economicinclusion.gov results from the 2011 

FDIC National Survey 

Number

(1000s)

Pct of

Row

Number

(1000s) Pct of Row

Number

(1000s) Pct of Row

Number

(1000s) Pct of Row

Number

(1000s) Pct of Row

All Households 120,408 100 9,875 8.2 24,199 20.1 82,830 68.8 3,504 2.9 

Albuquerque, NM 419 100 30 7.2 95 22.6 283 67.6 11 2.6 

Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA-NJ 389 100 21 5.5 85 21.8 262 67.4 21 5.4 

Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA^ 2,108 100 205 9.7 541 25.7 1,290 61.2 71 3.4 

Austin-Round Rock, TX 605 100 62 10.2 124 20.4 409 67.6 10 1.7 

Baltimore-Towson, MD 1,021 100 77 7.5 222 21.8 706 69.2 16 1.5 

Bangor, ME 63 100 2 3.9 17 27.1 43 68.0 1 1.0 

Birmingham-Hoover, AL 423 100 51 12.1 140 33.0 221 52.3 11 2.6 

Boise City-Nampa, ID^ 227 100 7 2.9 38 16.7 177 77.9 6 2.5 

Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH 1,843 100 77 4.2 271 14.7 1,467 79.6 27 1.5 

Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, CT 337 100 5 1.6 45 13.2 283 84.0 4 1.2 

Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY 462 100 40 8.6 46 10.0 368 79.8 8 1.7 

Burlington-South Burlington, VT 84 100 1 1.7 13 14.9 69 81.7 1 1.7 

Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC^ 742 100 66 8.9 206 27.8 458 61.7 12 1.7 

Chicago-Naperville-Joliet, IN-IN-WI^ 3,429 100 294 8.6 561 16.4 2,460 71.7 113 3.3 

Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN^ 823 100 84 10.3 127 15.5 565 68.6 46 5.6 

Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH 909 100 77 8.5 164 18.1 638 70.3 29 3.1 

Colorado Springs, CO 222 100 20 9.1 25 11.2 171 77.1 6 2.5 

Columbia, SC 294 100 22 7.4 48 16.4 224 76.3 - - 

Columbus, OH^ 718 100 58 8.1 182 25.3 454 63.2 24 3.3 

Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX^ 2,433 100 239 9.8 670 27.5 1,488 61.1 37 1.5 

Denver-Aurora, CO 974 100 51 5.2 175 18.0 730 75.0 18 1.8 

Des Moines, IA 228 100 16 7.0 53 23.2 156 68.6 3 1.3 

Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI 1,762 100 188 10.7 343 19.4 1,161 65.9 70 4.0 

Fargo, ND-MN^ 80 100 4 5.2 15 18.4 60 75.2 1 1.3 

Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT 437 100 23 5.3 59 13.6 344 78.8 10 2.4 

Honolulu, HI 315 100 9 2.8 64 20.2 223 70.9 19 6.1 

Houston-Baytown-Sugar Land, TX 2,215 100 264 11.9 630 28.4 1,264 57.1 56 2.5 

Indianapolis, IN 729 100 62 8.5 125 17.1 537 73.7 5 0.7 

Jacksonville, FL 600 100 36 6.0 150 25.0 414 68.9 - - 

Kansas City, MO-KS^ 849 100 85 10.0 172 20.3 581 68.5 11 1.3 

Las Vegas-Paradise, NM 727 100 45 6.2 241 33.2 417 57.3 24 3.4 

Little Rock-North Little Rock, AR^ 330 100 26 7.8 91 27.8 202 61.2 11 3.3 

Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA 4,353 100 421 9.7 811 18.6 3,015 69.3 106 2.4 

Louisville, KY-IN^ 571 100 48 8.4 131 23.0 389 68.2 2 0.4 

Madison, WI 254 100 3 1.0 34 13.5 217 85.5 - - 

Memphis, TN-MS-AR^ 567 100 63 11.1 93 16.4 393 69.4 18 3.1 

Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Miami Beach, FL 2,285 100 206 9.0 509 22.3 1,478 64.7 92 4.0 

Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI 627 100 68 10.8 79 12.6 460 73.3 20 3.3 

Minneapolis-St Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI^ 1,350 100 70 5.2 140 10.4 1,109 82.1 30 2.3 

Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro, TN^ 603 100 57 9.5 86 14.2 452 75.0 8 1.3 

New Haven, CT 224 100 11 4.8 42 18.6 163 72.7 9 3.9 

New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA 507 100 63 12.4 118 23.2 314 61.9 12 2.5 

New York-Northern New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA^ 7,191 100 700 9.7 1,409 19.6 4,894 68.1 188 2.6 

Oklahoma City, OK 529 100 49 9.3 139 26.4 313 59.2 27 5.1 

Omaha-Council Bluffs, NE-IA 338 100 14 4.2 51 15.1 265 78.4 8 2.2 

Orlando, FL 791 100 59 7.4 186 23.5 497 62.9 49 6.2 

Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE 2,359 100 183 7.8 377 16.0 1,715 72.7 84 3.6 

Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ 1,710 100 181 10.6 324 18.9 1,174 68.7 31 1.8 

Pittsburgh, PA 1,004 100 34 3.4 196 19.5 744 74.1 31 3.1 

Portland-South Portland, ME 146 100 6 4.0 19 12.8 118 80.8 4 2.5 

Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA^ 858 100 26 3.1 121 14.1 690 80.4 21 2.4 

Providence-Fall River-Warwick, MA-RI 523 100 40 7.6 86 16.5 383 73.1 14 2.7 

Raleigh-Cary, NC 470 100 12 2.6 73 15.5 372 79.3 13 2.7 

Reno-Sparks, NV 175 100 19 10.9 44 24.9 103 59.0 9 5.1 

Richmond, VA^ 522 100 31 6.0 113 21.6 345 66.2 33 6.3 

Riverside-San Bernardino, CA 1,384 100 176 12.7 309 22.3 874 63.1 25 1.8 

Rochester, NY 461 100 18 3.9 111 24.1 315 68.5 16 3.6 

Sacramento-Arden-Arcade Roseville, CA 827 100 44 5.4 175 21.2 607 73.5 - - 

Salt Lake City, UT^ 422 100 19 4.4 84 20.0 317 75.1 2 0.5 

San Antonio, TX 791 100 123 15.5 206 26.0 458 57.9 4 0.5 

San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA 1,090 100 49 4.5 195 17.9 780 71.6 66 6.0 

San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA 1,853 100 108 5.9 229 12.3 1,412 76.2 103 5.6 

San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA 694 100 17 2.4 80 11.6 567 81.8 29 4.2 

Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA 1,464 100 59 4.0 254 17.4 1,116 76.2 35 2.4 

Sioux Falls, SD 102 100 5 5.2 21 21.1 73 72.2 2 1.5 

St. Louis, MO-IL^ 1,140 100 111 9.7 229 20.1 761 66.8 39 3.4 

Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL 1,298 100 77 6.0 283 21.8 899 69.2 39 3.0 

Tulsa, OK^ 430 100 50 11.7 82 19.1 292 67.9 5 1.3 

Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC^ 626 100 36 5.8 189 30.2 366 58.4 35 5.5 

Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV^ 2,148 100 100 4.6 362 16.9 1,572 73.2 115 5.3 

Wichita, KS 229 100 34 14.8 70 30.6 125 54.6 - - 

2011 Household Banking Status

Geography

By MSA

Has a Bank Account

All Households Unbanked Underbanked Fully Banked

Banked but Underbanked 

Status Unknown

2011 Technical Notes

Households are identified as unbanked if they answered “no” to the question, “Do you or does anyone in your household currently have a checking or savings account?” 

The demographic characteristics of a household, such as race, age, education, and employment, are taken to be those of the owner or renter of the home (i.e., “householder”), unless the characteristic is one defined at the household level, such as 

income or household type. 

Refer to 2011 FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households and FDIC Technical Notes for terms, definitions, and methodological notes. Figures do not always reconcile to totals because of rounding. Differences between 

groups may or may not be statistically significant.

2011 FDIC National Survey of Unbanked and Underbanked Households

Notes:

- = For this table cell there were so few sample respondents (in some cases zero) reporting that the estimated universe proportion round to 0.0 percent. It is estimated that the true value is only slightly greater than zero.

^ For the MSA results presented in this table, response data may not be included for a few of the smaller counties included in the official MSA definitions prepared by OMB.