Earlier this summer, California announced it would be sending $1,050 checks to approximately 23 million residents to combat the devastating effects inflation has had on state residents. Since then, a number of other states have followed suit with some form of check or tax rebate. Should even more states follow suit and release their own relief, the checks likely would not be enough on their own for needy families. One long-standing program that millions of Americans rely on is the government’s food assistance benefits, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
As of 2020, roughly 13.8 million U.S. households received SNAP benefits, formerly known as food stamps. To find the town with the highest SNAP recipiency rate in every state, 24/7 Wall St. reviewed five-year estimates for places with at least 1,000 people and fewer than 25,000 to determine the share of households that received SNAP benefits in the 12 months prior to the survey from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2020 American Community Survey.
As of 2020, 11.4% of U.S. households received SNAP benefits. In most states, there is at least one town where a higher share of households receive nutrition assistance. In some of the towns with the highest SNAP recipiency rates in each state, that figure exceeds 30%, even in some cases 40%.
While factors such as assets and household composition impact whether a household qualifies for the benefit, SNAP recipiency is primarily determined by income. The majority of the towns with the highest SNAP recipiency rate in each state also rank among the three towns with the highest poverty rates in their respective states. Indian Hills, Texas, has a SNAP recipiency rate of72.4% and a poverty rate of 63.7%, each the highest share in the state and among the highest such figures in the country. These are the states where the most children live in Poverty.
Because income is the primary determinant for SNAP recipiency, unemployment is strongly linked to how many people receive benefits, as those workers who are out of a job are likely to have little to no income. Out of the 50 towns on this list, 42 have higher five-year unemployment rates compared to their respective states. This includes the unincorporated community of Lydia, Louisiana, which has an unemployment rate of 23.3% and a SNAP recipiency rate of 60.8%. These are the states with the worst spikes in unemployment since the pandemic began.
Click here to see where the most people need food stamps in every state.
Click here to see our detailed methodology.
Alabama: Bear Creek
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 43.8% (Alabama: 13.4%)
> Poverty rate: 18.3% (Alabama: 16.0%)
> Median household income: $33,421 (Alabama: $52,035)
> Unemployment rate: 13.7% (Alabama: 5.5%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 252
[in-text-ad]
Alaska: Houston
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 25.8% (Alaska: 10.3%)
> Poverty rate: 13.1% (Alaska: 10.3%)
> Median household income: $53,594 (Alaska: $77,790)
> Unemployment rate: 16.4% (Alaska: 6.8%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 52
Arizona: San Carlos
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 55.8% (Arizona: 10.5%)
> Poverty rate: 54.0% (Arizona: 14.1%)
> Median household income: $33,661 (Arizona: $61,529)
> Unemployment rate: 20.5% (Arizona: 5.8%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 129
Arkansas: Marvell
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 46.7% (Arkansas: 11.7%)
> Poverty rate: 35.5% (Arkansas: 16.1%)
> Median household income: $33,576 (Arkansas: $49,475)
> Unemployment rate: 23.3% (Arkansas: 5.2%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 165
[in-text-ad-2]
California: Pixley
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 45.4% (California: 9.0%)
> Poverty rate: 31.8% (California: 12.6%)
> Median household income: $32,209 (California: $78,672)
> Unemployment rate: 17.9% (California: 6.1%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 611
Colorado: Rocky Ford
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 36.1% (Colorado: 7.2%)
> Poverty rate: 37.9% (Colorado: 9.8%)
> Median household income: $28,383 (Colorado: $75,231)
> Unemployment rate: 10.2% (Colorado: 4.6%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 148
[in-text-ad]
Connecticut: Poquonock Bridge
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 39.6% (Connecticut: 11.6%)
> Poverty rate: 27.2% (Connecticut: 9.8%)
> Median household income: $44,544 (Connecticut: $79,855)
