In 2023, the around 11.1 percent of the population was living below the national poverty line in the United States. Poverty in the United StatesAs shown in the statistic above, the poverty rate among all people living in the United States has shifted within the last 15 years. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) defines poverty as follows: “Absolute poverty measures poverty in relation to the amount of money necessary to meet basic needs such as food, clothing, and shelter. The concept of absolute poverty is not concerned with broader quality of life issues or with the overall level of inequality in society.” The poverty rate in the United States varies widely across different ethnic groups. American Indians and Alaska Natives are the ethnic group with the most people living in poverty in 2022, with about 25 percent of the population earning an income below the poverty line. In comparison to that, only 8.6 percent of the White (non-Hispanic) population and the Asian population were living below the poverty line in 2022. Children are one of the most poverty endangered population groups in the U.S. between 1990 and 2022. Child poverty peaked in 1993 with 22.7 percent of children living in poverty in that year in the United States. Between 2000 and 2010, the child poverty rate in the United States was increasing every year; however,this rate was down to 15 percent in 2022. The number of people living in poverty in the U.S. varies from state to state. Compared to California, where about 4.44 million people were living in poverty in 2022, the state of Minnesota had about 429,000 people living in poverty.
This is a historical measure for Strategic Direction 2023. For more data on Austin demographics please visit austintexas.gov/demographics. This measure answers the question of what number and percentage of residents are living below the federal poverty level, which means they meet certain thresholds set by a set of parameters and computation performed by the Census Bureau. Following the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Statistical Policy Directive 14, the Census Bureau uses a set of money income thresholds that vary by family size and composition to determine who is in poverty. If a family's total income is less than the family's threshold, then that family and every individual in it is considered in poverty. The official poverty thresholds do not vary geographically, but they are updated for inflation using the Consumer Price Index (CPI-U). The official poverty definition uses money income before taxes and does not include capital gains or noncash benefits (such as public housing, Medicaid, and food stamps). Data collected from the U.S. Census Bureau, American Communities Survey (1yr), Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months (Table S1701). American Communities Survey (ACS) is a survey with sampled statistics on the citywide level and is subject to a margin of error. ACS sample size and data quality measures can be found on the U.S. Census website in the Methodology section. View more details and insights related to this data set on the story page:https://data.austintexas.gov/stories/s/kgf9-tcgd
This poverty rate data shows what percentage of the measured population* falls below the poverty line. Poverty is closely related to income: different “poverty thresholds” are in place for different sizes and types of household. A family or individual is considered to be below the poverty line if that family or individual’s income falls below their relevant poverty threshold. For more information on how poverty is measured by the U.S. Census Bureau (the source for this indicator’s data), visit the U.S. Census Bureau’s poverty webpage.
The poverty rate is an important piece of information when evaluating an area’s economic health and well-being. The poverty rate can also be illustrative when considered in the contexts of other indicators and categories. As a piece of data, it is too important and too useful to omit from any indicator set.
The poverty rate for all individuals in the measured population in Champaign County has hovered around roughly 20% since 2005. However, it reached its lowest rate in 2021 at 14.9%, and its second lowest rate in 2023 at 16.3%. Although the American Community Survey (ACS) data shows fluctuations between years, given their margins of error, none of the differences between consecutive years’ estimates are statistically significant, making it impossible to identify a trend.
Poverty rate data was sourced from the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, which are released annually.
As with any datasets that are estimates rather than exact counts, it is important to take into account the margins of error (listed in the column beside each figure) when drawing conclusions from the data.
Due to the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, instead of providing the standard 1-year data products, the Census Bureau released experimental estimates from the 1-year data in 2020. This includes a limited number of data tables for the nation, states, and the District of Columbia. The Census Bureau states that the 2020 ACS 1-year experimental tables use an experimental estimation methodology and should not be compared with other ACS data. For these reasons, and because data is not available for Champaign County, no data for 2020 is included in this Indicator.
For interested data users, the 2020 ACS 1-Year Experimental data release includes a dataset on Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months by Age.
*According to the U.S. Census Bureau document “How Poverty is Calculated in the ACS," poverty status is calculated for everyone but those in the following groups: “people living in institutional group quarters (such as prisons or nursing homes), people in military barracks, people in college dormitories, living situations without conventional housing, and unrelated individuals under 15 years old."
