Skip to main content

PantryPath Research · School Hunger Atlas

School hunger in Texas

62% certified free/reduced

Across 8,232 public schools serving 5,409,738 students, 61.7% of Texas students are certified free or reduced-price. 4,154 schools (52% of NSLP participants) operate under the Community Eligibility Provision, and 0.0% of students are directly certified through SNAP, TANF, or Medicaid linkage.

5.4M

Students enrolled

8,232

Public schools (CCD)

4,154

CEP / Provision 2 schools

253

Counties in atlas

Texas by county

← Back to national atlas

Toggle between the school-food-access composite, free/reduced eligibility, CEP share, direct-certification rate, and SAIPE school-age poverty. Hover a county to see schools, enrollment, and the underlying certification mix.

Loading county map…

Lower
Higher

Texas at a glance

Free/reduced

61.7%

Share of enrollment

CEP share

52%

Of NSLP schools

Direct cert

0.0%

SNAP/TANF/Medicaid

NSLP schools

97%

Serve NSLP meals

5–17 in poverty

17.6%

Census SAIPE 2023

Access score

0.66

Composite 0–1

The access score is a 0–1 composite weighted 50% eligibility, 30% CEP share, 20% NSLP share — a visualization and ranking aid, not a direct measurement. See methodology.

County-level hotspots

Top five counties across 253 in Texas.

Highest free/reduced share

Certified ≤185% FPL per enrollment

  1. 1 Starr 92.7%
  2. 2 Brooks 90.2%
  3. 3 Zapata 89.4%
  4. 4 Bailey 88.7%
  5. 5 Crosby 88.5%

Highest CEP adoption

Of NSLP schools — min. 3 NSLP schools

  1. 1 Aransas 100%
  2. 2 Bailey 100%
  3. 3 Baylor 100%
  4. 4 Bee 100%
  5. 5 Brooks 100%

Largest enrollment

Total students in CCD universe

  1. 1 Harris 875K
  2. 2 Dallas 447K
  3. 3 Tarrant 376K
  4. 4 Bexar 359K
  5. 5 Collin 218K

Every county in Texas

All 253 counties with school counts, enrollment, certification mix, CEP adoption, and the SAIPE 5–17 poverty backdrop.

