U.S. Department of Commerce

Economics and Statistics Administration

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

census.gov

Poverty and Shared Households by 

State: 2011

American Community Survey Briefs

Issued November 2012

ACSBR/11-05

By Suzanne Macartney and Laryssa Mykyta 

INTRODUCTION

Nationally, the number of people in shared households 

has risen since the onset of the most recent economic 

recession.1 This brief uses data from the American 

Community Survey (ACS) to explore the growth in 

shared households at the state level between 2007 

and 2011. Comparisons are also made between 2010 

and 2011. The report provides summary statistics on 

people sharing households, particularly their age and 

relationship to the householder. Finally, the report 

explores whether or not household sharing is influenced by economic circumstances by comparing three

different poverty estimates. 

Highlights

•	 In 2011, almost 1 in 5 households included

an “additional adult”—someone who was not 

the householder, the householder’s spouse, 

nor the householder’s cohabiting partner.

• 	 The number and percentage of shared households

peaked in 2010 at 22.2 million and 19.4 percent.

• 	 Between 2007 and 2011, the number and

percentage of all adults who were “additional adults” increased for the nation 

and in 40 states. The largest increases 

occurred in the South and the West.

•	 There is some evidence that these shifts in living

arrangements had an economic dimension. Many 

of the adults sharing a household with relatives 

would have been in poverty if they had been living on their own. 

1 “Sharing a Household: Household Composition and Economic WellBeing: 2007–2010,” Current Population Reports, P60-242, 

<www.census.gov/hhes/www/poverty/publications/pubs-cps.html>.

SHARED HOUSEHOLDS

National

Shared households are defined in this report by the 

presence of an “additional adult,” a resident aged 18 

or older who is not the householder or the householder’s spouse or cohabiting partner. Students aged 

18–24 who are enrolled in school are not counted as 

additional adults. The definition includes adult relatives 

Figure 1. 

Shared Households as a Percentage 

of Total Households in the United 

States: 2007–2011

(For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, 

nonsampling error, and definitions, 

see www.census.gov/acs/www)

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, and 

2011 American Community Surveys.

Percent

16.0

16.5

17.0

17.5

18.0

18.5

19.0

19.5

20.0

2007 2008 2009 2010 2011

Year
2 U.S. Census Bureau

of the householder as well as roommates or other unrelated people. 

In recent years, shared households

have increased as a proportion of all U.S. households.2 In

2007, prior to the start of the 

economic recession, 17.6 percent of households were shared 

(Figure 1). The number of shared 

households increased each year 

from 2008 to 2010 (Figure 2). 

Nationally, shared households 

peaked in 2010 at 22.2 million or 

19.4 percent of all households.

States

More than 1 in 5 households

were shared across 8 states in 

2011. The states with the highest proportion of shared households were Hawaii, California, 

and New York at 28.2 percent, 

25.8 percent, and 23.0 percent,

respectively. Twenty percent or 

more of households were shared 

in Delaware, Maryland, Nevada, 

New Jersey, and Texas3 (Table 1).

States with the lowest proportions 

of shared households were found 

in the West and Midwest (Figure 

3). North Dakota, South Dakota,

and Iowa had rates from 10.9 to

11.6 percent in 2011, among the 

lowest of any states.4 In Kansas,

about 1 in 7 households were 

shared in 2011 (14.2 percent). 

Between 2007 and 2011, the 

percentage of shared households increased in 40 states 

2 All comparisons presented in this report 

have taken sampling error into account and 

are significant at the 90 percent confidence 

level unless otherwise noted. 3 Rates for Texas and Utah are not 

statistically different. The percentage of 

shared households in the District of Columbia 

is not statistically different from Delaware, 

Maryland, Nevada, New Jersey, Texas, or 

Utah. 4 Wyoming’s estimate (11.9 percent) is 

not statistically different from those of Iowa,

Montana, Nebraska, North Dakota, or South 

Dakota in 2011.

and the District of Columbia. In

California the rate increased by 

2.5 percentage points, while in

New York the rate increased by 

1.9 percentage points. The rates 

for Indiana, Kentucky, Maryland,

New Jersey, South Carolina, and 

Virginia increased by 1.7 percentage points. Connecticut, 

Massachusetts, Tennessee, and 

Texas saw increases in the proportion of shared households of about 

1.5 percentage points. For Hawaii,

Mississippi, Rhode Island, South

Dakota, and Wyoming, neither 

the number nor the percentage 

of shared households changed 

significantly from 2007 to 2011.

Between 2010 and 2011, the 

percentage of shared households decreased in eight states 

and increased in two states. The 

number of shared households 

went down in five states and 

increased in two states and the 

District of Columbia (Table 2).

ADDITIONAL ADULTS

National

In 2011, 17.9 percent of persons

aged 18 or older were additional 

adults (residents in someone 

else’s household). This was an 

increase from the 2007 rate of 16.0 

percent and the fourth consecutive year showing an increase.

States

At least 20.0 percent of people 

aged 18 and older were additional 

adults in 2011 in the District of 

Columbia and across five states: 

California, Florida, Hawaii, New 

Figure 2. 

Change in Total and Shared Households in the United

States: 2008–2011

(For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error,

and definitions, see www.census.gov/acs/www)

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2008, 2009, 2010, and 2011 American Community 

Surveys.

Total households

Number Shared households

–200,000

0

200,000

400,000

600,000

800,000

1,000,000

1,200,000

1,400,000

2008 2009 2010 2011

Year
U.S. Census Bureau 3

York, and Nevada (Figure 4).5

Between 19.0 percent and 20.0 

percent of the adult population were additional adults in 

eight states: Arizona, Delaware, 

5 The rates for California and the District 

of Columbia are not statistically different. 

The rate for Nevada is not statistically 

different from rates in Florida, New York, 

or the District of Columbia. The rate for 

the District of Columbia is not statistically 

different from Nevada or California. The rate 

for Florida is not statistically different from 

New York or Nevada. The rate for New York 

is not statistically different from the rates in 

Maryland, Florida, or Nevada.

Georgia, Louisiana, Maryland, 

Mississippi, New Jersey, and Texas.6

The number and percentage of 

additional adults increased in 40 

states between 2007 and 2011 

with larger increases in the South 

(Table 3). Florida experienced a

6 The rate for New Jersey is not statistically 

different from the rates in Georgia or 

Mississippi. The rate for Mississippi is 

not statistically different from the rates 

in New Jersey, Georgia, Texas, Louisiana, 

Arizona, or Delaware. The rate for Georgia 

is not statistically different from New 

Jersey or Mississippi. The rate for Texas is 

not statistically different from Mississippi, 

Louisiana, Arizona, or Delaware. The rate 

for Arizona is not statistically different from 

Mississippi, Texas, Louisiana, or Delaware. The 

rate for Louisiana is not statistically different 

from Mississippi, Texas, Arizona, or Delaware. 

The rate for Delaware is not statistically 

different from the rates in Georgia, Mississippi, 

Texas, Louisiana, or Arizona.

4.4 percentage point increase 

while the percentage of the adult 

population who were additional 

adults in Delaware and West 

Virginia increased by 3.6 percentage points. In Nevada, the

proportion of additional adults 

grew by 3.9 percentage points,

from 17.5 percent in 2007 to 21.4

percent of all adults in 2011. 

Between 2010 and 2011, the number and percentage of additional 

adults increased in 19 states. In

23 states there was no change

in the number or percentage of 

additional adults over the period. 

The percentage of additional adults 

declined in the District of Columbia 

and Rhode Island (Table 4).

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

TX

CA

MT

AZ

ID

NV

KS

CO

NM

OR

UT

SD

IL

WY

NE IA

FL

MN

OK

ND

WI

WA

AL GA

MO

PA

AR

LA

NC

MS

NY

IN

MI

VA

TN

KY

SC

OH

ME

WV

VT

NH

NJ

MD

MA

CT

DE

RI

DC

AK

HI

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2011 American Community Survey.

0 500 Miles

0 100 Miles

0 100 Miles

Percent by State

19.2 or more

17.5 to 19.1

15.0 to 17.4

Less than 15.0

Shared Households as a Percentage of Total Households 

for the United States: 2011

U.S. percent is 19.2

Figure 3.
4 U.S. Census Bureau

CHARACTERISTICS OF 

ADDITIONAL ADULTS

National

In 2011, more than one out of

three young adults aged 18 to 24 

were residents in someone else’s 

household (35.3 percent) (Table

5). The estimate does not include

students enrolled in school. More 

than 30 percent of adults aged

25 to 34 were additional adults

in 2011. Fewer additional adults 

were found in the remaining age 

groups. For those aged 35 to 64,

the estimate was 11.9 percent. 

For those aged 65 and older, the

estimate was 10.9 percent. For 

the age group 25 to 34, the rate

of additional adults increased by 

4.5 percentage points since 2007.

By comparison, for those aged 18 

to 24, the rate increased by 1.7 

percentage points since 2007.

Nationally, more than 80 percent 

of additional adults were related 

to the householder in 2011.7

Almost one-half of all additional 

adults were adult children of the 

householder (Table 6). Additional 

adults were also parents of the 

householder (9.6 percent), siblings 

(8.1 percent), and other relatives (16.0 percent). Nonrelatives 

accounted for the remaining 19.2 

percent. The share of additional 

adults who were adult children of 

the householder increased by 1.7 

7 “Related” refers to persons related to the 

householder by blood, marriage, or adoption. 

percentage points between 2007 

and 2011 while the percentage 

of additional adults who were 

parents or nonrelatives declined. 

Most additional adults were not 

married (84.5 percent) in 2011.

The majority were never married 

(60.7 percent), and more than one 

out of five (23.8 percent) were

either divorced, separated, or 

widowed. Cohabitation status for 

additional adults was not discernible from the data.8 Nearly 11.0 

8 Cohabiting partners of the householder 

are identified in the data, but they are not 

considered additional adults.

! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! ! !

TX

CA

MT

AZ

ID

NV

KS

CO

NM

OR

UT

SD

IL

WY

NE IA

FL

MN

OK

ND

WI

WA

AL GA

MO

PA

AR

LA

NC

MS

NY

IN

MI

VA

TN

KY

SC

OH

ME

WV

VT

NH

NJ

MD

MA

CT

DE

RI

DC

AK

HI

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2011 American Community Survey.

0 500 Miles

0 100 Miles

0 100 Miles

Percent by State

20.0 or more

17.9 to 19.9

15.0 to 17.8

Less than 15.0

Additional Adults as a Percentage of Total Adults 

for the United States: 2011

U.S. percent is 17.9

Figure 4.
U.S. Census Bureau 5

percent of additional adults lived 

with their dependent child.9

States

States in which more than onethird of young adults aged 25

to 34 were additional adults

include: California, Florida, Hawaii, 

Maryland, New Jersey, and New 

York. People in this age group were 

more likely to be additional adults 

in the Northeast and the South. 

Fewer than 20.0 percent of those 

aged 25 to 34 years were additional adults in Iowa, North Dakota,

South Dakota, or Wyoming.10

In 2011, at least 54 percent of

additional adults were sons or 

daughters of the householder in 

Alabama, Kentucky, Michigan,

Mississippi, Ohio, Pennsylvania, 

and West Virginia.11 By comparison, 

40.0 percent or less of additional 

adults were adult children of the 

householder in California, the 

District of Columbia, and Nevada.12

The percentage who were children 

of the householder decreased 

over the 2007 to 2011 period 

in North Dakota, South Dakota, 

and the District of Columbia. 

POVERTY STATUS

National and States

In addition to describing the

scope of household sharing, this 

report compares poverty rates for 

shared households and additional adults to poverty rates for 

nonshared households and other 

9 Respondents did not report subfamily 

relationships in the 2011 ACS. Relationships 

were imputed based on responses for age, 

sex, and marital status, while consistency 

was maintained with responses for other 

individuals in the household. 10 Rates for these states are not 

statistically different from one another; the 

rate in Wyoming is not statistically different 

from the rates in Idaho, Iowa, Nebraska,

South Dakota, or Vermont. 11 Rates for additional adults in Louisiana, 

Wisconsin, Indiana, and Iowa are not

statistically different from 54.0 percent. 12 Rates for Oregon and South Dakota and 

are statistically different from 40.0 percent.

adults. A comparison of poverty 

rates provides a more complete 

picture of the economic wellbeing of additional adults and the 

shared households in which they 

live. Two sets of estimates are 

compared with official poverty: 

individual and household poverty 

rates. The comparisons shed light 

on the extent to which sharing a 

household is partially determined 

by economic circumstances. 

In 2011, the official poverty rate for

additional adults was 15.8 percent,

an estimate higher than the U.S. 

rate for all adults (13.9 percent).

To generate official poverty rates, 

a threshold value is compared with 

the combined income of all family 

members in the household. The 

official measure assumes family 

members share their economic 

resources and nonrelatives do not. 

Individual poverty assumes an 

adult or a married couple relies on 

their own income to support themselves and any minor children. If

the additional adult is married and 

living with a spouse, the couple’s 

combined income is compared 

with the appropriate threshold to 

get their individual or subfamily 

poverty rate.13 Since any cohabiting partners of additional adults 

cannot be identified by the data, 

they are treated as single adults 

when estimating individual poverty.

Alternatively, household poverty 

assumes all household members 

(related and unrelated) combine 

resources to meet basic needs. 

Each resident is included in the 

poverty threshold, and income 

from all adults is combined. 

13 Individual poverty is also calculated for 

householders. The individual or subfamily 

rate accounts for individuals, their spouses, 

and dependent children. For single, childless 

adults, personal income is compared to the 

age-appropriate, one-person threshold. For 

adults with spouses or dependent children, 

income from both spouses is summed and 

then compared with the appropriate familysize threshold. 

Household-level poverty is the only 

measure to include the income and 

expenses of unmarried partners.

Unmarried, cohabiting partners 

are not considered family members and therefore are not part of 

the householder’s family for the 

purposes of official poverty. Nor 

are unmarried partners counted 

as spouses for the purposes of 

individual (or subfamily) poverty. 

First, official and individual poverty 

rates are compared for householders by shared household status 

(Table 7). The official poverty 

rate for householders in shared 

households was 13.5 percent, 1.4

percentage points lower than for 

their counterparts in nonshared 

households. At the state level, the 

official poverty rate was lower for 

householders in shared households 

in 24 states. In one state, Arizona,

the outcome was reversed with 

the official poverty rate lower for 

householders not in shared households. The comparison suggests 

either householders with higher 

income are more likely to share 

their residences, or additional 

adults bring important economic 

resources to the family with whom 

they live. About 80.0 percent 

of additional adults are family 

members, and the income of a 

relative who lives in the household 

counts in assessing the householder’s official poverty status.

Table 7 also shows individual (or 

subfamily) poverty rates for the 

two groups of householders. In

this case, the rate is higher for 

shared households. Householders 

in shared households had an 

individual poverty rate (19.1 

percent) that was 4.0 percentage points higher than the rate 

of householders in nonshared 

households (15.1 percent). The

outcome is the same for 43 states

and the District of Columbia. In the

remaining states, the difference 
6 U.S. Census Bureau

is not statistically significant.

The results suggest an economic 

component to household sharing. 

As individuals or married couples, 

householders who shared a home 

with an additional adult were less 

well off than other householders. 

The gap in individual resources 

between the two kinds of householders shows that householders 

who shared their residences had 

higher individual poverty rates 

than householders who did not. 

Notwithstanding their more vulnerable economic situation, official 

poverty rates were not higher for 

householders in shared households 

because income brought into the 

household by additional adults 

lowered the official poverty rate.

Poverty rates were also compared 

for additional adults. Table 8 

includes official, individual, and 

household poverty rates for the 

United States and each state. The 

official poverty rate for additional 

adults in 2011 was 15.8 percent.

However, based on individual 

needs and resources, the individual

poverty rate was 55.5 percent. Just

over one-half of additional adults 

had income below their threshold.14 The individual poverty rate is 

roughly three times larger than the 

official poverty estimate. That is, 

many more additional adults would 

be living in official poverty if not 

for the resources of the householder or the householder’s family. 

Notwithstanding the difference 

in official and individual poverty 

outcomes, estimates should be 

interpreted with care as important assumptions could not be 

tested. Whether family members 

14 On average, a one-person poverty 

threshold was $11,698 and a two-person 

poverty threshold was $15,054 in 2011.

Values are based on an annualized Current 

Population Survey (CPS) adjustment and 

reference a householder under the age of 65.

Actual poverty thresholds used in the ACS are 

adjusted based on the Consumer Price Index

(CPI) value for the month of the interview.

actually shared expenses (e.g., 

food) or resources (e.g., income) 

among all members was not 

discernible from the data. 

Household poverty rates reflect an 

alternative scenario of resource 

sharing. The measure uses a 

threshold based on the number 

and ages of all household members. Income from all members is

combined to meet the threshold, 

but adding an adult to a household does not necessarily mean 

a lower poverty rate. Each adult 

introduced into the household 

raises the poverty threshold so 

that more income is needed to 

rise above the poverty line. 

The household measure accounts 

for the expenses and resources of 

every household resident, including cohabiting partners or other 

unrelated adults. The distinction 

between the official and household

poverty measures is that the official 

poverty rate is estimated only for 

related people in a household. 

Unrelated people are accounted 

for separately as individuals. Table 

8 presents household poverty 

rates for additional adults.

There is a statistically significant difference between official 

poverty and household poverty 

at the national level, as well as 

in each state and the District of 

Columbia. Nationally, the household poverty rate for additional 

adults is 4.9 percentage points 

lower than their official poverty 

rate (10.9 percent compared with 

15.8 percent) (Figure 5). Resources

introduced by residents unrelated 

to the householder account for 

the difference between the rates. 

The authors urge care when 

drawing conclusions from the 

analysis as it does not test whether 

householders and additional 

adults actually shared resources.

The individual poverty rate 

shows that additional adults had 

more limited personal resources 

than the families with whom 

they lived. Roughly one-half of 

additional adults would have 

lived in poverty based solely 

on their own resources. 

Nevertheless, additional adults 

contributed in measurable ways 

to family and household income. 

Householders who shared their 

households had a lower official 

poverty rate than those who 

did not share their households 

(Table 7). For householders in 

shared households, household

What Is the American Community Survey?

The American Community Survey (ACS) is a nationwide survey 

designed to provide communities with reliable and timely 

demographic, social, economic, and housing data for the nation, 

states, congressional districts, counties, places, and other localities 

every year. It has an annual sample size of about 3.3 million

addresses across the United States and Puerto Rico and includes 

both housing units and group quarters (e.g., nursing facilities and 

prisons). The ACS is conducted in every county throughout the 

nation, and every municipio in Puerto Rico, where it is called the 

Puerto Rico Community Survey. Beginning in 2006, ACS data for 2005

were released for geographic areas with populations of 65,000 and

greater. For information on the ACS sample design and other topics, 

visit <www.census.gov/acs/www>.
U.S. Census Bureau 7

poverty was lower nationally 

than official poverty (Table 9).

CONCLUSION

The data show household sharing has increased since 2007, 

peaking in 2010. For 2011, the 

data indicate household sharing 

had an economic component.

The results show householders who shared their residences 

with additional adults had higher 

individual poverty rates compared with householders who did 

not share their households. This 

comparison suggests householders who shared their households 

were more economically vulnerable than other householders.

