Food Access” in Suburban Cook County

March 2012Daniel R. Block, Ph.D.

John Bisegerwa

Kristin Bowen

Brent Lowe

John Owens

Noah Sager

Fred Ssepuuya

Food Access

Cook County Suburbanin

Prepared by the Chicago State University Neighborhood Assistance Center

Daniel R. Block, Ph.D. 1

John Bisegerwa 2

Kristin Bowen 2

Brent Lowe 2

John Owens 2

Noah Sager 2

Fred Ssepuuya 2

1 Director and Chief Writer

2 Cartography, Data Collection and Data Entry

This report was prepared by the Fred Blum Neighborhood Assistance Center at Chicago State University, directed by Dr. Daniel Block. Dr. Block directed and wrote the assessment report and performed much of the analysis. Noah Sager performed GIS analysis and created most of the maps. Data collection, geocoding, and mapping were performed by John Bisegerwa, Kristin Bowen, Brent Lowe, John Owens, and Fred Ssepuuya.

Made possible through funding from the Department of Health and Human Services: Communities Putting Prevention to Work (CPPW). CPPW is a joint project between the Cook County Department of Public Health and the Public Health Institute of Metropolitan Chicago.

Food Access

Cook County Suburbanin

March 2012

Table of Contents

Executive Summary 1Introduction 4Methods 6Analysis 8Results 10

County Maps: Supermarkets and Groceries 10Regional Maps 15Maps of Other Food Sources: Chain Convenience; Corner Stores; Fast Food; Chain Drug Stores; Liquor Stores; Alternative Food Sources 20Population per Store 26Distance to the Nearest Store 27The Relationship between Distance to the Nearest Store and Population Demographics 28

Limitations 30Conclusion 31

Table of Tables1: Store Type Definitions 342: Food Access Location Counts and Population by Suburban Cook County Region 353: Distance in Miles to the Nearest Store by Demographic Quartile 364: Distance Indexes by Demographic Quartile 375: Correlations between Distance Index and Demographics 386: Number of Stores and Sites by Municipality, 2011 397: Mean Miles to the Nearest Store or Food Access Site, Suburban Cook County Municipalities, 2011 418: Distance Index “Z” Scores, Suburban Cook County Municipalities, 2011 439: Low Food Access by Municipality, Cook County, 2011 45

Table of Maps1: Chain Food Stores in Suburban Cook County 112: Chain and Independent Food Stores in Suburban Cook County 123: Percent of Population with “Low Food Access” in Suburban Cook County 134: Low Food Access by Census Block Group 145: North East Region Food Stores 156: North West Region Food Stores 167: South Region Food Stores 178: South West Region Food Stores 189: West Region Food Stores 1910: Chain Convenience Stores 2011: Corner Stores 2112: Fast Food Restaurants 2213: Chain Drug Stores 2314: Liquor Stores 2415: Alternative Food Sources 25

IntroductionStudies across the US have recently shown that certain areas, mainly with high percentages of minorities and low income households, have poor access to stores that sell a variety of healthy foodsi,ii,iii. These foods, including fruits and vegetables, are important for maintaining health and preventing a wide variety of chronic diseases and conditions, such as diabetes, cancers, and heart disease.

Since chronic diseases are a leading cause of illness and death in suburban Cook County, the Cook County Department of Public Health (CCDPH) commissioned this assessment. The purpose was to gain a deeper understanding of food access for residents and to identify which communities may need support to increase food access.

MethodologyThe assessment includes maps of a wide variety of stores that sell foods used to analyze access to supermarkets and determine areas that have reduced access to healthy foods. Specifically, the analysis of store access patterns involved mapping store locations followed by summarization of the map patterns through geographic analysis and a comparison of these patterns to demographic variables such as race and home ownership. Numerous resources were used to identify locations of grocery stores, chain convenience stores, chain drug stores, liquor stores, warehouse stores and supercenters, farmers’ markets, community and school gardens, and farm stands. The analysis also included counts of store type by municipality and region, calculating the distance to the nearest store for each Census block group within a municipality. The distance index created uses population density and demographic variables to calculate of the numbers and locations of people living in low food access areas.

This assessment defines low food access as a U. S. Census block group that meets two criteria:

1) Distance: the average distance for residents is at least one mile to the nearest supermarket, supercenter or warehouse store (such as Jewel, Tony’s, Walmart, or Costco), and

2) Income: the median household income is below Cook County’s median household income ($52,539 in 2009)

FindingsAn estimated 351,024 people live in low food access areas in suburban Cook County, accounting for about 14.5% of the population. The assessment also identified a number of themes and characteristics within suburban Cook County that highlight differences in access by region, by race and ethnicity, to different store types, and by community economic characteristics.

Executive Summary

1

2

Differences in Access by Region

• Thesouthregionhastheleastaccess.Overall,thesouthregionofsuburbanCook County has the fewest full service chain supermarkets per person, the highest concentration of discount chains as well as independent groceries, and the lowest concentration of specialty stores. In addition, several municipalities in the south have no full-service grocery stores at all, including Burnham, Ford Heights, Phoenix, Robbins, and Thornton.

• Thenorthregionhasthegreatestaccess.Discountchainsaremuchlessconcentrated in the northeast and northwest region than elsewhere. The concentration of all supermarkets (including chains and independents—not including discount) is highest in the northeast areas but otherwise is fairly similar across the area. What varies is the store type. Farmers’ markets, school and community gardens, and specialty chains are more concentrated in northeast Cook County.

• PocketsoflowfoodaccessexistthroughoutsuburbanCookCounty.Rosemont, by the definition used, has low food access. This may seem surprising, but it is part of a larger low-access area surrounding O’ Hare airport that includes parts of Schiller Park, unincorporated Elk Grove Township, and Franklin Park. Isolated portions of north and northwest suburbs, in particular Prospect Heights, Schaumburg, and unincorporated Northfield Township, also have low food access areas.

• Manypeoplewithlowfoodaccesswerefoundinhigherpopulatedcommunities, even though a smaller percentage of their overall population, in many cases, had low food access. These communities are located predominantly in the south suburbs. • Harvey(17,395) • CalumetCity(15,925) • BlueIsland(14,537) • Riverdale(14,007) • Cicero(12,991)

Justice, Lansing, Schaumburg, Park Forest, and Schiller Park also each have 10,000 or more people living in low food access areas.

Differences in Access by Race and EthnicityAreas with higher percentages of African-Americans are further from most kinds of supermarkets than other communities, in particular full-service and specialty chains. However, African-American communities are generally closer to chain discount stores (Aldi and Save-a-Lot).

Communities with high percentages of Hispanic residents may be further from chain supermarkets, but are generally closer than other communities to independent groceries, corner stores, discount chains, fast food, liquor stores, and warehouse stores. However, they are further from farmers’ markets.

Differences in Access to Different Store Types In general, the location of farmers markets, specialty chains, and discount chains correlate most closely with demographics, varying by income and race. Farmers markets and specialty chains are closer to upper-income and white communities, while discount chain locations are more associated with lower-income and non-white communities. However, chain drug stores, liquor stores, and fast food restaurants are generally fairly evenly distributed throughout the region.

Differences in Access by Economics and Population DensityAreas with high percentages of rental housing generally are closer to chain drug stores, corner stores, independent and all groceries, fast food outlets, and liquor stores. The somewhat isolated industrial communities of Hodgkins and McCook lack food access, but have small populations. Surrounding communities, including Justice, Summit, and Lyons, also have relatively high percents of the population with low access.

ConclusionsThe goal of this assessment was to present patterns. It reveals differing levels of food access between regions of suburban Cook County, and suggests that these patterns are related to race, income, home ownership, and the industrial nature of a community. The assessment finds that food access in many suburbs, particularly in southern Cook County, is low and identifies pockets of low food access throughout the county. These results can be used to focus efforts within specific municipalities, as appropriate.

Food access is influenced by issues such as race, industrial investment, community priorities, and broader economic planning emphases. While this assessment classifies particular areas as having low food access, other variables that moderate the impact of living further from a full-service food store, such as road infrastructure, car ownership, public transportation access, and resident travel patterns need to be considered.

3

4

The presence of quality grocery stores in a community is also associated with other determinants of community health, such as jobs, social interaction, and overall economic viabilityv. In response, government bodies at all levels have created programs that help fund the building of new supermarkets or improvement of existing stores in low food access communities.

Diet and nutrition are contributors to the leading causes of death in suburban Cook County. However, little has been known about access to healthy food in the suburbs. Previous food access studies have almost entirely ignored suburban areas, except as comparisons to deprived central city zones. This is unfortunate because about half of Cook County’s residents live in the suburbs and suburban residents may have much lower access to public transportation than Chicago residents. If areas of relatively low food access are present, vulnerable populations such as the poor, elderly, and those lacking access to transportation might have difficulty accessing healthy food.

“Finding Food in Chicago and the Suburbs,” a 2008 report on food access in the six-county Chicago metropolitan area, found a number of areas of low food access in Chicago’s suburbs. Particular areas of concern included the Maywood, Riverdale, and Calumet City/Lansing areas. As in Chicago itself, these low food access areas were predominantly African-American. In many cases, communities in these areas have since worked to bring full service grocery stores into their neighborhoods, but the success, or lack thereof, of these efforts has yet to be documented. Food access research is also about what is in areas with poor food access. Often, low food access communities do have large numbers of smaller “corner” stores, as well as fast-food restaurants. In addition, innovative solutions to improving food access, such as implementation of farmers’ markets, community gardens, and farm stands, have not been mapped for suburban Cook County.

