Children in Poverty (Regions of 20,000 Residents or More), by Race/Ethnicity
(change)

Download & Other Tools
See Definition, Source & Notes
Location: (hide)

Loading...

Year(s): (edit)

Loading...

Data Type: (edit)

Loading...

Loading... (edit)

Loading...

Alameda County
Amador County
Butte County
Calaveras County
Colusa County
Contra Costa County
Del Norte County
El Dorado County
Fresno County
Glenn County
Humboldt County
Imperial County
Kern County
Kings County
Lake County
Lassen County
Los Angeles County
Madera County
Marin County
Mendocino County
Merced County
Monterey County
Napa County
Nevada County
Orange County
Placer County
Riverside County
Sacramento County
San Benito County
San Bernardino County
San Diego County
San Francisco County
San Joaquin County
San Luis Obispo County
San Mateo County
Santa Barbara County
Santa Clara County
Santa Cruz County
Shasta County
Siskiyou County
Solano County
Sonoma County
Stanislaus County
Sutter County
Tehama County
Tulare County
Tuolumne County
Ventura County
Yolo County
Yuba County
Loading…
(Return to top)

Learn More About Family Income and Poverty

Measures of Family Income and Poverty on Kidsdata.org
On kidsdata.org, measures of income and poverty include estimates of:
  • The Self-Sufficiency Standard, which measures how much income is needed for a family of a certain composition living in a particular county to adequately meet its basic needs, and the percentage of families living below the Self-Sufficiency Standard, from the Insight Center for Community Economic Development
  • Children in poverty based on the Supplemental Poverty Measure, by race/ethnicity, for California and the U.S. only
  • Children in poverty based on the Federal Poverty Level ($24,008 for a family of two adults and two children in 2014), by race/ethnicity
  • Children living above and below the Federal Poverty Level, by income level and family type
  • Children living in areas of concentrated poverty
  • Median family income (the income level at which half of families earn more and half earn less), by family type
  • Children living in low-income working families
  • Individuals receiving CalWORKs benefits, from the California Department of Social Services
Unless otherwise noted, data are estimates based on the U.S. Census Bureau’s American Community Survey. Depending on the indicator, geographic breakdowns may be
  • by city, school district, and county (65,000+ residents), as single-year estimates
  • by city, school district, and county (10,000+ residents), as 5-year estimates
  • by legislative district, as 5-year estimates

The Census Bureau’s Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM) addresses some of the shortcomings of the Federal Poverty Level by accounting for a wider range of benefits and expenses that affect a family’s economic resources. Poverty thresholds for the SPM are based on families’ expenditures on food, shelter, clothing and utilities, and are adjusted for geographic differences in the cost of housing. For more information, see: https://www.census.gov/hhes/povmeas/methodology/supplemental/research.html

For additional information about the differences between the measures of child poverty on kidsdata.org, please visit: http://www.kidsdata.org/blog/?p=6974
Family Income and Poverty
Demographics
Community Connectedness
Early Care and Education
Family Structure
Food Security
Disconnected Youth
Homelessness
Housing Affordability
Unemployment
Nutrition
Why This Topic Is Important
Income and health are intricately linked. Poverty can alter children’s developmental trajectories in cognitive, socio-emotional, and physical health (1). The effects of poverty on child health can begin during pregnancy, as low-income women are more likely to experience risk factors such as malnutrition and stress, and are less likely to receive prenatal care (2). Children who face economic hardship when they are young, or who experience extreme and prolonged hardship, are at greatest risk for poor outcomes (1). The effects of poverty and the stress associated with it can be long-term, contributing to increased risks of dropping out of school, poor adult health, and poor employment outcomes, among other adverse consequences (1, 3, 4). The impacts extend beyond individuals, too. For example, it is estimated that one percentage point increase in child poverty could cost the economy an extra $28 billion annually in the future, due in part to lower future earnings among those who grow up in poverty (5).

The link between income and well being is evident even for those living above the poverty level. That is, research has shown a health gradient along the economic spectrum so that health status improves as income levels increase, e.g., the health of those in the middle-income range tends to be inferior to those in higher-income groups (3).
Rates of poverty tend to be highest among children in single-parent families, those under 5 years old, and African American/black, Hispanic/Latino, and American Indian/Alaska Native children (4, 5, 6).

For more information on Family Income and Poverty, see kidsdata.org’s Research & Links section.

Sources for this narrative:

1.  Evans, G. W., & Kim, P. (2013). Childhood poverty, chronic stress, self-regulation, and coping. Child Development Perspectives, 7(1), 43-48. Retrieved from: http://www.centrelearoback.org/inrich/assets/documents/INRICH-PUBCH-EvansKim_ChildhoodPoverty.pdf

2.  Hamad, R., & Rehkopf, D. H. (2015). Poverty, pregnancy, and birth outcomes: A study of the Earned Income Tax Credit. Paediatric and Perinatal Epidemiology, 29(5), 444-452. Retrieved from: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4536129

3.  Aron, L., et al. (2015). Can income-related policies improve population health? Urban Institute and Virginia Commonwealth University Center on Society and Health. Retrieved from: http://www.urban.org/research/publication/can-income-related-policies-improve-population-health

4.  Child Trends Databank. (2015). Children in poverty. Retrieved from: http://www.childtrends.org/?indicators=children-in-poverty

5.  Nichols, A. (2013). Explaining changes in child poverty over the past four decades (Low-Income Working Families Discussion Paper No. 2). Urban Institute. Retrieved from: http://www.urban.org/publications/412897.html

6.  As cited on kidsdata.org, Children in poverty (regions of 65,000 residents or more), by race/ethnicity. (2015). U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey. Retrieved from: http://factfinder.census.gov
How Children Are Faring
In 2014, an estimated 23% of California children lived below the Federal Poverty Level (FPL) of $24,008 annually for a family of four, up from 17% in 2007. A child's likelihood of living in poverty varies by race/ethnicity and family structure. For example, statewide estimates show that 37% of African American/black children, 31% of Hispanic/Latino children, and 29% of American Indian/Alaska Native children lived below the FPL in 2014, compared to 16% of multiracial children and 11% of white and Asian American children. In addition, 39% of California children in single-parent households lived below the FPL in 2014, compared to 14% of children living with two parents.

