Skip to main content
. 2021 Apr 1;18:E28. doi: 10.5888/pcd18.200587

Table 4. Change in Outcomes Associated With Receipt of SNAP Benefits at Follow-Up Among SSI Recipients in Study of SNAP Eligibility, Food Security, and Health After a SNAP Policy Change, California, 2019–2020a .

Factor Did Not Receive SNAP Benefits (n = 43) Received SNAP Benefitsb (n = 114) P Valuec
Food insecurity, n (%)
  Food secure 15 (34.9) 36 (31.6) .71
  Food insecure 28 (65.1) 78 (68.4)
Healthy Food Index–2015, mean scored 45.8 45.0 .57
Alternative Healthy Food Index–2010, mean scored 44.3 46.7 .20
Stress, mean scoree 20.5 19.1 .65
Mean no. of unhealthy days 17.4 16.0 .69
General health status excellent/very good, n (%)d 10 (23.3) 33 (29.2)f .55
Mean no. of trade-offsg 1.7 1.5 .45
Cost-related medication nonadherence, n (%) 6 (17.6) 17 (17.7)f >.99
Weekly food budget shortfall, mean, $ 73.68 41.85 .48
Used community food resources in past 30 days, n (%) 29 (70.7) 88 (77.2) .41

Abbreviations: SNAP, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program; SSI, Supplemental Security Income.

a

Baseline survey administered to Supplemental Security Income recipients during May–August 2019; follow-up survey administered September 2019–January 2020. Policy change in effect beginning June 1, 2019.

b

Of this group, 72.6% (n = 114) had received SNAP at time of follow-up survey.

c

Fisher exact test for bivariate variables and Mann–Whitney U Test for continuous variables.

d

Scored from 0 to 100 with higher numbers indicating more nutritious dietary intake.

e

Scored from 0 to 40: low, 0–13; moderate, 14–26; high, 27–40.

f

Not all participants answered all questions; percentages based on number who answered question.

g

Trade-offs defined as answering yes to 1 or 2 times per year, some months, or every month (compared with never).