Finally, low food access is about more than access to one kind of store. Residents often use many kinds of stores, including traditional full-service supermarkets, warehouse stores such

Introduction

Access to healthy food is an area of great focus among public health practitioners,

urban planners, and community activists. So called “food deserts,” communities with

poor access to supermarkets, have been identified in cities throughout the United

States as well as in rural areas. While the direct relationship between food access and

health is still under investigation, low food access has been found to correlate with

higher rates of chronic disease including cardiovascular disease, diabetes and cancer.

In addition, the lack of consumption of healthy foods increases one’s risk of developing

chronic diseases and conditionsiv.

as Sam’s Club, discount stores such as Aldi, independent stores specializing in ethnic foods, and nearby convenience or corner stores, to provision their familyvi. These various store types often specialize in particular kinds of grocery products, and may price these products differently based on their store function and locationvii,viii,ix. For instance, when compared to chain supermarkets, fresh produce and meats tend to be cheaper at independent and ethnic oriented grocery stores while packaged goods are often more expensive. Given thiscomplexity, it is important to study access to a variety of store types. In addition, the number of alternative food sites, such as school gardens and farmers’ markets, has grown throughout Cook County. The geographic distribution of all of these sites is mapped for the first time for suburban Cook County through this assessment.

This assessment is a base-line survey of food access in suburban Cook County. It contains maps and analyses of patterns of access to a variety of store types, including retail groceries, chain drug stores, liquor stores, fast-food restaurants, as well as alternative agricultural retail and production sites. A basic statistical analysis is presented of these data sets by population density, race and ethnicity, and related demographic and economic measures.

The purpose of this assessment is to gain a deeper understanding of food access for residents of suburban Cook County through mapping and analysis of themes present in low-food access communities. In addition, this report will help to identify which communities may need support to increase food access and further promote healthy eating.

5

6

Data CollectionStore location data can be difficult to compile. Stores open and close frequently, and often datasets are out of date almost as soon as they are created. Data are available on the internet, but internet sites often list old information. For instance, two or even three store names may be listed for the same address. The difficulty is figuring out which of those stores is currently open, if any. Data may also be purchased from data vendors, such as Dun and Bradstreet. While these datasets are good tools in building lists of stores, they often contain systematic errors. For instance, a small chain of supermarkets may be listed only by the address of its headquarters.

Given this situation, this assessment used a variety of resources to build store databases. The supermarket and grocery database, including chain and independent supermarkets, chain convenience stores, warehouse stores, and chain drug stores are rooted in the data collected for the Northeastern Illinois Community Food Security Assessment in 2007, funded by the Searle Funds of the Chicago Community Trust, that resulted in the 2008 Finding Food in Chicago and the Suburbs report. This database was then updated as follows.

Chain supermarkets, convenience stores, and drug stores were updated primarily by checking the 2007 database with company websites, adding new stores and removing those that have closed. In disputed cases, stores were called and/or checked online through additional web-sites that listed closed stores.

Independent and local chain supermarkets are more difficult to map because they often do not have websites. In addition, it is difficult to know a store’s size from its name. In this case, building the store database began by updating the 2007 data through web searches to identify new and closed stores. When disputes occurred stores were called to check if they were still open. In addition, a purchased Dun and Bradstreet dataset was utilized to cross- check this updated list. Finally, all new independent stores were visited using a short survey to classify stores by size. To qualify for the database, independents and small chains must carry fresh produce and meats, as well as a selection of dry goods, and have at least two checkout lanes. Stores were classified as small (2-4 checkouts); medium (5-7 checkouts); and large (8 checkouts and above).

Datasets that were not compiled for the 2007 study had to be created through other means. The fast food, liquor store, and corner store databases are based on a purchased Hoover’s (Dun and Bradstreet) data set. These datasets were then processed to increase accuracy. For fast food and liquor stores, additional chain locations were found on company websites and other websites based on the original lists. Fast food locations were then classified as national chains, local chains and independents. The corner store database consisted generally of small groceries (annual revenue below 2 million), with misclassified locations (such as grocery distributors) and stores included as small groceries in the independent store database removed. These databases were compiled for Cook County as a whole (including Chicago).

Methods

Finally, alternative food production and distribution sites, including farmers’ markets, school gardens, community gardens, and farm stands were gathered using data compiled by suburban Cook County Communities Putting Prevention to Work staff, through surveys and inquiries of suburban Cook County municipal governments, schools and school districts. Internet listings were also searched and verified by telephone or website. These datasets only include suburban Cook County locations.

The specific definition of each store type can greatly affect the geographic pattern seen on maps and in the analysis. Definitions of the data layers analyzed in this assessment are in the back of this book, under Tables.

7

Analysis

In this assessment, patterns were identified through multiple analyses. First, counts of

stores by municipality were calculated. These counts can be seen in Table 6. The

number of people served by each store in the municipality (population divided by store

count) is also reported. Store counts are flawed in their inability to account for

service to residents just beyond a municipal border. Despite this flaw, store counts were

used in this assessment because they are an easy way to compare communities and

are important for municipal planning.

To remedy the border issue with the store counts, the mean distance to the nearest site within each store type was calculated. To do this, a grid showing street network distance from all residential and mixed residential addresses was compiled using the 2005 Chicago Metropoli-tan Agency for Planning (CMAP) land use map. Mean distances were then calculated both by municipality and by census block group (the next smallest census geographic designation under census tracts). The results by municipality are reported in Table 7.

In Table 2, the store counts for particular data layers are compiled by county region. These regions are based on the Cook County Department of Public Health service regions, with the north region broken into east and west portions along the I-294 corridor.

Data by block group was the source for the statistical analyses. In Table 3, the mean distance to the nearest store, separated by quartiles of specific demographic variables, is shown. For each variable, all suburban Cook County block groups were ranked. A population stand-ardized mean was then calculated for the bottom 25% of the cases, the next 25%, etc. The population standardized mean is an average that takes into account the population of each area studied.

The difficulty with comparing distance to the nearest store over a large and varied area such as suburban Cook County is that, as was confirmed in the data analysis, distance to the near-est store is greatly related to the population density of the area. When the number of people per square mile rises, the distance to the nearest store generally drops. Tables 4, 5 and 8 show distance indexes that attempt to minimize the effects of population density so that munici-palities can be compared and the effects of other variables can be seen. This index was calcu-lated thusly: (Distance to Nearest Store)/(1/Log(Population Density).

The basic idea is that the distance is divided by the population density, but since distance and population density are inversely related (as one goes up the other goes down), 1/Population Density is used. Finally, since population density within the county varies exponentially, the log of population density is used. In Table 4, block group distance indexes have been calcu-lated by demographic quartile in the same manner that the distances in miles were in Table 3. This allows for better comparisons across categories.

8

In Table 8, the index by store type is shown by municipality. It is depicted using Z scores, which compare the index for each municipality to the average for all municipalities. Negative Z scores indicate that the score was below the mean, so the distance to the nearest store would be less than expected, while positive Z scores indicate that the score was above the mean, so greater than would be expected. Large Z scores are worrisome. The distance is much greater than would be expected given the population density of the municipality. On the chart, Z scores above 1.5 (further than the average) are in grey and Z scores below negative 1.0 (closer than the average) are in pink.

Table 5 shows correlations between the demographic variables and store types. Correlations show how two variables “move” together. When one increases the other may increase or decrease. The numbers shown are Pearson Correlation Coefficients. These vary from 1 (perfectly positively correlated—the two variable increase and decrease together) grey boxes are relationships that have scores of at least 0.1 (positively correlated) and are deemed statistically highly significant, meaning that the two variables match each other closely enough that a relationship is at least 99% assured. The pink boxes are similar, but negatively correlated. In Table 9, the approximate number of people living in low food access areas by municipality and unincorporated township areas is listed.

This data set was created by using a definition of low food access based on a combination of definitions used by the USDA and CMAP. The USDA urban area definition for a low food access area is a census region (in this case a block group) with a mean distance to the nearest supermarket of more than 1 mile and a median household income of less than 80% of the area’s median. CMAP uses a definition based on a distance index and a median household income lower than the region’s median.

As stated earlier, a low food access area for this assessment is defined as a block group with a mean distance to the nearest supermarket of one mile or more and a median household income less than $52,516, the median for Cook County as a whole in 2009. A supermarket here is defined by the “all supermarkets” store type, which includes chain, local chain, and independent supermarkets. Populations by municipality were calculated by calculating the sum of all low food access block groups with their centroids (geographic center of an area with uneven boundaries) in a municipality divided by the total population in the municipal-ity as calculated by the sum of all block groups with centroids in the municipality. This is an approximation, since block group boundaries do not always align with municipal boundaries.

Through this variety of analyses, both specific low food access communities and overall patterns of these communities, such as the relationship between race and income and store access, can be seen. Also, it should not be implied that this number of people are food insecure, but only that they are living in an area of relatively low food access. Food insecurity is when people don’t have enough nutritious food that is safe to eat without resorting to the use of food donations, scavenging, or stealing.

2229

10

The first two maps show supermarket and grocery locations in suburban Cook County.While such dot maps may be difficult to analyze at first, patterns do appear which are later backed by the statistical analysis. These maps are followed by maps identifying locations of low food access throughout suburban Cook County.

