The European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC) collects timely and comparable multidimensional microdata on income, poverty, social exclusion and living conditions.

The EU-SILC collection is a key instrument for providing information required by the European Semester (_[1]) and the European Pillar of Social Rights, and the main source of data for microsimulation purposes and flash estimates of income distribution and poverty rates.

AROPE remains crucial to monitor European social policies, especially to monitor the EU 2030 target on poverty and social exclusion. For more information, please consult EU social indicators.

The EU-SILC instrument provides two types of data:

• Cross-sectional data pertaining to a given time or a certain time period with variables on income, poverty, social exclusion and other living conditions.
• Longitudinal data pertaining to individual-level changes over time, observed periodically over four‐or more year rotation scheme (Annex III (2) of 2019/1700).

EU-SILC collects:

• annual variables,
• three-yearly modules,
• six-yearly modules,
• ad-hoc new policy needs modules,
• optional variables.

The variables collected are grouped by topic and detailed topic and transmitted to Eurostat in four main files (D-File, H-File, R-File and P-file).

The domain ‘Income and Living Conditions’ covers the following topics: persons at risk of poverty or social exclusion, income inequality, income distribution and monetary poverty, living conditions, material deprivation, and EU-SILC ad-hoc modules, which are structured into collections of indicators on specific topics.

In 2023, in addition to annual data, in EU-SILC were collected: the three yearly module on labour market and housing, the six yearly module on intergenerational transmission of advantages and disadvantages, housing difficulties, and the ad hoc subject on households energy efficiency.

Starting from 2021 onwards, the EU quality reports use the structure of the Single Integrated Metadata Structure (SIMS).

_{([1]) The European Semester is the European Union’s framework for the coordination and surveillance of economic and social policies.}

The European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC) collects timely and comparable multidimensional microdata on income, poverty, social exclusion and living conditions.

The EU-SILC collection is a key instrument for providing information required by the European Semester (_[1]) and the European Pillar of Social Rights, and the main source of data for microsimulation purposes and flash estimates of income distribution and poverty rates.

AROPE remains crucial to monitor European social policies, especially to monitor the EU 2030 target on poverty and social exclusion. For more information, please consult EU social indicators.

The EU-SILC instrument provides two types of data:

• Cross-sectional data pertaining to a given time or a certain time period with variables on income, poverty, social exclusion and other living conditions.
• Longitudinal data pertaining to individual-level changes over time, observed periodically over four‐or more year rotation scheme (Annex III (2) of 2019/1700).

EU-SILC collects:

• annual variables,
• three-yearly modules,
• six-yearly modules,
• ad-hoc new policy needs modules,
• optional variables.

The variables collected are grouped by topic and detailed topic and transmitted to Eurostat in four main files (D-File, H-File, R-File and P-file).

The domain ‘Income and Living Conditions’ covers the following topics: persons at risk of poverty or social exclusion, income inequality, income distribution and monetary poverty, living conditions, material deprivation, and EU-SILC ad-hoc modules, which are structured into collections of indicators on specific topics.

In 2023, in addition to annual data, in EU-SILC were collected: the three yearly module on labour market and housing, the six yearly module on intergenerational transmission of advantages and disadvantages, housing difficulties, and the ad hoc subject on households energy efficiency.

Starting from 2021 onwards, the EU quality reports use the structure of the Single Integrated Metadata Structure (SIMS).

_{([1]) The European Semester is the European Union’s framework for the coordination and surveillance of economic and social policies.}

As of 2019, about *** out of every 10 young adults in Spain lived at their parent's house. While this figure went up to **** percent for those aged 15 to 19 years, in the case of people aged 26 to 29, around ** percent were in this situation. For this older group, living in their own residence was the most common housing situation, with **** percent.

