INTRODUCTION

The official poverty rate and the number

of people in poverty are important measures of the country’s economic wellbeing. These measures, developed in

the 1960s, have been criticized, however, because they do not reflect changes

in public policies since then, such as the

Earned Income Tax Credit and the use of

in-kind benefits such as food stamps. 

This report explains how the official

poverty measure was computed, how several series of alternative estimates were

developed, and how the alternative and

official measures offer different profiles of

people in poverty. The data in this report

were obtained from the Annual Social and

Economic Supplement (ASEC) to the

Current Population Survey (CPS), collected

by the U.S. Census Bureau from February

through April 2004. 

OVERVIEW OF POVERTY

MEASURES

All the measures of poverty in this report

are determined by a comparison of two

components: needs and resources. Needs

are expressed in dollar amounts called

poverty thresholds. These thresholds

serve as the benchmark against which a

family’s or person’s resources are compared in order to determine whether they

are in poverty.1

The three approaches to measuring

poverty examined here are:

• The official poverty measure as

defined by the Office of Management

and Budget (OMB) (see text box, “The

Official Poverty Measure,” on page 2).

• Measures that use alternative definitions of income to define resources.

Those resources are then compared

with either the same thresholds as the

official measure, or with similar

thresholds updated for inflation using

a different price index.

• Measures based on recommendations

from a National Academy of Sciences

(NAS) panel that use alternative

U S C E N S U S B U R E A U

Helping You Make Informed Decisions

U.S.Department of Commerce

Economics and Statistics Administration

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

Issued June 2005

P60-227

Alternative Poverty Estimates in

the United States: 2003

Current

Population

Reports

By 

Joe Dalaker

Consumer Income

Sources of Estimates and

Statistical Accuracy

The estimates in this report (which

may be shown in text, figures, and

tables) are based on responses from

a sample of the population and may

differ from actual values because of

sampling variability or other factors.

As a result, apparent differences

between the estimates for two or

more groups may not be statistically

significant. All comparative statements have undergone statistical

testing and are significant at the 

90-percent confidence level unless

otherwise noted. 

For further information about the

source and accuracy of the estimates, go to <www.census.gov

/hhes/www/p60-226sa.pdf>. 

1 When computing poverty status in the official

and alternative estimates shown in this report, the

Census Bureau adds together the income of all people living together who are related by birth, marriage, or adoption, and compares that dollar figure

with a poverty threshold. For an unrelated individual, his or her own income is compared with the

appropriate threshold. How “income” is defined and

what dollar value the “threshold” is vary among the

alternative measures.
definitions both of resources and

of thresholds.

These three approaches measure

needs differently. 

• The official measure, explained

in detail in Appendix A, uses

thresholds that vary by family

size and the members’ ages.

They initially were derived in

the 1960s using U.S.

Department of Agriculture

(USDA) data on food budgets

and estimates of what percentage of families’ income was

spent on food. Following the

practices specified by OMB, the

official thresholds are updated

annually for inflation, now using

the Consumer Price Index for All

Urban Consumers (CPI-U).

• Two series of measures are

based on alternative income definitions and use similar poverty

thresholds. One series of measures uses the official thresholds,

which are adjusted for inflation

from 1978 forward using the

CPI-U. The other series also

adjusts the thresholds for inflation since 1978, but it uses the

CPI-U-RS, a revised inflation

index that uses current price

index methodology, computed

for earlier dates by the Bureau

of Labor Statistics (see text box,

“What are the CPI-U and the 

CPI-U-RS?” on page 3). In that

series, the base thresholds (for

1978) are first computed in 

CPI-U-RS-adjusted dollars, then

those thresholds are adjusted

forward for inflation using the

CPI-U-RS. 

• Measures based on the NAS recommendations assign a dollar

amount for need for a family of

four (two adults and two children) using the cost of food,

clothing, shelter, utilities, a

small amount for miscellaneous

expenses, and, for some of the

measures, medical expenses.

That threshold is then scaled—

adjusted by family size and

composition—using three

parameters, or factors that

describe how family size and

composition affect a family’s

needs.2 The thresholds for this

approach were computed using

data from the Consumer

Expenditure Survey. 

The three measurement approaches also differ in the way they value

resources:

• The official measure uses money

income before taxes, excluding

capital gains, to determine

poverty status. 

• In the measures that use alternative income definitions, taxes

are subtracted from income and

for some measures various noncash benefits are added to

income. Each alternative

income definition uses a different combination of taxes and

noncash benefits. 

• The measures based on the NAS

panel recommendations also

expand the definition of

resources. Like the measures

based on alternative income definitions, total resources in the

NAS-based measures include the

cash equivalent of noncash benefits and exclude taxes. In addition, they exclude some workrelated expenses (such as

transportation and child care).

The NAS measures also take into

account medical expenses paid

by the patient, although each

NAS measure uses a different

method for doing so. 

None of the measures considered

in this report count assets as

resources when determining poverty status. Some do impute income

in the form of a return on home

equity for those who own and

occupy their home. 

2 U.S. Census Bureau

The Official Poverty Measure

The Office of Management and Budget’s (OMB) Statistical Policy

Directive 14 specifies the official measure of poverty for statistical

work. The directive states, “For the years 1969 and thereafter, the

statistics contained in subsequent applicable reports in this series

[the Census Bureau’s Current Population Reports, Series P-60] shall be

used.” However, the directive also states that “[the official poverty

thresholds] were not developed for administrative use in any specific

program and nothing in this Directive should be construed as requiring that they should be applied for such a purpose.” Many government aid programs use different dollar amounts as eligibility criteria.

See Appendix A for references and a discussion of how the official

measure was computed. The full text of Statistical Policy Directive

14 may be accessed at <www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/povmeas

/ombdir14.html>. 

2 The first scale parameter reflects that

children, on average, consume less than

adults; the second parameter reflects that as

family size doubles, not every expense

becomes twice as high, and the third parameter allows the first child in a single-adult

family to represent a greater increase in

expenses than the first child in a two-adult

family. For a more technical explanation of

how the equivalence scales (adjustments by

family size and composition) were derived,

see Citro and Michael, eds., Measuring

Poverty: A New Approach (National Academy

Press, 1995), Chapter 3, and Kathleen Short

et al., Experimental Poverty Measures: 1990

to 1997, U.S. Census Bureau, (P60-205),

Appendix C at <www.census.gov/prod

/99pubs/p60-205.pdf>. 
MEASURES USING

ALTERNATIVE INCOME

DEFINITIONS

The following alternatives illustrate

how poverty rates are affected

when various types of noncash benefits are treated as income and

when taxes are taken into account

while holding constant the measure

of need (the thresholds). These

data series were first developed in

the early 1980s, in response to a

congressional request. The U.S.

Senate included the following statement in the appropriations bill for

the Department of Commerce’s

1981 fiscal year: “The official statistics show no significant reduction

in recent years in the incidence of

poverty, although in-kind benefit

programs have expanded greatly.

The Committee considers it essential that official poverty statistics

reflect, at the earliest possible date,

the effects of in-kind benefits.

Without such information, Congress

and the Executive Branch cannot be

certain that Government transfer

programs are properly targeted.”3

After research and discussion with

academic professionals, other government agencies, private sector

organizations, and nonprofit and

public-interest organizations, the

Census Bureau published 17 alternative definitions of income in

1993.4 Also pursuant to such discussions, the Census Bureau has

produced a series of reports about

the valuation of noncash benefits

and taxes and their effects on

income and poverty.5 Analysts

have used these data to examine

to what extent taxes and various

types of noncash benefits affect

people’s economic well-being.

Four of the 17 alternative definitions are discussed below; historical tables for all 17 may be found

in Appendix B. Detailed tables and

more historical tables may be

accessed on the Census Bureau’s

poverty Web site at 

<www.census.gov/hhes/www

/poverty.html>. A report on the

income estimates for 2003,

Alternative Income Estimates in the

United States: 2003 (P60-228), is

U.S. Census Bureau 3

4 For an example of the research discussion that took place while the measures

were under development, see the proceedings of the “Conference on the Measurement

of Noncash Benefits,” Fort Magruder Inn &

Conference Center, Williamsburg, VA,

December 12-14, 1985. Eleven alternative

income definitions were presented in a subsequent Census Bureau report, Measuring

the Effect of Benefits and Taxes on Income

and Poverty: 1986 (P60-164-RD-1, issued in

December 1988). By 1993, 17 alternative

income definitions had been developed. 

According to the Williamsburg conference’s statement of purpose, “[t]he conference

[which the Census Bureau organized] was

designed to provide a wide variety of academic, private sector, and government

researchers, as well as representatives from

public interest groups and interested

Congressional committees, an opportunity to

learn about the issues involved [in considering noncash benefits as income] and to make

their own views known to the Census

Bureau.” 5 See, for example, U.S. Census Bureau,

Measuring the Effects of Benefits and Taxes 

on Income and Poverty: 1986, Current

Population Reports, Series P60, No. 164-RD-1,

U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington,

DC, 1988, at <www.census.gov/hhes/www

/prevcps/p60-164rd-1.pdf>.

The CPI-U (Consumer Price Index

for All Urban Consumers) and

the CPI-U-RS (Consumer Price

Index Research Series Using

Current Methods) are both price

indexes, used to update dollar

figures for inflation. These

indexes are computed by the

Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS). 

The CPI-U is used to update the

official poverty thresholds for

inflation. Statistical Policy

Directive 14, issued by the

Office of Management and

Budget (OMB), states that the

official poverty measure is to be

updated this way. 

The CPI-U-RS is an inflation index

covering 1978 to the present.

The CPI-U-RS applies most of the

methodological improvements

made to the CPI-U since 1978 to

every year of the series. Among

other improvements, the CPI-URS retroactively applies the

newest methods of quality

adjustment for many items,

including personal computers,

televisions, apparel, and many

appliances, and it takes better

account of how consumers might

buy lower-priced goods or services to protect themselves from

price increases on similar items.

Dollar figures updated with the

CPI-U-RS tend to be lower than

those updated with the CPI-U,

partly because the CPI-U-RS uses

a corrected method for calculating homeownership costs.

Although the research series has

some limitations, including being

subject to annual revisions, the

BLS states that this is the most

detailed and systematic index

available of a consistent CPI.* 

More information about the 

CPI-U-RS is available on the BLS

Web site at <www.bls.gov/cpi

/cpirsdc.htm>.

What are the CPI-U and the CPI-U-RS? 

* For information about the benefits and

limitations of the CPI-U-RS, see Kenneth J.

Stewart and Stephen B. Reed, “Consumer

Price Index research series using current

methods, 1978–98,” Monthly Labor Review,

June, 1999, pp 29-38. This article is available on the Internet at <www.bls.gov/opub

/mlr/1999/06/art4full.pdf>.

3 U.S. Senate Statement, “Data Collection

and Poverty Level,” Department of State,

Justice, and Commerce, The Judiciary and

Related Agencies Appropriation Bill, 1981,

U.S. Senate, 96th Congress, 2nd Session,

September 16, 1980: 33-34. Cited in U.S.

Census Bureau, Technical Paper 56,

Estimates of Poverty Including the Value of

Noncash Benefits: 1985, U.S. Government

Printing Office, Washington, DC, 1986,

Appendix A.
available at <www.census.gov

/hhes/www/income.html>. 

Table 1 lists ten sets of poverty

estimates. The first is the official

poverty measure, which is based

on money income (MI). The next

four compare modified definitions

of income (described in the text

box titled “Which Alternative

Measures of Income Are Used to

Compute These Alternative Poverty

Estimates?”) with the official poverty thresholds, which are updated

for inflation using the CPI-U. The

remaining five are similar to the

first five, except that the poverty

thresholds have been updated for

inflation based on the CPI-U-RS

instead of the CPI-U and thus differ

from the official ones (see the text

box titled “What are the CPI-U and

CPI-U-RS?” on page 3). Table 2 displays poverty rates using these

measures by selected demographic

groups and by region. 

Taxes and the value of noncash

benefits are important components

of the alternative approaches.

Among its questions, the ASEC

asks respondents about whether

they received certain types of noncash benefits. The respondents

are not asked to report whether

they pay taxes or to estimate a

dollar value for every noncash benefit they may receive. 

To compute the alternative income

estimates, dollar values of taxes

and noncash benefits were generated using statistical models.

Except for food stamps, the monetary values of the noncash benefits

included in the income definitions

were imputed. Those noncash

benefits included values of

employers’ contributions for health

insurance, Medicare and Medicaid,

rent subsidies, free and reducedprice school lunches, and return on

equity in one’s own home.6 Food

stamp amounts were those reported in the ASEC. This report presents several approaches to defining income—some include the

values of selected noncash transfers, others exclude them. 

The tax data used in the alternative income definitions were simulated from a newly revised tax

model, for both the 2002 and

2003 estimates.7 Four types of

4 U.S. Census Bureau

Which Alternative Measures of Income Are Used to

Compute These Alternative Poverty Estimates?