Results

County Maps: Supermarkets and Groceries

This section begins with maps of the locations of the different food access locations

throughout suburban Cook County. Patterns of access are identified and described.

The first maps described are county-level maps of chain and independent grocery store

locations. Maps of each region of suburban Cook County are also included to better

highlight food access patterns within each region. These maps are followed by maps

showing the locations of low food access areas by municipality and census block group.

Additional maps included in this section cover locations patterns of chain convenience

stores, corner stores, fast food restaurants, chain drug stores, liquor stores, and

alternative food sources such as school gardens and farmers markets. These maps are

shown at the suburban Cook County level.

Chain Food Stores in Suburban Cook CountyThis map shows the concentrations of stores of different types in various areas of the county. Most dramatic is the concentration of discount chains (green dots) in south suburban Cook County, especially in the Harvey/Dixmoor/Posen/Robbins area. Missing from this area are chain full-service stores. This is also true in far southeast Cook County. In the rest of Cook County, full service chains (red dots) are generally widespread, aside from a small region of west Cook County centered on Maywood and Bellwood. In addition, in far northwest Cook County, the village of Barrington Hills has no chain supermarkets in Cook County. This is a wealthy area with a low population density. A similar, but smaller pattern is seen in wealthy Glencoe. The most varied mix of chain stores may be in the northwest suburbs, which have large numbers of both full-service and discount chains.

MAP 1 | Chain Food Stores in Suburban Cook County, Spring 2011


11

12

Chain and Independent Food Stores in Suburban Cook CountyThis map adds independent food stores to the chain store map. The importance of small and medium sized groceries (light blue dots) in the near west suburbs, especially Cicero, as well as the southern and some northern suburbs can immediately be seen. Larger independents and small regional chains are also regionally important, in particular in the southern suburbs, where the regional Walt’s chain has a number of locations. In the northwest and southwest suburbs ethnic stores serving Hispanic, Asian, and eastern European communities are pre-sent, as well as the regional Tony’s chain.

MAP 2 | Chain and Independent Food Stores in Suburban Cook County, Spring 2011


Percent of Population with “Low Food Access”This map shows the estimated percent of the population living in low food access areas by suburban Cook County municipality and township. Low food access is defined here as a block group which has a median household income below the 2009 Cook County median, $52,516, and a mean distance to the nearest supermarket of one mile or greater. A “super-market” here includes national and regional chain, and independent supermarkets. It does not include discount limited assortment chains such as Aldi and Save-A-Lot. The map highlights the food access issues in the southern suburbs, and also points out a region of low food access in the Justice/Summit/Willow Springs area, surrounding O’Hare, and in Prospect Heights. The associated data for this map is in Table 9.

MAP 3 | Percent of Population with “Low Food Access” in Suburban Cook County, Spring 2011


13

14

Low Food Access by Block GroupThis map shows block groups qualifying as having low food access using the criteria described above. This map further highlights the concentration of low food access in the southern suburbs, the area surrounding O’Hare, and the Justice/Summit/Willow Springs area. In addition, there are scattered areas of low food access in other areas, including along I-294 in northern Cook County. As shown in Table 9, a total of approximately 351,024 people are estimated to live in low food access areas in suburban Cook County, about 14.5% of the population.

MAP 4 | Low Food Access by Census Block Group, Spring 2011


North East RegionThis generally wealthy and upper middle class area has relatively good food access. There is an unusual concentration of independents and local chains in mid-Skokie and Morton Grove, as well as north Niles. This map highlights the lack of large chain groceries in wealthy Winnetka and Glencoe, but the abundance of specialty stores. These are areas of fairly large Asian, eastern European, and Jewish populations where consumers of specialty products would demand such store types.

MAP 5 | North East Region Food Stores, Spring 2011

Regional Maps

15

16

North West RegionAside from the relatively sparsely populated Barrington area, the northwest region generallyhas the most diverse food store mix of any area in suburban Cook County. Chain full-service supermarkets are widespread, as well as discount supermarkets, independents and small chains of all sizes. Supercenters and wholesale stores are also present. Specialty stores are less widespread than in the northeast. In general, the mix of stores in this area reflects the dy-namic population mix of middle class and upper middle class households (with some low income pockets) with relatively high and growing percentages of persons of Hispanic and Asian ethnicity.

MAP 6 | North West Region Food Stores, Spring 2011

Regional Maps

South RegionAside from a few areas of concentration, particularly along US 30 in western Chicago Heights and the River Oaks area, this area has generally the lowest concentration of stores in suburban Cook County. Note in particular the lack of chain stores other than discount stores in the Riverdale/Dixmoor/Harvey/Markham area, as well as the lack of large supermarkets in the Lynwood/Lansing/Ford Heights/Sauk Village area. While many in this region may shop in neighboring Indiana (it is interesting that there are no large supermarkets within a mile and a half of the Illinois/Indiana border), the lack of large supermarkets, or any supermarkets at all in communities such as Ford Heights, Lynwood, and Burnham is striking. Completely missing from the area are any specialty chains (Whole Food and Trader Joe’s).

MAP 7 | South Region Food Stores, Spring 2011

17

Regional Maps

18

South West RegionThis region, which is broken up by large forest preserves, has relatively good food access,with the exception of the Willow Springs/Justice/Summit area, as well as neighboring northern Bridgeview. While there are stores in neighboring communities, Willow Springs and Justice in particular are quite isolated and it would be difficult to reach other communities by public transportation. More than any other region, the southwest is domi-nated by chains grocers with little independent and local grocers present. The only specialty chain location is in Orland Park.

MAP 8 | South West Region Food Stores, Spring 2011

Regional Maps

West RegionWest Cook County varies greatly by race and wealth and the store distribution reflects this.In heavily Hispanic northern Cicero and Berwyn, independent stores dominate. Full service chains and specialty stores are present in wealthier Oak Park, River Forest, as well as in the LaGrange/Western Springs/Hinsdale area. Predominately African-American Maywood and Bellwood have a mix of independents and discount chains, similar to patterns seen in some areas of the southern suburbs. In general, this region shows how store patterns often reflect demographics.

MAP 9 | West Region Food Stores, Spring 2011

19

Regional Maps

20

Chain Convenience StoresThe chain convenience store maps show a general pattern that is present also within Chicago itself. This store type, which is dominated by Seven Eleven, is much more sparse in highly African-American areas such as the southern suburbs than all other regions. In some highly Hispanic areas, such as Cicero, they also seem to be outcompeted by small independent groceries.

MAP 10 | Chain Convenience Stores, Spring 2011

Maps of Other Food Sources

Corner StoresThis map shows that corner stores are present in almost all of suburban Cook County, but generally are concentrated in inner-ring suburbs and along major roads, such as Dundee Road in far north Cook near Wheeling. There is a great concentration of corner stores in northern Cicero and Berwyn, as well as in the Skokie/Morton Grove area. Corner stores are generally missing in far south Cook County. This pattern may be a result of the general lack of gas station convenience stores in the database, which are abundant in the south suburbs. Most suburban Cook County municipalities average less than one mile to the nearest corner store (see Table 6).

MAP 11 | Corner Stores, Spring 2011

21


22

Fast FoodOther than far southeast Cook County and certain wealthy areas such as Barrington, Inverness, and Glencoe, fast food locations are heavily present in all of suburban CookCounty. Certain regions, for instance Glenview and Homewood, seem to be dominated more by national chains, while other areas have a mix of national and local. However, the general impression is that fast food is almost everywhere. This is reflected in Table 6, where almost all communities, except those straddling the county border, Barrington, and far southeast Cook County, average less than one mile to the nearest fast food location.

MAP 12 | Fast Food Restaurants, Spring 2011


Chain Drug StoresThe chain drug store map is notable mainly by the even spread of chain drug stores over the county. With few exceptions, Walgreens and CVS cover the county in a relatively even manner. Interestingly, the rapidly expanding CVS chain has expanded less into the southern suburbs than other areas. Also, the Justice/Willow Springs/Summit area does not currently have a chain drug store.

MAP 13 | Chain Drug Stores, Spring 2011

23


24

Liquor StoresLike fast food, liquor stores are widespread throughout the county, although certain communities have a history of keeping them out, and this may be generally reflected in lower concentrations of such stores. As seen in Table 6, most Cook County municipalities are be-tween 0.5 and 1.5 miles to the nearest liquor store.

MAP 14 | Liquor Stores, Spring 2011



Alternative Food SourcesThis map shows intense concentrations that may reflect reporting, particularly of school gardens in Oak Park, some southern suburbs and the North Shore. Farm stands are almost all located in the old “truck farm” vegetable growing areas of far southern and northwest Cook County. Farmers’ markets exist throughout the county, but are somewhat sparser in the northwest suburbs as well as the area around Franklin Park and Schiller Park, south of O’Hare. Comparatively, community gardens seem generally well dispersed throughout the county, although they are less prevalent in the southern and western suburbs.

MAP 15 | Alternative Food Sources, Spring 2011

25


26

Population Per StoreWhile maps show general patterns and give general impressions of concentrations, statistical analysis is needed to clarify these patterns. Table 2, showing counts and population per site by Cook County region, begins to do this. Certain patterns jump out of this table. Note that more people per store means that there are fewer stores to serve that population.

