You are on page 1of 16

Food Hardship 2008-2012:

Geography and Household Composition


Data for the Nation, States, Regions, and 100 MSAs
September 2013

Introduction
Between 2008 and 2012 the Gallup organization, as part of the Gallup-Healthways Well-Being Index project, surveyed nearly 1.8 million households on a range of matters. One of the survey questions was Have there been times in the past twelve months when you did not have enough money to buy food that you or your family needed? A household was classified as experiencing food hardship if it answered yes to the Gallup question. In this report FRAC looks at the food hardship rates from the Gallup survey at the national, regional, state, and metropolitan statistical area (MSA) levels broken down by households with children and households without children. The key finding: rates were much too high regardless of the households composition; on every level households with children fared considerably worse than households without children. Nationally, nearly one in four households with children answered yes. In the surveys taken between 2008 and 2012, an average of: 18.2 percent of all households in the U.S. experienced food hardship, but the rate leapt to 23.5 percent for households with children. Households without children still had a high food hardship rate, with 15.1 percent saying they struggled to afford enough food. In all of the regions of the nation, more than one in five households with children experienced food hardship, but the rates were above one in four (above 25 percent) in the Southeast, Southwest and Western regions. Nearly half of the states had food hardship rates above 25 percent for households with children. The worst 15 states all had a food hardship rate of at least 26.7 percent (more than one in four), and three states (Mississippi, Washington, D.C., and Alabama) had a rate greater than or equal to 30.0 percent for such households. Of the 100 largest MSAs, 78 had a food hardship rate for households with children greater than or equal to 20 percent. And while the conventional wisdom may be that urban poverty and economic hardship are concentrated in the Midwest, the Gallup data show that the Southeast, Southwest and California have MSAs where households were the most likely to experience food hardship.

As the nation recovers from the economic recession, and as economic indicators improve, more resources must be directed towards eliminating food hardship among all men, women, and children, regardless of household composition or geography. This is not simply a moral or ethical dutythe developmental, social, and economic consequences of food hardship damage children and adults, states and cities, suburban and rural areas, and the nations economic and fiscal strengths.

Food Hardship 2008-2012: Geography and Household Composition | 1

Results
National Rates of Food Hardship by Household Composition
Between 2008 and 2012, 18.2 percent of all households in the U.S. experienced food hardship. But households with children were substantially more likely than other households to suffer food hardship. The rate was 23.5 percent for households with children and 15.1 percent for households without children.

Regional Rates of Food Hardship by Household Composition


FRAC used the USDA Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) classification of U.S. regions to examine regional differences in food hardship by household composition between 2008 and 2012. The states included in the FNS regions are: Mid-Atlantic DE, DC, MD, NJ, PA, VA, WV Mountain Plains CO, IA, KS, MO, MT, NE, ND, SD, UT, WY Midwest IL, IN, MI, MN, OH, WI Northeast CT, MA, ME, NH, NY, RI, VT Southeast AL, FL, GA, KY, MS, NC, SC, TN Southwest AR, LA, NM, OK, TX Western AK, AZ, CA, HI, ID, NV, OR, WA

Overall, the Southeast, Southwest, and Western regions had the highest rates of food hardship for both types of households. In all regions more than one in five households with children experienced food hardship, and in the Southeast, Southwest and Western regions more than one in four did so. The disparity between households with and without children was greatest in the Western region, with over a 10 percent difference based on household composition.

State Rates of Food Hardship by Household Composition


The food hardship rates for all states and the District of Columbia can be found in the appendix listed both alphabetically and ranked by rate. There was considerable variation in food hardship rates from state to state, both for households with children and those without. But nearly all of the states had food hardship rates above 20 percent for households with children. Even for households without children, the worst 15 states all had a food hardship rate over 17 percent. That is one in six households or worse. The most shocking rates, however, were seen in households with children, where the worst 15 states all had a food hardship rate of at least 26.7 percent (more than one in four), and three states had a rate greater than or equal to 30 percent.
Percentage of Households Experiencing Food Hardship, 2008-2012 Households with Households Food Hardship Children without Children Rate Range (%) Number of States 0 - 4.9 0 0 5.0 9.9 0 1 10.0 14.9 1 25 15.0 19.9 8 22 20.0 24.9 19 3 25.0 29.99 20 0 30.0 and above 3 0
Includes the District of Columbia

