods for Select Subgroups

This section examines how the composition of the overall SNAP caseload changed, as well as household changes for select 

subgroups between the prepandemic and early pandemic periods. These different subgroups of SNAP households 

experienced different magnitudes of change between the two periods. 

Table 6 shows the proportion of SNAP households that belong to six key subgroups: those with an elderly individual, with 

nonelderly individuals with disabilities, with children, composed only of adults ages 18–49 without disabilities (hereafter 

referred to as working-age adult households), with an employed individual, and with zero gross income. These groups are 

not mutually exclusive. Of the subgroups, the only statistically significant changes between the two periods were increases 

in the percentage of SNAP households composed only of working-age adults or with zero income—by 2.65 and 2.95 

percent, respectively—and the percentage of households with an employed individual fell by 2.6 percent.

The other changes in household composition were not statistically significant. Thus, only the subgroups directly related to 

economic characteristics (i.e., working-age adult, zero-income, and employed households) had statistically significant 

changes in the early pandemic months. The proportion of households belonging to subgroups based on demographic 

characteristics (i.e., households with the elderly, disabled, or children) did not significantly differ between the two periods.

Table 6: Proportion of SNAP Households by Key Subgroups (FY2020)

Prepandemic Period Early Pandemic Period Difference†

Household Composition

% of SNAP 

HHs

Standard 

Error

% of SNAP 

HHs

Standard 

Error

With Elderly Individuals 27.64 0.50 27.22 0.73 -0.43

With Nonelderly Individuals With Disabilities 23.58 0.46 21.71 0.69 -1.87

With Children 39.09 0.55 38.28 0.80 -0.81

Only Adults Ages 18–49 Without Disabilities 10.81 0.31 13.46 0.54 2.65**

With an Employed Individual 27.91 0.51 25.30 0.71 -2.60***

With Zero Gross Income 19.24 0.43 22.19 0.70 2.95**

* = p<0.10; ** = p<0.05; *** = p<0.01; †Differences are rounded and may not match column differences

Table 7: Average Size of SNAP Households by Key Subgroups (FY2020)

Prepandemic Period Early Pandemic Period Difference†

Household Composition

Mean HH 

Size

Standard 

Error

Mean HH 

Size

Standard 

Error

All Households 1.98 0.02 1.96 0.02 -0.02

With Elderly Individuals 1.21 0.01 1.21 0.02 0.00

With Nonelderly Individuals With Disabilities 1.80 0.03 1.86 0.06 0.06

With Children 3.34 0.03 3.32 0.04 -0.02

Only Adults Ages 18–49 Without Disabilities 1.07 0.01 1.05 0.01 -0.02

With an Employed Individual 2.90 0.03 2.90 0.06 0.00

With Zero Gross Income 1.63 0.03 1.65 0.04 0.01

* = p<0.10; ** = p<0.05; *** = p<0.01; †Differences are rounded and may not match column differences
10

Table 7 displays the changes in household size (number of people in the household) for all SNAP households and the select 

subgroups. On average, households with children were the largest of the selected subgroups. Households with an 

employed individual were the second largest, which can be partially explained by the greater likelihood of households 

with children to also contain an employed individual (Cronquist & Eiffes, 2022). Households composed of only workingage adults were the smallest in both periods. We find no evidence of statistically significant changes in household size 

overall or for the subgroups. 

Table 8 shows changes in average gross income—earned and unearned income summed before deductions and 

exclusions—for the select subgroups and all households. Average gross income for all SNAP households fell by nearly $5, 

but this change was not statistically significant. However, except for households with children, all subgroups saw an 

increase in average gross income, meaning that the overall decline was driven primarily by households with children. 

Households with only working-age adults saw the largest increase ($92.01) of any subgroup. These changes reflect 

conditions in the early pandemic that likely increased the number of working adult households eligible for SNAP, including 

increased unemployment rates(Auginbaugh & Rothstein, 2022) and the 

temporary suspension of certain SNAP work requirements (Center for 

Budget and Policy Priorities, 2021), as well as increased unearned 

income from Federal supplements to UI payments under the CARES Act.

