USDA
plItvH «/*"/w*
United States
Department of
Agriculture
rood and
Nutrition
Service
3101 Park
Center Drive
Alexandria VA
22302-1500
CHARACTERISTICS OF FOOD STAMP HOUSEHOLDS:
FISCAL YEAR 1997 (ADVANCE REPORT)
Enclosed is a copy of Characteristics ofFood Stamp Households:
Fiscal Year 1997 (Advance Report). This report is the most recent of a
series of summary reports providing information about the
demographic and economic circumstances of food stamp households.
The information is based on data collected by the Food Stamp
Integrated Quality Control System for fiscal year (FY) 1997. Thus, this
report provides information about the characteristics of food stamp
recipients at a time when States were implementing the provisions of
welfare reform.
A full report discussing the characteristics of food stamp households in
FY 1997 will be completed later this winter.
If you have questions about the content of this report or need additional
copies, please contact the following:
ENCLOSURE
97-051059/113
Office of Analysis and Evaluation
Food and Consumer Service
3101 Park Center Drive
Alexandria, Virginia 22302
Phone (703) 305-2133
AN EQUAL OPPORTUNITY EMPLOYER G,
ff
CHARACTERISTICS OF FOOD STAMP HOUSEHOLDS:
FISCAL YEAR 1997
(Advance Report)
United States Department of Agriculture
Food and Nutrition Service
Office of Analysis and Evaluation
October 1998
The FSP is the nation's largest food
assistance program. In fiscal year 1997, it
served an average of 22.9 million people
per month. Almost SI9.6 billion was paid out in
food stamps that year.
Food stamps are made available to virtually all
low-income households with few resources to
supplement their food purchases and help them
maintain a healthy diet. In fiscal year 1997, food
stamps were approximately one-fourth of a
participating household's total monthly income
(cash plus food stamps). If the value of food
stamps was counted in addition to cash as gross
income, over one-fifth of food stamp households
would move from below to above half the poverty
line (Figure 1).
In fiscal year 1997, slightly over half of all food
stamp participants were children, most of whom
lived in single-parent households (Figure 2). The
remaining participants were nonelderly adults
(40.6 percent) or elderly adults—age 60 or older-
(7.9 percent).
I. Composition of Food Stamp Households
In fiscal year 1997, the majority (58.3 percent) of
food stamp households contained children (Table
1). Of these households, over two-thirds (69.1
percent) were single-parent homes, approximately
one-quarter (24.7 percent) were multiple-adult
homes, and the remaining households contained
no members over the age of 17. Households with
children received an average monthly food stamp
benefit of $234, reflecting their relatively large
average size (3.4 persons). Single-parent homes
(3.1 persons on average) received an average of
$228 in food stamps, and multiple-adult homes
with children (4.S persons on average) received an
average of $268.
Households containing elderly persons
represented 17.6 percent of all food stamp
households. Slightly over three-quarters of them
were single-person households, which received an
average monthly benefit of $47. Households
containing elderly and other persons received an
average benefit of $118. A substantial proportion
of food stamp households contained disabled
persons (22.3 percent); these households received
an average benefit of $104.
II. Characteristics of Food Stamp Participants
Among adult participants (age 18 or older),
women outnumbered men by over two to one
(Table 2). Of the children participating, 34.1
percent were of preschool age (0 to 4 years), and
65.9 percent were of school age (5 to 17 years).
The largest proportion of food stamp participants
were white, non-Hispanic (40.3 percent); about
one-third were African-American, non-Hispanic
(34.9 percent); and approximately one-fifth were
Hispanic (19.2 percent). The remaining
participants were Asian, Native American, or of
another race or ethnicity (Table 3).
This brief was prepared by Scott Cody and Jacquelyn Anderson of Mathematica Policy Research, Inc. Programming
support was proviaed by Mark Brinkley. The information presented in this brief is based on data collected by the Food
and Nutrition Service for quality control purposes for fiscal year 1997.