County Schools Enrollment Free/reduced CEP Direct cert 5–17 poverty Access
Anderson 25 8,091 67.2% 48% 0.0% 24.3% 0.65
Andrews 5 4,222 49.2% 0% 0.0% 12.7% 0.45
Angelina 33 15,773 71.9% 67% 0.0% 25.8% 0.76
Aransas 4 2,968 60.9% 100% 0.0% 26.4% 0.80
Archer 8 2,149 33.0% 0% 0.0% 12.2% 0.36
Armstrong 1 319 26.0% 0% 0.0% 15.9% 0.33
Atascosa 17 8,104 67.5% 24% 0.0% 21.7% 0.61
Austin 11 5,804 56.1% 0% 0.0% 17.5% 0.48
Bailey 4 1,321 88.7% 100% 0.0% 22.6% 0.94
Bandera 5 2,577 55.1% 0% 0.0% 18.1% 0.48
Bastrop 25 17,474 69.7% 60% 0.0% 15.2% 0.73
Baylor 3 633 59.6% 100% 0.0% 22.2% 0.80
Bee 12 5,165 81.9% 100% 0.0% 27.6% 0.86
Bell 94 69,629 60.3% 51% 0.0% 16.0% 0.64
Bexar 521 358,803 63.0% 72% 0.0% 18.5% 0.72
Blanco 6 1,823 43.8% 0% 0.0% 13.4% 0.32
Borden 1 242 0.0% — 0.0% 18.3% 0.00
Bosque 11 2,459 67.4% 36% 0.0% 18.2% 0.65
Bowie 41 16,976 66.4% 54% 0.0% 18.6% 0.68
Brazoria 92 74,699 53.5% 25% 0.0% 11.6% 0.54
Brazos 47 32,214 60.1% 53% 0.0% 19.1% 0.66
Brewster 6 1,115 53.3% 0% 0.0% 19.6% 0.43
Briscoe 2 414 51.4% 0% 0.0% 20.9% 0.46
Brooks 5 1,244 90.2% 100% 0.0% 45.2% 0.95
Brown 19 6,217 60.2% 17% 0.0% 22.5% 0.54
Burleson 9 3,107 66.4% 0% 0.0% 21.4% 0.53
Burnet 11 7,261 66.1% 82% 0.0% 13.1% 0.78
Caldwell 12 8,228 73.7% 100% 0.0% 21.1% 0.87
Calhoun 6 3,503 66.5% 100% 0.0% 21.7% 0.83
Callahan 11 2,603 51.7% 36% 0.0% 17.5% 0.57
Cameron 153 95,881 85.3% 97% 0.0% 32.6% 0.89
Camp 5 2,285 77.2% 100% 0.0% 27.0% 0.89
Carson 6 1,074 33.7% 17% 0.0% 12.0% 0.42
Cass 16 5,411 62.9% 88% 0.0% 23.4% 0.78
Castro 5 1,547 74.3% 80% 0.0% 21.9% 0.81
Chambers 16 11,542 33.0% 54% 0.0% 9.9% 0.49
Cherokee 23 11,026 65.8% 70% 0.0% 25.4% 0.74
Childress 3 976 59.1% 0% 0.0% 22.4% 0.50
Clay 7 1,748 53.9% 29% 0.0% 17.1% 0.56
Cochran 2 679 70.8% 100% 0.0% 34.9% 0.85
Coke 2 480 54.6% 50% 0.0% 18.6% 0.62
Coleman 6 1,208 64.4% 50% 0.0% 26.2% 0.67
Collin 263 217,719 26.4% 1% 0.0% 5.7% 0.32
Collingsworth 3 544 58.6% 0% 0.0% 25.8% 0.49
Colorado 12 3,549 66.1% 50% 0.0% 22.5% 0.68
Comal 37 28,513 34.9% 0% 0.0% 8.6% 0.37
Comanche 9 2,309 63.7% 67% 0.0% 23.6% 0.72
Concho 2 400 74.8% 100% 0.0% 28.7% 0.87
Cooke 19 7,040 52.5% 39% 0.0% 18.1% 0.57
Coryell 24 14,863 58.3% 21% 0.0% 16.2% 0.55
Cottle 1 161 73.3% 100% 0.0% 31.0% 0.87
Crane 3 1,211 74.9% 0% 0.0% 15.2% 0.57
Crockett 3 651 68.8% 100% 0.0% 21.2% 0.84
Crosby 5 963 88.5% 100% 0.0% 32.6% 0.94
Culberson 1 393 79.4% 100% 0.0% 33.4% 0.90