In terms of relative changes between the two periods, average gross 

income increased for all subgroups except households with children, which saw a decrease of about $13 in the early 

pandemic. Households with employed individuals saw an increase of nearly $78 in average gross income which, when 

combined with the fact that the proportion of employed SNAP households decreased (Table 6), may indicate that 

individuals who became unemployed were disproportionately lower income. Given the overlap between these two 

subgroups (Cronquist & Eiffes, 2022), these findings suggest a 

negative economic impact on SNAP households with children during 

the pandemic, which is supported by evidence of increased financial 

fragility for mothers during the pandemic (Lloro, 2021).

Mean gross income for households with elderly individuals increased slightly, but this increase was not statistically 

significant. These findings likely reflect the relatively fixed incomes of elderly individuals. Additionally, households that 

contained nonelderly individuals with disabilities saw their gross incomes increase on average by about $28 between the 

two periods, which was a statistically significant change. 

Table 8: Average Monthly Gross Income of SNAP Households by Key Subgroups (FY2020)

Prepandemic Period Early Pandemic Period Difference†

Household Composition

Mean 

Income ($) SE ($)

Mean 

Income ($) SE ($) ($)

All Households 881.27 8.20 876.54 13.40 -4.73

With Elderly Individuals 945.01 10.49 950.24 16.07 5.23

With Nonelderly Individuals With Disabilities 1,052.68 11.19 1,080.67 22.01 27.99***

With Children 1,109.41 16.63 1,096.37 27.04 -13.05**

Only Adults Ages 18–49 Without Disabilities 275.34 16.54 367.35 33.10 92.01***

With an Employed Individual 1,429.85 17.74 1,507.85 31.37 77.99***

* = p<0.10; ** = p<0.05; *** = p<0.01; †Differences are rounded and may not match column differences

Key Finding #6: Average household 

size did not significantly change 

overall or for any subgroups.

Key Finding #7: Except for households 

with children, all subgroups saw an 

increase in average gross income.
11

While gross income gives us clearer insight into the financial situation of SNAP households, net income is the basis for

household benefit amounts. Table 9 reports average net income across the select subgroups and all SNAP households. 

Unlike with gross income, all select subgroups experienced statistically significant increases in average net income.

Employed households saw the largest average increase in net income (of about $90) in the early pandemic period. The 

second largest increase occurred for households composed of working-age adults, 

which nearly doubled their net income from about $105 to $195; the third largest 

increase was for households containing an individual with a disability (about $64). 

For the first two subgroups noted above, this average increase was mostly due to 

increased UI income; for disabled households, this was mostly due to increased UI 

and SSI income for those households specifically. 

Among the select subgroups, households with elderly individuals or children experienced the smallest increases in net 

income. Both had lower average increases than SNAP households overall: all households increased their average net 

income by around $29 versus around $25 for those with children and close to $12 for those with elderly individuals. This 

is not unexpected for the latter subgroup because, as mentioned previously, elderly SNAP participants tend to have a 

relatively fixed income.

Table 9: Average Net Income of SNAP Households by Key Subgroups (FY2020)

Prepandemic Period Early Pandemic Period Change†

Household Composition

Mean 

Income ($) SE ($)

Mean 

Income ($) SE ($) ($)

All Households 414.98 5.91 444.45 10.15 29.47*** 

With Elderly Individuals 469.88 9.57 481.97 14.64 12.08** 

With Nonelderly Individuals With Disabilities 498.58 11.81 562.41 21.99 63.84*** 

With Children 552.27 11.81 577.39 19.70 25.12*** 

Only Adults Ages 18–49 Without Disabilities 105.37 9.25 195.14 26.45 89.78*** 

With an Employed Individual 687.87 13.90 778.32 25.43 90.46*** 

* = p<0.10; ** = p<0.05; *** = p<0.01; †Differences are rounded and may not match column differences

Table 10: Average Benefits of SNAP Households by Key Subgroups, Excluding Emergency Allotments (FY2020)

Prepandemic Period Early Pandemic Period Change

Household Composition

Mean 

Income ($) SE ($)

Mean 

Income ($) SE ($) ($)

