In 2023, the poverty rate of the United States was around 11.4 percent. Louisiana was the state with the highest poverty rate, at 18.9 percent. Poverty rates in the United States are higher than in many parts of the world, and minority groups are much more likely to be living in poverty when compared to white people.

In 2023, 17.9 percent of Black people living in the United States were living below the poverty line, compared to 7.7 percent of white people. That year, the total poverty rate in the U.S. across all races and ethnicities was 11.1 percent. Poverty in the United States Single people in the United States making less than 12,880 U.S. dollars a year and families of four making less than 26,500 U.S. dollars a year are considered to be below the poverty line. Women and children are more likely to suffer from poverty, due to women staying home more often than men to take care of children, and women suffering from the gender wage gap. Not only are women and children more likely to be affected, racial minorities are as well due to the discrimination they face. Poverty data Despite being one of the wealthiest nations in the world, the United States had the third highest poverty rate out of all OECD countries in 2019. However, the United States' poverty rate has been fluctuating since 1990, but has been decreasing since 2014. The average median household income in the U.S. has remained somewhat consistent since 1990, but has recently increased since 2014 until a slight decrease in 2020, potentially due to the pandemic. The state that had the highest number of people living below the poverty line in 2020 was California.

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.

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 map compares the number of people living above the poverty line to the number of people living below. Why do this?There are people living below the poverty line everywhere. Nearly every area of the country has a balance of people living above the poverty line and people living below it. There is not an "ideal" balance, so this map makes good use of the national ratio of 6 persons living above the poverty line for every 1 person living below it. Please consider that there is constant movement of people above and below the poverty threshold, as they gain better employment or lose a job; as they encounter a new family situation, natural disaster, health issue, major accident or other crisis. There are areas that suffer chronic poverty year after year. This map does not indicate how long people in the area have been below the poverty line. "The poverty rate is one of several socioeconomic indicators used by policy makers to evaluate economic conditions. It measures the percentage of people whose income fell below the poverty threshold. Federal and state governments use such estimates to allocate funds to local communities. Local communities use these estimates to identify the number of individuals or families eligible for various programs." Source: U.S. Census BureauIn the U.S. overall, there are 6 people living above the poverty line for every 1 household living below. Green areas on the map have a higher than normal number of people living above compared to below poverty. Orange areas on the map have a higher than normal number of people living below the poverty line compared to those above in that same area.The map shows the ratio for counties and census tracts, using these layers, created directly from the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS)For comparison, an older layer using 2013 ACS data is also provided.The layers are 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. Poverty status is based on income in past 12 months of survey. Current Vintage: 2014-2018ACS Table(s): B17020Data downloaded from: Census Bureau's API for American Community Survey National 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 is 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 RicoCensus tracts with no population that occur in areas of water, such as oceans, 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.

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.

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.

Durham, North Carolina Poverty Rate Statistics for 2023. Analyze over 60 metrics of the Durham, North Carolina poverty database including by age, education, race, gender, work experience and more. In Durham, North Carolina, an estimated 34,503 of 273,523 people live in poverty, which is 12.6%. Compared to the national average of 12.6%, the poverty rate in Durham is 0% lower.

Out of all OECD countries, Cost Rica had the highest poverty rate as of 2022, at over 20 percent. The country with the second highest poverty rate was the United States, with 18 percent. On the other end of the scale, Czechia had the lowest poverty rate at 6.4 percent, followed by Denmark.

The significance of the OECD

The OECD, or the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development, was founded in 1948 and is made up of 38 member countries. It seeks to improve the economic and social well-being of countries and their populations. The OECD looks at issues that impact people’s everyday lives and proposes policies that can help to improve the quality of life.

Poverty in the United States

In 2022, there were nearly 38 million people living below the poverty line in the U.S.. About one fourth of the Native American population lived in poverty in 2022, the most out of any ethnicity. In addition, the rate was higher among young women than young men. It is clear that poverty in the United States is a complex, multi-faceted issue that affects millions of people and is even more complex to solve.

