Leaders: Linda Burton, Kathryn Edin, David Grusky
The Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM) reveals substantial post-1970 reductions in poverty under a constant (i.e., “anchored”) threshold, but this trend masks worrisome developments at the very bottom of the distribution. Although the overall SPM has trended downward since 1970, the SPM for households with less than half of the anchored threshold level (i.e., “deep poverty”) has remained stable since 1968. Even more worrying, the most extreme forms of poverty, such as living on less than $2 per day (per person), have in fact increased over the last two decades. The main tasks of our Poverty and Deep Poverty RG are to describe trends in poverty and deep poverty, to assess the effectiveness of current anti-poverty programs, and to examine the likely payoff to introducing new anti-poverty programs. We present a sampling of relevant projects below.
Frequent Reporting Project: Why are unemployment statistics reported monthly whereas poverty statistics are reported only once a year (and with such a long lag)? The CPI is hard at work solving this problem.
California Poverty Project: The CPI, in collaboration with the Public Policy Institute of California, issues the California Poverty Measure (CPM) annually. There are plans afoot to make it an even more powerful policy instrument.
Ending Poverty in California: Is it possible to substantially reduce poverty in California by relying entirely on evidence-based programs? It indeed is.
The National Poverty Study: The country’s one-size-fits-all poverty policy ignores the seemingly profound differences between suburban poverty, immigrant poverty, reservation poverty, rural white poverty, deindustrializing poverty, and the many other ways in which massive deprivation plays out in the U.S. The National Poverty Study, which will be the country’s first qualitative census of poverty, takes on the problem.
Income supports and deep poverty: The U.S. does not rely heavily on unconditional cash transfers in its poverty programming. Is this a mistake? The CPI is assisting Y Combinator in providing the first U.S. evidence on unconditional income support since the negative income tax experiments of the 1970s.
Disability and deep poverty: The country’s disability programs are an important anti-poverty weapon. In evaluating their effectiveness, it is important to determine whether the low employment rates among program recipients reflects an underlying (low) capacity for employment, as opposed to the labor-supply effects of the programs themselves. Although it’s long been difficult to assess such labor-supply effects, now there’s a way forward.
Evictions and deep and extreme poverty: Are evictions an important cause of deep and extreme poverty? This line of research examines the extent to which deep and extreme poverty can be reduced with a “housing first” policy that ramps up federal housing programs.
Deep poverty and TANF add-ons: The country is implicitly running hundreds of experiments on how best to structure TANF programs, but it hasn’t had the capacity to evaluate them. Are administrative data the answer?
Poverty - CPI Research
|The More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same? The Safety Net and Poverty in the Great Recession||Marianne Bitler, Hilary Hoynes||
The More Things Change, the More They Stay the Same? The Safety Net and Poverty in the Great RecessionAuthor: Marianne Bitler, Hilary Hoynes
Publisher: Journal of Labor Economics
Much attention has been given to the large increases in safety net spending during the Great Recession. We examine the relationship between poverty, the safety net, and business cycles historically and test whether there has been a significant change in this relationship. We find that post-welfare reform, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families did not respond during the Great Recession and extreme poverty is more cyclical than in prior recessions. Food Stamps and Unemployment Insurance are providing more protection--or no less protection--in the Great Recession, and there is some evidence of less cyclicality for 100% poverty.
|Neighborhood Effect Heterogeneity by Family Income and Developmental Period||Geoffrey T. Wodtke, Felix Elwert, David Harding||
Neighborhood Effect Heterogeneity by Family Income and Developmental PeriodAuthor: Geoffrey T. Wodtke, Felix Elwert, David Harding
Publisher: American Journal of Sociology
Effects of disadvantaged neighborhoods on child educational outcomes likely depend on a family’s economic resources and the timing of neighborhood exposures during the course of child development. This study investigates how timing of exposure to disadvantaged neighborhoods during childhood versus adolescence affects high school graduation and whether these effects vary across families with different income levels. It follows 6,137 children in the PSID from childhood through adolescence and overcomes methodological problems associated with the joint endogeneity of neighborhood context and family income by adapting novel counterfactual methods—a structural nested mean model estimated via two-stage regression with residuals—for time-varying treatments and time-varying effect moderators. Results indicate that exposure to disadvantaged neighborhoods, particularly during adolescence, has a strong negative effect on high school graduation and that this negative effect is more severe for children from poor families.
|Severe Deprivation in America: An Introduction||Matthew Desmond||
Severe Deprivation in America: An IntroductionAuthor: Matthew Desmond
Publisher: The Russell Sage Foundation Journal of the Social Sciences
Poverty researchers from across the social sciences have the opportunity to reach collectively toward a new paradigm—not just a new way of thinking but a whole different approach to the study of vulnerability, violence, and marginality, one that carries methodological, policy-relevant, and normative implications. Most research is rooted in theories now a few decades old. These theories have stood the test of time because they are incisive, sweeping, and validated. But they also were developed before the United States began incarcerating more of its citizens than any other nation; before urban rents soared and poor families began dedicating the majority of their income to housing; before welfare reform caused caseloads to plummet; and before the crack epidemic tore apart poor minority communities. In recent years, the very nature of poverty in America has changed, especially at the very bottom. A new poverty agenda is needed for a world that is itself quite new.