Sources: U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2023 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (17 October 2024).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2022 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (25 September 2023).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2021 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (16 September 2022).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2019 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (8 June 2021).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2018 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using data.census.gov; (8 June 2021).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2017 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (13 September 2018).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2016 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (14 September 2017).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2015 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (19 September 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2014 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2013 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2012 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2011 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2010 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2009 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2008 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2007 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2006 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).; U.S. Census Bureau; American Community Survey, 2005 American Community Survey 1-Year Estimates, Table S1701; generated by CCRPC staff; using American FactFinder; (16 March 2016).
VITAL SIGNS INDICATOR
Poverty (EQ5)
FULL MEASURE NAME
The share of the population living in households that earn less than 200 percent of the federal poverty limit
LAST UPDATED
January 2023
DESCRIPTION
Poverty refers to the share of the population living in households that earn less than 200 percent of the federal poverty limit, which varies based on the number of individuals in a given household. It reflects the number of individuals who are economically struggling due to low household income levels.
DATA SOURCE
U.S Census Bureau: Decennial Census - http://www.nhgis.org
1980-2000
U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey - https://data.census.gov/
2007-2021
Form C17002
CONTACT INFORMATION
vitalsigns.info@mtc.ca.gov
METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator)
The U.S. Census Bureau defines a national poverty level (or household income) that varies by household size, number of children in a household, and age of householder. The national poverty level does not vary geographically even though cost of living is different across the United States. For the Bay Area, where cost of living is high and incomes are correspondingly high, an appropriate poverty level is 200% of poverty or twice the national poverty level, consistent with what was used for past equity work at MTC and ABAG. For comparison, however, both the national and 200% poverty levels are presented.
For Vital Signs, the poverty rate is defined as the number of people (including children) living below twice the poverty level divided by the number of people for whom poverty status is determined. The household income definitions for poverty change each year to reflect inflation. The official poverty definition uses money income before taxes and does not include capital gains or non-cash benefits (such as public housing, Medicaid and food stamps).
For the national poverty level definitions by year, see: US Census Bureau Poverty Thresholds - https://www.census.gov/data/tables/time-series/demo/income-poverty/historical-poverty-thresholds.html.
For an explanation on how the Census Bureau measures poverty, see: How the Census Bureau Measures Poverty - https://www.census.gov/topics/income-poverty/poverty/guidance/poverty-measures.html.
American Community Survey (ACS) 1-year data is used for larger geographies – Bay counties and most metropolitan area counties – while smaller geographies rely upon 5-year rolling average data due to their smaller sample sizes. Note that 2020 data uses the 5-year estimates because the ACS did not collect 1-year data for 2020.
To be consistent across metropolitan areas, the poverty definition for non-Bay Area metros is twice the national poverty level. Data were not adjusted for varying income and cost of living levels across the metropolitan areas.
This measure answers the question of what number and percentage of residents are living below the federal poverty level, which means they meet certain threshold set by a set of parameters and computation performed by the Census Bureau. Following the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Statistical Policy Directive 14, the Census Bureau uses a set of money income thresholds that vary by family size and composition to determine who is in poverty. If a family's total income is less than the family's threshold, then that family and every individual in it is considered in poverty. The official poverty thresholds do not vary geographically, but they are updated for inflation using the Consumer Price Index (CPI-U). The official poverty definition uses money income before taxes and does not include capital gains or noncash benefits (such as public housing, Medicaid, and food stamps). Data collected from the U.S. Census Bureau, American Communities Survey (1yr), Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months (Table S1701). American Communities Survey (ACS) is a survey with sampled statistics on the citywide level and is subject to a margin of error. ACS sample size and data quality measures can be found on the U.S. Census website in the Methodology section.
The most recent estimate of monetary poverty in Armenia found that nearly 30 percent of the population lives below the national poverty threshold. However, because the Armenian social protection system provides some, though limited, basic support, monetary measures provide only a partial picture of the negative effects of poverty on well-being and the lack of positive capabilities.
In 2013, the National Statistical Service of the Republic of Armenia and the World Bank began work on a national measure of multidimensional poverty to supplement the consumption poverty indicator. This measure, which was identified through consultations with many stakeholders in Armenia, reflects deprivations specific to Armenia in the areas of education, health, labor, housing conditions, and basic needs. The approach offers insights into the complexity, depth, and persistence of poverty in the country; tailoring it specifically to the country context enhances its relevance for policy.