Mexico Poverty Headcount Ratio at Societal Poverty Lines: % of Population data was reported at 22.500 % in 2022. This records a decrease from the previous number of 24.700 % for 2020. Mexico Poverty Headcount Ratio at Societal Poverty Lines: % of Population data is updated yearly, averaging 29.450 % from Dec 1989 (Median) to 2022, with 18 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 34.600 % in 1998 and a record low of 22.500 % in 2022. Mexico Poverty Headcount Ratio at Societal Poverty Lines: % of Population data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Mexico – Table MX.World Bank.WDI: Social: Poverty and Inequality. The poverty headcount ratio at societal poverty line is the percentage of a population living in poverty according to the World Bank's Societal Poverty Line. The Societal Poverty Line is expressed in purchasing power adjusted 2017 U.S. dollars and defined as max($2.15, $1.15 + 0.5*Median). This means that when the national median is sufficiently low, the Societal Poverty line is equivalent to the extreme poverty line, $2.15. For countries with a sufficiently high national median, the Societal Poverty Line grows as countries’ median income grows.;World Bank, Poverty and Inequality Platform. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are mostly from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see http://pip.worldbank.org.;;The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than 2000 household surveys across 169 countries. See the Poverty and Inequality Platform (PIP) for details (www.pip.worldbank.org).

Houston, Texas Poverty Rate Statistics for 2023. Analyze over 60 metrics of the Houston, Texas poverty database including by age, education, race, gender, work experience and more. In Houston, Texas, an estimated 443,001 of 2,260,756 people live in poverty, which is 19.6%. Compared to the national average of 12.6%, the poverty rate in Houston is 55.56% higher.

Hartford, Connecticut Poverty Rate Statistics for 2023. Analyze over 60 metrics of the Hartford, Connecticut poverty database including by age, education, race, gender, work experience and more. In Hartford, Connecticut, an estimated 30,538 of 113,596 people live in poverty, which is 26.9%. Compared to the national average of 12.6%, the poverty rate in Hartford is 113.49% higher.

Poverty Headcount Ratio at Societal Poverty Lines: % of Population data was reported at 38.500 % in 2021. This records an increase from the previous number of 36.000 % for 2018. Poverty Headcount Ratio at Societal Poverty Lines: % of Population data is updated yearly, averaging 51.750 % from Dec 1994 (Median) to 2021, with 6 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 84.500 % in 1994 and a record low of 36.000 % in 2018. Poverty Headcount Ratio at Societal Poverty Lines: % of Population data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Mali – Table ML.World Bank.WDI: Social: Poverty and Inequality. The poverty headcount ratio at societal poverty line is the percentage of a population living in poverty according to the World Bank's Societal Poverty Line. The Societal Poverty Line is expressed in purchasing power adjusted 2017 U.S. dollars and defined as max($2.15, $1.15 + 0.5*Median). This means that when the national median is sufficiently low, the Societal Poverty line is equivalent to the extreme poverty line, $2.15. For countries with a sufficiently high national median, the Societal Poverty Line grows as countries’ median income grows.;World Bank, Poverty and Inequality Platform. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are mostly from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see http://pip.worldbank.org.;;The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than 2000 household surveys across 169 countries. See the Poverty and Inequality Platform (PIP) for details (www.pip.worldbank.org).

In the U.S., the share of the population living in poverty fluctuated significantly throughout the six decades between 1987 and 2023. In 2023, the poverty level across all races and ethnicities was 11.1 percent. Black Americans have been the ethnic group with the highest share of their population living in poverty almost every year since 1974. In 1979 alone, Black poverty was well over double the national average, and over four times the poverty rate in white communities; in 1982, almost 48 percent of the Black population lived in poverty. Although poverty rates have been trending downward across all ethnic groups, 17.8 percent of Black Americans and 18.9 percent of American Indian and Alaskan Natives still lived below the poverty line in 2022.

In 2023, the relative poverty rate in South Korea stood at around 14.9 percent, which was the same as the previous year. The relative poverty rate, the share of people living with less than half of the national median disposable income, has fallen in recent years. However, the numbers are still relatively high by global standards, especially among older people. Relative poverty among older adults The share of older people in South Korea continues to rise. In 2023, the elderly population aged 65 years and older accounted for about 19 percent of the total South Korean population. In 2024, South Korea has become a 'super-aged' society, with people aged 65 and older accounting for more than 20 percent of the total population. However, the economic situation of older people has improved little – around 40 percent of the elderly population lives in relative poverty, which is among the highest rates of member countries of the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD). Poverty and suicide risk among older adults South Korea has the highest suicide rate in the OECD, with 13,978 people taking their own lives in 2023. The suicide rate among older adults is exceptionally high. The suicide rate was highest among the elderly male population aged 80 years and older. The most cited causes of suicide among people aged 65 years and older were health problems and financial difficulties.

