In 2023, about 14 percent of District of Columbia's population lived below the poverty line. This accounts for persons or families whose collective income in the preceding 12 months was below the national poverty level of the United States.

Graph and download economic data for Percent of Population Below the Poverty Level (5-year estimate) in District of Columbia (S1701ACS011001) from 2012 to 2023 about DC, Washington, percent, poverty, 5-year, population, and USA.

Polygons in this layer represent low food access areas: areas of the District of Columbia which are estimated to be more than a 10-minute walk from the nearest full-service grocery store. These have been merged with Census poverty data to estimate how much of the population within these areas is food insecure (below 185% of the federal poverty line in addition to living in a low food access area).Office of Planning GIS followed several steps to create this layer, including: transit analysis, to eliminate areas of the District within a 10-minute walk of a grocery store; non-residential analysis, to eliminate areas of the District which do not contain residents and cannot classify as low food access areas (such as parks and the National Mall); and Census tract division, to estimate population and poverty rates within the newly created polygon boundaries.Fields contained in this layer include:Intermediary calculation fields for the aforementioned analysis, and:PartPop2: The total population estimated to live within the low food access area polygon (derived from Census tract population, assuming even distribution across the polygon after removing non-residential areas, followed by the removal of population living within a grocery store radius.)PrtOver185: The portion of PartPop2 which is estimated to have household income above 185% of the federal poverty line (the food secure population)PrtUnd185: The portion of PartPop2 which is estimated to have household income below 185% of the federal poverty line (the food insecure population)PercentUnd185: A calculated field showing PrtUnd185 as a percent of PartPop2. This is the percent of the population in the polygon which is food insecure (both living in a low food access area and below 185% of the federal poverty line).Note that the polygon representing Joint Base Anacostia-Bolling was removed from this analysis. While technically classifying as a low food access area based on the OP Grocery Stores layer (since the JBAB Commissary, which only serves military members, is not included in that layer), it is recognized that those who do live on the base have access to the commissary for grocery needs.Last updated November 2017.

Graph and download economic data for Estimated Percent of People of All Ages in Poverty for District of Columbia (PPAADC11000A156NCEN) from 1989 to 2023 about DC, percent, child, poverty, and USA.

2020 data excluded because the U.S. Census Bureau did not release 2020 ACS 1-year estimates due to COVID-19. Some racial and ethnic categories are suppressed to avoid misleading estimates when the relative standard error exceeds 30%.

Data Source: American Community Survey (ACS) 1-Year Estimates

Why This Matters

Poverty threatens the overall well-being of individuals and families, limiting access to stable housing, healthy foods, health care, and educational and employment opportunities, among other basic needs.Poverty is associated with a higher risk of adverse health outcomes, including chronic physical and mental illness, lower life expectancy, developmental delays, and others.

Racist policies and practices have contributed to racial economic inequities. Nationally, Black, Indigenous, and people of color experience poverty at higher rates than white Americans, on average.

The District's Response

Boosting assistance programs that provide temporary cash and health benefits to help low-income residents meet their basic needs, including Medicaid, TANF For District Families, SNAP, etc.

Housing assistance and employment and career training programs to support resident’s housing and employment security. These include the Emergency Rental Assistance Program, Permanent Supportive Housing vouchers, Career MAP, the DC Infrastructure Academy, among other programs and services.

Creation of the DC Commission on Poverty to study poverty issues, evaluate poverty reduction initiatives, and make recommendations to the Mayor and the Council.

