The Department of Veterans Affairs provides official estimates and projections of the Veteran population using the Veteran Population Projection Model (VetPop). Based on the latest model VetPop2023 and the most recent national survey estimates from the 2023 American Community Survey 1-Year (ACS) data, the projected number of Veterans living in the 50 states, DC and Puerto Rico for fiscal years, 2023 to 2025, are allocated to Urban and Rural areas. As defined by the Census Bureau, Rural encompasses all population, housing, and territory not included within an Urban area (https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/geography/guidance/geo-areas/urban-rural.html). This table contains the Veteran estimates by urban/rural, age group, poverty, and disability. The poverty level and disability are determined by ACS based on responses on total income and functional difficulties. Refer to the sections on Poverty and Disability Status in the document, https://www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/acs/tech_docs/subject_definitions/2023_ACSSubjectDefinitions.pdf Note: rounding to the nearest 1,000 is always appropriate for VetPop estimates.

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)

Key Table Information.Table Title.Place of Birth by Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months in the United States.Table ID.ACSDT1Y2024.B06012.Survey/Program.American Community Survey.Year.2024.Dataset.ACS 1-Year Estimates Detailed Tables.Source.U.S. Census Bureau, 2024 American Community Survey, 1-Year Estimates.Dataset Universe.The dataset universe of the American Community Survey (ACS) is the U.S. resident population and housing. For more information about ACS residence rules, see the ACS Design and Methodology Report. Note that each table describes the specific universe of interest for that set of estimates..Methodology.Unit(s) of Observation.American Community Survey (ACS) data are collected from individuals living in housing units and group quarters, and about housing units whether occupied or vacant. For more information about ACS sampling and data collection, see the ACS Design and Methodology Report..Geography Coverage.ACS data generally reflect the geographic boundaries of legal and statistical areas as of January 1 of the estimate year. For more information, see Geography Boundaries by Year.Estimates of urban and rural populations, housing units, and characteristics reflect boundaries of urban areas defined based on 2020 Census data. As a result, data for urban and rural areas from the ACS do not necessarily reflect the results of ongoing urbanization..Sampling.The ACS consists of two separate samples: housing unit addresses and group quarters facilities. Independent housing unit address samples are selected for each county or county-equivalent in the U.S. and Puerto Rico, with sampling rates depending on a measure of size for the area. For more information on sampling in the ACS, see the Accuracy of the Data document..Confidentiality.The Census Bureau has modified or suppressed some estimates in ACS data products to protect respondents' confidentiality. Title 13 United States Code, Section 9, prohibits the Census Bureau from publishing results in which an individual's data can be identified. For more information on confidentiality protection in the ACS, see the Accuracy of the Data document..Technical Documentation/Methodology.Information about the American Community Survey (ACS) can be found on the ACS website. Supporting documentation including code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing, and a full list of ACS tables and table shells (without estimates) can be found on the Technical Documentation section of the ACS website.Sample size and data quality measures (including coverage rates, allocation rates, and response rates) can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Methodology section.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 roughly 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 ACS Technical Documentation). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables.Users must consider potential differences in geographic boundaries, questionnaire content or coding, or other methodological issues when comparing ACS data from different years. Statistically significant differences shown in ACS Comparison Profiles, or in data users' own analysis, may be the result of these differences and thus might not necessarily reflect changes to the social, economic, housing, or demographic characteristics being compared. For more information, see Comparing ACS Data..Weights.ACS estimates are obtained from a raking ratio estimation procedure that results in the assignment of two sets of weights: a weight to each sample person record and a weight to each sample housing unit record. Estimates of person characteristics are based on the person weight. Estimates of family, household, and housing unit characteristics are based on the housing unit weight. For any given geographic area, a characteristic total is estimated by summing the weights assigned to the persons, households, families or housing units possessing the characteristic in the geographic area. For more information on weighting and estimation in the ACS, see the Accuracy of the Data document.Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic and housing unit estimates, the decennial census is the official source of population totals for April 1st of each decennial year. In between censuses, the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Program produces and disseminates the official estimates of the population for the nation, states...

In May 2025, the average hourly earnings of all employees in the United States was at 11.30 U.S. dollars. The data have been seasonally adjusted. The deflators used for constant-dollar earnings shown here come from the Consumer Price Indexes Programs. The Consumer Price Index for All Urban Employees (CPI-U) is used to deflate the data for all employees. A comparison of the rate of wage growth versus the monthly inflation since 2020 rate can be accessed here. Real wages are wages that have been adjusted for inflation.

Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic and housing unit estimates, it is the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Program that produces and disseminates the official estimates of the population for the nation, states, counties, cities, and towns and estimates of housing units for states and counties..Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Technical Documentation section.Sample size and data quality measures (including coverage rates, allocation rates, and response rates) can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Methodology section..Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.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 roughly 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 ACS Technical Documentation). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables..Dollar amounts are adjusted to respective calendar years. For more information, see: Change to Income Deficit..The 2017-2021 American Community Survey (ACS) data generally reflect the March 2020 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) delineations of metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas. In certain instances, the names, codes, and boundaries of the principal cities shown in ACS tables may differ from the OMB delineation lists due to differences in the effective dates of the geographic entities..Estimates of urban and rural populations, housing units, and characteristics reflect boundaries of urban areas defined based on Census 2010 data. As a result, data for urban and rural areas from the ACS do not necessarily reflect the results of ongoing urbanization..Explanation of Symbols:- The estimate could not be computed because there were an insufficient number of sample observations. For a ratio of medians estimate, one or both of the median estimates falls in the lowest interval or highest interval of an open-ended distribution. For a 5-year median estimate, the margin of error associated with a median was larger than the median itself.N The estimate or margin of error cannot be displayed because there were an insufficient number of sample cases in the selected geographic area. (X) The estimate or margin of error is not applicable or not available.median- The median falls in the lowest interval of an open-ended distribution (for example "2,500-")median+ The median falls in the highest interval of an open-ended distribution (for example "250,000+").** The margin of error could not be computed because there were an insufficient number of sample observations.*** The margin of error could not be computed because the median falls in the lowest interval or highest interval of an open-ended distribution.***** A margin of error is not appropriate because the corresponding estimate is controlled to an independent population or housing estimate. Effectively, the corresponding estimate has no sampling error and the margin of error may be treated as zero.

This data package has the purpose to offer data for socio-economic indicators and to cover as much as possible the entire this indicator category with regard to the indicator type and to the geographic level. The major sources of the data are the U.S. Census Bureau and the U.S. Bureau for Labor Statistics. Another used sources of data are the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development and the U.S. Department of Housing and the U.S. Department Of Agriculture (Economic Research Service).

Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic and housing unit estimates, it is the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Program that produces and disseminates the official estimates of the population for the nation, states, counties, cities, and towns and estimates of housing units for states and counties..Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Technical Documentation section.Sample size and data quality measures (including coverage rates, allocation rates, and response rates) can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Methodology section..Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2017-2021 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.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 roughly 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 ACS Technical Documentation). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables..The 2017-2021 American Community Survey (ACS) data generally reflect the March 2020 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) delineations of metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas. In certain instances, the names, codes, and boundaries of the principal cities shown in ACS tables may differ from the OMB delineation lists due to differences in the effective dates of the geographic entities..Estimates of urban and rural populations, housing units, and characteristics reflect boundaries of urban areas defined based on Census 2010 data. As a result, data for urban and rural areas from the ACS do not necessarily reflect the results of ongoing urbanization..Explanation of Symbols:- The estimate could not be computed because there were an insufficient number of sample observations. For a ratio of medians estimate, one or both of the median estimates falls in the lowest interval or highest interval of an open-ended distribution. For a 5-year median estimate, the margin of error associated with a median was larger than the median itself.N The estimate or margin of error cannot be displayed because there were an insufficient number of sample cases in the selected geographic area. (X) The estimate or margin of error is not applicable or not available.median- The median falls in the lowest interval of an open-ended distribution (for example "2,500-")median+ The median falls in the highest interval of an open-ended distribution (for example "250,000+").** The margin of error could not be computed because there were an insufficient number of sample observations.*** The margin of error could not be computed because the median falls in the lowest interval or highest interval of an open-ended distribution.***** A margin of error is not appropriate because the corresponding estimate is controlled to an independent population or housing estimate. Effectively, the corresponding estimate has no sampling error and the margin of error may be treated as zero.