For additional adults, official 

poverty rates were lower than 

their individual poverty rates, 

indicating additional adults 

were more economically secure 

living with relatives than living 

alone. However, among people 

in shared households, household

poverty rates were lower than 

official poverty, showing additional adults brought necessary 

resources into the household.

SOURCE AND ACCURACY

The data presented in this report 

are based on the ACS sample 

interviewed in 2007, 2008, 2009, 

2010, and 2011. The estimates 

based on this sample approximate 

the actual values and represent 

the entire household and group 

quarters population. Sampling 

error is the difference between an 

estimate based in a sample and the 

corresponding value that would be 

obtained if the estimate were based 

on the entire population (as from a 

census). Measures of the sampling 

errors are provided in the form of 

margins of error for all estimates 

included in this report. All comparative statements in this report 

have undergone statistical testing, 

and comparisons are significant at 

the 90 percent level unless otherwise noted. In addition to sampling

error, nonsampling error may be 

introduced during any of the operations used to collect and process 

survey data such as editing, reviewing, or keying data from questionnaires. For more information on 

sampling and estimation methods, 

confidentiality protection, and 

sampling and nonsampling errors, 

please see the 2011 ACS Accuracy 

of the Data document located at 

<www.census.gov/acs/www

/Downloads/data_documentation

/Accuracy/ACS_Accuracy_of

_Data_2011.pdf>.

This brief is available electronically

at <www.census.gov/hhes

/www/poverty/publications

/acsbr11-05.html>.

Appendixes for Additional 

Adults

Selected characteristics are 

available electronically from the 

Poverty Statistics page at the 

U.S. Census Bureau’s Web site.

<www.census.gov/hhes/www/

poverty/publications/acsbr11-

050tables.pdf>

Detailed Tables for Additional 

Adults

Age Group 

Relationship to Householder 

Race and Hispanic Origin 

Educational Attainment 

Marital Status 

Subfamily Status 

Employment Status

Figure 5. 

Poverty Rates for Householders in Shared 

Households and Additional Adults: 2011

(For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, 

nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/acs/www)

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2011 American Community Survey.

Householders in Additional adults

shared households

Percent

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

Household 

poverty

Individual 

poverty

Official 

poverty

Household 

poverty

Individual 

poverty

Official 

poverty
8 U.S. Census Bureau

Table 1. 

Number and Percentage of Shared Households1 by State: 2007 and 2011 

(For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/acs/www)

State

2007 2011 Difference, 2011 less 2007

Shared 

households1

Margin 

of error2

(±)

Percent

Margin 

of error2

(±)

Shared 

households1

Margin 

of error2

(±)

Percent

Margin 

of error2

(±) Number

Margin 

of error2

(±)

Percent

Margin 

of error2

(±)

 United States . . 19,808,217 63,582 17.6 0.1 22,037,042 82,665 19.2 0.1 *2,228,825 104,357 *1.6 0.1

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . 307,180 7,900 16.9 0.4 331,121 7,950 18.0 0.4 *23,941 6,820 *1.1 0.3

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39,960 2,871 16.9 1.2 45,815 3,146 17.8 1.2 *5,855 2,590 0.9 1.0

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . 391,511 9,629 17.4 0.4 447,107 10,465 19.0 0.4 *55,596 8,616 *1.6 0.3

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . 159,522 5,412 14.5 0.5 180,262 8,045 16.0 0.7 *20,740 5,884 *1.5 0.5

California . . . . . . . . . . . 2,842,506 23,550 23.3 0.2 3,217,699 23,958 25.8 0.2 *375,193 20,431 *2.5 0.2

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . 264,435 6,933 14.2 0.4 315,634 8,939 16.0 0.4 *51,199 6,880 *1.8 0.3

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . 230,360 6,268 17.4 0.5 253,514 7,777 18.8 0.6 *23,154 6,070 *1.4 0.5

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . 57,304 3,211 17.4 1.0 72,555 3,581 21.8 1.0 *15,251 2,921 *4.4 0.9

District of Columbia . . . 46,012 2,567 18.3 1.0 56,939 2,944 21.2 1.2 *10,927 2,359 *2.9 0.9

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,282,689 19,111 18.1 0.3 1,364,275 19,513 19.2 0.3 *81,586 16,578 *1.1 0.3

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . 625,052 13,624 18.3 0.4 686,304 15,463 19.6 0.4 *61,252 12,504 *1.3 0.3

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . 120,932 4,586 27.5 1.0 126,489 4,630 28.2 1.0 5,557 3,962 0.7 0.9

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 77,367 4,129 13.8 0.7 85,608 5,632 14.8 0.9 *8,241 4,244 1.0 0.7

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 855,030 14,452 18.0 0.3 897,662 13,907 18.9 0.3 *42,632 12,201 *0.9 0.3

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . 351,740 9,382 14.3 0.4 395,727 9,233 16.0 0.4 *43,987 8,012 *1.7 0.3

Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 129,928 5,393 10.7 0.4 140,956 5,839 11.6 0.5 *11,028 4,836 *0.9 0.4

Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . 133,953 5,222 12.3 0.5 156,168 5,860 14.2 0.5 *22,215 4,773 *1.9 0.4

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . 243,991 7,513 14.7 0.4 273,517 6,490 16.4 0.4 *29,526 6,039 *1.7 0.3

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . 67,247 3,417 12.4 0.6 78,829 3,595 14.3 0.6 *11,582 6,422 *1.9 0.4

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67,247 3,417 12.4 0.6 78,829 3,595 14.3 0.6 *11,582 3,015 *1.9 0.5

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . 416,492 7,536 20.0 0.4 462,759 9,652 21.7 0.4 *46,267 7,440 *1.7 0.3

Massachusetts . . . . . . . 442,470 9,256 18.1 0.4 497,158 10,694 19.6 0.4 *54,688 8,570 *1.5 0.3

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . 600,943 8,929 15.6 0.2 655,365 10,597 17.4 0.3 *54,422 8,444 *1.8 0.2

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . 267,381 7,434 13.0 0.4 291,458 7,912 13.9 0.4 *24,077 6,601 *0.9 0.3

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . 199,653 6,950 18.5 0.6 209,022 7,366 19.3 0.7 9,369 6,151 0.8 0.6

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . 334,001 8,776 14.5 0.4 367,177 9,656 15.7 0.4 *33,176 7,933 *1.2 0.3

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . 43,205 2,968 11.6 0.8 52,725 3,691 13.0 0.9 *9,520 2,879 *1.4 0.7

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . 80,478 3,529 11.5 0.5 90,579 3,556 12.5 0.5 *10,101 3,047 *1.0 0.4

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . 191,833 7,097 20.1 0.7 209,951 8,368 21.4 0.8 *18,118 6,646 *1.3 0.6

New Hampshire . . . . . . 75,555 4,170 15.1 0.8 82,947 3,879 16.1 0.8 *7,392 3,462 1.0 0.7

New Jersey . . . . . . . . . 648,688 10,171 20.6 0.3 705,318 11,150 22.3 0.4 *56,630 9,195 *1.7 0.3

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . 128,165 5,635 17.4 0.7 136,782 5,262 17.8 0.6 *8,617 4,680 0.4 0.6

New York . . . . . . . . . . . 1,500,906 15,309 21.1 0.2 1,652,005 19,848 23.0 0.3 *151,099 15,257 *1.9 0.2

North Carolina . . . . . . . 558,689 11,065 15.8 0.3 617,087 12,914 16.8 0.4 *58,398 10,317 *1.0 0.3

North Dakota . . . . . . . . 25,352 2,117 9.3 0.8 31,006 2,708 10.9 0.9 *5,654 2,090 *1.6 0.7

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 659,660 12,405 14.6 0.3 727,701 12,544 16.0 0.3 *68,041 10,716 *1.4 0.3

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . 203,993 6,677 14.6 0.5 229,110 6,236 15.9 0.4 *25,117 5,556 *1.3 0.4

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . 223,757 7,197 15.2 0.5 260,354 6,668 17.2 0.5 *36,597 5,973 *2.0 0.4

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . 821,393 11,869 16.9 0.2 893,209 13,077 18.1 0.3 *71,816 10,740 *1.2 0.2

Rhode Island . . . . . . . . 72,312 4,225 18.0 1.0 77,192 4,605 18.7 1.1 4,880 3,801 0.7 0.9

South Carolina . . . . . . . 285,551 8,847 16.8 0.5 326,779 11,027 18.5 0.6 *41,228 8,601 *1.7 0.5

South Dakota . . . . . . . . 36,057 2,385 11.5 0.7 36,995 2,955 11.4 0.9 938 2,307 –0.1 0.7

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . 391,277 10,007 16.3 0.4 435,898 9,722 17.7 0.4 *44,621 8,480 *1.4 0.3

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,569,566 17,309 19.0 0.2 1,812,756 21,712 20.5 0.2 *243,190 16,846 *1.5 0.2

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 151,063 5,276 18.1 0.6 179,739 6,152 20.3 0.7 *28,676 4,933 *2.2 0.6

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . 31,795 2,326 12.6 0.9 38,144 2,640 14.8 1.0 *6,349 2,137 *2.2 0.8

Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . 506,321 11,183 17.3 0.4 569,517 12,114 19.0 0.4 *63,196 10,035 *1.7 0.3

Washington . . . . . . . . . 382,117 9,002 15.3 0.4 464,673 9,159 17.7 0.3 *82,556 7,810 *2.4 0.3

West Virginia . . . . . . . . 117,169 4,889 16.0 0.7 124,604 5,543 16.9 0.7 *7,435 4,499 0.9 0.6

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . 289,355 6,213 12.9 0.3 317,242 7,749 13.9 0.3 *27,887 6,027 *1.0 0.3

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . 25,211 2,303 12.2 1.1 26,391 2,725 11.9 1.2 1,180 2,169 –0.3 1.0

* Statistically different from zero at the 90 percent confidence level. 1 Shared households are defined by the presence of an additional adult, a resident aged 18 or older who is not the householder, nor the householder’s spouse 

or cohabiting partner. Students aged 18–24 enrolled in school are not counted as additional adults. 2 Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. A margin of error is a measure of an estimate’s variability.The larger the margin of error in rela- tion to the size of the estimate, the less reliable the estimate.This number when added to or subtracted from the estimate forms the 90 percent confidence interval. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 and 2011 American Community Surveys.
U.S. Census Bureau 9

Table 2. 