> Unemployment rate: 20.4% (Connecticut: 6.0%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 111
Delaware: Woodside East
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 46.5% (Delaware: 10.6%)
> Poverty rate: 15.2% (Delaware: 11.4%)
> Median household income: $56,042 (Delaware: $69,110)
> Unemployment rate: 8.1% (Delaware: 5.8%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 44
Florida: Florida City
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 53.1% (Florida: 13.2%)
> Poverty rate: 31.1% (Florida: 13.3%)
> Median household income: $37,556 (Florida: $57,703)
> Unemployment rate: 12.4% (Florida: 5.4%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 537
[in-text-ad-2]
Georgia: Camilla
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 51.1% (Georgia: 12.2%)
> Poverty rate: 45.6% (Georgia: 14.3%)
> Median household income: $32,920 (Georgia: $61,224)
> Unemployment rate: 10.8% (Georgia: 5.5%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 274
Hawaii: Ainaloa
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 48.7% (Hawaii: 10.7%)
> Poverty rate: 24.9% (Hawaii: 9.3%)
> Median household income: $48,963 (Hawaii: $83,173)
> Unemployment rate: 10.0% (Hawaii: 4.3%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 92
[in-text-ad]
Idaho: Homedale
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 32.6% (Idaho: 9.0%)
> Poverty rate: 22.4% (Idaho: 11.9%)
> Median household income: $32,146 (Idaho: $58,915)
> Unemployment rate: 0.8% (Idaho: 4.2%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 66
Illinois: Ford Heights
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 48.5% (Illinois: 12.4%)
> Poverty rate: 37.8% (Illinois: 12.0%)
> Median household income: $37,083 (Illinois: $68,428)
> Unemployment rate: 22.6% (Illinois: 5.9%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 545
Indiana: Cannelton
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 33.2% (Indiana: 9.3%)
> Poverty rate: 29.9% (Indiana: 12.9%)
> Median household income: $28,365 (Indiana: $58,235)
> Unemployment rate: 8.5% (Indiana: 4.7%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 252
[in-text-ad-2]
Iowa: Centerville
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 25.2% (Iowa: 9.8%)
> Poverty rate: 26.5% (Iowa: 11.1%)
> Median household income: $32,689 (Iowa: $61,836)
> Unemployment rate: 7.8% (Iowa: 3.9%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 235
Kansas: Oaklawn-Sunview
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 25.5% (Kansas: 7.2%)
> Poverty rate: 21.8% (Kansas: 11.4%)
> Median household income: $32,273 (Kansas: $61,091)
> Unemployment rate: 5.2% (Kansas: 4.0%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 160
[in-text-ad]
Kentucky: Pine Knot
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 62.0% (Kentucky: 13.0%)
> Poverty rate: 57.6% (Kentucky: 16.6%)
> Median household income: N/A (Kentucky: $52,238)
> Unemployment rate: 10.2% (Kentucky: 5.3%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 189
24/7 Wall St.
Louisiana: Lydia
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 60.8% (Louisiana: 15.3%)
> Poverty rate: 36.4% (Louisiana: 18.6%)
> Median household income: $58,350 (Louisiana: $50,800)
> Unemployment rate: 23.3% (Louisiana: 6.5%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 225
Maine: Newport
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 47.8% (Maine: 12.6%)
> Poverty rate: 25.1% (Maine: 11.1%)
> Median household income: $29,383 (Maine: $59,489)
> Unemployment rate: 3.4% (Maine: 4.0%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 92
[in-text-ad-2]
Maryland: Princess Anne
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 48.5% (Maryland: 10.1%)
> Poverty rate: 19.5% (Maryland: 9.0%)
> Median household income: $34,397 (Maryland: $87,063)
> Unemployment rate: 4.9% (Maryland: 5.1%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 235
Massachusetts: Southbridge Town
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 31.3% (Massachusetts: 11.6%)
> Poverty rate: 19.6% (Massachusetts: 9.8%)
> Median household income: $52,900 (Massachusetts: $84,385)
> Unemployment rate: 7.4% (Massachusetts: 5.1%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 136
[in-text-ad]
Michigan: Benton Harbor
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 52.6% (Michigan: 12.7%)
> Poverty rate: 44.9% (Michigan: 13.7%)
> Median household income: $21,947 (Michigan: $59,234)
> Unemployment rate: 19.0% (Michigan: 6.0%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 350
24/7 Wall St.