Money income (MI) is collected for all people in the sample 15

years old and over. Money income includes:

Earnings Dividends

Unemployment compensation Rents

Workers’ compensation Royalties

Social Security Income from estates

Supplemental Security Income Trusts

Public assistance Educational assistance

Veterans’ payments Alimony

Survivor benefits Child support

Pension or retirement income Assistance from outside the household

Interest Other miscellaneous sources

It is income before deductions for taxes or other expenses and does

not include lump-sum payments (such as contest prize winnings won

as a single payment) or capital gains.

MI - Tx is money income plus realized capital gains (losses), less

federal and state income taxes and less payroll taxes.

MI - Tx + NC - MM is money income plus realized capital gains

(losses), less federal and state income taxes, less payroll taxes, plus

the value of employer-provided health benefits and the value of noncash transfers except Medicare and Medicaid. Noncash transfers

included here are food stamps, rent subsidies, and free and reducedprice school lunches.

MI - Tx + NC is money income plus realized capital gains (losses),

less federal and state income taxes, less payroll taxes, plus the value

of employer-provided health benefits and noncash transfers.

MI - Tx + NC + HE is money income plus realized capital gains

(losses), less federal and state income taxes, less payroll taxes, plus

the value of employer-provided health benefits and noncash transfers, plus the annual benefits of converting one’s home equity into

an annuity, net of property taxes.

6 For descriptions of how the noncash

benefits were estimated in the alternative

measures, see Appendixes B and C of P60-

186RD, Measuring the Effect of Benefits and

Taxes on Income and Poverty: 1992. 

7 Information on the new methodology

used to simulate federal and state income

taxes and payroll taxes can be found in New

Methods for Simulating CPS Taxes, by Amy

O’Hara, available at <www.census.gov/hhes

/www/income/oharataxmodel.pdf>. See

also Appendix A in Alternative Income

Estimates in the United States: 2003

(P60-228) at <www.census.gov/prod

/2005pubs/p60-228.pdf>. 
U.S. Census Bureau 5

. 1 el baT

3

0

0

2

d

n

a

2

0

0

2: e

m

o

c

nI f

o

s

e

r

u

s

a

e

M

e

vit a

n

r

etl A

n

o

d

e

s

a

B

s

et a

mits

E

ytr

e

v

o

P

) st ni op egat necr ep ni sl avr et ni ecnedif noc ri e th dna set ar ytr evop, sdnasuoht in ls avr et in ecnedif noc ri eht dna el poepf o sr eb mu (N

snoiti nif ed e mocni evit anr etl a det c le eS

) 2002 ssel 3002( egnah C 3002 2002 2

r eb mu N

wol eb

ytr evop

t necr ep- 09

ecnedif noc

l avr et in 1

)-/ +(

ytr evoP

et ar

t necr ep- 09

ecnedif noc

l avr et ni 1

)-/ +(

r eb mu N

wol eb

ytr evop

t necr ep- 09

ecnedif noc

l avr et ni 1

)-/ +(

ytr evoP

et ar

t necr ep- 09

ecnedif noc

l avr et ni 1

)-/ +(

r eb mu N

wol eb

ytr evop

t necr ep- 09

ecnedif noc

l avr et ni 1

)-/ +(

ytr evoP

et ar

t necr ep- 09

ecnedif noc

l avr et ni 1

)-/ +(

N

OI TALFNI R

OF DET

S

UJ D

A

S

DL O

H

SER

H

T

U-I PC

G

NI S

U

er usae ml ai ciff o ni desu; e moc in yeno M( I M

. . . . .) ytr evopf o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 0 3. 0* 896 192, 1* 2. 0 5. 21 176 168, 53 2. 0 1. 21 066 075, 43

l ati pac dezil aer sul p e mocni yeno M( xT-I M

ll or yap dna e mocni ssel ,) sessol( sni ag

) sexat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 0 4. 0* 586 473, 1* 2. 0 0. 21 956 904, 43 .2 0 6. 11 746 530, 33

dezil aer sul p e moc in yeno M( M -M

C

N+xT-I M

- yap dna e mocni ssel ,) sessol( sni agl ati pac

dedi vor p-r eyol p mef o e lu av sul p, sexat ll or

sr ef snart hsacnonll a dna stif eneb htl aeh

. . ) di aci de Mdna er a ic de Mt pecxe . . . . . . . . . . 2. 0 4. 0* 836 961, 1* 2. 0 2. 01 316 342, 92 2. 0 .8 9 206 470, 82

sni agl tai pac s lu p e mocni yeno M( C

N+xT-I M

sul p, sexat ll or yap dna e mocni ssel ,) sessol(

) sr ef snart hsacnonll af o eul av . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 0 4. 0* 326 031, 1* 2. 0 7. 9 006 297, 72 2. 0 3. 9 985 266, 62

l ati pac sul p e mocni yeno M( EH+C

N+xT-I M

ll or yap dna e mocni ssel ,) sess lo( s in ag

, sr ef snart hsacnonll af o eul av sul p, sexat

) yti uqe e moh ot nr ut er det up mi sul p . . . . . . . . 2. 0 4. 0* 306 573, 1* 2. 0 0. 9 285 659, 52 2. 0 6. 8 765 185, 42

N

OI TALF IN

R

OF DET

S

UJ D

A

S

DL O

H

SER

H

T

S

R- U-I PC

G

NI S

U

er usae ml ai ciff o ni desu; e mocni yeno M( I M

. . . . .) ytr evopf o . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 0 4. 0* 746 593, 1* 2. 0 5. 01 326 403, 03 2. 0 1. 01 016 909, 82

l ati pac dezil aer sul p e mocni yeno M( xT-I M

ll or yap dna e mocni ssel ,) sessol( sni ag

. . . . .) sexat . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 0 3. 0* 726 761, 1* 2. 0 8. 9 406 50 ,2 82 2. 0 5. 9 295 830, 72

de izl aer sul p e mocni yeno M( M

M- C

N+xT-I M

- yap dna e mocni ssel ,) sessol( s in agl ati pac

dedi vor p-r eyol p mef o eul av s lu p, sexat ll or

sr ef snart hsacnonll a dna stif eneb htl aeh

. . ) di aci de Mdna er aci de Mt pecxe . . . . . . . . . . 2. 0 3. 0* 575 138* 2. 0 1. 8 355 422, 32 2. 0 .8 7 445 393, 22

s in agl ati pac sul p e mocni yeno M( C

N+xT-I M

sul p, sexat ll or yap dna e mocni ss le ,) sess lo(

) sr ef snart hsacnonll af o e lu av . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 0 2. 0* 965 238* 2. 0 9. 7 745 407, 22 2. 0 7. 7 835 278, 12

l ati pac sul p e mocni yeno M( EH+C

N+xT-I M

ll or yap dna e mocni ss le ,) sessol( sni ag

, sr fe snart hsacnonll af o e lu av sul p, sexat

) yti uqe e moh ot nr ut er det up mi s lu p . . . . . . . . 2. 0 3. 0* 055 040, 1* 2. 0 4. 7 135 822, 12 2. 0 .1 7 815 881, 02

.l evel ecnedif noct necr ep- 09 eht t a or ez morf t ner effi d yll acit sit ta S*

1 et a mit se eht f o ezi s eht ot noit al er ni l avr et ni ecnedif noc eht r egr al ehT. ytili bair av ’s te a mit se naf o er usae ma si l avr et in ecnedif noct necr ep- 09 A - a mr of ni er o mr oF. et a mit se eht el bail er ssel eht ,

in ’’ es Uri ehT dna sr orr E dr adnat S‘‘ ees, noit 3002: set at S deti n U eht ni egar evo C ecnar usnI htl ae H dna, ytr evoP, e mocnI r of set a mit s Ef o ycar ucc A dna ecr uoS

w

w

w/ sehh/ vog. susnec. w

w

w<t a

. f> dp. as622- 06p/ 2 . gni dnuor f o esuaceb sl at ot ot must on ya msli at e D

. st ne mel ppuSci monoc E dnal ia coSl aunnA 4002 dna 3002, yevr uS n iot al upoPt nerr u C, uaer uBsusne C. S. U: ecr uoS
taxes were simulated: federal individual income taxes, state individual income taxes, property taxes

on owner-occupied housing, and

payroll taxes. Federal, state, and

payroll taxes were modeled, in

part, using administrative records.

Property taxes were imputed using

data from the American Housing

Survey.8 To illustrate the effects of

the changes to the tax model,

Tables C-1 and C-2 in Appendix C

present poverty estimates for 2003

under the previous tax model and

the revised tax model. 

Some of the alternative income

definitions include the value of

noncash transfers, some of which

are designed to pay for expenditures that were largely nonexistent

when the official poverty definition

was developed. Some analysts

argue that it is inconsistent with

the original concept of the thresholds to include those benefits

(such as government health insurance programs) in income without

also including them in the thresholds. Hence, some alternative

measures include the value of inkind transfers in income and in the

thresholds (discussed on pages 

8-14), while others include them

only in income (discussed below). 

Looking at the CPI-U-adjusted estimates in Table 1, using the MI-Tx

income definition while holding the

thresholds constant lowered the

2003 percentage of people in families with incomes below the

thresholds from the official poverty

rate of 12.5 percent to 12.0 percent. While it may seem counterintuitive that a measure using aftertax income and the same

thresholds would have a lower

poverty rate, this income measure

(MI-Tx) also takes into account the

state and federal Earned Income

Tax Credits, which benefit some

people with low income, and capital gains and losses. 

6 U.S. Census Bureau

Figure 1.

Poverty Estimates Based on Selected Alternative Definitions

of Income and Deflators: 1987 to 2003

Note: The data points are placed at the midpoints of the respective years. 

MI means "Money income." 

MI-Tx+NC+HE means "Money income less taxes, plus the value of noncash benefits, plus imputed net return on home equity." 

CPI-U means "Thresholds were adjusted using the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers."

CPI-U-RS means "Thresholds were adjusted using the Consumer Price Index Research Series Using Current Methods." 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 1988 to 2004 Annual Social and Economic Supplements.

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003

Percent

MI, CPI-U (official measure)

MI, CPI-U-RS

MI-Tx+NC+HE, CPI-U

MI-Tx+MC+HE, CPI-U-RS

8 Property taxes were subtracted from

income only for the alternative measures

that included the return on home equity in

income. 
U.S. Census Bureau 7

. 2 el baT

f

o

s

e

r

u

s

a

e

M

e

vit a

n

r

etl A

n

o

d

e

s

a

B, n

oi g

e

R

y

b

d

n

a

s

citsi r

et c

a

r

a

h

C

ci h

p

a

r

g

o

m

e

D

d

et c

el e

S

y

b

s

et a

mits

E

et a

R

ytr

e

v

o

P

3

0

0

2: e

m

o

c

nI

ni su noit alf ni r of det suj da sdl ohser ht ytr evop no desab er a set a imt s E. st in op egat necr ep in ls avr et in ecne idf noc ri eht dna set a imt se et ar ytr evo (P ) U-I PC eht g

cit sir et car ah C

I M

; e mocni yeno M(

l ia ciff o ni desu

f o er usae m

) ytr evop

t necr ep- 09 ecnedif noc l avr et ni 1

)-/ +(

xT-I M e mocni yeno M(

de izl aer sul p sni agl ati pac ssel ,) sessol(

dna e mocni

) sexat ll or yap

t necr ep- 09 ecnedif noc

l avr et ni 1

)-/ +(

M

M- C

N+xT-I M

e mocni yeno M( dezil aer sul p

sni agl ati pac

ssel ,) sessol(

dna e mocni , sexat ll or yap f o eul av sul p -r ey lo p me htl aeh dedi vor p

ll a dna stif eneb

- snart hsacnon

t pecxe sr ef

er aci de M

) di aci de Mdna

t necr ep- 09

ecne idf noc l avr et ni 1

)-/ +(

C

N+xT-I M e mocni yeno M( l ati pac s lu p ,) sessol( sni ag

dna e mocni ssel , sexat ll or yap

ll af o e lu av s lu p hsacnon

) sr ef snart

t necr ep- 09 ecnedif noc

l avr et ni 1

)-/ +(

EH+C

N+xT-I M

e mocni yeno M( sul p sni agl ati pac ,) sessol( dna dna e mocni ss le

, sexat ll or yap

f o eul av sul p

hsacnonll a

sul p, sr ef snart

nr ut er det up mi

) yti uqe e moh ot

t necr ep- 09 ecnedif noc

l avr et ni 1

)-/ +(

. . el poepll A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 0 0. 9 2. 0 7. 9 2. 0 2. 01 2. 0 0. 21 .2 0 5. 21

. seili maf ni el poeP . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 0 4. 7 2. 0 8. 7 2. 0 2. 8 2. 0 9. 9 2. 0 8. 01

el puoc- deirr a m in el poeP

. . . . . . seili maf 2. 0 0. 4 2. 0 3. 4 2. 0 7. 4 2. 0 6. 5 2. 0 2. 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . .

