141st APHA Annual Meeting

In This section

286868
Assessing the impact of SNAP-ed census-tract targeting on access to nutrition programming for low-income individuals

Monday, November 4, 2013

Vanessa Buchthal, DrPH , Office of Public Health Studies, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI
Daniel Alexander, MURP , Department of Public Health Sciences, University of Hawaii, Honolulu, HI
Laura Hsu, MPH , John A Burns School of Medicine, Office of Public Health Sciences, university of hawaii at manoa, Honolulu
Introduction: One method for locating poverty geographically is census tracts where >50% of residents are below a poverty threshold. USDA has used this approach to define geographic limits for SNAP-Ed programming. Many states report inability to reach low-income audiences effectively using this criterion; USDA has indicated willingness to consider other approaches, but requires states to propose new criterion. Purpose: Document impact on reach of limiting programming to census tracts with <50% of population <185% of federal poverty level; demonstrate an alternate methodology for identifying highest-poverty areas within a state. Methods: Data on individuals in poverty and poverty rate was retrieved for all US census tracts, and analyzed to determine percentage of low-income population reachable through tracts with <50% <185%FPL. GIS-maps were developed to show geographic trends, and correlations between population size, density, and urbanicity examined. An alternate methodology was developed for Hawai‘i, clustering census tracts within locally-recognized communities, determined proportion of state's low-income population within each community, and ranking these results. Results: Census tract targeting reached 27% of low-income individuals nationally, with wide disparities between states -- 3% in Vermont to 43% in Mississippi/Texas. Reach was correlated with states' poverty level (r=.661 , p<.001) and population size (r=.424 , p=.002) In Hawai‘i, census tract methodology reached 6% of low-income residents. The alternate methodology increased reach to 50%, by targeting only 10 communities. Discussion: Targeting low-income individuals by census tract alone may result in poor reach; targeting by proportion of state's low income population located within communities can improve reach substantially.

Learning Areas:
Assessment of individual and community needs for health education
Conduct evaluation related to programs, research, and other areas of practice

Learning Objectives:
Demonstrate the impact of current SNAP-Ed census tract targeting criterion on the ability of different states to reach their low-income populations. Identify and compare an alternate approach for maximizing reach.

Keywords: Federal Policy, Nutrition

Presenting author's disclosure statement:

Qualified on the content I am responsible for because: I have been the PI of an evaluation contract with the State of Hawaii Department of Health's SNAP-Ed program for the past 3 years, and have been involved with SNAP-Ed on a regional and national level. My research focuses on food insecurity coping strategies and the relationship between environment and dietary behavior among low-income families.
Any relevant financial relationships? No

I agree to comply with the American Public Health Association Conflict of Interest and Commercial Support Guidelines, and to disclose to the participants any off-label or experimental uses of a commercial product or service discussed in my presentation.