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 map compares the number of households living above the poverty line to the number of households living below. In the U.S. overall, there are 6.2 households living above the poverty line for every 1 household living below. Green areas on the map have a higher than normal number of households living above compared to below poverty. Orange areas on the map have a higher than normal number of households living below the poverty line compared to those above in that same area.In this map you see the ratio of households living above the poverty line to households living below the poverty line. For the U.S. overall, there are 6.2 households living above the poverty line for every household living below. This map is shaded to clearly show which areas have about the same ratio as the U.S. overall, and which areas have far more families living above poverty or far more families living below poverty than "normal.""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 BureauThe map shows the ratio for states, counties, tracts and block groups, using data from the U.S. Census Bureau's American Community Survey (ACS) for 2013 for the previous 12 months. -------------------The Civic Analytics Network collaborates on shared projects that advance the use of data visualization and predictive analytics in solving important urban problems related to economic opportunity, poverty reduction, and addressing the root causes of social problems of equity and opportunity. For more information see About the Civil Analytics Network.

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.

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.

This map shows the percent of children living within poverty by county in the United States. The popup shows the breakdown of children within poverty by race, if the data is available. According to the National Center for Children in Poverty, 21% of all children live within poverty. The map uses this figure to show areas that are above or below the national average. Areas in orange represent areas that have a higher amount of children living within poverty.The data comes from the County Health Rankings 2018 layer. The report is from a collaboration between the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and the University of Wisconsin Population Health Institute.According to the County Health Rankings & Roadmaps site "By ranking the health of nearly every county in the nation, the County Health Rankings help communities understand what influences how healthy residents are and how long they will live. These comparisons among counties provide context and demonstrate that where you live, and many other factors including race/ethnicity, can deeply impact your ability to live a healthy life. The Rankings not only provide this snapshot of your county’s health, but also are used to drive conversations and action to address the health challenges and gaps highlighted in these findings."Download the Excel file here: 2018 County Health Rankings

Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic and housing unit estimates, for 2020, the 2020 Census provides the official counts of the population and housing units for the nation, states, counties, cities, and towns. For 2016 to 2019, the Population Estimates Program provides estimates of the population for the nation, states, counties, cities, and towns and intercensal housing unit estimates for the nation, states, and counties..Supporting documentation on code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Technical Documentation section.Sample size and data quality measures (including coverage rates, allocation rates, and response rates) can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Methodology section..Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2016-2020 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates.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 roughly 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 ACS Technical Documentation). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables..The 2016-2020 American Community Survey (ACS) data generally reflect the September 2018 Office of Management and Budget (OMB) delineations of metropolitan and micropolitan statistical areas. In certain instances, the names, codes, and boundaries of the principal cities shown in ACS tables may differ from the OMB delineation lists due to differences in the effective dates of the geographic entities..Estimates of urban and rural populations, housing units, and characteristics reflect boundaries of urban areas defined based on Census 2010 data. As a result, data for urban and rural areas from the ACS do not necessarily reflect the results of ongoing urbanization..Explanation of Symbols:- The estimate could not be computed because there were an insufficient number of sample observations. For a ratio of medians estimate, one or both of the median estimates falls in the lowest interval or highest interval of an open-ended distribution.N The estimate or margin of error cannot be displayed because there were an insufficient number of sample cases in the selected geographic area. (X) The estimate or margin of error is not applicable or not available.median- The median falls in the lowest interval of an open-ended distribution (for example "2,500-")median+ The median falls in the highest interval of an open-ended distribution (for example "250,000+").** The margin of error could not be computed because there were an insufficient number of sample observations.*** The margin of error could not be computed because the median falls in the lowest interval or highest interval of an open-ended distribution.***** A margin of error is not appropriate because the corresponding estimate is controlled to an independent population or housing estimate. Effectively, the corresponding estimate has no sampling error and the margin of error may be treated as zero.

