Waging War on Poverty: Poverty Trends Using a Historical Supplemental Poverty Measure

Fox, Liana; Wimer, Christopher; Garfinkel, Irwin; Kaushal, Neeraj; Waldfogel, Jane

doi:10.1002/pam.21833

Cited by 126 publications

(136 citation statements)

References 36 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

124

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Therefore, the income supports and direct benefits provided by these government programs have cut family poverty almost in half, from an estimated 31% to approximately 16%. 29 …”

Section: What Work To Ameliorate the Effects Of Child Povertymentioning

confidence: 99%

Poverty and Child Health in the United States

Gitterman¹,

Flanagan²,

Cotton³

et al. 2016

Pediatrics

477

171

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Almost half of young children in the United States live in poverty or near poverty. The American Academy of Pediatrics is committed to reducing and ultimately eliminating child poverty in the United States. Poverty and related social determinants of health can lead to adverse health outcomes in childhood and across the life course, negatively affecting physical health, socioemotional development, and educational achievement. The American Academy of Pediatrics advocates for programs and policies that have been shown to improve the quality of life and health outcomes for children and families living in poverty. With an awareness and understanding of the effects of poverty on children, pediatricians and other pediatric health practitioners in a family-centered medical home can assess the financial stability of families, link families to resources, and coordinate care with community partners. Further research, advocacy, and continuing education will improve the ability of pediatricians to address the social determinants of health when caring for children who live in poverty. Accompanying this policy statement is a technical report that describes current knowledge on child poverty and the mechanisms by which poverty influences the health and well-being of children.

show abstract

“…Therefore, the income supports and direct benefits provided by these government programs have cut family poverty almost in half, from an estimated 31% to approximately 16%. 29 …”

Section: What Work To Ameliorate the Effects Of Child Povertymentioning

confidence: 99%

Poverty and Child Health in the United States

Gitterman¹,

Flanagan²,

Cotton³

et al. 2016

Pediatrics

477

171

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…1-3 The poverty measure we use is based on the Census Bureau and Bureau of Labor Statistics' new Supplemental Poverty Measure, which is widely considered to be an improved measure of income poverty relative to official statistics because it takes into account government transfers such as the EITC and Food Stamps not counted in the official measure, geographic differences in cost of living, as well as costs such as medical expenses, child care, and commuting. 4 Families are classified as poor if their annual income (defined as post-tax cash income plus in-kind benefits, less expenditures for medical care, child care, or commuting) falls below a poverty line specific to New York City.…”

Section: Conceptualizing and Measuring Disadvantagementioning

confidence: 99%

Beyond Income Poverty: Measuring Disadvantage in Terms of Material Hardship and Health

Neckerman

Garfinkel

Teitler

et al. 2016

Academic Pediatrics

Self Cite

103

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The New York City (NYC) Longitudinal Study of Wellbeing, or “Poverty Tracker,” is a survey of about 2,300 New York City residents. Its purpose is to provide a multidimensional and dynamic understanding of economic disadvantage in NYC. Measures of disadvantage were collected at baseline and a 12-month follow-up, and include three types of disadvantage: (1) income poverty, using a measure based on the new Supplemental Poverty Measure; (2) material hardship, including indicators of food insecurity, housing hardship, unmet medical needs, utility cutoffs, and financial insecurity; and (3) adult health problems, which can drain family time and resources. This paper presents initial results for NYC families with children under 18. At baseline, 56% of families with children had one or more type of disadvantage, including 28% with income poverty, 39% with material hardship, and 17% with an adult health problem. Even among nonpoor families, 33% experienced material hardship and 14% reported an adult health problem. Two-thirds of all families faced disadvantage at either baseline or follow-up, with 46% experiencing some kind of disadvantage at both time points. Respondents with a college education were much less likely to face disadvantage. Even after adjusting for educational attainment and family characteristics, the families of black and Hispanic respondents had elevated rates of disadvantage. Considering income poverty alone greatly understates the extent of disadvantage among families with children in New York City. These results suggest that in addition to addressing income poverty, policymakers should give priority to efforts to reduce material hardship and help families cope with chronic physical or mental illness. The need for these resources extends far above the poverty line.

show abstract

“…In recent work, researchers have produced historical SPM estimates for the period 1967–2012, using data on incomes from the 1968–2013 Annual Social and Economic Supplement (ASEC) to the Current Population Survey (March CPS) and data on expenditures from the 1961, 1972/1973, and 1980–2012 Consumer Expenditure Survey (CE) (see Fox et al 2015). Those estimates showed that government policies have played a more important role in reducing poverty, particularly in recent years, than suggested by the OPM.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These thresholds are quasi-relative, in that the SPM methodology applies the same metric—the 30th to 36th percentile of expenditures on food, clothing, shelter, and utilities, plus 20 % more to cover other essentials—to define the poverty line over time. 2 For a discussion of trends in poverty using a quasi-relative measure, see Fox et al (2015).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Progress on Poverty? New Estimates of Historical Trends Using an Anchored Supplemental Poverty Measure

et al. 2016

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study examines historical trends in poverty using an anchored version of the U.S. Census Bureau’s recently developed Research Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM) estimated back to 1967. Although the SPM is estimated each year using a quasi-relative poverty threshold that varies over time with changes in families’ expenditures on a core basket of goods and services, this study explores trends in poverty using an absolute, or anchored, SPM threshold. We believe the anchored measure offers two advantages. First, setting the threshold at the SPM’s 2012 levels and estimating it back to 1967, adjusted only for changes in prices, is more directly comparable to the approach taken in official poverty statistics. Second, it allows for a better accounting of the roles that social policy, the labor market, and changing demographics play in trends in poverty rates over time, given that changes in the threshold are held constant. Results indicate that unlike official statistics that have shown poverty rates to be fairly flat since the 1960s, poverty rates have dropped by 40 % when measured using a historical anchored SPM over the same period. Results obtained from comparing poverty rates using a pretax/pretransfer measure of resources versus a posttax/posttransfer measure of resources further show that government policies, not market incomes, are driving the declines observed over time.

show abstract

Waging War on Poverty: Poverty Trends Using a Historical Supplemental Poverty Measure

Cited by 126 publications

References 36 publications

Poverty and Child Health in the United States

Poverty and Child Health in the United States

Beyond Income Poverty: Measuring Disadvantage in Terms of Material Hardship and Health

Progress on Poverty? New Estimates of Historical Trends Using an Anchored Supplemental Poverty Measure

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About