Tract-Level Geocoding Analysis: Identifying Communities With Low CalFresh Access

1. Tract-Level Geocoding Analysis: Identifying Communities With Low CalFresh Access • M. Akhtar Khan, PhD. • Research Services Branch Chief • AynalemAdugna, Ph.D. • Research Program Specialist • Research Services Branch • California Department of Social Services • August 20, 2014

2. Presentation Outline • SNAP-CalFresh Access: Big picture overview. • SNAP-CalFresh Access : As it is measured. • Geo-coding: Looking below county level. • Once below the county level, ability to measure CalFresh access at neighborhood and community levels. • New proposed methodology for identifying “true hot spots” for targeted outreach efforts. • Highlight measurement issues uncovered. • Application of adjusted access measure.

3. Household Characteristics— Income* * CalFresh Program Overview Legislative Analyst’s Office, March 2014

4. Eligible to Receive CalFresh • Income Below Certain Thresholds. • Gross income - 130 percent of federal poverty guidelines (also known as the federal poverty level, or FPL). Example:$2,008/month for a household of three (2012). • Net income - income of less than 100 percent of the FPL after certain deductions are applied. Example: $1,545/month for a household of three (2012). • Additional Eligibility Criteria for College Students • Ineligible to Receive CalFresh • Citizenship/Immigration Status – the largest group • Drug Felony Convictions • SSI/SSP Recipients Ineligible Due to “Cash-Out.” Source: CalFresh Program Overview Legislative Analyst’s Office, March 2014

5. Measuring Program Access The Program Access Index (PAI): USDA/FNS = • By this measure: • California is almost at the bottom in the Union. • 3.9 million eligible Californians are not receiving CalFresh. • Questions that come to mind…? • Why is participation low in California? • How counties within the State fare? • Is it unemployment rate at local level • Is it poverty level at local level? • Rural-Urban divide, or something else • Any issues with the way program access is measured? Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations; SSI is Supplemental Security Income

6. The search for answers: • What sub-county-level geographies should be used • to identify areas of low participation? • Regression analyses show the low predictive value of unemployment rates and poverty levels of counties in estimating calFresh access. • Distribution by proportions of non-English speakers points to: • Language as an important factor • The possible role of immigration status • A measure that takes into account ineligibility for CalFresh due to citizenship status is necessary

7. So the Issue! • Socio-economic indicators at the county level rarely show significant correlations with CalFresh access. • Explanation to this phenomena may exist at below county level – neighborhoods and communities. • The question – how do we get down to the neighborhood and community levels. • Need local level data and tools… Preliminary - not for reproduction

8. Geo-mapping Analytics • Geocoding analytics allow us to assemble a rich data set using a variety of resources. • Show differences in CalFresh access at below county levels – census tracts, zip codes, neighborhoods, etc. using geocoding analytics. • Highlight population subgroups having CalFresh access lower than expected based on poverty levels using geocoding analytics. Preliminary - not for reproduction

9. Geocoding • Gecodingis a technique that can help us: • map recipient level data, and • assess CalFresh reach at community levels. • Based on the poverty estimates for an area, this spatial analytical tool will enable us to identify places: • where potential CalFresheligibles reside, • where CalFresh reach is low, and more importantly, • where more effective and targeted outreach strategies could be directed. Preliminary - not for reproduction

10. Over two hundred tract-level data elements are linked to each dot. • Example: • Total tract population. • % Below poverty level. • % Non-native. • Number of Hispanics. • Number of families with children under 18. • Number of Female-headed households. • % Speaking languages other than English. • EBT access.

11. Fresno County CalFresh Distributions (July, 2013) Preliminary - not for reproduction

12. L.A. County: Number of CalFresh Recipients in Tracts with Reported Zero Poverty Levels

13. Monterey County: CalFresh Recipient Addresses and Distance from EBT Locations (Zip Codes 93905 and 93906) 286 EBT locations 7168 / 39167 locations (18 percent) within 0.1 mile 18624 / 39167 locations (47 percent) within 0.2 mile

14. Program Access Index (PAI) Where: FDPRI: Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations SSI: Supplemental Security Income Source: http://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/PAI2011.pdf Program Reach Index (PRI) * PRI= * Geography-based or population-based

15. Advantages of Using PRI • Measure CalFresh access below county levels. • Measure differences in access among population subgroups. • Use results to devise targeted CalFresh outreach activities. • Help uncover the limitations of PAI as measurement methodology. Preliminary - not for reproduction

16. Application Example: LA County on the Map Potential Eligible – Below 130 percent Poverty vs. CalFresh Access – PRI Preliminary - not for reproduction

17. MEDIUM HIGH LOW Preliminary - not for reproduction

18. HIGH MEDIUM HIGH Preliminary - not for reproduction

19. L.A. County Tracts: Percent Speaking Languages other than English by Position Above or Below Median (Median = 58.3) Preliminary - not for reproduction

20. L.A. County Tracts: Percent Below Poverty by Position Above or Below Median (Median = 11.2) Preliminary - not for reproduction

21. Population subgroups: LA County language deciles 10th 7th 31.5-23.4 *Deciles width/ interval ( percent) 5th 58.5-50.5