Albania Poverty Headcount Ratio at Societal Poverty Lines: % of Population data was reported at 16.000 % in 2020. This records an increase from the previous number of 15.800 % for 2019. Albania Poverty Headcount Ratio at Societal Poverty Lines: % of Population data is updated yearly, averaging 19.600 % from Dec 1996 (Median) to 2020, with 12 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 24.900 % in 2014 and a record low of 15.800 % in 2019. Albania Poverty Headcount Ratio at Societal Poverty Lines: % of Population data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Albania – Table AL.World Bank.WDI: Social: Poverty and Inequality. The poverty headcount ratio at societal poverty line is the percentage of a population living in poverty according to the World Bank's Societal Poverty Line. The Societal Poverty Line is expressed in purchasing power adjusted 2017 U.S. dollars and defined as max($2.15, $1.15 + 0.5*Median). This means that when the national median is sufficiently low, the Societal Poverty line is equivalent to the extreme poverty line, $2.15. For countries with a sufficiently high national median, the Societal Poverty Line grows as countries’ median income grows.;World Bank, Poverty and Inequality Platform. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are mostly from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see http://pip.worldbank.org.;;The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than 2000 household surveys across 169 countries. See the Poverty and Inequality Platform (PIP) for details (www.pip.worldbank.org).

Poverty Headcount Ratio at Societal Poverty Lines: % of Population data was reported at 7.800 % in 2021. This records an increase from the previous number of 7.600 % for 2020. Poverty Headcount Ratio at Societal Poverty Lines: % of Population data is updated yearly, averaging 7.800 % from Dec 1987 (Median) to 2021, with 23 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 8.400 % in 2010 and a record low of 4.200 % in 1995. Poverty Headcount Ratio at Societal Poverty Lines: % of Population data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Finland – Table FI.World Bank.WDI: Social: Poverty and Inequality. The poverty headcount ratio at societal poverty line is the percentage of a population living in poverty according to the World Bank's Societal Poverty Line. The Societal Poverty Line is expressed in purchasing power adjusted 2017 U.S. dollars and defined as max($2.15, $1.15 + 0.5*Median). This means that when the national median is sufficiently low, the Societal Poverty line is equivalent to the extreme poverty line, $2.15. For countries with a sufficiently high national median, the Societal Poverty Line grows as countries’ median income grows.;World Bank, Poverty and Inequality Platform. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are mostly from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see http://pip.worldbank.org.;;The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than 2000 household surveys across 169 countries. See the Poverty and Inequality Platform (PIP) for details (www.pip.worldbank.org).

Sweden Poverty Headcount Ratio at Societal Poverty Lines: % of Population data was reported at 12.100 % in 2021. This records an increase from the previous number of 11.000 % for 2020. Sweden Poverty Headcount Ratio at Societal Poverty Lines: % of Population data is updated yearly, averaging 10.000 % from Dec 1975 (Median) to 2021, with 27 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 12.100 % in 2021 and a record low of 6.700 % in 1987. Sweden Poverty Headcount Ratio at Societal Poverty Lines: % of Population data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Sweden – Table SE.World Bank.WDI: Social: Poverty and Inequality. The poverty headcount ratio at societal poverty line is the percentage of a population living in poverty according to the World Bank's Societal Poverty Line. The Societal Poverty Line is expressed in purchasing power adjusted 2017 U.S. dollars and defined as max($2.15, $1.15 + 0.5*Median). This means that when the national median is sufficiently low, the Societal Poverty line is equivalent to the extreme poverty line, $2.15. For countries with a sufficiently high national median, the Societal Poverty Line grows as countries’ median income grows.;World Bank, Poverty and Inequality Platform. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are mostly from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see http://pip.worldbank.org.;;The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than 2000 household surveys across 169 countries. See the Poverty and Inequality Platform (PIP) for details (www.pip.worldbank.org).

Turkey Poverty Headcount Ratio at Societal Poverty Lines: % of Population data was reported at 22.100 % in 2021. This records an increase from the previous number of 21.700 % for 2020. Turkey Poverty Headcount Ratio at Societal Poverty Lines: % of Population data is updated yearly, averaging 22.100 % from Dec 2017 (Median) to 2021, with 5 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 22.100 % in 2021 and a record low of 21.700 % in 2020. Turkey Poverty Headcount Ratio at Societal Poverty Lines: % of Population data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by World Bank. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Turkey – Table TR.World Bank.WDI: Social: Poverty and Inequality. The poverty headcount ratio at societal poverty line is the percentage of a population living in poverty according to the World Bank's Societal Poverty Line. The Societal Poverty Line is expressed in purchasing power adjusted 2017 U.S. dollars and defined as max($2.15, $1.15 + 0.5*Median). This means that when the national median is sufficiently low, the Societal Poverty line is equivalent to the extreme poverty line, $2.15. For countries with a sufficiently high national median, the Societal Poverty Line grows as countries’ median income grows.;World Bank, Poverty and Inequality Platform. Data are based on primary household survey data obtained from government statistical agencies and World Bank country departments. Data for high-income economies are mostly from the Luxembourg Income Study database. For more information and methodology, please see http://pip.worldbank.org.;;The World Bank’s internationally comparable poverty monitoring database now draws on income or detailed consumption data from more than 2000 household surveys across 169 countries. See the Poverty and Inequality Platform (PIP) for details (www.pip.worldbank.org).