Food Hardship 2008-2012: Geography and Household Composition | 2

Worst 15 States by Food Hardship for Households with and without Children, 2008-2012 Households with Children Households without Children State Rate (%) Rank State Rate (%) Rank Mississippi 31.5 1 Mississippi 22.8 1 District of Columbia 30.5 2 Alabama 20.5 2 Alabama 30.0 3 West Virginia 20.0 3 Florida 28.6 4 South Carolina 19.8 4 Nevada 28.3 5 Arkansas 19.7 5 Arkansas 28.2 6 Kentucky 19.5 6 Louisiana 28.1 7 Louisiana 19.5 6 Tennessee 28.0 8 Tennessee 19.2 8 Arizona 27.9 9 Georgia 19.0 9 North Carolina 27.5 10 North Carolina 18.7 10 Texas 27.4 11 Oklahoma 18.2 11 Delaware 27.3 12 Texas 17.6 12 Oklahoma 27.3 12 Florida 17.5 13 West Virginia 27.3 12 Ohio 17.2 14 South Carolina 26.7 15 Missouri 17.1 15

MSA Rates of Food Hardship by Household Composition


FRAC examined food hardship rates for the 100 largest MSAs in the Gallup data. The Census Bureau defines an MSA as a central city plus the surrounding counties with strong economic and social ties to the central city. Of the 100 largest MSAs, 78 had a food hardship rate for households with children greater than or equal to 20 percent. California and Florida together had the worst five MSA spots (and seven of the worst 12) for households with children, with food hardship rates of at least 30 percent.
Worst 25 MSAs by Food Hardship for Households with Children, 2008-2012 Metropolitan Statistical Area Food Hardship Rate (%) Rank Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL 31.8 1 Bakersfield, CA 30.8 2 Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL 30.6 3 Orlando-Kissimmee, FL 30.4 4 Fresno, CA 30.1 5 Las Vegas-Paradise, NV 29.3 6 New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA 29.2 7 Greensboro-High Point, NC 29.1 8 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA 29.1 8 Youngstown-Warren-Boardman, OH-PA 28.0 10 Louisville-Jefferson County, KY-IN 28.0 10 Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL 27.9 12 Memphis, TN-MS-AR 27.3 13 Birmingham-Hoover, AL 27.2 14 Dayton, OH 26.9 15 Winston-Salem, NC 26.8 16 Tulsa, OK 26.8 16 Asheville, NC 26.5 18 Albuquerque, NM 26.5 18 Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA 26.5 18 Scranton--Wilkes-Barre, PA 26.3 21 Jacksonville, FL 26.1 22 Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL 26.1 22 Knoxville, TN 26.0 24 Bradenton-Sarasota-Venice, FL 25.9 25
Food Hardship 2008-2012: Geography and Household Composition | 3

Families without children fared better but still suffered unacceptably high rates. For example, 97 of the 100 MSAs among households without children had a food hardship rate of at least 10 percent.
Worst 25 MSAs by Food Hardship for Households without Children, 2008-2012 Metropolitan Statistical Area Food Hardship Rate (%) Rank Bakersfield, CA 20.4 1 Greensboro-High Point, NC 19.6 2 Fresno, CA 18.9 3 Birmingham-Hoover, AL 18.9 3 Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA 18.4 4 Asheville, NC 18.3 6 Little Rock-N Little Rock-Conway, AR 18.3 6 Youngstown-Warren-Boardman, OH-PA 18.3 6 Dayton, OH 18.3 6 New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA 18.2 10 Columbia, SC 18.1 11 Memphis, TN-MS-AR 18.1 11 Oklahoma City, OK 18.0 13 San Antonio, TX 18.0 13 Springfield, MA 17.8 15 Orlando-Kissimmee, FL 17.7 16 Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL 17.5 17 Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL 17.4 18 Knoxville, TN 17.2 19 Charleston-N Charleston-Summerville, SC 17.1 20 Indianapolis-Carmel, IN 17.1 20 Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL 17.0 22 Baton Rouge, LA 16.9 23 Tulsa, OK 16.9 23 Toledo, OH 16.8 25