Food Stores• Thesouthregionhasthelargestpopulationpersite(fewerstoresforthepopulation) for full service chains.• Thesouthregionhasthehighestconcentrationofdiscountchainsaswellas independent groceries and the lowest concentration of specialty stores.• Discountchainsaremuchlessconcentratedinthenortheastandnorthwestregion than elsewhere.• Specialtystoresaremuchmoreconcentratedinthenortheastregionthanelsewhere.• Thesouthwestregionhascomparativelyfewindependentgroceries.• Theconcentrationofallsupermarkets(includingchainsandindependents—not including discount) is highest in the northeast areas but otherwise is fairly similar across the area. What varies is the store type.

Alternative Food Sites• Bothschoolgardensandfarmers’marketsareleastconcentratedinthenorthwest suburbs. Community gardens, however, are prevalent there. • Allalternativefoodsitesexceptfarmstandsareparticularlyconcentratedinnortheast Cook County.• Schoolgardenconcentrationsarerelativelyevenoverthecounty.• Notethatfarmers’marketsvarygreatlyinsize,asdootherformsofalternativefood sites. These size differences are not reflected in this assessment.

Others• Cornerstoresaremostconcentratedinthesouthregion,exceptthefarsouth. However, overall they are fairly evenly distributed between regions.• Fastfoodrestaurantshaveagenerallyevendistribution,althougharesomewhatless concentrated in the south region.• Chainconveniencestoresaremuchlessconcentratedinthesouthregionthanelse where.• Liquorstoresandchaindrugstoresarewelldistributedacrossthearea,althoughthe south and northeast regions have a somewhat higher concentration of liquor stores and the northwest region has a somewhat lower concentration of chain drug stores.• Ingeneral,patternsforfastfood,liquorstores,andchaindrugstoresshowaneven distribution across the region not seen in the food stores and alternative food sites.

Additional Results

Distance to the Nearest StoreTables 3 and 4 present a simple analysis of the relationship between distance to the near-est store for a variety of store types and a selection of economic, racial, and housing vari-ables arising from the 2005-2009 American Community Survey. Table 3 presents the basic dataset for the analysis, distance in miles to the nearest store by demographic quartile. For this analysis, all block groups in suburban Cook County were ranked by each demographic variable. Then, population standardized mean distances for each quartile (the upper ¼ of the data, next 1/4, etc.) were calculated. The last chart of this table is of Population per Square Mile versus Distance. For all variables except farmers’ markets, distance to the nearest store decreases in a regular manner between quartiles as population density increases. For this reason, Table 4 shows an index of distance with the effects of population density minimized. However, the raw distances are still important to know, since they are the distances actually experienced by Cook County residents.

• Medianhouseholdincome(MHI)andthepercentofhouseholdsundertwicethe poverty level are mixed predictors of distance. Distance to full-service and specialty chains drops with increased MHI, as does distance to alternative food sources, in particular farmers markets, but distance to all groceries, independent groceries, corner stores, discount chains, chain drug stores, and liquor stores generally increases.

Distance to the nearest fast food outlet also increases with increased MHI. Distances to all supermarkets and chain supermarkets show less relationship to the income variables. It could be in these cases that distance decreases with higher incomes for low and middle income communities and then increases again in the highest income communities where population density is generally low and there are few non-chain groceries. Aggregate income (all income in the community added together) generally correlates with the other income variables. These patterns are maintained and generally strengthened when population density is minimized as shown in Table 4.

• Percentrentalhousinggenerallyfollowstheeconomicvariables,withstronger relationships seen with independent fast food restaurants. As the percentage of rental housing increases distance to the nearest independent supermarket and fast food outlet decreases. A relatively strong negative relationship also seems to exist between percent rental housing and distances to liquor stores.

• Therelationshipbetweenraceanddistancetotheneareststoreiscomplicated.Rising percent white is associated with lower distances to full-service and specialty chains, as well as all alternative food sources and farmers’ markets. Higher percentages of whites were also associated with higher distances to corner stores, discount chains, and liquor stores. For the most part, these trends follow the economic variables.

27

Additional Results

28

• GenerallyoppositepatternsappearwithpercentAfrican-American,althoughthe pattern is confounded somewhat by the presence of Hispanic communities with few blacks. In general, as the percent of African Americans rises in a community, the distance to the nearest discount chain store decreases, while the distance to the nearest full-service, specialty chain, farmers’ market, and chain convenience store increases. The relationship with percent African-American and food access seems to be mainly seen in the highest quartile, indicating that differences between commu nities with lower percentages of these minorities may have little to do with race. On the other hand, communities with high percentages of African-American tend to have particularly high mean distances to the nearest store.

• PercentHispanicshowsinterestingpatterns.Distancetoanychainsupermarket decreases with increased percent Hispanic, as well as distance to all supermarkets, independents and local chains, corner stores, and discount chains, but not full-service chains. Non-store variables generally show fewer relationships to percent Hispanic than store variables.

The Relationship Between Distance to the Nearest Store and Population DemographicsTable 5 shows correlations between the distance index and the demographic variables. While this table shows a number of very interesting correlations, it should be noted that just because two variables correlate, it does not mean that one causes the other. Other, “confounding” variables might be the true “causer.” This is particularly true in this case, in which many of the variables correlate with each other as well as with the distance index. For ease of analysis, highly significant correlations above 0.1 have been colored in grey and highly significant correlations below -0.1 have been colored in pink. Note again that a positive correlation indicates increasing distance with increases in the demographic variable and negative correlations indicates decreasing distances with increases in the demographic variable. In general, this table summarizes the relationships seen on Tables 3 and 4 on one chart. The most significant conclusions include:

• Thethreeeconomicvariablesgenerallycorrelatewithdistanceinthesameway(note that % Under 2x Poverty is negatively correlated with the other two variables, since it increases the number of poor increases, which is the opposite of median and aggregate household income). Distance to discount chains in particular is strongly positively correlated with increases in income, as are distances to chain drug stores, fast food, and supercenters. Distance to farmers’ markets and specialty chains are positively correlated with increases in income. Interestingly, percent poverty correlates significantly and positively with distance to the nearest chain supermarket, full- service chain, chain convenience store, and alternative food sources, relationships that are not as strong with the other income variables.

Additional Results

• Percentofhousingthatisrentalisaninterestingvariablethatisnegativelycorrelated with a wide variety of store distances including distances to all groceries, independent and chains, corner stores, and most interestingly, chain drug stores, fast food outlets, and liquor stores.

• PercentAfrican-Americanishighlypositivelycorrelatedwithmostdistancevariables, except for chain discount stores, for which it is negatively correlated. This means that as percent African-American increases, distance to the nearest supermarket, chain supermarket, specialty chain, warehouse store, corner store, chain convenience store, farmers’ market, fast food outlet, and liquor store all increase. Only supercenters, chain drug stores, all alternative food sources, independent and local chain groceries, and all groceries show no relationship to percent African-American.

• Thesurprisingincreaseindistancetothenearestcornerstorewithincreasingpercent African-American probably has to do with the lack of corner stores in the database in far south Cook County, a pattern in need of further study. It may also be a result of the high levels of corner stores in Hispanic communities that tend to have few African-Americans.

• PercentHispanicishighlynegativelycorrelatedwithdistancetoallandindependent groceries, corner stores, discount chains, fast food, liquor stores, and warehouse stores. The only positive correlation is with farmers’ markets.

• Correlationsforpercentnon-Hispanicwhitetendtobegenerallyoppositethoseof percent African American.

29

Additional Results

30

A second limitation is the area of coverage for the alternative food, fast food, corner store, and liquor store databases. Because these only cover suburban Cook (alternative food) and Cook County including Chicago (fast food, corner stores, liquor stores), distance measure-ments are increased near the borders of these regions, since locations outside the county are not taken into account. This can be seen in certain data layers, particularly fast food, in which most areas with higher than expected distances to the nearest fast food location lie in these “border” zones. A more general concern is that none of the databases include Indiana. Distances to the nearest store in the border region between Cook County and Indiana are overstated because of this, as supermarkets do exist in Indiana just across the border.

A final limitation is that data collection was done over a period of five months (February-June, 2011). Stores close and open all the time, and the store database may currently be dated. In addition, while every effort was made to provide a complete store database, it is always possible that a store could have been missed or a closed store included. The authors take responsibility for any such errors.

Limitations

There are three main limitations to this assessment. First, as mentioned earlier, the fast

food, corner store, and liquor store databases are based closely on Hoover’s (Dun and

Bradstreet) data. While these datasets have been processed and added to, these datasets

likely are missing some business locations. In addition, convenience stores attached to

gas stations are only partially included in the chain convenience store and corner store

databases. Due to their primary industry designation as gas stations, these stores are

difficult to identify and time and monetary constraints did not allow for comprehensive

identification.

However, food access maps do reflect the differing amounts of investment in retail infrastruc-ture in a community, and increasing distance to the nearest store affects the ease of living in a community and your ability to obtain healthy foods. In this way, it is particularly interesting that the strongest relationship is between race and distance to the nearest food access site. Of all variables, percentage of African-American residents remains generally the most predic-tive of distance, particularly increased distance, to the nearest store. On the other hand, the percentage of Hispanic residents correlates with decreased distance for most supermarket and grocery types except full-service chains, for which it is somewhat positively correlated.

Although some correlations do exist, patterns for some store types such as warehouse stores, supercenters, and chain drug stores were more widespread through the county. If all groceries are counted, a similar pattern appears, although not for highly African-American communities. A key question is why such patterns do extend to specific types of groceries and supermarkets. In particular, does the fact that certain types of supermarkets located in areas with particular demographics necessarily lead to the conclusion that some communities are underserved? This, again, may be a question that needs further exploration, although the general increased distance to the nearest store in highly African American communities does suggest that this, at least, is an issue that warrants policy discussions.