Pa«2
i _,j .-. •- ... - ■-.--..,- ._., . -■..,., ■
FIGURE 1
POVERTY STATUS OF FOOD STAMP HOUSEHOLDS
WITH AND WITHOUT FOOD STAMPS, 1997
101% +of
Poverty
8.6%
51 to 100% of Poverty
51.5%
39.9%
Poorest Households
(50% of Poverty or Less)
CASH ONLY
51 to 100% of Poverty
66.6%
15.3%
101% +of
Poverty
18.1%
Poorest Households
(50% of Poverty or Less)
CASH AND FOOD STAMPS
FIGURE 2
DISTRIBUTION OF FOOD STAMP PARTICD7ANTS, 1997
Nonelderly Adults
40.6%
Children in Single
Parent Households
34.4%
2.8% Children in
Other Households
Elderly Adults 7.9% 14.3%
Children in Multiple
Adult Households
Source: 1997 Food Stamp Quality Control sample.
' '
m. Benefits and Income of Food Stamp
Households
The average monthly food stamp benefit in fiscal
year 1997 was $169. The majority (68.6 percent)
of food stamp households received monthly
benefits of over $100, and 36.4 percent received
over $200 (Table 4). In fiscal year 1997, 80.7
percent of all benefits went to households with
children, and 6.6 percent of all benefits went to
households with elderly members (not shown).
The average monthly gross income of food stamp
households was $558 (Table 5). The majority of
households (78.4 percent) received unearned
income from one or more of the following
sources: Aid to Families with Dependent
Children/Temporary Assistance to Needy
Families (AFDC^TANF). General Assistance
(GA), Social Security, Supplemental Security
Income (SSI), Unemployment Compensation, or
some other payment such as veterans benefits or
educational loans. Slightly less than one-forth of
all households (24.2 percent) received earned
income. Almost a tenth (9.2 percent) received
zero gross income.
IV. Characteristics ofFood Stamp Households
by State
In Fiscal year 1997, over half of all food stamp
households were located in eight states:
California, Florida, Illinois, Michigan, New York,
Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas (Table 6). The
average monthly food stamp benefit varied by
state, reflecting differences in income, expenses,
household size, and composition. Average
monthly benefits were largest in Alaska, Hawaii,
Guam, and the Virgin Islands because the
maximum allotment is set higher in those areas to
accommodate higher costs of living. Within the
contiguous United States, food stamp benefits
were highest (greater than $200) in Arizona and
Texas—states with above-average household size.
Conversely, average monthly food stamp benefits
were lowest (less than $140) in Connecticut,
Minnesota, New Hampshire, Ohio, and Vermont-states
with typically above-average gross
household income and below-average household
size.
V. Change in Participation Over Time
The number of persons participating in the FSP
grew substantially between 1989 and 1994 and
has declined steadily since 1994 (Figure 3).
Specifically, the number of food stamp
participants grew from 18.9 million persons in
1989 to a record high of 28.0 million in March
1994 and has decreased to 22.1 million in June
1997. The change in the number ofFood Stamp
Program participants is associated with changes in
the economy, as indicated by the number of
unemployed persons and the number of persons
living in poverty. For example, Figure 3 shows
that the surge in FSP participation between 1989
and 1994 was associated with a worsening
economy, and the drop in participation since 1994
has been associated with an improving economy.
The changes in program participation have been
accompanied by changes in the composition ofthe
caseload (Table 7). Although households with
children remain a large proportion ofthe caseload,
that proportion has dropped from a high of 62.2
percent in 1992 to 58.3 percent in 1997. On the
other hand, the proportion of households with
elderly has risen from a low of 15.4 percent in
1992 to 17.6 percent in 1997. However, the most
substantial change in caseload composition has
been the dramatic rise in the proportion of
participating households with disabled persons,
rising from a low of 8.9 percent in 1990 to 12.5
percent in 1994, and from 18.9 percent in 1995 to
22.3 percent in 1997.'