In 2024, 34.59 percent of all households in the United States were two person households. In 1970, this figure was at 28.92 percent. Single households Single mother households are usually the most common households with children under 18 years old found in the United States. As of 2021, the District of Columbia and North Dakota had the highest share of single-person households in the United States. Household size in the United States has decreased over the past century, due to customs and traditions changing. Families are typically more nuclear, whereas in the past, multigenerational households were more common. Furthermore, fertility rates have also decreased, meaning that women do not have as many children as they used to. Average households in Utah Out of all states in the U.S., Utah was reported to have the largest average household size. This predominately Mormon state has about three million inhabitants. The Church of the Latter-Day Saints, or Mormonism, plays a large role in Utah, and can contribute to the high birth rate and household size in Utah. The Church of Latter-Day Saints promotes having many children and tight-knit families. Furthermore, Utah has a relatively young population, due to Mormons typically marrying and starting large families younger than those in other states.

The Health Survey for England (HSE) monitors trends in the nation’s health and care. It provides information about adults aged 16 and over, and children aged 0 to 15, living in private households in England. The survey consists of an interview, followed by a visit from a nurse who takes some measurements and blood and saliva samples. Interviews for children aged 0 to 12 were carried out with a parent; children aged 13 to 15 were interviewed directly. Children aged 8 to 15 filled in a self-completion booklet about their drinking and smoking behaviour and young adults, aged between 16 and 17 completed these questions directly into a computer. A total of 8,205 adults (aged 16 and over) and 2,095 children (aged 0 to 15) were interviewed in the 2019 survey. 4,947 adults and 1,169 children had a nurse visit. Each survey in the series includes core questions, and measurements such as blood pressure, height and weight measurements and analysis of blood and saliva samples. In addition, there are modules of questions on specific topics that vary from year to year. The Main Findings follow this page via the link at the bottom. Detailed reports and a link to the supporting Excel tables can be found further down this page and include: • Overweight and obesity in adults and children • Eating Disorders • Adults' health-related behaviours (includes smoking and alcohol consumption) • Children’s health (includes smoking and alcohol consumption) • Providing care to family and friends • Adults' health (includes diabetes, hypertension, and high cholesterol) • Use of health care services

The European Union Statistics on Income and Living Conditions (EU-SILC) collects timely and comparable multidimensional microdata on income, poverty, social exclusion and living conditions.

The EU-SILC collection is a key instrument for providing information required by the European Semester (_[1]) and the European Pillar of Social Rights, and the main source of data for microsimulation purposes and flash estimates of income distribution and poverty rates.

AROPE remains crucial to monitor European social policies, especially to monitor the EU 2030 target on poverty and social exclusion. For more information, please consult EU social indicators.

The EU-SILC instrument provides two types of data:

• Cross-sectional data pertaining to a given time or a certain time period with variables on income, poverty, social exclusion and other living conditions.
• Longitudinal data pertaining to individual-level changes over time, observed periodically over four‐or more year rotation scheme (Annex III (2) of 2019/1700).

EU-SILC collects:

• annual variables,
• three-yearly modules,
• six-yearly modules,
• ad-hoc new policy needs modules,
• optional variables.

The variables collected are grouped by topic and detailed topic and transmitted to Eurostat in four main files (D-File, H-File, R-File and P-file).

The domain ‘Income and Living Conditions’ covers the following topics: persons at risk of poverty or social exclusion, income inequality, income distribution and monetary poverty, living conditions, material deprivation, and EU-SILC ad-hoc modules, which are structured into collections of indicators on specific topics.

In 2023, in addition to annual data, in EU-SILC were collected: the three yearly module on labour market and housing, the six yearly module on intergenerational transmission of advantages and disadvantages, housing difficulties, and the ad hoc subject on households energy efficiency.

Starting from 2021 onwards, the EU quality reports use the structure of the Single Integrated Metadata Structure (SIMS).

_{([1]) The European Semester is the European Union’s framework for the coordination and surveillance of economic and social policies.}

This report was written in collaboration between the Mayor's Office of Innovation and the Rochester Monroe Anti-Poverty Initiative (RMAPI) and released in December 2019. Executive SummaryThe Rochester Monroe Anti-Poverty Initiative (RMAPI) has selected single female headed households with children as one of its key target populations in which to focus strategy and its next phase of initiatives. This report is intended to provide additional insight on this population to support the next phase of RMAPI’s strategic planning as well as broader advocacy efforts on behalf of this population.

We begin with a brief summary of historic policy and societal factors known to have contributed to the current day inequities, written in collaboration with content experts from RMAPI.

