This report is the latest in a series of annual reports providing information about the demographic and economic circumstances of households and individuals participating in SNAP at both the national and state level. Because SNAP is available to most low-income households, participants represent a broad cross section of the nation's poor. This report covers fiscal year 2016. 

The SNAP E&T pilot projects give Congress, USDA, and states the opportunity to test innovative strategies and approaches that connect low-income households to good paying jobs and thereby reduce their reliance on public assistance.

This study examines how the policies that determine benefit levels for the USDA’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program compare to current low-income spending patterns by analyzing the expenditures of low-income households across the United States in 2013 and 2014.

This study uses surveys of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Employment and Training (E&T) participants and E&T providers to describe the characteristics of SNAP participants who use E&T services and the characteristics of organizations that provide the services. This study uses surveys of SNAP E&T participants and E&T providers to describe the characteristics of SNAP participants who use E&T services and the characteristics of organizations that provide the services.

Trafficking of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits occurs when SNAP recipients sell their benefits for cash to food retailers, often at a discount. Although trafficking does not increase costs to the federal government, it is a diversion of program benefits from their intended purpose of helping low-income families access a nutritious diet. This report, the latest in a series of periodic analyses, provides estimates of the extent of trafficking during the period 2012 through 2014.

This study develops standard methodologies that might be used to construct standard utility allowances, which are used by States as part of the SNAP eligibility and benefit determination.

This report is the latest in a series on SNAP participation rates, which estimate the proportion of people eligible for benefits under federal income and asset rules who actually participate in the program. This report presents estimates of participation rates for FY 2015, comparing them to estimates of participation rates for FYs 2010 through 2014.

This report – part of an annual series – presents estimates of the percentage of eligible persons, by state, who participated in SNAP during an average month in FY 2014 and in the two previous fiscal years. This report also presents estimates of state participation rates for eligible “working poor” individuals (persons in households with earnings) over the same period.

A fundamental issue in the design of the Food Stamp Program (FSP) is the form benefits should take. Advocates of the current coupon system argue that coupons are a direct and inexpensive way to ensure that food stamp benefits are used to purchase food. Coupon advocates contend that, despite some evidence of fraud and benefit diversion under the current system, food stamps are used largely to purchase food. In addition, they contend that coupons give household food budgets some measure of protection against other demands on limited household resources. Advocates of cashing out the FSP argue that the current system limits the food-purchasing choices of recipients and places a stigma on participation. Moreover, they cite the cumbersome nature and cost of coupon issuance, transaction, and redemption.

A fundamental issue in the design of the Food Stamp Program is the form the benefits take. From the inception of pilot programs in the early 1960s to the contemporary program, the vehicle of choice has been the food stamp coupon, a voucher that can be redeemed for food at authorized retailers. For nearly that same period analyses have considered the relative merits of cash--or, in practice, checks--as an alternative. Advocates of the current coupon system argue that coupons are a direct and inexpensive way to ensure that food stamp benefits are used to purchase food, that the unauthorized use of food stamps is relatively limited despite some evidence of fraud and benefit diversion, and that coupons provide some measure of protection to food budgets from other demands on limited household resources. Advocates of cash benefits argue that the current system limits the purchasing choices of participants; places a stigma on participation; does not prevent the diversion of benefits (as evidenced by the existence of illegal trafficking); and entails excessive costs for coupon production, issuance, transaction, and redemption.