Dallam 2 642 70.9% 0% 0.0% 15.4% 0.45
Dallas 685 446,697 74.6% 67% 0.0% 17.6% 0.77
Dawson 4 2,151 72.7% 100% 0.0% 27.2% 0.76
Deaf Smith 9 4,094 79.1% 100% 0.0% 22.0% 0.90
Delta 4 963 68.0% 100% 0.0% 22.4% 0.84
Denton 218 166,377 34.0% 1% 0.0% 5.4% 0.36
DeWitt 15 4,313 63.0% 87% 0.0% 23.3% 0.78
Dickens 2 281 57.3% 100% 0.0% 29.7% 0.79
Dimmit 4 1,915 82.7% 100% 0.0% 35.5% 0.91
Donley 4 518 57.9% 25% 0.0% 24.8% 0.56
Duval 9 2,448 86.7% 100% 0.0% 45.6% 0.93
Eastland 14 2,619 63.5% 86% 0.0% 23.0% 0.77
Ector 47 36,390 68.8% 93% 0.0% 14.4% 0.82
Edwards 2 321 68.5% — 0.0% 37.7% 0.34
El Paso 228 165,890 76.3% 72% 0.0% 23.2% 0.80
Ellis 66 44,556 53.9% 10% 0.0% 8.5% 0.48
Erath 14 5,814 52.2% 64% 0.0% 16.9% 0.65
Falls 7 2,373 80.2% 86% 0.0% 24.9% 0.86
Fannin 23 5,518 58.9% 35% 0.0% 18.8% 0.60
Fayette 10 3,773 53.7% 44% 0.0% 14.2% 0.58
Fisher 2 578 60.2% 0% 0.0% 19.4% 0.50
Floyd 6 1,080 77.0% 100% 0.0% 30.8% 0.89
Foard 1 196 61.7% 100% 0.0% 24.6% 0.81
Fort Bend 173 186,886 44.3% 27% 0.0% 9.8% 0.50
Franklin 3 1,563 64.0% 100% 0.0% 20.4% 0.82
Freestone 11 3,606 61.8% 73% 0.0% 20.7% 0.73
Frio 7 2,888 83.8% 100% 0.0% 35.0% 0.92
Gaines 7 3,616 63.2% 29% 0.0% 19.7% 0.60
Galveston 76 60,030 48.5% 41% 0.0% 14.4% 0.55
Garza 4 832 67.9% 100% 0.0% 25.9% 0.79
Gillespie 9 3,615 58.2% 0% 0.0% 13.4% 0.47
Glasscock 2 292 5.8% 0% 0.0% 8.9% 0.23
Goliad 3 1,280 48.1% 33% 0.0% 22.4% 0.54
Gonzales 9 3,843 77.9% 100% 0.0% 26.3% 0.89
Gray 5 2,190 56.4% 0% 0.0% 20.7% 0.44
Grayson 54 25,367 55.6% 30% 0.0% 13.9% 0.57
Gregg 36 20,149 68.8% 65% 0.0% 21.2% 0.73
Grimes 10 4,816 66.3% 60% 0.0% 20.7% 0.71
Guadalupe 40 29,947 48.3% 28% 0.0% 10.2% 0.52
Hale 14 6,038 75.7% 100% 0.0% 28.1% 0.88
Hall 4 400 81.8% 100% 0.0% 34.8% 0.91
Hamilton 6 1,817 54.8% 50% 0.0% 20.8% 0.62
Hansford 7 1,276 56.2% 0% 0.0% 12.8% 0.48
Hardeman 4 665 77.4% 50% 0.0% 25.9% 0.74
Hardin 18 10,688 50.8% 22% 0.0% 14.6% 0.52
Harris 1,046 874,997 71.1% 66% 0.0% 21.4% 0.75
Harrison 24 12,364 60.6% 48% 0.0% 22.3% 0.64
Hartley 5 1,734 65.0% 0% 0.0% 8.6% 0.41
Haskell 5 768 70.6% 100% 0.0% 31.9% 0.85
Hays 52 45,026 45.0% 38% 0.0% 8.6% 0.52
Hemphill 4 795 49.7% 0% 0.0% 12.6% 0.45
Henderson 29 11,096 70.0% 52% 0.0% 21.7% 0.67
Hidalgo 307 213,071 86.6% 97% 0.0% 37.1% 0.92
Hill 21 6,400 63.1% 43% 0.0% 17.9% 0.64
Hockley 12 4,558 61.2% 17% 0.0% 20.2% 0.56
Hood 14 9,251 51.3% 64% 0.0% 11.8% 0.65