The core of this report is a fact sheet based on analysis of US Census data. Major findings include:

Finding 1: Families headed by unmarried parents are a significant segment of the city population and account for the majority of individuals living below the poverty level in the city.

Finding 2: Unmarried households with children experience lower incomes, lower rates of home ownership, and higher rent burdens compared to their married counterparts

Finding 3: Women and people of color are overrepresented among the heads of unmarried households with children.

Finding 4: Four in ten unmarried householders with children have less than a high school education. Nearly 80 percent of those without a high school education are in poverty.

Finding 5: Unmarried householders with children in poverty are more likely to be disabled or face other common barriers to employment.

Finding 6: The more adults present in unmarried households with children, the less likely that household is to be in poverty. This trend amplifies when considering the number of employed adults.

Finding 7: Unmarried parents under age 40 head the majority of all households with children in Rochester. Younger householders correlate with higher poverty rates regardless of marriage status.

Finding 8: A birth before age 20, being unmarried, and having not completed high school education are three factors that, when compounded, are associated with poor economic outcomes.

Finding 9: The highest densities of unmarried householders with children are clustered in the highest poverty neighborhoods in the city of Rochester

We end with a discussion of the gaps in available data, acknowledging that there is room for further investigation and interpretation, data collection, and insights. We recommend readers to think critically about what is presented and how it might impact their own work in poverty reduction efforts. We present a series of questions that are a jumping off point for new inquiry and reflection. Methodology can be found in the Appendix.

Data Source:2017 Census American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, Public Microdata SampleData and documentation can be accessed here:https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/data/pums.html

The Youth Development Study (YDS) was initiated as a school-based study of adolescent children and their parents to examine the consequences of formative experiences in adolescence for mental health, value formation, educational achievement, and multiple facets of behavioral adjustment. Particular attention was directed to the impacts of early work experience. Data were also obtained about parent-child and peer relationships and experiences in school. As the study continued, the focus shifted to adult development and attainment and, most recently, mid-life adjustment and health. This comprehensive longitudinal study now encompasses three generations: the initial cohort studied from adolescence to mid-life (G2), their parents (G1), and their adolescent children (G3). Data from three generations in the same families enable study of intergenerational relationships and differences in the experience of adolescence and transition to adulthood across parent and child cohorts. The YDS covers a wide range of topics of interest to sociologists, social psychologists, developmental psychologists, and life course scholars, including the development and impacts of agentic resources, socioeconomic attainment, processes of inter- and intra-generational mobility, objective and subjective work conditions, family relationships, intergenerational relationships, mental and physical health, and well-being. In-school administration of paper surveys during the first four years of the study was supplemented by mailed surveys. Subsequent data collection took place entirely by mail, with 19 surveys conducted between 1988 and 2011. A final survey was conducted on-line in 2019. Survey data was obtained from the parents (G1) of this cohort during the first and fourth waves of the study (1988 and 1991). Surveys of the children (G3) began in 2009, continued in 2010 and 2011 (by mail) and in 2019-2020 (online). The Youth Development Study measures a wide range of formative experiences and both psychological and behavioral variables, using survey methodology. The G1 surveys obtained information about socioeconomic background as well as attitudes toward teenage employment, the parents' own employment as teenagers, their current work experiences, and educational expectations for their children. The G2 surveys during the high school years included detailed questions about students' work and volunteer experiences, as well as experiences in their family, school, and peer groups, with an emphasis on the ways that working affected other life domains, mental health, and well-being. Shorter surveys containing many of the same topics were administered to students in 1992, 1993, and 1994, and included questions about current family and living arrangements. In 1995, a full survey was administered covering the wide range of topics included in previous surveys as well as information about career plans and life events that had occurred in the past five years. G2 Waves 9 through 19 (1997-2011) included many of the same questions contained in earlier surveys and additional sections that focused on the respondents' educational experiences, family relationships, sources of living expenses, and health and well-being. The most recent G2 survey (2019), administered on-line, included questions about support of aging parents. The YDS is unique in its coverage of both objective and subjective work experiences from adolescence to mid-life. The topics covered by the G3 surveys are very similar to the G2 variables described above. Variables in each G2 and G3 wave are included in cross-wave codebooks, available at the Data Archive Codebook website. For an overview of the Youth Development Study, see Mortimer, Jeylan T. (2012) "The Evolution, Contributions, and Prospects of the Youth Development Study: An Investigation in Life Course Social Psychology." Social Psychology Quarterly 75(1, March):5-27.

