Leaders: Linda Burton, Kathryn Edin, David Grusky
The problems with official poverty measurement in the United States are legion. In an attempt to remedy many of these problems, the federal government recently released an experimental Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM), produced by the U.S. Census Bureau in cooperation with the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). The new thresholds defined under the SPM protocol equal the cost of a basket of goods, including food, clothing, shelter, utilities, and a small additional amount to allow for other needs. These thresholds are set with data from the Consumer Expenditure Survey and then adjusted to reflect the needs of different family types and geographic differences in housing costs. The main task of our Poverty Research Group is to elaborate the SPM measurement tool by (a) modifying it for the purposes of monitoring poverty at the state and sub-state levels, (b) developing a method for more frequent updating of poverty and hardship measures, (c) assessing poverty in ways that better reflect whether minimum standards of health care and child care are being met, and (d) developing a new protocol for measuring trends in the everyday experience of poverty.
Frequent Reporting Project: The CPI is building a suite of “frequent poverty measures” that will make it possible for the country to take current poverty data into account when tailoring its labor market and program policies. As it stands, the Census data used to compute annual poverty rates are released well after the year to which they pertain, thus requiring the U.S. to run its poverty policy largely in the blind. It would be considered deeply problematic, by contrast, to attempt to run the country’s employment policy with labor market data that, instead of being at most two months out of date, were approximately two years old. The Stanford Center has thus developed new frequent poverty measures using the monthly Current Population Survey (CPS). We have carried out nearly three years of research testing various specifications of these frequent measures and examining how they track the traditional poverty measure. We plan to release these measures in early 2016.
California Poverty Project: Although both the SPM and OPM are regularly used to characterize poverty at the national level, neither is well suited for the purpose of assessing (a) how poverty is changing at the state or local levels, (b) whether existing state or local policies are making much headway in reducing poverty, and (c) the extent to which new state or local proposals and initiatives would reduce poverty. The U.S. is accordingly in the untenable position of having committed itself to a decentralized policy regime without also having the capacity to measure child and adult poverty at the level at which policy is being developed and policy “experiments" are being undertaken. We have therefore undertaken to build an SPM-style poverty measure, dubbed the California Poverty Measure (CPM), in California. In collaboration with the Public Policy Institute of California (PPIC), we have so far issued two years of CPM data, and we have been analyzing those data to assist California legislators in designing poverty policy.
The National Poverty Study: The purpose of the National Poverty Study is to develop a protocol for the qualitative measurement of poverty that will allow us to measure trends in the everyday experience of poverty. Although the U.S. is doing an ever better job of counting the poor, it lacks a national infrastructure for examining how the poor live in their natural environment and how they forge their lives in the context of stress, disruption, and deprivation. We have selected 14 sites in the U.S. representing different types of poverty (e.g., deindustrializing poverty, rural poverty, border-community poverty, reservation poverty) and have developed a standardized protocol that allows us to assess cross-site differences and changes in how the poor find jobs, make ends meet, and interact with the safety net. This project is a joint undertaking with the American Institutes for Research (AIR).
Medical Expenses Project: This project proceeds from the concern that medical expenses are all too frequently “throwing families into poverty.” The objective is to examine the distribution of observed medical expenses across completely uninsured family units, partially uninsured units (e.g., a child has health insurance, but the parent does not), and fully insured units.
Poverty - CPI Research
|Family Ruptures, Stress, and the Mental Health of the Next Generation||Petra Persson, Maya Rossin-Slater||
Family Ruptures, Stress, and the Mental Health of the Next GenerationAuthor: Petra Persson, Maya Rossin-Slater
This paper studies how in utero exposure to maternal stress from family ruptures affects later mental health. We find that prenatal exposure to the death of a maternal relative increases take-up of ADHD medications during childhood and anti-anxiety and depression medications in adulthood. Further, family ruptures during pregnancy depress birth outcomes and raise the risk of perinatal complications necessitating hospitalization. Our results suggest large welfare gains from preventing fetal stress from family ruptures and possibly from economically induced stressors such as unemployment. They further suggest that greater stress exposure among the poor may partially explain the intergenerational persistence of poverty.
|Coming of Age in the Other America||Stefanie DeLuca, Susan Clampet-Lundquist, Kathryn Edin||
Coming of Age in the Other AmericaAuthor: Stefanie DeLuca, Susan Clampet-Lundquist, Kathryn Edin
Publisher: Russell Sage Foundation
Recent research on inequality and poverty has shown that those born into low-income families, especially African Americans, still have difficulty entering the middle class, in part because of the disadvantages they experience living in more dangerous neighborhoods, going to inferior public schools, and persistent racial inequality. Coming of Age in the Other America shows that despite overwhelming odds, some disadvantaged urban youth do achieve upward mobility. Drawing from ten years of fieldwork with parents and children who resided in Baltimore public housing, sociologists Stefanie DeLuca, Susan Clampet-Lundquist, and Kathryn Edin highlight the remarkable resiliency of some of the youth who hailed from the nation’s poorest neighborhoods and show how the right public policies might help break the cycle of disadvantage.