Gambia GM: (DC)Poverty Headcount Ratio at $1.90 a Day: 2011 PPP: % of Population data was reported at 10.100 % in 2015. This records a decrease from the previous number of 25.100 % for 2010. Gambia GM: (DC)Poverty Headcount Ratio at $1.90 a Day: 2011 PPP: % of Population data is updated yearly, averaging 35.200 % from Dec 1998 (Median) to 2015, with 4 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 70.500 % in 1998 and a record low of 10.100 % in 2015. Gambia GM: (DC)Poverty Headcount Ratio at $1.90 a Day: 2011 PPP: % of Population data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Gambia – Table GM.World Bank: Poverty. Poverty headcount ratio at $1.90 a day is the percentage of the population living on less than $1.90 a day at 2011 international prices. As a result of revisions in PPP exchange rates, poverty rates for individual countries cannot be compared with poverty rates reported in earlier editions.; ; World Bank, Development Research Group. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/index.htm).; ; The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than one thousand six hundred household surveys across 164 countries in six regions and 25 other high income countries (industrialized economies). While income distribution data are published for all countries with data available, poverty data are published for low- and middle-income countries and countries eligible to receive loans from the World Bank (such as Chile) and recently graduated countries (such as Estonia) only. The aggregated numbers for low- and middle-income countries correspond to the totals of 6 regions in PovcalNet, which include low- and middle-income countries and countries eligible to receive loans from the World Bank (such as Chile) and recently graduated countries (such as Estonia). See PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/WhatIsNew.aspx) for definitions of geographical regions and industrialized countries.

ACS 1-year estimates are based on data collected over one calendar year, offering more current information but with a higher margin of error. ACS 5-year estimates combine five years of data, providing more reliable information but less current. Both are based on probability samples. Some racial and ethnic categories are suppressed to avoid misleading estimates when the relative standard error exceeds 30%.

Data Source: American Community Survey (ACS) 1- & 5-Year Estimates

Why This Matters

Poverty threatens the overall well-being of individuals and families, limiting access to stable housing, healthy foods, health care, and educational and employment opportunities, among other basic needs.Poverty is associated with a higher risk of adverse health outcomes, including chronic physical and mental illness, lower life expectancy, developmental delays, and others.

Racist policies and practices have contributed to racial economic inequities. Nationally, Black, Indigenous, and people of color experience poverty at higher rates than white Americans, on average.

The District's Response

Boosting assistance programs that provide temporary cash and health benefits to help low-income residents meet their basic needs, including Medicaid, TANF For District Families, SNAP, etc.

Housing assistance and employment and career training programs to support resident’s housing and employment security. These include the Emergency Rental Assistance Program, Permanent Supportive Housing vouchers, Career MAP, the DC Infrastructure Academy, among other programs and services.

Creation of the DC Commission on Poverty to study poverty issues, evaluate poverty reduction initiatives, and make recommendations to the Mayor and the Council.

Gambia GM: (DC)Poverty Headcount Ratio at $3.20 a Day: 2011 PPP: % of Population data was reported at 37.800 % in 2015. This records a decrease from the previous number of 53.000 % for 2010. Gambia GM: (DC)Poverty Headcount Ratio at $3.20 a Day: 2011 PPP: % of Population data is updated yearly, averaging 61.300 % from Dec 1998 (Median) to 2015, with 4 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 86.800 % in 1998 and a record low of 37.800 % in 2015. Gambia GM: (DC)Poverty Headcount Ratio at $3.20 a Day: 2011 PPP: % of Population data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Gambia – Table GM.World Bank: Poverty. Poverty headcount ratio at $3.20 a day is the percentage of the population living on less than $3.20 a day at 2011 international prices. As a result of revisions in PPP exchange rates, poverty rates for individual countries cannot be compared with poverty rates reported in earlier editions.; ; World Bank, Development Research Group. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/index.htm).; ; The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than one thousand six hundred household surveys across 164 countries in six regions and 25 other high income countries (industrialized economies). While income distribution data are published for all countries with data available, poverty data are published for low- and middle-income countries and countries eligible to receive loans from the World Bank (such as Chile) and recently graduated countries (such as Estonia) only. The aggregated numbers for low- and middle-income countries correspond to the totals of 6 regions in PovcalNet, which include low- and middle-income countries and countries eligible to receive loans from the World Bank (such as Chile) and recently graduated countries (such as Estonia). See PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/WhatIsNew.aspx) for definitions of geographical regions and industrialized countries.