Downloads of Add Health require submission of the following information, which is shared with the original producer of Add Health: supervisor name, supervisor email, and reason for download. A Data Guide for this study is available as a web page and for download. The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health (Add Health), 1994-2018 [Public Use] is a longitudinal study of a nationally representative sample of U.S. adolescents in grades 7 through 12 during the 1994-1995 school year. The Add Health cohort was followed into young adulthood with four in-home interviews, the most recent conducted in 2008 when the sample was aged 24-32. Add Health combines longitudinal survey data on respondents' social, economic, psychological, and physical well-being with contextual data on the family, neighborhood, community, school, friendships, peer groups, and romantic relationships. Add Health Wave I data collection took place between September 1994 and December 1995, and included both an in-school questionnaire and in-home interview. The in-school questionnaire was administered to more than 90,000 students in grades 7 through 12, and gathered information on social and demographic characteristics of adolescent respondents, education and occupation of parents, household structure, expectations for the future, self-esteem, health status, risk behaviors, friendships, and school-year extracurricular activities. All students listed on a sample school's roster were eligible for selection into the core in-home interview sample. In-home interviews included topics such as health status, health-facility utilization, nutrition, peer networks, decision-making processes, family composition and dynamics, educational aspirations and expectations, employment experience, romantic and sexual partnerships, substance use, and criminal activities. A parent, preferably the resident mother, of each adolescent respondent interviewed in Wave I was also asked to complete an interviewer-assisted questionnaire covering topics such as inheritable health conditions, marriages and marriage-like relationships, neighborhood characteristics, involvement in volunteer, civic, and school activities, health-affecting behaviors, education and employment, household income and economic assistance, parent-adolescent communication and interaction, parent's familiarity with the adolescent's friends and friends' parents. Add Health data collection recommenced for Wave II from April to August 1996, and included almost 15,000 follow-up in-home interviews with adolescents from Wave I. Interview questions were generally similar to Wave I, but also included questions about sun exposure and more detailed nutrition questions. Respondents were asked to report their height and weight during the course of the interview, and were also weighed and measured by the interviewer. From August 2001 to April 2002, Wave III data were collected through in-home interviews with 15,170 Wave I respondents (now 18 to 26 years old), as well as interviews with their partners. Respondents were administered survey questions designed to obtain information about family, relationships, sexual experiences, childbearing, and educational histories, labor force involvement, civic participation, religion and spirituality, mental health, health insurance, illness, delinquency and violence, gambling, substance abuse, and involvement with the criminal justice system. High School Transcript Release Forms were also collected at Wave III, and these data comprise the Education Data component of the Add Health study. Wave IV in-home interviews were conducted in 2008 and 2009 when the original Wave I respondents were 24 to 32 years old. Longitudinal survey data were collected on the social, economic, psychological, and health circumstances of respondents, as well as longitudinal geographic data. Survey questions were expanded on educational transitions, economic status and financial resources and strains, sleep patterns and sleep quality, eating habits and nutrition, illnesses and medications, physical activities, emotional content and quality of current or most recent romantic/cohabiting/marriage relationships, and maltreatment during childhood by caregivers. Dates and circumstances of key life events occurring in young adulthood were also recorded, including a complete marriage and cohabitation history, full

