Signature · 2 LILA tracts (50% of tracts)
Dakota County, NE
Dakota County's signature pressure is desert tracts: 2 LILA tracts (50% of the book) alongside 16.2% low-access.
- 16.2%
- low-access pop.
- 2
- food-desert tracts
- 10.0%
- on SNAP
- 21K
- residents (ACS 2024)
USDA FARA access plate
County Dakota County, NE
LA-MODERATE · BELOW-NATIONAL · LILA-POCKET · SNAP-LIGHT · VEH-OK · DENSITY-DENSE
- LA-MODERATE 16.2% low-access
- BELOW-NATIONAL -5.9 pts vs US
- LILA-POCKET 2 food-desert tracts
- SNAP-LIGHT 10.0% SNAP
- VEH-OK 4.5% no vehicle
- DENSITY-DENSE 50% tracts LILA
Nearest low-access peer: Butler County ( -0.7 pts)
The food-access picture
According to the USDA Food Access Research Atlas, Dakota County ranks #2,009 of 3,079 U.S. counties by low-access share and #72 of 93 counties in NE (16.2% low-access; 2 food-desert tracts).
- #2,009
- national by low-access %
- #72
- in NE
- 3
- low-access tracts
- 1K
- food-desert residents
Low access = living more than 1 mile (urban) or 10 miles (rural) from the nearest supermarket. Food deserts add a low-income condition (USDA LILA).
Signature read: 2 LILA tracts (50% of tracts) .
How Dakota County compares nationally
Dakota County lands in the middle of the national distribution: a 16.2% low-access share that beats 36% of the 3,133 U.S. counties with USDA data (rank #2,016).
Dakota County: USDA Food-Access Tier Breakdown
4 census tracts grouped by USDA classification · 2 LILA.
By USDA urbanicity classification, Dakota County has 2 urban and 2 rural census tracts. The 1-mile (urban) vs 10-mile (rural) distance threshold above applies per tract, so a county's access rate reflects this mix.
Dakota County low-access neighbourhood
Poles + nearest peers in Nebraska, not a full county-board reprint
- Thomas
Thomas 100%
100 % low-access
- Hamilton 17.3
Hamilton 17.3%
17.3 % low-access
- Lancaster 17
Lancaster 17%
17 % low-access
- Dakota 16.2
Dakota 16.2%
16.2 % low-access
- Butler 15.5
Butler 15.5%
15.5 % low-access
- Lincoln 14.4
Lincoln 14.4%
14.4 % low-access
- Burt 0.7
Burt 0.7%
0.7 % low-access
Food Access (USDA FARA 2019)
| Indicator | Value |
|---|---|
| Census Tracts | 4 |
| Atlas Population (2010 basis) | 21,006 |
| Low-Access Tracts | 3 |
| Food-Desert Tracts (low-income & low-access) | 2 |
| Low-Access Population | 3,405 |
| Low-Access Share | 16.2%below the national average |
| Low-Income & Low-Access Population | 1,037 |
ACS 2024 · elevated SNAP band
| Indicator | Value |
|---|---|
| Population | 21,354 |
| Median Household Income | $70,329 |
| Poverty Rate | 11.5%below the national average |
| SNAP Households | 743 |
| SNAP Participation Rate | 10.0%below the national average |
| Households Without a Vehicle | 4.5%well below the national average |
| Group-Quarters Population | 0.8% |
SNAP retailers in Dakota County
Dakota County has 22 stores currently authorized to accept SNAP (EBT) benefits, across 6 store categories. Combination Grocery/Other lead with 7 locations (32% of the total), followed by convenience store.
Combination Grocery/Other · 7
- dollar general 21075, dakota city
- dollar general 9152, south sioux city
- dollar tree 3213, south sioux city
- family dollar 6088, south sioux city
- laos asian market, south sioux city
- salam restaurant & grocery 1, south sioux city
- walgreens 10502, south sioux city
Convenience Store · 6
- casey's general store 2722, south sioux city
- dakota food & fuel, dakota city
- hy-vee gas 5620, south sioux city
- maverik 5252, south sioux city
- pump & pantry 53, jackson
- speed mart, south sioux city
Medium Grocery Store · 4
- banadir coffee halal & grocery, south sioux city
- post 60 market, emerson
- seoul foods, south sioux city
- suxfresco, south sioux city
Large Grocery Store · 2
- el mexicano 5 inc, south sioux city
- marias supermarket, south sioux city
Super Store · 2
- hy-vee food store 1620, south sioux city
- walmart sc 1332, south sioux city
Small Grocery Store · 1
- old barrel grocery & liquor, south sioux city
Source: USDA SNAP Retailer Locator (currently authorized stores, a live third population, not the 2019 Atlas or ACS 2024 snapshot above).
Other Counties in Nebraska
One of 92 counties in Nebraska, 6 are shown here.
Compare Dakota County vs Adams County → · All Nebraska counties →
Nationwide peers for Dakota County's low-access or SNAP share
Two USDA/ACS-derived peer sets for Dakota County, both outside Nebraska so the neighborhoods are not the same-state county list above.
Similar low-access share
Nearest low-access rates outside NE (16.2% here).
- Merrimack County, NH · 16.2% low-access
- Merrimack County, NH · 16.2% low-access
- Chippewa County, MN · 16.2% low-access
- Chippewa County, MN · 16.2% low-access
Similar SNAP participation
Nearest household SNAP rates outside NE (10.0% here).
- Greene County, MO · 10.0% SNAP
- Greene County, MO · 10.0% SNAP
- Polk County, MN · 10.0% SNAP
- Polk County, MN · 10.0% SNAP
Source: USDA Food Access Research Atlas (2019) + Census ACS 2024 SNAP. Peers floor at 10,000 residents so stub counties cannot own the match.
Food access nationally, Nebraska in context
Dakota County sits inside Nebraska (ringed). Each state is colored by population-weighted low-access; click any state to compare.
USDA Economic Research Service, Food Access Research Atlas (2019), population-weighted · Census ACS 2024 context
Read with this county
Sources: USDA Economic Research Service, Food Access Research Atlas (2019) · U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2024 5-Year Estimates · methodology · compiled .
PlainFoodAccess renders this county profile directly from the USDA Food Access Research Atlas (2019) and U.S. Census Bureau American Community Survey (2024 5-year estimates), no number is typed in by an editor. Figures for Dakota County, NE are computed from the joined Atlas and ACS records for FIPS 31043. See our editorial standards & corrections policy, the methodology behind these numbers, or report a data error. Data current as of 2026-06-23. Primary sources: USDA Food Access Research Atlas and Census ACS 5-year estimates.
Note: This page presents public USDA and Census data for informational purposes and is not professional advice. Figures reflect the cited dataset vintages and may differ from the most recent local conditions. How this data is sourced & verified.