Hopkins 16 6,730 60.6% 69% 0.0% 17.9% 0.71
Houston 13 3,184 66.4% 62% 0.0% 27.7% 0.72
Howard 13 5,298 62.5% 62% 0.0% 21.5% 0.70
Hudspeth 4 559 85.3% 100% 0.0% 48.7% 0.83
Hunt 41 20,097 61.3% 13% 0.0% 15.1% 0.54
Hutchinson 12 3,740 55.5% 0% 0.0% 15.3% 0.48
Irion 2 337 33.2% 0% 0.0% 9.6% 0.37
Jack 5 1,655 63.5% 20% 0.0% 15.8% 0.58
Jackson 10 3,140 55.3% 40% 0.0% 19.2% 0.60
Jasper 13 5,496 68.3% 31% 0.0% 23.4% 0.63
Jeff Davis 2 287 48.1% 0% 0.0% 32.8% 0.44
Jefferson 65 42,101 73.3% 68% 0.0% 22.6% 0.77
Jim Hogg 3 1,000 82.7% 100% 0.0% 33.9% 0.91
Jim Wells 16 7,544 79.8% 53% 0.0% 29.7% 0.75
Johnson 61 38,828 52.8% 7% 0.0% 12.3% 0.46
Jones 13 2,647 59.8% 92% 0.0% 21.2% 0.78
Karnes 11 2,425 62.5% 82% 0.0% 25.9% 0.76
Kaufman 50 37,326 58.7% 42% 0.0% 13.6% 0.62
Kendall 13 10,360 25.5% 8% 0.0% 8.2% 0.35
Kenedy 1 130 0.0% — 0.0% 18.2% 0.00
Kent 1 177 39.6% — 0.0% 14.5% 0.20
Kerr 15 6,720 59.6% 43% 0.0% 18.6% 0.61
Kimble 3 589 64.5% 100% 0.0% 34.7% 0.82
King 1 98 0.0% — 0.0% 7.7% 0.00
Kinney 3 532 63.7% 100% 0.0% 26.6% 0.82
Kleberg 13 4,911 70.2% 85% 0.0% 29.4% 0.80
Knox 4 715 64.1% 75% 0.0% 30.3% 0.75
La Salle 4 1,143 86.6% 100% 0.0% 33.1% 0.93
Lamar 19 8,508 67.0% 53% 0.0% 28.7% 0.69
Lamb 12 2,661 71.5% 100% 0.0% 23.9% 0.86
Lampasas 6 3,880 52.4% 17% 0.0% 16.4% 0.51
Lavaca 10 2,544 38.0% 20% 0.0% 15.1% 0.45
Lee 9 3,224 52.1% 50% 0.0% 16.2% 0.59
Leon 12 3,316 59.7% 58% 0.0% 21.4% 0.67
Liberty 33 25,056 80.3% 67% 0.0% 19.7% 0.80
Limestone 10 3,656 74.7% 60% 0.0% 25.2% 0.75
Lipscomb 4 609 63.5% 0% 0.0% 16.4% 0.52
Live Oak 6 1,649 63.8% 33% 0.0% 23.2% 0.62
Llano 5 2,055 66.7% 100% 0.0% 21.6% 0.79
Lubbock 87 50,663 58.8% 70% 0.0% 19.1% 0.70
Lynn 6 1,658 44.6% 83% 0.0% 20.5% 0.67
Madison 5 2,750 71.9% 100% 0.0% 23.3% 0.86
Marion 4 1,106 74.1% 100% 0.0% 32.9% 0.87
Martin 4 1,290 46.8% 0% 0.0% 14.2% 0.43
Mason 3 705 43.5% 0% 0.0% 20.3% 0.42
Matagorda 16 6,973 71.6% 88% 0.0% 24.9% 0.82
Maverick 23 13,839 81.6% 100% 0.0% 29.9% 0.91
McCulloch 5 1,241 68.3% 100% 0.0% 26.8% 0.84
McLennan 92 45,278 62.7% 24% 0.0% 20.3% 0.58
McMullen 1 271 0.0% — 0.0% 19.8% 0.00
Medina 21 12,965 58.1% 38% 0.0% 18.5% 0.60
Menard 2 287 70.4% 0% 0.0% 33.8% 0.55
Midland 43 32,874 55.7% 2% 0.0% 14.6% 0.49
Milam 16 4,300 67.7% 50% 0.0% 23.2% 0.69
Mills 5 743 52.4% 0% 0.0% 21.7% 0.42
Mitchell 4 1,309 61.1% 75% 0.0% 20.9% 0.73
Montague 13 3,289 52.5% 54% 0.0% 15.6% 0.62
