Each year, the United States Census Bureau updates the statistics on poverty, health care coverage, and the median income for Americans. This research gives us not only a glimpse into how the country is faring in terms of economic opportunity for a given year but also a broad view of historical trends year-over-year.

Around the same time, the United States Department of Agriculture releases new data on food security in the United States. These data help us see how the country is faring in terms of access to healthy, safe food for Americans.

The data for 2016 were released last week and contained few surprises. Before getting into the numbers, though, here’s a few helpful notes on the Census reports. (Many thanks to the Coalition on Human Needs, an alliance of nonprofit organizations that hosts an annual webinar on the census data.)

• The data are collected annually through two tools: the Current Population Survey (CPS) and the American Community Survey (ACS). Both provide information on similar issues, but the ACS involves a much larger sample, making it possible to get statistics for smaller datasets. For example, you can use the ACS to find the rate of poverty in your state, county or congressional district.
• The rate of poverty is calculated for the previous year based on the official poverty thresholds for households based on household size. Households with annual income below the thresholds are considered to be poor. This matters a great deal, since some means-based public support – SNAP, TANF, etc. – are based on the poverty thresholds. For 2016, the year measured by the CPS and ACS in the newest data, the thresholds are:
  • 1 person, average – $12,234
  • 1 person, below 65 years old – $12,486
  • 1 person, above 65 years old – $11,511
  • 2 people – $15,585
  • 3 people – $19,109
  • 4 people – $24,563
• In addition to the official poverty rate, the Census Bureau provides data based on the “Supplemental Poverty Measure.” The Supplemental Poverty Measure has a few key differences that make it interesting. First, it includes forms of “income” that the official measure does not, for example, Social Security income, SNAP benefits, housing assistance and tax credits. It also makes adjustments in the poverty thresholds based on housing costs in a local geographic area. This makes the SPM fascinating, since it can be used to track the effect things like SNAP benefits, Social Security and medical out-of-pocket costs have on the rate of poverty in the US. For example, we can use the SPM to see what the rate of poverty might be without a program like SNAP. Or, we could use it to estimate what the rate of poverty would be if households had no medical out-of-pocket costs.
• To be statistically significant, the poverty rate has to change by at least .2 or .3 percent. For example, a change in the poverty rate from 15.5% to 15.4% is not statistically significant. For median income, the change has to be about 1 percent to be significant. (Thanks Jared Bernstein, Senior Fellow at the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities for his analysis here.)

Alright, enough notes. Here’s the numbers:

Food Security – 2016

• 3 percent of Americans – about 15.6 million households – were food insecure at some point during the year. This is down, but not significantly, from 12.7 percent in 2015. It is a significant decline from 2014, though, when 14 percent of Americans reported experiencing food insecurity in 2014.
• 9 percent of people in the US – about 6.1 million households – had very low food security in 2016, which means that their food intake was reduced and their normal eating patterns were disrupted at some point during the year. This is essentially the same rate as 2015, when 5 percent of households reported low food security.
• 5 percent of households with children experienced food insecurity in 2016. One interesting note here is that in 8.5 percent of households with children, only the adults were food-insecure. This may be due to the tendency of adults to reduce their own food intake and change their eating habits to ensure that children have enough to eat. Still, in 298,000 households, children, too, experienced disruptions in their food intake due to food insecurity.
• As you can see in the graph below, the Great Recession caused spikes in food insecurity, which have since abated. But food insecurity still hasn’t declined to what it was before the recession.

Poverty

• In 2016, 12.7 percent of Americans – about 40.6 million people – were living in poverty. This is a decline from 13.5 percent in 2015.
• While still high, the new rate reflects the biggest two-year decline in poverty in nearly 50 years. 2.5 million Americans who experienced poverty in 2015 had incomes in 2016 that were above the poverty threshold (see above.) This is a tremendous positive change.
• The number of children living in poverty continues to be high, though we did see a reduction in the number of children living in impoverished households from 2015 to 2016. In 2015, 14.5 million children were living in poverty. In 2016, the number dropped to 13.2 million.
• The Supplemental Poverty Measure demonstrates the huge impact that government programs have had on the rate of poverty in the United States. For example, Social Security helped 26 million people from experiencing poverty. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) reduced the number of people in poverty by almost 3.6 million.
• Higher income may be part of the reason for the decline in poverty. For the second year, the median income for American households increased, to $59,039 in 2016. This is still lower than it was before the Great Recession ($59,992 in 2007), but it shows a positive trend, at least from 2014 to 2016.
• Interestingly, this growth is not necessarily attributable to a growth in wages. Rather, the most likely reasons seem to be higher employment and the effects this has on household income. Wage growth, unfortunately, remains slow.

