In 2023, it was estimated that around ** percent of people in the United States living with a disability were in poverty. In comparison, the poverty rate among people in the U.S. without a disability was **** percent. A disability is any physical or mental condition that significantly impacts a person's ability to carry out daily tasks or life activities. How many people in the United States are disabled? In 2023, around ** percent of people in the United States were thought to be living with a disability. Types of disabilities include those that affect hearing, cognition, self-care, mobility, and vision. The most common type of disability in the United States is ambulatory disabilities, which impairs a person’s ability to walk. In 2023, almost ** percent of those aged 75 years and older in the U.S. had an ambulatory disability. However, disabilities are far less common among younger people, with less than **** percent of those aged 21 to 64 suffering from an ambulatory disability. Employment among the disabled The most obvious reason why the poverty rate among those with a disability is higher than those without a disability is because disabilities affect a person’s ability to work and be employed. In 2023, the employment rate for those with a disability was **** percent, compared to an employment rate of **** percent among those without a disability. Those with hearing disabilities are the most likely to be employed, with a rate of around ** percent, compared to an employment rate of ** percent among those with an ambulatory disability. Still, those with disabilities who do work have lower annual median earnings than those without disabilities. In 2023, the annual median earnings for U.S. adults without a disability were ****** U.S. dollars, compared to ****** U.S. dollars for those with a disability.

In 2023, around **** percent of persons with a disability in the United States were living below the national poverty line. However, **** percent of persons with a disability lived at or above *** percent of the poverty level.

Poverty and low-income statistics by disability status, age group, sex and economic family type, Canada, annual.

In 2022, it was reported that 41.2 percent of the population with a disability in Mexico lived in poverty. People without disabilities living in poverty in Mexico stood at 35.9 percent, being less likely to face poverty.

The Department of Veterans Affairs provides official estimates and projections of the Veteran population using the Veteran Population Projection Model (VetPop). Based on the latest model VetPop2023 and the most recent national survey estimates from the 2023 American Community Survey 1-Year (ACS) data, the projected number of Veterans living in the 50 states, DC and Puerto Rico for fiscal years, 2023 to 2025, are allocated to Urban and Rural areas. As defined by the Census Bureau, Rural encompasses all population, housing, and territory not included within an Urban area (https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/geography/guidance/geo-areas/urban-rural.html). This table contains the Veteran estimates by urban/rural, age group, poverty, and disability. The poverty level and disability are determined by ACS based on responses on total income and functional difficulties. Refer to the sections on Poverty and Disability Status in the document, https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/tech_docs/subject_definitions/2023_ACSSubjectDefinitions.pdf Note: rounding to the nearest 1,000 is always appropriate for VetPop estimates.

In 2016-2018, 12.7 percent of children living in families at 100 percent or more of the federal poverty level had been diagnosed with ADHD or a learning disability. The statistic illustrates the prevalence of children aged 3-17 years ever diagnosed with ADHD or a learning disability in the U.S. from 2016 to 2018, by poverty level and ethnicity.

Poverty and low-income statistics by disability status, age group, sex and economic family type, Canada, annual.

🇨🇦 캐나다

BackgroundYouth with disability contribute to a high burden of disease but are often neglected. This study aims to estimate the prevalence of disability and its association with poverty among Chinese youth aged 15–24 years.MethodsData were obtained from a nationally representative population-based cross-sectional survey in 2006 and its follow-up investigations from 2007 to 2013 in 31 provinces of mainland China. A total of 357 856 non-institutionalized youth at age of 15–24 years were investigated. Population weighted numbers and prevalence rates with 95% CI of various types and causes of disabilities for the overall youth were estimated where appropriate. Univariate and multivariate logistic regressions were used to identify the association between poverty and each type of and cause-specific disability.ResultsA weighted number of 3 633 838 youth were living with disability in China, with a prevalence rate of 19.7 per thousand Chinese youth. Youth living in poor households were 3.84 times more likely to be with disability than those living in affluent households (95% CI: 3.56–4.14). Associations were similar for most types of and cause-specific disabilities. Among youth with disability, those from poor households had less healthcare service use (OR: 0.71, 95% CI: 0.61–0.82) than those from affluent households.ConclusionA significant number of Chinese youth were living with disability, and poverty is significant associated with the disability among youth. Investment in health and disability prevention are essential to the development of youth, as well as their families and communities.