Number and Percentage of Shared Households1 by State: 2010 and 2011

(For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/acs/www)

State

2010 2011 Difference, 2011 less 2010

Shared 

households1

Margin

 of error2

(±)

Percent3

Margin

 of error2

(±)

Shared 

households1

Margin 

of error2

(±)

Percent3

Margin 

of error2

(±)

Shared 

households1

Margin 

of error2

(±)

Percent

Margin 

of error2

(±)

 United States . . 22,204,411 82,625 19.4 0.1 22,037,042 82,665 19.2 0.1 *–167,369 116,878 *–0.2 0.1

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . 329,730 8,784 18.2 0.5 331,121 7,950 18.0 0.4 1,391 7,202 –0.2 0.4

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45,012 3,164 17.7 1.2 45,815 3,146 17.8 1.2 803 2,712 0.1 1.0

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . 451,789 10,550 19.4 0.4 447,107 10,465 19.0 0.4 –4,682 9,033 –0.4 0.3

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . 186,158 6,536 16.7 0.6 180,262 8,045 16.0 0.7 –5,896 6,301 –0.7 0.6

California . . . . . . . . . . . 3,235,104 24,995 26.1 0.2 3,217,699 23,958 25.8 0.2 –17,405 21,047 –0.3 0.2

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . 320,169 7,519 16.3 0.4 315,634 8,939 16.0 0.4 –4,535 7,101 –0.3 0.3

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . 259,153 7,134 19.1 0.5 253,514 7,777 18.8 0.6 –5,639 6,415 –0.3 0.5

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . 62,425 3,498 19.0 1.0 72,555 3,581 21.8 1.0 *10,130 3,043 *2.8 0.9

District of Columbia . . . 52,319 3,326 20.7 1.3 56,939 2,944 21.2 1.2 *4,620 2,700 0.5 1.1

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,378,261 15,794 19.6 0.2 1,364,275 19,513 19.2 0.3 –13,986 15,261 *–0.4 0.2

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . 704,038 12,005 20.2 0.3 686,304 15,463 19.6 0.4 –17,734 11,900 *–0.6 0.3

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . 126,975 5,439 28.5 1.2 126,489 4,630 28.2 1.0 –486 4,342 –0.3 0.9

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 88,274 4,490 15.3 0.8 85,608 5,632 14.8 0.9 –2,666 4,379 –0.5 0.7

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 923,329 11,975 19.4 0.3 897,662 13,907 18.9 0.3 *–25,667 11,156 *–0.5 0.3

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . 391,258 8,219 15.8 0.3 395,727 9,233 16.0 0.4 4,469 7,514 0.2 0.3

Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 144,098 5,308 11.8 0.4 140,956 5,839 11.6 0.5 –3,142 4,797 –0.2 0.4

Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . 153,316 5,597 13.9 0.5 156,168 5,860 14.2 0.5 2,852 4,926 0.3 0.4

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . 274,505 7,614 16.3 0.5 273,517 6,490 16.4 0.4 –988 6,082 0.1 0.4

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . 341,687 9,610 20.2 0.6 329,218 7,372 19.3 0.4 –12,469 7,363 *–0.9 0.4

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79,658 4,271 14.6 0.8 78,829 3,595 14.3 0.6 *–829 3,394 –0.3 0.6

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . 464,182 10,316 21.8 0.5 462,759 9,652 21.7 0.4 –1,423 8,588 –0.1 0.4

Massachusetts . . . . . . . 489,239 10,892 19.4 0.4 497,158 10,694 19.6 0.4 7,919 9,279 0.2 0.3

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . 648,500 10,334 17.0 0.3 655,365 10,597 17.4 0.3 6,865 8,998 0.4 0.3

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . 291,022 7,410 13.9 0.3 291,458 7,912 13.9 0.4 436 6,590 0.0 0.3

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . 215,485 5,852 20.0 0.5 209,022 7,366 19.3 0.7 –6,463 5,719 –0.7 0.5

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . 370,855 9,168 15.8 0.4 367,177 9,656 15.7 0.4 –3,678 8,094 –0.1 0.3

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . 51,080 3,023 12.7 0.7 52,725 3,691 13.0 0.9 1,645 2,900 0.3 0.7

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . 90,867 3,966 12.6 0.5 90,579 3,556 12.5 0.5 –288 3,238 –0.1 0.4

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . 226,251 7,680 22.9 0.8 209,951 8,368 21.4 0.8 –16,300 6,905 *–1.5 0.7

New Hampshire . . . . . . 88,573 4,710 17.2 0.9 82,947 3,879 16.1 0.8 *–5,626 3,709 –1.1 0.7

New Jersey . . . . . . . . . 708,902 12,978 22.3 0.4 705,318 11,150 22.3 0.4 –3,584 10,401 0.0 0.3

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . 147,231 4,672 19.2 0.6 136,782 5,262 17.8 0.6 –10,449 4,278 *–1.4 0.5

New York . . . . . . . . . . . 1,675,678 20,464 23.3 0.3 1,652,005 19,848 23.0 0.3 *–23,673 17,330 –0.3 0.3

North Carolina . . . . . . . 623,474 12,260 17.0 0.3 617,087 12,914 16.8 0.4 –6,387 10,825 –0.2 0.3

North Dakota . . . . . . . . 28,844 2,026 10.3 0.7 31,006 2,708 10.9 0.9 2,162 2,056 0.6 0.7

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 745,747 11,143 16.5 0.2 727,701 12,544 16.0 0.3 –18,046 10,200 *–0.5 0.2

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . 232,915 7,371 16.3 0.5 229,110 6,236 15.9 0.4 *–3,805 5,869 –0.4 0.4

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . 260,746 7,268 17.3 0.5 260,354 6,668 17.2 0.5 –392 5,996 –0.1 0.4

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . 879,291 13,150 17.8 0.3 893,209 13,077 18.1 0.3 13,918 11,274 0.3 0.3

Rhode Island . . . . . . . . 77,048 3,823 19.2 0.9 77,192 4,605 18.7 1.1 144 3,638 –0.5 0.9

South Carolina . . . . . . . 337,954 8,918 19.2 0.5 326,779 11,027 18.5 0.6 –11,175 8,621 –0.7 0.5

South Dakota . . . . . . . . 38,992 2,823 12.2 0.9 36,995 2,955 11.4 0.9 –1,997 2,484 –0.8 0.8

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . 443,627 9,657 18.2 0.4 435,898 9,722 17.7 0.4 –7,729 8,330 –0.5 0.3

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,822,721 20,756 20.9 0.2 1,812,756 21,712 20.5 0.2 –9,965 18,260 *–0.4 0.2

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 182,923 6,293 20.8 0.7 179,739 6,152 20.3 0.7 –3,184 5,350 –0.5 0.6

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . 36,624 2,384 14.3 0.9 38,144 2,640 14.8 1.0 1,520 2,162 0.5 0.8

Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . 576,951 11,550 19.3 0.4 569,517 12,114 19.0 0.4 –7,434 10,175 –0.3 0.3

Washington . . . . . . . . . 439,289 9,706 16.9 0.4 464,673 9,159 17.7 0.3 25,384 8,113 *0.8 0.3

West Virginia . . . . . . . . 126,117 4,683 17.0 0.6 124,604 5,543 16.9 0.7 *–1,513 4,411 –0.1 0.6

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . 309,648 7,600 13.6 0.3 317,242 7,749 13.9 0.3 7,594 6,598 0.3 0.3

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . 26,377 2,717 11.8 1.2 26,391 2,725 11.9 1.2 14 2,339 0.1 1.0

* Statistically different from zero at the 90 percent confidence level. 1 Shared households are defined by the presence of an additional adult, a resident aged 18 or older who is not the householder, nor the householder’s spouse 

or cohabiting partner. Students aged 18–24 enrolled in school are not counted as additional adults. 2 Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. A margin of error is a measure of an estimate’s variability.The larger the margin of error in 

relation to the size of the estimate, the less reliable the estimate.This number when added to or subtracted from the estimate forms the 90 percent confidence interval. 3 Percentages are based on the population aged 18 and older.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 and 2011 American Community Surveys.
10 U.S. Census Bureau

Table 3.

