Signature · 2 LILA tracts (50% of tracts)
Tallahatchie County, MS
Tallahatchie County's signature pressure is desert tracts: 2 LILA tracts (50% of the book) alongside 51.2% low-access.
- 51.2%
- low-access pop.
- 2
- food-desert tracts
- 23.0%
- on SNAP
- 12K
- residents (ACS 2024)
USDA FARA access plate
County Tallahatchie County, MS
LA-SEVERE · ABOVE-NATIONAL · LILA-POCKET · SNAP-HEAVY · VEH-GAP · DENSITY-DENSE
- LA-SEVERE 51.2% low-access
- ABOVE-NATIONAL +29.1 pts vs US
- LILA-POCKET 2 food-desert tracts
- SNAP-HEAVY 23.0% SNAP
- VEH-GAP 10.2% no vehicle
- DENSITY-DENSE 50% tracts LILA
Nearest low-access peer: Bolivar County ( -0.3 pts)
Upper-band low-access
Tallahatchie County sits in the upper national band (51.2%, #190 of 3,079) with 2 LILA tracts.
- #190
- national by low-access %
- #3
- in MS
- 2
- low-access tracts
- 5K
- food-desert residents
Upper-band counties often pair elevated low-access with clustered LILA tracts. Low access = >1 mile urban / >10 miles rural.
Signature read: 2 LILA tracts (50% of tracts) .
How Tallahatchie County compares nationally
Tallahatchie County sits among the nation's most food-access-constrained counties: its 51.2% low-access share outpaces 94% of the 3,133 U.S. counties with USDA data, ranking #190 most-affected nationwide.
Tallahatchie County's elevated USDA tier split
4 census tracts grouped by USDA classification · 2 LILA.
Tallahatchie County is mostly rural by USDA tract type (3 rural, 1 urban), so most tracts are held to the 10-mile test and only the 1 urban tract faces the 1-mile one.
Tallahatchie County vs nearby high low-access peers
Poles + nearest peers in Mississippi, not a full county-board reprint
- Quitman
Quitman 90.1%
90.1 % low-access
- Carroll
Carroll 56.1%
56.1 % low-access
- Tallahatchie
Tallahatchie 51.2%
51.2 % low-access
- Bolivar
Bolivar 50.9%
50.9 % low-access
- DeSoto
DeSoto 48.7%
48.7 % low-access
- Hancock
Hancock 43.5%
43.5 % low-access
- Covington 0
Covington 0%
0 % low-access
FARA 2019 · elevated low-access
| Indicator | Value |
|---|---|
| Census Tracts | 4 |
| Atlas Population (2010 basis) | 15,378 |
| Low-Access Tracts | 2 |
| Food-Desert Tracts (low-income & low-access) | 2 |
| Low-Access Population | 7,876 |
| Low-Access Share | 51.2%well above the national average |
| Low-Income & Low-Access Population | 4,826 |
ACS 2024 · elevated SNAP band
| Indicator | Value |
|---|---|
| Population | 11,764 |
| Median Household Income | $37,466 |
| Poverty Rate | 24.6%well above the national average |
| SNAP Households | 990 |
| SNAP Participation Rate | 23.0%well above the national average |
| Households Without a Vehicle | 10.2%above the national average |
| Group-Quarters Population | 4.9% |
SNAP retailers in Tallahatchie County
Tallahatchie County has 11 stores currently authorized to accept SNAP (EBT) benefits, across 4 store categories. Convenience Store lead with 6 locations (55% of the total), followed by combination grocery/other.
Where the store book sits, by town
4 towns share the 11 authorized stores; Charleston holds 55% of them. 3 of the 4 towns have no grocery-grade outlet, only convenience or dollar/combination stores: Tutwiler, Webb, Scobey.
| Town | SNAP stores | Grocery-grade |
|---|---|---|
| Charleston | 6 | 1 |
| Tutwiler | 2 | none |
| Webb | 2 | none |
| Scobey | 1 | none |
Convenience Store · 6
- bloodworth's 4-way convenient stop 1, scobey
- double quick 49, tutwiler
- farmer one stop inc, charleston
- gpm 17243, charleston
- little market and deli inc, charleston
- onestop mini mart 1, webb
Combination Grocery/Other · 3
- dollar general 7983, charleston
- dollar general 25382, tutwiler
- family dollar 3303, charleston
Small Grocery Store · 1
- farmacy marketplace, webb
Supermarket · 1
- supervalue 2189, charleston
Source: USDA SNAP Retailer Locator (currently authorized stores, a live third population, not the 2019 Atlas or ACS 2024 snapshot above).
Other Counties in Mississippi
One of 81 counties in Mississippi, 6 are shown here.
Compare Tallahatchie County vs Adams County → · All Mississippi counties →
Counties near Tallahatchie County's elevated low-access or SNAP band
Two USDA/ACS-derived peer sets for Tallahatchie County, both outside Mississippi so the neighborhoods are not the same-state county list above.
Similar low-access share
Nearest low-access rates outside MS (51.2% here).
- Hamilton County, IN · 51.3% low-access
- Camden County, GA · 51.3% low-access
- Barnstable County, MA · 51.0% low-access
- Hendricks County, IN · 51.5% low-access
Similar SNAP participation
Nearest household SNAP rates outside MS (23.0% here).
- Wayne County, MI · 23.0% SNAP
- Powell County, KY · 23.0% SNAP
- Meriwether County, GA · 23.0% SNAP
- Marlboro County, SC · 23.0% 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.
Mississippi among East South Central states
Mississippi ranks 2nd of 4 East South Central states by population-weighted low-access (26.4%). Tallahatchie County, at 51.2%, runs 24.8 pts above the Mississippi rate.
- Tennessee 27.2%
- Mississippi 26.4%
- Alabama 24.5%
- Kentucky 19.8%
Source: USDA Economic Research Service, Food Access Research Atlas (2019), population-weighted by state; divisions per the U.S. Census Bureau. National state map
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 Tallahatchie County, MS are computed from the joined Atlas and ACS records for FIPS 28135. 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.