|$2.00 a Day: Living on Almost Nothing in America||Kathryn Edin, Luke Shaefer||
$2.00 a Day: Living on Almost Nothing in AmericaAuthor: Kathryn Edin, Luke Shaefer
Publisher: Boston MA: Houghton-Mifflin Harcourt
Jessica Compton’s family of four would have no cash income unless she donated plasma twice a week at her local donation center in Tennessee. Modonna Harris and her teenage daughter Brianna in Chicago often have no food but spoiled milk on weekends. After two decades of brilliant research on American poverty, Kathryn Edin noticed something she hadn’t seen since the mid-1990s — households surviving on virtually no income. Edin teamed with Luke Shaefer, an expert on calculating incomes of the poor, to discover that the number of American families living on $2.00 per person, per day, has skyrocketed to 1.5 million American households, including about 3 million children. Where do these families live? How did they get so desperately poor? Edin has “turned sociology upside down” (Mother Jones) with her procurement of rich — and truthful — interviews. Through the book’s many compelling profiles, moving and startling answers emerge. The authors illuminate a troubling trend: a low-wage labor market that increasingly fails to deliver a living wage, and a growing but hidden landscape of survival strategies among America’s extreme poor. More than a powerful exposé, $2.00 a Day delivers new evidence and new ideas to our national debate on income inequality.
Jessica Compton’s family of four would have no cash income unless she donated plasma twice a week at her local donation center in Tennessee. Modonna Harris and her teenage daughter Brianna in Chicago often have no food but spoiled milk on weekends - See more at: http://www.hmhco.com/shop/books/200-a-Day/9780544303188#sthash.U75TC8CS.dpu
essica Compton’s family of four would have no cash income unless she donated plasma twice a week at her local donation center in Tennessee. Modonna Harris and her teenage daughter Brianna in Chicago often have no food but spoiled milk on weekends.
After two decades of brilliant research on American poverty, Kathryn Edin noticed something she hadn’t seen since the mid-1990s — households surviving on virtually no income. Edin teamed with Luke Shaefer, an expert on calculating incomes of the poor, to discover that the number of American families living on $2.00 per person, per day, has skyrocketed to 1.5 million American households, including about 3 million children.
Where do these families live? How did they get so desperately poor? Edin has “turned sociology upside down” (Mother Jones) with her procurement of rich — and truthful — interviews. Through the book’s many compelling profiles, moving and startling answers emerge.
The authors illuminate a troubling trend: a low-wage labor market that increasingly fails to deliver a living wage, and a growing but hidden landscape of survival strategies among America’s extreme poor. More than a powerful exposé, $2.00 a Day delivers new evidence and new ideas to our national debate on income inequality.
|Poverty, Pregnancy, and Birth Outcomes: A Study of the Earned Income Tax Credit||Rita Hamad, David H. Rehkopf||
Poverty, Pregnancy, and Birth Outcomes: A Study of the Earned Income Tax CreditAuthor: Rita Hamad, David H. Rehkopf
Publisher: Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology
Economic interventions are increasingly recognised as a mechanism to address perinatal health outcomes among disadvantaged groups. In the US, the earned income tax credit (EITC) is the largest poverty alleviation programme. Little is known about its effects on perinatal health among recipients and their children. We exploit quasi-random variation in the size of EITC payments to examine the effects of income on perinatal health. We find that EITC payment size is associated with better levels of several indicators of perinatal health. Instrumental variables analysis, however, does not reveal a causal association between household income and these health measures.
Poverty - CPI Affiliates
|Trudi Renwick||Assistant Division Chief, Economic Characteristics, Social, Economic and Housing Statistics Division||U.S. Census Bureau|
|Alberto Diaz-Cayeros||Assistant Professor, Political Science||Stanford University|
|Barbara Bergmann||Professor Emeritus||American University|
|Bryan S. Graham||Associate Professor of Economics||University of California, Berkeley|
|Christopher Bryan||Graduate Student, Psychology||Stanford University|
Poverty - Other Research
|Are Latino Immigrants a Burden to Safety Net Services in Non-Traditional Immigrant States? Lessons from Oregon||Daniel López-Cevallos||
Are Latino Immigrants a Burden to Safety Net Services in Non-Traditional Immigrant States? Lessons from OregonAuthor: Daniel López-Cevallos
Publisher: American Journal of Public Health
The significant growth of the Latino population in the midst of an economic recession has invigorated anti-Latino, anti-immigrant sentiments in many US states. One common misconception is that Latino immigrants are a burden to safety net services. This may be particularly true in nontraditional immigrant states that have not historically served Latino immigrants. Oregon data suggest that despite a higher prevalence of poverty, use of safety net services among Latino immigrants in Oregon is lower than that among non-Latino Whites. Immigration status, costs, lack of insurance coverage, and discrimination are among the reasons for this group’s limited use of services. Nevertheless, policies designed to strengthen community and institutional support for Latino immigrant families should be considered in the context of current health care and immigration reform efforts.