a hti wseili maf ni le poeP on,r edl ohesuoh el a mef

t neser p dnabsuh . . . . . . . . . . . . 8. 0 4. 12 8. 0 3. 22 8. 0 .2 32 8. 0 8. 72 9. 0 0. 03

a hti wseili maf ni el poeP

efi w on,r edl ohesuoh le a m

. . . . . . t neser p . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0. 1 5. 01 0. 1 9. 01 0. 1 1. 11 1. 1 4. 31 1. 1 2. 41

egA

sr aey 81r edn U . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. 0 0. 21 4. 0 3. 21 4. 0 0. 31 .5 0 .0 61 5. 0 6. 71

sr aey 46 ot 81 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 0 5. 8 3. 0 9. 8 3. 0 3. 9 3. 0 7. 01 3. 0 8. 01

r evo dna sr aey 56 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. 0 7. 5 3. 0 1. 8 4. 0 7. 8 4. 0 2. 01 4. 0 2. 01

eca R 2 ni gir Oci napsi H dna

enol a eti h W 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 0 6. 7 2. 0 2. 8 2. 0 6. 8 2. 0 1. 01 2. 0 5. 01

2. 0 0. 6 .2 0 6. 6 2. 0 0. 7 2. 0 0. 8 2. 0 2. 8 . . . . enol a eti h Wci nap is H- no N

en lo a kcal B 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8. 0 5. 71 8. 0 5. 81 8. 0 4. 91 8. 0 4. 32 9. 0 4. 42

enol a nai s A 5 0. 1 1. 9 0. 1 6. 9 0. 1 8. 9 1. 1 1. 11 2. 1 8. 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

. ) ecar ynaf o( ci napsi H . . . . . . . . 7. 0 8. 51 7. 0 3. 61 7. 0 4. 71 8. 0 0. 12 .8 0 5. 22

noi ge R t saehtr o N 5. 0 3. 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. 0 8. 7 4. 0 3. 8 4. 0 7. 8 5. 0 5. 01

t se wdi M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. 0 8. 7 4. 0 2. 8 4. 0 6. 8 .4 0 3. 01 5. 0 7. 01

. . . . . . ht uoS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. 0 4. 01 4. 0 3. 11 4. 0 7. 11 4. 0 5. 31 5. 0 1. 41

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . t se W 5. 0 0. 9 5. 0 7. 9 5. 0 4. 01 5. 0 3. 21 6. 0 6. 21

1 et a mit se eht f o ezi s eht ot noit al er ni l avr et ni ecnedif noc eht r egr al ehT. ytili bair av s’ et a mit se naf o er usae ma si l avr et ni ecnedif noct necr ep- 09 A r oF. et a mit se eht el bail er ssel eht ,

ni ’’ es Uri ehT dna sr orr E dr adnat S‘‘ ees, noit a rmof ni er o m 3002: set at S

deti n U eht ni egar evo C ecnar usnI htl ae H

dna, ytr evoP, e mocnI r of set a imt s Ef o ycar ucc A

dna ecr uoS t a

. f> dp. as622- 06p/ w

w

w/ sehh/ vog. susnec. w

w

w< 2 . yl et ar apes n wohst on er a sr ednal sI cifi caPr eht Odna snaii a wa H evit a N dna, se ivt a N aks la A dna sn ia d In nacir e m

Ar of at a D

3 et ac ecar r eht o ynatr oper t on di d dna eti h Wdetr oper oh w el poep to sr ef er en lo a eti h W. secar er o mr o eno esoohc ot st nednopser deksa SPC 4002 dna 3002 ehT f o esu ehT. yr og

caor ppaf o yt eir av a sesu uaer uBsusne C ehT. at ad gni zyl anar o gnit neser pf o doht e mderr ef er p eht is ti t aht ly p mi t on seod noit al upop ecar- le g in s is ht oh w el poep no noit a rmof nI . seh

eti h Wsa hcus, ecar eno naht er o mdetr oper d

n

a nai s Ar o evit a N aksal A dna nai dnI nacir e m

A

d

n

a .r edni Ft caF nacir e m

A hguor ht 0002 susne C

morf el bali ava si , nacir e m

A nacirf Ar o kcal B

. 0002 susne C ni ecar eno naht er o mdetr oper el poepf ot necr ep 6. 2t uobA 4 . yr oget ac ecar r eht o ynatr oper t on di d dna kcal B detr oper oh w el poep ot sr ef er enol a kcal B

5 . yr oget ac ecar r eht o ynatr oper t on di d dna nai s A detr oper oh w el poep ot sr ef er enol a nai s A

.t ne mel ppuSci monoc E dnal ai coSl aunnA 4002, yevr uS noit al upoPt nerr u C, uaer uBsusne C. S. U: ecr uoS
Including noncash benefits as

income produced a greater effect on

poverty rates than adjustments for

taxes and capital gains. The poverty rate estimate that included the

value of noncash benefits other

than Medicaid and Medicare was

10.2 percent in 2003 (MI-Tx+NCMM, again based on CPI-U-adjusted

thresholds). Including those medical programs as well resulted in an

even lower poverty rate, 9.7 percent (MI-Tx+NC). Similarly, including the imputed returns on home

equity further reduced the poverty

rate by another 0.7 percentage

points, to 9.0 percent in 2003 

(MI-Tx+NC+HE), as shown in 

Figure 1. 

Estimates adjusted using the CPI-URS followed the same pattern as

their CPI-U-adjusted counterparts.

Because the CPI-U-RS-adjusted

thresholds were lower than the

official thresholds (by approximately 12 percent in 2002 and 2003),

the poverty rate for each alternative income definition estimate was

lower than its counterpart adjusted

with the CPI-U. 

Table 1 shows that all of the alternative income definitions yielded

poverty rate increases of 0.2 percentage points to 0.4 percentage

points between 2002 and 2003, as

did the official measure (0.3 percentage points).9 Before interpreting these data, please see the text

box on page 1 titled “Sources of

Estimates and Statistical Accuracy.”

Table 2 displays estimates by

selected demographic characteristics and region, using the CPI-Uadjusted thresholds for 2003. As

stated earlier, including noncash

benefits as income produced a

greater effect on poverty rates

than adjustments for taxes and

capital gains. Four demographic

groups illustrate those effects. For

people in female-householder families, people under 18, Blacks, and

Hispanics (who may be any race),

poverty rates fell by more than 

3.5 percentage points between the

MI-Tx definition and the MI-Tx+NC

definition.10 Among the groups

shown in the table, adding the

imputed net return on home equity

(MI-Tx+NC+HE) produced the greatest decline for people 65 years and

over (a poverty rate of 5.7 percent,

compared with 8.1 percent under

the MI-Tx+NC definition).

In summary, income definitions that

used after-tax income and included

the values of noncash benefits—

leaving the thresholds the same—

lowered the percentage of people

falling below the thresholds, but

they did not change the timing of

peaks and troughs over time (see

the CPI-U-adjusted estimates in

Figure 1). This result occurred

regardless of the price index used

to adjust the thresholds. 

MEASURES BASED ON

NATIONAL ACADEMY 

OF SCIENCES

RECOMMENDATIONS

In 1995, a panel of the National

Academy of Sciences (NAS) issued

a report that recommended new

ways to define resources, needs,

and other aspects related to measuring poverty.11 Because the official poverty measure does not take

into account how taxes, noncash

benefits, and work-related and

medical expenses affect people’s

well-being, the NAS panel observed

that the official measure does not

show how policy changes in those

areas affect who is considered to

be in poverty. In addition, the

panel concluded that the alternative measures that only change

income are inadequate because

they are not accompanied by parallel and consistent changes to the

poverty thresholds. The current

thresholds also do not reflect variation in the cost of goods and

services by geography.12

According to the NAS panel, the

official thresholds also do not

accurately account for increased

expenses and economies of scale

that occur as family size increases.

Hence, the NAS panel suggested a

way that a new poverty measure

be constructed that addresses

these issues.13

In response to the public debate

that followed publication of the

NAS report, under the auspices of

an OMB Interagency Technical

8 U.S. Census Bureau

9 The difference between the poverty

rates before rounding for 2002 (12.12 percent) and 2003 (12.46 percent) is 0.3 percentage points when it is rounded.

10 Federal surveys now ask people to

report one or more races. Therefore, two

ways of defining a group such as Asian are

possible. The first includes those who

reported Asian and no other race; the second includes everyone who reported Asian

regardless of whether they also reported

another race. Data using the first concept

are presented in Table 2 and Table 4. 

Because Hispanics may be any race,

data in this report for Hispanics overlap with

data for racial groups. In 2003, being

Hispanic was reported by 16.1 percent of

people who reported White as their only

race; 3.3 percent of people who reported

Black as their only race; 29.4 percent of people who reported American Indian or Alaska

Native as their only race; 1.3 percent of people who reported Asian as their only race;

and 10.3 percent of people who reported

Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander as

their only race. 

11 Citro, Constance F. and Robert T.

Michael, Measuring Poverty: A New

Approach, Washington, DC, National

Academy Press, 1995. As Robert T. Michael

indicated in the preface (p. xv), “...the Joint

Economic Committee of Congress initiated

an independent, in-depth review of the U.S.

poverty measure, working with the House

Subcommittee on Census, Statistics, and

Postal Personnel. ...Subsequently, the scope

of the study was broadened to include consideration of conceptual and methodological

issues for establishing standards of welfare

payments to needy families with children.

The Administration for Children and

Families... of the U.S. Department of Health

and Human Services provided funding for

this second request....” Additional funding

for the panel was granted by various federal

agencies. The panel members were scholars

from universities and research institutions. 12 Measuring Poverty, pp. 67-68. 13 A dissenting opinion objected to the

basic approach of the panel. See Appendix

A of the NAS panel’s report, Measuring

Poverty, pp. 385-390.
Working Group, the Census Bureau

has been conducting research to

refine some of the panel’s measurement methods and to examine

how the NAS panel’s approach

would affect the number of people

below poverty and the poverty

rate. Twelve NAS-based alternative

measures are discussed below.

These measures each account for

work-related expenses and noncash benefits (such as food stamps

and housing subsidies) and adjust

thresholds by family size in similar

ways, but the measures differ

among one another in three

aspects: the manner in which they

take account of health care costs,

whether they consider geographic

differences in the cost of living,

and the method used to update the

base threshold for a family of four

over time.14

Health care costs. To take account

of health care costs, the NAS panel

recommended accounting for

Medical Out-Of-Pocket expenditures, or MOOP. These medical

expenses include health insurance

premiums, copayments made to

medical providers that are not covered by insurance, and other

expenses paid out of the patient’s

pocket, such as over-the-counter

medications. The NAS-based

measures use three different methods for taking account of MOOP. 

• Medical out-of-pocket

expenses subtracted from

income (MSI). The MSI measure subtracts MOOP from family

income before comparing the

income to the family’s threshold,

which in this case does not

include a separate computation

for medical expenditures. 

• MOOP in the threshold (MIT).

The MIT measure increases the

poverty threshold to take a family’s potential MOOP expenses

into account, instead of subtracting their actual expenses

from income. Using data from

the 1997–1999 Consumer

Expenditure Survey and the

1996 Medical Expenditures

Panel Survey, the Census Bureau

computed a threshold to allow

for food, clothing, shelter, utilities, and MOOP. How much

money was allowed for MOOP

depended on the family’s size,

the presence of elderly family

members, the self-reported

health status of the family members, and differences in health

insurance coverage across families. Thus, for the MIT measures, the thresholds’ allowances

for MOOP reflect expected—that

is, average—medical expenses

along those dimensions, not the

family’s actual expenses. 

• Combined method (CMB).

The CMB measure combines

attributes of both the MSI and

MIT measures. Like the MIT

measure, the CMB includes

expected MOOP expenditures in

the thresholds. In addition, like

the MSI measure, the CMB takes

into account variations in medical expenditures across families. The CMB measure calculates the difference between the

expected MOOP and the actual

amounts each family spent outof-pocket for medical care and

subtracts the difference from

family income. This way, families that had greater than

expected medical expenses may

be classified as “in poverty”

when they otherwise would not

be, but those that were

unexpectedly healthy—and thus

spent less on MOOP than

expected, leaving those funds

available for other purposes—

are classified as better off than

they would be under both the

official and MIT measures. 

Geographic differences in the cost

of living. The official measure

applies the same poverty thresholds

nationally. Similarly, the measures

labeled NGA (for “no geographic

adjustment”) do not consider geographic variations in costs. 

The measures labeled GA (for “geographic adjustment”) do account

for some geographic differences in

the cost of living. The thresholds

in the GA measures are multiplied

by an index constructed from Fair

Market Rent data calculated by the

Department of Housing and Urban

Development. The index thus

reflects differences in rental housing costs by state and by metropolitan/nonmetropolitan status

within states.15

Method for updating the base

threshold. As explained earlier, the

official poverty measure was

derived in the 1960s, using U.S.

Department of Agriculture food

budgets and data from 1955 about

what percentage of a family’s

income was spent on food—it did

not stem from comprehensive

judgments about how family needs

compare among all sizes of families.16 The CPI-U is used to update

U.S. Census Bureau 9

14 For a full discussion of the methods

used to derive the NAS-based measures, see

Short, Kathleen, Experimental Poverty

Measures: 1999, U.S. Census Bureau, 

(P60-216), Washington, DC, 2001 at

<www.census.gov/prod/2001pubs

/p60-216.pdf>.

