About D.C. Hunger Solutions D.C. Hunger Solutions, founded in 2002 as an initiative of the Food Research and Action Center (FRAC), works to create a hunger-free community and improve the nutrition, health, economic security, and well-being of low-income people in the District of Columbia. To learn more about D.C. Hunger Solutions, visit www.dchunger.org. About Social Compact Social Compact is a non-profit, non-partisan organization dedicated to facilitating sustainable private investment in undervalued communities with the goal of helping families and communities build long-term wealth and strength. To learn more about Social Compact, visit www.socialcompact.org. Acknowledgments When Healthy Food Is Out of Reach was funded by the District of Columbia Department of Health, Community Health Administration. Special thanks to the Convergence Partnership. Support also was provided by the Altarum Institute, Morris and Gwendolyn Cafritz Foundation, Capital One, Case Foundation, Church World Service, CityBridge Foundation, Naomi and Nehemiah Cohen Foundation, Consumer Health Foundation, England Family Foundation, John Edward Fowler Memorial Foundation, HSC Foundation, Kaiser Permanente, MARPAT Foundation, MAZON: A Jewish Response to Hunger, Eugene and Agnes E. Meyer Foundation, Moriah Fund, Morningstar Foundation, Prince Charitable Trusts, Public Welfare Foundation, Robert Wood Johnson Foundation, Share Our Strength, Sodexo, Trellis Fund, UPS Foundation, U.S. Department of Agriculture, Wachovia Foundation, Washington Area Women s Foundation, Washington Post, Weissberg Foundation, and the World Bank Community Connections Fund. Points of view or opinions in this publication are those of the authors and do not represent official positions or policies of the District of Columbia Department of Health or other supporters. This report was written by D.C. Hunger Solutions staff Alexandra Ashbrook and Kristin Roberts, and by Social Compact. D.C. Hunger Solutions gratefully acknowledges the key support of: Michele Tingling-Clemmons, Bureau Chief, Nutrition and Physical Fitness Bureau, Community Health Administration of the D.C. Department of Health; Anita Hairston, former Chief of Staff, D.C. Office of Planning; and James K. Graham, GIS Specialist, D.C. Office of Planning. Thanks also to Keith Sellars and Chad Shuskey, Washington, D.C. Economic Partnership, for their collaboration and data contributions; Lori Glass, The Reinvestment Fund; Miriam Manon and Allison Karpyn, The Food Trust; Marc Bleyer, D.C. Office of Planning; Andrew Waxman, Jamaica Plain Neighborhood Development Corporation; and Jim Weill, Jen Adach, and Alexis Bylander, Food Research and Action Center.
Executive Summary In numerous cities across the United States, studies have documented a troubling grocery gap : low-income and minority communities often have far less access to full-service grocery stores than do higher-income communities. Nationally, the grocery gap forces many low-income people to spend money and time travelling long distances to access food at full-service grocery stores. In some neighborhoods where full-service stores are absent, shoppers may rely on small corner or convenience stores, which often do not have sufficient healthy food and may charge higher prices for the limited nutritious food available. Numerous researchers have demonstrated relationships between the food environment and diet, and frequently have pointed to the grocery gap and the resulting food deserts as a significant contributor to poor nutrition and rising rates of obesity and diet-related chronic illnesses. One study documented a significant uptick in fruit and vegetable consumption when a full-service grocer appeared in a previously underserved neighborhood. 1, 2 Food deserts have particularly detrimental effects in low-income communities where residents often face additional barriers to accessing nutritious foods and other services necessary for a healthy life. Limited access to full-service grocery stores also exacerbates the growing food insecurity Americans face 49.1 million Americans lived in food insecure households in 2008. The grocery gap means that communities and grocery store operators alike are unable to capitalize on the benefits of neighborhood grocery retail. For store operators, there is a missed market opportunity in the form of lost revenue when neighborhood residents are unable to shop in their own neighborhoods. For residents, particularly low-income people (including the nearly 38 million Americans receiving Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)/food stamps benefits and the nearly 9 million participating in the Women, Infants and Children nutrition program (WIC)), lack of full-service grocery stores in a community also means fewer job opportunities jobs that can offer benefits and potential for career advancement. In addition, full-service grocery stores often serve as catalysts for community revitalization by attracting other retail, improving the livability of the neighborhood, creating foot traffic for other businesses in the area, increasing property values of neighborhood residences, and expanding the tax base. Many areas in the District of Columbia are hit hard by the same set of coinciding problems that impact low-income communities across the U.S. poverty, hunger, obesity, and lack of access to healthy foods (see Overview Table). In the nation s capital, one in eight households struggles against hunger. In fall 2009, approximately 110,000 District residents more than one in six participated in SNAP/the Food Stamp Program, and about 17,500 received Women, Infants and Children program (WIC) benefits. Furthermore, high rates of obesity and diet-related diseases affect low-income District residents, and the city has an exceptionally large disparity in obesity rates between African- Americans and Caucasians living in the District. In view of the relationships among the local food environment and residents nutrition, health, and economic status, D.C. Hunger Solutions and Social Compact embarked on a project to investigate access to full-service grocery stores and determine whether food deserts exist in Washington, D.C. The resulting report, When Healthy Food Is Out of Reach, reveals a clear gap in access to full-service grocery stores between higher-income and lower-income wards of the District of Columbia. The report also identifies food deserts in low-income areas, which likely are contributing to alarming rates of obesity and diet-related diseases in these areas. Key Report Findings: Access to Full-Service Grocery Stores Finding #1 The District of Columbia s 43 full-service grocery stores are distributed very unevenly across the District. 