Minnesota: Pine City
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 26.9% (Minnesota: 7.5%)
> Poverty rate: 17.7% (Minnesota: 9.3%)
> Median household income: $40,553 (Minnesota: $73,382)
> Unemployment rate: 7.3% (Minnesota: 3.8%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 276
Mississippi: Drew
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 55.7% (Mississippi: 14.6%)
> Poverty rate: 45.3% (Mississippi: 19.6%)
> Median household income: $20,325 (Mississippi: $46,511)
> Unemployment rate: 7.6% (Mississippi: 7.1%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 149
[in-text-ad-2]
Missouri: Pine Lawn
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 60.0% (Missouri: 10.5%)
> Poverty rate: 27.4% (Missouri: 13.0%)
> Median household income: $24,493 (Missouri: $57,290)
> Unemployment rate: 18.2% (Missouri: 4.5%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 300
Montana: Pablo
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 41.8% (Montana: 9.3%)
> Poverty rate: 49.3% (Montana: 12.8%)
> Median household income: $23,750 (Montana: $56,539)
> Unemployment rate: 11.4% (Montana: 4.1%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 67
[in-text-ad]
Nebraska: Oakland
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 17.7% (Nebraska: 8.1%)
> Poverty rate: 13.3% (Nebraska: 10.4%)
> Median household income: $51,276 (Nebraska: $63,015)
> Unemployment rate: 7.8% (Nebraska: 3.4%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 96
Nevada: Tonopah
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 20.7% (Nevada: 11.6%)
> Poverty rate: 13.3% (Nevada: 12.8%)
> Median household income: $31,607 (Nevada: $62,043)
> Unemployment rate: 9.0% (Nevada: 6.5%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 36
New Hampshire: Winchester
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 23.0% (New Hampshire: 6.4%)
> Poverty rate: 27.6% (New Hampshire: 7.4%)
> Median household income: $43,594 (New Hampshire: $77,923)
> Unemployment rate: 5.3% (New Hampshire: 3.7%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 50
[in-text-ad-2]
New Jersey: Penns Grove
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 42.1% (New Jersey: 8.4%)
> Poverty rate: 37.7% (New Jersey: 9.7%)
> Median household income: $32,361 (New Jersey: $85,245)
> Unemployment rate: 18.2% (New Jersey: 5.8%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 417
New Mexico: Berino
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 73.2% (New Mexico: 17.0%)
> Poverty rate: 24.8% (New Mexico: 18.6%)
> Median household income: $26,875 (New Mexico: $51,243)
> Unemployment rate: 2.5% (New Mexico: 6.5%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 96
[in-text-ad]
New York: New Square
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 72.6% (New York: 14.3%)
> Poverty rate: 61.8% (New York: 13.6%)
> Median household income: $24,164 (New York: $71,117)
> Unemployment rate: 5.4% (New York: 5.7%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 653
24/7 Wall St.
North Carolina: Enfield
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 55.3% (North Carolina: 12.0%)
> Poverty rate: 33.5% (North Carolina: 14.0%)
> Median household income: $21,774 (North Carolina: $56,642)
> Unemployment rate: 17.5% (North Carolina: 5.3%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 363
North Dakota: Belcourt
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 32.2% (North Dakota: 6.6%)
> Poverty rate: 28.1% (North Dakota: 10.5%)
> Median household income: $35,345 (North Dakota: $65,315)
> Unemployment rate: 6.9% (North Dakota: 3.0%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 42
[in-text-ad-2]
Ohio: Lincoln Heights
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 57.1% (Ohio: 12.6%)
> Poverty rate: 59.9% (Ohio: 13.6%)
> Median household income: $15,417 (Ohio: $58,116)
> Unemployment rate: 22.4% (Ohio: 5.3%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 537
Oklahoma: Hugo
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 40.2% (Oklahoma: 12.6%)
> Poverty rate: 41.5% (Oklahoma: 15.3%)
> Median household income: $26,784 (Oklahoma: $53,840)
> Unemployment rate: 10.3% (Oklahoma: 5.0%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 176
[in-text-ad]
Oregon: Warm Springs
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 56.8% (Oregon: 15.0%)
> Poverty rate: 37.4% (Oregon: 12.4%)
> Median household income: $35,750 (Oregon: $65,667)
> Unemployment rate: 20.2% (Oregon: 5.4%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 181
24/7 Wall St.