Abstract

The 2003 Core Welfare Indicators Questionnaire (CWIQ) Survey is a nationwide sample survey, designed to provide indicators for monitoring poverty and living standards in the country, at national, regional and district levels. It is a district-based probability sample that covered a total of 49,003 households nationwide, with 405 households drawn from each district, except for the metropolitan areas, which had samples of households as follows: Accra, 2,430; Kumasi, 11,620; and Shama-Ahanta East, 1,215; as well as the Tema Municipal Area, 810.

Key Findings were as follows:

Adult Literacy

About 50 per cent of the population aged 15 years can read and write (53.4 per cent), an increase of about 10 per cent over the rate recorded in the 1997 CWIQ Survey. Males have a higher literacy rate than females, 65.8 per cent compared to 42.3 per cent. There is a 30 percentage point gap between urban and rural literacy rates (69.6 per cent and 39.8 per cent respectively). Females are more disadvantaged in rural areas where the literacy rate is less than 30 per cent compared urban areas where the rate is more than 50 per cent. The female literacy rates are also lower than the male rates in both urban and rural areas of the country.

Youth Literacy

Among the youth, i.e., the population aged 15 - 24 years, the proportion that can read and write increased only slightly from 64.1 per cent in 1997 to 68.7 per cent in 2003. The female youth made some modest gains in their literacy levels, which increased by 10 per cent, while that of males increased by only 4 per cent over the five-year period. The literacy rate for urban youth (81.7 per cent) is considerably higher than that of the rural youth (56.4 per cent). The rural poor have however remained disadvantaged, with just a third of its females and less than half of its males being able to read and write.

Net Enrolment

Seven in 10 children aged 6 to 11 years are enrolled in primary school, for girls as for boys. The differences between the enrolment rates for girls and boys at the national level, and in the rural and urban areas are marginal. The biggest gender gap is 2.4 percentage points among the urban poor, with boys having the edge.

Substantially fewer children progress from primary to secondary level. Of the children aged 12 to 17 years, only about 4 in 10, are enrolled in secondary school, and the gender disparity in 1997 has reversed. Overall, enrolment at the secondary level declined marginally, from 40.0 percent in 1997 to 38.1 per cent in 2003. The rate however declined appreciably for males (from 43.6 to 37.9 per cent) but increased slightly for females (from 36.4 to 38.4 per cent) over the five year period. There are substantial differences between the urban and rural areas (50.5 per cent compared to 28.7 per cent), and between the poor in urban and rural areas (40.3 per cent compared to 15.2 per cent).

Access to School

A high proportion of primary school children (85.4 per cent) have a primary school within 30 minutes of their home, compared to only 43.3 per cent, for secondary schools. Access to a primary school is substantially high for all four subgroups - rural versus urban and rural poor versus urban poor. The rural poor have the lowest access rate (72.7 per cent), with 93.4 percent of the urban poor reporting access. In contrast, about 62.6 per cent of secondary level students in urban areas, but only 28.8 per cent of their counterparts in rural areas have a secondary school within 30 minutes of their home. The corresponding proportions for the

urban and rural poor are 55.1 and 12.9 per cent, respectively.

Satisfaction with Education

About two-thirds (68.0 per cent) of all primary school children report being satisfied with the school they attend while a higher proportion (75.0 per cent) of the secondary school students report being satisfied with their school. However, primary pupils and secondary students in rural areas, especially the rural poor, are less satisfied with their schools than their counterparts in the urban areas.

Access to Health Facilities.

The time required to reach a health facility could affect the chances of survival of sick people, especially in emergency situations. Yet, only 57.6 per cent of the population live within 30 minutes of a health facility. This is however a significant improvement over the 1997 average of 37.2 per cent. More than three quarters (78.5 per cent) of urban households have good access to health facilities compared to 42.3 per cent of the rural households. The urban poor have an access rate (72.7 per cent) below the average rate for all urban areas (78.5 percent); while the rural poor is more disadvantaged, relative to their counterparts - in all rural areas and the urban poor. Only 27 per cent of the rural poor live within 30 minutes of a health facility.