3 Finding #2 The ratio of full-service grocery stores to residents varies widely among the District's wards. Ward 3 has five times as many full-service grocers per resident as Ward 4. 1 Moreland, K., Wing, S., and Diez Roux, A. The contextual effect of the local food environment on residents diets: The atherosclerosis risk in communities study, American Journal of Public Health, vol. 92, 11 (2002): 1761-67. 2 Cheadle, A., et al. Community-level comparisons between the grocery store environment and individual dietary practices, Preventive Medicine, vol. 20, 2 (1991): 250-61. 3 For this report, a full-service grocery store is defined as a business establishment with a minimum of 5,000 square feet primarily engaged in retailing food for home consumption and preparation, based on listings provided by ACNielsen-Claritas, which regularly provides products in each of the following categories: fresh fruits (eight or more types), fresh vegetables (eight or more types), fresh meat (five or more types), dairy, and bread. This category does not include restaurants or carry-out establishments. D.C. Hunger Solutions and Social Compact 1
Finding #3 While nearly all full-service grocers in the District accept SNAP/food stamp benefits, only 48 percent of them accept WIC. Finding #4 The available grocery retail space varies significantly from ward to ward. Wards 4, 7, and 8 have fewer square feet of grocery retail per person than the District average. Finding #5 On average, residents of Wards 4, 5, and 7 must travel longer distances than residents in other wards to reach the closest full-service grocery store. Finding #6 The District has an opportunity to capture more of residents grocery expenditures. The District loses more than $112 million in annual grocery revenues to neighboring jurisdictions because existing grocery retail is insufficient to meet residents demand. Finding #7 The District has a grocery gap. Some areas of the District particularly in Wards 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 are underserved by full-service grocery retail, compared to other areas. Food Deserts in the District of Columbia Based on the analysis of grocery store access, When Healthy Food Is Out of Reach shows that food deserts areas of the city with inadequate access to full-service stores and, possibly, potential for new grocery development exist in the District. Moreover, Wards 5, 6, 7, and 8 contain low-income areas with limited access to full-service grocery stores these areas warrant particular attention in closing the grocery gap. Recommendations If the District is to make strides in reducing the city s income and racial disparities in obesity rates, combating hunger, and taking advantage of economic development opportunities, it must close the grocery gap and eliminate food deserts by bringing full-service grocers to underserved areas. To do that, the District should achieve the following: 1. Develop a Healthy Food Access Initiative with an initial budget of several million dollars in public funds (which would be leveraged by a private institution). Modeled on Pennsylvania s successful Fresh Food Financing Initiative and New York City s FRESH Program, the District s Healthy Food Access Initiative would: a) attract full-service grocers and other healthy food vendors to low-income neighborhoods; and b) improve the capacity of existing food retailers in those areas. The Initiative also would create hundreds of jobs and generate tax revenue for the District. Pennsylvania s initiative, established in 2004, has helped finance the development and improvement of 83 full-service grocers and other fresh food outlets across the state and created and retained approximately 5,000 jobs. The state s initial investment of $30 million was leveraged by a private financing institution to create a $120 million fund. 4 A similar program the National Healthy Food Financing Initiative was introduced in President Obama s 2011 budget and reiterated in the First Lady s Let s Move initiative to address childhood obesity. 2. Ensure that WIC program participants have adequate access to retail outlets that accept WIC benefits. To ensure that WIC participants have access to WIC-approved retailers close to where they live, the District must recruit additional local full-service grocery stores particularly in Wards 7 and 8 to participate as WIC retailers. Further, the District should follow the lead of other cities like Baltimore and allow several smaller-scale grocery stores to become WIC-approved retailers in food deserts. Adding these small stores to the D.C. WIC program would help expand healthy food choices (including fresh fruits and vegetables) for all consumers shopping at WIC-approved stores. 4 More information about the Pennsylvania Fresh Food Financing Initiative available at: http://www.thefoodtrust.org/php/programs/fffi.php. D.C. Hunger Solutions and Social Compact 2
Report Summary Closing the grocery gap in Washington, D.C., is critical to the nutrition, health, and economic security of low-income households in the District, as well as that of the city at large. Equally critical is continuing to ensure that all existing full-service grocery stores accept food stamp benefits and a sufficient number accept WIC, which can help enable low-income consumers to access healthy food. The table below summarizes possible connections among income, race/ethnicity, health outcomes, and access to fullservice grocery stores in the District. District of Columbia Overview: Demographics, Access to Grocery Stores, and Health 5 Ward Population Avg. Household Income # of Full- Service Grocery Stores % Overweight or Obese % with Diabetes % African- American % Hispanic % non- Hispanic Caucasian Ward 1 79,290 $63,000 6 57.5 6.0 43.2 23.4 35.2 Ward 2 83,827 $98,000 8 47.9 8.2 30.4 8.6 56.2 Ward 3 80,775 $128,000 11 42.2 3.5 6.3 6.5 83.6 Ward 4 76,880 $78,000 2 61.2 8.1 77.9 12.8 10.3 Ward 5 73,634 $49,000 3 67.8 12.5 88.2 2.5 7.9 Ward 6 65,928 $69,000 6 49.2 6.3 68.7 2.4 27.2 Ward 7 73,856 $39,000 4 72.9 13.8 96.9 0.9 1.4 Ward 8 69,047 $29,000 3 71.5 18.3 91.8 1.5 5.8 D.C. 603,238 $74,000 43 (avg. 5.4 per ward) 55.0 8.0 60.0 7.9 30.8 Table notes: The shaded rows indicate Wards that have fewer full-service grocers than the District s average. Fortunately, the grocery gap and the resulting food deserts also presents investment opportunities for the District. Indeed, several market studies of District neighborhoods in or near current food deserts have found market demand that potentially could support full-service grocery stores of 50,000 square feet or larger. Investing in grocery retail development in the District s underserved communities is a win-win that improves public health and nutrition, can reduce costs for low-income residents, creates jobs, and helps stimulate the local economy and other development efforts. 