Signature · 29 SNAP-authorized stores
Lawrence County, AL
Lawrence County lands in the lower national band on low-access (12.4%); supermarket distance is less binding than in the upper band, though local tracts can still diverge.
- 12.4%
- low-access pop.
- 2
- food-desert tracts
- 15.1%
- on SNAP
- 33K
- residents (ACS 2024)
USDA FARA access plate
County Lawrence County, AL
LA-MODERATE · BELOW-NATIONAL · LILA-POCKET · SNAP-HEAVY · VEH-OK · DENSITY-MIXED
- LA-MODERATE 12.4% low-access
- BELOW-NATIONAL -9.7 pts vs US
- LILA-POCKET 2 food-desert tracts
- SNAP-HEAVY 15.1% SNAP
- VEH-OK 4.4% no vehicle
- DENSITY-MIXED 22% tracts LILA
Nearest low-access peer: Butler County ( -0.4 pts)
Lower-band low-access
Lawrence County lands in the lower national band (12.4%, #2,310 of 3,079); local tracts can still diverge from the county mean.
- #2,310
- national by low-access %
- #47
- in AL
- 3
- low-access tracts
- 2K
- food-desert residents
Lower-band county means still leave tract outliers on the table below.
Signature read: 29 SNAP-authorized stores .
How Lawrence County compares nationally
Lawrence County lands in the middle of the national distribution: a 12.4% low-access share that beats 26% of the 3,133 U.S. counties with USDA data (rank #2,314).
Lawrence County's lower-band USDA tier split
9 census tracts grouped by USDA classification · 2 LILA.
By USDA urbanicity classification, Lawrence County has 1 urban and 8 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.
Lawrence County vs nearby low low-access peers
Poles + nearest peers in Alabama, not a full county-board reprint
- Bullock
Bullock 68.5%
68.5 % low-access
- Cherokee 13.5
Cherokee 13.5%
13.5 % low-access
- Covington 12.9
Covington 12.9%
12.9 % low-access
- Lawrence 12.4
Lawrence 12.4%
12.4 % low-access
- Butler 12
Butler 12%
12 % low-access
- Washington 11.2
Washington 11.2%
11.2 % low-access
- DeKalb 0
DeKalb 0%
0 % low-access
FARA 2019 · lower low-access
| Indicator | Value |
|---|---|
| Census Tracts | 9 |
| Atlas Population (2010 basis) | 34,339 |
| Low-Access Tracts | 3 |
| Food-Desert Tracts (low-income & low-access) | 2 |
| Low-Access Population | 4,275 |
| Low-Access Share | 12.4%well below the national average |
| Low-Income & Low-Access Population | 1,839 |
Demographics & Assistance (Census ACS 2024)
| Indicator | Value |
|---|---|
| Population | 33,276 |
| Median Household Income | $66,071 |
| Poverty Rate | 13.3%near the national average |
| SNAP Households | 2,059 |
| SNAP Participation Rate | 15.1%above the national average |
| Households Without a Vehicle | 4.4%well below the national average |
| Group-Quarters Population | 0.7% |
Thick SNAP store book in Lawrence County
Lawrence County has 29 stores currently authorized to accept SNAP (EBT) benefits, across 4 store categories. Combination Grocery/Other lead with 15 locations (52% of the total), followed by convenience store.
Combination Grocery/Other · 15
- cvs 4931, moulton
- dollar general 11204, courtland
- dollar general 1673, moulton
- dollar general 6214, town creek
- dollar general 8586, trinity
- dollar general 10080, town creek
- dollar general 11500, mount hope
- dollar general 13273, moulton
- dollar general 15555, hillsboro
- dollar general 20284, moulton
- dollar general 22233, danville
- dollar general 24038, russellville
- dollar general 31197, moulton
- dollar tree 7009, moulton
- family dollar 12811, town creek
Convenience Store · 11
- al omari inc, hillsboro
- alia inc, moulton
- court street minimart 1, moulton
- food mart stop inc, town creek
- hatton enterprises, town creek
- highway 24 citgo inc, moulton
- murphy usa 7571, moulton
- new hope enterprises inc, trinity
- quik mart 1, town creek
- raceway, moulton
- vulcan food mart, russellville
Super Store · 2
- gateway foodland inc, moulton
- walmart supercenter 394, moulton
Seafood Specialty · 1
- pond pure seafood & meats llc, moulton
Source: USDA SNAP Retailer Locator (currently authorized stores, a live third population, not the 2019 Atlas or ACS 2024 snapshot above).
Other Counties in Alabama
One of 66 counties in Alabama, 6 are shown here.
Compare Lawrence County vs Autauga County → · All Alabama counties →
Counties near Lawrence County's lower low-access or SNAP band
Two USDA/ACS-derived peer sets for Lawrence County, both outside Alabama so the neighborhoods are not the same-state county list above.
Similar low-access share
Nearest low-access rates outside AL (12.4% here).
- Wright County, IA · 12.4% low-access
- Wright County, IA · 12.4% low-access
- Pope County, MN · 12.4% low-access
- Pope County, MN · 12.4% low-access
Similar SNAP participation
Nearest household SNAP rates outside AL (15.1% here).
- Carroll County, IL · 15.1% SNAP
- Carroll County, IL · 15.1% SNAP
- Wayne County, IN · 15.1% SNAP
- Wayne County, IN · 15.1% 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.
Lawrence County inside a lower low-access state context
Lawrence County sits inside Alabama (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 Lawrence County, AL are computed from the joined Atlas and ACS records for FIPS 01079. 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.