Abstract (en): This survey was undertaken to assemble a broad range of family, household, employment, schooling, and welfare data on families living in urban poverty areas of Chicago. The researchers were seeking to test a variety of theories about urban poverty. Questions concerned respondents' current lives as well as their recall of life events from birth to age 21. Major areas of investigation included household composition, family background, education, time spent in detention or jail, childbirth, fertility, relationship history, current employment, employment history, military service, participation in informal economy, child care, child support, child-rearing, neighborhood and housing characteristics, social networks, current health, current and past public aid use, current income, and major life events. ICPSR data undergo a confidentiality review and are altered when necessary to limit the risk of disclosure. ICPSR also routinely creates ready-to-go data files along with setups in the major statistical software formats as well as standard codebooks to accompany the data. In addition to these procedures, ICPSR performed the following processing steps for this data collection: Performed consistency checks.. Non-Hispanic whites, non-Hispanic Blacks, and persons of Mexican or Puerto Rican ethnicity, aged 18-44, residing in 1986 in Chicago census tracts with 20 percent or more persons living under the poverty line. Multistage stratified probability sample design yielding 2,490 observations (1,183 Blacks, 364 whites, 489 Mexican-origin persons, and 454 Puerto Rican-origin persons). Though Black respondents include parents (N = 1,020) and non-parents (N = 163), only parents were selected within non-Black groups. Response rates ranged from 73.8 percent for non-Hispanic whites to 82.5 percent for Black parents. 1997-11-04 The documentation and frequencies are being released as PDF files, and an SPSS export file is now available. Also, the SAS data definition statements and SPSS data definition statements have been reissued with minor changes, and SPSS value labels are being released in Part 7 due to SPSS for Windows limitations. Funding insitution(s): Carnegie Corporation. Chicago Community Trust. Ford Foundation. Institute for Research on Poverty. Joyce Foundation. Lloyd A. Fry Foundation. John D. and Catherine T. MacArthur Foundation. Rockefeller Foundation. Spencer Foundation. United States Department of Health and Human Services. William T. Grant Foundation. Woods Charitable Fund. Value labels for this study are being released in a separate file, Part 7, to assist users of SPSS Release 6.1 for Windows. The syntax window in this version of SPSS will read a maximum of 32,767 lines. If all value labels were included in the SPSS data definition file, the number of lines in the file would exceed 32,767 lines.All references to card-image data in the codebook are no longer applicable.During generation of the logical record length data file, ICPSR optimized variable widths to the width of the widest value appearing in the data collection for each variable. However, the principal investigator's user-missing data code definitions were retained even when a variable contained no missing data. As a result, when user-missing data values are defined (e.g., by uncommenting the MISSING VALUES section in the SPSS data definition statements) and exceed the optimized variable width, SPSS's display dictionary output will contain asterisks for the missing data codes.Producer: University of Chicago, Center for the Study of urban Inequality, and the National Opinion Research Center (NORC).

LOW POVERTY INDEXSummary The low poverty index captures poverty in a given neighborhood. The index is based on the poverty rate (pv). The mean and standard error are estimated over the national distribution.The poverty rate is determined at the census tract level.InterpretationValues are inverted and percentile ranked nationally. The resulting values range from 0 to 100. The higher the score, the less exposure to poverty in a neighborhood.

Data Source: American Community Survey, 2011-2015. Related AFFH-T Local Government, PHA and State Tables/Maps: Table 12; Map 12. School Proficiency Index.

To learn more about the Low Poverty Index 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: 07/2020

China's progress in poverty reduction over the last 25 years is enviable. One cannot fail to be impressed by what this vast nation of 1.3 billion people has achieved in so little time. In terms of a wide range of indicators, the progress has been remarkable. Poverty in terms of income and consumption has been dramatically reduced. Progress has also been substantial in terms of human development indicators. Most of the millennium development goals have either already been achieved or the country is well on the way to achieving them. As a result of this progress, the country is now at a very different stage of development than it was at the dawn of the economic reforms at the beginning of the 1980s. China's poverty reduction performance has been even more striking. Between 1981 and 2004, the fraction of the population consuming below this poverty line fell from 65 percent to 10 percent, and the absolute number of poor fell from 652 million to 135 million, a decline of over half a billion people. The most rapid declines in poverty, in both the poverty rate and the number of poor, occurred during the 6th, 8th, and 10th plans. During the 7th plan period the number of poor actually rose, while in the 9th plan period, the poverty rate declined only marginally. But the pace of poverty reduction resumed between 2001 and 2004 and there are indications that during the first couple of years of the 11th plan poverty has continued to decline rapidly. The most recent official estimate of rural poverty in China for 2007 puts the number of poor at 14.79 million, or less than 2 percent of the rural population. While there is no official urban poverty line, estimates by others have found poverty levels in urban areas to be negligible using an urban poverty line that is comparable to the official poverty line for rural areas. These estimates thus suggest that only about 1 percent of China's population is currently in extreme poverty. Notwithstanding this tremendous success, the central thesis of this report is that the task of poverty reduction in many ways continues and in some respects has become more demanding.