5 Population and income source: Social Compact, Washington, DC Drill Down, (2008). Existing grocery store source: ACNielsen-Claritas (2008). Planned grocery store source: Washington DC Economic Partnership (2009). Health indicators source: District of Columbia Department of Health, Center for Policy, Planning and Epidemiology. Behavioral Risk Factors Surveillance Survey, 2007 Annual Report (May 2009). Race/ethnicity source: U.S. Census (2000). D.C. Hunger Solutions and Social Compact 3
When Healthy Food Is Out of Reach: Report Overview In view of the numerous economic and health implications of improving access to full-service grocery stores, this report identifies and analyzes access to 43 full-service stores in the District of Columbia and stores located within two miles of the District s border. This report does not examine store quality or food prices. Part I: Analysis of Access to Full-Service Grocery Stores To determine physical access to grocery stores, the report looks at the following: The number of full-service grocery stores (without regard to quality of store) located in each ward (Map 1). The number of full-service grocery stores that accept federal nutrition benefits SNAP/food stamps and WIC (Map 2). The total square feet of grocery retail space available to residents of each ward (Table 6). The average distance each ward s residents travel to a full-service grocery store (Table 7). Grocery dollars spent outside the District, indicating unmet demand. The gap in access to full-service grocery stores, according to the access indicators listed above (Map 3). Part II: Identifying Food Deserts The report then identifies areas of the city with limited access to full-service grocery stores and highlights areas in which limited access overlaps with relatively high poverty. By identifying food deserts that likely are making it more difficult for low-income families to obtain reasonably-priced healthy food, as well as likely contributing to the District s high rates of obesity and related illnesses, this report sets the stage for prioritizing areas for new grocery store development. The District s food deserts located in low-income areas are shown in Map 4. Part III: Recommendations for Improving Access to Full-Service Grocery Stores in the District Areas with limited grocery store access that are deemed food deserts can also represent opportunities for grocery store development. Thus, this report concludes with a preliminary analysis of the potential to attract and support grocery stores in areas of the District underserved by grocery retail through the creation of a Healthy Food Access Initiative, similar to Fresh Food Financing Initiatives in other states and cities and to a National Healthy Food Financing Initiative introduced in President Obama s 2011 budget. The report also recommends expanding shopping options for low-income mothers and young children by increasing the number of WIC-approved retailers in the city. D.C. Hunger Solutions and Social Compact 4
PART I: Analysis of Access to Full-Service Grocery Stores Access Indicator: Number of Full-Service Grocery Stores Located in Each Ward Finding #1 The District of Columbia s 43 full-service grocery stores are distributed unevenly across the city. The uneven distribution of full-service grocery stores creates a substantial gap in access to groceries. Wards 7 and 8, the two wards with the lowest average household incomes, have 16 percent of the District s grocery stores but 23 percent of the city s population. Meanwhile, the two wards with the highest average household incomes, Wards 2 and 3, have 44 percent of the city s stores but only 27 percent of the population. The distribution of the 43 full-service grocery stores leaves many residents of lower-income areas of the city with far less access to stores located in their own wards than residents of higher-income areas have in theirs. Table 1 shows the distribution of the 43 full-service grocery stores located in Washington, D.C., included in this report. The report includes all full-service grocers as well as those stores slated for completion by 2010. The data on stores included in this report were gathered and analyzed in 2009 and do not take into account changes that have taken place since December 2009. The following two considerations regarding full-service grocers in the District should be noted: 1) the Harris Teeter store scheduled to be opened in the NoMa area (Ward 6) in 2010 has not yet opened at this report s release; 2) the Safeway store at 514 Rhode Island Ave. NE (Ward 5) will close its operations on March 6, 2010; 3) several stores undergoing renovations in 2010 may close at certain points during the process. TABLE 1 43 Full-Service Grocery Stores in D.C. Ward Store Ward Store 1 Best D.C. Supermarket 3 Super Fresh Food Market 1 Bestway Supermarket 3 Whole Foods Market 1 Giant Food Store 3 Whole Foods Market 1 Harris Teeter Supermarket 4 Safeway Store 1 Murry s 4 Safeway Store 1 Safeway Store 5 Giant Food Store 2 Capital Super Market 5 Safeway Store 2 Giant Food Store 5 Safeway Store 2 Safeway Store 6 Harris Teeter 2 Safeway Store 6 Harris Teeter 2 Safeway Store 6 Murry s 2 Safeway Store 6 Safeway Store 2 Trader Joes Market 6 Safeway Store 2 Whole Foods Market 6 Safeway Store 3 Brookville Super Market 7 Murry s 3 Giant Food Store 7 Murry s 3 Giant Food Store 7 Safeway Store 3 Magruder s Super Market 7 Safeway Store Anacostia Warehouse 3 Rodman s Discount Gourmet Food 8 Supermarket 3 Safeway Store 8 Giant Food Store 3 Safeway Store 8 Murry s 3 Safeway Store = store located in D.C. = store in D.C. under renovation = store in D.C. under construction D.C. Hunger Solutions and Social Compact 5