Number and Percentage of Additional Adults1 by State: 2007 and 2011

(For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/acs/www)

State

2007 2011 Difference, 2011 less 2007

Additional 

adults1

Margin

 of error2

(±)

Percent3

Margin

 of error2

(±)

Additional 

adults1

Margin 

of error2

(±)

Percent3

Margin 

of error2

(±) Number

Margin 

of error2

(±)

Percent

Margin 

of error2

(±)

 United States . . 35,192,178 233,389 16.0 0.1 41,244,682 278,766 17.9 0.1 *6,052,504 363,567 *1.9 0.1

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . 478,873 17,434 14.1 0.5 597,321 19,858 16.8 0.6 *118,448 16,064 *2.7 0.5

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . 82,619 4,960 17.2 1.0 82,422 6,122 16.2 1.2 –197 4,790 –1.0 0.9

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . 864,684 18,409 18.9 0.4 876,520 24,445 18.6 0.5 11,836 18,603 –0.3 0.4

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . 260,209 12,693 12.7 0.6 336,173 13,201 15.6 0.6 *75,964 11,133 *2.9 0.5

California . . . . . . . . . . . 5,834,417 40,505 22.1 0.2 6,558,089 49,945 23.7 0.2 *723,672 39,091 *1.6 0.2

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . 517,683 15,530 14.5 0.4 557,165 17,440 14.8 0.5 *39,482 14,196 0.3 0.4

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . 374,738 11,115 14.6 0.4 450,571 14,441 16.9 0.5 *75,833 11,078 *2.3 0.4

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . 94,660 6,930 14.9 1.1 125,683 6,041 18.5 0.9 *31,023 5,589 *3.6 0.9

District of Columbia . . . 102,228 4,580 23.2 1.0 106,326 5,599 22.5 1.2 4,098 4,397 –0.7 0.9

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,301,763 36,079 16.7 0.3 3,091,151 52,451 21.1 0.4 *789,388 38,700 *4.4 0.3

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,205,672 27,479 17.8 0.4 1,373,979 24,108 19.4 0.3 *168,307 22,222 *1.6 0.3

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . 227,616 7,426 23.7 0.8 280,775 10,650 27.3 1.0 *53,159 7,893 *3.6 0.8

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 110,464 6,592 10.4 0.6 144,365 10,048 12.8 0.9 *33,901 7,305 *2.4 0.7

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,484,693 23,379 15.9 0.3 1,710,157 24,905 18.0 0.3 *225,464 20,765 *2.1 0.3

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . 510,477 17,252 11.2 0.4 680,560 22,297 14.4 0.5 *170,083 17,138 *3.2 0.4

Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 164,667 9,737 7.6 0.5 236,805 11,536 10.6 0.5 *72,138 9,177 *3.0 0.4

Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . 194,479 10,041 9.7 0.5 256,467 10,201 12.4 0.5 *61,988 8,701 *2.7 0.4

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . 429,427 19,370 13.7 0.6 492,270 16,938 15.3 0.5 *62,843 15,642 *1.6 0.5

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . 522,806 13,703 16.9 0.4 623,189 17,875 18.7 0.5 *100,383 13,692 *1.8 0.4

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 96,717 9,067 9.7 0.9 122,439 10,972 12.0 1.1 *25,722 8,653 *2.3 0.9

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . 706,405 17,510 17.1 0.4 881,589 20,803 20.3 0.5 *175,184 16,530 *3.2 0.4

Massachusetts . . . . . . . 796,812 18,933 16.6 0.4 831,086 18,358 16.8 0.4 *34,274 16,032 0.2 0.3

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . 1,025,762 18,224 13.9 0.2 1,170,976 23,377 15.9 0.3 *145,214 18,019 *2.0 0.2

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . 373,716 12,630 9.8 0.3 449,143 13,560 11.4 0.3 *75,427 11,265 *1.6 0.3

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . 320,669 15,265 15.6 0.7 407,110 16,124 19.0 0.8 *86,441 13,498 *3.4 0.6

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . 517,405 17,148 12.1 0.4 617,846 18,804 13.9 0.4 *100,441 15,470 *1.8 0.3

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . 93,385 6,525 13.1 0.9 92,200 7,638 12.3 1.0 –1,185 6,107 –0.8 0.8

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . 118,177 7,617 9.3 0.6 141,124 8,090 10.6 0.6 *22,947 6,755 *1.3 0.5

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . 326,752 11,778 17.5 0.6 433,810 16,241 21.4 0.8 *107,058 12,196 *3.9 0.6

New Hampshire . . . . . . 119,012 7,755 12.2 0.8 129,608 6,951 13.0 0.7 *10,596 6,331 0.8 0.6

New Jersey . . . . . . . . . 1,147,493 20,821 17.8 0.3 1,296,733 21,076 19.7 0.3 *149,240 18,010 *1.9 0.3

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . 243,567 9,205 17.0 0.6 277,517 10,904 18.2 0.7 *33,950 8,675 *1.2 0.6

New York . . . . . . . . . . . 2,783,635 28,870 19.5 0.2 3,038,735 32,459 20.8 0.2 *255,100 26,408 *1.3 0.2

North Carolina . . . . . . . 862,026 22,620 13.1 0.3 1,132,460 33,605 15.9 0.5 *270,434 24,625 *2.8 0.4

North Dakota . . . . . . . . 27,074 3,847 5.8 0.8 43,519 4,734 8.6 0.9 *16,445 3,708 *2.8 0.7

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,064,023 23,684 12.6 0.3 1,196,381 26,095 14.0 0.3 *132,358 21,423 *1.4 0.3

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . 330,896 12,386 12.7 0.5 408,332 11,606 14.8 0.4 *77,436 10,318 *2.1 0.4

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . 391,708 14,675 14.0 0.5 447,731 13,782 15.3 0.5 *56,023 12,238 *1.3 0.4

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . 1,212,051 22,006 13.2 0.2 1,521,369 26,903 15.9 0.3 *309,318 21,129 *2.7 0.2

Rhode Island . . . . . . . . 128,513 7,560 16.4 1.0 128,107 7,425 16.2 0.9 –406 6,442 –0.2 0.8

South Carolina . . . . . . . 478,489 18,059 14.9 0.6 605,123 20,637 17.5 0.6 *126,634 16,670 *2.6 0.5

South Dakota . . . . . . . . 56,768 5,013 10.0 0.9 59,281 5,495 10.1 0.9 2,513 4,522 0.1 0.8

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . 666,263 20,882 14.7 0.5 793,305 23,761 16.7 0.5 *127,042 19,230 *2.0 0.4

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,018,844 35,178 18.1 0.2 3,455,792 40,474 19.0 0.2 *436,948 32,599 *0.9 0.2

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 283,695 10,818 15.9 0.6 333,283 11,143 17.6 0.6 *49,588 9,441 *1.7 0.5

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . 53,520 4,424 11.4 0.9 52,494 4,499 11.0 0.9 –1,026 3,836 –0.4 0.8

Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . 846,484 23,059 15.0 0.4 1,045,873 22,728 17.4 0.4 *199,389 19,682 *2.4 0.3

Washington . . . . . . . . . 692,196 19,230 14.4 0.4 775,510 19,684 15.2 0.4 *83,314 16,728 *0.8 0.3

West Virginia . . . . . . . . 181,364 11,303 13.1 0.8 237,403 10,734 16.7 0.8 *56,039 9,476 *3.6 0.7

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . 418,292 13,892 10.1 0.3 490,802 18,605 11.6 0.4 *72,510 14,115 *1.5 0.3

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . 48,290 4,830 12.6 1.2 48,013 5,604 11.4 1.3 –277 4,497 –1.2 1.1

* Statistically different from zero at the 90 percent confidence level. 1 An additional adult is defined as a household resident aged 18 or older who is not the householder, nor the householder’s spouse or cohabiting partner.

Students aged 18–24 enrolled in school are not counted as additional adults. 2 Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. A margin of error is a measure of an estimate’s variability.The larger the margin of error in 

relation to the size of the estimate, the less reliable the estimate.This number when added to or subtracted from the estimate forms the 90 percent confidence interval. 3 Percentages are based on the population aged 18 and older.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 and 2011 American Community Surveys.
U.S. Census Bureau 11

Table 4. 

Number and Percentage of Additional Adults1 by State: 2010 and 2011

(For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/acs/www)

State

2010 2011 Difference, 2011 less 2010

Additional 

adults1

Margin

 of error2

(±)

Percent3

Margin

 of error2

(±)

Additional 

adults1

Margin 

of error2

(±)

Percent3

Margin 

of error2

(±)

Additional 

adults1

Margin 

of error2

(±)

Percent3

Margin 

of error2

(±)

 United States . . 39,361,180 256,484 17.3 0.1 41,244,682 278,766 17.9 0.1 *1,883,502 378,807 *0.6 0.1

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . 619,066 20,185 17.5 0.6 597,321 19,858 16.8 0.6 –21,745 17,213 –0.7 0.5

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . 79,095 5,832 15.8 1.2 82,422 6,122 16.2 1.2 3,327 5,140 0.4 1.0

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . 810,669 20,481 17.4 0.4 876,520 24,445 18.6 0.5 *65,851 19,387 *1.2 0.4

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . 332,348 13,126 15.6 0.6 336,173 13,201 15.6 0.6 3,825 11,317 0.0 0.5

California . . . . . . . . . . . 6,258,351 40,080 23.0 0.1 6,558,089 49,945 23.7 0.2 *299,738 38,929 *0.7 0.1

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . 514,883 15,478 13.9 0.4 557,165 17,440 14.8 0.5 *42,282 14,175 *0.9 0.4

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . 428,802 13,229 16.2 0.5 450,571 14,441 16.9 0.5 *21,769 11,905 0.7 0.4

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . 123,938 7,373 18.5 1.1 125,683 6,041 18.5 0.9 1,745 5,794 0.0 0.9

District of Columbia . . . 119,570 5,946 25.8 1.3 106,326 5,599 22.5 1.2 *–13,244 4,965 *–3.3 1.1

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,942,578 44,273 20.4 0.3 3,091,151 52,451 21.1 0.4 *148,573 41,725 *0.7 0.3

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,305,245 26,555 18.7 0.4 1,373,979 24,108 19.4 0.3 *68,734 21,803 *0.7 0.3

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278,271 8,941 27.3 0.9 280,775 10,650 27.3 1.0 2,504 8,453 0.0 0.8

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 138,836 8,844 12.5 0.8 144,365 10,048 12.8 0.9 5,529 8,137 0.3 0.7

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,596,242 25,512 16.9 0.3 1,710,157 24,905 18.0 0.3 *113,915 21,673 *1.1 0.3

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . 625,788 18,431 13.3 0.4 680,560 22,297 14.4 0.5 *54,772 17,586 *1.1 0.4

Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 209,020 10,923 9.4 0.5 236,805 11,536 10.6 0.5 *27,785 9,658 *1.2 0.4

Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . 244,903 11,469 11.9 0.6 256,467 10,201 12.4 0.5 11,564 9,331 0.5 0.5

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . 459,050 16,827 14.3 0.5 492,270 16,938 15.3 0.5 *33,220 14,514 *1.0 0.4

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . 610,841 18,529 18.5 0.6 623,189 17,875 18.7 0.5 12,348 15,651 0.2 0.5

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 123,525 8,619 12.1 0.9 122,439 10,972 12.0 1.1 –1,086 8,482 –0.1 0.9

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . 824,185 18,657 19.2 0.4 881,589 20,803 20.3 0.5 *57,404 16,987 *1.1 0.4

Massachusetts . . . . . . . 811,235 19,414 16.5 0.4 831,086 18,358 16.8 0.4 19,851 16,243 0.3 0.3

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . 1,071,413 23,072 14.6 0.3 1,170,976 23,377 15.9 0.3 *99,563 19,967 *1.3 0.3

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . 421,131 15,017 10.8 0.4 449,143 13,560 11.4 0.3 *28,012 12,300 *0.6 0.3

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . 391,745 13,843 18.4 0.7 407,110 16,124 19.0 0.8 15,365 12,919 0.6 0.6

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . 589,306 17,568 13.4 0.4 617,846 18,804 13.9 0.4 *28,540 15,644 0.5 0.3

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . 81,330 6,718 11.0 0.9 92,200 7,638 12.3 1.0 *10,870 6,184 1.3 0.8

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . 133,328 8,784 10.1 0.7 141,124 8,090 10.6 0.6 7,796 7,259 0.5 0.6

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . 414,143 12,351 20.7 0.6 433,810 16,241 21.4 0.8 19,667 12,404 0.7 0.6

New Hampshire . . . . . . 120,973 7,939 12.2 0.8 129,608 6,951 13.0 0.7 8,635 6,415 0.8 0.6

New Jersey . . . . . . . . . 1,254,336 21,482 19.1 0.3 1,296,733 21,076 19.7 0.3 *42,397 18,294 *0.6 0.3

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . 267,883 10,925 17.8 0.7 277,517 10,904 18.2 0.7 9,634 9,383 0.4 0.6

New York . . . . . . . . . . . 2,898,526 34,099 20.0 0.2 3,038,735 32,459 20.8 0.2 *140,209 28,619 *0.8 0.2

North Carolina . . . . . . . 1,076,370 25,873 15.3 0.4 1,132,460 33,605 15.9 0.5 *56,090 25,782 0.6 0.4

North Dakota . . . . . . . . 40,543 5,256 8.1 1.1 43,519 4,734 8.6 0.9 2,976 4,300 0.5 0.9

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,168,023 25,402 13.7 0.3 1,196,381 26,095 14.0 0.3 28,358 22,138 0.3 0.3

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . 395,905 13,280 14.6 0.5 408,332 11,606 14.8 0.4 12,427 10,721 0.2 0.4

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . 423,313 14,423 14.7 0.5 447,731 13,782 15.3 0.5 *24,418 12,127 0.6 0.4

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . 1,458,450 26,035 15.3 0.3 1,521,369 26,903 15.9 0.3 *62,919 22,759 *0.6 0.3

Rhode Island . . . . . . . . 140,429 8,534 17.8 1.1 128,107 7,425 16.2 0.9 *–12,322 6,877 *–1.6 0.9

South Carolina . . . . . . . 594,067 18,800 17.4 0.6 605,123 20,637 17.5 0.6 11,056 16,970 0.1 0.5

South Dakota . . . . . . . . 58,827 5,818 10.1 1.0 59,281 5,495 10.1 0.9 454 4,865 0.0 0.8

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . 765,949 21,572 16.3 0.5 793,305 23,761 16.7 0.5 27,356 19,509 0.4 0.4

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,332,644 39,959 18.7 0.2 3,455,792 40,474 19.0 0.2 *123,148 34,575 0.3 0.2

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 294,591 10,633 15.8 0.6 333,283 11,143 17.6 0.6 *38,692 9,363 *1.8 0.5

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . 52,893 4,546 11.2 1.0 52,494 4,499 11.0 0.9 –399 3,888 –0.2 0.8

Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,009,171 24,410 17.0 0.4 1,045,873 22,728 17.4 0.4 *36,702 20,275 0.4 0.3

Washington . . . . . . . . . 732,984 17,934 14.6 0.4 775,510 19,684 15.2 0.4 *42,526 16,188 *0.6 0.3

West Virginia . . . . . . . . 211,856 9,403 14.9 0.7 237,403 10,734 16.7 0.8 *25,547 8,675 *1.8 0.6

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . 462,476 16,490 11.0 0.4 490,802 18,605 11.6 0.4 *28,326 15,113 *0.6 0.3

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . 42,134 5,468 10.2 1.3 48,013 5,604 11.4 1.3 5,879 4,760 1.2 1.1

* Statistically different from zero at the 90 percent confidence level. 1 An additional adult is defined as a household resident aged 18 or older who is not the householder, nor the householder’s spouse or cohabiting partner.

Students aged 18–24 enrolled in school are not counted as additional adults 2 Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. A margin of error is a measure of an estimate’s variability.The larger the margin of error in 

relation to the size of the estimate, the less reliable the estimate.This number when added to or subtracted from the estimate forms the 90 percent confidence interval. 3 Percentages are based on the population aged 18 and older.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2007 and 2011 American Community Surveys.
12 U.S. Census Bureau

Table 5.

Percentage of Additional Adults1 by Age Group by State: 2011

(For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/acs/www)

State

Additional adult1 status

18 to 24 years 25 to 34 years 35 to 64 years 65 years or older

Percent

Margin of 

error2 (±) Percent

Margin of 

error2 (±) Percent

Margin of 

error2 (±) Percent

Margin of 

error2 (±)

 United States . . 35.3 0.2 30.5 0.2 11.9 0.1 10.9 0.2

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . 34.1 1.5 27.9 1.3 11.9 0.5 8.7 0.7

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35.9 2.8 22.5 2.9 9.7 1.1 9.3 2.0

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . 36.8 1.4 29.6 1.3 13.2 0.6 10.0 0.8

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . 33.9 1.9 24.1 1.5 11.8 0.8 6.9 0.7

California . . . . . . . . . . . 37.0 0.5 39.3 0.5 16.2 0.2 17.4 0.4

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . 34.0 1.4 23.8 1.2 8.8 0.4 8.6 0.7

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . 38.9 1.4 33.9 1.7 9.9 0.6 10.8 0.8

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . 36.1 3.4 34.3 2.1 12.7 1.1 10.0 1.7

District of Columbia . . . 37.3 3.9 28.4 2.5 17.9 1.7 10.8 2.0

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36.2 1.0 37.1 0.8 15.9 0.4 13.9 0.5

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . 35.6 1.2 31.5 0.9 13.2 0.4 13.0 0.7

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41.9 2.4 41.7 2.3 21.4 1.4 19.8 1.5

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28.6 2.7 20.0 2.2 8.3 1.0 6.5 1.2

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35.6 0.9 31.3 0.7 11.8 0.3 10.4 0.4

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32.9 1.2 23.9 1.1 9.1 0.4 7.9 0.6

Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27.6 1.8 16.8 1.2 6.7 0.5 4.9 0.6

Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28.4 1.5 20.3 1.1 7.8 0.5 6.2 0.8

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . 33.7 1.4 26.0 1.1 10.4 0.6 7.5 0.6

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . 35.7 1.2 29.6 1.5 13.4 0.6 9.3 0.6

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36.9 3.1 22.0 2.7 6.8 0.9 7.4 1.3

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . 40.7 1.4 36.1 1.0 13.0 0.5 12.8 0.7

Massachusetts . . . . . . . 34.1 1.1 31.8 1.0 10.5 0.5 10.4 0.6

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . 33.3 0.8 29.5 0.7 10.5 0.3 8.1 0.5

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . 30.8 1.1 20.6 0.9 6.3 0.4 4.4 0.3

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . 36.8 2.0 31.3 1.8 13.8 0.9 9.6 1.0

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . 32.4 1.3 22.4 0.9 9.3 0.5 7.2 0.6

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . 32.6 2.5 22.2 3.0 7.4 1.1 4.4 0.9

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . 25.5 2.1 18.9 1.6 6.3 0.6 4.2 0.7

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . 38.6 2.6 31.1 2.2 16.0 1.0 15.1 1.4

New Hampshire . . . . . . 40.0 2.7 22.4 2.1 7.3 0.8 8.1 1.1

New Jersey . . . . . . . . . 36.6 1.1 38.0 0.8 12.5 0.4 14.0 0.6

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . 33.3 2.4 30.1 1.8 13.1 0.8 10.1 1.2

New York . . . . . . . . . . . 37.2 0.6 38.5 0.6 13.4 0.3 12.6 0.4

North Carolina . . . . . . . 34.4 1.3 26.1 1.0 10.7 0.5 9.0 0.6

North Dakota . . . . . . . . 22.0 2.7 13.1 2.1 4.7 0.9 3.9 1.0

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32.3 0.8 24.6 0.8 9.1 0.3 7.2 0.4

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . 32.2 1.4 23.8 1.2 10.2 0.5 6.8 0.6

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33.6 1.7 25.4 1.3 10.3 0.5 7.7 0.7

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . 37.6 0.9 29.4 0.8 9.8 0.3 9.2 0.4

Rhode Island . . . . . . . . 33.5 2.9 30.1 2.4 10.4 1.1 9.4 1.5

South Carolina . . . . . . . 39.0 1.7 28.3 1.5 12.0 0.7 9.1 0.8

South Dakota . . . . . . . . 25.9 2.6 16.0 2.1 6.1 0.9 4.5 1.1

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . 37.1 1.5 26.6 1.1 11.4 0.6 9.4 0.7

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35.4 0.7 29.0 0.6 12.6 0.3 13.1 0.4

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33.3 1.8 26.0 1.2 10.9 0.8 7.1 0.9

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . 34.8 3.5 20.3 2.5 6.2 1.0 4.9 1.0

Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34.6 1.1 30.4 0.9 11.4 0.4 10.6 0.6

Washington . . . . . . . . . 36.0 1.3 24.2 1.0 9.3 0.4 8.4 0.6

West Virginia . . . . . . . . 38.6 2.5 30.1 2.1 11.7 0.8 8.4 1.0

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . 31.2 1.2 20.8 1.0 6.6 0.4 5.0 0.4

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . 26.4 3.5 16.9 3.1 7.7 1.2 5.7 2.0 1 An additional adult is defined as a household resident aged 18 or older who is not the householder, nor the householder’s spouse or cohabiting partner.