Adequacy of Health Services

About 18 per cent of the population reported having been sick or injured in the four-week period preceding the survey, and there has been little change in the situation since 1997 (18.6 percent). In general, only 18.4 per cent of the people consult a health practitioner. Nearly eight out of ten (78.6 per cent) persons who use health services are satisfied with the services they receive, a considerable improvement over the 1997 rate of 57 per cent. The level of satisfaction with the medical services show very little variation across groups. Equal proportions of rural and urban users of the health services are satisfied, and a slightly lower percentage of the rural than urban poor users of these facilities are satisfied.

Prenatal Care

About nine in ten women (93.4 per cent) aged 12-49 years who had live births within 12 months of the survey, received prenatal care. The urban and rural poor have lower participation in prenatal care than their counterparts. The proportion of these women who received prenatal care is 95.9 per cent for the urban poor, and 97.3 per cent for all urban areas. Similarly, the rural poor have lower participation in prenatal care than all rural areas; 86.5 per cent compared to 91.2 percent, respectively.

Births Assisted by Trained Health Professionals

About half of the children aged under five years, were delivered with the assistance of a trained health professional (doctors, nurses and midwifes) in 2003 (51.8 per cent), an increase over the proportion in 1997 (44.7 per cent). The involvement of trained professionals in birth deliveries is more than twice as high in the urban areas (83.3 per cent), than in the rural areas (34.7 per cent). The rate of professionally assisted births is extremely low among the rural poor, for whom the corresponding proportion is only 17.3 per cent compared to that for the urban poor, almost four times as high.

Child Nutritional Status

Of the three anthropometric indicators of malnutrition (stunting, wasting and underweight), stunting is the most prevalent among the children aged 0-4 years. Nearly one-third (32.4 percent) of the children under the age of five years are stunted (short for their age) compared to 15.5 per cent for wasted (underweight for age for height) and 25.8 per cent for underweight (underweight for their height for age). Stunting is higher in rural children (33.6 per cent) than in urban children (30.0 per cent), while children of the poor in both rural and urban areas are worse off relative to the national average. However, the urban rates for both wasting and

underweight are considerably higher than the rural rates, and the urban rates are higher than the national average, while the rural rates are lower. While the level of underweight barely changed over the five year period, (26.0 per cent, in 1997), the rates of stunting and wasting have worsened, and in the case of wasting, it is more than double the 1997 rate (6.5 per cent).

Availability of Employment

The proportion of the population aged 15 years and older who are unemployed averaged 5.4 percent, a slight increase over the 1997 figure (4.6 per cent). The proportion for urban areas (7.6 per cent) is about twice that of rural areas (3.5 per cent). The underemployment rate stood at 13.6 per cent, with the rural rate being 14.9 per cent, and urban, 12.1 per cent.

Meeting Food Needs

More than a tenth (12.8 per cent) of the households report having problems to meet their basic food needs. However, this problem is more prevalent among the rural poor. The proportion of rural households that have difficulty meeting their basic food needs is slightly higher (13.8 per cent) than for urban areas (11.6 per cent).

Access to Water

More than 90 per cent of households are within 30 minutes of their source of drinking water, compared to 82.1 per cent recorded in 1997. Both the rural and urban households record an access level of over 90 per cent. The rural poor have a lower access rate of 83.1 per cent, compared to 94.9 per cent for the urban poor.

Improved Water Source

The quality of drinking water is of great importance to the health of every individual. A higher percentage of households obtain their drinking water from improved water sources- pipe water in the dwelling, outdoor tap, borehole, and protected well-(74.1 per cent), compared to the 1997 figure of 65.2 per cent. Urban households record a higher percentage than rural households (87.3 per cent and 63.0 per cent, respectively), with over 20 percentage points difference.

Safe Sanitation

Safe sanitation, defined as the use of flush toilet, covered pit latrine and VIP/KVIP, is available to 55 per cent of households. Although this represents an improvement over the 1997 rate of 45.8 per cent, safe sanitation is more of an urban (80.9 per cent) than rural phenomenon (33.1 per cent). Safe sanitation facilities are even scarcer among the rural poor, with only 9.2 per cent of their households with these facilities. Moreover, the proportion of urban poor households with safe sanitation (66.9 per cent),