Making America Stronger:

A Profile of the 

Food Stamp Program

United States

Department 

of Agriculture

Food and 

Nutrition 

Service

Office of

Analysis,

Nutrition, 

and

Evaluation

September

2005
w fns usda gov

The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) prohibits discrimination in all 

its programs and activities on the basis of race, color, national origin, age, 

disability, and where applicable, sex, marital status, familial status, parental

status, religion, sexual orientation, genetic information, political beliefs,

reprisal, or because all or part of an individual’s income is derived from any

public assistance program. (Not all prohibited bases apply to all programs.)

Persons with disabilities who require alternative means for communication 

of program information (Braille, large print, audiotape, etc.) should contact

USDA’s TARGET Center at (202) 720-2600 (voice and TDD). To file a 

complaint of discrimination, write to USDA, Director, Office of Civil Rights,

1400 Independence Avenue, S.W., Washington, D.C. 20250-9410, or call

(800) 795-3272 (voice) or (202) 720-6382 (TDD). USDA is an equal 

opportunity provider and employer.

Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food

Stamp Program is available on our website at

www.fns.usda.gov/oane. If you would like additional

copies, write or call us at:

Office of Analysis, Nutrition, and Evaluation

Food and Nutrition Service, USDA

3101 Park Center Drive

Alexandria, VA 22302

(703) 305-2134

Want to learn more about USDA nutrition assistance

programs? Visit our website at www.fns.usda.gov.

You can also find additional information on 

Food Stamp Program research on our website at

www.fns.usda.gov/oane.
Acknowledgments

The creation of this research summary was a team effort by the Family Programs

Staff in the Office of Analysis, Nutrition, and Evaluation. The scope and quality of

the summary reflect the talents and expertise of:

Dawn Aldridge Jenny Genser

Sharron Cristofar Kristen Hyatt

Michael DePiro Erika Jones

Rosemarie Downer Christine Kissmer

Kate Fink Carol Olander

Many others too numerous to name individually gave generously of their time,

experience, and insight by reviewing drafts, providing the design and layout, and

assisting in final production, gifts the team gratefully acknowledges.
Table of Contents

Introduction ................................................................................................................................1

How the Food Stamp Program Works ....................................................................................2

Trends in Mandatory Spending ...............................................................................................3

Serving Millions of Americans..................................................................................................4

Overview of Food Stamp Participation...................................................................................4

Characteristics of Food Stamp Participants ............................................................................5

Changes in Characteristics of Food Stamp Participants .........................................................6

Food Stamp Participation Dynamics.......................................................................................7

Multiple Participation in Nutrition Assistance Programs .......................................................8

Ensuring Access..........................................................................................................................9

Food Stamp Participation Rates ..............................................................................................9

Food Stamp Participation Rates by Group............................................................................10

State Food Stamp Participation Rates ...................................................................................11

Reasons for Not Participating in the Food Stamp Program..................................................12

Encouraging Participation .....................................................................................................13

Targeting People in Need.........................................................................................................14

Income and Poverty Status of Food Stamp Households.......................................................14

Sources of Cash Income in Food Stamp Households...........................................................15

Deductions Available to Food Stamp Households................................................................16

Asset Eligibility among Low-Income People .......................................................................17

Improving Nutrition.................................................................................................................18

Food Expenditures among Food Stamp Participants ............................................................18

Adequacy of Food Stamp Benefits .......................................................................................19

Food Stamp Nutrition Education ..........................................................................................20

Impact of Food Stamp Participation on Nutrition.................................................................21

Prevalence of Food Insecurity...............................................................................................22

Hunger, Obesity, and Food Stamp Program Participation ....................................................23

Making Work Pay ....................................................................................................................24

Food Stamp Program Work Requirements............................................................................24

Food Stamp Program Interaction with TANF.......................................................................25

Food Stamp Participation among TANF Leavers.................................................................26

Improving Administrative Efficiency.....................................................................................27

Food Stamp Program Customer Satisfaction ........................................................................27

Timeliness of Food Stamp Application Processing ..............................................................28

Food Stamp Program Payment Accuracy .............................................................................29

The Extent of Food Stamp Trafficking .................................................................................30

Food Stamp Administrative Costs.........................................................................................31

State Food Stamp Policy Options .........................................................................................32

Delivering Benefits Effectively................................................................................................33

Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) ........................................................................................33

Authorized Food Stamp Stores .............................................................................................34

Access to Food Retailers.......................................................................................................35

Disaster Food Stamp Assistance ...........................................................................................36

ii ✥ Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program Food and Nutrition Service/USDA
Food and Nutrition Service/USDA Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program ✥ 1

For over 35 years, the Food Stamp Program (FSP) has

served as the foundation of America’s national nutrition

safety net. It is America’s first line of defense against

hunger, and offers a powerful tool for improving nutrition

among low-income people.

Over the course of three and a half decades, researchers and

analysts—inside government and out—have built a substantial body of evidence that the FSP makes an important 

difference in the lives of low-income people.

• It touches the lives of millions of people in need of a 

helping hand to put food on the table. Unlike most 

other government assistance, the FSP is available to 

nearly anyone with little income and few resources. For 

example, program rules do not limit benefits to families 

with children, the elderly, or the unemployed. Nationwide 

standards for eligibility and benefits create a national 

nutrition safety net for low-income families and 

individuals wherever they live.

• It raises food expenditures and improves nutrient 

availability. Participants in the FSP spend more on 

food than they would in the absence of the program. 

Providing benefits that can be spent only on food raises 

food expenditures more than an equal amount of cash. In 

addition, there is evidence that program participation can 

increase the availability of some nutrients in the home 

food supply. In the mid-1990s, the nutrient intake of 

low-income people differed little from that of higherincome people—a sharp contrast from 40 years ago.

• It responds to changing economic conditions. The 

program automatically expands to meet increased need 

when the economy is in recession and contracts when the 

economy is growing, making sure that food gets to people 

who need it. Food stamp benefits automatically flow to 

communities, States, or regions of the country that face 

rising unemployment or poverty, providing a boost for 

local economies. USDA researchers have estimated that 

an additional $5.00 in food stamp benefits can generate 

$9.20 in total economic activity. And when the economy 

strengthens, participation declines.

• It delivers billions of dollars in benefits with a high 

degree of integrity. The program is effective at delivering 

benefits only to households that need them; more than 98 

percent of all participating households are eligible for food

stamp benefits. In 2004, the program achieved the highest 

level of overall payment accuracy in its history. The 

national overpayment error rate—the percentage of food 

stamp benefit dollars issued in excess of the amounts for 

which households are eligible—fell to 4.5 percent; the 

underpayment error rate fell to 1.4 percent. The extent of 

trafficking food stamps for cash is also low—only 2.5 

cents of every dollar issued.

• It provides flexibility to States while ensuring the 

protection of a national safety net. The Farm Security 

and Rural Investment Act of 2002 continued the commitment to a national nutrition safety net and gave States 

substantial new opportunity to streamline complex rules 

and align food stamp rules with other program requirements. States can also use the FSP’s waiver procedures to 

test changes to a variety of program rules.

The 2002 Farm Bill made several additional changes that

strengthened the program by:

• Giving States new options to simplify program rules 

and support working families

• Restoring food stamp eligibility for many legal 

immigrants

• Creating a more balanced system of accountability 

for program performance

The current authorization of operations for the FSP extends

through the end of fiscal year 2007. As the time for reauthorization approaches, it is useful to take stock of its accomplishments, identify those features that have contributed to

its success, and look for ways to strengthen operations to

achieve program goals more fully. To that end, the Food and

Nutrition Service (FNS) has prepared this summary of past

research on program operations and outcomes.

