2015 BRFSS Survey Results: Piedmont North Carolina**

Perceived Nutrition Environment

To what degree would you agree with the statement, “It is easy to purchase healthy foods
in my neighborhood such as whole grain foods, low fat options, and fruits and vegetables.”

View results for a demographic group:
Select a different topic:
View results for a different geographical area:
  Total
Respond.^
Strongly agree Agree Neutral Disagree Strongly disagree
N % C.I.(95%) N % C.I.(95%) N % C.I.(95%) N % C.I.(95%) N % C.I.(95%)
North Carolina 5,644 1,973 33.6 32.1-35.1 2,745 49.1 47.5-50.7 325 6.2 5.5- 7.1 436 8.2 7.3- 9.1 165 3.0 2.4- 3.6
-Piedmont 2,809 1,054 36.4 34.3-38.5 1,345 47.8 45.6-49.9 156 5.8 4.8- 6.9 186 7.3 6.2- 8.6 68 2.7 2.1- 3.7
GENDER
Male 1,171 433 36.3 33.1-39.6 574 48.5 45.2-51.9 63 5.6 4.3- 7.4 80 7.2 5.6- 9.2 21 2.3 1.3- 4.0
Female 1,638 621 36.5 33.8-39.3 771 47.1 44.2-49.9 93 5.9 4.7- 7.4 106 7.5 6.0- 9.2 47 3.1 2.3- 4.3
RACE
Non-Hispanic White 1,823 779 42.4 39.8-45.1 828 44.6 41.9-47.3 83 4.4 3.5- 5.6 94 6.0 4.7- 7.5 39 2.6 1.8- 3.9
Non-Hispanic Black 576 174 28.1 24.0-32.6 263 45.5 40.7-50.4 45 9.0 6.5-12.4 69 13.1 10.1-16.7 25 4.3 2.8- 6.7
Other 374 87 20.9 16.8-25.8 243 67.4 61.8-72.6 22 6.2 4.0- 9.7 18 4.4 2.6- 7.4 *** *** ***
AGE
18-34 492 158 32.1 27.5-37.1 232 47.2 42.1-52.4 40 7.7 5.5-10.7 47 9.4 6.9-12.8 15 3.5 1.9- 6.2
35-44 439 153 34.4 29.7-39.5 209 48.3 43.0-53.6 26 5.8 3.7- 8.8 35 8.6 6.0-12.1 16 2.9 1.7- 5.0
45-54 535 205 38.6 34.1-43.3 255 47.4 42.7-52.2 25 4.6 3.0- 7.0 34 6.5 4.5- 9.3 16 2.9 1.7- 4.8
55-64 541 223 40.4 35.7-45.2 240 43.9 39.2-48.7 28 5.1 3.4- 7.5 36 8.1 5.5-11.8 14 2.6 1.4- 4.6
65-74 466 192 38.3 33.3-43.6 233 52.9 47.5-58.2 16 3.1 1.8- 5.1 21 3.4 2.1- 5.4 *** *** ***
75+ 299 105 35.6 29.5-42.3 163 51.2 44.6-57.7 18 7.8 4.6-12.8 *** *** *** *** *** ***
EDUCATION
Less Than H.S. 288 34 14.4 9.6-20.9 196 64.4 57.3-71.0 *** *** *** 32 11.6 7.9-16.6 *** *** ***
H.S. or G.E.D. 703 200 29.4 25.6-33.5 390 53.7 49.4-57.9 45 6.9 5.1- 9.4 60 8.8 6.7-11.6 *** *** ***
Some Post-H.S. 735 269 37.8 33.8-41.9 342 44.7 40.6-48.9 46 6.7 4.9- 9.2 52 7.4 5.4-10.0 26 3.4 2.3- 5.2
College Graduate 1,066 545 52.4 49.1-55.7 411 37.4 34.3-40.7 49 4.4 3.2- 5.9 40 3.8 2.7- 5.3 21 2.0 1.3- 3.1
HOUSEHOLD INCOME
Less than $15,000 236 47 17.1 12.3-23.2 131 57.3 49.6-64.7 *** *** *** 38 17.7 12.3-24.9 *** *** ***
$15,000- 24,999 437 109 24.5 20.0-29.7 255 56.6 51.0-62.1 24 5.4 3.5- 8.3 39 10.8 7.6-15.2 *** *** ***
$25,000- 34,999 235 75 30.9 24.4-38.4 121 51.9 44.1-59.7 16 6.2 3.6-10.5 16 6.4 3.7-10.9 *** *** ***
$35,000- 49,999 306 99 29.7 24.2-35.8 156 50.9 44.3-57.5 22 8.2 5.1-13.0 18 6.0 3.7- 9.6 *** *** ***
$50,000- 74,999 340 147 42.7 36.5-49.1 149 43.3 37.2-49.6 20 6.9 4.2-11.2 18 4.9 2.9- 8.2 *** *** ***
$75,000+ 687 375 53.9 49.7-58.1 255 37.6 33.6-41.8 25 3.0 2.0- 4.5 21 3.9 2.4- 6.0 *** *** ***
DISABILITY STATUS
Yes 655 235 35.3 31.1-39.8 306 44.1 39.7-48.6 36 5.6 3.8- 8.0 51 10.1 7.3-13.7 27 4.9 3.1- 7.7
No 2,144 814 36.7 34.4-39.1 1,036 48.8 46.3-51.3 120 5.8 4.8- 7.1 134 6.5 5.4- 7.9 40 2.1 1.5- 3.1
VETERAN STATUS
Veteran 308 131 44.2 37.9-50.7 142 45.6 39.3-52.0 16 5.1 3.0- 8.6 16 4.3 2.5- 7.2 *** *** ***
Non-Veteran 2,490 918 35.4 33.2-37.7 1,202 48.2 45.8-50.5 138 5.8 4.8- 7.0 168 7.7 6.5- 9.1 64 2.9 2.2- 4.0
RURAL-URBAN CATEGORY
Urban 1,473 633 42.6 39.6-45.6 648 43.7 40.7-46.7 77 5.4 4.2- 7.0 85 6.1 4.8- 7.7 30 2.2 1.4- 3.5
Regional City or Suburban 762 265 34.5 30.6-38.6 388 49.7 45.5-53.9 44 5.9 4.3- 8.2 48 7.5 5.5-10.3 17 2.3 1.4- 3.9
Rural 574 156 23.7 20.0-27.9 309 55.2 50.3-60.1 35 6.4 4.4- 9.2 53 10.2 7.5-13.8 21 4.5 2.7- 7.5

