In 2021, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania was the city with the highest poverty rate of the United States' most populated cities. In this statistic, the cities are sorted by poverty rate, not population. The most populated city in 2021 according to the source was New York city - which had a poverty rate of 18 percent.

In 2023, around 27.4 percent of residents in Bremen were at risk of living in poverty. This list shows the 15 cities in Germany with the highest at-risk-of-poverty rates.

In 2021, New York city had the highest number of people living below the poverty line, with 1.4 million people living in poverty. This is significantly higher than any of the other most populated cities.

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 2021, the city of Philadelphia in Pennsylvania had the highest family poverty rate of the 25 most populated cities in the United States. The city with the next highest poverty rate was Houston, Texas.

Graph and download economic data for Percent of Population Below the Poverty Level (5-year estimate) in St. Louis city, MO (S1701ACS029510) from 2012 to 2023 about St. Louis City, MO; St. Louis; MO; poverty; percent; 5-year; population; and USA.

Living Conditions Survey (LCS): At-risk-of-poverty rate, by Autonomous Community. Annual. Autonomous Communities and Cities.

The municipalities of Manapiare and Bolívar, located in the Venezuelan states of Amazonas and Falcón, respectively, registered the highest share of population living under the poverty line in the country in 2021. That year, almost the entire population of these municipalities was reported to be living in poverty. All the 25 Venezuelan cities listed in this statistic had at least 99.7 percent of their population living under the poverty line.

This table contains data on the percentage of the total population living below 200% of the Federal Poverty Level (FPL), and the percentage of children living below 200% FPL for California, its regions, counties, cities, towns, public use microdata areas, and census tracts. Data for time periods 2011-2015 (overall poverty) and 2012-2016 (child poverty) and with race/ethnicity stratification is included in the table. The poverty rate table is part of a series of indicators in the Healthy Communities Data and Indicators Project of the Office of Health Equity. Poverty is an important social determinant of health (see http://www.healthypeople.gov/2020/topicsobjectives2020/overview.aspx?topicid=39) that can impact people’s access to basic necessities (housing, food, education, jobs, and transportation), and is associated with higher incidence and prevalence of illness, and with reduced access to quality health care. More information on the data table and a data dictionary can be found in the About/Attachments section.

Percent of children living below the poverty line measures the percentage of persons under the age of 18, out of all persons under the age of 18 in an area, where total household 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: American Community Survey Years Available: 2010-2014, 2011-2015, 2012-2016, 2013-2017, 2014-2018, 2015-2019, 2016-2020, 2017-2021, 2018-2022, 2019-2023

Table from the American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year series on poverty and employment status related topics for City of Seattle Council Districts, Comprehensive Plan Growth Areas and Community Reporting Areas. Table includes B23025 Employment Status for the Population 16 years and over, B23024 Poverty Status by Disability Status by Employment Status for the Population 20 to 64 years, B17010 Poverty Status of Families by Family Type by Presence of Related Children under 18 years, C17002 Ratio of Income to Poverty Level in the Past 12 Months. Data is pulled from block group tables for the most recent ACS vintage and summarized to the neighborhoods based on block group assignment.Table created for and used in the Neighborhood Profiles application.Vintages: 2023ACS Table(s): B23025, B23024, B17010, C17002Data downloaded from: Census Bureau's Explore Census Data The 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.<d