Introduction
2 ✥ Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program Food and Nutrition Service/USDA

The FSP alleviates hunger and improves nutrition by

increasing the food-purchasing power of low-income

households, enabling them to obtain a more nutritious

diet through normal channels of trade.

The program is available to nearly anyone with little

income and few resources. Program rules do not limit 

benefits to a specific group of people, such as the elderly,

families with children, or the unemployed. As a result, the

program serves a wide range of low-income persons.

Nationwide standards for eligibility and benefits create a

national safety net for low-income households. Most food

stamp households must have monthly gross income less than

130 percent of the Federal poverty guidelines ($2,097 for a

family of four in fiscal year 2006), monthly net income less

than 100 percent of the poverty guidelines, and assets less

than $2,000. Households with elderly and disabled members

are exempt from the gross income limit and must have assets

less than $3,000. Households are exempt from the income

and asset tests if all members receive Temporary Assistance

for Needy Families (TANF), General Assistance (GA), or

Supplemental Security Income (SSI). Eligible households

must also meet some non-financial criteria, including 

citizenship and work requirements.

To provide a better measure of disposable income 

available to purchase food and to encourage work, the

program allows several deductions from income. The

deductions include a standard available to all households; an

earned-income deduction available to working households;

an excess-shelter deduction for those with high housing and

utility expenses; and dependent care, medical, and child support deductions for some people with particular expenses.

Food stamp benefits are based on the Thrifty Food Plan,

a low-cost model food plan that reflects current nutrition

standards and guidance, the nutrient content and cost of

food, and consumption patterns of low-income households.

Maximum allotments vary by household size. In fiscal year

2006, the maximum allotment for a family of four is $506

per month.

Maximum allotments are reduced by 30 percent of a

household’s net income. Food stamp benefits are designed

to be a supplement to household food purchases from a

household’s own income.

Participating households receive monthly benefit 

allotments in the form of electronic debit cards. Food

stamp benefits are limited to the purchase of food items for

use at home as well as seeds and plants to produce food.

Except in a few uncommon circumstances, benefits can be

exchanged only at authorized food retailers. Nationwide,

there are about 152,000 such retailers.

Benefits are fully funded by the Federal government,

while administrative costs are shared between States

and the Federal government. While FNS provides 

broad policy guidance, States and counties carry out the

day-to-day administration. States are responsible for the

certification of households and issuance of benefits; 

FNS is responsible for the authorization and oversight of

food retailers.

The program monitors performance through a national

system of quality control and a set of performance 

indicators. The quality control system measures the 

accuracy of eligibility decisions and benefit determinations

against program rules for a representative sample of cases.

Other performance measures include the proportion of 

eligible households who receive benefits and the percentage

of applications processed within required timelines.

How the Food Stamp Program Works
Food and Nutrition Service/USDA Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program ✥ 3

Mandatory programs cost the Federal government more

than $1.3 trillion in fiscal year 2004. Mandatory spending

accounted for 61 percent of total outlays, down from 64 

percent in 1995. Social Security, Medicare, and Medicaid

made up two-thirds of total mandatory outlays in 2004.

The FSP is an important, though smaller, entitlement. 

In 2004, it served 24 million people, providing an average

monthly benefit of $86 per person, with a total Federal 

cost of $27 billion (excluding the Nutrition Assistance

Program in Puerto Rico). This represents about 2 percent 

of mandatory spending, 1 percent of total Federal spending,

and about a third of USDA spending in 2004.

The size of the FSP is diminishing relative to that of

other entitlements. Food stamp spending fell from 2.5 

percent of mandatory spending in 1995 to 2.0 percent in

2004, a result mainly of growth in Medicaid, Medicare, 

and Social Security.

Source:

Office of Management and Budget. Fiscal Year 2006

President’s Budget, Historical Tables 8.1, 8.5, and 11.3.

Available online at

[www.whitehouse.gov/omb/budget/fy2006/pdf/hist.pdf].

Trends in Mandatory Spending
4 ✥ Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program Food and Nutrition Service/USDA

The pattern of participation in the FSP over the past 25

years has followed closely the pattern of poverty and the

economic cycle in America.

• Participation declined slowly from 1983 to 1989, a result 

of a strong economy and possibly welfare cutbacks. It 

increased from 1990 through 1994 by 37 percent, driven 

by a slowing economy, Medicaid expansion, and changes 

that increased access to the FSP.

• After peaking at 28.0 million in March 1994, participation 

declined steadily, reaching a low of 16.9 million in July 

2000 in response to a strong economy, restrictions on the 

eligibility of non-citizens, time limits for non-elderly 

childless adults, and a lower participation rate among 

eligible people.

• Participation began rising in 2001 as unemployment and 

poverty increased. At the same time, eligibility was 

restored for many non-citizens, vehicle rules were relaxed,

States had options to simplify their reporting requirements,

and FNS encouraged improved access to program benefits.

• In fiscal year 2005, growth in participation slowed and 

then leveled off. Through the first nine months of that 

year, the program served an average of 25.5 million people.

Source:

Food and Nutrition Service. Food Stamp Program

Participation and Costs. Available online at

[www.fns.usda.gov/pd/fssummar.htm].

Serving Millions of Americans

Overview of Food Stamp Participation
Food and Nutrition Service/USDA Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program ✥ 5

Most food stamp participants are children. Fifty percent

of all participants are under 18, and about half of all 

households include at least one child. Households with 

children receive about three-quarters of all food stamp

benefits. About two-thirds of the households with children

are single-parent families.

Many food stamp participants are elderly or disabled.

About 8 percent of all participants are over 59, and 71 

percent of this group live alone. About 17 percent of all

households include an elderly person, and 23 percent 

include someone who is disabled.

Forty-two percent are non-elderly adults, divided roughly

equally among childless adults, single parents, and adults

living with children and at least one other adult.

Nearly 4 percent are non-citizens, including legal 

permanent resident aliens and refugees. Another 3 percent

are naturalized citizens.

More are non-Hispanic white (43 percent) than any other

racial/ethnic category. Thirty-three percent are African

American, and 19 percent are Hispanic.

Almost 40 percent of all participants live in households

with earnings. About 22 percent live in households with

TANF, 21 percent in households with SSI, and 17 percent in

households with Social Security.

Source:

Poikolainen, Anni. Characteristics of Food Stamp

Households: Fiscal Year 2004. Report submitted to the 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition 

Service. Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research,

September 2005.

Characteristics of Food Stamp Participants
6 ✥ Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program Food and Nutrition Service/USDA

Over the past 15 years, earnings have replaced cash 

welfare payments as the most common source of income

among food stamp households. The share of households

with cash welfare fell from 42 percent to 16 percent between

1989 and 2004, while the share with earnings rose from 20

percent to 29 percent.

About half of all food stamp participants were children

(under age 18) throughout this period.

The number of elderly receiving food stamps has

remained fairly constant, since factors that drive participation changes, such as welfare policy and employment rates,

don’t typically affect them.

Source: 

Poikolainen, Anni. Characteristics of Food Stamp

Households: Fiscal Year 2004. Report submitted to the 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition 

Service. Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research,

September 2005.

Changes in Characteristics of Food Stamp Participants
Food and Nutrition Service/USDA Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program ✥ 7

Half of all new entrants to the program received benefits

for eight months or less throughout the 1990s. Single

mothers, elderly persons, and non-citizens tended to stay 

on longer than working poor people and childless adults

without disabilities. In the late 1990s, 75 percent of new

entrants left the program by month 16, five months faster

than in the early 1990s.

