The Delta Food Outlets Study was an observational study designed to assess the nutritional environments of 5 towns located in the Lower Mississippi Delta region of Mississippi. It was an ancillary study to the Delta Healthy Sprouts Project and therefore included towns in which Delta Healthy Sprouts participants resided and that contained at least one convenience (corner) store, grocery store, or gas station. Data were collected via electronic surveys between March 2016 and September 2018 using the Nutrition Environment Measures Survey (NEMS) tools. Survey scores for the NEMS Corner Store, NEMS Grocery Store, and NEMS Restaurant were computed using modified scoring algorithms provided for these tools via SAS software programming. Because the towns were not randomly selected and the sample sizes are relatively small, the data may not be generalizable to all rural towns in the Lower Mississippi Delta region of Mississippi. Dataset one (NEMS-C) contains data collected with the NEMS Corner (convenience) Store tool. Dataset two (NEMS-G) contains data collected with the NEMS Grocery Store tool. Dataset three (NEMS-R) contains data collected with the NEMS Restaurant tool.

Frontier and Remote Area (FAR) codes provide a statistically-based, nationally-consistent, and adjustable definition of territory in the U.S. characterized by low population density and high geographic remoteness. To assist in providing policy-relevant information about conditions in sparsely settled, remote areas of the U.S. to public officials, researchers, and the general public, ERS has developed ZIP-code-level frontier and remote (FAR) area codes. The aim is not to provide a single definition. Instead, it is to meet the demand for a delineation that is both geographically detailed and adjustable within reasonable ranges, in order to be usefully applied in diverse research and policy contexts. This initial set, based on urban-rural data from the 2000 decennial census, provides four separate FAR definition levels, ranging from one that is relatively inclusive (18 million FAR residents) to one that is more restrictive (4.8 million FAR residents).

Note: Updates to this data product are discontinued. The PIZA codes index small geographic areas (the contiguous 48 States divided up into five-kilometer grid cells) according to the size and proximity of population concentrations. Widespread conversion of rural lands to urban uses has drawn attention at all levels of government. To provide information useful for projections of future changes in land use, ERS has created a system to classify remaining farmland into "population-interaction zones for agriculture" (PIZA). These zones represent areas of agricultural land use in which urban-related activities (residential, commercial, and industrial) affect the economic and social environment of agriculture. In these zones, interactions between urban-related population and farm production activities tend to increase the value of farmland, change the production practices and enterprises of farm operators, and elevate the probability that farmland will be converted to urban-related uses.

Note: Updates to this data product are discontinued. Over 1 in 4 rural children are living in families that are poor, according to the official poverty measure, up from 1 in 5 in 1999, but this change was uneven across the rural landscape. Counties with high vulnerability to child poverty, those with both low young adult education levels and high proportions of children in single-parent families, were generally the most hard-hit by the recession of the past decade and experienced substantial increases in their already high child poverty rates. Along with the recession, an increase in rural children in single-parent households, continuing from the 1990s, was a major contributor to the rise in child poverty after 2000. Three factors that shape the geography of high and increasing rural child poverty are explored below: economic conditions, young adult education levels, and family structure. This collection of maps complements the July 2015 Amber Waves feature, Understanding the Geography of Growth in Rural Child Poverty.

Note: Updates to this data product are discontinued. Dozens of definitions are currently used by Federal and State agencies, researchers, and policymakers. The ERS Rural Definitions data product allows users to make comparisons among nine representative rural definitions. Methods of designating the urban periphery range from the use of municipal boundaries to definitions based on counties. Definitions based on municipal boundaries may classify as rural much of what would typically be considered suburban. Definitions that delineate the urban periphery based on counties may include extensive segments of a county that many would consider rural. We have selected a representative set of nine alternative rural definitions and compare social and economic indicators from the 2000 decennial census across the nine definitions. We chose socioeconomic indicators (population, education, poverty, etc.) that are commonly used to highlight differences between urban and rural areas.

Rural Development Disaster Assistance Declarations - April30Ver2

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for April 2015.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for April 2016.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for August 2015.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for August 2016.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for December 2015.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for February 2015.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for February 2016.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for January 2015.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for January 2016.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for January 2017.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for July 2015.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for July 2016.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for June 2015.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for June 2016.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for March 2015.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for March 2016.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for May 2015.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for May 2016.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for November 2015.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for November 2016.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for October 2015.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for October 2016.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for September 2015.

In accordance with the Federal Funding Accountability and Transparency Act of 2006 (FFATA) and the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA), this downloadable file identifies Rural Development non-ARRA program obligations for September 2016.

Rural Water Programme - May 2015 Allocations GWS- Group Water scheme DBO- Design Build Operate The cost of the rural water scheme per county for May 2015.

The rural-urban commuting area codes (RUCA) classify U.S. census tracts using measures of urbanization, population density, and daily commuting from the decennial census. The most recent RUCA codes are based on data from the 2000 decennial census. The classification contains two levels. Whole numbers (1-10) delineate metropolitan, micropolitan, small town, and rural commuting areas based on the size and direction of the primary (largest) commuting flows. These 10 codes are further subdivided to permit stricter or looser delimitation of commuting areas, based on secondary (second largest) commuting flows. The approach errs in the direction of more codes, providing flexibility in combining levels to meet varying definitional needs and preferences. The 1990 codes are similarly defined. However, the Census Bureau's methods of defining urban cores and clusters changed between the two censuses. And, census tracts changed in number and shapes. The 2000 rural-urban commuting codes are not directly comparable with the 1990 codes because of these differences. An update of the Rural-Urban Commuting Area Codes is planned for late 2013.