All Households 231.08 2.18 225.65 3.09 -5.44**

With Elderly Individuals 110.28 1.89 109.29 3.25 -0.99

With Nonelderly Individuals With Disabilities 179.24 3.83 174.76 6.81 -4.47

With Children 389.36 3.90 382.31 5.42 -7.04**

Only Adults Ages 18–49 Without Disabilities 181.86 2.04 174.72 2.63 -7.15***

With an Employed Individual 289.32 4.37 273.63 6.50 -15.69***

With Zero Gross Income 288.87 4.48 292.18 5.99 3.31

* = p<0.10; ** = p<0.05; *** = p<0.01; †Differences are rounded and may not match column differences.

Key Finding #8: On 

average, the increase in 

net income led to a fall in 

non-EA SNAP benefits.
12

Table 10 compares average non-EA benefits between the two 

periods for key subgroups, including zero-income households,

and Figure 4 makes this comparison on a per-person basis. 

Overall, changes in non-EA benefits were relatively muted 

between the two periods. This was especially true for perperson non-EA benefits estimates, which fell by $1.42 on 

average (see Figure 4). As noted previously, the general increase 

in net income led to a fall in average non-EA SNAP benefits. On 

average, households’ non-EA SNAP benefit fell by $5.44.

Most household types experienced a decline in SNAP benefit, 

the largest of which was a nearly $16 decline among households 

with an employed individual. This amounts to a decrease in nonEA benefits of more than 5 percent. The fall in benefits for this 

subgroup is explained by it having the largest increase in net 

income (Table 9) and no significant change in household size 

between the two periods (Table 7).

Households with elderly individuals or nonelderly individuals with disabilities saw small decreases in non-EA benefits that

were not statistically significant. The minimal change in the elderly benefits is consistent with this subgroup’s minimal 

change in net income and household size. Although disabled households’ average net income increased by about $63, this 

subgroup also had the greatest rise in average household size, which, although not statistically significant, may help

explain the relatively small reduction in benefits.

Households with children and those composed only of working-age adults both experienced similar declines in average 

non-EA SNAP benefits of about $7 per household; the declines were less similar on a per-person basis, about $1.5 and $4 

declines, respectively.

In summary, there was an increase in households with zero income and those composed only of working-age adults and 

a decrease in households with employed individuals. However, average net income increased between the prepandemic

and early pandemic periods for most of the select subgroups, which led to a decrease in non-EA SNAP benefits. Household 

size did not change for any subgroup to a statistically significant extent. Elderly households, which tend to have more 

stable circumstances, saw limited changes in income and benefits between the two periods. Households with children 

were the only subgroup to see a significant reduction in average gross income, but they remained the household subgroup 

with the highest average benefits for both periods due to their larger household size. 

(5) Emergency Allotments

Up to this point the analyses have only examined changes in benefit amounts under regular SNAP rules. We will now 

briefly examine how EA benefits were distributed amongst the selected subgroups. Congress established EA under the 

FFCRA in response to the COVID-19 pandemic. During the early pandemic, States were permitted to provide EA to SNAP 

households if two criteria were met: (1) the declaration of a Federal public health emergency under Section 319 of the 

Public Health Service Act; and (2) an emergency having been declared in the State (Aussenberg & Billings, 2022). EA 

benefits were calculated in this manner: households that were not already receiving the maximum SNAP benefit for their 

household size were eligible to receive a supplemental benefit equal to the difference between their benefit as certified 

Figure 4: Average Per-Person Benefits of SNAP 

Households by Key Subgroups ($) (FY2020)

$116.75 

$91.21 

$99.47 

$116.59 

$169.72 

$99.76 

$176.73 

$115.32 

$90.64 

$93.94 

$115.11 

$165.69 

$94.43 

$177.24 

All Households

With Elderly Individuals

With Nonelderly Individuals

With Disabilities

With Children

Only Adults Ages 18–49 

Without Disabilities

With an Employed

Individual

With Zero Gross Income

Prepandemic Period Early Pandemic
13

under normal SNAP rules and the maximum allotment based on their household size.

iii Thus, the dollar amount of EA each 

household received was a function of both household net income and household size.