Although conventional wisdom sometimes is that urban poverty and economic hardship, especially in the wake of the recession, are concentrated in the Midwest, the Gallup data show that the Southeast, Southwest and California have the MSAs where households are the most likely to experience food hardship. For example, of the worst 25 MSAs for all households, 11 were located in the Southeast, eight were in the Southwest, and four were located in California. A complete list of the 100 largest MSAs can be found in the appendix.

Methodology
FRAC used data from the Gallup Healthways Well-Being Index (HWBI). The HWBI uses live interviewers conducting telephone interviews with randomly sampled respondents aged 18 or older, including cell phone users and Spanish-speaking respondents, from all 50 states and the District of Columbia. The data are weighted based on age, sex, region, gender, education, ethnicity and race to be representative of population at each level of geographical analysis (e.g., nation, state, and MSA). At the regional level, we used the mean state-weight for states within a region as the regional weight. The weights help account for differences in selection probabilities and respondent non-response. Only one person per household is interviewed and that person is chosen at random from all eligible adult respondents in the household. While individuals were asked a variety of questions, this report focuses on the questions regarding food hardship and household composition. The question used to measure food hardship was Have there been times in the past twelve months when you did not have enough money to buy food that you or your family needed? Respondents could answer yes or no. A household was classified as having experienced food hardship if they answered yes. This question is similar to a question in the USDAs Household Food Security Survey which asks The food that we bought just didnt last and we didnt have money to get more, with response options of often, sometimes, or never true, for you in the last 12 months? An affirmative response is counted if the respondent answered often or sometimes. Respondents were also asked How many children under the age
Food Hardship 2008-2012: Geography and Household Composition | 4

of 18 are living in your household? If the respondent indicated there were no children, they were classified as a household without children. If the respondent indicated there was at least one child, they were classified as a household with children. Chi square tests at an alpha of 0.05 were used to test for differences between households with and without children. All differences between households with and without children were significant in this report. Finally, 95 percent confidence intervals were used to construct the margin of error for each food hardship rate. FRAC looked at survey years between 2008 and 2012 at the national, state, and MSA levels to obtain the smallest possible margin of error. Our total sample size across all years was about 1.8 million individuals. At the national, state, and MSA levels for households with children, the mean margins of error (in percentage points) were 0.2 (SD 0.00), 1.6 (SD 0.09), 2.7 (SD 0.09), respectively. The margins of error were considerably smaller for households with children, as the sample sizes were larger (not shown).

Acknowledgments
This report was prepared by Michael Burke, Hannah Martin, and Jim Weill.

Food Hardship 2008-2012: Geography and Household Composition | 5

Food Hardship Estimates by State between 2008-2012, Listed Alphabetically Households with Children State Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Rate 30.0% 21.2% 27.9% 28.2% 26.0% 21.6% 18.6% 27.3% 30.5% 28.6% 26.5% 20.1% 22.9% 22.8% 26.5% 19.0% 21.6% 26.5% 28.1% 23.2% 20.4% 18.2% 24.3% 17.3% 31.5% 24.0% 21.2% 20.3% 28.3% 19.9% 19.5% 25.4% 23.6% 27.5% 14.3% 26.1% 27.3% 26.2% 21.8% 25.5% 26.7% 21.1% 28.0% 27.4% 22.4% 19.1% 22.2% 21.7% 27.3% 19.5% 20.3% Rank 3 36 9 6 21 34 48 12 2 4 16 42 28 29 16 47 34 16 7 27 39 49 24 50 1 25 36 40 5 43 44 23 26 10 51 20 12 19 32 22 15 38 8 11 30 46 31 33 12 44 40 Households without Children Rate 20.5% 14.8% 15.9% 19.7% 15.8% 14.3% 12.6% 15.4% 13.5% 17.5% 19.0% 12.3% 14.1% 14.1% 17.0% 12.2% 13.8% 19.5% 19.5% 15.1% 13.2% 14.1% 16.6% 11.7% 22.8% 17.1% 13.2% 12.3% 16.5% 13.2% 13.3% 16.1% 14.5% 18.7% 8.5% 17.2% 18.2% 15.3% 13.3% 15.2% 19.8% 11.3% 19.2% 17.6% 13.7% 14.4% 13.2% 13.5% 20.0% 12.0% 12.7% Rank 2 26 20 5 21 29 44 22 35 13 9 45 30 30 16 47 33 6 6 25 39 30 17 49 1 15 39 45 18 39 37 19 27 10 51 14 11 23 37 24 4 50 8 12 34 28 39 35 3 48 43

