We periodically examine how SNAP households use their monthly EBT benefits, including number of purchase transactions per month, average purchase amount, types of retailers frequented, and rate at which households exhaust their benefits over the month. This study, the fourth in the series, was done to assess monthly EBT redemption patterns during FY 2022 when SNAP EBT benefits were much larger than usual due to pandemic funding. By FY 2022, SNAP households could also use SNAP EBT to purchase groceries from authorized online retailers, so we analyzed benefits redeemed through online purchasing.
We periodically examine SNAP benefit redemption patterns related to the timing, number, and dollar amount of transactions and the rate at which households spend down and exhaust their monthly benefits. These studies also report on the number of transactions made and the share of benefits redeemed at various types of stores.
President Trump made a commitment to the American people to cut wasteful spending, Make America Healthy Again, and to combat fraud, waste, and abuse—restoring common sense to government. Under the leadership of Secretary Rollins, USDA’s FNS has taken swift and decisive action to be representative of the change the American people voted for.
These additional funds are targeted to households receiving less than $95 in EA benefits under the previous policy — the lowest income households participating in each state.
These reports describe individuals’ patterns of SNAP participation and analyze which factors were associated with their decisions to enter or exit the program. Both studies use data from the U.S. Census Bureau’s Survey of Income and Program Participation covering the period from 2008 to 2012.
This study describes the characteristics, circumstances, and participation and income dynamics of zero-income SNAP households and seeks to assess whether economic and policy changes may have affected this growth.
This study was undertaken to understand why some SNAP participants shop at farmers markets and others in the same geographic area do not.
The study generates national estimates of administrative error in eligibility determinations and benefit issuance for free or reduced-price school meals. For school year 2012-2013, local education agencies correctly certified 96.4% of students who applied for meal benefits. LEAs assigned the correct free, reduced-price, or paid status to a slightly smaller 96.2% of students.
This study is part of a larger FNS effort to ensure WIC program integrity and to comply with the Improper Payments Information Act of 2002 which requires FNS to estimate improper payments in its programs.