Tabular data of population by age groups, race and gender, and the poverty by race is attached to the split tract geography to create this split tract with population and poverty data. Split tract data is the product of 2020 census tracts split by 2022 incorporated city boundaries and unincorporated community/countywide statistical areas (CSA) boundaries. The census tract boundaries have been altered and aligned where necessary with legal city boundaries and unincorporated areas, including shoreline/coastal areas. Census Tract:Every 10 years the Census Bureau counts the population of the United States as mandated by Constitution. The Census Bureau (https://www.census.gov/) released 2020 geographic boundaries data including census tracts for the analysis and mapping of demographic information across the United States. City Boundary:City Boundary data is the base map information for the County of Los Angeles. These City Boundaries are based on the Los Angeles County Seamless Cadastral Landbase. The Landbase is jointly maintained by the Los Angeles County Assessor and the Los Angeles County Department of Public Works (DPW). This layer represents current city boundaries within Los Angeles County. The DPW provides the most current shapefiles representing city boundaries and city annexations. True, legal boundaries are only determined on the ground by surveyors licensed in the State of California.Countywide Statistical Areas (CSA): The countywide Statistical Area (CSA) was defined to provide a common geographic boundary for reporting departmental statistics for unincorporated areas and incorporated Los Angeles city to the Board of Supervisors. The CSA boundary and CSA names are established by the CIO and the LA County Enterprise GIS group worked with the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors Unincorporated Area and Field Deputies that reflect as best as possible the general name preferences of residents and historical names of areas. This data is primarily focused on broad statistics and reporting, not mapping of communities. This data is not designed to perfectly represent communities, nor jurisdictional boundaries such as Angeles National Forest. CSA represent board approved geographies comprised of Census block groups split by cities.Data Field:CT20: 2020 Census tractFIP22: 2022 City FIP CodeCITY: City name for incorporated cities and “Unincorporated” for unincorporated areas (as of July 1, 2022) CSA: Countywide Statistical Area (CSA) - Unincorporated area community names and LA City neighborhood names.CT20FIP22CSA: 2020 census tract with 2022 city FIPs for incorporated cities and unincorporated areas and LA neighborhoods. SPA22: 2022 Service Planning Area (SPA) number.SPA_NAME: Service Planning Area name.HD22: 2022 Health District (HD) number: HD_NAME: Health District name.POP22_AGE_0_4: 2022 population 0 to 4 years oldPOP22_AGE_5_9: 2022 population 5 to 9 years old POP22_AGE_10_14: 2022 population 10 to 14 years old POP22_AGE_15_17: 2022 population 15 to 17 years old POP22_AGE_18_19: 2022 population 18 to 19 years old POP22_AGE_20_44: 2022 population 20 to 24 years old POP22_AGE_25_29: 2022 population 25 to 29 years old POP22_AGE_30_34: 2022 population 30 to 34 years old POP22_AGE_35_44: 2022 population 35 to 44 years old POP22_AGE_45_54: 2022 population 45 to 54 years old POP22_AGE_55_64: 2022 population 55 to 64 years old POP22_AGE_65_74: 2022 population 65 to 74 years old POP22_AGE_75_84: 2022 population 75 to 84 years old POP22_AGE_85_100: 2022 population 85 years and older POP22_WHITE: 2022 Non-Hispanic White POP22_BLACK: 2022 Non-Hispanic African AmericanPOP22_AIAN: 2022 Non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska NativePOP22_ASIAN: 2022 Non-Hispanic Asian POP22_HNPI: 2022 Non-Hispanic Hawaiian Native or Pacific IslanderPOP22_HISPANIC: 2022 HispanicPOP22_MALE: 2022 Male POP22_FEMALE: 2022 Female POV22_WHITE: 2022 Non-Hispanic White below 100% Federal Poverty Level POV22_BLACK: 2022 Non-Hispanic African American below 100% Federal Poverty Level POV22_AIAN: 2022 Non-Hispanic American Indian or Alaska Native below 100% Federal Poverty Level POV22_ASIAN: 2022 Non-Hispanic Asian below 100% Federal Poverty Level POV22_HNPI: 2022 Non-Hispanic Hawaiian Native or Pacific Islander below 100% Federal Poverty Level POV22_HISPANIC: 2022 Hispanic below 100% Federal Poverty Level POV22_TOTAL: 2022 Total population below 100% Federal Poverty Level POP22_TOTAL: 2022 Total PopulationAREA_SQMil: Area in square mile.POP22_DENSITY: Population per square mile.POV22_PERCENT: Poverty rate/percentage.How this data created?The tabular data of population by age groups, by ethnic groups and by gender, and the poverty by ethnic groups is attributed to the split tract geography to create this data. Split tract polygon data is created by intersecting 2020 census tract polygons, LA Country City Boundary polygons and Countywide Statistical Areas (CSA) polygon data. The resulting polygon boundary aligned and matched with the legal city boundary whenever possible. Note:1. Population and poverty data estimated as of July 1, 2022. 2. 2010 Census tract and 2020 census tracts are not the same. Similarly, city and community boundary are not the same because boundary is reviewed and updated annually.

Graph and download economic data for Percent of Population Below the Poverty Level (5-year estimate) in Baltimore city, MD (S1701ACS024510) from 2012 to 2023 about Baltimore City, MD; Baltimore; MD; poverty; percent; 5-year; population; and USA.