The national measure of multidimensional poverty for Armenia uses the Alkire-Foster approach.This tailored measure is not intended to be used in international comparisons; it is simply representative of the country and its specific development challenges. For every multidimensional measure, the dimensions, weights, and a method for aggregation must be selected.
The first step in constructing the measure of multidimensional poverty is to select dimensions that reflect achievements or deprivations. These indicators complement the national monetary poverty measure with information that better captures nonmonetary aspects of well-being. The primary dimensions of the measure are basic needs, housing, education, labor, and health.
The datasets documented here include 2010-2015 national multidimensional poverty indices, constructed using Armenia Integrated Living Conditions Survey (ILCS) data from 2010 to 2015.
National, urban-rural-Yerevan levels
Sample survey data [ssd]
Each year Integrated Living Conditions Survey (ILCS) interviews more than 5,000 households; is representative at the regional level (marz level, which corresponds to the NUTS 3 regions); and provides comparable data starting from the early 2000s.
Face-to-face [f2f]
The Integrated Living Conditions Survey (ILCS) asks about education, labor market outcomes, health behavior, and living conditions of households and individuals. It also collects detailed data on consumption behavior and is used to calculate Armenia's official poverty rate. Since the measure of multidimensional poverty is meant to complement the analysis of consumption poverty, using the same survey instrument is crucial. On the other hand, a serious drawback of using existing rather than new data-constructing the measure on multidimensional poverty is limited by the ILCS information available.
Unpublished data product not for circulation Persistent Poverty tracts*Persistent poverty area and enduring poverty area measures with reference year 2015-2019 are research measures only. The ERS offical measures are updated every ten years. The next updates will use 1960 through 2000 Decennial Census data and 2007-2011 and 2017-2021 5-year ACS estimates. The updates will take place following the Census Bureau release of the 2017-2021 estimates (anticipated December 2022).A reliability index is calculated for each poverty rate (PctPoor) derived using poverty count estimates and published margins of error from the 5-yr ACS. If the poverty rate estimate has low reliability (=3) AND the upper (PctPoor + derived MOE) or lower (PctPoor - derived MOE) bounds of the MOE adjusted poverty rate would change the poverty status of the estimate (high = 20.0% or more; extreme = 40.0% or more) then the county/tract type is coded as "N/A". If looking at metrics named "PerPov0711" and PerPov1519" ERS says: The official measure ending in 2007-11 included data from 1980. The research measure ending in 2015-19 drops 1980 and begins instead with 1990. There were huge differences in geographic coverage of census tracts and data quality between 1980 and 1990, namely "because tract geography wasn’t assigned to all areas of the country until the 1990 Decennial Census. Last date edited 9/1/2022Variable NamesVariable Labels and ValuesNotesGeographic VariablesGEO_ID_CTCensus download GEOID when downloading county and tract data togetherSTUSABState Postal AbbreviationfipsCounty FIPS code, in numericCountyNameArea Name (county, state)TractNameArea Name (tract, county, state)TractCensus Tract numberRegionCensus region numeric code 1 = Northeast 2 = Midwest 3 = South 4 = Westsubreg3ERS subregions 1 = Northeast and Great Lakes 2 = Eastern Metropolitan Belt 3 = Eastern and Interior Uplands 4 = Corn Belt 5 = Southeastern Coast 6 = Southern Coastal Plain 7 = Great Plains 8 = Rio Grande and Southwest 9 = West, Alaska and HawaiiMetNonmet2013Metro and nonmetro county code 0 = nonmetro county 1 = metro countyBeale2013ERS Rural-urban Continuum Code 2013 (counties) 1 = counties in metro area of 1 million population or more 2 = counties in metro area of 250,000 to 1 million population 3 = counties in metro area of fewer than 250,000 population 4 = urban population of 20,000 or more, adjacent to a metro area 5 = urban population of 20,000 or more, not adjacent to a metro area 6 = urban population of 2,500 to 19,999, adjacent to a metro area 7 = urban population of 2,500 to 19,999, not adjacent to a metro area 8 = completely rural or less than 2,500, adjacent to a