15 For more information about Fair Market

Rents (FMRs), see the Department of

Housing and Urban Development Web site,

<www.huduser.org/datasets/fmr.html>. For

information about how FMRs are used to

geographically adjust the poverty thresholds

see Kathleen Short, “Where We Live –

Geographic Differences in Poverty

Thresholds,” <www.census.gov/hhes

/poverty/povmeas/papers/sgepaper.pdf>. 16 The thresholds for unrelated individuals were computed as a proportion of thresholds for two-person families. See Appendix

A for details and references. 
10 U.S. Census Bureau . 3 el baT yranoit alf nI dna ci hpargoeG yb, snoit adne mmoceR secnei cS f o y medac Al anoit a N no desaB set a mitsE ytrevoP evit anretl A 3002 dna 2002: st ne mtsuj dA ) st ni op egat necr ep ni sl avr et ni ecnedif noc ri eht dna set ar ytr evop, sdnasuoht in ls avr et in ecnedif noc ri eht dna el poepf o sr eb mu (N doht e mt ne mer usae mytr evoP ) 2002 ssel 3002( egnah C 3002 2002 2 r eb mu N wol eb ytr evop l evel t necr ep- 09 -if noc ecned l avr et ni 1)-/ +( ytr evoP et ar t necr ep- 09 -if noc ecned l avr et ni 1)-/ +( r eb mu N wol eb ytr evop l evel t necr ep- 09 -if noc ecned l avr et ni 1)-/ +( ytr evoP et ar t necr ep- 09 -if noc ecned l avr et ni 1)-/ +( r eb mu N wol eb ytr evop l ev le t necr ep- 09 -if noc ecned l avr et ni 1)-/ +( ytr evoP et ar t necr ep- 09 -if noc ecned l avr et ni 1)-/ +( GNI SU DETADPU SDL OHSERHT : U-I PC EHT f ot ne mt suj dAci hpar goe G oN sdl ohser hT . . . . . . . er usae ml ia ciff O . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 0 3. 0* 896 192, 1* 2. 0 5. 21 176 168, 53 .2 0 1. 21 066 075, 43 t ekcop-f o-t uol aci de M( AGN-I S M morf det cart bus ) POOM( sesnepxe ) e moc in . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 0 5. 0* 307 585, 1* 2. 0 7. 21 676 755, 63 2. 0 3. 21 466 179, 43 2. 0 4. 0* 517 854, 1* 2. 0 2. 31 786 129, 73 2. 0 8. 21 676 364, 63 . . . ) sdl ohser ht eht ni POOM( AGN- TI M ) sdoht e mdeni b mo C( AGN- B MC . . . . . . 2. 0 5. 0* 817 336, 1* .2 0 3. 31 096 263, 83 2. 0 9. 21 876 927, 63 f ot ne mt suj dAci hpar goe G sdl ohser hT . . . AG-I S M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 0 5. 0* 996 117, 1* 2. 0 6. 21 376 951, 63 2. 0 1. 21 956 844, 43 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AG- TI M 2. 0 4. 0* 017 824, 1* 2. 0 0. 31 386 053, 73 2. 0 6. 21 176 329, 53 . . . . AG- B MC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 0 5. 0* 517 286, 1* 2. 0 2. 31 886 220, 83 2. 0 7. 21 576 143, 63 GNI SU DETUP MOC SDL OHSERHT ERUTI DNEPXE RE MUSNOC EHT : YEVRUS f ot ne mt suj dAci hpar goe G oN sdl ohser hT . . . AGN-I S M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. 0 5. 0* 137 047, 1* 2. 0 9. 31 307 380, 04 2. 0 4. 31 096 343, 83 . . . . AGN- TI M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. 0 5. 0* 247 288, 1* 2. 0 5. 41 517 126, 14 2. 0 9. 31 107 047, 93 AGN- B MC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .3 0 6. 0* 737 089, 1* 2. 0 3. 41 017 400, 14 2. 0 7. 31 596 420, 93 f ot ne mt suj dAci hpar goe G s ld ohser hT . . . AG-I S M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. 0 5. 0* 627 378, 1* 2. 0 7. 31 996 655, 93 2. 0 2. 31 586 386, 73 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . AG- IT M 3. 0 5. 0* 737 646, 1* .2 0 .2 41 907 618, 04 2. 0 7. 31 796 071, 93 . . . . A -G B MC . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. 0 .6 0* 237 941, 2* .2 0 .1 41 607 864, 04 2. 0 4. 31 096 913, 83 . or ez ot sdnuor r o or ez st neser pe R- .l evel ecnedif noct necr ep- 09 e th t a or ez morf t ner effi d lyl acit sit ta S* it alf ni dna, st soc ni snoit iar av ci hpar goeg, sesnepxel aci de mf o noit at up moc ri eht in r eht ona eno gno mar effi d ser usae mevit anr etl a eht eli h W: te o N er a ye th , sdoht e mt ne mt suj da no of dnat xet eeS. sesnepxe det al er- kr o w dna er ac dli hc dna stif eneb hsacnonf ot ne mt aert ri eht dna ezi s lyi maf yb sdl ohser ht f o gnil acs ri eht ni r lai mi s dna noit a mr of ni l anoiti ddar of set ont o . secner ef er 1 et a mit se eht f o ezi s eht ot noit al er ni l avr et ni ecnedif noc eht r egr al ehT. ytili b iar av s’ et a mit se naf o er usae ma si l avr et ni ecne idf noct necr ep- 09 A - a mr of ni er o mr oF. et a mit se eht el bail er ssel eht , ni ’’ es Uri ehT dna sr orr E dr adnat S‘‘ ees, noit 3002: set at S deti n U eht ni egar evo C ecnar usnI htl ae H dna, ytr evoP, e mocnI r of s te a mit s Ef o ycar ucc A dna ecr uoS www/ seh /h vog. susnec. www<t a . >f dp. as622- 06p/ 2 . g in dnuor f o esuacebl at ot ot must on ya msli at e D . st ne mel ppuSci monoc E dnal ai coSl aunnA 4002 dna 3002, yevr uS noit al upoPt nerr u C, uaer uBsusne C. S. U: ecr uoS
these thresholds for inflation, by

expressing the threshold matrix for

1978 in terms of the most recent

year’s dollars.17 

The NAS-based measures instead

compute a threshold for a family of

four—two adults and two children—and scale it by family size

using three parameters (see

Footnote 2). 

• The measures in the top half of

Table 3 (and labeled “CPI” in

Figure 2) use as their base

threshold a dollar figure computed using Consumer Expenditure

Survey data from 1997 to 1999,

and this threshold value is

adjusted for inflation since 1999

using the CPI-U. While the

threshold amounts are expressed

in the current year’s dollars,

these measures reflect families’

spending on food, clothing, shelter, utilities, and (for the MIT and

CMB measures) medical expenses during 1997 through 1999. 

• The measures in the bottom half

of Table 3 (and labeled “CE” in

Figure 2) estimate the base

threshold for a family of four for

2003 using median expenditures from the latest available

12 quarters of Consumer

Expenditure Survey data. While

the CPI measures adjust the

thresholds for overall changes

in prices, the CE measures

U.S. Census Bureau 11

17 The earliest thresholds available for the

threshold matrix now in use—which includes

thresholds for families of seven, eight, and

nine or more people—are for 1978.

Previously, families of seven or more members were included in the same category. See

U.S. Census Bureau, Characteristics of the

Population Below the Poverty Level: 1980

(P60-133), available at <www.census.gov

/hhes/www/prevcps.html>, for information

about the 1980–1981 modifications to the

poverty threshold matrix. 

Figure 2.

Poverty Rates Based on National Academy of Sciences (NAS) 

Recommendations: 1999 to 2003

Note: The data points are placed at the midpoints of the respective years. 

MSI means "Medical out-of-pocket expenses (MOOP) subtracted from income." 

MIT means "MOOP in the thresholds." 

CMB means "Combined methods." 

GA means "Geographic Adjustment (of poverty thresholds)." 

NGA means "No Geographic Adjustment (of poverty thresholds)."

CPI means "Thresholds were adjusted since 1999 using the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers." 

CE means "Thresholds were recomputed since 1999 using data from the Consumer Expenditure Survey." 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2000 to 2004 Annual Social and Economic Supplements. 

Percent

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

14

16

CMB-NGA-CE

MIT-NGA-CE

MSI-NGA-CE

CMB-GA-CE

MIT-GA-CE

MSI-GA-CE

CMB-NGA-CPI

MIT-NGA-CPI

MSI-NGA-CPI

CMB-GA-CPI

MIT-GA-CPI

MSI-GA-CPI

Official measure

1987 1988 1989 1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003
reflect families’ spending on the

set of goods in the threshold. 

As shown in Table 3 and Figures 2

and 3, the NAS alternative poverty

measures produced higher poverty

rates than the official measure.

The MSI measures updated with

the CPI (labeled “MSI-GA-CPI” and

“MSI-NGA-CPI” in Figures 2 and 3)

were closest to the official measure. The MIT measure with no

geographic adjustment was the

highest among the CE measures.

The CMB measure with no geographic adjustment was the highest among the CPI-adjusted

measures. The CE poverty measures were higher than their CPIadjusted counterparts because

their thresholds rose along with

expenditures for the bundle of

goods in the threshold, which rose

faster than overall prices during

the 1999–2003 period. 

As seen in Figure 2, the NAS alternative poverty rates were all at or

within about 2 percentage points

above the official rate in each of

the 5 years for which the Census

Bureau has data. The geographically-adjusted MSI measure updated with the CPI (MSI-GA-CPI)

consistently produced poverty

rates lower than the other alternative measures. The gap between

that measure and the official measure was largest in 2000 and smallest in 2002, when both the MSIGA-CPI and the official measure

estimated a poverty rate of 

12.1 percent. The largest differences between the alternative and

the official estimates occurred in

2003, when the MIT measure with

no geographical adjustment that

used CE thresholds (MIT-NGA-CE)

was 14.5 percent and the official

measure was 12.5 percent. 

12 U.S. Census Bureau

11

12

13

14

15

CMB-NGA-CE

MIT-NGA-CE

MSI-NGA-CE

CMB-GA-CE

MIT-GA-CE

MSI-GA-CE

CMB-NGA-CPI

MIT-NGA-CPI

MSI-NGA-CPI

CMB-GA-CPI

MIT-GA-CPI

MSI-GA-CPI

Official measure

1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004

Figure 3.

Poverty Rates Based on National Academy of Sciences Recommendations, 

With Scales Magnified to Show Differences Among Measures: 1999 to 2003

Note: The data points are placed at the midpoints of the respective years. Scale has been magnified to make the measures easier 

to distinguish; for absolute comparisons, see Figure 2. 

MSI means "Medical out-of-pocket expenses (MOOP) subtracted from income." 

MIT means "MOOP in the thresholds." 

CMB means "Combined method." 

GA means "Geographic Adjustment (of poverty thresholds)." 

NGA means "No Geographic Adjustment (of poverty thresholds)."

CPI means "Thresholds were adjusted since 1999 using the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers." 

CE means "Thresholds were recomputed since 1999 using data from the Consumer Expenditure Survey." 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2000 to 2004 Annual Social and Economic Supplements. 

