FNS Documents & Resources
Reaching Those in Need: Estimates of State Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Participation Rates in FY 2016
This report – part of an annual series – presents estimates, by state, of the percentage of eligible persons and working poor individuals who participated in SNAP during an average month in fiscal year (FY) 2016 and in the two previous fiscal years.
Nationally, the SNAP participation rate among all eligible persons was 85 percent in FY 2016. The participation rate for eligible working poor individuals was significantly lower, at 75 percent. Participation rates for all eligible persons varied from state to state, ranging from a low of 56 percent to a high of 100 percent. Participation rate estimates for the working poor also varied widely across states. In no state was the rate for working poor people higher than the rate for all eligible people.
The Characteristics report is published annually, dating back to 1976, and provides information about the demographic and economic circumstances of SNAP households. Using a sample of SNAP Quality Control (QC) data that is representative at both the state and national level, this report summarizes the characteristics of households and individuals who participated in SNAP in fiscal year 2017.
Identifying Program Components and Practices that Influence Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Application Processing Timeliness Rates
This study sought to better understand the root causes of SNAP application timeliness concerns. A comprehensive in-depth study of program components and practices adopted by the 50 states and the District of Columbia to process SNAP applications was conducted. The study objectives are to understand the characteristics of states’ application processing procedures and examine what facilitates or impedes states’ ability to meet Federal requirements for application timeliness.
The 2010 Child Nutrition reauthorization provided funding to test innovative strategies to end childhood hunger and food insecurity. Demonstration projects were funded and implemented in Chickasaw Nation, Kentucky, Navajo Nation, Nevada, and Virginia. The reauthorization also required an independent and rigorous evaluation, which occurred in all of the sites besides Navajo Nation. The Navajo Nation project, which focused on capacity building and community outreach, was difficult to evaluate because an appropriate control group could not be identified. Therefore, the Navajo Nation demonstration was not evaluated and a final evaluation report is not available.