metro area 9 = completely rural or less than 2,500, not adjacent to a metro areaRUCA_2010Rural Urban Commuting Areas, primary code (census tracts) 1 = Metropolitan area core: primary flow within an urbanized area (UA) 2 = Metropolitan area high commuting: primary flow 30% or more to a UA 3 = Metropolitan area low commuting: primary flow 10% to 30% to a UA 4 = Micropolitan area core: primary flow within an Urban Cluster of 10,000 to 49,999 (large UC) 5 = Micropolitan high commuting: primary flow 30% or more to a large UC 6 = Micropolitan low commuting: primary flow 10% to 30% to a large UC 7 = Small town core: primary flow within an Urban Cluster of 2,500 to 9,999 (small UC) 8 = Small town high commuting: primary flow 30% or more to a small UC 9 = Small town low commuting: primary flow 10% to 30% to a small UC 10 = Rural areas: primary flow to a tract outside a UA or UC 99 = Not coded: Census tract has zero population and no rural-urban identifier informationBNA01Census tract represents block numbering areas; BNAs are small statistical subdivisions of a county for numbering and grouping blocks in nonmetropolitan counties where local committees have not established tracts. 0 = not a BNA tract 1 = BNA tractPoverty Areas MeasuresHiPov60Poverty Rate greater than or equal to 20.0% 1960 (counties only) -1 = N/A 0 = PctPoor60 < 20.0% 1 = PctPoor60 >= 20.0%HiPov70Poverty Rate greater than or equal to 20.0% 1970 -1 = N/A 0 = PctPoor70 < 20.0% 1 = PctPoor70 >= 20.0%HiPov80Poverty Rate greater than or equal to 20.0% 1980 -1 = N/A 0 = PctPoor80 < 20.0% 1 = PctPoor80 >= 20.0%HiPov90Poverty Rate greater than or equal to 20.0% 1990 -1 = N/A 0 = PctPoor90 < 20.0% 1 = PctPoor90 >= 20.0%HiPov00Poverty Rate greater than or equal to 20.0% 2000 -1 = N/A 0 = PctPoor00 < 20.0% 1 = PctPoor00 >= 20.0%HiPov0711Poverty Rate greater than or equal to 20.0% 2007-11 ACS -1 = N/A 0 = PctPoor0711 < 20.0% 1 = PctPoor0711 >= 20.0%HiPov1519Poverty Rate greater than or equal to 20.0% 2015-19 ACS -1 = N/A 0 = PctPoor1519 < 20.0% 1 = PctPoor1519 >= 20.0%ExtPov60Poverty Rate greater than or equal to 40.0% 1960 (counties only) -1 = N/A 0 = PctPoor60 < 40.0% 1 = PctPoor60 >= 40.0%ExtPov70Poverty Rate greater than or equal to 40.0% 1970 -1 = N/A 0 = PctPoor70 < 40.0% 1 = PctPoor70 >= 40.0%ExtPov80Poverty Rate greater than or equal to 40.0% 1980 -1 = N/A 0 = PctPoor80 < 40.0% 1 = PctPoor80 >= 40.0%ExtPov90Poverty Rate greater than or equal to 40.0% 1990 -1 = N/A 0 = PctPoor90 < 40.0% 1 = PctPoor90 >= 40.0%ExtPov00Poverty Rate greater than or equal to 40.0% 2000 -1 = N/A 0 = PctPoor00 < 40.0% 1 = PctPoor00 >= 40.0%ExtPov0711Poverty Rate greater than or equal to 40.0% 2007-11 ACS -1 = N/A 0 = PctPoor0711 < 40.0% 1 = PctPoor0711 >= 40.0%ExtPov1519Poverty Rate greater than or equal to 40.0% 2015-19 ACS -1 = N/A 0 = PctPoor1519 < 40.0% 1 = PctPoor1519 >= 40.0%PerPov90Official ERS Measure: Persistent Poverty 1990: poverty rate >= 20.0% in 1960, 1970, 1980, and 1990 (counties only) May not match previously published versions due to changes in geographic normalization procedures. -1 = N/A 0 = poverty rate not >= 20.0% in 1960, 1970, 1980, and 1990 1 = poverty rate >= 20.0% in 1960, 1970, 1980, and 1990PerPov00Official ERS Measure: Persistent Poverty 2000: poverty rate >= 20.0% in 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000May not match previously published versions due to changes in geographic normalization procedures. -1 = N/A 0 = poverty rate not >= 20.0% in 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000 1 = poverty rate >= 20.0% in 1970, 1980, 1990, and 2000PerPov0711Official ERS Measure: Persistent Poverty 2007-11: poverty rate >= 20.0% in 1980, 1990, 2000, and 2007-11May not match previously published versions due to changes in geographic normalization procedures and -1 = N/A application of reliability criteria. 0 = poverty rate not >= 20.0% in 1980, 1990, 2000, and 2007-11 1 = poverty rate >= 20.0% in 1980, 1990, 2000, and 2007-11PerPov1519Research Measure Only: Persistent Poverty 2015-19: poverty rate >= 20.0% in 1990, 2000, 2007-11, and 2015May not match previously published versions due to changes in geographic normalization procedures and -1 = N/A application of reliability criteria. 