Percent. Vertical scale begins at 11 percent
U.S. Census Bureau 13

. 4 el baT

ci h

p

a

r

g

o

m

e

D

d

et c

el e

S

y

b, s

n

oit a

d

n

e

m

m

o

c

e

R

s

e

c

n

ei c

S

f

o

y

m

e

d

a

c

Al a

n

oit a

N

n

o

d

e

s

a

B

s

et a

mits

E

ytr

e

v

o

P

e

vit a

n

r

etl A

3

0

0

2: n

oi g

e

R

y

b

d

n

a

s

citsi r

et c

a

r

a

h

C

) U-I PC eht gni su noit alf ni r of det suj da sdl ohser ht esu ser usae mll A. st in op egat necr ep in ls avr et in ecne idf noc ri eht dna set a imt se et ar ytr evo (P

cit sir et car ah C

) sdl ohser ht ytr evopf ot ne mt suj dAci hpar goe G( A

G ) sdl ohser ht ytr evopf ot ne mt suj dAci hpar goe Go N( A

G

N

l ai ciff O

ytr evop

- ae m

er us

t necr ep- 09

-if noc

ecned

l avr et in 1

)-/ +(

-I S

M

A

G

N

l aci de M(

-f o-t uo

t ekcop

sesnepxe

) PO

O

M(

- bus

det cart

morf

) e moc in

t necr ep- 09

-if noc

ecned

l avr et ni 1

)-/ +(

- TI M

A

G

N

PO

O

M(

dedul cni

eht ni

- hser ht

) s ld o

t necr ep- 09

-if noc

ecned

l avr et ni 1

)-/ +(

- B M

C

A

G

N

- mo C(

deni b

- ht e m

) sdo

t necr ep- 09

-if noc

ecned

l avr et ni 1

A

G-I S

M)-/ +(

t necr ep- 09

-if noc

ecned

l avr et ni 1

A

G- IT

M )-/ +(

t necr ep- 09

-if noc

ecned

l avr et ni 1

A

G- B M

C )-/ +(

t necr ep- 09

-if noc

ecned

l avr te ni 1

)-/ +(

. . . . . . el poepll A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 0 2. 31 2. 0 .0 31 .2 0 6. 21 2. 0 3. 31 2. 0 .2 31 2. 0 7. 21 2. 0 5. 21

. . . . . . seili maf ni el poeP . . . . . . 2. 0 3. 11 2. 0 2. 11 2. 0 7. 01 2. 0 2. 11 2. 0 3. 11 2. 0 7. 01 2. 0 .8 01

le puoc- d ierr a m in el poeP

s ieli maf 2. 0 1. 7 2. 0 1. 7 .2 0 7. 6 2. 0 1. 7 2. 0 1. 7 .2 0 7. 6 2. 0 2. 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

a hti wseili maf ni le poeP

on,r edl ohesuoh el a mef

. t neser p dnabsuh . . . . . . . . . . 8. 0 8. 72 8. 0 3. 72 8. 0 7. 62 8. 0 1. 82 8. 0 2. 82 8. 0 9. 62 9. 0 0. 03

a hti wseili maf ni le poeP

on,r edl ohesuoh el a m

t neser p efi w . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 1 2. 71 2. 1 0. 71 2. 1 7. 61 2. 1 6. 61 2. 1 6. 61 2. 1 0. 61 1. 1 2. 41

egA

sr aey 81r edn U . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. 0 4. 51 4. 0 8. 51 4. 0 6. 41 4. 0 4. 51 4. 0 0. 61 4. 0 .7 41 5. 0 6. 71

. sr aey 46 ot 81 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. 0 7. 11 3. 0 8. 11 3. 0 1. 11 3. 0 .7 11 3. 0 9. 11 3. 0 2. 11 3. 0 8. 01

. . . . r evo dna sr aey 56 . . . . . . . . 5. 0 6. 61 4. 0 3. 31 5. 0 7. 51 5. 0 3. 71 4. 0 0. 41 5. 0 3. 61 4. 0 2. 01

eca R 2 ni igr Oci napsi H dna

enol a eti h W 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. 0 7. 11 2. 0 4. 11 2. 0 1. 11 3. 0 8. 11 3. 0 7. 11 2. 0 3. 11 2. 0 5. 01

2. 0 0. 9 2. 0 6. 8 2. 0 5. 8 3. 0 6. 9 2. 0 3. 9 2. 0 .2 9 2. 0 2. 8 . . . enol a eti h Wci napsi H- no N

en lo a kcal B 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8. 0 6. 12 8. 0 3. 12 8. 0 7. 02 8. 0 7. 22 8. 0 5. 22 8. 0 6. 12 9. 0 .4 42

enol a nai s A 5 1. 1 9. 11 2. 1 8. 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. 1 3. 51 2. 1 1. 51 2. 1 3. 41 1. 1 .5 21 1. 1 0. 21

. ) ecar ynaf o( ic napsi H . . . . . . . . 8. 0 7. 52 8. 0 2. 62 8. 0 3. 42 8. 0 9. 22 .8 0 7. 32 8. 0 9. 12 8. 0 5. 22

noi ge R

t saehtr o N 5. 0 3. 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. 0 1. 31 5. 0 7. 21 5. 0 3. 21 5. 0 0. 11 5. 0 6. 01 5. 0 3. 01

. . . . . . t se wdi M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. 0 9. 9 4. 0 7. 9 4. 0 5. 9 5. 0 5. 11 .4 0 3. 11 .4 0 0. 11 5. 0 7. 01

th uoS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. 0 2. 31 4. 0 0. 31 4. 0 7. 21 5. 0 6. 51 5. 0 6. 51 4. 0 0. 51 5. 0 1. 41

. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .t se W 6. 0 6. 61 6. 0 4. 61 .6 0 5. 51 6. 0 4. 31 6. 0 3. 31 5. 0 8. 21 6. 0 6. 21

s er a yeht , st soc ni snoit air av ci hpar goeg dna sesnepxel aci de mf o noit at up moc ri eht ni r eht ona eno gno mar effi d ser usae mevit anr etl a eht lei h W: et o N ri eht , ezi s yli maf yb sdl ohser ht f o gnil acs ri eht ni r ali mi

t oof dnat xet eeS. sesnepxe det al er- kr o w dna er ac dli hc dna stif eneb hsacnonf ot ne mt aert ri e th dna,) -UI PC eht no desab( doht e mt ne mt suj da noit alf ni . secner ef er dna noit a mr of ni l anoiti ddar of set on 1 et a mit se eht f o ezi s eht ot noit al er ni l avr et ni ecnedif noc eht r egr al ehT. ytili bair av s’ et a mit se naf o er usae ma si l avr et ni ecnedif noct necr ep- 09 A - nat S‘‘ ees noit a mr of ni er o mr oF. et a mit se eht el bail er ssel eht ,

ni ’’ es Uri ehT dna sr orr E dr ad 3002: set at S deti n U eht ni egar evo C ecnar usnI htl ae H dna, ytr evoP, e mocnI r of set a mit s Ef o ycar ucc A dna ecr uoS . >f dp. as622- 06p/ w

w

w/ sehh/ vog. susnec. w

w

w<t a 2 . yl et ar apes n wohst on er a sr edn la sI cifi caPr eht Odna snaii a wa H evit a N dna, sevit a N aks la A dna snai d In nacir e mAr fo at a D

3 et ac ecar r eht o ynatr oper t on di d dna eti h Wdetr oper oh w el poep to sr fe er en lo a eti h W. secar er o mr o eno esoohc to st nednopser deksa SPC 4002 dna 3002 ehT noit al upop ecar- le gni s si ht f o esu ehT. yr og

h w el poep no noit a mr fo nI . sehcaor ppaf o yt ier av a sesu uaer uBsusne C ehT. at ad gni zyl anar o g int neser pf o doht e mderr ef er p eht si ti t a th yl p mi t on seod eti h Wsa hcus, ecar eno na th er o mdetr oper o dna -ir e mA

nai s Ar o evit a N aksal A dna nai dnI nac dna usne C ni ecar eno naht er o mdetr oper el poepf ot necr ep 6. 2t uobA.r edni Ft caF nacir e mA hguor ht 0002 susne C morf el bali ava si , nacir e mA nacirf Ar o kcal B . 0002 s 4 . yr oget ac ecar r eht o ynatr oper t on id d dna kcal B detr oper oh w el poep ot sr ef er enol a kc la B

5 . yr oget ac ecar r eht o ynatr oper t on di d dna nai s A detr oper oh w el poep ot sr ef er enol a nai s A

.t ne mel ppuSci monoc E dnal ai coSl aunnA 4002, yevr uS noit al upoPt nerr u C, uaer uBsusne C. S. U: ecr uoS
Figure 3 magnifies the relative differences between the poverty rates

plotted in Figure 2 to better illustrate that the CE measures diverge

from their CPI-adjusted counterparts. As noted earlier, because

the CE thresholds are computed

using median expenditures, they

take account of families’ spending

on a set of goods.

Table 3, like Table 1, shows that all

the NAS-based alternative poverty

measures yielded poverty rate

increases, in this case ranging from

0.4 percentage points to 0.6 percentage points between 2002 and

2003. In comparison, the official

measure increased 0.3 percentage

points in that same time period.

From this point forward, the text

discusses only the NAS measures

that use the CPI-adjusted thresholds. Table 4 illustrates how the

NAS measures using the CPI-adjusted thresholds lead to varying

poverty rates by selected demographic characteristics. Each of

these alternative measures yielded

lower poverty rates than the official measure for people in families

with a female householder and no

husband present, whereas the

opposite was true for people in

married-couple families and malehouseholder families. This was

because families with a female

householder and no husband present received more in-kind benefits

and paid less in taxes and work

expenses than did married-couple

families.18

Similarly, poverty rates by age

from the NAS alternative measures

differed from the official measure.

People under 18 had lower poverty

rates than under the official measure, while those aged 18 to 64 had

higher rates. People 65 and older

had the largest difference from the

official measure among the three

age groups. Including medical

expenses when measuring poverty

affected poverty rates by age

because the elderly tend to have

high out-of-pocket expenses for

health care. The opposite was true

for children, who are healthier than

older people, on average. 

The method by which one accounts

for medical care expenditures also

affects poverty rates by age. The

poverty rate for people 65 and over

according to the MIT measure with

no geographic adjustment 

(14.0 percent), though higher than

the official measure (10.3 percent),

was not as high as the measures

that subtract actual MOOP from

income (16.3 percent for MSI-NGA

and 17.3 percent for CMB-NGA).

The same relationship among the

methods for measuring medical

care expenses holds when the

thresholds are adjusted for geographic variation in prices. In that

case, the poverty rates for people

65 and over are 13.3 percent using

the MIT-GA measure, 15.7 percent

for the MSI-GA, and 16.6 percent for

the CMB-GA measure. 

The NAS alternative and the official

measures showed different poverty

rates by race and Hispanic origin.

The alternative measures yielded

slightly higher poverty rates for

Asians and non-Hispanic Whites, and

lower rates for Blacks, than the official measure. While these comparisons against the official measure

held true regardless of geographic

adjustment, geographic adjustment

either amplified or lessened the difference from the official measure,

depending on how each group was

geographically distributed. For

Asians and Hispanics (who may be

any race), the geographically adjusted measures produced higher rates

than the measures without

geographic adjustment, reflecting

the fact that these groups tend to

live in areas with higher housing

costs, such as California.

Conversely, the poverty rates for

non-Hispanic Whites and Blacks

were lower using the geographically

adjusted measures than those without geographic adjustment. 

Finally, regional poverty rates

based on the NAS alternative measures differed from the official

poverty rates and geographic

adjustments did affect the rates.

Among the measures without geographic adjustment, the Midwest,

the South, and the West had higher

poverty rates than the official

measure, while the Northeast had

lower rates. In contrast, among

the measures with geographic

adjustments, the Northeast and the

West had higher poverty rates than

the official measure, while the

Midwest and the South had lower

rates. These differences by region

may reflect the lower housing

costs in the Midwest and the South

than in the Northeast and the West. 

CPS DATA COLLECTION

The information in this report was

collected in the 50 states and the

District of Columbia and does not

represent residents of Puerto Rico

and outlying areas. It is based on a

sample of about 100,000 addresses. The estimates in this report are

controlled to national population

estimates by age, race, sex, and

Hispanic origin, and to state population estimates by age. The population controls used to prepare estimates for 1999 to 2003 were based

on the results from Census 2000

and are updated annually using

administrative records such as birth

and death certificates. 

14 U.S. Census Bureau

18 Short, Kathleen, and John Iceland,

“Who is Better Off Than We Thought?

Evaluating Poverty with a Different Measure,”

prepared for the Annual Meeting of the

American Economic Association, January 8,

2000, pp. 12-13 and Table 3. This paper is

available at <www.census.gov/hhes

/poverty/povmeas/papers/whor.pdf>. 
The CPS is primarily an employment

survey of households. The sample

universe for the basic CPS consists

of the resident civilian noninstitutionalized population of the United

States. It does not include people

in institutions, such as prisons,

long-term care hospitals, and

nursing homes. Students living in

dormitories are only included in the

estimates if information about them

is reported in an interview at their

parents’ homes. 

The sample universe for the ASEC

supplement is slightly larger than

for the basic CPS since it includes

military personnel who live in a

household with at least one other

civilian adult, regardless of whether

they live off post or on post. All

Armed Forces households without a

civilian adult are excluded. For further documentation about the ASEC,

see <www.bls.census.gov

/cps/ads/adsmain.htm>.

COMMENTS

The Census Bureau welcomes the

comments and advice of data and

report users. If you have suggestions or comments, please write

to:

Charles Nelson

Assistant Division Chief for

Income, Poverty, and Health

Statistics

Housing and Household Economic

Statistics Division

U.S. Census Bureau 

Washington, DC 20233-8500

or send e-mail to 

<charles.t.nelson@census.gov>.

U.S. Census Bureau 15

Additional Data and Contacts 

Detailed tables, historical tables, press releases and briefings, and

unpublished data are available electronically on the U.S. Census

Bureau’s Poverty Web site, which may be accessed through the

Census Bureau’s home page at <www.census.gov> or directly at

<www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty.html>. Technical methods

have been applied to CPS microdata to avoid disclosing the identities

of individuals from whom data were collected. These protected

microdata are available for downloading by clicking on “Data Tools”

on the Census Bureau’s home page and then clicking the

“DataFerrett” link. 