Changes Under PRWORA. The Personal
Responsibility and Work Opportunity
Reconciliation Act of 1996 (PRWORA) took
effect in FY 1997. This legislation, enacted
August 22,1996, made the following significant
modifications to the FSP:2
: :: : ■ ■■. ■mmmMmmmw!mmmmMWMmzim>>w>w ■ ^^liij^^j^i^^^
40
Millions
FIGURE 3
FOOD STAMP PROGRAM PARTICIPANTS, "*
UNEMPLOYED PERSONS, AND POOR PERSONS
30 -
20 -
10 -
Persons in poverty
FSP participants
Unemployed persons
84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97
Year
'Annual values. The number ofpersons in poverty in Fiscal Year 1997 was not available when this report went to print
Source: Bureau of the Census, Poverty in the United States: 1996, Series P60-198.
"Average monthly values. Source: Food and Nutrition Service, Fiscal Years 1984-1997 FSP Participation and Issuance.
'Average monthly values. Source: Economic Report of the President, 1998 Table B-36.
Sei- mwaWM$M^Mm&MMWlWM^WI^My--WM: ■:■■■ " : :'■ : ™ : . ':: .''■■■■:■: ■ :■■:■:' ,.-.:. ' " ' ■::
• Most legal permanent resident aliens are
disqualified from the FSP.3
• Most able-bodied, nonworking, childless adults
are limited to 3 months ofFSP benefits in any
36-month period.
• The maximum food stamp benefit is reduced
from 103 percent to 100 percent ofthe Thrifty
Food Plan.
• The standard deduction is frozen indefinitely at
fiscal year 1996 levels.
• New shelter deduction caps are established for
fiscal years 1997 through 2001, with the cap
frozen at fiscal year 2001 levels thereafter.
The fiscal year 1997 data provide the fust picture
of food stamp participants since PRWORA's
implementation. The data show that the
percentage of permanent resident aliens
participating in the FSP fell from 5.6 percent in
fiscal year 19% to 4.4 percent in fiscal year 1997.
In addition, the percentage of able-bodied,
nonworking, childless adults participating in the
FSP fell from 3.6 percent in fiscal year 1996 to
2.9 percent in fiscal year 1997. PRWORA is
likely a contributing factor behind the continued
overall decline in the FSP caseload and costs
since 1996. However, the extent to which these
trends are caused by PRWORA rather than other
factors such as the economy is difficult to
determine. Furthermore, PRWORA was
implemented in stages throughout fiscal year
1997, and the average annual estimates provided
here include data from before major components
ofPRWORA were in effect
households, regardless ofalmost any nonfinancial
categorical criteria. Second, instead of cash, it
provides benefits in the form of coupons or
electronic benefits which can be redeemed for
food in any of about 200,000 authorized stores
across the nation. The cost of providing food
stamps to needy persons is funded fully by the
federal government. Administrative costs are
shared by federal, state, and local governments.
Eligibility. To be eligible for food stamps, a
household's assets, gross income, and net income,
which is based on gross income less deductions
permitted under the FSP, must not exceed
specified levels that vary by household size,
composition, and location. Most permanent
resident aliens are ineligible to join die FSP, and
most able-bodied, nonworking, childless adults
are limited to 3 months ofFSP benefits in any 36-
month period.
Food Stamp Benefit Computation and
Issuance. Benefits are computed by subtracting
30 percent of a household's net income from the
maximum benefit amount, which is based on 100
percent of the June cost of the Thrifty Food Plan
(TFP) for a family of four, adjusted for household
size and location. The TFP is based on the cost of
a market basket of food that provides an
economical and nutritious diet. In fiscal year
1997, the maximum benefit for a family of four in
the contiguous United States was $400 per month.