Food Hardship 2008-2012: Geography and Household Composition | 6

Food Hardship Estimates by State between 2008-2012, Listed by Rank State Mississippi District of Columbia Alabama Florida Nevada Arkansas Louisiana Tennessee Arizona North Carolina Texas Delaware Oklahoma West Virginia South Carolina Georgia Indiana Kentucky Oregon Ohio California Rhode Island New Mexico Michigan Missouri New York Maine Idaho Illinois Utah Virginia Pennsylvania Washington Colorado Kansas Alaska Montana South Dakota Maryland Nebraska Wyoming Hawaii New Hampshire New Jersey Wisconsin Vermont Iowa Connecticut Massachusetts Minnesota North Dakota Households with Children Rate 31.5% 30.5% 30.0% 28.6% 28.3% 28.2% 28.1% 28.0% 27.9% 27.5% 27.4% 27.3% 27.3% 27.3% 26.7% 26.5% 26.5% 26.5% 26.2% 26.1% 26.0% 25.5% 25.4% 24.3% 24.0% 23.6% 23.2% 22.9% 22.8% 22.4% 22.2% 21.8% 21.7% 21.6% 21.6% 21.2% 21.2% 21.1% 20.4% 20.3% 20.3% 20.1% 19.9% 19.5% 19.5% 19.1% 19.0% 18.6% 18.2% 17.3% 14.3% Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 12 12 15 16 16 16 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 34 36 36 38 39 40 40 42 43 44 44 46 47 48 49 50 51 Households without Children Rate Mississippi 22.8% Alabama 20.5% West Virginia 20.0% South Carolina 19.8% Arkansas 19.7% Kentucky 19.5% Louisiana 19.5% Tennessee 19.2% Georgia 19.0% North Carolina 18.7% Oklahoma 18.2% Texas 17.6% Florida 17.5% Ohio 17.2% Missouri 17.1% Indiana 17.0% Michigan 16.6% Nevada 16.5% New Mexico 16.1% Arizona 15.9% California 15.8% Delaware 15.4% Oregon 15.3% Rhode Island 15.2% Maine 15.1% Alaska 14.8% New York 14.5% Vermont 14.4% Colorado 14.3% Idaho 14.1% Illinois 14.1% Massachusetts 14.1% Kansas 13.8% Utah 13.7% District of Columbia 13.5% Washington 13.5% New Jersey 13.3% Pennsylvania 13.3% Maryland 13.2% Montana 13.2% New Hampshire 13.2% Virginia 13.2% Wyoming 12.7% Connecticut 12.6% Hawaii 12.3% Nebraska 12.3% Iowa 12.2% Wisconsin 12.0% Minnesota 11.7% South Dakota 11.3% North Dakota 8.5% State Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 6 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 30 30 33 34 35 35 37 37 39 39 39 39 43 44 45 45 47 48 49 50 51