22. Preliminary - not for reproduction

24. Applying PRI as New Measures of Access • 1. The Program Reach Index – PRI • Raises eligibility from 125 % FPL to the State’s poverty threshold of 130%FPL

25. Some observations so far! • The Program Reach Index (PRI) is as useful an indicator of CalFresh access at the county level as the Program Access Index (PAI). • The ability to apply PRI at below county levels makes it much more valuable in accessing CalFresh reach at community and neighborhood levels. • The PRI can help target outreach activities through mapping techniques that highlight areas needing benefits the most. • HOWEVER, does it help us in identifying “true hot spots” where outreach efforts should be targeted??? Preliminary - not for reproduction

26. Number of persons receiving CalFresh Federal law ???? Languages other than English Poverty level of tracts Preliminary - not for reproduction Visualphotos.com

27. Proposed New Measures of Access …contd. • 2. Adjusted Program Reach Index – APRI • Keeps the above adjustment • Removes the estimated number of undocumented persons using data on child-only CalFresh households as proxy • We refer to this method as the Child-only method

28. Proposed New Measures of Access The Child-Only Method • The child-only method is an indirect method of estimating the number of persons ineligible to receive CalFresh due to citizenship status. • Child-only CalFresh households are households in which all participants are minors and all adults: • receive SSI • are convicted felons • undocumented immigrants

29. . • Three important questions: • Q. 1 What proportions of child-only households are headed by parents/adults who are ineligible to receive CalFresh due to citizenship status? • Q. 2 How many undocumented adults live in a child-only household? • Q. 3 How many undocumented adults live in households where there are no children? The Child-only method…contd.

30. Answer 1: 6 percent of child-only cases in every county are due to non-immigration causes such as or parents on SSI and that the remaining 94 percent are due to immigration status Regions are per. Thomas MaCurdy, Mancuso and Margaret O’Brien-Strain, The Rise and Fall of C a l i f o r n i a ’s We l f a r e Caseload: Types and R e g i o n s , 1 9 80– 1 9 9 9, Public Policy Institute of California, PPIC, 2000. *Alpine, Mono, Sierra and Trinity are excluded

31. Number of adults in child-only CalFresh households • Answer 2: There are 1.77 undocumented adults in each child-only household. • Answer 3: Number of adults in non-participating non-child-only households • For every 177undocumented adults residing in child-only households there are 124 undocumented persons residing in households without children.

32. Validating the Child-Only Method Fresno County, 2011 (15,136 Child-Only Households) *This is a minimum percentage for all counties (based on simulation)

33. Validation: Ten largest child-only counties, 2011

34. The Child-Only Method vs. PPIC’s method • The Child-Only Method (poverty-based) appears to give a better estimate of undocumented persons than PPIC’s: • for counties with higher poverty level than the statewide average • in general, for counties where agriculture is the predominant economy • The PPIC method (tax-return-based) appears to give a better estimate of undocumented persons than the Child-only method: • for counties with lower poverty level than the statewide average • for counties with predominantly non-agricultural economies

35. SUMMARY: Statewide PAI Gain Using Different Estimates

36. LA County: Program Reach Index - PRI, June 2013 L.A. County (June, 2013) True + False “hot-spots”

37. LA County: Adjusted Program Reach Index - APRI, June 2013 True “hot-spots”

38. L.A. County Regions PRI = 0.47 APRI = 0.54 PRI = 0.64 APRI = 0.72 PRI = 0.53 APRI = 0.63 PRI = 0.21 APRI = 0.22

39. Kern

41. LIMITATIONS OF THE CHILD-ONLY METHOD • Numerator and Denominator Data Issues • The reliability of APRI is affected by percentage of unmatched addressesdue to P. O. Box addresses. • The denominator becomes negative for tracts with 0 eligibles and where the eligibles based on 130% poverty (formula below) is lower than the SSI component and/or the child-only households component. • Due to small sample sizes and large margins of error, the ACS shows many tracts with fewer eligible persons than the number of persons receiving CalFresh; this leads to APRI greater than1. • A single address is used to provide CalFresh benefits to hundreds or thousands of beneficiaries (over 6,100 recipients in one L.A. County address and 5,100 recipients in one Fresno County address) making it difficult to interpret APRI maps for surrounding areas. APRI =

42. LIMITATIONS….Summary The reliability of APRI increases with increasing geographic scale Denominator margin of error Numerator includes recipients from outside of geographic unit Zip code CalFresh region County Tract

43. Conclusions • Geocoding enables us to analyze CalFresh data in the context of the environments in which recipients live. • Estimates of undocumented persons from the Child-Only Method are broadly consistent with county-level estimates from PPIC and state-level estimates from DHS and PPIC. • Any discrepancies most likely reflect differences in methodological focus - persons receiving public assistance (Child-Only) vs. persons receiving taxable income (PPIC). • The Child-Only Method can be used with confidence at county levels and for regions within a county. • In some instances, Zip code or tract-level analysis may be feasible. • It appears that in places where non-English speakers are a minority (example: LA Southwest) the participation rate is significantly lower (APRI = 0.22) than in places where they are a majority.

44. THANK YOU