There were over 15 million millennials in the United Kingdom in 2024. This generation, sometimes called Generation Y were born between 1981 and 1996 and are mainly the children of the post-war Baby Boomer generation. As of 2024, Millennials were the largest generational cohort in the UK, followed by Generation X at 14 million people, Gen Z at 13.6 million, and then the Baby Boomer generation at 13.4 million. The most numerous single-year of age for Millennials, and the UK as a whole, was 33 at over 976,000. Boomerang generation The first cohort of millennials came of age at the turn of the century and have almost certainly been heavily influenced by the growth of internet accessibility during this time. The economic challenges faced by this generation may have a relation to the increasing share of young adults who live with their parents in the UK. This has led to the perhaps unfair, characterization of millennials as the boomerang generation, who failed to grow-up and mature. Some of these negative stereotypes regarding Millennials have since shifted to the next youngest generation, Generation Z, who entered the workplace in the mid-2010s. Generation Remain One of the main challenges that British millennials currently face are their prospects after Brexit. Although the United Kingdom voted to leave the European Union in June 2016, there were clear divisions between regions, classes and age-groups. Most millennials voted to remain in the Brexit referendum, with 73 percent of people aged 18 to 24, and 62 percent of those aged 25 to 34 voting to remain. As of October 2025, around a quarter of 25 to 49-year-olds intended to vote for the Labour Party, the same who would vote for the insurgent Reform Party, currently riding high in opinion polls. Millennials still appear to oppose Brexit, with approximately 69 percent of 25 to 49-year-olds believing Brexit to have been the wrong decision.

This is the second (wave 2) in a series of follow up reports to the Mental Health and Young People Survey (MHCYP) 2017, exploring the mental health of children and young people in February/March 2021, during the Coronavirus (COVID-19) pandemic and changes since 2017. Experiences of family life, education, and services during the COVID-19 pandemic are also examined. The sample for the Mental Health Survey for Children and Young People, 2021 (MHCYP 2021), wave 2 follow up was based on 3,667 children and young people who took part in the MHCYP 2017 survey, with both surveys also drawing on information collected from parents. Cross-sectional analyses are presented, addressing three primary aims: Aim 1: Comparing mental health between 2017 and 2021 – the likelihood of a mental disorder has been assessed against completion of the Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) in both years in Topic 1 by various demographics. Aim 2: Describing life during the COVID-19 pandemic - Topic 2 examines the circumstances and experiences of children and young people in February/March 2021 and the preceding months, covering: COVID-19 infection and symptoms. Feelings about social media use. Family connectedness. Family functioning. Education, including missed days of schooling, access to resources, and support for those with Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEND). Changes in circumstances. How lockdown and restrictions have affected children and young people’s lives. Seeking help for mental health concerns. Aim 3: Present more detailed data on the mental health, circumstances and experiences of children and young people by ethnic group during the coronavirus pandemic (where sample sizes allow). The data is broken down by gender and age bands of 6 to 10 year olds and 11 to 16 year olds for all categories, and 17 to 22 years old for certain categories where a time series is available, as well as by whether a child is unlikely to have a mental health disorder, possibly has a mental health disorder and probably has a mental health disorder. This study was funded by the Department of Health and Social Care, commissioned by NHS Digital, and carried out by the Office for National Statistics, the National Centre for Social Research, University of Cambridge and University of Exeter.

Growing Up in Australia: The Longitudinal Study of Australian Children (LSAC) is a major study following the development of approximately 10,000 young people and their families from all parts of Australia. It is conducted in partnership between the Department of Social Services, the Australian Institute of Family Studies and the Australian Bureau of Statistics with advice provided by a consortium of leading researchers. The study began in 2003 with a representative sample of children (who are now teens and young adults) from urban and rural areas of all states and territories in Australia. The study has a multi-disciplinary base, and examines a broad range of research questions about development and wellbeing over the life course in relation to topics such as parenting, family, peers, education, child care and health. It will continue to follow participants into adulthood. The study informs social policy and is used to identify opportunities for early intervention and prevention strategies. Participating families have been interviewed every two years from 2004, and between-wave mail-out questionnaires were sent to families in 2005 (Wave 1.5), 2007 (Wave 2.5) and 2009 (Wave 3.5). The B cohort (“Baby” cohort) of around 5,000 children was aged 0–1 years in 2003–04, and the K cohort (“Kinder” cohort) of around 5,000 children was aged 4–5 years in 2003–04. Study informants include the young person, their parents (both resident and non-resident), carers and teachers. Please note that this release of LSAC is now superseded, and is available by request for approved training courses only. For the current release, please visit https://ada.edu.au/lsac_current