Methodology: For purposes of this report, full-service grocery stores are defined as business establishments with a minimum of 5,000 square feet primarily engaged in retailing food for home consumption and preparation, according to data provided by ACNielsen-Claritas (2008). The 2008 data were supplemented with information from the Washington, D.C. Economic Partnership on grocery stores that opened and planned to open in 2009 and 2010. Stores that closed in the 2009 to 2010 period were taken out of the total list of stores. Additionally, to be considered fullservice, stores had to contain the following sections: fresh fruits (eight or more types), fresh vegetables (eight or more types), fresh meat (five or more types), dairy, and bread. This category does not include restaurants, carry-out establishments, etc. These criteria are consistent with Social Compact s methodology for assessing grocery store access nationally. The stores identified were not evaluated on the condition of the store s infrastructure, the quality of the products sold, or the prices of products. Map 1 depicts the locations of the 43 full-service grocery stores in the District, as well as stores located outside the city, within two miles of the District border. The map illustrates the concentration of full-service grocery stores in Wards 2 and 3 and the paucity of stores east of the Anacostia River (Wards 7 and 8) and in Wards 4 and 5. MAP 1 Full-Service Grocery Stores in the Washington, D.C. Area Developed by Social Compact 4 3 1 5 2 6 7 8 D.C. Hunger Solutions and Social Compact 6
Access Indicator: Number of Full-Service Grocery Stores per Resident Finding #2 The ratio of full-service grocery stores to residents varies widely among the District s wards. Ward 3 has five times as many full-service grocers per resident as Ward 4. Analyzing the number of full-service grocery stores per resident gives a more detailed picture of and can highlight differences in access to fullservice grocers among wards. Fewer stores per resident in an area can indicate that that area s residents have less access to full-service grocers than those in an area with more stores per resident. The District has approximately one full-service grocery store for every 14,000 residents. In Wards 4, 5, 7, and 8 the store-to-resident ratio is lower than the District average. Ward 4 demonstrates the greatest disparity: this ward has fewer than half as many stores per resident compared to the District average. Table 2 lists the store-to-resident ratio for each of the District s eight wards. Shaded wards have ratios below the District average of 1:14,000. TABLE 2 District Residents and Full-Service Grocery Stores Developed by D.C. Hunger Solutions Ward # of Residents # of Grocery Store-to-Resident Stores Ratio Ward 1 79,290 6 1 : 13,215 Ward 2 83,827 8 1 : 10,478 Ward 3 80,775 11 1 : 7,343 Ward 4 76,880 2 1 : 38,440 Ward 5 73,634 3 1 : 24,545 Ward 6 65,928 6 1 : 10,988 Ward 7 73,856 4 1 : 18,464 Ward 8 69,047 3 1 : 23,016 D.C. 603,238 43 1 : 14,029 Methodology: The number of residents in each District ward was determined by Social Compact s 2008 DrillDown analysis, a methodology used to analyze inner-city markets and create accurate, business-oriented profiles of emerging neighborhood markets. D.C. Hunger Solutions calculated the stores-to-resident ratio by dividing the number of residents in each ward by the number of full-service grocery stores located in that ward. D.C. Hunger Solutions and Social Compact 7
Access Indicator: Number of Full-Service Grocery Stores that Accept Federal Nutrition Benefits Finding #3 Nearly all grocery retailers in the District accept food stamp/snap benefits. Only 48% of full-service grocery stores, however, accept WIC. The Food Stamp Program (now known federally as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP ) and WIC (Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children) program are critical nutrition and income supports for tens of thousands of low-income District residents. These programs are effective in boosting lowincome consumers grocery purchasing power, stimulating the local economy, and promoting healthy eating. The programs benefits to participants and to the local economy are greatest when all eligible retailers accept food stamp and WIC payments so that the federally-funded debit cards and vouchers can be used fully and conveniently. Thus, local grocery stores acceptance of benefits is another important aspect of District residents access to groceries. Table 3 lists the benefits accepted at each store included in this analysis (note: one Harris Teeter store in Ward 6 is not yet open, so is not yet accepting nutrition benefits). SNAP / Food Stamps The SNAP/ Food Stamp Program provides lowincome households with monthly benefits that can be used only to buy food. Benefits come on an Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) card, similar to a debit card, that participants can use at most grocery stores and other food retailers. In September 2009, more than 110,000 District residents participated in the Food Stamp Program, pumping millions of federal dollars into local food retail outlets. 6 In fiscal year 2008, TABLE 3 Acceptance of Federal Nutrition Benefits at Full-Service Grocery Stores Developed by D.C Hunger Solutions Ward Store Accept Accept SNAP? WIC? 1 Best DC Supermarket Yes No 1 Bestway Supermarket Yes No 1 Giant Food Store Yes Yes 1 Harris Teeter Yes Yes 1 Murry s Yes No 1 Safeway Store Yes Yes 2 Capital Super Market Yes Yes 2 Giant Food Store Yes Yes 2 Safeway Store Yes No 2 Safeway Store Yes No 2 Safeway Store Yes Yes 2 Safeway Store Yes Yes 2 Trader Joes Market Yes No 2 Whole Foods Market Yes No 3 Brookville Super Market Yes No 3 Giant Food Store Yes Yes 3 Giant Food Store Yes Yes 3 Magruder s Super Market No No 3 Rodman s Discount Gourmet Food Yes No 3 Safeway Store Yes No 3 Safeway Store Yes No 3 Safeway Store Yes No 3 Super Fresh Food Market Yes No 3 Whole Foods Market Yes No 3 Whole Foods Market Yes No 4 Safeway Store Yes Yes 4 Safeway Store Yes Yes 5 Giant Food Store Yes Yes 5 Safeway Store Yes Yes 5 Safeway Store Yes Yes 6 Harris Teeter Yes Yes 6 Harris Teeter N/A N/A 6 Murry s Yes No 6 Safeway Store Yes Yes 6 Safeway Store Yes Yes 6 Safeway Store Yes No 7 Murry s Yes No 7 Murry s Yes No 7 Safeway Store Yes Yes 7 Safeway Store Yes Yes 8 Anacostia Warehouse Supermarket Yes No 8 Giant Food Store Yes Yes 8 Murry s Yes No 6 City-wide monthly participation data provided by U.S. Department of Agriculture. D.C. Hunger Solutions and Social Compact 8