Finally, there are particular areas of need in suburban Cook County. Large areas of the south suburbs particularly stand out, as well as the area around the community of Justice. In west suburban Cook County, the highly African-American communities of Maywood and Bellwood show somewhat similar patterns to the southern suburbs, but are located nearer to supermarkets and supercenters in surrounding communities.

In summary, the most interesting conclusions seen are the following:

1) Percent African-American is highly positively correlated with most distance variables, except for chain discount stores, for which it is negatively correlated. Only super centers, chain drug stores, all alternative food sources, independent and local chain groceries, and all groceries show no relationship to percent African-American.

2) Percent Hispanic is highly negatively correlated with distance to all and independent groceries, corner stores, discount chains, fast food, liquor stores, and warehouse stores. The only positive correlation is with farmers’ markets.

Conclusion

Food access mapping assessments such as this one suggest connections rather than prove

them. These conclusions do not necessarily predict people’s shopping behavior. To dis-

cover these kinds of relationships, surveys and qualitative studies, as well as “pre-post”

studies around a new store need to be done.

31

32

3) The income variables strongly positively correlate with distance to the nearest discount chain, and strongly negatively correlate with distance to the nearest specialty chain and farmer’s market.

4) Percent rental housing correlates negatively with chain drug stores, corner stores, independent and all groceries, fast food outlets, and liquor stores.

5) Chain drug stores, liquor stores, and fast food are generally fairly evenly distributed throughout the region.

6) Farmers’ markets as well as school and community gardens and specialty chains all are much more concentrated in northeast Cook County.

7) The northwest suburbs have the most varied food access pattern, with access to many store types, but are somewhat lacking in alternative food projects.

8) An area with only discount chains and independent stores stands out in a region around Harvey/Dixmoor/Posen/Robbins.

9) A large area of the southern suburbs, plus the area around Justice have higher than expected distances to many categories of food access site.

This assessment was an initial effort to develop a picture of food access in suburban Cook County. While it is not comprehensive, it highlights both the patterns that exist related to food access, and the complexities that arise when examining this issue. Ultimately, access to food is a local issue, but does not honor the boundaries of municipalities or counties. Any effort to improve access must take into account broader issues such as land availability, travel patterns, and community cultural preferences.

Table 1 Store Type Definitions

Table 2 Food Access Location Counts and Population by Suburban Cook County Region

Table 3 Distance in Miles to the Nearest Store by Demographic Quartile

Table 4 Distance Indexes by Demographic Quartile

Table 5 Correlations Between Distance Index and Demographics

Table 6 Number of Stores and Sites by Municipality, 2011

Table 7 Mean Miles to the Nearest Store or Food Access Site, Suburban Cook County Municipalities, 2011

Table 8 Distance Index “Z” Scores, Suburban Cook County Municipalities, 2011

Table 9 Low Food Access by Municipality, Cook County, 2011

Tables

33

34

Data Layers Definitions

All Groceries All independent, local chains, and chain groceries of all types

All Supermarkets Includes all full-service and specialty chains and all independents and local chains with 5 or more check-out lanes

All Chain Supermarkets Includes all full-service, discount, and specialty chains

Full-Service Chains Jewel, Dominick’s, Ultra, and Food 4 Less

Discount Chains Aldi and Save-A-Lot. These are also called “limited assortment stores”

Specialty Chains Whole Foods and Trader Joe’s

Supercenters Wal-Mart Supercenter, Meijer, and Target

Warehouse Stores Costco and Sam’s Club

Chain Drug Stores Walgreen’s and CVS. Food selections are similar to a chain convenience store, but are expanding in many locations

Chain Convenience Stores 7-Eleven, Convenient Mart, and J.J. Peppers

Corner Stores All stores with less than 2.5 million annual sales that do not carry a full line of groceries

Fast-Food Restaurants All chain fast and independent limited service (fast food) restaurants

Liquor Stores All package liquor stores. Some (but not all) carry a small line of foods similar to a corner store

Farmers’ Markets, School Gardens, Community Gardens, and Farm Stands

All sites reported to or identified by CPPW staff. Note that these programs, in particular school and community gardens, differ greatly in size and in how they are incorporated into the community and schools

TABLE 1 | Store Type Definitions

TABLE 2 | Food Access Location Counts and Population by Suburban Cook County Region

35

36

TABLE 3 | Distance in Miles to the Nearest Store by Demographic Quartile

Note: Quartiles calculated using American Community Survey estimates, 2005-2009, US Census. See Table 1 for definitions of store types.

TABLE 4 | Distance Indexes by Demographic Quartile

Note: Quartiles calculated using American Community Survey estimates, 2005-2009, US Census. See Table 1 for definitions of store types.

37

38

TABLE 5 | Correlations Between Distance Index and Demographics

Notes: See Table 1 for definitions of store types.

Pearson Correlation Coefficient: Varies from 1 (perfect positive correlation) to -1 (perfect negative correlation).

Grey cells: Positive correlation significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) & Correlation Coefficient greater than .1 (increases in variable correlate with increases in distance to store).

Pink cells: Negative correlation significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed) & Correlation Coefficient less than .1 (increases in variable correlate within decreases in distance to store)

* Correlation is significant at the 0.05 level (2-tailed)** Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed)

Median House-hold Income

Aggregate Household

Income%Under 2x

Poverty Level% Housing

Units Rental%Non-Hispanic

White %Hispanic%African-American

Chain Supermarkets -.028 -.024 .134** -.002 -.170** .020 .199**

All Groceries .086** .156** .087** -.160** .041 -.160** .079**Indep. & Local Chain Gro-ceries .112** .285** -.142** -.140** .173** -.208** -.029

All Supermarkets -.025 -.039 .048* -.075** -.103** .035 .166**

Corner Stores .052* .074** -.001 -.130** -.003 -.188** .185**

Discount Chains .484** .427** -.242** -.098** .246** -.250** -.111**

Full-Service Chains -.099** -.095** .236** .049 -.292** .052* .322**

All Alternative Food Sources .038 -.055* .133** .019 -.118** .093** .051*

Convenience Stores -.050 .004 .142** .030 -.225** -.091** .339**

Chain Drug Stores .124** .144** -.069** -.110** .042 -.037 -.004

Farmers’ Markets -.297** -.216** .383** .167** -.378** .293** .218**

Fast Food Outlets .122** .113** -.003 -.108** .018 -.136** .115**

Liquor Stores .071** .095** -.087** -.148** .048 -.204** .106**

National Chain Fast Food .038 .058* .077** -.063* -.051* -.076** .156**

Specialty Chains -.371** -.294** .358** .084** -.399** .001 .523**

Supercenters .159** .104** .015 .005 .050 -.082** .033

Warehouse Stores -.012 -.011 .086** .049 -.052* -.161** .203**

39

TABLE 6 | Number of Stores and Sites by Municipality, 2011

Notes: See Table 1 for definitions of store types. * Populations for entire municipality. Also includes areas not in Cook.

40

TABLE 6 | Number of Stores and Sites by Municipality, 2011 (continued)

Notes: See Table 1 for definitions of store types. * Populations for entire municipality. Also includes areas not in Cook.

TABLE 7 | Mean Miles to the Nearest Store or Food Access Site, Suburban Cook County Municipalities, 2011

41

TABLE 7 | Mean Miles to the Nearest Store or Food Access Site, Suburban Cook County Municipalities, 2011 (continued)

Notes: See Table 1 for definitions of store types. Distances are mean street distances from residential and mixed residential areas of each community to the nearest site. Calculated using ESRI ArcGIS10 and Spatial Analyst. Mean is population standardized.

42

TABLE 8 | Distance Index “Z” Scores, Suburban Cook County Municipalities, 2011

43

MunicipalityAll Groc-

eries All Super-markets

Chain Super-markets

Full-Service Chains

Indep. & Local Chain Groc.

