In 2023, **** percent of Black people living in the United States were living below the poverty line, compared to *** percent of white people. That year, the total poverty rate in the U.S. across all races and ethnicities was **** percent. Poverty in the United States Single people in the United States making less than ****** U.S. dollars a year and families of four making less than ****** 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.

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.

This dataset contains R/ECAP data for the nine-county San Francisco Bay Region at the census tract level.

To assist communities in identifying racially/ethnically-concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAPs), HUD has developed a census tract-based definition of R/ECAPs.

To assist communities in identifying racially/ethnically-concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAPs), HUD has developed a census tract-based definition of R/ECAPs. The definition involves a racial/ethnic concentration threshold and a poverty test. The racial/ethnic concentration threshold is straightforward: R/ECAPs must have a non-white population of 50 percent or more. Regarding the poverty threshold, Wilson (1980) defines neighborhoods of extreme poverty as census tracts with 40 percent or more of individuals living at or below the poverty line. Because overall poverty levels are substantially lower in many parts of the country, HUD supplements this with an alternate criterion. Thus, a neighborhood can be a R/ECAP if it has a poverty rate that exceeds 40% or is three or more times the average tract poverty rate for the metropolitan/micropolitan area, whichever threshold is lower. Census tracts with this extreme poverty that satisfy the racial/ethnic concentration threshold are deemed R/ECAPs.

Data Source: Decennial census (2010); American Community Survey (ACS), 2006-2010; Brown Longitudinal Tract Database (LTDB) based on decennial census data, 2000 & 1990 References: Wilson, William J. (1980). The Declining Significance of Race: Blacks and Changing American Institutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

Data Source: American Community Survey (ACS), 2009-2013; Decennial Census (2010); Brown Longitudinal Tract Database (LTDB) based on decennial census data, 1990, 2000 & 2010.

Related AFFH-T Local Government, PHA Tables/Maps: Table 4, 7; Maps 1-17.

Related AFFH-T State Tables/Maps: Table 4, 7; Maps 1-15, 18.

References: Wilson, William J. (1980). The Declining Significance of Race: Blacks and Changing American Institutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

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.

The US Poverty Level Statistics dataset includes percentages and numbers of persons and children below the poverty level in the United States by race between 1973 and 2016.

To assist communities in identifying racially/ethnically-concentrated areas of poverty (R/ECAPs), HUD has developed a census tract-based definition of R/ECAPs. The definition involves a racial/ethnic concentration threshold and a poverty test. The racial/ethnic concentration threshold is straightforward: R/ECAPs must have a non-white population of 50 percent or more. Regarding the poverty threshold, Wilson (1980) defines neighborhoods of extreme poverty as census tracts with 40 percent or more of individuals living at or below the poverty line. Because overall poverty levels are substantially lower in many parts of the country, HUD supplements this with an alternate criterion. Thus, a neighborhood can be a R/ECAP if it has a poverty rate that exceeds 40% or is three or more times the average tract poverty rate for the metropolitan/micropolitan area, whichever threshold is lower. Census tracts with this extreme poverty that satisfy the racial/ethnic concentration threshold are deemed R/ECAPs. This translates into the following equation: Where i represents census tracts, () is the metropolitan/micropolitan (CBSA) mean tract poverty rate, is the ith tract poverty rate, () is the non-Hispanic white population in tract i, and Pop is the population in tract i.While this definition of R/ECAP works well for tracts in CBSAs, place outside of these geographies are unlikely to have racial or ethnic concentrations as high as 50 percent. In these areas, the racial/ethnic concentration threshold is set at 20 percent.

Data Source: American Community Survey (ACS), 2009-2013; Decennial Census (2010); Brown Longitudinal Tract Database (LTDB) based on decennial census data, 1990, 2000 & 2010.

Related AFFH-T Local Government, PHA Tables/Maps: Table 4, 7; Maps 1-17. Related AFFH-T State Tables/Maps: Table 4, 7; Maps 1-15, 18.

References:Wilson, William J. (1980). The Declining Significance of Race: Blacks and Changing American Institutions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.