Poverty Area MeasuresThis data product provides poverty area measures for counties across 50 States and Washington DC. The measures include indicators of high poverty areas, extreme poverty areas, persistent poverty areas, and enduring poverty areas for Decennial Census years 1960–2000 and for American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year periods spanning both 2007–11 and 2015–19.HighlightsThis data product uniquely provides poverty area measures at the census-tract level for decennial years 1970 through 2000 and 5-year periods spanning 2007–11 and 2015–19.The poverty area measure—enduring poverty—is introduced, which captures the entrenchment of high poverty in counties for Decennial Census years 1960–2000 and for ACS 5-year periods spanning 2007–11 and 2015–19. The same is available for census tracts beginning in 1970.High and extreme poverty area measures are provided for various data years, offering end-users the flexibility to adjust persistent poverty area measures to meet their unique needs.All measures are geographically standardized to allow for direct comparison over time and for census tracts within county analysis.Diverse geocoding is provided, which can be used for mapping/GIS applications, to link to supplemental data (e.g., USDA, Economic Research Service’s Atlas of Rural and Small-Town America), and to explore various spatial categories (e.g., regions and metro/nonmetro status). DefinitionsHigh poverty: areas with a poverty rate of 20.0 percent or more in a single time period.Extreme poverty: areas with a poverty rate of 40.0 percent or more in a single time period.Persistent poverty: areas with a poverty rate of 20.0 percent or more for 4 consecutive time periods, about 10 years apart, spanning approximately 30 years (baseline time period plus 3 evaluation time periods).Enduring poverty: areas with a poverty rate of 20.0 percent or more for at least 5 consecutive time periods, about 10 years apart, spanning approximately 40 years or more (baseline time period plus four or more evaluation time periods).Additional information about the measures can be found in the downloadable Excel file, which includes the documentation, data, and codebook for the poverty area measures (county and tract).The next update to this data product—planned for early 2023—is expected to include the addition of poverty area measures for the 5-year period 2017–21.Data SetLast UpdatedNext UpdatePoverty area measures (in CSV format)11/10/2022Poverty area measures11/10/2022Poverty Area MeasuresOverviewBackground and UsesERS's Legacy of Poverty Area MeasurementDocumentationDescriptions and MapsLast updated: Thursday, November 10, 2022For more information, contact: Tracey Farrigan and Austin SandersRecommended CitationU.S. Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service. Poverty Area Measures, November 2022.

Indonesia (DC)Average Monthly Poverty Line per Capita: Riau Islands: Riau Islands data was reported at 290,994.000 IDR in 2012. This records an increase from the previous number of 208,350.000 IDR for 2007. Indonesia (DC)Average Monthly Poverty Line per Capita: Riau Islands: Riau Islands data is updated yearly, averaging 198,185.000 IDR from Dec 2005 (Median) to 2012, with 4 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 290,994.000 IDR in 2012 and a record low of 174,756.000 IDR in 2005. Indonesia (DC)Average Monthly Poverty Line per Capita: Riau Islands: Riau Islands data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Central Bureau of Statistics. The data is categorized under Indonesia Premium Database’s Socio and Demographic – Table ID.GAE015: Poverty Line: by Regency.

Indonesia (DC)Poverty Severity Index: Riau Islands: Riau Islands data was reported at 0.140 % in 2012. This records a decrease from the previous number of 0.440 % for 2007. Indonesia (DC)Poverty Severity Index: Riau Islands: Riau Islands data is updated yearly, averaging 0.575 % from Dec 2005 (Median) to 2012, with 4 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 1.560 % in 2005 and a record low of 0.140 % in 2012. Indonesia (DC)Poverty Severity Index: Riau Islands: Riau Islands data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Central Bureau of Statistics. The data is categorized under Indonesia Premium Database’s Socio and Demographic – Table ID.GAE011: Poverty Severity Index: by Regency.