Discount Chains

Specialty Chains

Ware-house Stores

Super-centers

Chain Drug

Stores

Chain Conven-

ience Stores

Corner Stores

Farmers Markets

Fast Food

Liquor Stores

Alsip -0.80 -0.33 -1.18 -0.75 0.98 -1.15 0.61 1.01 -0.42 0.06 -0.66 0.41 0.54 -0.44 0.40Arlington Heights -0.15 -0.48 -0.55 -0.70 -0.17 -0.56 -0.89 -0.36 -1.02 0.88 -0.06 0.11 0.26 -0.30 -0.73Barrington 0.18 -0.26 -0.43 -0.82 3.88 1.51 -0.57 0.10 0.75 -0.22 2.80 1.49 -1.12 4.19 -0.22Barrington Hills 2.10 1.38 1.06 0.42 2.23 1.40 -0.45 0.44 0.51 3.43 1.58 3.69 -0.04 4.57 2.34Bartlett 1.13 0.59 0.76 0.04 0.79 1.32 0.98 0.38 1.39 1.35 0.77 0.60 -0.32 1.79 1.17Bedford Park -0.03 -0.01 -0.11 0.32 -0.55 -0.96 -0.58 -0.88 -0.80 -0.61 -0.93 -1.08 -1.03 -0.65 -1.13Bellwood -0.94 -0.73 -0.91 1.62 -1.05 -1.22 -0.39 -0.24 -1.27 -1.21 -0.84 -0.44 0.31 -0.56 -1.00Berkeley -0.96 -1.23 0.75 1.02 -1.20 -0.55 -0.16 -0.97 -0.33 0.54 0.45 -0.58 1.25 -0.61 0.38Berwyn -0.74 -0.29 -0.30 -0.56 -1.05 -0.91 -0.50 -0.17 0.61 -0.67 -1.01 -0.70 -0.32 -0.78 -1.14Blue Island -0.94 0.80 -0.71 0.08 -0.74 -1.19 1.08 0.80 -0.70 0.30 0.99 -0.96 1.87 -0.35 -0.72Bridgeview -0.08 1.02 -0.23 1.05 -0.03 -0.83 0.33 0.31 1.47 -0.19 -0.57 -0.77 0.10 -0.67 -0.62Broadview -0.54 -0.76 -0.99 0.99 0.54 -0.97 -0.60 0.29 -2.03 -1.93 -0.80 -0.56 -1.02 -0.57 -1.22Brookfield -0.39 -0.57 0.41 0.24 -0.86 0.09 -1.01 0.08 -0.50 -1.39 -0.82 -0.13 -1.19 -0.57 -1.28Buffalo Grove 0.30 -0.05 -0.33 -0.62 1.65 0.44 -0.41 -0.83 0.34 0.25 -0.05 0.30 -0.51 1.52 0.51Burbank 0.00 -0.09 -0.53 -0.62 0.52 -0.86 0.81 -0.80 -0.33 -0.62 -0.61 -0.82 -0.18 -0.71 -1.21Burnham 1.39 1.86 3.78 2.42 -0.15 0.81 2.17 -0.50 0.27 0.71 2.74 -0.49 1.59 -0.55 0.94Burr Ridge 2.90 2.06 1.68 1.92 2.27 1.41 -0.66 0.44 -0.61 2.94 0.03 0.06 -0.54 1.05 1.20Calumet City 0.30 1.17 1.83 1.52 -0.60 0.21 2.54 -0.89 -0.44 -0.29 3.91 -0.58 0.83 -0.64 -0.71Calumet Park -0.26 -0.60 -0.77 -1.02 0.55 -1.17 1.47 1.01 -1.50 -0.71 2.30 -0.85 2.39 -0.66 -0.01Chicago Heights -0.07 -0.39 0.26 0.14 -0.22 -0.81 2.12 0.82 1.33 -0.56 1.20 2.71 -0.10 0.55 1.91Chicago Ridge 0.47 0.22 0.53 1.35 -0.45 -0.70 0.49 1.19 1.16 0.07 -0.94 0.12 -0.21 -0.05 1.06Cicero -0.59 -0.23 0.16 0.44 -0.94 -0.57 -0.22 -1.11 -0.91 -1.06 0.03 -1.10 0.58 -0.52 -0.74Country Club Hills 1.53 1.42 0.63 1.10 0.49 -0.50 0.83 0.39 -0.62 0.66 0.49 2.27 -1.00 0.17 0.36Countryside -1.15 -1.37 -1.45 -1.34 1.60 -0.89 -0.74 -1.37 -1.03 0.64 -0.86 -0.16 -0.83 -0.66 -0.45Crestwood 0.07 -0.11 -0.38 1.47 0.65 -0.02 0.18 1.13 -1.55 -0.08 -0.76 -0.04 0.76 -0.21 0.94Deerfield 0.21 -0.24 -0.41 0.32 2.15 3.87 -1.11 1.07 0.66 0.39 1.24 3.59 0.51 1.27 0.32Des Plaines -0.27 -0.52 -0.33 -0.29 -0.57 -0.57 -0.39 -0.89 0.40 -0.06 -0.41 -0.57 -0.05 -0.45 -0.83Dixmoor -0.66 -0.84 -1.06 1.33 -1.02 -1.33 0.96 1.81 0.90 1.67 0.50 -0.09 1.19 -0.20 -1.03Dolton -0.92 -0.45 -0.22 -0.66 -1.15 0.33 1.98 -0.11 0.27 -0.77 0.54 -0.70 1.36 -0.33 -0.87East Dundee 0.25 -0.02 -0.37 -0.44 2.26 -0.75 -0.19 2.11 -1.49 0.10 3.08 0.88 3.03 4.78 -0.16East Hazel Crest 0.28 -0.17 -0.30 -0.33 0.59 -0.18 1.21 1.42 -1.71 2.55 0.58 0.31 -0.87 -0.51 0.11Elgin 0.30 0.02 0.50 0.09 -0.32 -0.32 0.71 2.94 0.15 0.07 0.41 1.47 3.11 2.98 2.27Elk Grove Village -0.43 -0.19 -0.50 -0.72 0.69 -0.08 -0.52 0.18 0.19 0.27 -0.88 0.37 -0.71 -0.41 0.19Elmwood Park -0.96 -1.23 -0.30 -0.65 -0.93 0.12 -0.68 -0.84 -0.91 -0.93 -0.52 -0.94 0.67 -0.48 -0.68Evanston -0.51 -0.81 -0.92 -1.06 0.78 1.82 -1.01 -0.94 -0.03 -1.15 -0.71 -0.54 -1.24 -0.61 0.28Evergreen Park -1.32 -1.18 -1.22 -1.14 -1.03 -0.90 1.37 -1.21 -1.28 -1.58 -0.95 -0.53 -0.99 -0.56 -0.40Flossmoor 0.30 0.70 1.10 0.49 -0.62 -0.31 1.37 0.36 0.63 -0.41 -0.23 1.49 -1.11 0.15 -0.24Ford Heights 5.47 4.25 6.42 4.15 1.69 1.55 2.54 2.18 2.85 6.03 0.81 6.58 1.33 4.13 3.92Forest Park -1.40 -1.28 -1.40 -1.42 -1.09 -0.70 -1.07 0.02 0.54 -1.29 -1.01 -1.11 -1.27 -0.92 -1.57Forest View -0.83 -1.11 -1.21 -1.34 -0.90 -1.26 -0.59 -0.21 -0.06 0.27 -1.35 -0.14 -0.74 -0.80 -0.34Franklin Park -1.17 -0.65 -0.83 -1.04 -1.20 -0.29 -0.10 -0.33 0.15 -1.06 -0.70 -0.85 1.88 -0.61 -1.03Glencoe -0.51 -0.85 2.65 3.28 -1.01 5.25 -0.86 1.27 2.69 1.30 1.98 -0.24 -1.24 0.33 -0.71Glenview 0.31 0.27 -0.16 -0.20 0.40 0.69 -0.88 -0.33 -0.36 0.32 0.07 -0.09 -0.23 -0.30 -0.40Glenwood 2.54 3.52 1.48 1.66 1.97 -0.36 2.04 1.59 -0.20 3.18 0.89 3.09 -0.22 1.09 0.27Golf 1.09 0.65 0.40 -0.23 -0.29 -0.60 -1.00 -0.27 -0.56 -0.68 0.44 -0.07 -0.95 -0.60 -0.14Hanover Park 0.08 0.20 0.16 -0.31 0.37 0.06 0.59 -1.03 -0.33 0.38 0.20 0.33 0.37 0.91 0.36Harvey -0.27 0.62 0.11 2.51 -0.67 -0.84 1.26 1.31 0.79 0.07 1.08 -0.62 0.61 -0.64 -1.33Harwood Heights -1.43 -1.36 -1.49 -1.24 -0.52 -1.28 -0.46 0.88 -1.52 -0.70 -0.90 -0.64 0.93 -0.82 2.44Hazel Crest 0.86 0.77 0.11 0.27 0.00 -0.73 1.09 1.52 -0.56 1.50 0.12 -0.17 -0.71 -0.62 -0.43Hickory Hills -0.16 -0.50 0.32 -0.28 -0.80 0.74 0.33 1.03 2.70 -1.41 0.46 -0.60 1.07 -0.15 -0.42Hillside -0.10 -0.50 0.01 0.83 -0.51 -0.63 -0.30 -0.28 -1.30 -1.80 0.26 0.24 0.66 -0.25 -0.91Hinsdale -0.33 -0.64 0.10 0.37 -0.73 1.46 -1.02 0.31 1.36 0.04 0.49 -0.66 -0.38 2.17 -0.46Hodgkins 0.09 -0.14 -0.50 0.42 2.44 -1.05 -0.70 -1.51 -1.47 2.80 0.15 1.54 -0.92 -0.01 0.52Hoffman Estates 0.05 -0.33 -0.04 -0.31 0.76 0.33 -0.28 0.28 0.78 0.71 0.12 0.29 0.34 -0.14 1.20Hometown -0.86 -1.15 -1.23 -1.40 -0.47 -0.99 1.34 -0.61 -1.57 -1.28 -0.52 -0.31 -0.70 -0.70 -0.66Homewood -0.36 -0.28 -0.03 -0.12 -0.52 -0.69 1.50 1.55 -0.59 -0.12 -0.53 0.08 -0.99 -0.36 0.01Indian Head Park 0.22 -0.22 -0.40 -0.79 2.01 0.03 -0.57 -0.71 0.30 0.48 -1.04 0.15 -0.49 -0.01 0.90Inverness 1.97 1.26 1.01 0.22 2.03 1.97 -0.32 0.70 1.55 4.02 0.04 1.59 -0.17 0.69 2.82Justice 3.66 3.27 2.55 2.22 1.17 0.18 0.12 0.50 2.08 1.66 -0.59 -0.78 0.51 0.53 -1.29Kenilworth -0.72 -0.45 -0.61 -0.89 -0.73 2.97 -1.00 0.45 2.72 0.31 -0.92 -0.27 -0.98 0.66 0.59La Grange -0.90 -0.42 -1.06 -0.92 -0.68 0.18 -1.13 -0.63 -0.07 -0.62 -1.06 -0.35 -1.30 -0.50 0.05La Grange Park -0.48 -0.75 -0.78 -0.99 -0.53 0.36 -1.06 0.42 -0.36 0.40 -0.98 -0.41 -0.84 -0.05 -0.29Lansing -0.56 3.74 0.37 1.79 -0.92 -0.76 2.78 -0.22 0.63 -0.16 3.10 -0.22 -0.95 -0.42 -0.34Lemont 0.55 0.07 0.26 -0.31 -0.38 -0.73 0.54 1.40 -0.75 0.12 4.65 0.44 -0.87 0.43 -0.21Lincolnwood -0.93 -0.24 -0.26 -0.29 -1.02 -0.14 -1.00 -0.66 -0.76 -0.63 0.16 -0.53 -1.14 -0.59 0.19Lynwood 2.43 4.36 5.11 5.18 0.31 1.02 2.63 0.96 2.54 4.77 2.31 2.10 0.22 1.89 3.27Lyons 1.10 0.69 0.64 0.16 -0.21 -0.59 -0.77 -0.03 0.04 1.12 -1.12 -0.63 -0.93 -0.76 -1.30Markham -0.57 -0.07 0.20 2.38 -0.63 -0.38 0.67 1.09 -0.96 -0.79 0.74 0.34 0.19 -0.27 -0.74Matteson 1.95 1.45 0.94 0.95 2.43 -0.16 1.10 -1.08 -0.60 0.76 1.22 2.93 0.57 0.63 2.18Maywood -0.49 -0.50 -0.46 0.96 -0.90 -1.06 -0.74 -0.59 -0.98 -0.63 -0.24 -0.80 -0.77 -0.52 -0.99McCook -0.09 -0.49 -0.63 -0.34 -0.31 -0.81 -1.01 -1.41 -1.93 -0.34 -1.14 -0.99 -1.21 -1.14 -0.87

