Food Consumption

Understanding a community’s eating patterns and how those patterns relate to health outcomes provides valuable insights into the dynamic relationship between the community and the regional food system. These insights can support evidence-based planning across agriculture, public health, healthcare, and economic development, helping guide decisions about which types of foods are grown, how they are processed, and where they are made available.

The dashboards below present data on the types and quantities of food consumed, as well as the prevalence of health conditions that can be influenced by diet.

Questions to Consider:

  • Which types of foods are Central Texans consuming?

  • How does what is grown in Central Texas compare with what Central Texans are consuming?

  • How much are Central Texans spending on different types of food?

  • When purchasing food, which tradeoffs do households make within their budgets? (e.g., paying for medical care or housing instead of food)

  • What are the most common diet-related health conditions affecting Central Texans?

  • In which areas do community members experience poorer physical and mental health outcomes? Which food system interventions could address these outcomes?

  • Where are support services, such as nutrition education classes, being offered?

List of Dashboards

Continue scrolling to view the dashboards linked below or click on a link to visit a specific part of this page.

    • Household Spending on Food

    • Consumption vs. Production

    • Key Health Indicators

    • Poor Health Days (Mental and Physical Health)

    • Cost of Care

    • Nutrition Education Programs

TYPES OF FOOD CONSUMED
HEALTH OUTCOMES

Types of Food Consumed

Household Spending on Food

Nationwide, the percentage of household budgets spent on food has decreased steadily since the 1950s, from 20% to 10%, with a temporary sharp increase during the COVID-19 pandemic. Compared to other states’ per-capita food spending, Texas falls in the middle.

Some of these spending trends are likely related to increasing food prices. Beginning in 2020, food prices rose by 3.4%, followed by a 9.9% increase in 2022, when food price inflation reached its highest level in over 40 years. After 2023, food price growth began to slow, with increases of 2.3% in 2024 and 2.9% in 2025. Prices across food categories are expected to increase another 2.9% in 2026. Although these increases are lower than the peak inflation observed immediately after 2020, they build on several consecutive years of rapid price growth, resulting in a sustained increase in the share of household budgets spent on food.

Several factors have contributed to the increase in food prices observed after the COVID-19 pandemic, including supply chain issues exacerbated by the pandemic, severe weather events affecting agricultural production, and international conflicts influencing global commodity markets. Additionally, during this same time period, financial reports show that several large food corporations recorded historically high profits. Some analysts suggest that profit margin expansion may have been an additional factor contributing to the recent acceleration in food prices.

As food prices have risen, changes in household food‑spending patterns have also become more apparent. Within those total expenditures, spending on food at home (supermarket or grocery store spending) is falling after experiencing an upward trend during the early 2010s and through the first years of the COVID-19 pandemic. Conversely, expenditures on food away from home (mostly restaurant spending) are increasing, continuing an upward trend that was temporarily disrupted by the COVID-19 pandemic.

The following charts highlight how much households spend on food they eat at home and food they eat away from home. Expenditures on food at home are further categorized by type of food (note that all foods except “Dining Out” are consumed at home). “Other Food” includes bakery items and snacks, as well as other types of food not specified.

Highlights:

  • In 2025, Central Texas households spent 10.2% of their income on food, down from 10.6% in 2024. This is slightly lower than state and national averages (10.5% and 10.4%, respectively).

  • Two-thirds of Central Texas food dollars are spent on dining out and “Other Food,” while only 11% of food dollars are spent on produce.

  • The total dollar amount spent on food is highest in Travis and Williamson counties, likely influenced by higher wages and cost of living. However, when measured as a percentage of income, the highest spending burden is in Freestone County, at 11.3%.

Click on a metric button on the bottom right to toggle between “Gross Expenditures” and “% of Income” in the view. You must select a year every time you switch metrics. Filter by county using the filter at right.

Data Source: 2022-2024 5-Year American Community Surveys (ACS) and 2023-2025 Esri Consumer Spending Data

Refreshed: Annually. Dashboard last updated May 2026.

Consumption vs. Production

As a diverse and populous region, consumers in Central Texas have varying food preferences. While local production may not be able to realistically meet all the food needs and preferences of Central Texans, the charts below illustrate the relationship between local production and consumption. Placing consumption and production on the same scale allows for a better visual assessment of the gap between production and consumption in Central Texas.

  • Estimated Consumption chart (left side): Shows the estimated consumption of agricultural products in Central Texas. This includes all food community members purchase, not only what is produced locally.

  • Agricultural Sales chart (right side): Shows the amount of locally produced food for the same categories of agricultural products. The data are not meant to imply that production alone drives supply and demand mismatches—distribution, waste, and economic and physical access to food should also be considered. Note that this only includes food grown for human consumption, not all agricultural output.

Note on methodology: Comparing sales volume is an imperfect measure because it does not indicate the quantity of food that was purchased or sold and does not consider differences between agricultural sale prices and consumer prices. However, it provides a meaningful proxy for understanding regional self-sufficiency.