The 2013 Rural-Urban Continuum Codes form a classification scheme that distinguishes metropolitan counties by the population size of their metro area, and nonmetropolitan counties by degree of urbanization and adjacency to a metro area. The official Office of Management and Budget (OMB) metro and nonmetro categories have been subdivided into three metro and six nonmetro categories. Each county in the U.S. is assigned one of the 9 codes. This scheme allows researchers to break county data into finer residential groups, beyond metro and nonmetro, particularly for the analysis of trends in nonmetro areas that are related to population density and metro influence. The Rural-Urban Continuum Codes were originally developed in 1974. They have been updated each decennial since (1983, 1993, 2003, 2013), and slightly revised in 1988. Note that the 2013 Rural-Urban Continuum Codes are not directly comparable with the codes prior to 2000 because of the new methodology used in developing the 2000 metropolitan areas. See the Documentation for details and a map of the codes. An update of the Rural-Urban Continuum Codes is planned for mid-2023.

State fact sheets provide information on population, income, education, employment, federal funds, organic agriculture, farm characteristics, farm financial indicators, top commodities, and exports, for each State in the United States. Links to county-level data are included when available.

Locations and characteristics of projects that have received USDA Rural Development Community Facilities Loans, Grants, and Guaranteed Loans. Includes latitude and longitude coordinates, facility name and address, NAICS Code, funding type, obligation date and amount, total development cost, borrower name and type, and more

This dataset provides loan-level information on when USDA Section 514 and 515 properties are projected to pay off their loans and exit USDA’s Multi-Family Housing program. Includes estimated property exit year, whether the loan is prepay eligible and when, loan amount, original loan term and remaining term days, borrower characteristics, property location and characteristics, and more.

This data is used to determine eligibility for certain USDA Single Family Housing and Multi-Family Housing loan and grant programs.

This data is used to determine eligibility for certain USDA RBS loan and grant programs.

This data is used to determine eligibility for certain USDA Intermediary Relending Programs.

This data is used to determine eligibility for certain USDA Water and Environmental Programs.

Data provides current information regarding single family homes and ranches for sale by the U.S. Federal Government. These previously owned properties are for sale by public auction or other method depending on the property.

Data provides current information regarding single family homes, and ranches for sale by the U.S. Federal Government. These previously owned properties are for sale by public auction or other method depending on the property.

Borrower, property and loan characteristics for all active Section 502 Guaranteed Loans, aggregated by Congressional District. Borrower characteristics include: income, debt-income ratio, race, ethnicity, marital status, dependents, household size, first-time homebuyer status, age and disability status. Property characteristics include: project type (PUD, Condo, Coop), housing structure (detached, attached), manufactured home, living area. Loan characteristics include: loan request amount, loan amount, loan-to-value ratio, and appraised value.Property characteristics include: project type (PUD, Condo, Coop), housing structure (detached, attached), manufactured home, living area. Loan characteristics include: loan request amount, loan amount, loan-to-value ratio, and appraised value.

Borrower, property and loan characteristics for all active Section 502 Guaranteed Loans, aggregated by county. Borrower characteristics include: income, debt-income ratio, race, ethnicity, marital status, dependents, household size, first-time homebuyer status, age and disability status. Property characteristics include: project type (PUD, Condo, Coop), housing structure (detached, attached), manufactured home, living area. Loan characteristics include: loan request amount, loan amount, loan-to-value ratio, and appraised value.

Active loan characteristics in USDA RD Section 538 Multifamily Guaranteed Loan program, including loan, property, and community characteristics. Loan characteristics include obligation fiscal year, lender, borrower, loan closing date, loan amount, total development cost, loan to cost ratio, and federal LIHTC tax credit indicator. Property characteristics include location and address, colonias or tribal location indicator, EZ/EC location indicator, project size, project type, construction type, number of units by bedroom size, and average contract rent by bedroom size. Community characteristics include the area population and median household income at time of obligation.

Active borrower characteristics aggregated at the Congressional District level of geography, including number of borrowers, income levels, race, ethnicity, marital status, number of children in household, and average household size.

Active borrower characteristics aggregated at the county level of geography, including number of borrowers, income levels, race, ethnicity, marital status, number of children in household, and average household size.

Active loan characteristics aggregated at the Congressional District level of geography, including number of loans, average loan amount, average loan amount by 5 year ranges, number of loans to Section 523 Mutual Self Help Housing program participants, and number of leveraged loans.

Active loan characteristics aggregated at the county level of geography, including number of loans, average loan amount, average loan amount by 5 year ranges, number of loans to Section 523 Mutual Self Help Housing program participants, and number of leveraged loans.

The 2013 Urban Influence Codes form a classification scheme that distinguishes metropolitan counties by population size of their metro area, and nonmetropolitan counties by size of the largest city or town and proximity to metro and micropolitan areas. The standard Office of Management and Budget (OMB) metro and nonmetro categories have been subdivided into two metro and 10 nonmetro categories, resulting in a 12-part county classification. This scheme was originally developed in 1993. This scheme allows researchers to break county data into finer residential groups, beyond metro and nonmetro, particularly for the analysis of trends in nonmetro areas that are related to population density and metro influence. An update of the Urban Influence Codes is planned for mid-2023.