Program participants receive their monthly
benefits through the mail, directly from the local
office, or through an electronic benefit transfer
(which is similar to a bank card).
vn. Data
VI. Description of the Food Stamp Program
The FSP is unique among income maintenance
programs in two important ways. First, it offers
assistance to nearly all financially needy
The estimates presented here are based on data
extracted from the Integrated Quality Control
System, which is an ongoing review offood stamp
households designed to measure the accuracy with
which eligibility and benefit determinations are
*m «™:*:W:-.-:v. ■:■■:■■:•■:■:■■■:,:■ :- ■ .. ■ ■::■.;■■■■■ .: .-'■:■::|.'!:':■.ilv-:.:-fe ™!f"*-— ' ■ ■'
made. All estimates are based on a full-year
sample of 48,854 households.
Food and Nutrition Service administrative records
indicate that the FSP served 22.9 million persons
in fiscal year 1997, and food stamp households
received an average benefit of $173 per month.
The figures in the attached tables of 23.1 million
participants with an average household benefit of
SI69 vary from the administrative figures because
they are estimates from the Food Stamp Quality
Control sample, which weights data by
households rather than persons or benefits.
Administrative figures are based on a monthly
census of actual FSP participation and benefit
issuance.
Notes
'The 1994-to-1995 increase in the proportion of
households with disabled persons is due in part to a
change in the definition of households with disabled
persons. However, using the old definition, the
proportion with disabled still increases from 12.5
percent to 13.3 percent.
2A summary ofthe PRWORA provisions that affect the
FSP is available from the FNS World Wide Web she
(http://www.usda.gov/fcs/fcs.htm).
3 The Agricultural Research Bill, enacted on June 23,
1998, restored eligibility to a substantial number of
legal immigrants who lost eligibility under PRWORA.
Specifically, child, elderly, and disabled permanent
resident aliens will be able to begin receiving federal
food stamp benefits on November 1,1998.
Page 7
Table 1 - Selected Characteristics of Participating Food Stamp Households, 1997
Household type
Participating households
Number
(thousands) Percent
■gc monthly vain
(dollars)
Food stamp
benefit
Gross
income Net
Average
hs«s«hold
sise
(persons)
Total - -
Children
Single-parent households ...
Multiple- adult households .
Other
Elderly
Living alone -
Not living alone..—
Disabled —
Living alone
Not living alone
Other _
Single-person
Multiple-pelson _
9,452
5,508
3,806
1360
342
1,667
1592
375
2.108
1,110
998
1307
1,168
139
100.0
583
403
14.4
3.6
17.6
13.7
4.0
223
11.7
10.6
133
12.4
13
169
234
228
268
169
63
47
118
104
52
162
118
110
185
558
648
576
917
378
577
521
767
687
525
868
185
159
407
299
364
302
590
162
319
266
503
418
244
612
52
38
170
2.4
34
3.1
43
IB
13
IX)
23
Zl
\a
34 •
1.1
1.0
12
Source: 1997 Food Stamp Quality Control sample.
" •—"-" ,:^.:m>^::-:-^.,:-:^::::::T
Table 2 - Gender and Age of Food Stamp Participants, 1997
A«e
All participants
Number
(thousands) Percent
Female
Number
(thousands)
Percent
Male
Number
(thousands) Percent
Total -
Children (0-17)
0-4 -.
5-17...
Adults (18 or more)
18-35
36-59
60 or more —
Unknown _.
23,117
11371
4.046
7325
11.219
5332
4353
1334
27
100.0
51.4
175
33.8
48.5
23.1
175
7.9
0.1
13380
5350
2317
3333
7316
4307
2382
1328
14
100.0
42.9
145
285
57.0
28.9
18.6
93
0.1
9333
5,918
2326
3392
3302
1324
1372
506
13
1000
64.1
21.9
422
355
145
15.9
55
0.1
Source: 1997 Food Stamp Quality Control sample.
Table 3 - Race/Ethnidty of Food Stamp Participants, 1997
Parodpants
Race Number
(thousands) Percent
Total.- - -.