Pennsylvania: Dale
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 50.4% (Pennsylvania: 13.1%)
> Poverty rate: 36.0% (Pennsylvania: 12.0%)
> Median household income: $26,127 (Pennsylvania: $63,627)
> Unemployment rate: 9.1% (Pennsylvania: 5.3%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 807
Rhode Island: Central Falls
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 37.1% (Rhode Island: 14.8%)
> Poverty rate: 29.9% (Rhode Island: 11.6%)
> Median household income: $34,689 (Rhode Island: $70,305)
> Unemployment rate: 7.5% (Rhode Island: 5.5%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 16
[in-text-ad-2]
South Carolina: Kingstree
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 41.7% (South Carolina: 11.2%)
> Poverty rate: 28.4% (South Carolina: 14.7%)
> Median household income: $28,830 (South Carolina: $54,864)
> Unemployment rate: 3.1% (South Carolina: 5.5%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 205
South Dakota: Pine Ridge
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 50.1% (South Dakota: 8.7%)
> Poverty rate: 41.1% (South Dakota: 12.8%)
> Median household income: $37,198 (South Dakota: $59,896)
> Unemployment rate: 10.6% (South Dakota: 3.5%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 57
[in-text-ad]
Tennessee: Jamestown
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 47.8% (Tennessee: 12.6%)
> Poverty rate: 43.9% (Tennessee: 14.6%)
> Median household income: $17,051 (Tennessee: $54,833)
> Unemployment rate: 13.1% (Tennessee: 5.3%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 231
Texas: Indian Hills
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 72.4% (Texas: 11.5%)
> Poverty rate: 63.7% (Texas: 14.2%)
> Median household income: $23,486 (Texas: $63,826)
> Unemployment rate: 0.0% reported (Texas: 5.3%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 669
Utah: East Carbon
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 30.6% (Utah: 6.2%)
> Poverty rate: 23.8% (Utah: 9.1%)
> Median household income: $29,867 (Utah: $74,197)
> Unemployment rate: 8.0% (Utah: 3.6%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 95
[in-text-ad-2]
Vermont: Richford
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 31.7% (Vermont: 10.6%)
> Poverty rate: 15.3% (Vermont: 10.8%)
> Median household income: $40,150 (Vermont: $63,477)
> Unemployment rate: 9.1% (Vermont: 3.8%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 38
Virginia: Jonesville
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 51.5% (Virginia: 7.9%)
> Poverty rate: 48.9% (Virginia: 10.0%)
> Median household income: $15,691 (Virginia: $76,398)
> Unemployment rate: 17.7% (Virginia: 4.5%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 270
[in-text-ad]
Washington: Granger
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 57.9% (Washington: 11.1%)
> Poverty rate: 17.1% (Washington: 10.2%)
> Median household income: $54,107 (Washington: $77,006)
> Unemployment rate: 19.5% (Washington: 4.8%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 304
West Virginia: Addison (Webster Springs)
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 55.4% (West Virginia: 16.5%)
> Poverty rate: 46.4% (West Virginia: 17.1%)
> Median household income: $22,062 (West Virginia: $48,037)
> Unemployment rate: 8.7% (West Virginia: 6.5%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 122
Wisconsin: Fox Lake
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 34.8% (Wisconsin: 10.2%)
> Poverty rate: 16.7% (Wisconsin: 11.0%)
> Median household income: $57,961 (Wisconsin: $63,293)
> Unemployment rate: 3.8% (Wisconsin: 3.5%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 319
[in-text-ad-2]
Wyoming: Fox Farm-College
> Households receiving SNAP benefits: 18.1% (Wyoming: 5.3%)
> Poverty rate: 17.4% (Wyoming: 10.8%)
> Median household income: $48,254 (Wyoming: $65,304)
> Unemployment rate: 3.9% (Wyoming: 4.3%)
> No. of towns considered in ranking: 37
Methodology
To determine the town with the highest SNAP recipiency rate in every state, 24/7 Wall St. reviewed five-year estimates of the share of households that received SNAP benefits in the 12 months prior to the survey from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2020 American Community Survey.
We used Census “place” geographies — a category that includes incorporated legal entities and Census-designated statistical entities. We defined towns based on population thresholds — having at least 1,000 people and less than 25,000 people.
Towns were excluded if the SNAP recipiency rate was not available in the 2020 ACS, if there were fewer than 500 households, or if the sampling error associated with a town’s data was deemed too high.
The sampling error was defined as too high if the coefficient of variation — a statistical assessment of how reliable an estimate is — for a town’s SNAP recipiency rate was above 15% and greater than two standard deviations above the mean CV for all towns’ SNAP recipiency rates. We similarly excluded towns that had a sampling error too high for their population, using the same definition.
Towns were ranked based on the share of households that received SNAP benefits in the past 12 months. To break ties, we used the number of households that received SNAP benefits in the past 12 months.
Additional information on poverty rate, median household income, and unemployment rate are also five-year estimates from the 2020 ACS. Because the Census Bureau didn’t release one-year estimates for 2020 due to data collection issues caused by the COVID-19 pandemic, all ACS data are five-year estimates.
Take Charge of Your Retirement: Find the Right Financial Advisor For You in Minutes (Sponsor)
Retirement planning doesn’t have to feel overwhelming. The key is finding professional guidance—and we’ve made it easier than ever for you to connect with the right financial advisor for your unique needs.
Here’s how it works:
1️ Answer a Few Simple Questions
Tell us a bit about your goals and preferences—it only takes a few minutes!
2️ Get Your Top Advisor Matches
This tool matches you with qualified advisors who specialize in helping people like you achieve financial success.
3️ Choose Your Best Fit
Review their profiles, schedule an introductory meeting, and select the advisor who feels right for you.
Why wait? Start building the retirement you’ve always dreamed of. Click here to get started today!
Thank you for reading! Have some feedback for us?
Contact the 24/7 Wall St. editorial team.