In 2022, it was estimated that around 26 percent of people in the United States living with a disability were in poverty. In comparison, the poverty rate among people in the U.S. without a disability was 11.5 percent. A disability is any physical or mental condition that significantly impacts a person's ability to carry out daily tasks or life activities.

How many people in the United States are disabled? In 2022, around 14 percent of people in the United States were thought to be living with a disability. Types of disabilities include those that affect hearing, cognition, self-care, mobility, and vision. The most common type of disability in the United States is ambulatory disabilities, which impair a person’s ability to walk. In 2021, almost 30 percent of those aged 75 years and older in the U.S. had an ambulatory disability. However, disabilities are far less common among younger people, with less than five percent of those aged 21 to 64 suffering from an ambulatory disability.

Employment among the disabled The most obvious reason why the poverty rate among those with a disability is higher than those without a disability is because disabilities affect a person’s ability to work and be employed. In 2022, the employment rate for those with a disability was 44.5 percent, compared to an employment rate of 79 percent among those without a disability. Those with hearing disabilities are the most likely to be employed, with a rate of around 56 percent, compared to an employment rate of 27 percent among those with an ambulatory disability. Still, those with disabilities who do work have lower annual median earnings than those without disabilities. In 2022, the annual median earnings for U.S. adults without a disability was 55,208 U.S. dollars, compared to 46,887 U.S. dollars for those with a disability.

NOTE: Data based on a sample. For information on confidentiality.protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, definitions, and.count corrections see.http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2000/doc/sf4.pdf

The Digital Divide Index or DDI ranges in value from 0 to 100, where 100 indicates the highest digital divide. It is composed of two scores, also ranging from 0 to 100: the infrastructure/adoption (INFA) score and the socioeconomic (SE) score.The INFA score groups five variables related to broadband infrastructure and adoption: (1) percentage of total 2020 population without access to fixed broadband of at least 100 Mbps download and 20 Mbps upload as of 2020 based on Ookla Speedtest® open dataset; (2) percent of homes without a computing device (desktops, laptops, smartphones, tablets, etc.); (3) percent of homes with no internet access (have no internet subscription, including cellular data plans or dial-up); (4) median maximum advertised download speeds; and (5) median maximum advertised upload speeds.The SE score groups five variables known to impact technology adoption: (1) percent population ages 65 and over; (2) percent population 25 and over with less than high school; (3) individual poverty rate; (4) percent of noninstitutionalized civilian population with a disability: and (5) a brand new digital inequality or internet income ratio measure (IIR). In other words, these variables indirectly measure adoption since they are potential predictors of lagging technology adoption or reinforcing existing inequalities that also affect adoption.These two scores are combined to calculate the overall DDI score. If a particular county or census tract has a higher INFA score versus a SE score, efforts should be made to improve broadband infrastructure. If on the other hand, a particular geography has a higher SE score versus an INFA score, efforts should be made to increase digital literacy and exposure to the technology’s benefits.The DDI measures primarily physical access/adoption and socioeconomic characteristics that may limit motivation, skills, and usage. Due to data limitations it was designed as a descriptive and pragmatic tool and is not intended to be comprehensive. Rather it should help initiate important discussions among community leaders and residents.