TABLE 8 | Distance Index “Z” Scores, Suburban Cook County Municipalities, 2011 (continued)

Notes: See Table 1 for definitions of store types. Index is the Z score by store type of (Mean Distance to Nearest Store)/(1/log(Population Density)Grey areas: Z score greater than 1.5 (Mean distance is 1.5 Standard Deviations further than mean for that store type)Pink areas: Z score less than -1.0 (Mean distance is 1 Standard Deviation closer than mean for that store type)

44

Melrose Park -1.40 -0.72 -0.92 -0.95 -1.11 -1.13 -0.64 -1.31 -1.63 -0.44 -1.03 -0.51 0.29 -0.70 -1.07Merrionette Park -1.68 -1.84 -1.86 -1.85 0.26 -0.48 1.18 0.02 -0.29 -0.70 -1.29 0.78 0.50 -0.72 -1.31Midlothian -0.60 -0.11 -0.57 2.54 -0.62 -1.13 0.43 1.00 0.00 -1.26 -0.98 -0.78 1.54 -0.73 -0.63Morton Grove -0.64 0.10 -0.21 -0.50 -0.99 -0.54 -0.68 -0.41 -0.66 -1.31 0.07 -0.73 -0.94 -0.57 -1.13Mount Prospect -0.10 -0.41 -0.23 -0.24 -0.24 -0.61 -0.35 -0.92 0.10 0.04 1.05 -0.32 -0.56 -0.44 -0.59Niles -1.03 -1.14 -1.23 -1.21 -1.07 -0.81 -0.86 -0.33 -1.20 -0.97 -0.54 -0.82 -0.66 -0.76 -0.77Norridge -1.03 -1.23 -1.18 -0.97 -0.90 -0.77 -0.46 0.72 -1.14 -1.01 -0.77 -0.45 0.70 -0.49 3.77North Riverside -0.96 -0.32 -1.08 0.34 -0.13 -1.26 -0.63 0.54 -1.33 0.36 -0.73 -0.37 -0.79 -0.56 1.41Northbrook 0.14 -0.28 0.35 -0.11 -0.08 2.68 -0.68 -0.41 -0.51 1.26 -0.14 0.04 -0.39 -0.24 0.10Northfield -0.52 -0.86 -0.93 -1.17 1.02 2.30 -0.94 -0.48 0.16 -0.40 1.41 0.09 -0.84 -0.04 0.02Northlake -0.94 -1.09 -0.64 0.32 -1.19 -1.12 -0.09 -1.53 0.37 -0.79 -0.98 -0.22 1.77 -0.60 -1.03Oak Forest 0.55 0.27 -0.08 -0.03 0.65 -0.55 0.13 -0.38 -0.50 0.84 -0.49 0.16 0.39 -0.03 0.29Oak Lawn -0.69 -0.76 -0.48 -0.78 -0.73 -0.22 0.91 0.10 -0.58 -0.54 -0.86 -0.51 -0.77 -0.53 -0.21Oak Park -1.11 -1.17 -0.95 -1.04 -0.94 -0.25 -1.01 0.10 0.72 -1.31 -0.94 -0.72 -0.98 -0.71 -0.52Olympia Fields -0.36 -0.02 -0.17 -0.63 -0.23 -0.52 1.46 -0.61 0.16 -0.88 0.91 2.27 -0.42 -0.09 0.30Orland Hills 0.92 0.47 0.15 -0.34 2.53 -0.79 -0.74 -1.00 -1.52 1.65 1.31 0.11 0.12 0.20 0.66Orland Park 1.08 1.02 0.48 0.28 1.00 0.14 -0.76 -0.57 -0.14 1.34 0.02 0.65 -0.02 0.11 0.59Palatine 0.32 -0.14 -0.02 -0.37 0.13 0.86 -0.76 0.62 -0.16 0.66 -0.11 -0.02 -0.48 -0.11 0.04Palos Heights -0.42 -0.75 -0.88 -1.14 0.83 0.43 -0.21 0.79 0.24 0.35 -0.83 0.58 -0.92 -0.36 1.86Palos Hills 0.94 0.85 0.79 0.39 -0.19 0.01 0.16 1.90 3.19 0.38 1.52 -0.44 0.33 -0.29 0.85Palos Park 2.47 1.75 1.38 0.50 1.54 -0.19 -0.54 0.86 1.65 0.46 0.63 0.48 -0.97 0.29 0.18Park Forest 3.77 2.81 2.34 1.18 3.22 0.35 2.33 0.14 0.96 -0.06 -0.05 -0.07 -0.94 0.45 0.92Park Ridge -0.58 -0.63 -0.75 -0.94 -0.39 0.25 -1.06 0.08 -0.17 -0.76 -0.83 0.07 -0.87 -0.52 0.68Phoenix 0.08 0.59 2.25 1.38 -0.75 0.00 1.55 0.59 0.48 0.71 0.31 -0.22 0.52 -0.04 -0.34Posen -0.05 -0.19 -0.60 3.16 -0.66 -1.16 0.83 1.96 1.27 -0.75 -0.58 -0.76 1.61 -0.35 0.06Prospect Heights 0.89 0.40 0.45 0.18 0.78 -0.26 -0.69 -1.00 -0.62 0.65 0.73 -0.45 0.25 -0.26 -0.61Richton Park 2.64 1.83 1.47 1.80 3.96 0.73 1.89 -0.78 -0.93 -0.16 0.07 -0.46 -0.04 -0.50 0.33River Forest -1.06 -1.30 -1.38 -1.47 0.09 -0.40 -1.12 -1.06 -0.57 -1.19 -0.34 -0.25 -0.78 -0.41 -0.84River Grove 0.21 -0.13 -0.35 -0.70 0.05 -0.24 -0.46 -1.16 -0.96 0.10 -1.21 -0.57 1.17 -0.56 0.09Riverdale -0.27 2.99 2.52 1.34 -0.90 0.57 1.47 0.88 1.26 -1.27 -0.90 -0.08 1.52 -0.26 -0.03Riverside -1.25 -0.60 -0.64 -0.82 -1.32 -1.05 -0.71 -0.11 -0.16 1.03 -0.75 -0.50 -1.33 -0.46 -0.02Robbins 0.89 2.55 0.20 1.70 0.62 -0.84 0.56 1.78 -0.29 1.31 0.01 -0.73 1.83 -0.21 -1.28Rolling Meadows -0.23 -0.40 -0.64 -0.75 1.16 -0.23 -0.58 -0.52 0.13 0.17 -0.06 -0.02 0.30 -0.54 -0.39Rosemont 0.75 0.23 0.01 1.15 0.81 0.49 -0.69 0.16 -1.64 4.10 -0.82 -0.56 0.05 -0.35 -0.50S. Chicago Hts. -1.10 -1.32 -1.41 -1.51 1.64 -1.38 2.47 1.35 3.04 -1.61 -0.38 0.70 -0.06 -0.52 0.06Sauk Village -0.13 -0.52 7.23 4.70 -0.84 1.91 3.23 2.73 5.40 0.11 -0.66 6.86 2.24 4.75 -0.12Schaumburg -0.31 -0.14 -0.25 -0.56 -0.20 -0.03 -0.41 -0.67 -0.71 -0.26 -0.64 -0.23 -0.30 -0.09 -0.85Schiller Park -0.59 2.14 -0.64 0.79 -0.73 -1.17 -0.17 0.54 0.22 -1.05 -1.23 -0.82 1.53 -0.54 -0.70Skokie -0.51 -0.58 -0.30 -0.30 -0.83 -0.35 -0.70 -0.93 -0.07 -1.05 -0.64 -0.78 -0.82 -0.59 -0.13South Barrington 3.13 2.26 1.85 1.98 2.95 2.39 0.11 0.83 -0.37 1.93 2.16 2.61 1.02 1.16 2.30South Holland -0.56 -0.67 -0.55 -0.84 -0.44 -0.86 1.77 -0.58 -0.48 0.48 1.07 -0.07 0.03 -0.52 1.91Steger 0.98 0.70 0.22 -0.17 1.16 -0.84 2.83 2.17 4.05 1.77 -0.61 0.05 0.61 0.83 -0.12Stickney -1.17 -1.41 -1.47 -1.56 -0.99 -1.33 -0.45 0.01 0.66 -0.36 -0.84 -0.46 -0.60 -0.58 -1.12Stone Park -1.66 0.10 -0.12 -0.31 -1.52 -0.64 -0.22 -1.02 -0.37 1.68 -0.75 -1.17 1.37 -0.81 -0.60Streamwood 0.11 -0.30 -0.45 -0.25 0.37 -0.31 0.54 -0.71 -1.10 0.75 -0.72 0.16 0.18 -0.04 -0.27Summit 2.36 1.60 2.52 1.56 0.34 0.20 -0.24 0.38 0.78 -0.55 -1.31 -1.13 -1.32 -0.79 -0.73Thornton 2.36 1.60 1.27 0.54 0.77 0.06 1.43 0.11 -0.98 2.74 -1.13 -0.91 -1.32 0.44 2.41Tinley Park 2.15 1.46 1.12 0.44 1.37 0.05 -0.24 -0.61 -0.11 0.82 0.27 0.63 -0.31 0.15 0.34Westchester -0.60 -0.92 -1.03 -1.02 0.94 0.26 -0.66 0.55 -1.26 -0.55 0.36 -0.45 -0.04 -0.59 0.15Western Springs -0.51 -0.23 -0.40 -0.60 -0.86 1.04 -0.97 -0.03 0.99 0.74 -0.67 0.63 -1.16 0.07 -0.71Wheeling 0.01 -0.27 0.11 0.35 -0.47 -0.70 -0.56 -0.89 -0.56 0.01 -0.25 -0.43 0.46 -0.44 -0.71Willow Springs 4.92 3.80 3.78 2.38 2.50 1.21 -0.25 0.06 0.72 3.89 -0.46 -0.67 -0.06 1.80 1.88Wilmette -0.79 -0.58 0.35 -0.14 -0.74 2.36 -0.84 0.25 2.28 0.58 -0.24 -0.33 -0.99 -0.09 0.28Winnetka -0.77 -1.04 -0.54 0.85 -0.99 3.93 -1.14 0.94 2.66 -0.98 -0.04 -0.15 -0.53 0.03 -0.94Worth -1.49 -0.78 -0.50 1.30 -1.35 -1.09 0.15 1.64 1.14 -1.40 -0.39 -0.71 -0.86 -0.58 -0.97

