Signature · 2 LILA tracts (28.6% of tracts)
Milam County, TX
Milam County's signature pressure is desert tracts: 2 LILA tracts (28.6% of the book) alongside 26.1% low-access.
- 26.1%
- low-access pop.
- 2
- food-desert tracts
- 11.2%
- on SNAP
- 26K
- residents (ACS 2024)
USDA FARA access plate
County Milam County, TX
LA-ELEVATED · ABOVE-NATIONAL · LILA-POCKET · SNAP-TYPICAL · VEH-OK · DENSITY-DENSE
- LA-ELEVATED 26.1% low-access
- ABOVE-NATIONAL +4.0 pts vs US
- LILA-POCKET 2 food-desert tracts
- SNAP-TYPICAL 11.2% SNAP
- VEH-OK 5.5% no vehicle
- DENSITY-DENSE 29% tracts LILA
Nearest low-access peer: Angelina County ( -0.1 pts)
The food-access picture
According to the USDA Food Access Research Atlas, Milam County ranks #1,208 of 3,079 U.S. counties by low-access share and #118 of 252 counties in TX (26.1% low-access; 2 food-desert tracts).
- #1,208
- national by low-access %
- #118
- in TX
- 6
- low-access tracts
- 3K
- 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 (28.6% of tracts) .
How Milam County compares nationally
Relative to the 3,133 U.S. counties with USDA food-access data, Milam County's 26.1% low-access share is elevated, higher than 61% of them and ranked #1,210 most-affected nationwide.
Milam County: USDA Food-Access Tier Breakdown
7 census tracts grouped by USDA classification · 2 LILA.
By USDA urbanicity classification, Milam County has 2 urban and 5 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.
Milam County low-access neighbourhood
Poles + nearest peers in Texas, not a full county-board reprint
- Throckmorton
Throckmorton 100%
100 % low-access
- Travis 26.4
Travis 26.4%
26.4 % low-access
- Eastland 26.3
Eastland 26.3%
26.3 % low-access
- Milam 26.1
Milam 26.1%
26.1 % low-access
- Angelina 26
Angelina 26%
26 % low-access
- Hardeman 25.8
Hardeman 25.8%
25.8 % low-access
- Rains 0
Rains 0%
0 % low-access
Food Access (USDA FARA 2019)
| Indicator | Value |
|---|---|
| Census Tracts | 7 |
| Atlas Population (2010 basis) | 24,757 |
| Low-Access Tracts | 6 |
| Food-Desert Tracts (low-income & low-access) | 2 |
| Low-Access Population | 6,465 |
| Low-Access Share | 26.1%above the national average |
| Low-Income & Low-Access Population | 2,824 |
Demographics & Assistance (Census ACS 2024)
| Indicator | Value |
|---|---|
| Population | 25,567 |
| Median Household Income | $66,141 |
| Poverty Rate | 12.9%near the national average |
| SNAP Households | 1,135 |
| SNAP Participation Rate | 11.2%near the national average |
| Households Without a Vehicle | 5.5%below the national average |
| Group-Quarters Population | 2.0% |
Thick SNAP store book in Milam County
Milam County has 29 stores currently authorized to accept SNAP (EBT) benefits, across 4 store categories. Convenience Store lead with 17 locations (59% of the total), followed by combination grocery/other.
Convenience Store · 17
- 7-eleven 41007h, cameron
- buckholts food mart, buckholts
- cefco 17, cameron
- cefco 3, cameron
- cefco 38, rockdale
- cefco 58, milano
- cefco 75, thorndale
- cameron food mart, cameron
- coats grocery & market, gause
- j & k grocery, thorndale
- munchies, rockdale
- murphy usa 7197, rockdale
- rockdale country corner, rockdale
- rockdale food mart, rockdale
- rockdale food mart & kitchen, rockdale
- smart stop, rockdale
- sunny food mart 01, cameron
Combination Grocery/Other · 8
- cvs/ pharmacy inc 7729, cameron
- dollar general 11196, thorndale
- dollar general 3282, cameron
- dollar general 3357, rockdale
- dollartree 9869, rockdale
- dollar general 22785, milano
- dollar general 25380, cameron
- family dollar 2601, cameron
Super Store · 3
- brookshire brothers 0019, rockdale
- brookshire brothers 0046, cameron
- walmart 280, rockdale
Supermarket · 1
- arlan's market #23, cameron
Source: USDA SNAP Retailer Locator (currently authorized stores, a live third population, not the 2019 Atlas or ACS 2024 snapshot above).
Other Counties in Texas
One of 253 counties in Texas, 6 are shown here.
Compare Milam County vs Anderson County → · All Texas counties →
Nationwide peers for Milam County's low-access or SNAP share
Two USDA/ACS-derived peer sets for Milam County, both outside Texas so the neighborhoods are not the same-state county list above.
Similar low-access share
Nearest low-access rates outside TX (26.1% here).
- Roosevelt County, MT · 26.1% low-access
- Roosevelt County, MT · 26.1% low-access
- Jasper County, MO · 26.1% low-access
- Jasper County, MO · 26.1% low-access
Similar SNAP participation
Nearest household SNAP rates outside TX (11.2% here).
- Jasper County, SC · 11.2% SNAP
- Jasper County, SC · 11.2% SNAP
- Thurston County, WA · 11.2% SNAP
- Thurston County, WA · 11.2% 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, Texas in context
Milam County sits inside Texas (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 Milam County, TX are computed from the joined Atlas and ACS records for FIPS 48331. 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.