Altogether, the news from the US Census Bureau shows the positive effects of economic growth, as well as the importance of public programs like Social Security, SNAP, housing assistance and others. For a full report on the new data, see  https://www.census.gov/topics/income-poverty/poverty.html.

Synod assembly season is in full-swing in the ELCA, and many readers of this blog will be helping raise awareness about hunger and poverty among their fellow Lutherans in the coming weeks.  Outside of assemblies and events, we often are asked for statistics and facts about hunger and poverty for congregations and groups.  So, ELCA World Hunger’s education team has put together a presentation with stats on global and domestic hunger and poverty that you can share.

The stats in the slides are from the most up-to-date sources we have.  This will differ for each of the four areas: US hunger, US poverty, global hunger, and global poverty.  Each of the sources we used are listed in the second slide, so you can read more about the measurements.  Follow the link at the end to download the whole presentation.

Thank you for all you do to help your community learn more about hunger and poverty and how together we can work for a just world in which all are fed!

How many people in the US were living in poverty in 2014?

Food insecurity means lacking access to sufficient amounts of affordable, healthy foods to live an active life.  In the US, food insecurity tends to be “episodic,” which means that there may be times when people can’t access the food they need.  This may be because of seasonal work or insufficient benefits that run out before the end of the month.

What percentage of people in different age groups experience poverty in the United States?

Global hunger tends to be chronic, rather than episodic, which means that hunger is often a daily reality, leading to problems like malnutrition and stunting. The good news is, the number has fallen in the last 30 years.  The bad news is, it is still too high.

How prevalent is undernourishment in different regions of the world?

The World Bank has begun using a new standard for global extreme poverty – $1.90 per day. This line better reflects real costs of food, clothing, and shelter around the world.  Again, the number is falling, with the World Bank projecting that about 700 million people will be living in extreme poverty in 2015.  Hopeful, but there is more work to be done.

To download the presentation, click here.

Elyssa J. Salinas

 
One wheel with many spokes is how the Community Empowerment Project in Burundi acts – one project that supports many communities or “collines” as community members make their hope for the future a reality in the present. With support from ELCA World Hunger through its implementing partner, the Lutheran World Federation (LWF), each colline focuses on a set of key issues related to the well-being of community members.  As the people take part in the activities, they develop the skills they will need to ensure long-term sustainability for themselves, their families and their neighbors.  These collines are “growing and growing” says Adela from the Musha colline the elected leader of the Musha colline’s self-help group. Her participation has helped her develop her own skills as she helps her fellow colline members. “As leader of the group, I have become more self-confident.” As a result of the program, Adela has seen an increase in food security and productivity. People in her town are now able to have meals three times a day instead of one, and they have extra funds for medical expenses and school.

Regina, a grandmother left homeless after the recent civil war in Burundi, is also a witness to the benefits of the project in Musha. With support from LWF, she received help she needed to build a new home and reclaim the swamp for agriculture. “I am able to get enough money to pay the school fees. I grow produce in the swamp – rice, bean and sweet potato,” she says.

Amina is from the Cendajura Commune and was a refugee during the later years of the civil war. In 2000, she left for Tanzania, traveling without food or water with her child until she got to a refugee camp. During the mobilization to return to Burundi, Amina moved from camp to camp, fearful of returning to a war-torn area. Amina is part of the Muslim community, but she thankful for the interreligious aid she is receiving in the form of a new house, “I am a Muslim, but I feel very well that it is Christians who help me.” She is slowly but surely gaining hope for her future as she is in conversation with LWF about a house for her family.

War, homelessness, and food production are not the only issues Burundians face, as community members in Mwiruzi well know. In this region, contaminated water has created a crisis.  As Oscar, a worker at the project site says, “For us, when there is a water shortage, we don’t have life. So we are fighting for life .” As with the activities at other collines, this project is community-initiated, and LWF is providing materials to aid in the building of wells and improved water systems.

Emile Nihende is a LWF facilitator, and is responsible for a colline where there are activities assisted by LWF. He spends only one weekend a month with his family and lives alongside the community he is helping. “I am here because I had the chance to be educated. Because I have been supported, now I want to share the fruits of this education with the community.” This perspective is key to the Community Empowerment Project’s sustainability.  As neighbors build their own skills and meet their needs together, the entire community can look toward long-term sustainable change together.