Students aged 18–24 enrolled in school are not counted as additional adults. 2

 Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. A margin of error is a measure of an estimate’s variability.The larger the margin of error in 

relation to the size of the estimate, the less reliable the estimate.This number when added to or subtracted from the estimate forms the 90 percent confidence interval.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2011 American Community Survey.
U.S. Census Bureau 13

Table 6. 

Percentage of Additional Adults1 by Relationship to Householder2 by State: 2011 

(For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/acs/www)

State

Relationship to householder2

 for additional adults1

Total

Child Sibling Parent Other relative1 Nonrelative1

Percent

Margin of 

error3 (±) Percent

Margin of 

error3 (±) Percent

Margin of 

error3 (±) Percent

Margin of 

error3 (±) Percent

Margin of 

error3 (±)

 United States . . 100.0 47.1 0.3 8.1 0.1 9.6 0.1 16.0 0.1 19.2 0.2

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 55.4 1.4 8.2 0.8 7.6 0.7 15.8 1.0 13.0 0.9

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 43.5 2.9 7.9 1.7 5.4 1.5 17.4 2.4 25.8 3.0

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 44.9 1.4 8.2 0.8 9.5 0.8 16.1 1.0 21.3 1.1

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 50.7 2.0 6.8 0.9 7.2 0.9 19.2 1.4 16.0 1.3

California . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 40.0 0.5 9.2 0.2 11.4 0.3 18.4 0.3 21.0 0.4

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 41.4 1.3 7.6 0.8 7.7 0.8 15.0 1.0 28.3 1.5

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . 100.0 51.5 1.8 7.7 0.8 10.0 0.8 13.3 1.1 17.6 1.4

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 48.3 2.9 7.4 1.5 8.7 1.6 17.0 2.4 18.6 2.7

District of Columbia . . . 100.0 34.6 2.5 10.0 1.9 6.4 1.7 15.8 2.3 33.3 3.3

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 43.1 0.7 7.7 0.3 12.4 0.5 16.1 0.5 20.7 0.7

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 46.1 1.0 9.1 0.6 9.7 0.6 17.5 0.9 17.6 0.9

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 42.7 2.2 7.1 1.0 9.6 1.1 25.4 1.5 15.2 1.4

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 46.0 2.7 6.0 1.3 9.0 1.6 14.9 2.2 24.2 2.6

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 50.0 0.8 9.2 0.5 9.6 0.5 15.0 0.5 16.3 0.7

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 53.0 1.3 6.9 0.7 8.2 0.7 13.3 0.8 18.5 1.0

Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 52.9 1.9 7.0 0.9 7.0 0.9 11.8 1.1 21.2 1.5

Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 48.2 1.9 7.2 0.8 8.5 1.1 13.0 1.2 23.1 1.6

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 56.8 1.3 7.3 0.7 7.4 0.6 14.4 0.8 14.2 1.0

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 53.8 1.4 7.2 0.5 7.0 0.8 16.9 0.9 15.0 1.0

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 47.7 2.9 5.3 0.9 8.3 1.3 12.1 1.8 26.7 2.7

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 49.0 1.1 7.2 0.5 8.6 0.6 15.1 0.7 20.1 1.0

Massachusetts . . . . . . . 100.0 48.6 1.1 7.1 0.6 9.0 0.5 13.6 0.6 21.7 1.0

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 55.2 1.0 7.7 0.5 7.8 0.5 13.2 0.6 16.1 0.7

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 49.5 1.2 8.0 0.7 6.4 0.7 11.5 0.7 24.7 1.3

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 56.1 1.9 9.0 1.0 6.9 0.8 16.9 1.1 11.1 1.1

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 51.3 1.2 6.6 0.7 8.1 0.7 15.0 0.8 19.0 1.0

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 49.7 3.0 7.8 1.5 6.7 1.4 13.3 1.9 22.5 2.5

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 47.7 2.6 9.1 1.2 5.4 0.9 11.6 1.3 26.1 2.8

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 37.4 1.8 11.0 1.3 11.3 1.3 17.2 1.4 23.1 1.8

New Hampshire . . . . . . 100.0 52.4 2.9 5.6 1.3 6.9 1.0 12.6 1.6 22.5 2.7

New Jersey . . . . . . . . . 100.0 48.0 0.8 8.9 0.5 11.7 0.6 16.3 0.7 15.2 0.7

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . 100.0 51.3 2.2 7.6 1.2 9.4 1.1 16.2 1.5 15.4 1.8

New York . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 46.5 0.6 8.6 0.3 10.1 0.3 16.1 0.4 18.7 0.6

North Carolina . . . . . . . 100.0 48.2 1.0 7.9 0.6 9.2 0.6 14.7 0.6 20.0 0.8

North Dakota . . . . . . . . 100.0 49.1 3.8 8.3 2.2 7.2 2.2 10.0 2.4 25.5 3.6

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 54.9 0.9 6.8 0.4 8.3 0.5 13.2 0.6 16.8 0.8

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 47.1 1.3 7.3 0.7 8.3 0.8 16.6 1.1 20.6 1.3

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 41.5 1.5 6.0 0.7 7.2 0.7 14.9 1.1 30.4 1.6

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . 100.0 55.6 0.8 7.0 0.4 8.8 0.4 13.1 0.5 15.4 0.7

Rhode Island . . . . . . . . 100.0 47.5 3.1 8.1 1.4 8.9 1.5 14.2 2.2 21.4 2.7

South Carolina . . . . . . . 100.0 52.0 1.4 7.5 0.8 8.6 0.8 16.4 1.0 15.4 1.1

South Dakota . . . . . . . . 100.0 43.6 4.2 9.3 2.2 8.5 2.5 14.9 2.9 23.8 3.8

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 49.7 1.3 7.7 0.7 8.4 0.7 16.2 1.0 17.9 1.2

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 46.8 0.6 8.7 0.4 10.5 0.4 18.1 0.5 15.9 0.5

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 49.2 2.0 7.8 1.0 5.5 0.9 17.3 1.3 20.3 1.9

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 45.8 3.4 6.6 1.9 4.9 1.2 10.1 2.0 32.6 3.5

Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 45.4 1.1 7.4 0.6 8.9 0.5 15.3 0.8 23.0 1.0

Washington . . . . . . . . . 100.0 42.3 1.2 6.9 0.6 7.8 0.5 14.6 0.8 28.5 1.2

West Virginia . . . . . . . . 100.0 56.0 1.7 6.7 1.2 7.9 1.1 14.5 1.2 14.9 1.3

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 53.2 1.6 7.2 0.6 6.9 0.7 10.9 0.8 21.8 1.2

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . 100.0 45.6 4.8 8.4 2.6 4.8 1.8 13.4 3.0 27.6 4.9 1 An additional adult is defined as a household resident aged 18 or older who is not the householder, nor the householder’s spouse or cohabiting partner. Students aged 18–24 enrolled in school are not counted as additional adults. “Relative” refers to those related to the householder by blood, marriage, or adoption. 2

 “Related” refers to persons related to the householder by blood, marriage, or adoption. 3

 Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. A margin of error is a measure of an estimate’s variability.The larger the margin of error in relation to the size of the estimate, the less reliable the estimate.This number when added to or subtracted from the estimate forms the 90 percent confidence interval.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2011 American Community Survey.
14 U.S. Census Bureau

Table 7. 

Official and Individual Poverty1 Rates for Householders in Shared and Non-Shared 

Households2 by State: 2011

(For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/acs/www)

State

Householders in 

shared households2

 Householders not in 

shared households2

Difference: 

shared less not shared 

Official poverty Individual poverty1 Official poverty Individual poverty1 Official 

poverty 

difference

Margin

 of error3 

(±)

Individual

poverty 

difference

Margin

 of error3 

Percent (±)

Margin

 of error3 

(±) Percent

Margin

 of error3 

(±) Percent

Margin

 of error3 

(±) Percent

Margin

 of error3 

(±)

 United States . . . 13.5 0.1 19.1 0.2 14.9 0.1 15.1 0.1 *–1.4 0.1 *4.0 0.2

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . . 17.2 1.2 24.0 1.1 18.5 0.5 18.7 0.6 –1.3 0.8 *5.3 0.8

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.8 1.9 12.2 2.5 8.7 0.7 8.9 0.7 –0.9 1.2 3.3 1.6

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17.6 1.1 20.9 1.3 15.8 0.5 15.9 0.5 *1.8 0.7 *5.0 0.8

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.3 1.2 23.1 1.6 19.4 0.6 19.6 0.6 *–3.1 0.8 *3.5 1.0

California . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.0 0.3 19.9 0.4 15.1 0.2 15.3 0.2 *–2.1 0.2 *4.6 0.3

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.0 1.0 17.5 1.1 12.2 0.4 12.3 0.4 0.8 0.7 *5.2 0.7

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . . 8.9 1.0 14.3 1.1 11.0 0.5 11.1 0.5 *–2.1 0.7 *3.2 0.7