0 = poverty rate not >= 20.0% in 1990, 2000, 2007-11, and 2015-19 1 = poverty rate >= 20.0% in 1990, 2000, 2007-11, and 2015-19EndurePov0711Official ERS Measure: Enduring Poverty 2007-11: poverty rate >= 20.0% for at least 5 consecutive time periods up-to and including 2007-11 -1 = N/A 0 = Poverty Rate not >=20.0% in 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, and 2007-11 1 = poverty rate >= 20.0% in 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, and 2007-11 2 = poverty rate >=20.0% in 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, and 2007-11 (counties only)EndurePov1519Research Measure Only: Enduring Poverty 2015-19: poverty rate >= 20.0% for at least 5 consecutive time periods, up-to and including 2015-19 -1 = N/A 0 = Poverty Rate not >=20.0% in 1980, 1990, 2000, 2007-11, and 2015-19 1 = poverty rate >= 20.0% in 1980, 1990, 2000, 2007-11, and 2015-19 2 = poverty rate >= 20.0% in 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, 2007-11, and 2015-19 3 = poverty rate >=20.0% in 1960, 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, 2007-11, and 2015-19 (counties only)Additional Notes: *In the combined data tab each variable ends with a 'C' for county and a 'T' for tractThe spreadsheet was joined to Esri's Living Atlas Social Vulnerability Tract Data (CDC) and therefore contains the following information as well: ATSDR’s Geospatial Research, Analysis & Services Program (GRASP) has created a tool to help emergency response planners and public health officials identify and map the communities that will most likely need support before, during, and after a hazardous event. The Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) uses U.S. Census data to determine the social vulnerability of every county and tract. CDC SVI ranks each county and tract on 15 social factors, including poverty, lack of vehicle access, and crowded housing, and groups them into four related themes:SocioeconomicHousing Composition and DisabilityMinority Status and LanguageHousing and TransportationThis feature layer visualizes the 2018 overall SVI for U.S. counties and tracts. Social Vulnerability Index (SVI) indicates the relative vulnerability of every U.S. county and tract.15 social factors grouped into four major themes | Index value calculated for each county for the 15 social factors, four major themes, and the overall rank
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Analysis of ‘Strategic Measure_EOA.B.1 Number and percentage of residents living below the poverty level’ provided by Analyst-2 (analyst-2.ai), based on source dataset retrieved from https://catalog.data.gov/dataset/e723c523-221e-4e4b-bb9c-54c1056ae83b on 26 January 2022.
--- Dataset description provided by original source is as follows ---
This measure answers the question of what number and percentage of residents are living below the federal poverty level, which means they meet certain thresholds set by a set of parameters and computation performed by the Census Bureau. Following the Office of Management and Budget's (OMB) Statistical Policy Directive 14, the Census Bureau uses a set of money income thresholds that vary by family size and composition to determine who is in poverty. If a family's total income is less than the family's threshold, then that family and every individual in it is considered in poverty. The official poverty thresholds do not vary geographically, but they are updated for inflation using the Consumer Price Index (CPI-U). The official poverty definition uses money income before taxes and does not include capital gains or noncash benefits (such as public housing, Medicaid, and food stamps).
Data collected from the U.S. Census Bureau, American Communities Survey (1yr), Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months (Table S1701). American Communities Survey (ACS) is a survey with sampled statistics on the citywide level and is subject to a margin of error. ACS sample size and data quality measures can be found on the U.S. Census website in the Methodology section.
View more details and insights related to this data set on the story page:https://data.austintexas.gov/stories/s/kgf9-tcgd
--- Original source retains full ownership of the source dataset ---
VITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Poverty (EQ5)
FULL MEASURE NAME The share of the population living in households that earn less than 200 percent of the federal poverty limit
LAST UPDATED December 2018
DESCRIPTION Poverty refers to the share of the population living in households that earn less than 200 percent of the federal poverty limit, which varies based on the number of individuals in a given household. It reflects the number of individuals who are economically struggling due to low household income levels.