District residents received $112,324,800 in federal food stamp dollars. 7 Every $1 in food stamp benefits generates $1.84 in local economic activity. 8, 9 Table 4 shows that food stamp participants live in all wards of the District (food stamp recipients also work and travel throughout the city), which makes acceptance of food stamps at every full-service grocer in the District imperative for customer access and, in many cases, a viable business opportunity for grocery stores. The vast majority (41 out of 42) of the District s full-service grocery stores accept food stamps. Additionally, many smaller stores, pharmacies, and ten farmers markets in Washington, D.C., accept food stamps. (In 2008, D.C. Hunger Solutions surveyed 21 smaller food stores in Wards 7 and 8. All 21 stores accepted food stamps.) In total, there are 378 retailers that accept food stamps in the District. 10 The Harris Teeter planned for the NoMa neighborhood in Ward 6 should be encouraged to follow the example of other Harris Teeter stores in the District and begin accepting food stamps when it opens in 2010. Similarly, Magruder s (in the Chevy Chase neighborhood of Ward 3) currently the only full-service grocery store in the District not accepting food stamps should be encouraged to become authorized to accept food stamps. TABLE 4 Acceptance of SNAP/Food Stamps at District Grocery Stores Ward # of Residents Receiving Food Stamps (June 09) # of Full-Service Grocery Stores that Accept Food Stamps Developed by D.C Hunger Solutions % of Grocery Stores Accepting Food Stamps Ward 1 7,709 6 out of 6 100% Ward 2 10,970 8 out of 8 100% Ward 3 334 10 out of 11 91% Ward 4 9,888 2 out of 2 100% Ward 5 14,607 3 out of 3 100% Ward 6 12,990 5 out of 5 100% Ward 7 20,934 4 out of 4 100% Ward 8 24,015 3 out of 3 100% D.C. 101,447 41 out of 42 98% D.C. WIC The WIC program serves pregnant or breast-feeding mothers and children under age five. Families participating in WIC receive monthly vouchers to purchase healthy foods at eligible stores. In a typical month, more than 17,500 District residents participate in WIC, boosting food purchases in area stores that accept D.C. WIC vouchers. 11 In fiscal year 2008, District residents received nearly $13.5 million in federal WIC benefits. 12 In October 2009, the D.C. WIC Agency (part of the D.C. Department of Health), implemented the new federal rules for items included in the WIC food package. The new WIC food package is aimed at reducing obesity and improving health. It allows participants to purchase a wider variety of food, including fruits, vegetables, and whole grains, and provides WIC State 7 U.S. Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service. Annual State Level Data, (2008). 8 Hanson, Kenneth, and Elise Golan. Effects of Changes in Food Stamp Expenditures Across the U.S. Economy, U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service: Food Assistance and Nutrition Research Report, Report Number 26-6 (2002), http://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/fanrr26/fanrr26-6/fanrr26-6.pdf. 9 Economic effect of increasing food stamps measured for the whole U.S. economy. It may vary by location. 10 JPMorgan Chase. November Retailer Report to EFS, (November 2009). 11 WIC participation data by Ward are provided by the D.C. WIC Agency (July 2009). 12 Food Research and Action Center. 2008 State of the States. D.C. Hunger Solutions and Social Compact 9
agencies greater flexibility in prescribing food packages to accommodate the cultural preferences of WIC participants. 13 As Table 5 shows, while almost all full-service grocery stores in the District accept food stamps, only 48 percent of the full-service grocery stores included in this report accept D.C. WIC. (Two additional pharmacies in the District are authorized to accept WIC, and the D.C. WIC Agency plans to allow farmers markets to accept WIC fruit and vegetable cash vouchers. Unlike food stamps, WIC benefits are not widely accepted at smaller food stores in the District.) Even though the WIC population is smaller than the food stamp population, it is crucial for the District to increase the number of WIC-authorized retailers: WIC participants are predominantly breast-feeding mothers and young children. Ensuring convenient, sufficient access to the healthy foods that WIC makes affordable is critical to giving low-income children a healthy start. Further, since the WIC population faces special obstacles in using public transportation or finding the time to shop, it is critical that stores in areas with significant numbers of WIC participants accept WIC benefits. Because WIC-approved stores must stock sufficient quantities of approved healthy foods, such as fruits and vegetables, authorizing more stores to accept WIC benefits can also support access to healthy food for the broader community and might have a ripple effect on community health. With the 2009 implementation of the new WIC food package in the District, the D.C. WIC Agency can focus on promoting the use of WIC and work with full-service grocery vendors, as well as smaller corner stores, to accept this benefit. Priority should be given to approving new WIC vendors in Wards 7 and 8 given these wards high percentages of low-income residents who likely are eligible for WIC. (District-wide WIC participation is counted by the locations at which participants enroll, not by the Wards or neighborhoods in which participants live.) TABLE 5 Acceptance of WIC at District Grocery Stores Ward # of WIC Participants Enrolling in Each Ward (July 09) Developed by D.C. Hunger Solutions # of Full-Service Grocery Stores that Accept WIC % of Grocery Stores Ward 1 6,892 3 out of 6 50% Ward 2 no WIC clinic in Ward 4 out of 8 50% Ward 3 721 2 out of 11 18% Ward 4 1,954 2 out of 2 100% Ward 5 255 3 out of 3 100% Ward 6 2,086 3 out of 5 60% Ward 7 3,258 2 out of 4 50% Ward 8 2,406 1 out of 3 33% D.C. 17,572 20 out of 42 48% Map 2 (see next page) provides a picture of the relative dearth of WIC-approved retailers in Wards 7 and 8, which already have fewer full-service stores than the District average and have child poverty rates of 37 percent and 47 percent, respectively. 14 Methodology: D.C. Hunger Solutions called each of the 42 full-service grocery stores currently open to verify food stamp acceptance. The list of WIC-approved stores was provided by the D.C. WIC Agency. 13 USDA Food and Nutrition Service. Benefits & Services: WIC Food Packages, http://www.fns.usda.gov/wic/benefitsandservices/foodpkg.htm. 14 U.S. Census (2000). D.C. Hunger Solutions and Social Compact 10