Entrants who don’t cycle off the program quickly 

accumulate on the caseload so that, in any given month,

a substantial portion are in the midst of a long participation spell. In March 1996, for example, half the participants

were in the midst of spells that had lasted more than four

and a half years. As many as half will participate multiple

times, one-fourth will participate for a single short spell, and

one-fourth will participate for a single long spell lasting 

several years.

Participation in the FSP is a common experience for

many Americans. One study suggests that about half 

(49 percent) of all children will receive benefits before they 

reach age 20, and about half (51 percent) of all adults will

receive benefits at some point between the ages of 20 and 65.

Source:

Cody, Scott, Philip Gleason, Bruce Schechter, Miki Satake,

and Julie Sykes. Food Stamp Program Entry and Exit: 

An Analysis of Participation Trends in the 1990s. Report

submitted to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic

Research Service. Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy

Research, February 2005.

Gleason, Philip, Peter Schochet, and Robert Moffitt. The

Dynamics of Food Stamp Program Participation in the

Early 1990s. Report submitted to the U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Washington, DC:

Mathematica Policy Research, April 1998.

Rank, Mark R., and Thomas A. Hirschl. Estimating the

Probabilities and Patterns of Food Stamp Use Across the

Life Course. Report submitted to the U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Chicago: Joint

Center for Poverty Research, University of Chicago and

Northwestern University, February 2003.

Measured from the month the person entered the Food Stamp Program.

Food Stamp Participation Dynamics
8 ✥ Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program Food and Nutrition Service/USDA

Most families who participate in nutrition assistance 

programs do not enroll in every program. Among all 

people that participate in at least one of four major nutrition

assistance programs (food stamps, free or reduced-price

lunch and breakfast, and WIC), only 5 percent live in 

families that receive all four, and 40 percent live in families

that receive only one.

Over one-third (37 percent) of the participants in nutrition assistance programs receive food stamps; 11 percent

receive only food stamps, 17 percent receive only school

meals (lunch or breakfast), and 11 percent receive only WIC.

The most common participation combination includes

food stamps and school meals (15 percent). Virtually all

families in which a child receives a free or reduced-price

school breakfast also receive free or reduced-price 

school lunch.

Source:

Trippe, Carole, and Karen Cunnyngham. Multiple Benefit

Receipt among Persons Receiving Food Assistance and

Other Government Assistance in January 2002. Report 

submitted to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and

Nutrition Service. Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy

Research, May 2004.

Multiple Participation in Nutrition Assistance Programs
Food and Nutrition Service/USDA Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program ✥ 9

One important measure of a program’s performance is its

ability to reach its target population, as indicated by the fraction of people eligible for benefits who actually participate.

The participation rate among people eligible for food

stamps rose to 54 and 56 percent, respectively, in 2002

and 2003, after a seven-year decline. The participation rate

remains below the high rates of the mid-1990s, as the pool

of eligibles has expanded even faster than participation.

Economic changes, trends in other public assistance 

programs (notably TANF), less restrictive vehicle asset

rules, and the restoration of eligibility for many legal 

non-citizens all contributed to this expansion.

The program provided 65 percent of the total benefits

possible, an indication that benefits reach those most in

need. While only 22 percent of eligible persons with income

above poverty participate, 79 percent with incomes below

poverty participate. Those with incomes between 1 and 50

percent of poverty participate at a rate of 93 percent.

Source: 

Cunnyngham, Karen. Food Stamp Program Participation

Rates: 2003. Report submitted to the U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Washington, DC:

Mathematica Policy Research, July 2005.

Ensuring Access

Breaks in the trend line represent transitions to improved estimation methods.

Food Stamp Participation Rates
10 ✥ Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program Food and Nutrition Service/USDA

Persons in households receiving TANF and in households

with children have the highest participation rates. The

participation rate among persons in households receiving

TANF is twice that of those in households with earnings.

Children participate at almost three times the rate of 

elderly people.

Participation rates are lowest among the elderly and

adults without children. Less than one-third of eligible 

elderly and non-disabled childless adults receive benefits.

People in households with earnings or in households with

citizen children living with non-citizen parents participate at

lower-than-average rates.

For most groups of participants, participation rates

increase as benefits increase, and participants receive 

higher benefits than would eligible non-participants. But

many eligible non-participants forgo a substantial benefit.

Nearly 60 percent of all eligible non-participants would

qualify for a monthly benefit of more than $100, and nearly

30 percent would qualify for more than $200.

Source:

Cunnyngham, Karen. Food Stamp Program Participation

Rates: 2003. Report submitted to the U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Washington, DC:

Mathematica Policy Research, July 2005.

Downer, Rosemarie. Food Stamp Benefits and Participation

Rates within Demographic Groups. Alexandria, VA: Food

and Nutrition Service, Office of Analysis, Nutrition, and

Evaluation, July 2005.

Subgroups overlap. Estimates exceed 100 percent because of underreporting of TANF receipt.

Food Stamp Participation Rates by Group
Food and Nutrition Service/USDA Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program ✥ 11

Participation rates among eligible persons vary widely

among States. In fiscal year 2002, rates ranged from a 

low of 39 percent in Massachusetts to a high of 81 percent

in Oregon.

While rates remained unchanged for most States

between fiscal years 2000 and 2002, they improved in

Arizona, Indiana, and Oregon and declined in the District of

Columbia, Hawaii, Maine, New York, New Jersey,

Pennsylvania, Vermont, and West Virginia.

Some States have had consistently high and low rates 

relative to other States. From 2000 to 2002, the District of

Columbia, Hawaii, Kentucky, Louisiana, Maine, Michigan,

Missouri, Oregon, and West Virginia had significantly 

higher rates than two-thirds of the States, while Idaho,

Massachusetts, Nevada, North Carolina, Texas, and Utah

had significantly lower rates than two-thirds of the States.

Source:

Castner, Laura A., and Allen L. Schirm. Reaching Those in

Need: State Food Stamp Participation Rates in 2002. Report

submitted to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and

Nutrition Service. Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy

Research, March 2005.

State Food Stamp Participation Rates
12 ✥ Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program Food and Nutrition Service/USDA

There are many reasons why people eligible for benefits

might not apply. Five of the most common reasons cited 

in the research literature are (1) lack of information about

eligibility, (2) a sense that benefits are not needed, 

(3) dissatisfaction with the size of the benefit, (4) the 

complexity of the application process, and (5) the stigma

attached to participation.

Most non-participation in the FSP does not stem from 

a lack of basic awareness of the program. Nearly all 

non-participants (96 percent) know of the program,

two-thirds know where to go to apply for benefits, and half

have received food stamps before as adults.

Lack of information about eligibility is a more important

reason for non-participation. Less than half of all apparently eligible non-participants think that they are eligible.

Most non-participants (69 percent) would apply for food

stamp benefits if they knew that they were eligible.

Nevertheless, 27 percent would not apply even if they knew

they were eligible. The vast majority (91 percent) of these

households who would not apply most often cite a desire for

personal independence as their reason.

Source:

Bartlett, Susan, and Nancy Burstein. Food Stamp Program

Access Study: Eligible Nonparticipants. Report submitted to

the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research

Service. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates, December 2003.

Ponza, Michael, James Ohls, Lorenzo Moreno, Amy

Zambrowski, and Rhoda Cohen. Customer Service in the

Food Stamp Program. Report submitted to the U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service.

Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research, July 1999.

Reasons for Not Participating in the Food Stamp Program
Food and Nutrition Service/USDA Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program ✥ 13

Public education increases awareness of the program and

its benefits. Outreach efforts to educate the public occur in

offices covering three-fourths of the national caseload.