DATA SOURCE U.S Census Bureau: Decennial Census http://www.nhgis.org (1980-1990) http://factfinder2.census.gov (2000)
U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey Form C17002 (2006-2017) http://api.census.gov
METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) The U.S. Census Bureau defines a national poverty level (or household income) that varies by household size, number of children in a household, and age of householder. The national poverty level does not vary geographically even though cost of living is different across the United States. For the Bay Area, where cost of living is high and incomes are correspondingly high, an appropriate poverty level is 200% of poverty or twice the national poverty level, consistent with what was used for past equity work at MTC and ABAG. For comparison, however, both the national and 200% poverty levels are presented.
For Vital Signs, the poverty rate is defined as the number of people (including children) living below twice the poverty level divided by the number of people for whom poverty status is determined. Poverty rates do not include unrelated individuals below 15 years old or people who live in the following: institutionalized group quarters, college dormitories, military barracks, and situations without conventional housing. The household income definitions for poverty change each year to reflect inflation. The official poverty definition uses money income before taxes and does not include capital gains or noncash benefits (such as public housing, Medicaid, and food stamps). For the national poverty level definitions by year, see: https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/threshld/index.html For an explanation on how the Census Bureau measures poverty, see: https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/about/overview/measure.html
For the American Community Survey datasets, 1-year data was used for region, county, and metro areas whereas 5-year rolling average data was used for city and census tract.
To be consistent across metropolitan areas, the poverty definition for non-Bay Area metros is twice the national poverty level. Data were not adjusted for varying income and cost of living levels across the metropolitan areas.
The Multidimensional Poverty Measure (MPM) seeks to understand poverty beyond just a monetary dimension by including access to education and basic infrastructure along with the monetary headcount ratio at the $1.90 poverty line. The World Bank’s measure takes inspiration and guidance from other prominent multidimensional measures, particularly the Multidimensional Poverty Index (MPI) developed by UNDP and Oxford University but differs from them in one important aspect: it includes Monetary poverty (measured as having a daily consumption less than $1.90 in 2011 PPP) as one of the dimensions. While monetary poverty is strongly correlated with deprivations in other domains, this correlation is far from perfect. The Poverty and Shared Prosperity 2020 (World Bank, 2020) report shows that over a third of those experiencing multidimensional poverty are not captured by the monetary headcount ratio, in line with the findings of the previous edition of the report (World Bank, 2018). A country’s MPM is at least as high as or higher than the monetary poverty, reflecting the additional role of nonmonetary dimensions in increasing multidimensional poverty and their importance to general well-being.
American Community Survey Public Use Micro Sample, augmented by NYC Opportunity.
The figures presented here are from the End Child Poverty Coalition are based on tax credit data, used to estimate the percentage of children on low incomes in local authorities, parliamentary constituencies and wards across the UK. They also use national trends in worklessness to estimate recent changes in the number of children who are in poverty because their parents have lost their jobs, to update the local tax credit data which is more than two years old. This is not a direct measure of exactly how many children are in poverty on the official definition, but is based on the closest to an equivalent measure we have of local levels of child poverty. The data have been adjusted to produce figures compatible with the measures derived from the national survey of income, showing how many children live in households with below 60 per cent of median income. Specifically, the adjustments ensure that the total reported level of child poverty, before and after housing costs, is similar when adding up all the local figures as the official national totals. Thus, the local data gives an idea of the relative poverty levels in different areas, but are adjusted to estimate what these actual levels would be if they could be measured on the same basis as the national household income survey. The local data starts by classifying children in poverty if they live in families in receipt of out of work benefits or in receipt of in-work tax credits where their reported family income is less than 60 per cent of median income. This indicator, compiled officially as a local estimate of child poverty, has been reported for August 2011 by HMRC. However, on its own it is provides an inaccurate picture of actual child poverty, considerably overstating the numbers in out-of-work poverty and understating the numbers in working poverty. While these factors may balance out overall, they can seriously misrepresent the overall trend where working and non-working poverty change in different ways, as well as misrepresenting local differences where working poverty is relatively more important in some areas than others. Therefore, the figures include an upward adjustment in the in-work figure and a downward adjustment in the out-of-work figure. The adjustments are made separately to for AHC and BHC estimates, in each case according to how the total of the local estimates compare to the actual national measure. Figures are then updated, taking into account Labour Force Survey data on the number of children in non-working households for the final quarter of 2013. Additional metadata: - Licence: http://reference.data.gov.uk/id/open-government-licence
Open Government Licence - Canada 2.0https://open.canada.ca/en/open-government-licence-canada
License information was derived automatically
Individual poverty status using Market Basket Measure (MBM) by family characteristics, age, and gender for Canada, provinces and territories, census divisions and census subdivisions.