|Poverty and Child Development: A Longitudinal Study of the Impact of the Earned Income Tax Credit||Rita Hamad, David H. Rehkopf||
Poverty and Child Development: A Longitudinal Study of the Impact of the Earned Income Tax CreditAuthor: Rita Hamad, David H. Rehkopf
Publisher: American Journal of Epidemiology
Although adverse socioeconomic conditions are correlated with worse child health and development, the effects of poverty-alleviation policies are less understood. We examined the associations of the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) on child development and used an instrumental variable approach to estimate the potential impacts of income. We used data from the US National Longitudinal Survey of Youth (n = 8,186) during 1986–2000 to examine effects on the Behavioral Problems Index (BPI) and Home Observation Measurement of the Environment inventory (HOME) scores. We conducted 2 analyses. In the first, we used multivariate linear regressions with child-level fixed effects to examine the association of EITC payment size with BPI and HOME scores; in the second, we used EITC payment size as an instrument to estimate the associations of income with BPI and HOME scores. In linear regression models, higher EITC payments were associated with improved short-term BPI scores (per $1,000, β = −0.57; P = 0.04). In instrumental variable analyses, higher income was associated with improved short-term BPI scores (per $1,000, β = −0.47; P = 0.01) and medium-term HOME scores (per $1,000, β = 0.64; P = 0.02). Our results suggest that both EITC benefits and higher income are associated with modest but meaningful improvements in child development. These findings provide valuable information for health researchers and policymakers for improving child health and development.
|Childhood Environment and Gender Gaps in Adulthood||Raj Chetty, Nathaniel Hendren, Frina Lin, Jeremy Majerovitz, Benjamin Scuderi||
Childhood Environment and Gender Gaps in AdulthoodAuthor: Raj Chetty, Nathaniel Hendren, Frina Lin, Jeremy Majerovitz, Benjamin Scuderi
We show that differences in childhood environments play an important role in shaping gender gaps in adulthood by documenting three facts using population tax records for children born in the 1980s. First, gender gaps in employment rates, earnings, and college attendance vary substantially across the parental income distribution. Notably, the traditional gender gap in employment rates is reversed for children growing up in poor families: boys in families in the bottom quintile of the income distributionare less likely to work than girls. Second, these gender gaps vary substantially across counties and commuting zones in which children grow up. The degree of variation in outcomes across places is largest for boys growing up in poor, single-parent families. Third, the spatial variation in gender gaps is highly correlated with proxies for neighborhood disadvantage. Low-income boys who grow up in high-poverty, high-minority areas work significantly less than girls. These areas also have higher rates of crime, suggesting that boys growing up in concentrated poverty substitute from formal employment to crime. Together, these findings demonstrate that gender gaps in adulthood have roots in childhood, perhaps because childhood disadvantage is especially harmful for boys.
|State of the Union 2016: Poverty||Janet C. Gornick, Markus Jäntti||
State of the Union 2016: PovertyAuthor: Janet C. Gornick, Markus Jäntti
The well-known exceptionalism of American relative poverty extends only to rich countries, not to middle-income countries. Using a relative poverty standard for disposable household income, the U.S. poverty rate exceeds that reported in all of the other high-income countries in this study, with the sole exception of Israel.
- 1 of 6
- next ›
Poverty - CPI Affiliates
|David Grusky||Co-Director, Center on Poverty and Inequality; Professor of Sociology||Stanford University|
|Kathryn Edin||Poverty Research Group Leader; Bloomberg Distinguished Professor of Sociology||Johns Hopkins University|
|Linda Burton||Poverty Research Group Leader; Dean of the Social Sciences||Duke University|
|Arloc Sherman||Senior Fellow||Center on Budget and Policy Priorities|
|Charles Varner||Executive Director, Center on Poverty and Inequality; Pathways Senior Editor||Stanford University|
Poverty - Other Research
|Asset Limits, SNAP Participation, and Financial Stability||Caroline Ratcliffe, Signe-Mary McKernan, Laura Wheaton, Emma Cancian Kalish, Catherine Ruggles, Sara Armstrong, Christina Oberlin||
Asset Limits, SNAP Participation, and Financial StabilityAuthor: Caroline Ratcliffe, Signe-Mary McKernan, Laura Wheaton, Emma Cancian Kalish, Catherine Ruggles, Sara Armstrong, Christina Oberlin
Publisher: The Urban Institute
Asset limits in means-tested programs are designed to target benefits to the neediest people, but they can discourage low-income households from saving and can increase program costs when participants leave and reenter the program (i.e., churn) for administrative reasons. Using Survey of Income and Program Participation data from 1997 to 2013, we find that relaxing Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) asset limits through broad-based categorical eligibility increases the likelihood that low-income people live in a household with a bank account (by 5 percent) and at least $500 in that bank account (by 8 percent). We also find that relaxed asset limits reduce SNAP churn by 26 percent.