Smaller offices are somewhat more likely than larger ones to

conduct outreach. In areas where a large number of outreach

models are used, non-participants who are eligible for food

stamps are more likely to perceive themselves as eligible.

FNS is committed to ensuring that all persons eligible for

the FSP participate. FNS supports the efforts of State and

community organizations to reach those eligible for the 

program and to educate the public about program benefits.

In fiscal years 2001 and 2002, FNS awarded $8.5 million in

grants to 33 community and faith-based organizations to

educate the public about the program, reach underserved and

hard-to-reach non-participating eligible persons, and address

barriers to participation. Grantees developed prescreening

tools (such as paper forms, software, and Internet-based

tools); disseminated information through various media and

hotlines; and provided application assistance, transportation,

and alternative eligibility process options.

Evaluations of these grants revealed that partnerships with

community groups serving low-income families help

increase participation; cooperation with the local food stamp

office is essential; technology for eligibility prescreening

and application, while difficult, can pay off; successful 

outreach requires more than education about the program;

and the groups with the lowest food stamp participation—

immigrants, seniors, and the working poor—are the most

difficult to reach.

In 2002, FNS also awarded grants to six States to test three

models for reducing barriers for elderly persons. Each

model—simplified eligibility rules, direct application 

assistance, and a commodity alternative—produced large

increases in food stamp participation among eligible elderly

persons (between 20 and 35 percent after 21 months of

demonstration activities). Costs varied widely across the

three approaches, ranging from $400 to $3,800 per net new

food stamp household.

Between 2003 and 2005, FNS also awarded $15 million in

grants to State and local agencies to help simplify food

stamp application and eligibility systems.

Source:

Bartlett, Susan, Nancy Burstein, William Hamilton, and

Ryan Kling. Food Stamp Program Access Study: Final

Report. Report submitted to the U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Economic Research Service (E-FAN-03-013-3).

Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates, November 2004.

Cody, Scott, and James Ohls. Evaluation of the USDA

Elderly Nutrition Demonstrations: Volume 1, Evaluation

Findings. Report submitted to the U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Washington, DC:

Mathematica Policy Research, July 2005.

Gabor, Vivian, Brooke Hardison, Christopher Botsko, and

Susan Bartlett. Food Stamp Program Access Study: Local

Office Policies and Practices. Report submitted to the U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service 

(E-FAN-03-013-1). Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates,

December 2003.

Office of Analysis, Nutrition, and Evaluation. Research

Grants to Improve Food Stamp Program Access through

Partnership and Technology: 2001 Program Evaluation

Summary. Alexandria, VA: Food and Nutrition Service,

September 2004.

Zedlewski, Sheila, David Wittenburg, Carolyn O’Brien,

Robin Koralek, Sandra Nelson, and Gretchen Rowe.

Evaluation of Food Stamp Research Grants to Improve

Access through New Technology and Partnerships. Report

submitted to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and

Nutrition Service. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute

(forthcoming).

Encouraging Participation
14 ✥ Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program Food and Nutrition Service/USDA

Participating households had little cash income in fiscal

year 2004. Almost 40 percent had incomes at or below 50

percent of the poverty level (including 13 percent with no

income), and only 12 percent had cash income above the

poverty level. 

The FSP reduces the poverty gap. The value of food stamp

benefits, when added to cash income, moved 16 percent of

households to between 51 and 100 percent of poverty and

boosted nearly 9 percent above poverty. Nearly one-fourth 

of a food stamp household’s monthly income came from 

food stamps.

The FSP plays an important role in improving the 

welfare of children in low-income households.

Participation in the program significantly reduces the depth

and severity of child poverty. The average reduction in the

child poverty gap—the distance below the poverty line—was

20 percent from 1988 to 2000.

Food stamp participants tend to be poorer for a longer

period of time than eligible non-participants. Participants’

income was below 130 percent of poverty in 41 of 48

months, compared with 30 of 48 months for non-participants.

Source: 

Poikolainen, Anni. Characteristics of Food Stamp

Households: Fiscal Year 2004. Report submitted to the U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service.

Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research, 

September 2005.

Farrell, Mary, Michael Fishman, Matthew Langley, and

David Stapleton. The Relationship of Earnings and Income

to Food Stamp Participation: A Longitudinal Analysis.

Report submitted to the U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Economic Research Service. Washington, DC: Lewin Group,

November 2003.

Jolliffe, Dean, Craig Gunderson, Laura Tiehan, and Joshua

Winicki. “Food Stamp Benefits and Child Poverty.”

American Journal of Agricultural Economics, vol. 87, no. 3,

August 2005, pp. 569-81.

Targeting People in Need

Income and Poverty Status of Food Stamp Households
Food and Nutrition Service/USDA Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program ✥ 15

Many participating households are or have been part of

the labor force. About 29 percent have earnings, 23 percent

receive Social Security, and almost 3 percent receive

Unemployment Insurance or Workers’ Compensation.

Participating households receive cash from a variety of

unearned sources that help them make ends meet. About

27 percent receive SSI, 16 percent receive TANF, 6 percent

receive GA, and 10 percent receive child support.

Source:

Poikolainen, Anni. Characteristics of Food Stamp

Households: Fiscal Year 2004. Report submitted to the 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition 

Service. Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research,

September 2005.

“Other unearned income” includes alimony, foster care payments, and dividend and interest payments. “Other government [cash] 

benefits” include Black Lung Benefits, Railroad Retirement payments, Workers’ Compensation, and USDA payments to farmers.

Sources of Cash Income in Food Stamp Households
16 ✥ Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program Food and Nutrition Service/USDA

Eligibility for food stamps and determination of the benefit amount start with a household’s gross income, but

certain expenses can be deducted. Deductions recognize

that households have expenses that reduce funds available to

purchase food. They also encourage certain behaviors (such

as paying child support or working).

Most households take advantage of one or more 

deductions. In fiscal year 2004, over two-thirds deducted

excess-shelter expenses averaging $254, and 29 percent

deducted earned income, averaging $171. Five percent

deducted dependent care expenses, and 5 percent deducted

allowable medical expenses. Only 1.5 percent of households

took the deduction for child support payments paid to 

other non-household members. The standard deduction is

available to all households (with the exception of some

households in a few demonstrations).

Some households are not able to use the full value of

deductions available to them. Because net income cannot

be less than zero, households with total deductions greater

than their gross income can claim only a portion of the

deductions available to them. In 2004, about 13 percent of

all participating households had zero gross income and

received the maximum benefit without using any deductions.

Another 18 percent had sufficient deductions to offset their

gross income and raise their benefits to the maximum.

Source:

Poikolainen, Anni. Characteristics of Food Stamp

Households: Fiscal Year 2004. Report submitted to the U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service.

Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research, 

September 2005.

Deductions Available to Food Stamp Households
Food and Nutrition Service/USDA Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program ✥ 17

Many households with income low enough to meet the

program’s income limits have assets that make them 

ineligible for benefits. Among all income-eligible households, 30 percent had assets that were above the program’s

limit in 1999. Asset-ineligible households were more likely

to be married, be elderly, own a home and a vehicle, and be

a high school graduate. They were less likely to have income

below poverty and receive TANF, GA, or SSI.

Important policy reforms have extended program benefits to many low-income families and individuals. New

rules replaced outdated limits on the value of vehicles they

could own. The old food stamp rules were widely seen as

barriers to participation for many of the working poor, who

need reliable transportation to find and keep jobs. About 2.7

million low-income people met the new eligibility standards

in 2002.

Source:

Rosso, Randy. Tables Describing the Asset and Vehicle

Holdings of Low-Income Households in 1999. Report 

submitted to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and

Nutrition Service. Alexandria, VA: Mathematica Policy

Research, September 2003.