MAP 2 Full-Service Grocery Stores that Accept SNAP/Food Stamps and D.C. WIC Developed by Social Compact 4 3 1 5 2 6 7 8 D.C. Hunger Solutions and Social Compact 11
Access Indicator: Square Feet of Grocery Retail Available to District Residents Finding #4 District residents have unequal amounts of grocery retail space located in and near their own wards. Residents of Wards 4 and 7 in particular have considerably fewer square feet of full-service grocery retail space per person than the District average. Calculating the number of square feet of grocery retail available to each person in each ward of the District gives a picture of access that accounts for variation in store sizes details of grocery store access not captured by simply counting the number of stores in each ward. Larger stores can serve more customers and maintain larger, more varied inventories (as well as, in many cases, sell products at lower costs). Furthermore, as described in the methodology section below, the square feet calculation accounts for stores just outside the District border and captures a more accurate representation of grocery retailers available to District residents. Across the District, an average of 2.11 square feet15 of full-service grocery retail space is available for each resident. There are wide gaps between the number of square feet available per person in Ward 7 and Ward 3: Ward 7, one of the lowest-income wards, has only 1.67 square feet of grocery space per person, whereas residents of Ward 3, the highest-income ward, are better served with 2.73 square feet per person. Wards 4 and 8 also have less grocery retail space per person than the District average. The wards shaded in Table 6 are those that have fewer square feet of grocery retail space per person than the District average. Methodology: The calculation of square feet of grocery retail per person takes into account the tendency of customers to shop outside of ward and District boundaries by including, for each resident, stores located within a two-mile radius of where that resident lives. To determine the number of square feet of grocery retail space available to each resident in each of the District s eight wards, Social Compact calculates the following: 1) the sum of the square feet of all the full-service grocery stores located within two miles of each Census block group in the District; 2) the average number of grocery retail square feet for all block groups in a ward; and 3) the average number of grocery square feet divided by the total population of the block groups in the ward. The figure for Washington, D.C., as a whole is calculated as a ratio of the sum of the square feet of all grocers in the District and within two miles of the District border to the total District population. 15 TABLE 6 Grocery Retail Space Per Person Developed by Social Compact Ward Sq. Ft. Per Person Ward 1 Ward 2 Ward 3 Ward 4 Ward 5 Ward 6 Ward 7 Ward 8 2.34 2.19 2.73 1.69 2.25 2.21 1.67 2.09 D.C. 2.11 Data on store sizes (square feet devoted to groceries) were provided by ACNielsen-Claritas. D.C. Hunger Solutions and Social Compact 12
Access Indicator: Average Distance to Full-Service Grocery Stores Finding #5 Residents of Wards 4, 5, and 7 must travel longer distances on average than residents in other wards to reach the closest full-service grocery store. The average distance residents travel to a full-service grocery store is another indicator of District residents access to affordable healthy foods. Comparing average distances to full-service grocery stores for residents of each ward helps show which areas of the city are better-served versus underserved by grocery retail. The wards shaded in Table 7 have a greater average distance than the District average. Of course, within each ward, the actual distance to the nearest full-service grocer may be much longer for some residents than the average distance for the whole ward. The distances listed in Table 7 do not account for factors that affect walkability, including safety, the presence of physical barriers such as highways, weather, and the reality of walking while carrying bags of groceries, or supervising young children. Nor do the average distances reflect other realities that can affect access to grocery stores: proximity to convenient public transit routes, ownership of a car or access to a borrowed car, access to shuttle services and taxi cabs, or extra income to pay for transportation. Any of these factors can limit an individual s or family s ability to reach a nearby grocery store. Low-income people, whose budgets already are stretched to meet basic needs, often do not have extra money to pay for additional transportation costs and are most affected by long distances to grocery stores. Low-income District residents also typically have fewer transportation options than higher-income residents. Methodology: To calculate the average distance to a grocery store for residents of each District ward, Social Compact measured the average distance (in miles) from the center of each census block group to the nearest full-service grocery store (irrespective of Ward and/or District boundaries). Then, the distances for all block groups in a ward are averaged to calculate the average distance to a grocery store for residents of each ward. TABLE 7 Average Distance for Residents to Full-Service Grocers Developed by Social Compact Ward Avg. Distance to Grocer (miles) Ward 1.30 Ward 2.33 Ward 3.44 Ward 4.66 Ward 5.65 Ward 6.41 Ward 7.66 Ward 8.50 D.C..52 D.C. Hunger Solutions and Social Compact 13