In California, the median family income was $71,015 in 2014, and ranged at the county level from $44,616 to $127,470. In all but seven counties with data, estimates of median income were lower for families with children than for families without children in 2014.
As an alternative to the Federal Poverty Level, the Census Bureau has created the Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM), which uses a different poverty threshold based on expenses for food, shelter, clothing and utilities; it also is adjusted for geographic differences in the cost of housing. According to the SPM, about 25% of California children lived in poverty in 2014, compared to 17% nationwide. Among racial/ethnic groups with data, 36% of Hispanic/Latino children lived in poverty in California, compared to 12% of white children, 15% of multiracial children, and 17% of Asian/Pacific Islander children, according to 2013-2014 SPM estimates.

The Self-Sufficiency Standard (SSS), another measure on kidsdata.org, represents the estimated amount of money a family needs to adequately meet its basic needs. In 2014, the average SSSs for the six most common family types in California ranged from $43,354 to $63,979. Statewide in 2012, about half (51%) of families of all household types lived below the SSS.

CalWORKs is a welfare program that provides cash aid and services to eligible needy families in California. In 2015, almost 1.3 million individuals in California (3.3% of the total population) participated in CalWORKs. According to a California Budget and Policy Center report, nearly four in five (79%) CalWORKs participants are children.

An estimated 17% of California children lived in areas of concentrated poverty, where 30% or more of the population lives below the FPL, according to 2010-2014 data.
Policy Implications
Family poverty has multiple causes and dimensions, many of which public policy can address. Maintaining a public safety net for children whose parents do not have the resources to provide adequate food, clothing, health care, and shelter can mitigate some of the effects of poverty (1). Other strategies, such as tax credits and parental work support, also have the potential to help lift families out of poverty. Preventing a child from growing up in poverty requires a broad policy strategy targeting diverse root causes. While California has made strides in recent years, additional effort is needed to ensure that all children have the opportunity to thrive (1, 2).

Policies that could influence family income and poverty include:
  • Restoring and maintaining CalWORKs/Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF) cash assistance and work support to families, so that benefits support an adequate living standard and families receive the assistance necessary to transition from welfare to work (1, 2)
  • Ensuring that eligible families enroll in safety net programs—such as CalFresh (Food Stamps) and the Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC)—through outreach and elimination of administrative barriers (2, 3)
  • Maintaining and strengthening state tax policies aimed at reducing poverty among working families, such as the state Earned Income Tax Credit (1)
  • Ensuring comprehensive and consistent benefits across public and private health insurance carriers, so all families can access high-quality, affordable care; this may include increasing Medi-Cal provider rates, reducing administrative burden on providers, and developing a tool to regularly monitor children’s access to quality care in Medi-Cal (4)
  • Increasing access to high-quality, affordable child care in a variety of settings for all young children, especially low-income children, by capitalizing on the expansion of federal and state subsidies for early childhood programs and ensuring that eligible children receive subsidies (1, 4)
  • Continuing to strengthen child support enforcement programs that work effectively with non-custodial parents and ensure that support reaches the families that need it (5)
For more policy ideas and information on this topic see kidsdata.org’s Research & Links section or visit the Urban Institute, California Budget & Policy Center, Center for Law and Social Policy, or the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. Also see Policy Implications on kidsdata.org under Unemployment, Housing Affordability, and Homelessness.

Sources for this narrative:

1.  Danielson, C. (2016). California's future: Social safety net. Public Policy Institute of California. Retrieved from: http://www.ppic.org/main/publication.asp?i=1080

2.  Schumacher, K. (2015). Even CalWORKs and CalFresh food assistance combined fails to lift families out of poverty. California Budget & Policy Center. Retrieved from: http://calbudgetcenter.org/resources/even-calworks-and-calfresh-food-assistance-combined-fails-to-lift-families-out-of-poverty

3.  California Department of Public Health, Center for Family Health. (2016). Making connections: Understanding women’s reasons for not enrolling in WIC during pregnancy, California 2010-2012. Retrieved from: https://www.cdph.ca.gov/programs/wicworks/Pages/MakingConnectionsUnderstandingWomensReasonsforNotEnrollinginWICduringPreganancy.aspx

4.  Children Now. (2016). 2016 California children's report card: A survey of kids’ well-being and a roadmap for the future. Retrieved from: http://www.childrennow.org/reports-research/2016cachildrensreportcard

5.  U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children & Families. (2016). Office of Child Support Enforcement Annual Report to Congress FY 2014. Retrieved from: http://www.acf.hhs.gov/css/resource/fy2014-annual-report-to-congress
Websites with Related Information
Key Reports
County/Regional Reports
More Data Sources For Family Income and Poverty