Census Bureau tabulated population data in each decennial census. Poverty data is available in American Community Survey (ACS) 5-Year Summary File. Population data shows increasing whereas the poverty data shows decreasing in Los Angeles County from 2000 census to 2020 census. This poverty Dashboard is created to display and visualize the change in the poverty in LA County during three decennial censuses 2000, 2010 and 2020. The 2000 poverty data from 2000 census, and the 2010 and 2020 poverty from ACS 5YR Summary File. How population and poverty data by city and community are created?For population data, block centroids of 2000, 2010 and 2020 census blocks were intersected with the current city and community boundaries, and block-based population were aggregated by the current city and community boundaries. For poverty rate data, tract-based poverty data were extracted from ACS 5-YR Summary file, allocated to blocks by multiplying a tract-to-block allocation factor, and aggregated by the current city and community boundaries. These population and population below poverty level (below 100% FPL) data are based on current city/community boundaries and are created for general comparison purpose only. Since current city and community boundaries are different than those at 2000 and 2010 census due to annexation and incorporation of boundaries, the numbers should not be compared with those based on old city and community boundaries.

In 2014 and 2015, The LA County Enterprise GIS team under the Geographic Information Officer worked with the Unincorporated Area Deputies and Field Deputies of each Board Office to establish names that reflect the desires of residents. CSAs differ from the more informal Community geographies because:They are focused on broad statistics and reporting, not mapping of communities.They represent board approved names assigned to Census block groups and city boundaries.They cover the entire unincorporated County (no gaps).There are not overlapping areas. Additionally, CSAs use the following naming conventions:All names are assumed to begin with Unincorporated (e.g. Unincorporated El Camino Village) which will not be part of the CSA Name (so the name of the Statistical Area would be El Camino Village).Names will not contain “Island.” Beginning each name with Unincorporated will distinguish an area from any surrounding cities. There may be one or more exceptions for certain small areas (e.g. Bandini Islands)A forward slash implies an undetermined boundary between two areas within a statistical geography (e.g. Westfield/Academy Hills or View Park/Windsor Hills)Certain established names may include hyphens (e.g. Florence-Firestone)Aliases may be defined in parentheses (e.g. Unincorporated Long Beach (Bonner/Carson Park))The original set of names were derived from community names used in the 2011 Redistricting process, chosen with the assistance of the Board of Supervisors.Updates: 2023 December: CSA data updated to include "Unincorporated Charter Oak" (south of 10 Freeway) into "Unincorporated Covina".2023 June: CSA data was updated to include "Kinneloa Mesa" community, which was a part of Unincorporated East Pasadena.2023 January: Updated layer schema to include feature type (“FEAT_TYPE”) field, which can be one of land, water, breakwater, or pier (consistent with the City Boundaries layer).2022 December: CSA data was updated to incorporate the “Tesoro Del Valle” annexation to the city of Santa Clarita. Unincorporated Valencia is now completely annexed to the City of Santa Clarita. In addition to land area, this data also includes other feature types such as piers, breakwater and water area. 2022 September: CSA data was updated to match with city boundaries along shoreline/coastal area and minor boundary adjusted in some other areas.

Graph and download economic data for Estimate of People of All Ages in Poverty in Radford City, VA (PEAAVA51750A647NCEN) from 1989 to 2023 about Radford City, VA; Blacksburg; VA; child; poverty; persons; and USA.

The McAllen-Edinburg-Mission metropolitan area in Texas was ranked first with 27.2 percent of its population living below the poverty level in 2023. Eagle Pass, Texas had the second-highest poverty rate, at 24.4 percent.

This data set contains poverty data by age for cities in Utah from 2013. This data was collected by the US Dept of Census.

Dashboard featuring statistics regarding poverty in Roanoke (city), VA. Data derived from ACS Poverty Status Variables - Boundaries, which is a layer by Esri and is available on Living Atlas.

Abstract

The objective of the survey was to produce baselines for 15 large urban centers in Kenya. The urban centers covered Nairobi, Mombasa, Naivasha, Nakuru, Malindi, Eldoret, Garissa, Embu, Kitui, Kericho, Thika, Kakamega, Kisumu, Machakos, and Nyeri. The survey covered the following issues: (a) household characteristics; (b) household economic profile; (c) housing, tenure, and rents; and (d) infrastructure services. The survey was undertaken to deepen understanding of the cities’ growth dynamics, and to identify specific challenges to quality of life for residents. The survey pays special attention to living conditions for residents of formal versus informal settlements, poor versus non-poor, and male and female headed households.