For assistance with poverty data, contact the Housing and Household

Economic Statistics Division statistical information staff by telephone

at 301-763-3242 or search your topic of interest using the Census

Bureau’s “Question and Answer Center” found at

<http://ask.census.gov>. 
Following the Office of

Management and Budget’s (OMB)

Statistical Policy Directive 14, the

Census Bureau uses a set of money

income thresholds that vary by

family size and composition to

determine who is in poverty (see

Table A-1).20

If a family’s total income is less

than that family’s threshold, then

that family, and every individual in

it, is considered to be “in poverty.”

The official poverty thresholds do

not vary geographically, and they

are updated annually for inflation,

now using the Consumer Price

Index (CPI-U). The official poverty

definition counts money income

before taxes and does not include

capital gains and noncash benefits

(such as public housing, Medicaid,

and food stamps).

Example: Suppose Family A consists of five people: two children,

their mother, father, and greataunt. Family A’s poverty threshold

in 2003 was $22,509. Suppose

also that each member had the following income in 2003:

Mother $ 10,000

Father 5,000

Great-aunt 10,000

First child 0

Second child 0

Total: $ 25,000

Since their total family income,

$25,000, was greater than their

threshold ($22,509), the family

would not be considered “in

poverty” according to the official

poverty measure. 

While the thresholds represent one

measure of families’ needs, the

official poverty measure should be

interpreted as a statistical yardstick

rather than as the only description

of what people and families need to

live. Many government aid programs use different dollar amounts

as eligibility criteria.

Official poverty rates and the number below poverty are one important way of examining well-being.

Other approaches are described in

this report and in the Census

Bureau’s companion report,

Supplemental Measures of Material

Well-Being: Basic Needs, Consumer

Durables, Energy, and Poverty,

1981-2002 (P23-202), by 

Kurt Bauman. 

Some data users want a summary

of the 48 thresholds to get a general sense of the “poverty line.”

The weighted average thresholds

in the first column of Table A-1

provide that summary, but they are

not used to compute poverty data.

16 U.S. Census Bureau

20 The entire text of Statistical Policy

Directive 14 may be accessed at 

<www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/povmeas

/ombdir14.html>.

Table A-1.

Poverty Thresholds in 2003 by Size of Family and Number of Related Children

Under 18 Years

(Dollars)

Size of family unit

Weighted

average

thresholds

Related children under 18 years

None One Two Three Four Five Six Seven

Eight or

more

One person (unrelated individual) . . 9,393

Under 65 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9,573 9,573

65 years and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8,825 8,825

Two people . ..................... 12,015

Householder under 65 years . . . . 12,384 12,321 12,682

Householder 65 years and over . . 11,133 11,122 12,634

Three people .................... 14,680 14,393 14,810 14,824

Four people . . ................... 18,810 18,979 19,289 18,660 18,725

Five people. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22,245 22,887 23,220 22,509 21,959 21,623

Six people. . ..................... 25,122 26,324 26,429 25,884 25,362 24,586 24,126

Seven people .................... 28,544 30,289 30,479 29,827 29,372 28,526 27,538 26,454

Eight people . . ................... 31,589 33,876 34,175 33,560 33,021 32,256 31,286 30,275 30,019

Nine people or more.............. 37,656 40,751 40,948 40,404 39,947 39,196 38,163 37,229 36,998 35,572

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2004 Annual Social and Economic Supplement.

APPENDIX A. 

How the Official Poverty Measure is Computed
Derivation of the Official

Poverty Thresholds

Mollie Orshansky, an analyst at the

Social Security Administration,

developed a set of poverty thresholds in 1963–1964, initially for

research purposes, which the

Bureau of the Budget (renamed as

the Office of Management and

Budget) later adopted and modified

for the official poverty measure. 

Orshansky focused on family food

consumption because, as she

wrote in a 1965 article, “...there is

no generally accepted standard of

adequacy for essentials of living

except food.”21 She used data from

the U.S. Department of Agriculture

(USDA), which had already constructed food plans for families

based on the nutritional needs of

children and adults. Within each

food plan, dollar amounts varied

according to the total number of

people in the family and the

family’s composition, such as the

number of children within each

family. The most stringent of these

plans, the Economy Food Plan, was

designed to address the dietary

needs of families on an austere

budget.22

Because Orshansky observed that

families of three or more people,

across all income levels, spent

roughly one-third of their income

on food (according to the USDA’s

1955 Food Consumption Survey),

she multiplied the cost of the

Economy Food Plan by three to

obtain dollar figures for the poverty thresholds. Since the Economy

Food Plan budgets varied by family

size and composition, so did the

poverty thresholds. For twoperson families, she adjusted the

thresholds by slightly higher factors because those families were

thought to have higher fixed costs.

Thresholds for unrelated individuals were calculated as a fixed proportion of the corresponding

thresholds for two-person families.

For a more detailed history of the

official poverty measure, see “The

Development of the Orshansky

Thresholds and Their Subsequent

History as the Official U.S. Poverty

Measure,” by Gordon M. Fisher, at

<www.census.gov/hhes/poverty

/povmeas/papers/orshansky.html>.

U.S. Census Bureau 17

21 Orshansky, Mollie, “Counting the Poor:

Another Look at the Poverty Profile,” Social

Security Bulletin, Vol. 28, No. 1, January

1965, pp. 3-29.

22 Gordon Fisher, “The Development of

the Orshansky Thresholds and Their

Subsequent History as the Official U.S.