Highlights:

The data reveal a wide gap between food consumption and production throughout Central Texas, especially for produce and dairy products. This points to major economic and environmental impacts:

  • Economic: While overall production exceeds consumption in half of Central Texas counties, as a region, sales meet only 23.7% of consumption needs. This is due to large gaps in the counties with the highest consumption, including Travis, Hays, and Williamson counties. Reliance on external supply chains increases vulnerability to supply chain disruptions outside the region, posing a challenge for regional resilience.

  • Environmental: Most food consumed in Central Texas must travel further before it reaches its final customer, increasing transport-related emissions.

Filter data by county by selecting the county name on the filter to the right of the charts. Click on a census year to change the agricultural sales chart and gap/gap % values in the table. Click on a header in the table to sort by that column. Drag the circles up and down on the y-axis of the bar charts to adjust the y-axis.

Data Sources:

Refreshed:

  • Consumption: Annually

  • Sales: Every 5 years; next Census data expected in 2029

  • Dashboard last refreshed May 2026

Health Outcomes

Key Health Indicators

‍Dietary patterns are measurable predictors of long-term health outcomes in a community. These outcomes influence the vitality of the workforce and shape the long-term human and economic potential of the region.

Consuming nutritious foods is essential to a person’s overall health. The typical diet in the United States tends to be high in sodium and sugar and highly processed. The majority of Americans consume more sodium and more added sugar than the Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGAs) recommend, which can contribute to higher levels of diet-related diseases. The following dashboard displays Central Texas’ rates of obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and depression, all of which can be influenced by diet.

National data indicate that Texas’ prevalence of obesity (35.9%) and diabetes (13.0%) exceed national rates (34.2% and 12.0%, respectively). Heart disease is a leading cause of death in Texas and the top cause of death for most racial and ethnic groups nationwide. While the rate of reported mental illness, which includes but is not limited to depression, is lower in Texas than the national average (21.5% vs. 23.1% nationwide), it is trending upward.

A significant limitation of this dashboard is the lack of localized data for different demographic groups, which limits the ability to assess how these chronic conditions affect different populations within Central Texas. Adult obesity prevalence in Texas is higher among individuals who identify as Black (44%), American Indian or Alaska Native (44%), or Hispanic or Latino/a/e (38%), and lower among Asian (14%) and non-Hispanic White adults (34%). Similarly, national data show higher rates of death from heart disease among Black individuals. People who identify as Asian, Black, or Hispanic or Latino/a/e experience a higher prevalence of type 2 diabetes than White community members. Diabetes prevalence is also higher among individuals with lower educational attainment (13% among those with less than a high school education versus 7% among those with more than a high school education), among those with lower incomes (13% below 100% of the federal poverty level versus 5.5% at or above 500% of the federal poverty level), and among residents of nonmetropolitan areas (10% versus 8% in metropolitan areas). Nationwide, mental illness rates are highest among adults who identify as multiracial (35%) or White (25%) and lowest among adults who identify as Asian (17%).

Understanding where health outcomes are strongest and where they lag among Central Texans provides a foundation for informed, targeted strategies to improve individual health, strengthen regional resilience, enhance workforce productivity, and support the long-term economic stability of the region.

Highlights:

  • Rates of obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and depression vary greatly across Central Texas and within each county.

  • Nearly half of counties have higher rates for all four conditions than the state average, mostly in the northeastern and southeastern parts of the region (Bastrop, Caldwell, Falls, Freestone, Lee, Limestone, Llano, Milam, and San Saba counties).

  • Only Williamson County has lower-than-average rates for all four health conditions.

To toggle each health indicator layer off or on, open the “Layers” card on the left-hand side of the map, then click on the “eye” icon to the right of the layer name to either make that layer visible or hide it. View only one layer at a time. The default view is set on the “Obesity” layer.

In both the map and table, colors diverge from state averages: areas filled in pink or red are above the state average, while areas filled in light or dark blue are below the state average.

Data Source: CDC PLACES: Local Data for Better Health, 2025 release

Refreshed: Annually. Dashboard last updated February 2026.

Poor Health Days (Mental and Physical Health)

Mental and physical health are impacted by many different factors, including food security and nutrition. The map below shows self-reported poor mental or physical health by census tract. Locations of healthcare facilities and select food retail establishments are marked on the map. Healthcare facilities indicated below include hospitals, Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs), and retail-based clinics. Food retail establishments include supermarkets, convenience stores, and fast food restaurants.

Food insecurity is not only associated with higher incidences of poor physical health outcomes, but also mental health outcomes such as anxiety, depression, and mental distress. Over half of the calories adults in the U.S. consume are in the form of ultra-processed foods, which have been linked to depression, anxiety, and an increased number of poor mental health days. Eating more fruits and vegetables may help prevent and treat mental health conditions. More research is needed to better understand relationships and causality between food security, nutrition, and physical and mental health.

Healthcare facility locations are highlighted because geographic proximity to healthcare facilities may lead to improved overall health through increased use of preventive care. There are many other factors that affect access to healthcare, like having insurance and the level of coverage that insurance provides, as well as language access. Low-income communities and areas with high Black or Hispanic or Latino/a/e populations are more likely to have lower geographic access to healthcare facilities.