CC0 1.0 Universal Public Domain Dedicationhttps://creativecommons.org/publicdomain/zero/1.0/
License information was derived automatically
Note: Updates to this data product are discontinued. Over 1 in 4 rural children are living in families that are poor, according to the official poverty measure, up from 1 in 5 in 1999, but this change was uneven across the rural landscape. Counties with high vulnerability to child poverty, those with both low young adult education levels and high proportions of children in single-parent families, were generally the most hard-hit by the recession of the past decade and experienced substantial increases in their already high child poverty rates. Along with the recession, an increase in rural children in single-parent households, continuing from the 1990s, was a major contributor to the rise in child poverty after 2000. Three factors that shape the geography of high and increasing rural child poverty are explored below: economic conditions, young adult education levels, and family structure. This collection of maps complements the July 2015 Amber Waves feature, Understanding the Geography of Growth in Rural Child Poverty.This record was taken from the USDA Enterprise Data Inventory that feeds into the https://data.gov catalog. Data for this record includes the following resources: Rural Child Poverty Chart Gallery For complete information, please visit https://data.gov.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
Jordan JO: Poverty Gap at National Poverty Lines: % data was reported at 3.600 % in 2010. This records an increase from the previous number of 2.600 % for 2008. Jordan JO: Poverty Gap at National Poverty Lines: % data is updated yearly, averaging 3.100 % from Dec 2008 (Median) to 2010, with 2 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 3.600 % in 2010 and a record low of 2.600 % in 2008. Jordan JO: Poverty Gap at National Poverty Lines: % data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Jordan – Table JO.World Bank: Poverty. Poverty gap at national poverty lines is the mean shortfall from the poverty lines (counting the nonpoor as having zero shortfall) as a percentage of the poverty lines. This measure reflects the depth of poverty as well as its incidence.; ; World Bank, Global Poverty Working Group. Data are compiled from official government sources or are computed by World Bank staff using national (i.e. country–specific) poverty lines.; ; This series only includes estimates that to the best of our knowledge are reasonably comparable over time for a country. Due to differences in estimation methodologies and poverty lines, estimates should not be compared across countries.
This manuscript presents a new measure of safety net program effectiveness—a “poverty relief ratio”—that is based on the estimated relationship between market income and social transfers, and reports the amount of income support provided, relative to the amount required to provide for all low-income households’ basic needs. In an important advance over the standard poverty reduction rate measures, the poverty relief ratio preserves the rank order of observations across varying poverty thresholds. In this paper, we introduce this measure and demonstrate its validity by tracking major changes in federal policy, and cross-state variation in safety net programs.
Market Basket Measure (MBM) thresholds for the reference family by MBM region and base year. Total thresholds as well as thresholds for the food, clothing, transportation, shelter and other expenses components are presented, in current and constant dollars, annual.
VITAL SIGNS INDICATOR Poverty (EQ5)
FULL MEASURE NAME The share of the population living in households that earn less than 200 percent of the federal poverty limit
LAST UPDATED December 2018
DESCRIPTION Poverty refers to the share of the population living in households that earn less than 200 percent of the federal poverty limit, which varies based on the number of individuals in a given household. It reflects the number of individuals who are economically struggling due to low household income levels.
DATA SOURCE U.S Census Bureau: Decennial Census http://www.nhgis.org (1980-1990) http://factfinder2.census.gov (2000)
U.S. Census Bureau: American Community Survey Form C17002 (2006-2017) http://api.census.gov
METHODOLOGY NOTES (across all datasets for this indicator) The U.S. Census Bureau defines a national poverty level (or household income) that varies by household size, number of children in a household, and age of householder. The national poverty level does not vary geographically even though cost of living is different across the United States. For the Bay Area, where cost of living is high and incomes are correspondingly high, an appropriate poverty level is 200% of poverty or twice the national poverty level, consistent with what was used for past equity work at MTC and ABAG. For comparison, however, both the national and 200% poverty levels are presented.