Food Hardship 2008-2012: Geography and Household Composition | 7

Food Hardship Estimates by 100 Largest MSAs between 2008-2012, Listed Alphabetically Metropolitan Statistical Area Akron, OH Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY Albuquerque, NM Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA-NJ Anchorage, AK Asheville, NC Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA Austin-Round Rock, TX Bakersfield, CA Baltimore-Towson, MD Baton Rouge, LA Birmingham-Hoover, AL Boise City-Nampa, ID Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH Bradenton-Sarasota-Venice, FL Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, CT Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL Charleston-N Charleston-Summerville, SC Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC Chicago-Naperville-Joilet, IL-IN-WI Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH Colorado Springs, CO Columbia, SC Columbus, OH Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX Dayton, OH Denver-Aurora, CO Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI Durham, NC Fresno, CA Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI Greensboro-High Point, NC Greenville-Mauldin-Easley, SC Harrisburg-Carlisle, PA Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT Honolulu, HI Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX Indianapolis-Carmel, IN Jacksonville, FL Kansas City, MO-KS Knoxville, TN Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL Lancaster, PA Las Vegas-Paradise, NV Little Rock-N Little Rock-Conway, AR Households with Children Rate 22.2% 20.5% 26.5% 23.0% 21.0% 26.5% 24.0% 23.2% 30.8% 20.5% 25.4% 27.2% 20.2% 16.3% 25.9% 15.2% 19.3% 30.6% 22.7% 22.7% 21.8% 22.0% 23.0% 17.8% 23.7% 24.1% 22.8% 26.9% 21.2% 15.5% 23.0% 19.3% 30.1% 22.7% 29.1% 21.1% 18.4% 17.4% 15.0% 25.5% 22.4% 26.1% 20.0% 26.0% 31.8% 15.5% 29.3% 23.2% Rank 55 71 18 46 67 18 33 43 2 71 29 14 75 93 25 98 81 3 51 51 60 57 46 89 38 32 50 15 64 96 46 81 5 51 8 66 87 90 99 28 54 22 77 24 1 96 6 43 Households without Children Rate 16.2% 13.6% 15.8% 13.1% 15.0% 18.3% 16.0% 13.9% 20.4% 13.7% 16.9% 18.9% 15.2% 12.3% 12.3% 11.5% 11.9% 14.6% 17.1% 15.7% 13.6% 15.8% 16.3% 13.4% 18.1% 14.8% 16.0% 18.3% 14.0% 12.6% 16.0% 14.5% 18.9% 15.7% 19.6% 16.7% 11.6% 12.3% 10.2% 15.6% 17.1% 16.8% 15.3% 17.2% 17.5% 9.1% 16.7% 18.3% Rank 33 68 38 77 50 6 34 63 1 66 23 3 48 84 84 93 89 55 20 42 68 38 32 73 11 51 34 6 60 80 34 57 3 42 2 27 92 84 96 44 20 25 47 19 17 99 27 6

Food Hardship 2008-2012: Geography and Household Composition | 8

Food Hardship Estimates by 100 Largest MSAs between 2008-2012, Listed Alphabetically Metropolitan Statistical Area Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA Louisville-Jefferson County, KY-IN Madison, WI Memphis, TN-MS-AR Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro-Franklin, TN New Haven-Milford, CT New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA New York-North New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA Ogden-Clearfield, UT Oklahoma City, OK Omaha-Council Bluffs, NE-IA Orlando-Kissimmee, FL Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA Palm Bay-Melbourne-Titusville, FL Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ Pittsburgh, PA Portland-South Portland-Biddeford, ME Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, NY Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA Raleigh-Cary, NC Richmond, VA Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA Rochester, NY Sacramento--Arden-Arcade--Roseville, CA Salt Lake City, UT San Antonio, TX San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA Scranton--Wilkes-Barre, PA Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Spokane, WA Springfield, MA St. Louis, MO-IL Syracuse, NY Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL Toledo, OH Tucson, AZ Tulsa, OK Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV Wichita, KS Households with Children Rate 26.5% 28.0% 14.2% 27.3% 27.9% 19.3% 16.0% 23.8% 19.9% 29.2% 21.0% 23.4% 24.9% 20.8% 30.4% 23.9% 23.4% 21.2% 25.6% 19.4% 18.0% 21.9% 20.5% 23.1% 19.3% 24.0% 29.1% 18.9% 23.0% 20.9% 24.0% 21.9% 16.9% 15.8% 22.1% 26.3% 18.7% 23.4% 23.4% 21.3% 21.6% 26.1% 25.7% 24.9% 26.8% 20.4% 17.2% 21.7% Rank 18 10 100 13 12 81 94 37 79 7 67 39 30 70 4 36 39 64 27 80 88 58 71 45 81 33 8 85 46 69 33 58 92 95 56 21 86 39 39 63 62 22 26 30 16 74 91 61 Households without Children Rate 15.8% 16.5% 9.0% 18.1% 17.4% 11.9% 10.9% 15.6% 14.0% 18.2% 13.5% 13.8% 18.0% 13.0% 17.7% 12.3% 16.6% 13.5% 14.7% 12.4% 12.4% 14.0% 12.4% 16.4% 13.4% 14.7% 18.4% 12.7% 14.6% 14.2% 18.0% 13.7% 12.0% 10.3% 13.5% 14.2% 11.7% 15.8% 17.8% 13.3% 13.8% 17.0% 16.8% 15.9% 16.9% 13.3% 9.3% 15.2% Rank 38 30 100 11 18 89 94 44 60 10 70 64 13 78 16 84 29 70 52 81 81 60 81 31 73 52 5 79 55 58 13 66 88 95 70 58 91 38 15 75 64 22 25 37 23 75 98 48