Select food retail establishments are displayed below due to associations between these types of establishments and health. For example, proximity to convenience stores has been associated with unhealthy eating patterns (low fruit and vegetable consumption and high consumption of sugary drinks, snacks, and fast food) among children. Increased grocery store density has been associated with a reduced number of poor mental health days, while increased fast food restaurant density has been associated with an increased number of poor mental health days.

Highlights:

  • Statewide, 13.9% of adults in Texas report frequent physical distress, meaning that their physical health was not good for 14 or more of the past 30 days. In terms of mental health, 17.3% of adults in Texas report frequent mental distress, meaning that their mental health was not good for 14 or more of the past 30 days.

  • Five counties have rates of both physical and mental distress that are higher than state averages, mostly in the northeast and southeast parts of the region (Caldwell, Falls, Freestone, Lee, Limestone).

  • Two-thirds of counties (13) have rates of physical distress that are higher than the state average, and all counties have at least one census tract that is higher than the state average. Travis and Williamson counties have the lowest rates at under 11%.

  • One-third of counties (8) have higher rates of mental distress than the state average. Blanco, Gillespie, and Llano counties have the lowest rates at under 15%. All counties except for Blanco, Fayette, Gillespie, and Mills have at least one census tract that is higher than the state average.

  • Looking at the healthcare and food retail environment surrounding census tracts with relatively high rates of mental and physical distress, there tend to be few supermarkets and healthcare facilities nearby.

To toggle each layer off or on, open the “Layers” card on the left-hand side of the map, then click on the “eye” icon to the right of the layer name to either make that layer visible or hide it. View either physical or mental health data one layer at a time, not overlaid. The default view is set on the “Poor Physical Health Days” layer.

In both the map and table, colors diverge from state averages: areas filled in pink or red are above the state average, while areas filled in light or dark blue are below the state average.

Data Sources:

Refreshed: Annually. Dashboard last updated April 2026.

Cost of Care

The health outcomes described in the dashboards above contribute greatly to the overall cost of healthcare. Almost half of Texas’ state budget goes towards healthcare, totaling nearly $43 billion per year. This high price tag has been partly attributed to the treatment of chronic diseases like diabetes and heart disease. Nationwide, the cost of diagnosed diabetes is nearly $413 billion, and the annual cost of heart disease exceeds $168 billion. Beyond specific health outcomes, food insecurity is associated with higher healthcare utilization, including more emergency room visits, hospital admissions, and longer hospital stays, and thus, higher healthcare costs. More research is needed to understand the relationships between and causality of these associations.

‍ The dashboard below shows average annual household healthcare expenditures in Central Texas. These amounts include health insurance; doctor, medical facility, or hospital visits; prescription and nonprescription drugs and vitamins; and medical supplies. For context, the national average is $6,197 per household as of 2024. This figure is higher in Texas, at $7,564. Additionally, healthcare services in Texas tend to be more expensive and therefore less utilized. A recent Episcopal Health Foundation survey found that 56% of Texans with insurance skip or postpone care because of high costs.

Highlights:

  • Average healthcare expenditures are higher overall than the state average in one-third of all counties, primarily in the Austin MSA and rural counties to the west (Williamson, Travis, Blanco, Llano, Gillespie, Fayette, Burnet, and Hays).

  • Every county except for Limestone and Falls is higher than the national average.

  • Williamson County has the highest average healthcare expenditures—nearly $2,000 above the state average per household.

In the map and table, colors diverge from the state average: areas filled in pink or red are above the state average, while areas filled in light or dark blue are below the state average.

Data Source: Census Business Builder, using 2024-2025 Esri Consumer Spending data

Refreshed: Annually. Data last updated June 2025. Dashboard last updated April 2026.

Nutrition Education Programs

Across Central Texas, several organizations provide free cooking and nutrition education classes, including Central Texas Food Bank, Sustainable Food Center, and Common Threads. These programs aim to provide recipes that are culturally familiar, affordable, nutritious, and practical for everyday life. They tend to prioritize reaching people with low incomes, individuals experiencing food insecurity, or communities with higher rates of diet-related disease.

Research shows that nutrition education programs improve diet quality by increasing consumption of fruits and vegetables and whole grains. Additionally, these programs strengthen knowledge, skills, and confidence around preparing nutritious meals, which may support more nutritious eating patterns. Over time, strategies like these can support a shift toward preventive healthcare.

There is opportunity to conduct research to better understand what motivates people to participate in these programs, as well as which barriers may limit participation. Expanding access to and participation in these programs is a practical strategy for improving community health outcomes in the region.

Central Texas Food Bank is compiling a list of nutrition education programs in Central Texas. Identifying additional programs operating across the region will help create a more complete understanding of Central Texas’ preventive health infrastructure. If you would like to add a program to the list, please contact the Research Team at Central Texas Food Bank.

< RETURN TO DASHBOARD
CONTINUE TO NEXT >