|Addressing Child Poverty: How Does the United States Compare With Other Nations?||Timothy Smeeding, Catherine Thévenot||
Addressing Child Poverty: How Does the United States Compare With Other Nations?Author: Timothy Smeeding, Catherine Thévenot
Publisher: Academic Pediatrics
Poverty during childhood raises a number of policy challenges. The earliest years are critical in terms of future cognitive and emotional development and early health outcomes, and have long-lasting consequences on future health. In this article child poverty in the United States is compared with a set of other developed countries. To the surprise of few, results show that child poverty is high in the United States. But why is poverty so much higher in the United States than in other rich nations? Among child poverty drivers, household composition and parent's labor market participation matter a great deal. But these are not insurmountable problems. Many of these disadvantages can be overcome by appropriate public policies. For example, single mothers have a very high probability of poverty in the United States, but this is not the case in other countries where the provision of work support increases mothers' labor earnings and together with strong public cash support effectively reduces child poverty. In this article we focus on the role and design of public expenditure to understand the functioning of the different national systems and highlight ways for improvements to reduce child poverty in the United States. We compare relative child poverty in the United States with poverty in a set of selected countries. The takeaway is that the United States underinvests in its children and their families and in so doing this leads to high child poverty and poor health and educational outcomes. If a nation like the United States wants to decrease poverty and improve health and life chances for poor children, it must support parental employment and incomes, and invest in children's futures as do other similar nations with less child poverty.
|Strengthening the EITC for Childless Workers Would Promote Work and Reduce Poverty||Arloc Sherman, Chuck Marr, Chye-Ching Huang, Cecile Murray||
Strengthening the EITC for Childless Workers Would Promote Work and Reduce PovertyAuthor: Arloc Sherman, Chuck Marr, Chye-Ching Huang, Cecile Murray
Publisher: Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
Working childless adults[ are the lone group that the federal tax code taxes into or deeper into poverty, largely because they are also the only group largely excluded from the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC). For low-income working families with children, the EITC encourages and rewards work and offsets federal payroll and income taxes. The EITC for childless adults, by contrast, is so small that it effectively does none of those things. Today, the federal tax code taxes about 7.5 million childless adults aged 21 through 66 into or deeper into poverty.
|Including Health Insurance in Poverty Measurement: The Impact of Massachusetts Health Reform on Poverty||Sanders Korenman, Dahlia K. Remler||
Including Health Insurance in Poverty Measurement: The Impact of Massachusetts Health Reform on PovertyAuthor: Sanders Korenman, Dahlia K. Remler
We develop and implement what we believe is the first conceptually valid health-inclusive poverty measure (HIPM)—a measure that includes health care or insurance in the poverty needs threshold and health insurance benefits in family resources—and we discuss its limitations. Building on the Census Bureau’s Supplemental Poverty Measure, we construct a pilot HIPM for the under-65 population under ACA-like health reform in Massachusetts. This pilot is intended to demonstrate the practicality, face validity and value of a HIPM. Results suggest that public health insurance benefits and premium subsidies accounted for a substantial, one-third reduction in the poverty rate. Among low-income families who purchased individual insurance, premium subsidies reduced poverty by 9.4 percentage points.
|Changing Family Structures Play a Major Role in the Fight Against Poverty||Lawrence Aber, Stuart Butler, Sheldon Danziger, Robert Doar, David T. Ellwood, Judith M. Gueron, Jonathan Haidt, Ron Haskins, Harry J. Holzer, Kay Hymowitz, Lawrence Mead, Ronald Mincy, Richard V. Reeves, Michael R. Strain, Jane Waldfogel||
Changing Family Structures Play a Major Role in the Fight Against PovertyAuthor: Lawrence Aber, Stuart Butler, Sheldon Danziger, Robert Doar, David T. Ellwood, Judith M. Gueron, Jonathan Haidt, Ron Haskins, Harry J. Holzer, Kay Hymowitz, Lawrence Mead, Ronald Mincy, Richard V. Reeves, Michael R. Strain, Jane Waldfogel
Publisher: AEI-Brookings Working Group on Poverty and Opportunity
Improving the family environment in which children are raised is vital to any serious effort to reduce poverty and expand opportunity. Twenty-five years of extensive and rigorous research has shown that children raised in stable, secure families have a better chance to flourish.
The family structure in and of itself is an important factor in reducing poverty: children raised in single-parent families are nearly five times as likely to be poor as those in married-couple families.
In Chapter 3 of a new report from the AEI-Brookings Working Group on Poverty and Opportunity, the Working Group recommends policies that:
- 1 of 20
- next ›