Food Hardship 2008-2012: Geography and Household Composition | 9

Food Hardship Estimates by 100 Largest MSAs between 2008-2012, Listed Alphabetically Metropolitan Statistical Area Winston-Salem, NC Worcester, MA York-Hanover, PA Youngstown-Warren-Boardman, OH-PA Households with Children Rate 26.8% 20.0% 20.1% 28.0% Rank 16 77 76 10 Households without Children Rate 15.5% 14.7% 10.2% 18.3% Rank 46 52 96 6

Food Hardship 2008-2012: Geography and Household Composition | 10

Food Hardship Estimates by 100 Largest MSAs between 2008-2012, Listed by Rank Households with Children Metropolitan Statistical Area Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL Bakersfield, CA Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL Orlando-Kissimmee, FL Fresno, CA Las Vegas-Paradise, NV New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA Greensboro-High Point, NC Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA Youngstown-Warren-Boardman, OH-PA Louisville-Jefferson County, KY-IN Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL Memphis, TN-MS-AR Birmingham-Hoover, AL Dayton, OH Winston-Salem, NC Tulsa, OK Asheville, NC Albuquerque, NM Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA Scranton--Wilkes-Barre, PA Jacksonville, FL Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL Knoxville, TN Bradenton-Sarasota-Venice, FL Toledo, OH Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX Baton Rouge, LA Tucson, AZ Oklahoma City, OK Columbus, OH Richmond, VA San Antonio, TX Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro-Franklin, TN Columbia, SC Palm Bay-Melbourne-Titusville, FL Spokane, WA Springfield, MA Ogden-Clearfield, UT Little Rock-N Little Rock-Conway, AR Austin-Round Rock, TX Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA-NJ Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH Sacramento--Arden-Arcade--Roseville, CA Rate 31.8% 30.8% 30.6% 30.4% 30.1% 29.3% 29.2% 29.1% 29.1% 28.0% 28.0% 27.9% 27.3% 27.2% 26.9% 26.8% 26.8% 26.5% 26.5% 26.5% 26.3% 26.1% 26.1% 26.0% 25.9% 25.7% 25.6% 25.5% 25.4% 24.9% 24.9% 24.1% 24.0% 24.0% 24.0% 23.9% 23.8% 23.7% 23.4% 23.4% 23.4% 23.4% 23.2% 23.2% 23.1% 23.0% 23.0% 23.0% Rank 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 8 10 10 12 13 14 15 16 16 18 18 18 21 22 22 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 30 32 33 33 33 36 37 38 39 39 39 39 43 43 45 46 46 46