Montgomery 124 130,648 50.2% 0% 0.0% 13.0% 0.45
Moore 9 4,186 70.1% 0% 0.0% 21.6% 0.55
Morris 7 1,864 79.6% 100% 0.0% 27.9% 0.90
Motley 1 160 60.6% 100% 0.0% 30.3% 0.80
Nacogdoches 24 10,401 71.0% 35% 0.0% 24.1% 0.65
Navarro 21 10,673 73.8% 76% 0.0% 21.7% 0.80
Newton 6 1,712 72.7% 100% 0.0% 27.1% 0.86
Nolan 12 10,667 16.3% 60% 0.0% 25.8% 0.43
Nueces 97 58,432 67.7% 80% 0.0% 21.6% 0.77
Ochiltree 5 1,905 65.7% 0% 0.0% 14.6% 0.53
Oldham 6 705 24.7% 0% 0.0% 28.4% 0.26
Orange 24 15,279 60.6% 71% 0.0% 19.0% 0.72
Palo Pinto 9 4,687 68.5% 67% 0.0% 23.9% 0.74
Panola 9 3,830 54.5% 0% 0.0% 18.8% 0.45
Parker 43 27,034 34.9% 7% 0.0% 8.7% 0.39
Parmer 11 2,203 73.9% 64% 0.0% 17.2% 0.76
Pecos 9 2,782 71.4% 89% 0.0% 22.3% 0.82
Polk 17 7,112 68.5% 81% 0.0% 26.6% 0.77
Potter 47 21,377 75.1% 0% 0.0% 21.3% 0.58
Presidio 4 1,261 86.4% 0% 0.0% 37.8% 0.48
Rains 4 1,738 60.8% 0% 0.0% 19.9% 0.50
Randall 37 23,080 48.3% 0% 0.0% 10.0% 0.44
Reagan 3 810 65.4% 0% 0.0% 15.2% 0.53
Real 2 497 68.2% 100% 0.0% 40.1% 0.74
Red River 10 2,055 77.6% 100% 0.0% 27.3% 0.89
Reeves 5 3,027 71.7% 100% 0.0% 23.6% 0.82
Refugio 7 1,234 68.6% 100% 0.0% 24.9% 0.84
Roberts 1 198 31.8% 0% 0.0% 11.3% 0.36
Robertson 11 3,402 61.9% 27% 0.0% 26.1% 0.59
Rockwall 29 23,433 30.5% 0% 0.0% 6.1% 0.34
Runnels 10 1,970 59.1% 50% 0.0% 23.1% 0.65
Rusk 26 10,303 70.9% 81% 0.0% 17.2% 0.80
Sabine 7 1,753 64.3% 71% 0.0% 31.8% 0.74
San Augustine 3 1,013 79.8% 100% 0.0% 31.5% 0.90
San Jacinto 8 3,584 73.6% 100% 0.0% 25.5% 0.87
San Patricio 29 13,912 64.5% 97% 0.0% 24.0% 0.81
San Saba 5 1,008 71.5% 60% 0.0% 25.5% 0.74
Schleicher 3 451 57.0% 0% 0.0% 22.9% 0.48
Scurry 6 2,905 65.8% 0% 0.0% 20.0% 0.53
Shackelford 3 617 50.1% 33% 0.0% 18.4% 0.55
Shelby 9 5,205 72.3% 44% 0.0% 24.5% 0.69
Sherman 4 695 62.9% 0% 0.0% 17.1% 0.51
Smith 58 37,075 65.5% 44% 0.0% 17.2% 0.66
Somervell 4 2,060 41.8% — 0.0% 13.1% 0.21
Starr 28 16,943 92.7% 100% 0.0% 36.2% 0.95
Stephens 4 1,390 70.7% 0% 0.0% 24.9% 0.55
Sterling 2 348 45.7% 0% 0.0% 15.4% 0.43
Stonewall 2 192 53.6% 100% 0.0% 21.9% 0.77
Sutton 2 654 55.2% 100% 0.0% 18.4% 0.78
Swisher 7 1,418 72.3% 29% 0.0% 26.8% 0.65
Tarrant 535 376,080 61.3% 40% 0.0% 13.7% 0.61
Taylor 38 23,137 57.4% 63% 0.0% 15.3% 0.68
Terrell 1 117 48.7% 0% 0.0% 19.4% 0.44
Terry 6 2,142 79.5% 83% 0.0% 28.4% 0.85
Throckmorton 2 307 59.3% 50% 0.0% 20.2% 0.65
Titus 13 6,816 75.9% 100% 0.0% 20.0% 0.88