Access Indicator: Grocery Dollars Leaking Out of the District Finding #6 The District has an opportunity to capture more of residents grocery dollars. The District loses more than $112 million in annual grocery revenues to neighboring jurisdictions because existing grocery retail is insufficient to meet residents demand. Grocery sales leakage gives another perspective of the inadequate access to full-service grocery stores in the District: District residents spend an estimated $920 million on groceries annually; of this amount, at least $112 million is leaked spent outside the District. In other words, District residents are spending 12 percent of their grocery dollars elsewhere because existing District grocery outlets are not satisfying local demand. 16 What is Leakage? Leakage is used to describe the amount of money that residents spend on groceries outside an area. It is calculated by subtracting annual sales revenue of full-service grocery stores in the area from area residents annual aggregate grocery ( food at home ) expenditures. Leakage can indicate unmet demand. Dollars that are leaked into neighboring jurisdictions suggest unmet demand. That is, District residents do not have sufficient full-service grocery retail options to meet their grocery needs and likely are travelling out of the District to shop. Importantly, leakage is a measure not only of access to grocery stores but also an indicator of potential markets for grocery retail development. District residents spent $920 million on groceries District full-service grocery stores earned $807.6 million in revenue $112.4 million was leaked out of the District Methodology: Social Compact calculated annual aggregate grocery expenditures using Consumer Expenditure Survey (CE) data (2008) and grocery sales revenue from ACNielsen-Claritas grocery store data (2008). For stores undergoing renovation and planned stores, the grocery sales revenue was calculated by using the average grocery sales revenue per square feet of similar stores located in the District. Leakage is determined by subtracting annual sales revenue of full-service grocery stores in the District from District residents annual aggregate expenditures on food for home consumption as defined by the CE. Total grocery revenue used in the calculation above is the total estimated revenue for the 43 full-service grocery stores in this report. 16 Expenditure data are for 2008. D.C. Hunger Solutions and Social Compact 14
Access Indicators Combined: The Grocery Gap Finding #7 The District has a grocery gap. Some areas of the city particularly in Wards 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 are underserved by full-service grocery retail, compared to other areas, and compared to demand for groceries. Taken together, the access indicators examined in the previous sections identify the areas of the District with the least access to full-service grocery stores. Along with the locations of grocery stores, Map 3 depicts access to grocery stores as a combination of the following: below-average square feet of grocery retail space per person; above-average distance to a grocery store; and above-average grocery sales leakage. Areas shaded in tan rank worse than the District average on all three measures. Wards 4, 5, 6, 7, and 8 each contain areas that, according to all three access indicators, have less access to full-service grocery stores than average for city residents. MAP 3 Areas of the District with Limited Grocery Store Access Developed by Social Compact 4 3 1 5 2 6 7 8 D.C. Hunger Solutions and Social Compact 15
To reflect the reality that individuals shopping patterns transcend political boundaries, the map accounts for all grocery stores available within two miles of each census block group. Thus, the map provides a realistic picture of which District neighborhoods and their residents grocery needs are not being met. The next section looks deeper into the grocery gap to identify those areas of the District that have limited access to grocery stores as well as relatively high concentrations of poverty the areas most in need of better access to fullservice grocery stores. The next section also discusses why this report is primarily concerned with the impact of the grocery gap on lower-income communities. D.C. Hunger Solutions and Social Compact 16
PART II: Identifying the District s Food Deserts Finding #8 Food deserts exist in the District. In Wards 5, 6, 7, and 8, food deserts impact lower-income areas. Communities and neighborhoods with limited access to full-service grocery stores often are called food deserts. But not all areas underserved by full-service grocery retail are of equal concern. The U.S. Congress, in the 2008 Farm Bill, defined a food desert as an area in the United States with limited access to affordable and nutritious food, particularly such an area composed of predominantly lower income neighborhoods and communities [emphasis added]. 17 While recognizing that limited access to grocery stores can be problematic for District residents at any income level, this analysis is concerned primarily with low-income areas with limited grocery store access which Congress noted as a particular concern in the Farm Bill. (This analysis also recognizes that not every individual or household in a lowerincome area has a low income, and that some low-income people live in areas with higher average incomes.) There are several reasons to focus a grocery gap analysis on low-income individuals and communities, including the following: low-income households with already-tight food budgets often have little or no extra money to spend on travel to distant grocery stores; larger grocery stores tend to have lower prices than small markets, and consequently, those who live far from full-service grocers may ultimately pay a poverty tax to purchase higher-priced foods in small neighborhood stores; 18 and full-service grocery stores can bring new job opportunities to communities. Additionally, as suggested in this report s Overview Table (see Executive Summary), the disparity in access to fullservice grocery stores between lower- and higher-income areas of the District parallels health disparities, where lowerincome city residents have higher rates of obesity and nutrition-related chronic illnesses (particularly type 2 diabetes). Furthermore, understanding the specific impact of food deserts on low-income communities can help policymakers and economic development experts prioritize areas for grocery store development and develop solutions to the special challenges of attracting stores to underserved areas. Map 4, on the next page, illustrates the District s food deserts and highlights affected low-income communities. 17 U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service. Access to Affordable and Nutritious Food Measuring and Understanding Food Deserts and Their Consequences, Report to Congress, (June 2009). 18 U.S. Department of Agriculture Economic Research Service. Access to Affordable and Nutritious Food Measuring and Understanding Food Deserts and Their Consequences, Report to Congress, (June 2009). D.C. Hunger Solutions and Social Compact 17