White, Non-Hispanic
African-American, Non-Hispanic -...
Hispanic
Asian
Native American
Other _
23,117
9323
8372
4341
705
313
263
100.0
405
34.9
19.2
33
1.4
1.1
Source 1997 Food Stamp Quality Control sample.
Pay 9
• ' '••■•:: mm
Table 4-Monthly Food Stamp Benefits of Pwticipirting Food
Stamp Households, 1997
Monthly food stamp benefit
Number
(thousands)
Percent
Total
$0-50 ...-
$51-100 __
9452
1726
1736
2,085
969
1758
660
1319
100.0
183
131
$101-150 22.1
$151-200 __ 103
$201-250 133
$251-300 73
$301 ♦ 16.1
Sourer 1997 Food Stamp Quality Control umple.
Table 5- Selected Economic Characteristics of PMtsdfudbeg, Pood Stamp Households, 1997
Participating
tmmmUi
PSMSMWhsOJlDBlas
wttfcsoarcc (dollars)
Average
rood
benefit
(dollars)
Average
Incsoae source
Number
(thousands) Percent Number
(thousands) Percent Gross From
source
hold
size
(persons)
Total 9.452 100.0 23,117 100.0 558 (n/a)
708
169 24
Earned incoate — 2784 24.2 7333 32.6 879 187 33
Wages and salaries 2,139 224 7,105 30.7 898 728 185 33
Self-employment 137 15 424 13 620 324 225 3.1
35
7/415
0.4
78.4
106
18.036
05
783
817
580
421
492
178
163
33
Unearned income 24
AFDC/TANF 3770 34.6 10349 46.1 569 372 240 33
General Assistance 588 67 899 3.9 411 252 123 15
jupplemrMtal Security mcouv 2304 263 4782 207 642 372 93 1.9
Social Security 1399 21.1 3377 144 647 483 77 1.7
156 1.7 509 23 755 491 190 33
Other unearned income 1476 15.6 4,128 17.9 666 211 176 23
Hi sriiiwi 868 97 1408 6.1 0 0 180 14
Sourer 1997 Fi u id litaf Quality Control ssanpat.
10
■*^»,::-III. .Illllll H II II.I. ■■:•-■■ - >^"^*^— ' ' " ' *<^*^> - •*W*: = -
Table 6 - Selected Characteristics of Participating Food Stamp Households by Slate, 1997
State Total
(thousands)
Percent of all
households
Avtrjge monthly amount
Food itaunp
benefit
(dollars)
GfOMinoomc
(doUan)
Net asioomc
(doDan)
Total
deduction
(dollars)-
Countable
aaans
(dollars)
Avenge
size
Total ....
Alabama
Alaska
Arizona
Arkansas
California _
Colorado
Connecticut
Delaware
Dot. of Col
Florida
Georgia
Guam
Hawaii -
Idaho
Illinois
Indiana
Iowa _
Kansas
Kentucky
Louisiana ....
Maine
Maryland
Massachusetts ....
Michigan
Msvtcsots
Mississippi
Missouri
Montana -.
Nebraska
Nevada
?Jew Hampshire
New Jersey
New Mexico
New York -
Norm Carolina...
North Dakota ....
Ohio
Oklahoma
Oregon
Permsvh'ania
Rhode Island ......
South Carolina ....
South Dakota......
Texas
Utah
Vermont
Virgin Islands
Virginia
Washington ....
West Virginia .