Back to Perceived Nutrition Environment.

PLEASE NOTE: Due to changes in the weighting methodology and other factors, results from 2015 are NOT comparable to 2010
and earlier years.

***The estimate was suppressed because it did not meet statistical reliability standards. See BRFSS 2015 Annual Results Technical Notes for more details.

^Use caution in interpreting cell sizes less than 50, % = Percentage, C.I.(95%) = Confidence Interval (at 95 percent probability level).
Percentages are weighted to population characteristics and therefore cannot be calculated exactly from the numbers in this table.

Eastern North Carolina: Beaufort, Bertie, Bladen, Brunswick, Camden, Carteret, Chowan, Columbus, Craven, Cumberland, Currituck, Dare, Duplin, Edgecombe, Gates, Greene, Halifax, Harnett, Hertford, Hoke, Hyde, Johnston, Jones, Lenoir, Martin, Nash, New Hanover, Northampton, Onslow, Pamlico, Pasquotank, Pender, Perquimans, Pitt, Robeson, Sampson, Scotland, Tyrrell, Washington, Wayne, and Wilson counties.
**Piedmont North Carolina: Alamance, Alexander, Anson, Cabarrus, Caswell, Catawba, Chatham, Cleveland, Davidson, Davie, Durham, Forsyth, Franklin, Gaston, Granville, Guilford, Iredell, Lee, Lincoln, Mecklenburg, Montgomery, Moore, Orange, Person, Randolph, Richmond, Rockingham, Rowan, Stanly, Stokes, Union, Vance, Wake, Warren, and Yadkin counties.
Western North Carolina: Alleghany, Ashe, Avery, Buncombe, Burke, Caldwell, Cherokee, Clay, Graham, Haywood, Henderson, Jackson, McDowell, Macon, Madison, Mitchell, Polk, Rutherford, Surry, Swain, Transylvania, Watauga, Wilkes, and Yancey counties.

BRFSS Home | Annual Questionnaires | Technical Notes

This page was generated on 21SEP16.

SCHS Home | FAQs | Contacts