MunicipalityAll Groc-

eries

All Super-markets

Chain Super-markets

Full-Service Chains

Indep. & Local Chain Groc.

Discount Chains

Specialty Chains

Ware-house Stores

Super-centers

Chain Drug

Stores

Chain Conven-

ience Stores

Corner Stores

Farmers Markets

Fast Food

Liquor Stores

TABLE 9 | Low Food Access by Municipality, Cook County, 2011

Notes: See Table 1 for definitions of store types. Food Desert Population calculated by block group. Because block groups do not align to municipal boundaries, populations may not match other municipal population counts. Includes Block Groups with a mean distance to nearest store greater than 1 mile and a median household income less than the 2009 Cook County Mean, $52,51645

TABLE 9 | Low Food Access by Municipality, Cook County, 2011

46

Texti McKinnon RA, Reedy J, Morrissette MA, Lytle LA, Yaroch AL. Measures of the food environment: a compilation of the literature, 1990-2007. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2009; 36: S124-133.

ii Larson NI, Story MT, Nelson MC. Neighborhood environments: disparities in access to healthy foods in the U.S. American Journal of Preventive Medicine. 2009; 36: 74-81.

iii White M. Food access and obesity. Obesity Reviews. 2007; 8 (Suppl 1): 99-107.

iv U.S. Department of Agriculture and U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Dietary Guidelines for Americans. 7th Edition, Washington, DC: U.S. Government Printing Office, December 2010.

v Proscio T. Food Markets, and Healthy Communities. New York: Local Initiatives Support Corporation, 2006.

vi Odoms-Young AM, Zenk S, Mason M. Measuring food availability and access in African-American communities: implications for intervention and policy. Am J Prev Med. 2009 Apr; 36 (4 Suppl): S145-50.

vii Horowitz CR, Colson KA, Hebert PL, Lancaster K. Barriers to buying healthy foods for people with diabetes: Evidence of environmental disparities. American Journal of Public Health. 2004; 94(9): 1549- 1554.

viii Block D, Kouba J. A comparison of the availability and affordability of a market basket in two communities in the Chicago area. Public Health Nutrition. 2006; 9(7): 837-845.

ix Block D, Chavez N, Birgen J. Finding Food in Chicago and the Suburbs. Chicago, IL: Chicago State

University, 2008

MapsStoresNortheastern Illinois Community Food Security Assessment, Company Websites, Spring 2011

Base maps Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning, US Census Bureau

Tables1 None

2 Land Use Data for Calculations, Chicago Metro Agency for Planning, 2005; Streets: US Census Bureau, 2008 Supermarket Data. Based on Company Web Sites and In-person Visits, Chicago State University, Spring 2011 Chain Convenience Store Data, Based on Company Web Sites: Spring 2011 Farmers’ Markets: Communities Putting Prevention to Work, 2011; Corner Stores, Chain Fast-Food Restaurants, and Corner Stores: Dun and Bradstreet, 2011

3 Land Use Data for Calculations, Chicago Metro Agency for Planning, 2005; Streets: US Census Bureau, 2008 Supermarket Data. Based on Company Web Sites and In-person Visits, Chicago State University, Spring 2011 Chain Convenience Store Data, Based on Company Web Sites: Spring 2011 Farmers’ Markets: Communities Putting Prevention to Work, 2011 Corner Stores, Chain Fast-Food Restaurants, and Corner Stores: Dun and Bradstreet, 2011

References

47

48

4 Land Use Data for Calculations, Chicago Metro Agency for Planning, 2005; Streets: US Census Bureau, 2008 Supermarket Data. Based on Company Web Sites and In-person Visits, Chicago State University, Spring 2011 Chain Convenience Store Data, Based on Company Web Sites: Spring 2011 Farmers’ Markets: Communities Putting Prevention to Work, 2011 Corner Stores, Liquor Stores; and Fast-Food Restaurants: Dun and Bradstreet, 2011

5 Land Use Data for Calculations, Chicago Metro Agency for Planning, 2005; Streets: US Census Bureau, 2008 Supermarket Data. Based on Company Web Sites and In-person Visits, Chicago State University, Spring 2011 Chain Convenience Store Data, Based on Company Web Sites: Spring 2011 Farmers’ Markets: Communities Putting Prevention to Work, 2011; Corner Stores, Chain Fast-Food Restaurants, and Corner Stores: Dun and Bradstreet, 2011

6 Populations: Census 2010 Land Use Data for Calculations, Chicago Metro Agency for Planning, 2005; Streets: US Census Bureau, 2008 Supermarket Data. Based on Company Web Sites and In-person Visits, Chicago State University, Spring 2011 Chain Convenience Store Data, Based on Company Web Sites: Spring 2011 Chain Drug Store Data: Based on Company Web Sites, Spring 2011 Farmers’ Markets: Communities Putting Prevention to Work, 2011 Corner Stores, Chain Fast-Food Restaurants, and Corner Stores: Dun and Bradstreet, 2011

7 Land Use Data for Calculations, Chicago Metro Agency for Planning, 2005; Streets: US Census Bureau, 2008 Supermarket Data. Based on Company Web Sites and In-person Visits, Chicago State University, Spring 2011 Chain Convenience Store Data, Based on Company Web Sites: Spring 2011 Chain Drug Store Data: Based on Company Web Sites, Spring 2011 Farmers’ Markets: Communities Putting Prevention to Work, 2011 Corner Stores, Chain Fast-Food Restaurants, and Corner Stores: Dun and Bradstreet, 2011

8 Land Use Data for Calculations, Chicago Metro Agency for Planning, 2005; Streets: US Census Bureau, 2008 Supermarket Data. Based on Company Web Sites and In-person Visits, Chicago State University, Spring 2011 Chain Convenience Store Data, Based on Company Web Sites: Spring 2011 Chain Drug Store Data: Based on Company Web Sites, Spring 2011

9 Land Use Data for Calculations, Chicago Metro Agency for Planning, 2005; Streets and Census Boundaries: US Census Bureau, 2008 Supermarket Data. Based on Company Web Sites and In-person Visits, Chicago State University, Spring 2011

Documents

Food Access” in Suburban Cook County