Food Hardship 2008-2012: Geography and Household Composition | 11

Food Hardship Estimates by 100 Largest MSAs between 2008-2012, Listed by Rank Households with Children Metropolitan Statistical Area Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX Charleston-N Charleston-Summerville, SC Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC Indianapolis-Carmel, IN Akron, OH Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA Chicago-Naperville-Joilet, IL-IN-WI Wichita, KS Syracuse, NY St. Louis, MO-IL Denver-Aurora, CO Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD Greenville-Mauldin-Easley, SC Anchorage, AK New York-North New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA Salt Lake City, UT Omaha-Council Bluffs, NE-IA Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, NY Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY Baltimore-Towson, MD Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC Boise City-Nampa, ID York-Hanover, PA Worcester, MA Kansas City, MO-KS New Haven-Milford, CT Pittsburgh, PA Durham, NC Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY Raleigh-Cary, NC Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI Rochester, NY Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Harrisburg-Carlisle, PA Portland-South Portland-Biddeford, ME Colorado Springs, CO Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA Rate 23.0% 22.8% 22.7% 22.7% 22.7% 22.4% 22.2% 22.1% 22.0% 21.9% 21.9% 21.8% 21.7% 21.6% 21.3% 21.2% 21.2% 21.1% 21.0% 21.0% 20.9% 20.8% 20.5% 20.5% 20.5% 20.4% 20.2% 20.1% 20.0% 20.0% 19.9% 19.4% 19.3% 19.3% 19.3% 19.3% 18.9% 18.7% 18.4% 18.0% 17.8% 17.4% 17.2% 16.9% 16.3% 16.0% 15.8% 15.5% Rank 46 50 51 51 51 54 55 56 57 58 58 60 61 62 63 64 64 66 67 67 69 70 71 71 71 74 75 76 77 77 79 80 81 81 81 81 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96

Food Hardship 2008-2012: Geography and Household Composition | 12

Food Hardship Estimates by 100 Largest MSAs between 2008-2012, Listed by Rank Households with Children Metropolitan Statistical Area Lancaster, PA Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, CT Honolulu, HI Madison, WI Rate 15.5% 15.2% 15.0% 14.2% Rank 96 98 99 100

Food Hardship 2008-2012: Geography and Household Composition | 13

Food Hardship Estimates by 100 Largest MSAs between 2008-2012, Listed by Rank Households without Children Metropolitan Statistical Area Bakersfield, CA Greensboro-High Point, NC Fresno, CA Birmingham-Hoover, AL Riverside-San Bernardino-Ontario, CA Asheville, NC Little Rock-N Little Rock-Conway, AR Youngstown-Warren-Boardman, OH-PA Dayton, OH New Orleans-Metairie-Kenner, LA Columbia, SC Memphis, TN-MS-AR Oklahoma City, OK San Antonio, TX Springfield, MA Orlando-Kissimmee, FL Lakeland-Winter Haven, FL Miami-Fort Lauderdale-Pompano Beach, FL Knoxville, TN Charleston-N Charleston-Summerville, SC Indianapolis-Carmel, IN Tampa-St. Petersburg-Clearwater, FL Baton Rouge, LA Tulsa, OK Toledo, OH Jacksonville, FL Greenville-Mauldin-Easley, SC Las Vegas-Paradise, NV Palm Bay-Melbourne-Titusville, FL Louisville-Jefferson County, KY-IN Providence-New Bedford-Fall River, RI-MA Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor, OH Akron, OH Detroit-Warren-Livonia, MI Atlanta-Sandy Springs-Marietta, GA Dallas-Fort Worth-Arlington, TX Tucson, AZ Spokane, WA Albuquerque, NM Cincinnati-Middletown, OH-KY-IN Los Angeles-Long Beach-Santa Ana, CA Grand Rapids-Wyoming, MI Charlotte-Gastonia-Concord, NC-SC Nashville-Davidson-Murfreesboro-Franklin, TN Houston-Sugar Land-Baytown, TX Winston-Salem, NC Kansas City, MO-KS Boise City-Nampa, ID Rate 20.4% 19.6% 18.9% 18.9% 18.4% 18.3% 18.3% 18.3% 18.3% 18.2% 18.1% 18.1% 18.0% 18.0% 17.8% 17.7% 17.5% 17.4% 17.2% 17.1% 17.1% 17.0% 16.9% 16.9% 16.8% 16.8% 16.7% 16.7% 16.6% 16.5% 16.4% 16.3% 16.2% 16.0% 16.0% 16.0% 15.9% 15.8% 15.8% 15.8% 15.8% 15.7% 15.7% 15.6% 15.6% 15.5% 15.3% 15.2% Rank 1 2 3 3 5 6 6 6 6 10 11 11 13 13 15 16 17 18 19 20 20 22 23 23 25 25 27 27 29 30 31 32 33 34 34 34 37 38 38 38 38 42 42 44 44 46 47 48