Analysis unit

Household Urban center

Kind of data

Sample survey data [ssd]

Sampling procedure

The Kenya State of the Cities Baseline Survey is aimed to produce reliable estimates of key indicators related to demographic profile, infrastructure access and economic profile for each of the 15 towns and cities based on representative samples, including representative samples of households (HHs) residing in slum and non-slum areas. For this baseline household survey, NORC used a two- or three-stage stratified cluster sampling design within each of the 15 urban centers. Our first-stage sampling frame was based on the 2009 census frame of enumeration areas. For each of the 15 towns and cities, NORC received the sampling frame of EAs from the Kenya National Bureau of Statistics (KNBS). In the first stage, NORC selected a sample of enumeration areas (PSUs). The second stage involved a random selection of households (SSUs) from each selected EA. In order to manage the field interviewing efficiently, we drew a fixed number of HHs from each selected EA, irrespective of EA size. The third stage arose in instances of very large EAs (EAs containing more than 200 households) in which EAs were divided into 2, 3 or 4 segments, from which one segment was selected randomly for household selection.

Stratification of Enumeration Areas: A few stratification factors were available for stratifying the EAs to help to achieve the survey objectives. As mentioned earlier, for this baseline survey we wanted to draw representative samples from slum and non-slum areas and also to include poor/non-poor households (HHs). For the 2009 census, depending on the location, KNBS divided the EAs into three categories: rural, urban, and peri-urban.

Although there is a clear distinction of EAs into slum and non-slum areas, it is hard to classify EAs into poor and non-poor categories. To guarantee enough representation of HHs living in slum and non-slum areas (also referred to as formal and informal areas) as well as HHs living below and above the poverty line, NORC stratified the first-stage sampling units (EAs) into strata, based on EA type (3 types) and settlement type (2 types). Given the resources available, we believe this stratification would serve our purpose as HHs living in slum and in rural areas tend to be poor. Table 1 in Appendix C of final Overview Report (provided under the Related Materials tab) presents the allocation of sampled EAs across the strata for each of the 15 cities in the baseline survey.

Sampling households is not as straightforward as the first-stage sampling of EAs, since the 2009 census frame of HHs does not exist. In the absence of a household sampling frame, NORC carried out a listing of HHs within each EA selected in the first stage. Trained listers, accompanied by local cluster guides (local residents with some form of authority in the EA), systematically listed all households in each selected EA, gathering the address, names of head of household and spouse, household description, latitude and longitude. To ensure completeness of listing data, avoid duplication and improve ease of locating households that were eventually selected for interview, listers enumerated households by chalking household identification number above the household doorway (an accepted practice for national surveys). The sampling frame of HHs produced from the listing activity was, therefore, up-to-date and included new formal and informal settlements that appeared after the 2009 census.

For adequate representativeness and to manage the interviewing task efficiently, NORC planned seven completed household interviews per EA. The final recommended sample size for the Kenya State of the Cities baseline survey is found in Table 2 in Appendix C of the final Overview Report.

Because the expected response rate was unknown prior to the start of the field period, the sampling team randomly selected ten households per enumeration area and distributed them to the interviewers working within the EA. Interviewing teams were instructed to complete at least seven interviews per EA from among the ten selected households. Interviewers were instructed to attempt at least three contacts with each selected household, approaching potential respondents on different days of the week and different times of day. Table 2 presents the final number of EAs listed per city and the final number of completed interviews per city. The table also presents the percent of planned EAs and interviews that were completed vs. planned. Please note that in several cities more interviews were completed than planned. As part of NORC's data quality plan, data collection teams were instructed to overshoot slightly the target of seven interviews per EA, if feasible, to mitigate any potential loss of cases due to poor quality or uncooperative respondents. Few cases were lost due to poor quality, therefore the target number of interviews remains over 100 percent in ten of the fifteen cities.

Mode of data collection

Face-to-face [f2f]

Research instrument

The questionnaire was developed by World Bank staff with input from stakeholders in the Kenya Municipal Program and NORC researchers and survey methodologists. The base questionnaire for the project was a 2004 World Bank survey of Nairobi slums. However, an extended iterative review process led to many changes in the questionnaire. The final version that was used for programming provided under the Related Materials tab, and in Volume II of the Overview.

The questionnaire’s topical coverage is indicated by the titles of its nine modules: 1. Demographics and household composition 2. Security of housing, land and tenure 3. Housing and settlement profile 4. Economic profile 5. Infrastructure services 6. Health 7. Household enterprises7 8. Civil participation and respondent tracking

Response rate

The completion rate is reported as the number of households that successfully completed an interview over the total number of households selected for the EA. These are shown by city in Table 5 in Appendix C of the final Overview Report, and have an average rate of 68.66 percent, with variation from 66 to 74 percent (aside from Nairobi at 61.47 percent and Machakos at 56 percent). As described earlier, ten households were selected per EA if the EA contained more than 10 households. For EAs where fewer than ten households were selected for interviews, all households were selected. In some EAs, more than ten households were selected due to a central office error.