In 2024, approximately 10.6 percent of the population was living below the national poverty line in the United States. This reflected a 0.5 percentage point decrease from the previous year. Most recently, poverty levels in the country peaked in 2010 at just over 15 percent. Poverty in the U.S. States The number of people living in poverty in the U.S. as well as poverty rates, vary greatly from state to state. With their large populations, California and Texas led that charts in terms of the size of their impoverished residents. On the other hand, Louisiana had the highest rates of poverty, standing at 20 percent in 2024. The state with the lowest poverty rate was New Hampshire at 5.9 percent. Vulnerable populations The poverty rate in the United States varies widely across different ethnic groups. American Indians and Alaska Natives are the ethnic group with the highest levels of poverty in 2024, with about 19 percent earning an income below the official threshold. In comparison, only about 7.5 percent of the White (non-Hispanic) and Asian populations were living below the poverty line. Children are one of the most poverty endangered population groups in the U.S. between 1990 and 2024. Child poverty peaked in 1993 with 22.7 percent of children living in poverty. Despite fluctuations, in 2024, poverty among minors reached its lowest level in decades, falling to 14.3 percent.

In 2024, 8.1 percent of the families in the U.S. lived in poverty, reflecting a slight decrease from the previous year. The poverty rate of families in the last years has a decrease from a peak of almost 12 percent in 2012.

In 2024, about **** percent of children under the age of 18 were living below the poverty line in the United States. This reflected a decrease of *** percentage point from the previous year. Over the observed period, a historic decrease in child poverty was recorded in 2019 at **** percent.

Historical dataset showing Bolivia poverty rate by year from 1990 to 2023.

Historical dataset showing Paraguay poverty rate by year from 1990 to 2023.

Historical dataset showing Egypt poverty rate by year from 1990 to 2021.

Historical dataset showing Sub-Saharan Africa poverty rate by year from 1990 to 2019.

Most remarkably, the poverty rate in East Asia & The Pacific fell from over ** percent in 1990 to *** percent in 2022, underlining the rapid increase of living standards in the region over the past three decades. Also, South Asia has seen a remarkable reduction in poverty during the period, from around ** percent in 1990 to less than ** percent in 2022. As of 2019, Sub-Saharan Africa was the region with the highest share of people living on less than 2.15 U.S. dollars per day, but also here, there has been a poverty reduction since 1990.

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

Yearly (annual) dataset of the Paraguay Poverty Rate, including historical data, latest releases, and long-term trends from 1990-12-31 to 2023-12-31. Available for free download in CSV format.

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.

In 2024, **** percent of families with a female householder without a spouse in the U.S. lived in poverty. This reflected the lowest level recorded over the observed period. You can get an overview on the total number of households in the U.S. here.

In 2024, about 35.9 million Americans were living below the poverty line. This reflected a decrease of over 900,000 people compared to the previous year. The number of people living in poverty peaked in 2014, but trended downwards until the start of the COVID-19 pandemic.

Nearly 9 million Americans live in extreme-poverty neighborhoods, places that also tend to be racially segregated and dangerous. Yet, the effects on the well-being of residents of moving out of such communities into less distressed areas remain uncertain. Moving to Opportunity (MTO) is a randomized housing experiment administered by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development that gave low-income families living in high-poverty areas in five cities the chance to move to lower-poverty areas. Families were randomly assigned to one of three groups: (1) The experimental group (also called the low-poverty voucher (LPV) group) received Section 8 rental assistance certificates or vouchers that they could use only in census tracts with 1990 poverty rates below 10 percent. The families received mobility counseling and help in leasing a new unit. One year after relocating, families could use their voucher to move again if they wished, without any special constraints on location. (2) The Section 8 group (also called the traditional voucher (TRV) group) received regular Section 8 certificates or vouchers that they could use anywhere; these families received no special mobility counseling. (3) The control group received no certificates or vouchers through MTO, but continued to be eligible for project-based housing assistance and whatever other social programs and services to which they would otherwise be entitled. Families were tracked from baseline (1994-98) through the long-term evaluation survey fielding period (2008-10) with the purpose of determining the effects of "neighborhood" on participating families. This data collection contains data from the 3,273 adult interviews completed as part of the MTO long-term evaluation and are comprised of adult variables that have been analyzed. Using data from the long-term evaluation, the associated article reports that moving from a high-poverty to lower-poverty neighborhood leads to long-term (10- to 15-year) improvements in adult physical and mental health and subjective well-being, despite not affecting economic self-sufficiency. The data contain all adult outcomes and mediators analyzed for the associated article as well as a variety of demographic and other baseline measures that were controlled for in the analysis.

Chile Poverty Statistics: Antofagasta data was reported at 30,057.000 Person in 2017. This records a decrease from the previous number of 31,095.000 Person for 2015. Chile Poverty Statistics: Antofagasta data is updated yearly, averaging 59,138.000 Person from Dec 1990 (Median) to 2017, with 13 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 134,771.000 Person in 1990 and a record low of 22,338.000 Person in 2013. Chile Poverty Statistics: Antofagasta data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Ministry of Social Development. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Chile – Table CL.H020: National Socio-Economic Characterization Survey: Poverty Situation.

These datasets contain measures of socioeconomic and demographic characteristics by U.S. census tract for the years 1990-2022 and ZIP code tabulation area (ZCTA) for the years 2008-2022. Example measures include population density; population distribution by race, ethnicity, age, and income; income inequality by race and ethnicity; and proportion of population living below the poverty level, receiving public assistance, and female-headed or single parent families with kids. The datasets also contain a set of theoretically derived measures capturing neighborhood socioeconomic disadvantage and affluence, as well as a neighborhood index of Hispanic, foreign born, and limited English.

This indicator provides information about the percentage of the population living in census tracts identified as having persistent poverty. The ACS defined persistent poverty as having a poverty rate of 20% or higher over a 30-year period using the 1990 and 2000 Censuses and the 2005–2009 and 2015–2019 ACS 5-year estimates. A census tract is characterized as a persistent poverty census tract if 20% or more of its residents are living below the federal poverty level over an extended period.Areas of persistent poverty may have limited access to healthcare services, quality education, and healthy and affordable food. These communities may also face unique social and structural challenges that relate to poverty. Identifying areas of persistent poverty and the population living in these areas can help streamline resource allocation to communities that may benefit the most from additional investments and support.For more information about the Community Health Profiles Data Initiative, please see the initiative homepage.

This dataset contains measures of socioeconomic and demographic characteristics by US census tract 1990-2010. Example measures include population density; population distribution by race, ethnicity, age, and income; and proportion of population living below the poverty level, receiving public assistance, and female-headed families. The dataset also contains a set of index variables to represent neighborhood disadvantage and affluence.

Korea Relative Poverty Rate: Urban Households: Market Income data was reported at 15.400 % in 2016. This records an increase from the previous number of 14.200 % for 2015. Korea Relative Poverty Rate: Urban Households: Market Income data is updated yearly, averaging 12.200 % from Dec 1990 (Median) to 2016, with 27 observations. The data reached an all-time high of 15.400 % in 2016 and a record low of 7.200 % in 1991. Korea Relative Poverty Rate: Urban Households: Market Income data remains active status in CEIC and is reported by Statistics Korea. The data is categorized under Global Database’s Korea – Table KR.H066: Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HS): Income Distribution.

In 2023, about 13.7 percent of Texas's population lived below the poverty line. This was a slight decreae from the previous year. The poverty rate of the United States since 1990 can be accessed here.