In Figure 5, we see the average EA benefits for each of the select household subgroups along with their regular SNAP 

benefits.iv Households on average received nearly $115 in EA each month, but amounts received varied by household 

subgroup. Only zero-income and working-age adult households had lower than average EA benefits because their regular 

SNAP benefit is generally close to the maximum allotment for their 

household size. Over 97 percent of zero-income households were 

certified for the maximum benefit under normal SNAP rules in the 

early pandemic period.vIn addition, households composed only of 

working-age adults had relatively lower average income and were 

the smallest (1.05 people on average) of the selected subgroups.

Households with employed individuals or children received the highest average EA benefits. In the early pandemic period, 

both subgroups had larger than average household sizes (2.90 and 3.32 people, respectively) and a smaller percentage 

received the maximum benefit under regular SNAP procedures (20.39 and 37.19 percent, respectively). Households with 

elderly individuals received an average of $118 in EA whereas households with nonelderly disabled individuals received 

about $149. This is primarily because the former subgroup tends to be smaller (1.21 people on average) compared to the 

latter (1.80 people on average).

Figure 6 shows the distribution of total EA benefits allocated across different household groups and households by poverty 

level. Starting with the household groups, those with children received the largest portion of EA benefits (nearly 55 percent

of the total), and households with employed individuals received the second most with around 46 percent. Households 

with zero income received the least with less than 1 percent of EA benefits, and working-age adults received slightly more 

at around 3 percent. Households with elderly disabled individuals made up the middle. This distribution results 

unambiguously from the information in Table 6 and Figure 5, which show that households with children and/or employed 

individuals comprise a relatively large proportion of the SNAP caseload as well as receiving relatively high average EA 

benefits, while working adult household and those with zero income received small average EA benefits.

Figure 5: Average Emergency Allotments of SNAP Households by Key Subgroups ($) (FY2020)

$225.65

$109.29

$174.76

$382.31

$174.72

$273.63 $292.18

$114.57

$118.27

$148.69

$164.12

$28.54

$206.85

$3.20

$0

$100

$200

$300

$400

$500

$600

All Households With Elderly

Individuals

With Nonelderly

Individuals With

Disabilities

With Children Only Adults Ages 

18–49 Without 

Disabilities

With an

Employed

Individual

With Zero Gross

Income

Regular SNAP EA

Key Finding #9: Households received 

an average of nearly $115 in EA each 

month, but amounts received varied 

by household composition.
14

Distribution of total EA benefits by poverty groups followed a similar logic. Households in the lower-income brackets 

received the lowest proportion of total EA benefits, with households at zero and 1–50-percent of poverty receiving less 

than one percent and around 5 percent, respectively. Households in the 51–100-percent of poverty range received the 

largest share of EA benefits (around 48 percent). As income increased, the share fell: the 101–130-percent group took 

away around 29.5 percent of EA benefits, while the 130-percent-or-more group received approximately 17.5 percent. Like 

with the household groups, these findings are unsurprising considering that nearly half of SNAP cases are in the 51–100-

percent range. Meanwhile, those households with higher incomes received relatively smaller portions despite being 

eligible for larger EA benefits because there are less of these households.

The impact of EA can perhaps best be seen in its impact on poverty. When added to gross income, regular SNAP and EA 

moved nearly 4-in-10 households out of poverty. Figure 7 shows the impact of SNAP and EA on poverty levels amongst

SNAP households in the early pandemic period. When only counting gross income, about 79 percent of SNAP 

households were at or below poverty. When we add SNAP benefits to cash income, that percentage drops to just over 

half (51 percent), a decrease of nearly 29 percentage points. When EA benefits are further added, the percentage of 

SNAP households living in poverty falls to about 42 percent. Thus, SNAP and EA benefits were able to move 38 percent

Figure 6: Proportion of Total EA Benefits Going to Household and Poverty Groups, Early Pandemic (FY2020)

Figure 7: The Impact of SNAP and EA on SNAP Household Poverty Levels, Early Pandemic (FY2020)

28.16%

28.01%

54.91%

3.35%

45.73%

0.62%

0.62%

4.71%

47.73%

29.49%

17.44%

With Elderly Individuals

With Nonelderly Individuals With Disabilities

With Children

Only Adults Ages 18–49 Without Disabilities

With an Employed Individual

With Zero Gross Income

0% of Poverty Line

1–50% of Poverty Line

51–100% of Poverty Line

101–130% of Poverty Line

130% or More of Poverty Line

79.39%

50.69%

41.72%

20.61%

49.31%

58.28%

0% 100%

Counting Gross Income Only

Gross Income + SNAP

Gross Income + SNAP + EA

% of households at or below the poverty level % of households above the poverty level
15

of households over the poverty line in the early pandemic.