Highlighted in dark purple on Map 4 are the District s food deserts where limited access to full-service grocery stores (as defined in previous sections) overlap with census tracts in which more than 51 percent of individuals have incomes below 200 percent of the federal poverty level. 19 (Light purple are other areas with limited grocery store access.) Map 4 reveals that Wards 5, 6, 7, and 8 contain food deserts and warrant further examination for opportunities to develop new grocery stores and help close the District s grocery gap. Methodology: Map 4 was developed using poverty data provided by the District of Columbia Office of Planning. The Office of Planning matched census tracts where 51 percent or more of the population lives at incomes below 200 percent of the federal poverty level with those tracts that have below-average access to full-service grocery stores (as identified by Social Compact in Map 3). MAP 4 Food Deserts and Intersection with Poverty in the District of Columbia 19 Poverty rates mapped by Census tract are provided by the D.C. Office of Planning and use 2000 Census data. 200% of the 2009 federal poverty level for an individual is $21,660/year. On the whole, 35.9% of District residents have family incomes below 200% of the poverty level. D.C. Hunger Solutions and Social Compact 18
PART III: Recommendations for Improving Access to Grocery Stores in the District Improving access to full-service grocery stores should be a centerpiece of the District s current and future health, economic development, and community revitalization initiatives. Increasing the presence of full-service grocery stores in a community has the potential to improve residents nutrition and overall health and possibly to lower residents food costs. In addition, attracting new grocery stores makes good economic sense grocery retailers are anchor businesses that create jobs, generate tax revenue, draw foot traffic to support neighboring businesses, and help spur other development. Recommendation #1 The District should follow the lead of other cities and states and create a Healthy Food Access Initiative that attracts grocers and other healthy food vendors to underserved lowincome District neighborhoods and that improves the capacity of existing food retailers in those areas. An initial budget of several million dollars in public funds (which would be leveraged by a private institution) should be sufficient to create a pool of funds for financing grocery store development and improvement and other fresh food retail ventures. Purpose of the District s Healthy Food Access Initiative The Healthy Food Access Initiative would assist developers and grocery store operators in securing financing to cover development costs. It would also include a robust and flexible package of other incentives and assistance designed to draw more fresh food retailers into underserved areas of the District, as well as to expand the capacity of local business owners to sell affordable fresh foods. The District s Initiative would be modeled on the successful Fresh Food Financing Initiative in Pennsylvania and the Food Retail Expansion to Support Health (FRESH) Initiative in New York City, and akin to the National Healthy Food Financing Initiative, which was introduced in President Obama s 2011 budget and forms a key prong of the First Lady s Let s Move initiative to reduce childhood obesity. 20, 21 A Healthy Food Access Initiative would effectively help close the District s grocery gap, create hundreds of jobs, encourage local entrepreneurs to establish fresh food businesses in the District s food deserts, and improve the existing food retail options in lowincome areas of the District. The Initiative also would help the District make strides toward becoming a healthier community: research shows a link between the local food environment and residents dietary intake and an uptick in fruit and vegetable The National Healthy Food Financing Initiative In his 2011 budget, President Obama called for $400 million in financing and other investment in full-service grocery stores and other fresh food retailers. The funds are spread among the U.S. Department of Agriculture, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, and U.S. Department of the Treasury. Modeled on Pennsylvania s successful program, the national Healthy Food Financing Initiative would provide financing to attract new grocery stores to communities that are underserved by fresh food and would support renovation and expansion of existing stores so they can provide the healthy foods that communities want and need. The National Healthy Food Financing Initiative would allow states and localities to create complementary incentives to meet local communities needs. Additionally, House Resolution 975, introduced in December 2009, supports a National Fresh Food Financing Initiative. These both are important and encouraging steps forward in improving access to healthy foods in low-income communities across the U.S., including in the District of Columbia. 20 Giang, T., Karpyn, A., Laurison, H.B., Hillier, A., and Perry, R.D. Closing the Grocery Gap in Underserved Communities: The Creation of the Pennsylvania Fresh Food Financing Initiative, Journal of Public Health Management Practic, 14, 3 (2008): 272-79. 21 Information about New York City s Food Retail Expansion to Support Health initiative available at www.nyc.gov/fresh. D.C. Hunger Solutions and Social Compact 19