Poverty Measure,” available at 

<www.census.gov/hhes/poverty/povmeas

/papers/orshansky.html>. In footnote 23 he

states that the characterization of the

Economy Food Plan as being for “temporary

or emergency use” has its bibliographic

source in Betty Peterkin, “Family Food Plans,

Revised 1964,” Family Economics Review

October 1964, p. 12. 
18 U.S. Census Bureau . B xi dneppA . 1- B el baT ) U-I PC no desaB sdl ohser hT ytrevoP( 3002 ot 0891: e mocnI f o noiti nif e D yb, ytrevoP ni el poePf o egat necreP )r aey gni woll of eht f o hcr a Mf o sa el poe (P r aeY l at oT - uoht( ) dnas - dul cx E g in l ati pac sni ag t nerr uc( l ai ciff o - ae m ) er us )I M( sexat r etf A sexat er of eB e moc in yeno M ssel 1 noiti nif e D -i pac sul p sexat sni agl ta ) sessol( yeno M —e mocni -i nif e D 3 noit sul p htl aeh -r usni ecna - el ppus st ne m ega w ot r oyr al as e mocni -i nif e D 4 noit ssel l ai cos ytir uces ll or yap sexat -i nif e D 5 noit ss le l ar edef e mocni sexat -i inf e D 6 noit sul p CI E -i inf e D 7 noit ssel et at s e mocni sexat -i nif e D 8 noit sul p - non - snae m det set - nr evog t ne m hsac - snart sr ef -i nif e D 9 noit sul p -i de M er ac -i nif e D 01 noit sul p -r al uger ecir p l oohcs sehcnul -i nif e D 11 noit sul p - snae m det set - nr evog t ne m hsac - snart sr ef -i nif e D 21 noit sul p - ci de M di a 31 noiti nif e D r eht o sul p det set- snae m —t ne mnr evog noiti inf e D sul p 41 t en det up mi no nr ut er ni yti uqe n wo e moh +xT-I M( ) EH+CN t uohti W denr ae e mocni ti der c ) CI E( hti WIC E ) xT-I M( -i inf e D 1 noit ssel - nr evog t ne m - snart sr ef -i nif e D 2 noit sul p l ati pac sni ag ) sessol( - no N hsac - snart -I M( sr fe ) CN+xT - no N hsac - snart ssel sr ef l a ic de m - or p s mar g +xT-I M( ) MM- CN 51 a41 41 31 21 11 01 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 b1 a1 1 3002 . . . . . . . 0. 9 2. 01 7. 9 5. 01 2. 11 9. 11 9. 11 3. 21 2. 91 2. 91 6. 02 .6 02 5. 91 1. 02 5. 02 0. 21 5. 31 5. 21 996, 782 2002 . . . . . . . 6. 8 8. 9 3. 9 3. 01 9. 01 5. 11 5. 11 8. 11 7. 81 7. 81 0. 02 0. 02 0. 91 7. 91 0. 02 6. 11 0. 31 1. 21 713, 582 2002 1 . . . . . . . 6. 8 9. 9 4. 9 3. 01 9. 01 6. 11 6. 11 9. 11 1. 91 9. 81 3. 02 3. 02 3. 91 0. 02 0. 02 6. 11 2. 31 1. 21 713, 582 1002 . . . . . . . 3. 8 6. 9 0. 9 9. 9 5. 01 .3 11 3. 11 6. 11 4. 81 2. 81 5. 91 3. 91 .5 81 1. 91 .2 91 3. 11 7. 21 7. 11 574, 182 0002 2 . . . . . . . 0. 8 3. 9 .8 8 8. 9 3. 01 .0 11 0. 11 3. 11 9. 71 8. 71 2. 91 0. 91 .0 81 5. 81 7. 81 0. 11 4. 21 3. 11 44 ,9 872 9991 3 . . . . . . . 2. 8 4. 9 9. 8 9. 9 5. 01 3. 11 3. 11 8. 11 4. 81 3. 81 7. 91 7. 91 7. 81 2. 91 4. 91 3. 11 9. 21 .9 11 80 ,2 672 8991 . . . . . . . 8. 8 0. 01 5. 9 6. 01 2. 11 0. 21 0. 21 4. 21 0. 91 9. 81 4. 02 .2 02 3. 91 .9 91 1. 02 0. 21 6. 31 7. 21 950, 172 7991 . . . . . . . 2. 9 8. 01 0. 01 2. 11 0. 21 9. 21 9. 21 4. 31 1. 02 0. 02 4. 12 3. 12 .3 02 9. 02 0. 12 7. 21 3. 41 3. 31 084, 862 6991 . . . . . . . 3. 9 1. 11 2. 01 5. 11 4. 21 5. 31 5. 31 9. 31 7. 02 5. 02 0. 22 8. 12 8. 02 5. 12 6. 12 3. 31 9. 41 .7 31 812, 662 5991 . . . . . . . .4 9 1. 11 3. 01 7. 11 5. 21 7. 31 7. 31 1. 41 .0 12 9. 02 .1 22 .0 22 1. 12 8. 12 9. 12 .4 31 8. 41 8. 31 337, 362 4991 . . . . . . . 0. 01 0. 21 1. 11 6. 21 5. 31 7. 41 8. 41 1. 51 2. 22 0. 22 2. 32 0. 32 .0 22 7. 22 8. 22 6. 41 8. 51 5. 41 616, 162 3991 . . . . . . . 2. 11 1. 31 1. 21 5. 31 5. 41 6. 51 6. 51 1. 61 2. 32 1. 32 8. 32 6. 32 6. 22 3. 32 4. 32 5. 51 3. 61 .1 51 872, 952 2991 4 . . . . . . . 7. 01 8. 21 9. 11 3. 31 3. 41 4. 51 4. 51 8. 51 8. 22 6. 22 4. 32 2. 32 1. 22 7. 22 8. 22 .2 51 2. 61 8. 41 945, 652 1991 5 . . . . . . . 3. 01 2. 21 4. 11 9. 21 6. 31 6. 41 7. 41 1. 51 8. 12 6. 12 3. 22 0. 22 1. 12 8. 12 8. 12 7. 41 .4 51 2. 41 291, 152 0991 . . . . . . . 8. 9 ) AN( 9. 01 4. 21 2. 31 2. 41 2. 41 7. 41 8. 02 6. 02 1. 12 9. 02 9. 91 4. 02 .5 02 ) A (N ) AN( 5. 31 446, 842 9891 . . . . . . . 1. 9 ) AN( 4. 01 7. 11 5. 21 5. 31 5. 31 0. 41 3. 02 1. 02 5. 02 3. 02 4. 91 9. 91 0. 02 ) AN( ) AN( 8. 21 299, 542 8891 . . . . . . . 4. 9 ) AN( 8. 01 .1 21 7. 21 6. 31 6. 31 1. 41 5. 02 3. 02 7. 02 6. 02 7. 91 2. 02 2. 02 ) AN( ) A (N .0 31 035, 342 7891 . . . . . . . 7. 9 ) AN( 0. 11 4. 21 .0 31 8. 31 8. 31 3. 41 6. 02 .4 02 .7 02 .5 02 7. 91 2. 02 4. 02 ) AN( ) A (N 4. 31 289, 042 6891 . . . . . . . 1. 01 ) AN( 3. 11 8. 21 3. 31 2. 41 2. 41 .7 41 .0 12 9. 02 1. 12 7. 02 9. 91 4. 02 .8 02 ) AN( ) AN( 6. 31 455, 832 5891 . . . . . . . 9. 9 ) AN( 7. 11 2. 31 8. 31 .8 41 8. 41 2. 51 7. 12 5. 12 6. 12 3. 12 .4 02 9. 02 3. 12 ) A (N ) AN( .0 41 495, 632 4891 . . . . . . . 9. 9 ) AN( 0. 21 5. 31 2. 41 1. 51 1. 51 5. 51 0. 22 9. 12 0. 22 6. 12 8. 02 4. 12 8. 12 ) AN( ) AN( 4. 41 61 ,8 332 3891 . . . . . . . 4. 01 ) AN( 7. 21 2. 41 8. 41 7. 51 7. 51 1. 61 9. 22 8. 22 0. 32 6. 22 .8 12 5. 22 .0 32 ) A (N ) AN( 2. 51 007, 132 2891 . . . . . . . 9. 9 ) AN( 3. 21 0. 41 6. 41 5. 51 .5 51 0. 61 3. 32 1. 32 3. 32 9. 22 0. 22 7. 22 0. 32 ) AN( ) A (N .0 51 214, 922 1891 . . . . . . . 7. 8 ) AN( 5. 11 0. 31 7. 31 .8 41 8. 41 3. 51 4. 22 3. 22 5. 22 .0 22 1. 12 .8 12 0. 22 ) AN( ) A (N 0. 41 751, 722 0891 . . . . . . . 2. 8 ) A (N 1. 01 7. 11 .5 21 6. 31 7. 31 1. 41 .9 02 .8 02 1. 12 8. 02 1. 02 7. 02 8. 02 ) AN( ) A (N 0. 31 720, 522 . el bali avat o N AN1 . det ceff a eb ya msr aey r eilr ae hti wsnosir ap moc, ylt neuqesno C. set a mit se 2002 eht hti w evit ceff e, sexat del edo mti ya w eht degnahc uaer uBsusne C ehT 1- Csel baT, Cxi dneppA eeS dna, 2- C dna 3002: set at S deti n U eht ni set a mit s E e mocnI evit anr etl A . noit a mr of ni r ehtr uf r of , Axi dneppA,) 822- 06P( 2 . sdl ohesuoh 000, 82 yb dednapxe le p mas dna ls ort noc noit la upop desab- 0002 susne Cf o noit at ne mel p mI 3 . sl ort noc noit al upop desab- 0002 susne Ct celf er ot desi ve R4 . sl ort noc n iot al upop susnec 0991f o noit at ne mel p Im5 eni nr of st hgi e W. str oper ytr evoP dna e mocnI 1991 e th f o esael er eht r tef a det cerr oc sa w) at ad 1991( 2991 hcr a Mr of elif SPC eeS( . elif l ani gir o eht no detti mo er e wsdr ocer nosr ep ). lsi at edr ehtr fu r of 481- 06P . st ne mel ppuS ic monoc E dnal ia coSl aunnA 4002 ot 1891, yevr uS noit al upoPt nerr u C, uaer uBsusne C. S. U: ecr uoS
U.S. Census Bureau 19 . 2- B el baT ) S R- U-I PC no desaB sdl ohser hT ytrevoP( 3002 ot 7891: e mocnI f o noiti nif e D yb, ytrevoP ni el poePf o egat necreP )r aey gni woll of eht f o hcr a Mf o sa el poeP( r aeY l at oT - uoht( ) dnas - x E - dul c g in l tai pac sni ag )I M( sexat r etf A sexat er of eB e mocnI yeno M 1 n ioti nif e D s lu p sexat ssel sni agl ati pac ) sessol( yeno M —e mocni -i nif e D 3 noit sul p htl aeh -r usni ecna - pus - el p st ne m otega w r oyr al as e moc in -i nif e D 4 noit ssel l ai cos - uces ytir ll or yap sexat -i nif e D 5 noit ssel - def l ar e e mocni sexat -i nif e D 6 noit sul p CI E -i nif e D 7 noit ssel et at s e mocni sexat -i nif e D 8 noit sul p - non snae m det set- - vog - nr e t ne m hsac - snart sr ef -i nif e D 9 noit s lu p -i de M er ac -i nif e D n iot 01sul p - uger r al - ecir p l oohcs - hcnul se -i nif e D 11 noit s lu p - snae m det set - vog - nr e t ne m hsac - snart sr ef -i nif e D n iot 21sul p - ci de M di a 31 noiti nif e D r eht o sul p det set snae m —t ne mnr evog -i nif e D 41 noit sul p - mi t en det up nr ut er noyti uqe n wo ni e moh -I M( +xT +CN ) EH - hti W t uo denr ae e mocni ti der c ) IC E( hti W CI E -I (M ) xT -i nif e D 1 noit ssel - vog - nr e t ne m - snart sr ef -i nif e D 2 n iot sul p l ati pac sni ag - ss lo( ) se - no N hsac - snart sr ef -I M( +xT ) CN - no N hsac - snart sr ef ssel -i de m l ac - or p s mar g -I M( +xT - CN ) MM 51 a41 41 31 21 11 01 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 b1 a1 1 . . 3002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. 7 1. 8 9. 7 0. 9 3. 9 1. 01 1. 01 3. 01 2. 71 2. 71 7. 81 .6 81 8. 71 .3 81 7. 81 .8 9 3. 11 5. 01 996, 782 . . 2002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. 7 8. 7 7. 7 7. 8 0. 9 8. 9 8. 9 0. 01 8. 61 8. 61 2. 81 1. 81 4. 71 8. 71 1. 81 5. 9 8. 01 1. 01 713, 582 2002 1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. 7 8. 7 .7 7 7. 8 0. 9 8. 9 8. 9 0. 01 2. 71 0. 71 4. 81 3. 81 6. 71 1. 81 1. 81 .5 9 0. 11 1. 01 713, 582 . . 1002 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7. 6 5. 7 3. 7 3. 8 7. 8 5. 9 5. 9 8. 9 .5 61 3. 61 7. 71 6. 71 9. 61 4. 71 5. 71 .2 9 6. 01 .9 9 574, 182 0002 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. 6 4. 7 .2 7 1. 8 5. 8 2. 9 2. 9 5. 9 0. 61 9. 51 3. 71 .2 71 5. 61 9. 61 0. 71 0. 9 3. 01 7. 9 449, 872 9991 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. 6 4. 7 .2 7 3. 8 6. 8 6. 9 6. 9 9. 9 5. 61 4. 61 9. 71 8. 71 9. 61 4. 71 6. 71 .2 9 7. 01 9. 9 802, 672 . . 8991 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. 7 9. 7 7. 7 0. 9 3. 9 2. 01 2. 01 5. 01 0. 71 9. 61 5. 81 4. 81 4. 71 0. 81 1. 81 9. 9 6. 11 6. 01 950, 172 . . 7991 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. 7 5. 8 2. 8 5. 9 1. 01 1. 11 1. 11 5. 11 3. 81 1. 81 6. 91 5. 91 7. 81 2. 91 2. 91 6. 01 1. 21 3. 11 084, 862 . . 6991 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. 7 7. 8 4. 8 9. 9 4. 01 8. 11 8. 11 1. 21 8. 81 6. 81 1. 02 9. 91 1. 91 6. 91 6. 91 0. 11 6. 21 6. 11 812, 662 . . 5991 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. 7 9. 8 5. 8 0. 01 7. 01 0. 21 0. 21 3. 21 1. 91 0. 91 4. 02 3. 02 5. 91 0. 02 1. 02 2. 11 6. 21 7. 11 337, 362 . . 4991 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. 8 6. 9 2. 9 8. 01 6. 11 9. 21 9. 21 2. 31 .3 02 .2 02 3. 12 2. 12 .3 02 0. 12 .0 12 3. 21 4. 31 6. 21 616, 162 . . 3991 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. 9 8. 01 3. 01 0. 21 7. 21 1. 41 1. 41 4. 41 4. 12 3. 12 0. 22 9. 12 .1 12 7. 12 .8 12 4. 31 1. 41 4. 31 872, 952 2991 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. 9 7. 01 2. 01 8. 11 5. 21 8. 31 8. 31 1. 41 9. 02 8. 02 6. 12 5. 12 6. 02 1. 12 2. 12 1. 31 9. 31 1. 31 945, 652 1991 5 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. 8 2. 01 .7 9 4. 11 1. 21 2. 31 2. 31 6. 31 2. 02 1. 02 7. 02 6. 02 7. 91 1. 02 2. 02 6. 21 3. 31 4. 21 291, 152 . . 0991 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. 8 8. 9 3. 9 9. 01 6. 11 7. 21 8. 21 1. 31 2. 91 1. 91 6. 91 4. 91 7. 81 1. 91 1. 91 3. 21 8. 21 9. 11 446, 842 . . 9891 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. 7 4. 9 8. 8 3. 01 0. 11 1. 21 1. 21 5. 21 8. 81 7. 81 2. 91 0. 91 1. 81 6. 81 7. 81 7. 11 2. 21 3. 11 299, 542 . . 8891 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 8 0. 01 4. 9 8. 01 4. 11 4. 21 4. 21 8. 21 1. 91 0. 91 4. 91 4. 91 5. 81 0. 91 0. 91 1. 21 5. 21 7. 11 035, 342 . . 7891 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 8 1. 01 5. 9 0. 11 7. 11 7. 21 7. 21 0. 31 3. 91 2. 91 5. 91 4. 91 7. 81 2. 91 3. 91 .4 21 8. 21 1. 21 289, 042 1 . det ceff a eb ya msr aey r eilr ae hti wsnosir ap moc, ylt neuqesno C. set a mit se 2002 eht hti w evit ceff e, sexat del edo mti ya w eht degnahc uaer uBsusne C ehT , 2- C dna 1- Csel baT, Cxi dneppA eeS dna 3002: s te at S d tei n U e th ni set a mit s E e mocnI evit anr etl A . noit a mr of ni r ehtr uf r fo , Axi dneppA,) 822- 06P( 2 . sdl ohesuoh 000, 82 yb dednapxe le p mas dna sl ort noc n iot al upop desab- 0002 susne Cf o noit ta ne mel p Im3 . sl ort noc noit al upop desab- 0002 susne Ct celf er ot desi ver elif CESA SPC4 . sl ort noc noit al upop susnec 0991f o noit ta ne mel p Im5 eni nr of st hgi e W. str oper ytr evoP dna e moc In 1991 eht f o esael er eht r etf a det cerr oc sa w) at ad 1991( 2991 hcr a Mr of elif SPC r of 481- 06P eeS( . elif l ani gir o eht no detti mo er e wsdr ocer nosr ep a m to t p mett a na in , yti uqe ld ohesuohf o eul av eht ni egnahcl aunna eht t neser per to desu sa w 7182 .9 0f o et a mit se na, 51 noiti inf edr oF). sli ta edr ehtr uf sti thi w el bar ap moc et a imt se ytr evop eht ek . et a mit se desab- U-I PC g in dnopserr oc . st ne mel ppuSci monoc E dnal ai coSl aunnA 4002 ot 8891, yevr uS noit al upoPt nerr u C, uaer uBsusne C. S. U: ecr uoS
20 U.S. Census Bureau

Table B-3.

Official and National Academy of Sciences (NAS) Based Poverty Rates: 1999 to 2003

(Percent)

Measurement method 1999 2000 2001

2002 (old

tax model)

2002 (new

tax model) 2003

Official measure . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.9 11.3 11.7 12.1 12.1 12.5

MSI-GA-CPI ............................. 12.1 12.0 12.2 12.2 12.1 12.6

MIT-GA-CPI . . . ........................... 12.7 12.5 12.5 12.6 12.6 13.0

CMB-GA-CPI . . ........................... 12.8 12.6 12.8 12.8 12.7 13.2

MSI-NGA-CPI . ........................... 12.2 12.1 12.3 12.3 12.3 12.7

MIT-NGA-CPI . . .......................... 12.8 12.7 12.7 12.9 12.8 13.2

CMB-NGA-CPI . .......................... 12.9 12.8 12.9 12.9 12.9 13.3

MSI-GA-CE .............................. 12.1 12.3 12.9 13.3 13.2 13.7

MIT-GA-CE . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.7 12.8 13.2 13.9 13.7 14.2

CMB-GA-CE . . ........................... 12.8 12.8 13.1 13.6 13.4 14.1

MSI-NGA-CE . . ........................... 12.2 12.5 13.0 13.5 13.4 13.9

MIT-NGA-CE . . . .......................... 12.8 13.0 13.4 14.1 13.9 14.5

CMB-NGA-CE . . .......................... 12.9 13.0 13.2 13.8 13.7 14.3

The Census Bureau changed the way it modeled taxes, effective with the revised 2002 estimates. Consequently, comparisons with earlier years may be affected. See Appendix C, Tables C-1 and C-2, and Alternative Income Estimates in the United States: 2003 (P60-228),

Appendix A, for further information.

MSI means ‘‘Medical out-of-pocket expenses (MOOP) subtracted from income.’’

MIT means ‘‘MOOP in the thresholds.’’

CMB means ‘‘Combined method.’’

GA means ‘‘Geographic Adjustment (of poverty thresholds).’’

NGA means ‘‘No Geographic Adjustment (of poverty thresholds).’’

CPI means ‘‘Thresholds were adjusted since 1999 using the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.’’

CE means ‘‘Thresholds were recomputed since 1999 using data from the Consumer Expenditure Survey.’’