Indonesia (DC)Poverty Gap Index: Riau Islands: Riau Islands data was reported at 0.820 % in 2012. This records a decrease from the previous number of 1.850 % for 2007. Indonesia (DC)Poverty Gap Index: Riau Islands: Riau Islands data is updated yearly, averaging 2.175 % from Dec 2005 (Median) to 2012, with 4 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 3.880 % in 2005 and a record low of 0.820 % in 2012. Indonesia (DC)Poverty Gap Index: Riau Islands: Riau Islands data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Central Bureau of Statistics. The data is categorized under Indonesia Premium Database’s Socio and Demographic – Table ID.GAE007: Poverty Gap Index: by Regency.

Note: These layers were compiled by Esri's Demographics Team using data from the Census Bureau's American Community Survey. These data sets are not owned by the City of Rochester.Overview of the map/data: This map shows the percentage of the population living below the federal poverty level over the previous 12 months, shown by tract, county, and state boundaries. Estimates are from the 2018 ACS 5-year samples. This service is updated annually to contain the most currently released American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year data, and contains estimates and margins of error. There are also additional calculated attributes related to this topic, which can be mapped or used within analysis. Current Vintage: 2019-2023ACS Table(s): B17020, C17002Data downloaded from: Census Bureau's API for American Community Survey Date of API call: December 12, 2024National Figures: data.census.govThe United States Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS):About the SurveyGeography & ACSTechnical DocumentationNews & UpdatesThis ready-to-use layer can be used within ArcGIS Pro, ArcGIS Online, its configurable apps, dashboards, Story Maps, custom apps, and mobile apps. Data can also be exported for offline workflows. Please cite the Census and ACS when using this data.Data Note from the Census:Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. The degree of uncertainty for an estimate arising from sampling variability is represented through the use of a margin of error. The value shown here is the 90 percent margin of error. The margin of error can be interpreted as providing a 90 percent probability that the interval defined by the estimate minus the margin of error and the estimate plus the margin of error (the lower and upper confidence bounds) contains the true value. In addition to sampling variability, the ACS estimates are subject to nonsampling error (for a discussion of nonsampling variability, see Accuracy of the Data). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables.Data Processing Notes:This layer will be updated automatically when the most current vintage of ACS data is released each year, usually in December. The layer always contains the latest available ACS 5-year estimates. It is updated annually within days of the Census Bureau's release schedule. Click here to learn more about ACS data releases.Boundaries come from the US Census TIGER geodatabases. Boundaries are updated at the same time as the data updates (annually), and the boundary vintage appropriately matches the data vintage as specified by the Census. These are Census boundaries with water and/or coastlines clipped for cartographic purposes. For census tracts, the water cutouts are derived from a subset of the 2010 AWATER (Area Water) boundaries offered by TIGER. For state and county boundaries, the water and coastlines are derived from the coastlines of the 500k TIGER Cartographic Boundary Shapefiles. The original AWATER and ALAND fields are still available as attributes within the data table (units are square meters). The States layer contains 52 records - all US states, Washington D.C., and Puerto Rico.Census tracts with no population are removed from this data service (Census Tracts beginning with 99).Percentages and derived counts, and associated margins of error, are calculated values (that can be identified by the "_calc_" stub in the field name), and abide by the specifications defined by the American Community Survey.Field alias names were created based on the Table Shells file available from the American Community Survey Summary File Documentation page.Negative values (e.g., -555555...) have been set to null. These negative values exist in the raw API data to indicate the following situations:The margin of error column indicates that either no sample observations or too few sample observations were available to compute a standard error and thus the margin of error. A statistical test is not appropriate.Either no sample observations or too few sample observations were available to compute an estimate, or a ratio of medians cannot be calculated because one or both of the median estimates falls in the lowest interval or upper interval of an open-ended distribution.The median falls in the lowest interval of an open-ended distribution, or in the upper interval of an open-ended distribution. A statistical test is not appropriate.The estimate is controlled. A statistical test for sampling variability is not appropriate.The data for this geographic area cannot be displayed because the number of sample cases is too small. NOTE: any calculated percentages or counts that contain estimates that have null margins of error yield null margins of error for the calculated fields.

