Skip to main content

PantryPath Research · WIC Coverage Atlas

WIC in Washington

64.1% coverage

Washington's WIC program reaches 64.1% of eligible residents — an estimated 127,000 participants out of 198,000 who qualify. That leaves 71,000 pregnant women, infants, and young children eligible but not receiving WIC's food package or nutrition counseling.

198K

WIC eligibles

127K

Participants (FY2024 avg)

71K

Unserved eligibles

39

Counties

Washington by county

← Back to national atlas

Toggle between estimated WIC eligibles, unserved gap, low-income child counts, and child-poverty share. Hover a county for its exact value.

Note: USDA does not publish sub-state WIC participation, so every county in Washington inherits the state's 64.1% coverage rate. County-level eligibles are allocated from state totals in proportion to the county's share of low-income children under 6 (ACS B17024). See methodology.

Loading county map…

Fewer
More

Washington at a glance

Coverage rate

64.1%

Participants ÷ eligibles

Participation gap

35.9%

1 − coverage

Eligibles

198K

USDA FNS FY2022

Participants

127K

Monthly avg FY2024

Unserved

71K

Eligibles − participants

Kids < 6 low-income

143K

27.7% of universe

County-level hotspots

Top five counties across 39 counties in Washington.

Most WIC eligibles

Estimated eligible population

  1. 1 King 38K
  2. 2 Pierce 24K
  3. 3 Spokane 19K
  4. 4 Yakima 16K
  5. 5 Snohomish 16K

Largest unserved gap

Eligibles not receiving WIC

  1. 1 King 13K
  2. 2 Pierce 8K
  3. 3 Spokane 7K
  4. 4 Yakima 6K
  5. 5 Snohomish 6K

Highest child-poverty share

Children < 6 at ≤185% FPL

  1. 1 Adams 59.3%
  2. 2 Okanogan 57.4%
  3. 3 Yakima 52.3%
  4. 4 Wahkiakum 51.1%
  5. 5 Stevens 47.6%

Every county in Washington

All 39 counties with WIC eligibility estimates, unserved gap, and ACS child-poverty context.

County Eligibles est. Participants est. Unserved est. Kids < 6 low-income Poverty share
Adams 1,718 1,102 616 1,243 59.3%
Asotin 651 418 233 471 32.0%
Benton 7,539 4,835 2,704 5,454 32.6%
Chelan 2,151 1,380 771 1,556 28.9%
Clallam 1,856 1,191 665 1,343 35.5%
Clark 13,037 8,362 4,675 9,432 26.8%
Columbia 90 58 32 65 32.2%
Cowlitz 3,653 2,343 1,310 2,643 35.4%
Douglas 1,451 931 520 1,050 34.9%
Ferry 205 131 74 148 39.7%
Franklin 5,577 3,577 2,000 4,035 40.8%
Garfield 53 34 19 38 42.2%
Grant 5,143 3,299 1,844 3,721 44.5%
Grays Harbor 2,263 1,451 812 1,637 41.1%
Island 1,877 1,204 673 1,358 26.7%
Jefferson 623 400 223 451 44.8%
King 37,587 24,109 13,478 27,193 19.2%
Kitsap 5,868 3,764 2,104 4,245 24.8%
Kittitas 1,038 666 372 751 33.8%
Klickitat 532 341 191 385 30.6%
Lewis 3,229 2,071 1,158 2,336 41.7%
Lincoln 365 234 131 264 38.1%
Mason 1,710 1,097 613 1,237 31.9%
Okanogan 2,266 1,453 813 1,639 57.4%
Pacific 503 323 180 364 38.8%
Pend Oreille 449 288 161 325 41.1%
Pierce 23,646 15,167 8,479 17,107 25.5%
San Juan 281 180 101 203 36.8%
Skagit 3,689 2,366 1,323 2,669 31.3%
Skamania 162 104 58 117 20.4%
Snohomish 16,150 10,359 5,791 11,684 19.7%
Spokane 18,775 12,043 6,732 13,583 37.7%
Stevens 1,869 1,199 670 1,352 47.6%
Thurston 7,409 4,752 2,657 5,360 28.0%
Wahkiakum 164 106 58 119 51.1%
Walla Walla 2,057 1,319 738 1,488 40.3%
Whatcom 4,947 3,173 1,774 3,579 27.9%
Whitman 1,041 668 373 753 32.8%
Yakima 16,375 10,503 5,872 11,847 52.3%

Apply for WIC in Washington

Income limits, food-package rules, clinic locator, and application instructions specific to Washington's WIC agency.

Washington WIC guide

Families with children

Our population-specific guide: WIC, SNAP, school meals, Summer EBT, and pantry programs for families with kids in Washington.

Families guide

Washington SNAP

SNAP recipients are automatically income-eligible for WIC through adjunctive eligibility — often the fastest path to enrollment.

Washington SNAP guide

Find a food pantry

Search Washington's verified pantries — many partner with WIC clinics and distribute infant formula, baby food, and diapers.

Washington food pantries

WIC methodology

How we estimated county-level eligibles, why state coverage rates can't be disaggregated, and which data sources we used.

Full methodology