Food Hardship 2008-2012: Geography and Household Composition | 14

Food Hardship Estimates by 100 Largest MSAs between 2008-2012, Listed by Rank Households without Children Metropolitan Statistical Area Wichita, KS Anchorage, AK Columbus, OH Worcester, MA Richmond, VA Phoenix-Mesa-Scottsdale, AZ Cape Coral-Fort Myers, FL Sacramento--Arden-Arcade--Roseville, CA Durham, NC Scranton--Wilkes-Barre, PA Salt Lake City, UT New Haven-Milford, CT Denver-Aurora, CO Portland-Vancouver-Beaverton, OR-WA Austin-Round Rock, TX Ogden-Clearfield, UT Syracuse, NY Baltimore-Towson, MD San Diego-Carlsbad-San Marcos, CA Albany-Schenectady-Troy, NY Chicago-Naperville-Joilet, IL-IN-WI Santa Rosa-Petaluma, CA Philadelphia-Camden-Wilmington, PA-NJ-DE-MD New York-North New Jersey-Long Island, NY-NJ-PA Colorado Springs, CO Raleigh-Cary, NC Virginia Beach-Norfolk-Newport News, VA-NC St. Louis, MO-IL Allentown-Bethlehem-Easton, PA-NJ Omaha-Council Bluffs, NE-IA Rochester, NY Des Moines-West Des Moines, IA Poughkeepsie-Newburgh-Middletown, NY Portland-South Portland-Biddeford, ME Pittsburgh, PA Oxnard-Thousand Oaks-Ventura, CA Bradenton-Sarasota-Venice, FL Hartford-West Hartford-East Hartford, CT Boston-Cambridge-Quincy, MA-NH San Francisco-Oakland-Fremont, CA Buffalo-Niagara Falls, NY Milwaukee-Waukesha-West Allis, WI Seattle-Tacoma-Bellevue, WA Harrisburg-Carlisle, PA Bridgeport-Stamford-Norwalk, CT Minneapolis-St. Paul-Bloomington, MN-WI San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA Honolulu, HI Rate 15.2% 15.0% 14.8% 14.7% 14.7% 14.7% 14.6% 14.6% 14.5% 14.2% 14.2% 14.0% 14.0% 14.0% 13.9% 13.8% 13.8% 13.7% 13.7% 13.6% 13.6% 13.5% 13.5% 13.5% 13.4% 13.4% 13.3% 13.3% 13.1% 13.0% 12.7% 12.6% 12.4% 12.4% 12.4% 12.3% 12.3% 12.3% 12.3% 12.0% 11.9% 11.9% 11.7% 11.6% 11.5% 10.9% 10.3% 10.2% Rank 48 50 51 52 52 52 55 55 57 58 58 60 60 60 63 64 64 66 66 68 68 70 70 70 73 73 75 75 77 78 79 80 81 81 81 84 84 84 84 88 89 89 91 92 93 94 95 96

Food Hardship 2008-2012: Geography and Household Composition | 15

Food Hardship Estimates by 100 Largest MSAs between 2008-2012, Listed by Rank Households without Children Metropolitan Statistical Area York-Hanover, PA Washington-Arlington-Alexandria, DC-VA-MD-WV Lancaster, PA Madison, WI Rate 10.2% 9.3% 9.1% 9.0% Rank 96 98 99 100

Food Hardship 2008-2012: Geography and Household Composition | 16