Mortality rates in the United States vary based on race, individual economic status and neighborhood. Correlations among these variables in most urban areas have limited what conclusions can be drawn from existing research. Our study employs a unique factorial design of race, sex, age and individual poverty status, measuring time to death as an objective measure of health, and including both neighborhood economic status and income inequality for a sample of middle-aged urban-dwelling adults (N = 3675). At enrollment, African American and White participants lived in 46 unique census tracts in Baltimore, Maryland, which varied in neighborhood economic status and degree of income inequality. A Cox regression model for 9-year mortality identified a three-way interaction among sex, race and individual poverty status (p = 0.03), with African American men living below poverty having the highest mortality. Neighborhood economic status, whether measured by a composite index or simply median household income, was negatively associated with overall mortality (p

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.

Key Table Information.Table Title.Selected Characteristics of People at Specified Levels of Poverty in the Past 12 Months.Table ID.ACSST1Y2024.S1703.Survey/Program.American Community Survey.Year.2024.Dataset.ACS 1-Year Estimates Subject Tables.Source.U.S. Census Bureau, 2024 American Community Survey, 1-Year Estimates.Dataset Universe.The dataset universe of the American Community Survey (ACS) is the U.S. resident population and housing. For more information about ACS residence rules, see the ACS Design and Methodology Report. Note that each table describes the specific universe of interest for that set of estimates..Methodology.Unit(s) of Observation.American Community Survey (ACS) data are collected from individuals living in housing units and group quarters, and about housing units whether occupied or vacant. For more information about ACS sampling and data collection, see the ACS Design and Methodology Report..Geography Coverage.ACS data generally reflect the geographic boundaries of legal and statistical areas as of January 1 of the estimate year. For more information, see Geography Boundaries by Year.Estimates of urban and rural populations, housing units, and characteristics reflect boundaries of urban areas defined based on 2020 Census data. As a result, data for urban and rural areas from the ACS do not necessarily reflect the results of ongoing urbanization..Sampling.The ACS consists of two separate samples: housing unit addresses and group quarters facilities. Independent housing unit address samples are selected for each county or county-equivalent in the U.S. and Puerto Rico, with sampling rates depending on a measure of size for the area. For more information on sampling in the ACS, see the Accuracy of the Data document..Confidentiality.The Census Bureau has modified or suppressed some estimates in ACS data products to protect respondents' confidentiality. Title 13 United States Code, Section 9, prohibits the Census Bureau from publishing results in which an individual's data can be identified. For more information on confidentiality protection in the ACS, see the Accuracy of the Data document..Technical Documentation/Methodology.Information about the American Community Survey (ACS) can be found on the ACS website. Supporting documentation including code lists, subject definitions, data accuracy, and statistical testing, and a full list of ACS tables and table shells (without estimates) can be found on the Technical Documentation section of the ACS website.Sample size and data quality measures (including coverage rates, allocation rates, and response rates) can be found on the American Community Survey website in the Methodology section.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 roughly 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 ACS Technical Documentation). The effect of nonsampling error is not represented in these tables.Users must consider potential differences in geographic boundaries, questionnaire content or coding, or other methodological issues when comparing ACS data from different years. Statistically significant differences shown in ACS Comparison Profiles, or in data users' own analysis, may be the result of these differences and thus might not necessarily reflect changes to the social, economic, housing, or demographic characteristics being compared. For more information, see Comparing ACS Data..Weights.ACS estimates are obtained from a raking ratio estimation procedure that results in the assignment of two sets of weights: a weight to each sample person record and a weight to each sample housing unit record. Estimates of person characteristics are based on the person weight. Estimates of family, household, and housing unit characteristics are based on the housing unit weight. For any given geographic area, a characteristic total is estimated by summing the weights assigned to the persons, households, families or housing units possessing the characteristic in the geographic area. For more information on weighting and estimation in the ACS, see the Accuracy of the Data document.Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic and housing unit estimates, the decennial census is the official source of population totals for April 1st of each decennial year. In between censuses, the Census Bureau's Population Estimates Program produces and disseminates the official estimates of the population for the nati...

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