VVBConsin
Wyoming _
9,452
186
15
133
105
1.045
91
94
20
40
514
284
6
57
27
434
140
67
64
174
220
58
152
149
366
110
155
199
27
41
38
21
212
75
859
250
16
389
131
121
440
37
140
18
253
751
38
25
6
206
198
117
87
11
100.0
24
02
14
1.1
11.1
10
1.0
02
0.4
5.4
30
0.1
06
03
44
15
0.7
0.7
1.8
2-3
04
1.6
14
3.9
12
1.6
2.1
03
04
04
02
12
03
95
24
02
4.1
14
13
47
04
15
02
2.7
7.9
04
03
0.1
23
2.1
13
09
0.1
169
174
273
203
159
187
169
139
175
186
168
177
408
291
175
173
167
148
156
165
185
149
184
148
161
139
160
161
171
150
165
116
176
179
150
156
156
137
168
141
161
158
160
185
154
201
167
125
322
156
157
168
151
174
558
553
928
569
568
594
56i
596 sn
390
549
535
567
629
622
476
572
625
586
551
526
597
445
635
579
573
550
542
600
630
520
596
512
571
603
513
637
556
534
516
531
562
550
552
564
535
661
598
490
548
547
509
689
583
299
302
607
305
339
333
277
335
305
201
276
279
251
355
338
252
308
360
323
341
282
269
220
333
283
331
332
312
302
361
257
391
224
348
283
289
364
325
299
289
265
304
346
288
312
296
375
339
29V
309
272
280
427
314
291
292
382
294
263
296
319
278
309
227
306
298
396
308
322
260
294
290
290
243
277
356
264
318
330
270
247
264
325
290
305
239
316
252
346
256
304
253
277
276
302
279
234
313
285
278
312
286
223
268
306
269
287
313
92
78
117
76
163
122
48
135
105
16
139
00
118
169
175
61
123
85
125
109
75
109
24
95
57
159
161
115
236
238
67
173
42
107
24
85
351
78
79
249
93
95
104
206
135
52
185
164
93
122
56
90
148
180
24
23
3.1
2.9
23
23
24
23
2.6
23
24
23
33
23
17
24
23
24
14
24
2.6
2.1
24
23
23
23
23
24
23
24
23
23
23
2.7
23
23
23
23
23
2.1
23
23
23
24
23
23
17
2.1
32
23
23
24
2.7
24
Source: 1997 Food Stamp Quality Control sampfe
*'
11
■-. v^i::::^^^
Tabk 7 - Selected Characteristics of Food Stamp Households Over Time
Fiscal Year 1989-Fiscal Year 1995
Total ChiMrea Elderly Disahkd
Fiscal
Year
Partkipaats
(thoataadi)
Households
(thoasaads)
Childrea
(perceat
of all
partkipaats)
Households
with childrra
(perceat
of all)
Elderly
(perceat
of all
partkipaats)
Households
with elderly
(perceat
of all)
■ ■ L.li.
withdkahied
(percent
of all)
1997 23,117 9.452 51.4 58.3 7.9 17.6 22.3
1996 25.926 10.552 51.0 59.5 7.3 16.2 20.2
1995 26.955 10.883 51.5 597 7.1 16.0 18.9'
1994 28.009 11.091 51.4 61 1 7.0 15.8 12.5
1993 27,595 10.791 51.5 62.1 6.8 15.5 10.7
1992b 25,743 10.049 51.9 62.2 6.6 15.4 9.5
1991" 22.963 8.855 520 604 7.0 164 9.0
1990* 20,411 7.803 49.6 60.3 7.7 18.1 8.9
1989** 18.925 7,209 49.8 60.4 8.2 19.3 9.1
"Full year analysis files were not developed for the years prior to 1989.
bPrior to fiscal year 1993, food stamp cases from Guam and the Virgin Islands were excluded from the analysis files.
'Beginning In 199S, disabled households are defined as households with at least one member under age 63 who
received SSI, or at least one member age 18 to 61 who received Social Security, veterans benefits, or other
government benefits as a result of a disability. For years prior to 1995, disabled households are defined as
households with SSI but no members over age 59. The substantial increase in the percentage of households with
a disabled member between 1994 and 1995 is due in part to the change in the definition ofdisabled households.
Using the previous definition, 13.3 percent of households included a disabled person in fiscal year 1995.
Source: Food Stamp Quality Control samples.
Home Economics and Household Collection