Office of Analysis, Nutrition, and Evaluation. Explaining

Changes in Food Stamp Program Participation Rates.

Alexandria, VA: Food and Nutrition Service, September 2004.

Data are from 1999, prior to changes in vehicle rules.

Asset Eligibility among Low-Income People
18 ✥ Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program Food and Nutrition Service/USDA

The FSP increases household food spending, and the

increase is greater than what would occur with an equal

benefit in cash. The most reliable estimates indicate that

each additional dollar in food stamp benefits increases food

expenditures by 14 to 47 cents. In contrast, food expenditures

increase by 5 to 13 cents for each additional cash dollar.

Food stamp recipients shop frequently, making an average

of 10 food stamp purchases each month. Most use their 

benefits within 2 weeks of issuance, regardless of amount.

Most recipients report that they use careful shopping 

practices—comparing prices across stores, looking for store

specials, and stocking up on bargains—fairly often, to

stretch their food buying resources.

Vegetables, fruits, grain products, meat, and meat alternatives account for most of the money value of food used

by food stamp households. These groups account for nearly

three-quarters of the money value of food used at home.

Lower-cost red meats (7.8 percent) and milk and yogurt (7.6

percent) account for the largest shares of food used at home.

Source:

Fraker, Thomas. The Effects of Food Stamps on Food

Consumption: A Review of the Literature. Report submitted

to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition 

Service. Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research,

October 1990.

Fox, Mary Kay, William Hamilton, and Biing-Hwan Lin.

Effects of Food Assistance and Nutrition Programs on

Nutrition and Health. Volume 4, Executive Summary of the

Literature Review. Report submitted to the U.S. Department

of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Cambridge,

MA: Abt Associates, November 2004.

Cole, Nancy. Evaluation of the Expanded EBT

Demonstration in Maryland: Patterns of Food Stamp and

Cash Welfare Benefit Redemption. Report submitted to the

U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service.

Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates, February 1997.

Ohls, James, Barbara Cohen, and Rhoda Cohen. Food Stamp

Participants’ Food Security and Nutrient Availability. Report

submitted to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and

Nutrition Service. Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy

Research, July 1999.

Ohls, James, Michael Ponza, Lorenzo Moreno, Amy

Zambrowski, and Rhoda Cohen. Food Stamp Participants’

Access to Food Retailers. Report submitted to the U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service.

Princeton, NJ: Mathematica Policy Research, July 1999.

Improving Nutrition

Food Expenditures among Food Stamp Participants
Food and Nutrition Service/USDA Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program ✥ 19

Food stamp recipients received an average monthly 

benefit of about $92 per person in fiscal year 2005. Food

stamp benefit amounts are based on the Thrifty Food Plan

(TFP), a nutritious, low-cost food plan that reflects current

nutrition standards and guidance. Families with no net

income receive the maximum allotment, the full cost of the

TFP. Most food stamp households have income and receive

a benefit equal to the difference between the maximum 

allotment and 30 percent of their net income. The maximum

benefit for a family of four in 2005 was $499, or less than

$1.40 per person per meal.

On average, low-income people in the United States 

consume amounts of most vitamins and minerals that

meet or exceed established nutrition standards. However,

usual intake of several key nutrients and food energy is

lower than recommended for a substantial number of people.

One study reports, for example, that 95 percent of food

stamp participants had adequate intakes of food energy and

91 percent had adequate intakes of iron, but only 80 percent

had adequate intakes of zinc and 75 percent had adequate

intakes of vitamin C.

More than half (51 percent) of all food stamp households

experienced food insecurity during 2003, and about 18

percent experienced food insecurity with hunger. The

relationship between program participation and food security

is complex. The program is intended to reduce hunger by

increasing household purchasing power. But households 

with the greatest difficulty meeting their food needs might

be more likely than others to seek help.

Almost half (48 percent) of emergency food pantry users

report some food stamp participation in the last year. At

the same time, almost half of pantry users eligible to receive

food stamps do not receive them.

Source:

Poikolainen, Anni. Characteristics of Food Stamp

Households: Fiscal Year 2004. Report submitted to the U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service.

Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research, 

September 2005.

Fox, Mary Kay, and Nancy Cole. Nutrition and Health

Characteristics of Low-Income Populations: Volume 1, 

Food Stamp Program Participants and Nonparticipants.

Report submitted to the U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Economic Research Service. Cambridge, MA: Abt

Associates, December 2004.

Nord, Mark, Margaret Andrews, and Steven Carlson.

Household Food Security in the United States, 2003.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic

Research Service, October 2004.

Briefel, Ronnette, Jonathan Jacobson, and Laura Tiehen. 

The Emergency Food Assistance System: Findings from the

Client Survey. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Economic Research Service (FANRR 26-10),

September 2003.

Adequacy of Food Stamp Benefits

Benefits as a Percentage of the Maximum Allotment in Fiscal Year 2004

Percentage of 

Households

Minimum <25 Percent 25-50 Percent 51-75 Percent 76-99 Percent Maximum

6.1 8.9 16.9 18.7 18.8 30.6
20 ✥ Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program Food and Nutrition Service/USDA

Food stamp participants are more likely than low-income

non-participants to lack confidence about the quality of

their diet. Low-income people are less likely to be confident

about their knowledge of good dietary practices than others,

even though they report valuing healthy eating.

Food Stamp Nutrition Education (FSNE) plays an

increasing role in helping needy families make healthy

food choices. Consistent with national dietary guidelines,

FSNE promotes (1) consumption of more fruits, vegetables,

whole grains, and low-fat dairy products; (2) daily physical

activity; and (3) energy balance.

FSNE has expanded from 7 State agencies with approved

plans in 1992 to 52 in 2004. Over the same time, approved

Federal funding—which reimburses half a State’s allowable

costs—increased from less than $1 million to $229 million.

While the overall expenditure is large, Federal investment

per person is modest, averaging 79 cents per food stamp 

participant each month in fiscal year 2004.

FNS encourages nutrition education that is integrated

across the country and across nutrition assistance programs. Currently, 41 States have developed State Nutrition

Action Plans designed to pursue common goals across 

FNS programs.

Source:

Gleason, Philip, Anu Rangarajan, and Christine Olson.

Dietary Intake and Dietary Attitudes among Food Stamp

Participants and Other Low-Income Individuals. Report 

submitted to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and

Nutrition Service. Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy

Research, September 2000.

Food Stamp Nutrition Education
Food and Nutrition Service/USDA Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program ✥ 21

The FSP increases nutrient availability for participating

households, especially food energy and protein. It might

also increase the availability of a number of vitamins and

minerals, though the evidence is weaker. Nutrient availability

is measured in terms of the food used from the home supply,

typically over the course of a week.

There is little evidence that food stamp participation 

consistently affects individual dietary intake. Studies 

that have tried to assess the impact on nutrient intake at 

the individual level have not been conclusive, but it is 

widely agreed that this research suffers from a number of

limitations.

Food stamp recipients are similar to low-income 

non-participants with respect to nutrient intakes. Food

stamp recipients and low-income participants consume 

similar amounts of vitamins and minerals on average. They

are equally likely to have adequate levels of usual nutrient

intake and to eat a similar number of servings from the

major food groups.

There is little research that addresses the effect of food

stamp participation on nutrition-related health outcomes

such as height and weight. Food stamp participation can be

sporadic, and diet and health outcomes are influenced by

many factors, some of which operate over extended periods. 

As a result, it is difficult to establish a direct causal relationship between participation and health outcomes.

Source:

Gleason, Philip, Anu Rangarajan, and Christine Olson.