(6) Conclusion

This report examined changes in SNAP household characteristics 

observed in the early months of the COVID-19 pandemic (June to

September 2020) in 47 States that reported QC data during that timeperiod. Using descriptive analytical techniques, changes in means and 

proportions of various characteristics for this SNAP caseload were 

calculated using common statistical significance tests.

These analyses show that although earned income fell in the early pandemic period, overall mean gross income did not 

statistically change due to a rise in unearned income, particularly UI benefits. However, when looking at changes among

select subgroups, all subgroups except households with children saw a rise in average gross income. The decrease in 

earned income was accompanied by an increase in the proportion of SNAP households reporting zero gross income, which 

is consistent with other research indicating a significant rise in unemployment during the early months of the pandemic

(Auginbaugh & Rothstein, 2022; Bureau of Labor Statistics, 2021; Zabek & Larrimore, 2020).

The early pandemic period also saw a slight increase in the distribution of households with relatively higher income and 

households with zero income compared to other SNAP households. Thus, there were more households receiving both the 

maximum and minimum SNAP benefits when excluding EA. Due to decreases in the earned income and shelter deductions, 

the average amount of deductions applied to SNAP cases fell, and mean net income rose for all subgroups examined in 

this report. Meanwhile, household size remained relatively stable. This led to a general fall in non-EA benefits for all SNAP 

households and subgroups, except for zero-income households, which had a small but not statistically significant increase 

in benefits.

However, EA benefits were designed to respond to the economic impacts of the pandemic by providing households with 

supplemental benefits, calculated as the difference between their regular SNAP benefit and the maximum benefit for their 

household size. Thus, while households saw decreases in average non-EA benefits due to changing economic 

circumstances, EA provided additional assistance to SNAP households that were not already receiving the maximum 

allotment, which may have contributed to stability of food security between 2019 and 2020 (Coleman-Jensen, Rabbitt, 

Gregory, & Singh, 2021). This was especially evident for households with an employed individual or children, which saw 

larger decreases in regular SNAP benefits but also received the highest average amounts of EA benefits due to their 

relatively large household sizes. The impact of SNAP and EA on households’ financial circumstances is demonstrated by 

the fact that those benefits, when combined with cash income, were sufficient to move nearly 40 percent of SNAP 

households above the poverty level. Thus, this evidence indicates that SNAP and EA accomplished their intended antipoverty goals during the pandemic, increasing family food budgets for low-income households during a time of general 

economic hardship in the U.S.

References

Auginbaugh, A., & Rothstein, D. S. (2022, January). How did employment change during the COVID-19 pandemic? 

Evidence from a new BLS survey supplement. Employment & Unemployment, Vol. 11(No. 1).

Aussenberg, R. A., & Billings, K. C. (2022). USDA Nutrition Assistance Programs: Response to the COVID-19 Pandemic.

Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service.

Key Finding #10: When added to 

cash income, regular SNAP and 

EA moved nearly 4-in-10 

households out of poverty.
16

Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2021, December 17). The Economics Daily. Retrieved February 17, 2022, from 

https://www.bls.gov/opub/ted/2021/15-7-percent-of-people-who-worked-or-looked-for-work-experiencedunemployment-in-2020.htm

Center for Budget and Policy Priorities. (2021). States Are Using Much-Needed Temporary Flexibility in SNAP to Respond 

to COVID-19 Challenges. Washington, DC. Retrieved from https://www.cbpp.org/research/foodassistance/states-are-using-much-needed-temporary-flexibility-in-snap-to-respond-to