To learn more about R/ECAPs visit:https://www.hud.gov/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/affh ; https://www.hud.gov/sites/dfiles/FHEO/documents/AFFH-T-Data-Documentation-AFFHT0006-July-2020.pdf, for questions about the spatial attribution of this dataset, please reach out to us at GISHelpdesk@hud.gov. Date of Coverage: 11/2017

In 2023, 15.4 percent of Black families were living below the poverty line in the United States. Poverty is the state of one who lacks a certain amount of material possessions or money. Absolute poverty or destitution is inability to afford basic human needs, which commonly includes clean and fresh water, nutrition, health care, education, clothing, and shelter.

This map highlights child poverty in the US by which race has the highest percentage of children in poverty. The pattern is shown by county, and the popup provides a breakdown of child poverty rates by race (where available). Note that not all counties have data for all races, so the map will show the predominant value based on the data available.The data comes from County Health Rankings, a collaboration between the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute, measure the health of nearly all counties in the nation and rank them within states. The layer used in the map comes from ArcGIS Living Atlas of the World, and the full documentation for the layer can be found here. To explore other child poverty patterns, visit the following maps:Where is Black child poverty higher than total child poverty?Black Children in Poverty in the US

Between 2019 and 2023, people living in households in the Asian and ‘Other’ ethnic groups were most likely to be in persistent low income before and after housing costs

Descriptive statistics of residential (high-poverty) trajectories by race and cohort.

ACS 1-year estimates are based on data collected over one calendar year, offering more current information but with a higher margin of error. ACS 5-year estimates combine five years of data, providing more reliable information but less current. Both are based on probability samples. Some racial and ethnic categories are suppressed to avoid misleading estimates when the relative standard error exceeds 30%.

Data Source: American Community Survey (ACS) 1- & 5-Year Estimates

Why This Matters

Poverty threatens the overall well-being of individuals and families, limiting access to stable housing, healthy foods, health care, and educational and employment opportunities, among other basic needs.Poverty is associated with a higher risk of adverse health outcomes, including chronic physical and mental illness, lower life expectancy, developmental delays, and others.

Racist policies and practices have contributed to racial economic inequities. Nationally, Black, Indigenous, and people of color experience poverty at higher rates than white Americans, on average.

The District's Response

Boosting assistance programs that provide temporary cash and health benefits to help low-income residents meet their basic needs, including Medicaid, TANF For District Families, SNAP, etc.

Housing assistance and employment and career training programs to support resident’s housing and employment security. These include the Emergency Rental Assistance Program, Permanent Supportive Housing vouchers, Career MAP, the DC Infrastructure Academy, among other programs and services.

Creation of the DC Commission on Poverty to study poverty issues, evaluate poverty reduction initiatives, and make recommendations to the Mayor and the Council.

Bronx 2010 Census data on poverty compared to race per census tract, also includes fields for households with two or more races respresented.

Poverty status by race and Hispanic Origin by sex and by age as reported by the US Census Bureau, 2016-2020 American Community Survey tables B17001(A-I).

In 2023, the prevalence of extreme poverty among black men and women in Brazil was higher than that observed in other demographic groups. In particular, the rate of extreme poverty among black men reached two percent, which was the highest among all demographic groups.

Among Latin American countries in 2023, Colombia had the highest share of both Afro-descendants and indigenous people living impoverished, with 45.6 percent and 63.5 percent, respectively. Additionally, Colombia also had the highest share of indigenous people living under extreme poverty that year. Ecuador had the second-highest share of indigenous population whose average per capita income was below the poverty line, with 50.4 percent. Uruguay was the only nation where Afro-descendants were the ethnic group with the largest share of the poor population, as in the other selected countries such group was indigenous people.

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.

Poverty and low-income statistics by visible minority group, Indigenous group and immigration status, Canada and provinces.

Financial overview and grant giving statistics of Center On Race Poverty And The Environment

A striking negative correlation exists between an area's residential racial segregation and its population characteristics, but it is recognized that this relationship may not be causal. I present a novel test of causality from segregation to population characteristics by exploiting the arrangements of railroad tracks in the nineteenth century to isolate plausibly exogenous variation in areas' susceptibility to segregation. I show that this variation satisfies the requirements for a valid instrument. Instrumental variables estimates demonstrate that segregation increases metropolitan rates of black poverty and overall black-white income disparities, while decreasing rates of white poverty and inequality within the white population. (JEL I32, J15, N31, N32, N91, N92, R23)

This dataset has been left in Excel format due to N/A values for various counties. We expect this to be due to privacy reasons and/or lack of data for specific groups in certain counties.