Dietary Intake and Dietary Attitudes among Food Stamp

Participants and Other Low-Income Individuals. Report 

submitted to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and

Nutrition Service. Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy

Research, September 2000.

Lin, Biing-Hwan. Nutrition and Health Characteristics of

Low-Income Populations: Healthy Eating Index.

Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic

Research Service, February 2005.

Fox, Mary Kay, William Hamilton, and Biing-Hwan Lin.

Effects of Food Assistance and Nutrition Programs on

Nutrition and Health. Volume 3, Literature Review. Report

submitted to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic

Research Service. Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates,

December 2004.

Fox, Mary Kay, William Hamilton, and Biing-Hwan Lin.

Effects of Food Assistance and Nutrition Programs on

Nutrition and Health. Volume 4, Executive Summary of the

Literature Review. Report submitted to the U.S. Department

of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Cambridge,

MA: Abt Associates, November 2004.

Impact of Food Stamp Participation on Nutrition
22 ✥ Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program Food and Nutrition Service/USDA

Food insecurity is the lack of access to enough food to

meet basic needs at all times due to lack of financial

resources. It has been measured using the Food Security

Supplement to the Current Population Survey since 1995.

Established income and food assistance programs help to

provide a safety net for many low-income families. However, a small proportion of adults, and a smaller proportion

of children, experience food insecurity with hunger.

During calendar year 2003, 11.2 percent of all American

households were food insecure, and 3.5 percent were food

insecure with hunger. The prevalence of food insecurity

and food insecurity with hunger varied considerably among

different households types. Rates of food insecurity were

substantially higher among households with children, those

headed by single mothers, and African American and 

Hispanic households. Food insecurity was more common in

central cities and rural areas and in the South and West.

Federal and community food assistance programs are

important resources for low-income households. In 

calendar year 2003, 20 percent of households reporting 

food insecurity used emergency food providers in their 

communities, and 2 percent ate meals at an emergency

kitchen. During the month before the December 2003 

food security survey was administered, 31 percent of 

food-insecure households received food stamps.

Source:

Nord, Mark, Margaret Andrews, and Steven Carlson.

Household Food Security in the United States, 2003. Food

Assistance and Nutrition Research Report No. (FANRR 

No. 42). Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture,

Economic Research Service, October 2004.

Prevalence of Food Insecurity
Food and Nutrition Service/USDA Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program ✥ 23

The existing research base does not yet provide enough

evidence from which to draw firm conclusions about 

the relationship between hunger, obesity, and program

participation. It is particularly difficult to establish causal

links between hunger, obesity, and participation. Some have

pointed to the paradox that hunger persists when a growing

number of Americans are overweight, and have suggested a

possible causal link. Families who run short may tend to eat

more when they can because they are unsure when they will

have sufficient food again. Since many studies indicate that

binge eating can result in weight gain, overeating when food

is plentiful could result in gradual gains over time.

The potential effects of participation in nutrition 

assistance programs on obesity are tangled with the

effects of poverty and socioeconomic status. Since poverty

is highly correlated with food stamp participation and with

obesity, the independent effect of each factor is hard to

determine. Existing research does not provide evidence of 

a consistent association between FSP participation and 

overweight or obesity.

New research to determine the relationship between 

program participation and obesity needs to address 

key limitations of past studies. Of particular concern is 

the potential that program participants differ from nonparticipants in ways that could bias observed differences 

in weight and prevalence of obesity. Data sources used in

recent research efforts were designed to approach other

issues and are for the most part cross-sectional.

Measurement and design issues associated with current

research efforts prevent construction of a causal model.

Controls for self-selection and use of longitudinal data are

needed to model more fully the relationship between 

poverty, program participation, and obesity.

Source:

Linz, Paul, Michael Lee, and Loren Bell. Obesity, Poverty,

and Participation in Nutrition Assistance Programs. Report

submitted to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and

Nutrition Service. Washington, DC: ALTA Systems,

February 2005.

Scheier, Lee M. “What Is the Hunger-Obesity Paradox?”

Journal of the American Dietetic Association, vol. 105, 

no. 6, June 2005, pp. 883-886.

Hunger, Obesity, and Food Stamp Program Participation
24 ✥ Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program Food and Nutrition Service/USDA

States are required to establish a Food Stamp 

Employment and Training (E&T) Program to help food

stamp recipients find work or gain the skills, training,

and experience to lead to employment. In addition, 

able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWDs) are 

limited to three months of food stamp benefits unless they

meet the program’s work requirements. The food stamp

E&T requirement is usually the only work requirement for

non-TANF food stamp households.

States reported 3.4 million new work registrants in fiscal

year 2004. About two-thirds of these registrants—including

an estimated 450,000 ABAWDs—were subject to the

requirements of E&T. States exempted the rest from 

participation in E&T.

The Federal government provided States with $101 

million in direct grants and another $128 million to

match State costs to operate E&T in fiscal year 2004.

The Federal government also matched $38 million in State

funds spent to reimburse E&T participants for dependent

care, transportation, and other expenses.

Most participants are exempt from work registration

because they are young, elderly, disabled, or already

working. ABAWDs account for less than 4 percent of all

participants. Many live in areas that have high unemployment or insufficient jobs, and so do not face the three-month

time limit. About half of those subject to the time limit meet

the program’s work requirements. Overall, about 9 percent

of food stamp recipients are registered for work, and 

two-thirds are subject to E&T requirements.

Source:

Food and Nutrition Service. Fiscal Year 2006 Explanatory

Notes. Alexandria, VA: U.S. Department of Agriculture,

2005.

Poikolainen, Anni. Characteristics of Food Stamp Households: Fiscal Year 2004. Report submitted to the U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service.

Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research, 

September 2005.

Czajka, John. Imposing a Time Limit on Food Stamp

Receipt: Implementation of the Provisions and Effect on

Food Stamp Program Participation, Volume I. Report 

submitted to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and

Nutrition Service. Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy

Research, September 2001.

Super, David. Work and the Food Stamp Program.

Washington, DC: Center for Budget and Policy Priorities,

September 2003.

Making Work Pay

Food Stamp Program Work Requirements
Food and Nutrition Service/USDA Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program ✥ 25

Food stamp benefits help families on welfare move

toward self-sufficiency. As welfare rolls dropped, the 

proportion of the food stamp caseload receiving TANF

declined steadily from 37 percent in 1996 to 16 percent in

2004. In 2002, 80 percent of TANF families and 72 percent

of families leaving TANF received food stamp benefits.

Nationally uniform rules to calculate food stamp benefits

help mitigate State-to-State variation in TANF benefits.

Food stamp policy options help States coordinate the

administration of food stamps and TANF. States can adopt

their TANF vehicle rules for food stamp eligibility determination, align the types of income and resources they exclude

for determination of eligibility and benefits, disqualify food

stamp applicants who fail to comply with TANF rules, and

provide up to five months of transitional food stamp benefits

to food stamp households leaving TANF.

Source:

Poikolainen, Anni. Characteristics of Food Stamp

Households: Fiscal Year 2004. Report submitted to the U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service.

Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research, 

September 2005.

Food and Nutrition Service. Food Stamp Program State

Options Report, Fourth Edition. Alexandria, VA: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, September 2004.

Administration for Children and Families. Temporary

Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Sixth Annual Report

to Congress. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health

and Human Services, November 2004.

Food Stamp Program Interaction with TANF
26 ✥ Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program Food and Nutrition Service/USDA

Food stamp participation rates among recent TANF

leavers improved substantially between 1999 and 2002.

Among families with children with incomes below 50 percent of poverty, the share receiving food stamps increased

from 47 percent to 64 percent. Among those with incomes

between 50 and 100 percent of poverty, the share receiving

food stamps increased from 40 percent to 52 percent.