|The Effect of Early Childhood Poverty||Greg Duncan, Ariel Kalil, Kathleen Ziol-Guest||
The Effect of Early Childhood PovertyAuthor: Greg Duncan, Ariel Kalil, Kathleen Ziol-Guest
Publisher: Australian Institute of Family Studies
Almost universally neglected in the poverty scholarship is the timing of economic hardship across childhood and adolescence. Emerging research in neuroscience, social epidemiology and developmental psychology suggests that poverty early in a child's life may be particularly harmful.
|Why Concentrated Poverty Matters||Lisa Gennetian , Jens Ludwig , Thomas McDade , Lisa Sanbonmatsu||
Why Concentrated Poverty MattersAuthor: Lisa Gennetian , Jens Ludwig , Thomas McDade , Lisa Sanbonmatsu
Publisher: Pathways Spring 2013
In 1987 sociologist William Julius Wilson published his influential book The Truly Disadvantaged, which argued that the growing geographic concentration of poor minority families in urban areas contributed to high rates of crime, out-of-wedlock births, female-headed families, and welfare dependency. The exodus of black working- and middle-class families during the 1960s and 1970s from inner-city areas had adverse effects on the poor families left behind in high-poverty areas, Wilson suggested, by eliminating a “social buffer” that helped “keep alive the perception that education is meaningful, that steady employment is a viable alternative to welfare, and that family stability is the norm, not the exception” (p. 49). Our research on the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development’s (HUD) Moving to Opportunity (MTO) randomized mobility experiment raises questions about whether Wilson was right about the effects of concentrated poverty on the earnings, welfare receipt, or schooling outcomes of low-income families living in such areas. But MTO suggests concentrated poverty does have extremely important impacts on outcomes not emphasized so much by Wilson – such as physical and mental health.
|How Much Protection Does a College Degree Afford? The Impact of the Recession on Recent College Graduates||The Pew Charitable Trusts||
How Much Protection Does a College Degree Afford? The Impact of the Recession on Recent College GraduatesAuthor: The Pew Charitable Trusts
Publisher: The Pew Charitable Trusts
Past research from Pew’s Economic Mobility Project has shown the power of a college education to both promote upward mobility and prevent downward mobility. The chances of moving from the bottom of the family income ladder all the way to the top are three times greater for someone with a college degree than for someone without one. Moreover, when compared with their less-credentialed counterparts, college graduates have been able to count on much higher earnings and lower unemployment rates. Even during the Great Recession, college graduates maintained higher rates of employment and higher earnings compared with less educated adults. However, the question of how recent college graduates have fared has remained largely unexamined, and many in the popular media have suggested that the advantageous market situation of college graduates is beginning to unravel under the pressure of the economic downturn. This study examines whether a college degree protected these recent graduates from a range of poor employment outcomes during the recession, including unemployment, low-skill jobs, and lesser wages.
|Identifying the Disadvantaged: Official Poverty, Consumption Poverty, and the New Supplemental Poverty Measure||Bruce D. Meyer, James X. Sullivan||
Identifying the Disadvantaged: Official Poverty, Consumption Poverty, and the New Supplemental Poverty MeasureAuthor: Bruce D. Meyer, James X. Sullivan
Publisher: Journal of Economic Perspectives
We discuss poverty measurement, focusing on two alternatives to the current official measure: consumption poverty, and the Census Bureau's new Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM) that was released for the first time last year. The SPM has advantages over the official poverty measure, including a more defensible adjustment for family size and composition, an expanded definition of the family unit that includes cohabitors, and a definition of income that is conceptually closer to resources available for consumption. The SPM's definition of income, though conceptually broader than pre-tax money income, is difficult to implement given available data and their accuracy. Furthermore, income data do not capture consumption out of savings and tangible assets such as houses and cars. A consumption-based measure has similar advantages but fewer disadvantages. We compare those added to and dropped from the poverty rolls by the alternative measures relative to the current official measure. We find that the SPM adds to poverty individuals who are more likely to be college graduates, own a home and a car, live in a larger housing unit, have air conditioning, health insurance, and substantial assets, and have other more favorable characteristics than those who are dropped from poverty. Meanwhile, we find that a consumption measure compared to the official measure or the SPM adds to the poverty rolls individuals who are more disadvantaged than those who are dropped. We decompose the differences between the SPM and official poverty and find that the most problematic aspect of the SPM is the subtraction of medical out-of-pocket expenses from SPM income. Also, because the SPM poverty thresholds change in an odd way over time, it will be hard to determine if changes in poverty are due to changes in income or changes in thresholds. Our results present strong evidence that a consumption-based poverty measure is preferable to both the official income-based poverty measure and to the Supplemental Poverty Measure for determining who are the most disadvantaged.