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, 2000 to 2004 Annual Social and Economic Supplements.
U.S. Census Bureau 21 . C xi dneppA . 1- C el baT det cel eS yb, sl edo MxaT we N dnal ani gi r O dna e mocnI f o ser usae Mevit anretl A no desaB set a mitsE et aR ytrevoP 3002: noi geR yb dna scitsi ret carahC ci hpargo me D ) U-I PC eht gni su noit alf ni r of det suj da sdl ohser ht ytr evop no desab er a set a mit s E. st ni op egat necr ep in set a imt se et ar ytr evo (P ict isr te car ah C I M desu; e mocni yeno M( f o er usae ml ai ciff o ni ) ytr evop xT-I M sul p e mocni yeno (M sni agl ati pac dezil aer dna e moc in ssel ,) sessol( ) sexat ll or yap MM- CN+xT-I M e mocni yeno M( dezil aer sul p ,) sessol( sni agl ati pac ll or yap dna e mocni ssel f o eul av sul p, sexat dedi vor p-r eyol p me dna stif eneb thl aeh sr ef snart hsacnon dna er aci de Mt pecxe ) di aci de M CN+xT-I M e mocni yeno M( ,) sessol( sni agl ati pac sul p ll or yap dna e mocni ssel f o eul av sul p, sexat ) sr ef snart hsacnon EH+CN+xT-I M e mocni yeno M( s in agl ati pac sul p dna e mocni ss le ,) sessol( f o eul av sul p, sexat ll or yap sul p, sr ef snart hsacnon e moh ot nr ut er det up mi ) yti uqe xat dl O l edo m xat we N l edo m xat dl O l edo m xat we N l edo m xat dl O l edo m xat we N l edo m xat dl O l edo m xat we N l edo m xat dl O l edo m xat we N l edo m el poepll A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0. 9 1. 9 7. 9 7. 9 2. 01 2. 01 0. 21 1. 21 5. 21 5. 21 . . . . . . seili maf ni el poeP . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. 7 4. 7 8. 7 8. 7 2. 8 2. 8 9. 9 0. 01 8. 01 8. 01 seili maf el puoc- deirr a mni el poeP 0. 4 0. 4 3. 4 4. 4 7. 4 7. 4 6. 5 8. 5 2. 6 2. 6 . . . . . - esuoh el a mef a hti wseili maf ni el poeP t neser p dnabsuh on,r edl oh . . . . . . . . . . 4. 12 3. 12 3. 22 2. 22 2. 32 9. 22 8. 72 0. 82 .0 03 .0 03 - esuoh el a ma thi ws ieli maf ni el poeP t neser p efi w on,r edl oh . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. 01 6. 01 9. 01 9. 01 1. 11 1. 11 4. 31 3. 31 2. 41 .2 41 egA sr aey 81r edn U . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0. 21 0. 21 3. 21 3. 21 0. 31 0. 31 0. 61 .1 61 .6 71 .6 71 . . sr aey 46 ot 81 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. 8 5. 8 9. 8 0. 9 3. 9 4. 9 7. 01 .8 01 .8 01 .8 01 . . . . r evo dna sr aey 56 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7. 5 8. 5 1. 8 3. 8 7. 8 7. 8 2. 01 3. 01 2. 01 2. 01 eca R 1 ni igr Oci nap is H dna enol a eti h W 2 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. 7 6. 7 2. 8 2. 8 6. 8 7. 8 1. 01 2. 01 5. 01 5. 01 . enol a eti h Wic napsi H- no N 0. 6 1. 6 6. 6 7. 6 0. 7 0. 7 0. 8 1. 8 2. 8 2. 8 . . . . . . . . . . . enol a kcal B 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5. 71 6. 71 5. 81 6. 81 4. 91 5. 91 4. 32 6. 32 4. 42 4. 42 enol a nai s A 4 1. 11 4. 11 8. 11 8. 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. 9 1. 9 6. 9 8. 9 8. 9 1. 01 . ) ecar ynaf o( ci nap is H . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8. 51 0. 61 3. 61 5. 61 4. 71 5. 71 0. 12 2. 12 5. 22 5. 22 noi ge R . . . t saehtr o N 1. 11 3. 11 3. 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8. 7 1. 8 .3 8 6. 8 7. 8 .1 9 5. 01 . . . . t se wid M . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .8 7 9. 7 2. 8 4. 8 6. 8 8. 8 3. 01 5. 01 7. 01 .7 01 . . . . ht uoS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. 01 3. 01 3. 11 2. 11 7. 11 6. 11 5. 31 5. 31 1. 41 1. 41 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . t se W 0. 9 1. 9 7. 9 7. 9 4. 01 3. 01 .3 21 3. 21 6. 21 6. 21 1 . yl et ar apes n wohst on er a sr ednal sI cifi caPr eht Odna sn iai a wa H evit a N dna, sevit a N aksal A dna snai dnI nacir e mAr of at a D2 et ac ecar r eht o ynatr oper t on di d dna eti h Wdetr oper oh w el poep ot sr ef er enol a eti h W. secar er o mr o eno esoohc ot st nednopser deksa SPC 4002 dna 3002 ehT f o esu ehT. yr og caor ppaf o yt eir av a sesu uaer uBsusne C ehT. at ad gni zyl anar o gnit neser pf o doht e mderr ef er p eht is ti t aht yl p mi t on seod noit al upop ecar- el gni s si ht oh w el poep no noit a mr of nI . seh tei h Wsa hcus, ecar eno naht er o mdetr oper dna n ia s Ar o evit a N aksal A dna nai dnI na icr e mA dna .r edni Ft caF nacir e mA hguor ht 0002 susne C morf le b lai ava si , nacir e mA na icrf Ar o kcal B . 0002 susne C ni ecar eno naht er o mdetr oper el poepf ot necr ep 6. 2t uobA 3 . yr oget ac ecar r eht o ynatr oper t on di d dna kcal B detr oper oh w el poep ot sr ef er enol a kcal B4 . yr oget ac ecar r eht o ynatr oper t on di d dna nai s A detr oper oh w el poep ot sr ef er enol a nai s A .t ne mel ppuSci monoc E dnal ia coSl aunnA 4002, yevr uS noit al upoPt nerr u C, uaer uBsusne C. S. U: ecr uoS
22 U.S. Census Bureau . 2- C el baT xaT we N dnal ani gi r O dna snoit adne mmoceR secnei cS f o y medac Al anoit a N no desaB set a mitsE ytrevoP evit anretl A 3002: noi geR yb dna scitsi ret carahC ci hpargo me D det cel eS yb, sl edo M ) U-I PC eht g in su noit laf in r of det suj da er e wser usae mll A. st ni op egat necr ep in set a imt se et ar ytr evo (P cit sir et car ah C ) sdl ohser ht ytr evopf ot ne mt suj dAci hpar goe G( AG )t ne mt suj dAci hpar goe Go N( AGN AG- B MC AG- TI M AG-I S M AGN- B MC AGN- TI M AGN-I S M xat dl O l edo m xat we N l edo m xat dl O l edo m xat we N l edo m xat dl O l edo m xat we N l edo m xat dl O l edo m xat we N l edo m xat dl O l edo m xat we N l edo m xat dl O l edo m xat we N l edo m . . . . . . le poepll A . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 31 4. 31 0. 31 1. 31 .6 21 8. 21 3. 31 6. 31 2. 31 4. 31 7. 21 9. 21 . . . . . . seili maf ni el poeP . . . . . . 3. 11 4. 11 2. 11 3. 11 7. 01 8. 01 3. 11 5. 11 3. 11 4. 11 7. 01 8. 01 el puoc- d ierr a mni el poeP seili maf 1. 7 3. 7 1. 7 2. 7 7. 6 9. 6 1. 7 3. 7 1. 7 .3 7 7. 6 9. 6 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . a hti ws ieli maf ni el poeP on,r edl ohesuoh le a mef . . t neser p dnabsuh . . . . . . . . 8. 72 6. 72 3. 72 3. 72 7. 62 5. 62 1. 82 0. 82 1. 82 2. 82 9. 62 7. 62 a hti wseili maf in le poeP on,r edl ohesuoh el a m t neser p efi w . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 71 4. 71 0. 71 .4 71 7. 61 0. 71 6. 61 0. 71 .6 61 1. 71 0. 61 3. 61 egA sr aey 81r edn U . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4. 51 6. 51 8. 51 8. 51 6. 41 8. 41 4. 51 6. 51 9. 51 2. 61 7. 41 8. 41 . sr aey 46 ot 81 2. 11 4. 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7. 11 8. 11 9. 11 9. 11 1. 11 3. 11 7. 11 9. 11 9. 11 1. 21 . r evo dna sr aey 56 . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. 61 9. 61 3. 31 4. 31 7. 51 0. 61 3. 71 6. 71 0. 41 0. 41 3. 61 .5 61 eca R 1 ni igr Oci napsi H dna enol a eti h W 2 7. 11 8. 11 3. 11 4. 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7. 11 8. 11 4. 11 6. 11 1. 11 3. 11 8. 11 0. 21 0. 9 1. 9 6. 8 7. 8 5. 8 7. 8 6. 9 8. 9 3. 9 5. 9 2. 9 3. 9 . . . enol a eti h Wci napsi H- no N en lo a kcal B 3 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6. 12 7. 12 3. 12 4. 12 7. 02 7. 02 7. 22 0. 32 5. 22 6. 22 6. 12 9. 12 enol a nai s A 4 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3. 51 7. 51 1. 51 5. 51 3. 41 9. 41 5. 21 2. 31 0. 21 9. 21 9. 11 4. 21 . ) ecar ynaf o( ic napsi H . . . . . . . . 7. 52 1. 62 2. 62 5. 62 3. 42 6. 42 9. 22 2. 32 7. 32 9. 32 9. 12 9. 12 noi ge R t saehtr o N . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1. 31 5. 31 7. 21 0. 31 3. 21 .8 21 9. 01 3. 11 6. 01 1. 11 3. 01 8. 01 . . . . . . t se wdi M 3. 11 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9. 9 1. 01 7. 9 0. 01 5. 9 8. 9 5. 11 0. 21 3. 11 6. 11 9. 01 th uoS . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2. 31 1. 31 0. 31 9. 21 7. 21 6. 21 6. 51 7. 51 6. 51 6. 51 0. 51 .0 51 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .t se W 6. 61 9. 61 4. 61 5. 61 .5 51 8. 51 4. 31 6. 31 3. 31 5. 31 8. 21 8. 21 s er a yeht , st soc ni snoit air av ci hpar goeg dna sesnepxel aci de mf o noit at up moc ri e th ni r e th ona eno gno mar effi d ser usae mevit anr etl a eht eli h W: et o N - hser ht f o gnil acs ri eht ni r ali mi e det al er- kr o w dna er ac dli hc dna stif eneb hsacnonf ot ne mt aert ri eht dna,) U-I PC eht no desab( doht e mt ne mt suj da noit alf ni ri eht , ezi s yli maf yb sdl o r of set ont oof dnat xet eeS. sesnepx . secner ef er dna n iot a mr of ni l an ioti dda ’’. e moc in morf det cart bus ) POOM( sesnepxet ekcop-f o-t uol a ic de M‘‘ snae mI S M ’’. sdl ohser ht eht ni POOM‘‘ snae mTI M ’’. sdoht e mde in b mo C‘‘ snae m B MC1 . yl et ar apes n wohst on er a sr ednal sI cifi caPr eht Odna sn iai a wa H evit a N dna, se ivt a N aks la A dna sn ia d In nacir e mAr of at a D2 et ac ecar r eht o ynatr oper t on di d dna tei h Wdetr oper oh w el poep ot sr ef er en lo a eti h W. secar er o mr o eno esoohc ot st nednopser deksa SPC 4002 dna 3002 ehT f o esu ehT. yr og caor ppaf o yt eir av a sesu uaer uBsusne C ehT. at ad gni zyl anar o gnit neser pf o doht e mderr ef er p eht si ti t a th yl p mi t on seod noit al upop ecar- le g in s is ht oh w el poep no noit a mr of nI . seh eti h Wsa hcus, ecar eno naht er o mdetr oper dna nai s Ar o evit a N aksal A dna nai dnI nacir e mA dna .r edni Ft caF nacir e mA hguor ht 0002 susne C morf el bali ava si , nacir e mA nacirf Ar o kcal B . 0002 susne C ni ecar eno naht er o mdetr oper el poepf ot necr ep 6. 2t uobA 3 . yr oget ac ecar r eht o ynatr oper t on di d dna kcal B detr oper oh w el poep ot sr ef er enol a kcal B4 . yr oget ac ecar r eht o ynatr oper t on di d dna n ia s A detr oper oh w le poep ot sr ef er enol a nai s A .t ne mel ppuSci monoc E dnal ai coSl aunnA 4002, yevr uS noit al upoPt nerr u C, uaer uBsusne C. S. U: ecr uoS
U.S. Department of Commerce

Economics and Statistics Administration

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

Washington, DC 20233

OFFICIAL BUSINESS

Penalty for Private Use $300

FIRST-CLASS MAIL

POSTAGE & FEES PAID

U.S. Census Bureau

Permit No. G-58