For Vital Signs, the poverty rate is defined as the number of people (including children) living below twice the poverty level divided by the number of people for whom poverty status is determined. Poverty rates do not include unrelated individuals below 15 years old or people who live in the following: institutionalized group quarters, college dormitories, military barracks, and situations without conventional housing. The household income definitions for poverty change each year to reflect inflation. The official poverty definition uses money income before taxes and does not include capital gains or noncash benefits (such as public housing, Medicaid, and food stamps). For the national poverty level definitions by year, see: https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/data/threshld/index.html For an explanation on how the Census Bureau measures poverty, see: https://www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/about/overview/measure.html
For the American Community Survey datasets, 1-year data was used for region, county, and metro areas whereas 5-year rolling average data was used for city and census tract.
To be consistent across metropolitan areas, the poverty definition for non-Bay Area metros is twice the national poverty level. Data were not adjusted for varying income and cost of living levels across the metropolitan areas.
Attribution 4.0 (CC BY 4.0)https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/
License information was derived automatically
The most common poverty measures, including that used by the OECD, focus on income based approaches. One of the most common measures of income poverty is the proportion of households with income less than half median equivalised disposable household income (which is set as the poverty line); this is a relative income poverty measure as poverty is measured by reference to the income of others rather than in some absolute sense. Australia has one of the highest household disposable incomes in the world, which means that an Australian relative income poverty line is set at a high level of income compared to most other countries.
OECD statistics on Australian poverty 2015-16 (based on ABS Survey of Income and Housing data and applying a poverty line of 50% of median income) determined the Australian poverty rate was over 25% before taxes and transfers, but falls around 12% after taxes and transfers. Though measuring poverty through application of solely an income measure is not considered comprehensive for an Australian context, however, it does demonstrate that the Australian welfare system more than halves the number of Australians that would otherwise be considered as at risk of living in poverty under that measure.
It is important to consider a range of indicators of persistent disadvantage to understand poverty and hardship and its multidimensional nature. Different indicators point to different dimensions of poverty.
While transient poverty is a problem, the experience of persistent poverty is of deeper concern, particularly where families experience intergenerational disadvantage and long-term welfare reliance. HILDA data from the Melbourne Institute of Applied Economic and Social Research shows the Distribution of number of years in poverty 2001–2015. The figure focuses on the longer term experience of working age adults and shows that while people do fall into poverty, only a small proportion of people are persistently poor.
merican Community Survey Public Use Micro Sample, augmented by NYC Opportunity.
This file contains poverty rates and related data from the NYCgov poverty measure data. The NYCgov poverty measure is generated annually by the poverty research unit of the Mayor's Office of Economic Opportunity (NYC Opportunity). The data is derived from the American Community Survey Public Use Microsample for NYC, augmented by NYC Opportunity to include imputed estimates for benefit participation and some household expenditures. For information on how the NYCgov poverty rate is constructed see http://www1.nyc.gov/site/opportunity/poverty-in-nyc/poverty-measure.page.
DISCLAIMER: Do not use the visualization tool with this data set. This data set is unweighted. See “Read Me” page in data dictionary for correct use of person and household weights. Visualizations generated from this file will result in incorrect distributions of the data.
For the list of all NYCgov Poverty Measure Data datasets available on the portal please use this link.
In 2023, the around 11.1 percent of the population was living below the national poverty line in the United States. Poverty in the United StatesAs shown in the statistic above, the poverty rate among all people living in the United States has shifted within the last 15 years. The United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) defines poverty as follows: “Absolute poverty measures poverty in relation to the amount of money necessary to meet basic needs such as food, clothing, and shelter. The concept of absolute poverty is not concerned with broader quality of life issues or with the overall level of inequality in society.” The poverty rate in the United States varies widely across different ethnic groups. American Indians and Alaska Natives are the ethnic group with the most people living in poverty in 2022, with about 25 percent of the population earning an income below the poverty line. In comparison to that, only 8.6 percent of the White (non-Hispanic) population and the Asian population were living below the poverty line in 2022. Children are one of the most poverty endangered population groups in the U.S. between 1990 and 2022. Child poverty peaked in 1993 with 22.7 percent of children living in poverty in that year in the United States. Between 2000 and 2010, the child poverty rate in the United States was increasing every year; however,this rate was down to 15 percent in 2022. The number of people living in poverty in the U.S. varies from state to state. Compared to California, where about 4.44 million people were living in poverty in 2022, the state of Minnesota had about 429,000 people living in poverty.