Gambia GM: (DC)Poverty Gap at $1.90 a Day: 2011 PPP: % data was reported at 2.200 % in 2015. This records a decrease from the previous number of 7.400 % for 2010. Gambia GM: (DC)Poverty Gap at $1.90 a Day: 2011 PPP: % data is updated yearly, averaging 12.550 % from Dec 1998 (Median) to 2015, with 4 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 36.000 % in 1998 and a record low of 2.200 % in 2015. Gambia GM: (DC)Poverty Gap at $1.90 a Day: 2011 PPP: % data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Gambia – Table GM.World Bank.WDI: Poverty. Poverty gap at $1.90 a day (2011 PPP) is the mean shortfall in income or consumption from the poverty line $1.90 a day (counting the nonpoor as having zero shortfall), expressed as a percentage of the poverty line. This measure reflects the depth of poverty as well as its incidence. As a result of revisions in PPP exchange rates, poverty rates for individual countries cannot be compared with poverty rates reported in earlier editions.; ; World Bank, Development Research Group. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/index.htm).; ; The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than one thousand six hundred household surveys across 164 countries in six regions and 25 other high income countries (industrialized economies). While income distribution data are published for all countries with data available, poverty data are published for low- and middle-income countries and countries eligible to receive loans from the World Bank (such as Chile) and recently graduated countries (such as Estonia) only. The aggregated numbers for low- and middle-income countries correspond to the totals of 6 regions in PovcalNet, which include low- and middle-income countries and countries eligible to receive loans from the World Bank (such as Chile) and recently graduated countries (such as Estonia). See PovcalNet (http://iresearch.worldbank.org/PovcalNet/WhatIsNew.aspx) for definitions of geographical regions and industrialized countries.

When analyzing the ratio of homelessness to state population, New York, Vermont, and Oregon had the highest rates in 2023. However, Washington, D.C. had an estimated ** homeless individuals per 10,000 people, which was significantly higher than any of the 50 states. Homeless people by race The U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development performs homeless counts at the end of January each year, which includes people in both sheltered and unsheltered locations. The estimated number of homeless people increased to ******* in 2023 – the highest level since 2007. However, the true figure is likely to be much higher, as some individuals prefer to stay with family or friends - making it challenging to count the actual number of homeless people living in the country. In 2023, nearly half of the people experiencing homelessness were white, while the number of Black homeless people exceeded *******. How many veterans are homeless in America? The  number of homeless veterans in the United States has halved since 2010. The state of California, which is currently suffering a homeless crisis, accounted for the highest number of homeless veterans in 2022. There are many causes of homelessness among veterans of the U.S. military, including post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), substance abuse problems, and a lack of affordable housing.

2018 DC School Report Card. STAR Framework student group scores by school and school framework. The STAR Framework measures performance for 10 different student groups with a minimum n size of 10 or more students at the school. The student groups are All Students, Students with Disabilities, Student who are At Risk, English Learners, and students who identify as the following ESSA-defined racial/ethnic groups: American Indian or Alaskan Native, Asian, Black or African American, Hispanic/Latino of any race, Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander, White, and Two or more races. The Alternative School Framework includes an eleventh student group, At-Risk Students with Disabilities.Some students are included in the school- and LEA-level aggregations that will display on the DC School Report Card but are not included in calculations for the STAR Framework. These students are included in the “All Report Card Students” student group to distinguish from the “All Students” group used for the STAR Framework.Supplemental:Metric scores are not reported for n-sizes less than 10; metrics that have an n-size less than 10 are not included in calculation of STAR scores and ratings.At the state level, teacher data is reported on the DC School Report Card for all schools, high-poverty schools, and low-poverty schools. The definition for high-poverty and low-poverty schools is included in DC's ESSA State Plan. At the school level, teacher data is reported for the entire school, and at the LEA-level, teacher data is reported for all schools only.On the STAR Framework, 203 schools received STAR scores and ratings based on data from the 2017-18 school year. Of those 203 schools, 2 schools closed after the completion of the 2017-18 school year (Excel Academy PCS and Washington Mathematics Science Technology PCHS). Because those two schools closed, they do not receive a School Report Card and report card metrics were not calculated for those schools.Schools with non-traditional grade configurations may be assigned multiple school frameworks as part of the STAR Framework. For example, a K-8 school would be assigned the Elementary School Framework and the Middle School Framework. Because a school may have multiple school frameworks, the total number of school framework scores across the city will be greater than the total number of schools that received a STAR score and rating.Detailed information about the metrics and calculations for the DC School Report Card and STAR Framework can be found in the 2018 DC School Report Card and STAR Framework Technical Guide (https://osse.dc.gov/publication/2018-dc-school-report-card-and-star-framework-technical-guide).