Tom Green 37 18,303 56.0% 3% 0.0% 16.7% 0.48
Travis 274 185,685 49.0% 57% 0.0% 11.0% 0.60
Trinity 8 2,353 75.5% 0% 0.0% 28.3% 0.58
Tyler 14 3,368 66.1% 86% 0.0% 23.5% 0.79
Upshur 23 8,028 66.8% 43% 0.0% 18.6% 0.66
Upton 4 793 50.2% 0% 0.0% 20.1% 0.45
Uvalde 10 4,957 75.4% 89% 0.0% 33.3% 0.82
Val Verde 14 10,005 74.2% 93% 0.0% 32.1% 0.85
Van Zandt 26 10,684 59.2% 50% 0.0% 15.7% 0.65
Victoria 27 13,968 66.6% 93% 0.0% 20.4% 0.81
Walker 16 12,787 66.8% 6% 0.0% 20.0% 0.55
Waller 13 10,196 65.0% 54% 0.0% 17.0% 0.69
Ward 6 2,328 57.6% 17% 0.0% 18.6% 0.54
Washington 9 5,453 58.5% 22% 0.0% 20.5% 0.56
Webb 80 63,740 84.0% 96% 0.0% 30.2% 0.91
Wharton 18 7,817 68.0% 28% 0.0% 21.7% 0.62
Wheeler 6 1,028 56.8% 0% 0.0% 19.1% 0.45
Wichita 35 19,358 63.1% 12% 0.0% 22.2% 0.55
Wilbarger 6 2,103 69.0% 83% 0.0% 23.9% 0.80
Willacy 12 3,930 82.1% 100% 0.0% 34.0% 0.91
Williamson 139 118,688 30.0% 2% 0.0% 6.7% 0.35
Wilson 14 9,129 44.5% 0% 0.0% 13.5% 0.42
Winkler 5 1,787 55.6% 0% 0.0% 17.2% 0.40
Wise 28 12,590 47.0% 4% 0.0% 11.6% 0.45
Wood 17 6,329 63.8% 53% 0.0% 20.3% 0.68
Yoakum 7 1,926 64.1% 43% 0.0% 17.0% 0.65
Young 7 3,135 59.9% 29% 0.0% 19.7% 0.59
Zapata 6 3,359 89.4% 100% 0.0% 41.6% 0.95
Zavala 8 2,275 84.7% 100% 0.0% 43.7% 0.92

Texas school meals guide

How free and reduced-price school lunch eligibility works, application steps, and what to do if your child's school is not in CEP.

School meals guide

Summer meals

When the school year ends, NSLP and CEP stop. The Summer Food Service Program and Summer EBT fill the gap for the 3,335,567 children who rely on school meals in Texas.

Summer meals guide

Families with children

SNAP, WIC, Head Start, and the full federal-program stack for households with kids — the assistance ecosystem around the school cafeteria.

Families guide

Texas child poverty

The sibling atlas — county-level child poverty across Texas. Free/reduced eligibility and child poverty track each other closely but not perfectly.

Texas child poverty atlas

Texas pantries

Verified food pantries, food banks, and meal programs across Texas — open weeknights, weekends, and through the summer gap.

Texas pantry directory

Methodology

How we aggregated NCES Common Core of Data school-level records to counties, proxied CEP from lunch_program == 2, and layered SAIPE school-age poverty — plus the access-score formula.

Full methodology