Between 1997 and 1999, most families who left TANF

also left the FSP, even though two-thirds remained

income-eligible. Many assumed they no longer qualified

when they began working. Because they could no longer

rely on a TANF caseworker for food stamp enrollment, they

might have been less informed about eligibility rules and

had concerns about the administrative difficulties of 

applying for food stamps.

Since 1999, States have implemented new rules and policy options to improve participation for TANF leavers and

working poor families. These include transitional benefits

for employed TANF leavers, simplified income reporting,

more-lenient rules governing vehicles, and program 

outreach.

Food stamp participation by low-income families with

children with no TANF experience remained steady at

about 20 percent from 1997 to 2002. Lacking the connection with social services, these families have not benefited

from outreach activities and more-flexible food stamp rules.

Source:

Zedlewski, Sheila R., and Kelly Rader. Recent Trends in

Food Stamp Participation among Poor Families with

Children. Washington DC: The Urban Institute, June 2004.

Zedlewski, Sheila R., and Amelia Gruber. Former Welfare

Families and the Food Stamp Program: The Exodus

Continues. Washington DC: The Urban Institute, April 2001.

Administration for Children and Families. Temporary

Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Sixth Annual Report

to Congress. Washington, DC: U.S. Department of Health

and Human Services, November 2004.

Families with children who left TANF within 2 years of survey.

Food Stamp Participation among TANF Leavers
Food and Nutrition Service/USDA Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program ✥ 27

Overall, participating households report satisfaction with

the program. Clients expressing some dissatisfaction with

the program, about 25 percent of all participants, are more

likely to receive lower benefits than satisfied households,

reside in urban areas, associate stigma with participation,

and spend more time and money applying for benefits.

Participants must make some effort to apply for and

keep food stamp benefits. On average, in 2000, successful

applicants made 2.4 trips to the food stamp office for filing

applications, meetings, and submitting verification 

documents and 1.2 trips elsewhere to acquire the documentation. They devoted 3.9 hours at the office and 2.2 hours to

traveling. It appears that completing the food stamp application required somewhat more visits to the food stamp office

in 2000 (2.4) than in 1996 (1.6).

Participants must also incur some cost to apply for and

keep benefits. In 1996, participants spent $10.31 (6 percent

of the average monthly benefit). Each recertification cost

$5.84. Transportation accounted for most of these costs for

both actions.

Source:

Ponza, Michael, James Ohls, Lorenzo Moreno, Amy

Zambrowski, and Rhoda Cohen. Customer Service in the

Food Stamp Program. Report submitted to the U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service.

Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research, July 1999.

Bartlett, Susan, Nancy Burstein, and William Hamilton, with

the assistance of Ryan Kling. Food Stamp Program Access

Study: Final Report. Report submitted to the U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.

Washington, DC: Abt Associates, November 2004.

Improving Administrative Efficiency

a Other government offices include Division of Motor Vehicles, voter registration, WIC, post office, and unemployment office.

Food Stamp Program Customer Satisfaction
28 ✥ Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program Food and Nutrition Service/USDA

FSP guidelines ensure that people eligible for benefits

receive them in a timely manner. States must act on 

routine applications within 30 days and within 7 days 

on expedited applications for people who need food 

assistance urgently.

In fiscal year 2003, the FSP began routine tracking of

application processing timeliness using the food stamp

quality control system. Most States processed 90 percent or

more of their cases on time.

Source:

Food and Nutrition Service. Food Stamp Quality Control

Data for Fiscal Year 2003. Alexandria, VA: 2004.

a Includes the District of Columbia, Virgin Islands, and Guam.

Timeliness of Food Stamp Application Processing
Food and Nutrition Service/USDA Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program ✥ 29

The FSP has improved payment accuracy for six years 

in a row, culminating in a combined payment error rate

of 5.9 percent in fiscal year 2004, the lowest in program

history. The combined error rate is equal to the sum of 

overpayments (4.5 percent) and underpayments (1.4

percent). The net cost of erroneous payments to the Federal

government (overpayments minus underpayments) is 

3 percent. Improvements in the rate at which errors were 

prevented or corrected through an interim action process

contributed significantly to the overall improvement in error

rates between 1998 and 2001.

Virtually all (98 percent) households receiving food

stamps were eligible for some benefit. Thus, the problem

of erroneous payments is not so much one of determining

eligibility, but rather one of finely targeting benefits to 

the complicated and changing circumstances of lowincome households.

Neither overpayments nor underpayments had much

effect on overall household purchasing power. Most 

overpayments to eligible households are small relative to

household income and official poverty standards. As a result,

most food stamp households are poor, and remain poor even

when overpaid.

Source:

Program Accountability Division. Food Stamp Program

Error Rates. Alexandria, VA: Food and Nutrition Service,

June 2005.

Office of Analysis, Nutrition, and Evaluation. Impact of

Food Stamp Payment Error on Household Purchasing

Power. Alexandria, VA: Food and Nutrition Service, 

March 2005.

Mills, Gregory, Don Laliberty, and Christopher Rodger.

Food Stamp Certification Periods and Payment Accuracy:

State Experience During 1997-2001. Report submitted to the

Economic Research Service (E-FAN-04-012). Cambridge,

MA: Abt Associates, November 2004.

Food Stamp Program Payment Accuracy
Trafficking is the sale of food stamp benefits for cash, a

practice that diverts benefits away from their nutritional 

purpose. To combat trafficking, FNS conducts investigations

of authorized food stores and uses powerful new tools—

made possible by the implementation of Electronic Benefit

Transfer (EBT)—to identify and sanction traffickers.

The value of food stamp benefits trafficked decreased by

more than 50 percent between 1993 and 2002. Trafficking

now amounts to two-and-a-half cents of every benefit 

dollar issued.

Stores that redeem the majority of food stamp benefits

continue to have the lowest trafficking rates.

Supermarkets—where rates of trafficking are very low—

redeem over 80 percent of all benefits. Small stores—which

have higher rates—redeem less than 5 percent.

Source:

Macaluso, Theodore F. The Extent of Trafficking in the Food

Stamp Program: 1999-2002. Alexandria, VA: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, 

July 2003.

30 ✥ Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program Food and Nutrition Service/USDA

The Extent of Food Stamp Trafficking
In fiscal year 2004, the total cost of administering the

FSP was almost $5 billion. These costs were shared

between the Federal government ($2.3 billion) and State

governments ($2.6 billion). Sixty-one percent of those costs

were for certification. Total administrative costs (adjusted

for inflation) showed a moderately increasing trend between

1989 and 2004.

The Federal and State governments share FSP administrative costs. States are reimbursed for about half their

costs. State costs vary, in part, as a function of different

State operations and interactions with other assistance 

programs. Demographic, economic, and geographical 

factors, as well as management efficiency, also affect administrative costs.

The average monthly administrative cost per case tends

to be higher when caseloads are increasing and lower

when they decline, because costs such as office leases and

equipment are fixed and because workforce adjustments 

take time.

Source:

Unpublished tabulations from National Data Bank.

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

Nutrition Service, July 2005.

Food and Nutrition Service/USDA Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program ✥ 31

Food Stamp Administrative Costs
Food stamp policy options provide States with flexibility to

simplify the eligibility process and their program operations,

improve coordination with other programs such as TANF or

Medicaid, and support participation among target groups

such as working families. All States have implemented at

least a few policy options. 

Some policy options have been widely adopted by States.