Goal 1End poverty in all its forms everywhereTarget 1.1: By 2030, eradicate extreme poverty for all people everywhere, currently measured as people living on less than $1.25 a dayIndicator 1.1.1: Proportion of the population living below the international poverty line by sex, age, employment status and geographic location (urban/rural)SI_POV_DAY1: Proportion of population below international poverty line (%)SI_POV_EMP1: Employed population below international poverty line, by sex and age (%)Target 1.2: By 2030, reduce at least by half the proportion of men, women and children of all ages living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national definitionsIndicator 1.2.1: Proportion of population living below the national poverty line, by sex and ageSI_POV_NAHC: Proportion of population living below the national poverty line (%)Indicator 1.2.2: Proportion of men, women and children of all ages living in poverty in all its dimensions according to national definitionsSD_MDP_MUHC: Proportion of population living in multidimensional poverty (%)SD_MDP_ANDI: Average proportion of deprivations for people multidimensionally poor (%)SD_MDP_MUHHC: Proportion of households living in multidimensional poverty (%)SD_MDP_CSMP: Proportion of children living in child-specific multidimensional poverty (%)Target 1.3: Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all, including floors, and by 2030 achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerableIndicator 1.3.1: Proportion of population covered by social protection floors/systems, by sex, distinguishing children, unemployed persons, older persons, persons with disabilities, pregnant women, newborns, work-injury victims and the poor and the vulnerableSI_COV_MATNL: [ILO] Proportion of mothers with newborns receiving maternity cash benefit (%)SI_COV_POOR: [ILO] Proportion of poor population receiving social assistance cash benefit, by sex (%)SI_COV_SOCAST: [World Bank] Proportion of population covered by social assistance programs (%)SI_COV_SOCINS: [World Bank] Proportion of population covered by social insurance programs (%)SI_COV_CHLD: [ILO] Proportion of children/households receiving child/family cash benefit, by sex (%)SI_COV_UEMP: [ILO] Proportion of unemployed persons receiving unemployment cash benefit, by sex (%)SI_COV_VULN: [ILO] Proportion of vulnerable population receiving social assistance cash benefit, by sex (%)SI_COV_WKINJRY: [ILO] Proportion of employed population covered in the event of work injury, by sex (%)SI_COV_BENFTS: [ILO] Proportion of population covered by at least one social protection benefit, by sex (%)SI_COV_DISAB: [ILO] Proportion of population with severe disabilities receiving disability cash benefit, by sex (%)SI_COV_LMKT: [World Bank] Proportion of population covered by labour market programs (%)SI_COV_PENSN: [ILO] Proportion of population above statutory pensionable age receiving a pension, by sex (%)Target 1.4: By 2030, ensure that all men and women, in particular the poor and the vulnerable, have equal rights to economic resources, as well as access to basic services, ownership and control over land and other forms of property, inheritance, natural resources, appropriate new technology and financial services, including microfinanceIndicator 1.4.1: Proportion of population living in households with access to basic servicesSP_ACS_BSRVH2O: Proportion of population using basic drinking water services, by location (%)SP_ACS_BSRVSAN: Proportion of population using basic sanitation services, by location (%)Indicator 1.4.2: Proportion of total adult population with secure tenure rights to land, (a) with legally recognized documentation, and (b) who perceive their rights to land as secure, by sex and type of tenureSP_LGL_LNDDOC: Proportion of people with legally recognized documentation of their rights to land out of total adult population, by sex (%)SP_LGL_LNDSEC: Proportion of people who perceive their rights to land as secure out of total adult population, by sex (%)SP_LGL_LNDSTR: Proportion of people with secure tenure rights to land out of total adult population, by sex (%)Target 1.5: By 2030, build the resilience of the poor and those in vulnerable situations and reduce their exposure and vulnerability to climate-related extreme events and other economic, social and environmental shocks and disastersIndicator 1.5.1: Number of deaths, missing persons and directly affected persons attributed to disasters per 100,000 populationVC_DSR_MISS: Number of missing persons due to disaster (number)VC_DSR_AFFCT: Number of people affected by disaster (number)VC_DSR_MORT: Number of deaths due to disaster (number)VC_DSR_MTMP: Number of deaths and missing persons attributed to disasters per 100,000 population (number)VC_DSR_MMHN: Number of deaths and missing persons attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_DAFF: Number of directly affected persons attributed to disasters per 100,000 population (number)VC_DSR_IJILN: Number of injured or ill people attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_PDAN: Number of people whose damaged dwellings were attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_PDYN: Number of people whose destroyed dwellings were attributed to disasters (number)VC_DSR_PDLN: Number of people whose livelihoods were disrupted or destroyed, attributed to disasters (number)Indicator 1.5.2: Direct economic loss attributed to disasters in relation to global gross domestic product (GDP)VC_DSR_GDPLS: Direct economic loss attributed to disasters (current United States dollars)VC_DSR_LSGP: Direct economic loss attributed to disasters relative to GDP (%)VC_DSR_AGLH: Direct agriculture loss attributed to disasters (current United States dollars)VC_DSR_HOLH: Direct economic loss in the housing sector attributed to disasters (current United States dollars)VC_DSR_CILN: Direct economic loss resulting from damaged or destroyed critical infrastructure attributed to disasters (current United States dollars)VC_DSR_CHLN: Direct economic loss to cultural heritage damaged or destroyed attributed to disasters (millions of current United States dollars)VC_DSR_DDPA: Direct economic loss to other damaged or destroyed productive assets attributed to disasters (current United States dollars)Indicator 1.5.3: Number of countries that adopt and implement national disaster risk reduction strategies in line with the Sendai Framework for Disaster Risk Reduction 2015–2030SG_DSR_LGRGSR: Score of adoption and implementation of national DRR strategies in line with the Sendai FrameworkSG_DSR_SFDRR: Number of countries that reported having a National DRR Strategy which is aligned to the Sendai FrameworkIndicator 1.5.4: Proportion of local governments that adopt and implement local disaster risk reduction strategies in line with national disaster risk reduction strategiesSG_DSR_SILS: Proportion of local governments that adopt and implement local disaster risk reduction strategies in line with national disaster risk reduction strategies (%)SG_DSR_SILN: Number of local governments that adopt and implement local DRR strategies in line with national strategies (number)SG_GOV_LOGV: Number of local governments (number)Target 1.a: Ensure significant mobilization of resources from a variety of sources, including through enhanced development cooperation, in order to provide adequate and predictable means for developing countries, in particular least developed countries, to implement programmes and policies to end poverty in all its dimensionsIndicator 1.a.1: Total official development assistance grants from all donors that focus on poverty reduction as a share of the recipient country’s gross national incomeDC_ODA_POVLG: Official development assistance grants for poverty reduction, by recipient countries (percentage of GNI)DC_ODA_POVDLG: Official development assistance grants for poverty reduction, by donor countries (percentage of GNI)DC_ODA_POVG: Official development assistance grants for poverty reduction (percentage of GNI)Indicator 1.a.2: Proportion of total government spending on essential services (education, health and social protection)SD_XPD_ESED: Proportion of total government spending on essential services, education (%)Target 1.b: Create sound policy frameworks at the national, regional and international levels, based on pro-poor and gender-sensitive development strategies, to support accelerated investment in poverty eradication actionsIndicator 1.b.1: Pro-poor public social spending

Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic and housing unit estimates, it is the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Program that produces and disseminates the official estimates of the population for the nation, states, counties, cities, and towns and estimates of housing units for states and counties..Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Technical Documentation section.Sample size and data quality measures (including coverage rates, allocation rates, and response rates) can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Methodology section..Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2021 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates.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 roughly 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 ACS Technical Documentation). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables..The Census Bureau introduced a new set of disability questions in the 2008 ACS questionnaire. Accordingly, comparisons of disability data from 2008 or later with data from prior years are not recommended. For more information on these questions and their evaluation in the 2006 ACS Content Test, see the Evaluation Report Covering Disability..The 2021 American Community Survey (ACS) data generally reflect the March 2020 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) delineations of metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas. In certain instances the names, codes, and boundaries of the principal cities shown in ACS tables may differ from the OMB delineations due to differences in the effective dates of the geographic entities..Estimates of urban and rural populations, housing units, and characteristics reflect boundaries of urban areas defined based on Census 2010 data. As a result, data for urban and rural areas from the ACS do not necessarily reflect the results of ongoing urbanization..Explanation of Symbols:- The estimate could not be computed because there were an insufficient number of sample observations. For a ratio of medians estimate, one or both of the median estimates falls in the lowest interval or highest interval of an open-ended distribution. For a 5-year median estimate, the margin of error associated with a median was larger than the median itself.N The estimate or margin of error cannot be displayed because there were an insufficient number of sample cases in the selected geographic area. (X) The estimate or margin of error is not applicable or not available.median- The median falls in the lowest interval of an open-ended distribution (for example "2,500-")median+ The median falls in the highest interval of an open-ended distribution (for example "250,000+").** The margin of error could not be computed because there were an insufficient number of sample observations.*** The margin of error could not be computed because the median falls in the lowest interval or highest interval of an open-ended distribution.***** A margin of error is not appropriate because the corresponding estimate is controlled to an independent population or housing estimate. Effectively, the corresponding estimate has no sampling error and the margin of error may be treated as zero.

Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic and housing unit estimates, the decennial census is the official source of population totals for April 1st of each decennial year. In between censuses, the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Program produces and disseminates the official estimates of the population for the nation, states, counties, cities, and towns and estimates of housing units and the group quarters population for states and counties..Information about the American Community Survey (ACS) can be found on the ACS website. Supporting documentation including code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing, and a full list of ACS tables and table shells (without estimates) can be found on the Technical Documentation section of the ACS website.Sample size and data quality measures (including coverage rates, allocation rates, and response rates) can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Methodology section..Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2023 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates.ACS data generally reflect the geographic boundaries of legal and statistical areas as of January 1 of the estimate year. For more information, see Geography Boundaries by Year..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 roughly 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 ACS Technical Documentation). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables..Users must consider potential differences in geographic boundaries, questionnaire content or coding, or other methodological issues when comparing ACS data from different years. Statistically significant differences shown in ACS Comparison Profiles, or in data users' own analysis, may be the result of these differences and thus might not necessarily reflect changes to the social, economic, housing, or demographic characteristics being compared. For more information, see Comparing ACS Data..Estimates of urban and rural populations, housing units, and characteristics reflect boundaries of urban areas defined based on 2020 Census data. As a result, data for urban and rural areas from the ACS do not necessarily reflect the results of ongoing urbanization..Explanation of Symbols:- The estimate could not be computed because there were an insufficient number of sample observations. For a ratio of medians estimate, one or both of the median estimates falls in the lowest interval or highest interval of an open-ended distribution. For a 5-year median estimate, the margin of error associated with a median was larger than the median itself.N The estimate or margin of error cannot be displayed because there were an insufficient number of sample cases in the selected geographic area. (X) The estimate or margin of error is not applicable or not available.median- The median falls in the lowest interval of an open-ended distribution (for example "2,500-")median+ The median falls in the highest interval of an open-ended distribution (for example "250,000+").** The margin of error could not be computed because there were an insufficient number of sample observations.*** The margin of error could not be computed because the median falls in the lowest interval or highest interval of an open-ended distribution.***** A margin of error is not appropriate because the corresponding estimate is controlled to an independent population or housing estimate. Effectively, the corresponding estimate has no sampling error and the margin of error may be treated as zero.

This statistic depicts the percentage of U.S. adults aged 18 to 44 with any disability as of 2016, by poverty level. According to the data, among that age group, 27.8 percent of those living with incomes less than 100% of the federal poverty level had a disability.

Child poverty statistics provide estimates of low income and material hardship rates for measures listed in the Child Poverty Reduction Act 2018.

In 2022, the overall poverty rate based on disposable income in South Korea amounted to **** percent of the total population living below the poverty line. However, this was doubled among the disabled population, with almost ** percent living in poverty.

Series Name: [ILO] Proportion of population with severe disabilities receiving disability cash benefit by sex (percent)Series Code: SI_COV_DISABRelease Version: 2021.Q2.G.03 This dataset is part of the Global SDG Indicator Database compiled through the UN System in preparation for the Secretary-General's annual report on Progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals.Indicator 1.3.1: Proportion of population covered by social protection floors/systems, by sex, distinguishing children, unemployed persons, older persons, persons with disabilities, pregnant women, newborns, work-injury victims and the poor and the vulnerableTarget 1.3: Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all, including floors, and by 2030 achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerableGoal 1: End poverty in all its forms everywhereFor more information on the compilation methodology of this dataset, see https://unstats.un.org/sdgs/metadata/

The Digital Divide Index or DDI ranges in value from 0 to 100, where 100 indicates the highest digital divide. It is composed of two scores, also ranging from 0 to 100: the infrastructure/adoption (INFA) score and the socioeconomic (SE) score.The INFA score groups five variables related to broadband infrastructure and adoption: (1) percentage of total 2020 population without access to fixed broadband of at least 100 Mbps download and 20 Mbps upload as of 2020 based on Ookla Speedtest® open dataset; (2) percent of homes without a computing device (desktops, laptops, smartphones, tablets, etc.); (3) percent of homes with no internet access (have no internet subscription, including cellular data plans or dial-up); (4) median maximum advertised download speeds; and (5) median maximum advertised upload speeds.The SE score groups five variables known to impact technology adoption: (1) percent population ages 65 and over; (2) percent population 25 and over with less than high school; (3) individual poverty rate; (4) percent of noninstitutionalized civilian population with a disability: and (5) a brand new digital inequality or internet income ratio measure (IIR). In other words, these variables indirectly measure adoption since they are potential predictors of lagging technology adoption or reinforcing existing inequalities that also affect adoption.These two scores are combined to calculate the overall DDI score. If a particular county or census tract has a higher INFA score versus a SE score, efforts should be made to improve broadband infrastructure. If on the other hand, a particular geography has a higher SE score versus an INFA score, efforts should be made to increase digital literacy and exposure to the technology’s benefits.The DDI measures primarily physical access/adoption and socioeconomic characteristics that may limit motivation, skills, and usage. Due to data limitations it was designed as a descriptive and pragmatic tool and is not intended to be comprehensive. Rather it should help initiate important discussions among community leaders and residents.