Fact check: Which states have seen the largest decrease in SNAP benefits usage from 2020 to 2024?

1. Why the question remains unanswered in the supplied reporting — missing state-by-state decline data

All six analyses emphasize aggregate or single-year state-level figures but omit direct 2020-to-2024 state comparisons, leaving the core question unresolved. The September 2024 summary highlights that SNAP and WIC usage dropped to 4.3% year-ending July, down from 4.9% the prior period, yet it contains no breakdown by state or explicit multi-year trajectories ^[1]. Similarly, articles discussing spending fluctuations and charts of benefit spending through FY2023 describe national policy drivers and aggregate spending totals rather than listing which states saw the steepest participation declines ^{[2] [3]}.

2. What the sources do provide — context on national trends and policy drivers

The materials repeatedly point to pandemic-era changes—notably emergency allotments and altered maximum benefit amounts—as primary drivers of rising then falling SNAP spending and participation between 2020 and 2023. One piece explains how SNAP spending rose during expanded pandemic benefits and later fell as those temporary increases ended, which explains part of the national decline but not how that trend distributed across states ^[2]. A July 2024 chart documents spending variability across FY2020–FY2023 linked to these policy shifts, reinforcing that federal policy changes largely explain aggregate declines ^[3].

3. What the 2024 state snapshot tells us — levels but not trends

USDA Economic Research Service materials included in the sample present a fiscal year 2024 snapshot showing state variation: New Mexico had the highest share of residents on SNAP at 21.2% and Utah the lowest at 4.8% in FY2024, but these figures are not paired with 2020 baselines or year-to-year deltas ^{[4] [5] [6]}. That snapshot is useful for understanding which states had elevated participation by 2024 but cannot by itself indicate which states experienced the largest declines since 2020 without earlier-year comparators.

4. Plausible mechanisms that could produce large state drops — what to expect when you compare years

Based on the supplied analyses, the most plausible reasons certain states would show larger decreases are differing exposure to emergency allotments, state-level economic recovery speed, policy choices around outreach and access, and demographic shifts. The spending-focused pieces note that when emergency allotments ended and maximum benefit amounts were adjusted downward, participation and spending fell nationally; states that relied relatively more on pandemic-era increases or that had faster employment recoveries should logically show larger declines, but the present materials do not test or quantify that expectation ^{[2] [3]}.

5. Why state rankings require different data — what’s missing from the packet

To rank states by their change in SNAP use from 2020 to 2024, one needs consistent annual state-level participation counts or participation rates for each year (or quarterly data) plus definitions that match across years (e.g., resident share vs. caseload counts). The supplied items lack those longitudinal series; they either provide single-year FY2024 state shares or national-year aggregates. Without those multi-year state series, any attempt to name “largest decreases” would be speculative and not supported by the provided documents ^{[4] [5] [6] [1]}.

6. How different narratives could emerge from the same high-level facts — reading motives and agendas

The supplied analyses emphasize policy-driven fluctuations (emergency allotments) and FY2024 state snapshots; each framing can serve different agendas. Focusing on aggregate decline can be used to argue SNAP spending normalization post-pandemic, while highlighting high FY2024 state shares could be used to argue ongoing need in particular states. The documents themselves remain descriptive, but readers should note that selecting either high-level spending narratives or single-year state snapshots implicitly supports different policy arguments despite relying on overlapping facts ^{[1] [2] [4]}.

7. Practical next steps to produce the requested state ranking accurately

To answer the user’s original question definitively, follow-up actions are necessary: obtain state-level SNAP participation counts or participation rates for 2020 and 2024 from USDA Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) or ERS time series tables, then compute percentage-point or percent declines and rank states. The supplied packet points researchers to the right themes—policy-driven aggregate change and FY2024 state variation—but does not contain the longitudinal state data required to identify which states saw the largest decreases ^{[3] [4]}.

8. Bottom line for users seeking a quick answer today

Based on the supplied materials, you cannot determine which states had the largest drop in SNAP usage from 2020 to 2024 because the necessary state-by-state year-over-year data are absent. The documents explain why the national decline occurred and show FY2024 state participation levels, which provides context, but resolving the ranking requires additional state-level time series not included among these sources ^{[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]}.