Coleman-Jensen, A., Rabbitt, M. P., Gregory, C., & Singh, A. A. (2021). Household Food Security in the United States in 

2020. Washington, DC: Economic Research Service.

Cronquist, K., & Eiffes, B. (2022). Characteristics of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Households: Fiscal Year 

2020. Alexandria, VA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service.

Food and Nutrition Service. (2019, August 8). SNAP - Application Processing Waivers. Retrieved June 13, 2022, from 

Food and Nutrition Service website: https://www.fns.usda.gov/disaster/pandemic/covid-19/snap-applicationwaivers

Food and Nutrition Service. (2022, February 16). National Data Bank, FNS-388 data. Alexandria, VA.

Franckle, B., Vigil, A., & Leftin, J. (2021). Updated findings and recommendations for Subtask 122: Assess small sample 

sizes in the FY 2020 SNAP QC data. Contract Number: 12-3198-21-F-0056, Memo Number: 005, Washington, DC.

Government Accountability Office. (2021). Fiscal Conditions During the COVID-19 Pandemic in Selected States.

Washington, DC: Government Accountability Office.

Hodges, L., Jones, J. W., & Toossi, S. (2021, October 04). Coronavirus (COVID-19) Pandemic Transformed the U.S. Federal 

Food and Nutrition Assistance Landscape. Retrieved February 22, 2022, from https://www.ers.usda.gov/amberwaves/2021/october/coronavirus-covid-19-pandemic-transformed-the-u-s-federal-food-and-nutritionassistance-landscape/

Jones, J. W. (2021). COVID-19 Working Paper: Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and Pandemic Electronic 

Benefit Transfer Redemptions during the Coronavirus Pandemic. Washington, DC: United States Department of 

Agriculture, Economic Research Service.

Kaplan, H. (2020, November). The Initial Impact of COVID-19 on Communities and the Entities Serving Them. 

Consumer & Community Context, Vol. 2(No. 2), 23–29.

Lloro, A. (2021, November). Childcare Disruptions and Mothers’ Availability to Work during the Pandemic: Evidence 

from the Survey of Household Economics and Decisionmaking. Consumer & Community Context, Vol. 3(No. 1), 

2–7.

Toossi, S., Jones, J. W., & Hodges, L. (2021). The Food and Nutrition Assistance Landscape: Fiscal Year 2020 Annual 

Report. Washington, DC: United States Department of Agricultur, Economic Research Service.

Udalova, V. (2021, March 8). Pandemic Impact on Mortality and Economy Varies Across Age Groups and Geographies. 

Retrieved February 17, 2022, from https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2021/03/initial-impact-covid-19-

on-united-states-economy-more-widespread-than-on-mortality.html

Zabek, M., & Larrimore, J. (2020, November). Household Finances under COVID-19: Evidence from the Survey of 

Household Economics and Decisionmaking. Consumer & Community Context, Vol. 2, (No. 2), 2–8.
17

End Notes

i Pandemic-EBT was a program authorized under the FFCRA to provide school children with food assistance funds through EBT cards 

meant to replace free and reduced-price school meals that weren’t being served during the pandemic.

ii Note that the Consolidated Appropriations Act of 2021 (P.L. 116-159) excludes Federal Pandemic Unemployment Compensation 

from consideration as income and from consideration as resources in the month of receipt and the following 9 months for the 

purposes of determining SNAP eligibility. However, this did not impact FY2020.

iii This policy changed on April 1, 2021, which is beyond the period examined here.

iv EA benefits were not recorded in the QC data. Thus, Mathematica calculated EA benefits based on the difference between the 

household’s certified benefit and the maximum benefit the household would have been eligible for based on household size.

v The remainder of these households participating in a combined application project, in which FNS collaborates with the Social 

Security Administration to provide fixed SNAP benefit levels for SSI recipients.

For More Information:

Burt, Kameron (2022). Early Months of the COVID-19 Pandemic in Fiscal Year 2020: Characteristics of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance 

Program Households, Alexandria, VA: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, Office of Policy Support, Available online at:

www.fns.usda.gov/research-and-analysis. 

USDA is an equal opportunity provider, employer, and lender.