In recent years, studies of differential access to resources such as food have been investigated through social capital measures. Social capital measures have used class based etic perspectives in order to determine why these differential outcomes exist. The theory base from which these measures are drawn is still debated in the interdisciplinary literature; and social capital measures have not been subject to context specific testing to determine their validity. This is, in part, due to the limited relationship between anthropology and social capital theory. Anthropology is in a unique position to develop emic measures which may better determine the utility of a class based concept like social capital. This research examines the validity of a theoretically and culturally defined model of social capital as a tool to understand differential access to the resource of food for a low income, food insecure population. Cognitive anthropological methods and the Household Food Insecurity Access Scale were adapted and used with samples of low income women seeking food assistance through a Tuscaloosa, Alabama non-profit. It was hypothesized that a shared model of social capital would exist for clients and that knowledge of the model would predict food security levels. The results do not support a single shared model, but indicate that subgroups may share information about resource access. The results also indicate that knowledge of this emic social capital tool is not predictive of food security levels. Results suggest that food security levels predict social capital knowledge, instead. This may indicate that experience with food security is a greater predictor of world view and knowledge development. This research supports further critique of the utility of social capital theory in the food security literature and the use of culturally specific measures.