The Urban Institute undertook a comprehensive assessment of communities approaching decay to provide public officials with strategies for identifying communities in the early stages of decay and intervening effectively to prevent continued deterioration and crime. Although community decline is a dynamic spiral downward in which the physical condition of the neighborhood, adherence to laws and conventional behavioral norms, and economic resources worsen, the question of whether decay fosters or signals increasing risk of crime, or crime fosters decay (as investors and residents flee as reactions to crime), or both, is not easily answered. Using specific indicators to identify future trends, predictor models for Washington, DC, and Cleveland were prepared, based on data available for each city. The models were designed to predict whether a census tract should be identified as at risk for very high crime and were tested using logistic regression. The classification of a tract as a "very high crime" tract was based on its crime rate compared to crime rates for other tracts in the same city. To control for differences in population and to facilitate cross-tract comparisons, counts of crime incidents and other events were converted to rates per 1,000 residents. Tracts with less than 100 residents were considered nonresidential or institutional and were deleted from the analysis. Washington, DC, variables include rates for arson and drug sales or possession, percentage of lots zoned for commercial use, percentage of housing occupied by owners, scale of family poverty, presence of public housing units for 1980, 1983, and 1988, and rates for aggravated assaults, auto thefts, burglaries, homicides, rapes, and robberies for 1980, 1983, 1988, and 1990. Cleveland variables include rates for auto thefts, burglaries, homicides, rapes, robberies, drug sales or possession, and delinquency filings in juvenile court, and scale of family poverty for 1980 through 1989. Rates for aggravated assaults are provided for 1986 through 1989 and rates for arson are provided for 1983 through 1988.

2018 DC School Report Card. A school framework is a set of metrics and weighted domains based on the school's grade configuration or school designations. The STAR Framework contains four school frameworks: Elementary School Framework, Middle School Framework, High School Framework, and Alternative School Framework. The Elementary School Framework has two versions, one for schools with Pre-Kindergarten and one for schools without Pre-Kindergarten.Supplemental:Metric scores are not reported for n-sizes less than 10; metrics that have an n-size less than 10 are not included in calculation of STAR scores and ratings.At the state level, teacher data is reported on the DC School Report Card for all schools, high-poverty schools, and low-poverty schools. The definition for high-poverty and low-poverty schools is included in DC's ESSA State Plan. At the school level, teacher data is reported for the entire school, and at the LEA-level, teacher data is reported for all schools only.On the STAR Framework, 203 schools received STAR scores and ratings based on data from the 2017-18 school year. Of those 203 schools, 2 schools closed after the completion of the 2017-18 school year (Excel Academy PCS and Washington Mathematics Science Technology PCHS). Because those two schools closed, they do not receive a School Report Card and report card metrics were not calculated for those schools.Schools with non-traditional grade configurations may be assigned multiple school frameworks as part of the STAR Framework. For example, a K-8 school would be assigned the Elementary School Framework and the Middle School Framework. Because a school may have multiple school frameworks, the total number of school framework scores across the city will be greater than the total number of schools that received a STAR score and rating.Detailed information about the metrics and calculations for the DC School Report Card and STAR Framework can be found in the 2018 DC School Report Card and STAR Framework Technical Guide (https://osse.dc.gov/publication/2018-dc-school-report-card-and-star-framework-technical-guide).

At-risk-of-poverty rate by poverty threshold, age and sex