The most common options include simplified reporting, use

of TANF vehicle rules for eligibility determination, and

expanded categorical eligibility. Despite challenges such as

differing reporting requirements with other programs and

some confusion about required client reporting, States report

that simplified reporting reduced staff workload, improved

client access, and reduced quality control errors. 

Other policy options have been adopted less frequently.

These include rules governing disqualification for noncooperation with child support enforcement agencies and

rules to simplify the calculation of deductions by disregarding changes within a certification period. States report not

choosing some options out of concern that they would complicate program rules, affect few households, or result in 

little benefit to participants. Data are limited on the effect of

policy options on program administration, operations, costs,

error rates, and participant satisfaction. Additional research

is needed to better inform State decision makers on the 

merits of the various options. 

Source:

Trippe, Carole, Liz Schott, Nancy Wemmerus, and Andrew

Burwick. Simplified Reporting and Transitional Benefits in

the Food Stamp Program: Case Studies of State

Implementation, Final Report. Report submitted to the U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service.

Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research, May 2004.

Program Development Division. Food Stamp Program State

Options Report, Fourth Edition. Alexandria, VA: U.S.

Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service,

September 2004.

U.S. Government Accountability Office. Food Stamp

Program: Farm Bill Options Ease Administrative Burden,

but Opportunities Exist to Streamline Participant Reporting

Rules among Programs (GAO-04-916). Report to the

Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, U.S.

Senate. Washington, DC: U.S. Government Accountability

Office, September 2004.

32 ✥ Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program Food and Nutrition Service/USDA

State Food Stamp Policy Options
Since June 2004, Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) has

efficiently delivered food stamp benefits Statewide in

every State. EBT replaced paper coupons with debit cards

and personal identification numbers. All but Ohio and

Wyoming use online technology that allows participants to

use their benefits in other States. Some States use 

multiprogram EBT cards to issue benefits for additional 

programs such as TANF, Child Care, and WIC.

Recipients prefer EBT to coupon benefit delivery and

redemption. One survey of client satisfaction indicated that

about 95 percent of all participants are either “very” or

“somewhat” satisfied with their EBT card. Seniors report a

preference for EBT benefits despite their unfamiliarity with

bank cards and problems recalling pin numbers. Lower 

processing costs appeal to retailers and banks.

Source:

Food and Nutrition Service. Food Stamp Program, State by

State EBT Map. Available online at

[www.fns.usda.gov/fsp/ebt/ebt_map.htm].

Food and Nutrition Service. WIC EBT Status Report—

August 2005. Alexandria, VA: U.S Department of

Agriculture, August 2005.

Kirlin, John, and Christopher Logan. Effects of EBT

Customer Service Waivers on Food Stamp Recipients.

Report submitted to the Economic Research Service 

(E-FAN-02-007). Cambridge, MA: Abt Associates, 

June 2002.

Food and Nutrition Service/USDA Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program ✥ 33

Delivering Benefits Effectively

Electronic Benefit Transfer
Nationwide, more than 152,000 stores were authorized to

accept and redeem food stamp benefits in fiscal year

2004. To qualify as an authorized food stamp retailer, the

store must (1) stock and sell an ample variety of items in all

four categories of staple foods: breads and cereals; dairy

products; fruits and vegetables; and meat, fish, and poultry

(two of which must include perishable foods), or (2) obtain

more than 50 percent of gross total sales from the sale of

one or more staple food categories.

Virtually all authorized stores meet the program’s 

criteria for eligibility. This indicates that the authorization

process works well in screening out ineligible stores. An

annual review of a representative sample of stores found that

99 percent were eligible in fiscal year 2004.

Most authorized stores are supermarkets, small or

medium-sized groceries, or convenience stores. In fiscal

year 2004, 23 percent of all authorized stores were supermarkets, 22 percent were grocery stores, and 20 percent

were convenience stores. Most other authorized firms were

specialty food stores or combination markets.

Source:

Food Stamp Benefit Redemption Division. Food Stamp

Benefit Redemption Division 2004 Annual Report.

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

Nutrition Service, July 2005.

34 ✥ Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program Food and Nutrition Service/USDA

Authorized Food Stamp Stores
The type of store at which food stamp participants buy

food is important, because store type often determines

the cost and selection of foods available. Supermarkets

supply, on average, a wider variety of high-quality food at

lower cost.

Most food stamp benefits are redeemed in supermarkets.

About 86 percent of all food stamp benefits were redeemed

in supermarkets in fiscal year 2004. Nearly 90 percent of

food stamp recipients report that they rely mainly on 

supermarkets for their food purchases.

About one-third of low-income households usually shop

for food within a mile of where they live. Another third

shop at stores that are between one and four miles away.

Many recipients, however, do not shop at the store nearest 

to them. For those who do not usually shop in their own

neighborhoods, the most common reasons are high prices

(47 percent) and a lack of nearby stores (51 percent).

Distances to the nearest store are higher, and access to

supermarkets is less, for rural households. The reported

average distance to the most-used store ranges from 2.5

miles in urban areas to 14.4 miles in rural areas. An earlier

study found that the share of redemptions in supermarkets

varied from 80 percent in suburban areas to 64 percent in

central cities to 53 percent in rural areas.

Source:

Ohls, James C., Michael Ponza, Lorenzo Moreno, Amy

Zambrowski, and Rhoda Cohen. Food Stamp Participants’

Access to Food Retailers: Final Report. Report submitted to

the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition

Service. Washington, DC: Mathematica Policy Research,

July 1999.

Mantovani, Richard E., Lynn Daft, Theodore Macaluso,

James Welsh, and Katherine Hoffman. Authorized Food

Retailer Characteristics Study: Technical Report IV

(Authorized Food Retailers’ Characteristics and Access

Study). Report submitted to the U.S. Department of

Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Washington, DC:

ORC/MACRO, February 1997.

Kaufman, Phil, James MacDonald, Steven Lutz, and David

Smallwood. Do the Poor Pay More for Food? Washington,

DC: U.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research

Service (AER No. 759), November 1997.

Food and Nutrition Service/USDA Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program ✥ 35

Left column displays the percentage of authorized retailers in each store type; right column displays the percentage of redemptions.

Access to Food Retailers
The Disaster Food Stamp Program operates under

special eligibility and issuance rules. States must submit a

formal request for the operation of the Disaster FSP in areas

affected by a disaster. In general:

• Benefits are provided to existing food stamp households 

who qualify for replacement benefits and to newly eligible

households due to the disaster. State certification workers 

determine eligibility.

• The monthly income eligibility limit is the poverty level 

plus the standard deduction and excess-shelter cap—

$1,828 for a family of three in 2005.

• Income plus liquid assets less disaster-related expenses 

during the disaster month must be less than the eligibility 

limit. Once eligible, households receive the maximum 

benefit for their size through the end of the disaster period.

• After the disaster period, new households must meet 

normal program rules to continue receiving food 

stamp benefits.

FNS provides other emergency food assistance to disaster

victims by providing food commodities to shelters, 

congregate feeding sites, and pertinent local relief organizations such as the Red Cross and Salvation Army; and by 

distributing food directly to households.

In fiscal year 2004, FNS provided more than $278 million 

in disaster food stamp assistance to more than 500,000

households. The value of assistance provided in the wake 

of Hurricane Katrina is expected to exceed this amount.

Source:

Food and Nutrition Service. Fiscal Year 2006 Explanatory

Notes. Alexandria, VA: U.S. Department of Agriculture,

2005.

36 ✥ Making America Stronger: A Profile of the Food Stamp Program Food and Nutrition Service/USDA

Disaster Food Stamp Assistance

United States Department of Agriculture

Food and Nutrition Service

3101 Park Center Drive

Alexandria, VA 22302

Visit us at www.fns.usda.gov/fns