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.5 2.2 14.2 2.2 10.6 0.9 10.6 0.9 –1.1 1.4 *3.6 1.4

District of Columbia . . . . 14.7 2.6 20.6 2.8 16.5 1.4 16.4 1.4 –1.8 1.8 *4.2 1.9

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.0 0.6 21.3 0.6 15.3 0.3 15.5 0.3 –0.3 0.4 *5.8 0.4

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17.4 0.8 22.9 0.9 17.3 0.4 17.4 0.4 0.1 0.5 *5.5 0.6

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.7 1.1 12.9 1.6 13.3 1.0 13.4 1.1 *–6.6 0.9 –0.5 1.2

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.8 2.2 21.8 2.7 14.8 0.9 15.1 0.9 2.0 1.4 *6.7 1.7

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.4 0.5 17.7 0.6 13.8 0.3 14.0 0.3 *–1.4 0.4 *3.7 0.4

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.4 0.8 16.9 0.9 14.6 0.4 14.7 0.4 *–1.2 0.5 *2.2 0.6

Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.9 1.4 15.7 1.5 12.0 0.4 12.2 0.4 –0.1 0.9 *3.5 0.9

Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.7 1.2 15.4 1.3 13.0 0.5 13.2 0.5 –1.3 0.8 2.2 0.8

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.1 0.9 21.8 1.0 19.3 0.6 19.5 0.6 *–4.2 0.7 *2.3 0.7

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . . 18.2 1.0 24.0 1.1 20.1 0.6 20.3 0.6 *–1.9 0.7 *3.7 0.8

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.0 1.8 16.6 1.9 15.0 0.8 15.4 0.8 *–3.0 1.2 1.2 1.3

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.9 0.7 13.1 0.9 9.5 0.3 9.7 0.3 –0.6 0.5 *3.4 0.6

Massachusetts . . . . . . . . 9.0 0.7 14.8 0.9 12.8 0.4 13.2 0.4 *–3.8 0.5 1.6 0.6

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.6 0.6 19.8 0.7 15.8 0.3 16.0 0.3 –0.2 0.4 *3.8 0.5

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . . 9.8 0.8 13.9 0.9 11.5 0.3 11.6 0.3 *–1.7 0.5 2.3 0.6

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . . 20.8 1.5 28.5 1.6 21.2 0.7 21.4 0.7 –0.4 1.0 *7.1 1.1

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.9 0.9 19.2 1.0 15.2 0.4 15.4 0.4 *–1.3 0.6 *3.8 0.7

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.1 2.2 17.2 2.3 13.4 0.8 13.4 0.8 –0.3 1.4 3.8 1.5

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.6 1.6 15.4 1.7 13.0 0.7 13.1 0.7 –1.4 1.1 *2.3 1.1

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.5 1.2 16.5 1.4 14.6 0.8 14.6 0.8 *–3.1 0.9 1.9 1.0

New Hampshire . . . . . . . 5.9 1.4 10.8 1.8 9.6 0.7 9.6 0.7 *–3.7 1.0 1.2 1.2

New Jersey . . . . . . . . . . 8.0 0.5 13.3 0.7 10.7 0.3 10.8 0.3 *–2.7 0.4 *2.5 0.5

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . . 19.7 1.7 27.1 2.3 19.2 0.9 19.4 0.9 0.5 1.2 *7.7 1.5

New York . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.5 0.4 19.4 0.5 15.7 0.2 16.0 0.2 *–3.2 0.3 *3.4 0.3

North Carolina . . . . . . . . 16.2 0.8 21.5 0.9 16.2 0.3 16.4 0.4 0.0 0.5 *5.1 0.6

North Dakota . . . . . . . . . 9.0 2.1 14.4 2.4 13.0 1.0 13.1 1.0 *–4.0 1.4 1.3 1.6

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.1 0.5 17.6 0.6 15.8 0.3 16.0 0.3 *–2.7 0.4 *1.6 0.4

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . . 17.1 1.1 22.3 1.2 16.0 0.5 16.2 0.5 1.1 0.7 *6.1 0.8

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.7 1.3 21.6 1.4 15.4 0.5 15.6 0.5 1.3 0.8 *6.0 0.9

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . . 11.0 0.6 16.1 0.6 13.4 0.3 13.6 0.3 *–2.4 0.4 *2.5 0.4

Rhode Island . . . . . . . . . 9.6 1.9 15.5 2.2 15.0 1.0 15.2 1.0 *–5.4 1.3 0.3 1.5

South Carolina . . . . . . . . 17.7 1.1 24.5 1.2 17.3 0.5 17.4 0.5 0.4 0.7 *7.1 0.8

South Dakota . . . . . . . . . 11.9 2.0 18.3 2.6 13.2 0.9 13.3 0.9 –1.3 1.3 5.0 1.7

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . . 16.9 1.1 22.3 0.9 17.1 0.4 17.3 0.4 –0.2 0.7 *5.0 0.6

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.1 0.5 21.5 0.7 16.4 0.3 16.5 0.2 *–1.3 0.4 *5.0 0.4

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.6 1.7 17.1 1.8 12.8 0.6 13.0 0.6 –0.2 1.1 4.1 1.2

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.2 2.2 12.5 2.4 11.8 0.8 12.2 0.9 *–3.6 1.4 0.3 1.6

Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.7 0.7 14.9 0.9 11.3 0.3 11.5 0.3 *–1.6 0.5 *3.4 0.6

Washington . . . . . . . . . . 12.2 0.9 16.9 1.0 12.6 0.4 12.8 0.4 –0.4 0.6 *4.1 0.7

West Virginia . . . . . . . . . 15.8 1.7 23.6 1.9 18.9 0.7 19.1 0.7 *–3.1 1.1 *4.5 1.2

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . . 11.6 0.9 16.9 1.0 12.4 0.3 12.7 0.3 –0.8 0.6 *4.2 0.6

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.7 2.8 14.1 3.1 10.5 1.1 10.8 1.2 0.2 1.8 3.3 2.0

* Statistically different from zero at the 90 percent confidence level. 1 Individual poverty was calculated by comparing personal income (and spousal income) to the appropriate poverty threshold. The householder, spouse, and 

own children under the age of 18 were included in the poverty unit. In 2011, the annual average poverty threshold for one person under the age of 65 was $11,698.

For two adults and one child the average value was $18,098. 2

 Shared households are defined by the presence of an additional adult, a resident aged 18 or older who is not the householder, nor the householder’s spouse 

or cohabiting partner. Students aged 18–24 enrolled in school are not counted as additional adults. 3

 A margin of error is a measure of an estimate’s variability. Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability.The larger the margin of error in 

relation to the size of the estimate, the less reliable the estimate.This number when added to or subtracted from the estimate forms the 90 percent confidence interval. Note: Poverty status is determined for individuals in housing units and noninstitutional group quarters. The poverty universe excludes children under the age of 

15 who are not related to the householder, people living in institutional group quarters, and people living in college dormitories or military barracks. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2011 American Community Survey.
U.S. Census Bureau 15

Table 8. 

Official, Individual,1 and Household Poverty2 Rates for Additional Adults3

by State: 2011

(For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/acs/www)

State

Additional adults3 Difference: 

Official poverty Individual poverty1 Household poverty2 measure less official poverty

Percent

Margin of 

error4 (±) Percent

Margin of 

error4 (±) Percent

Margin of 

error4 (±)

Individual

poverty1

Margin of 

error4 (±)

Household

poverty2

Margin of 

error4 (±)

 United States . . 15.8 0.1 55.5 0.2 10.9 0.1 *39.7 0.2 *–4.9 0.1

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . 18.4 1.1 61.4 1.2 15.1 1.0 *43.0 1.6 *–3.3 1.5

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.1 2.0 46.1 2.6 5.9 1.3 *34.0 3.3 *–6.2 2.4

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . 20.2 1.2 58.1 1.4 15.5 1.1 *37.9 1.8 *–4.7 1.6

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . 18.7 1.3 60.1 1.7 13.0 1.2 *41.4 2.1 *–5.7 1.8

California . . . . . . . . . . . 15.2 0.3 56.7 0.4 9.6 0.3 *41.5 0.5 *–5.6 0.4

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . 15.1 0.9 51.2 1.3 8.6 0.9 *36.1 1.6 *–6.5 1.3

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . 11.1 1.1 46.6 1.6 6.5 0.9 *35.5 1.9 *–4.6 1.4

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . 12.2 2.2 51.7 2.8 6.8 1.9 *39.5 3.6 *–5.4 2.9

District of Columbia . . . 14.4 2.3 42.6 3.3 10.1 2.0 *28.2 4.0 *–4.3 3.0

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17.1 0.6 56.2 0.8 11.8 0.5 *39.1 1.0 *–5.3 0.8

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . 19.2 0.8 60.3 1.0 14.9 0.7 *41.1 1.3 *–4.3 1.1

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.5 1.5 53.3 1.7 5.8 1.2 *43.8 2.3 *–3.7 1.9

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20.3 2.5 60.2 2.8 12.1 2.2 *39.9 3.8 *–8.2 3.3

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.6 0.7 55.1 0.8 10.5 0.6 *40.5 1.1 *–4.1 0.9

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.8 0.9 57.6 0.9 11.5 0.8 *40.8 1.3 *–5.3 1.2

Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.3 1.3 50.2 1.8 9.0 1.1 *35.9 2.2 *–5.3 1.7

Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.7 1.4 54.6 1.9 8.8 1.1 *39.9 2.4 *–5.9 1.8

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . 17.6 1.0 60.1 1.3 13.7 1.0 *42.5 1.6 *–3.9 1.4

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . 19.9 1.0 60.0 1.4 15.9 1.0 *40.1 1.7 *–4.0 1.4

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14.4 2.1 50.6 2.6 6.8 1.4 *36.2 3.3 *–7.6 2.5

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . 11.3 0.8 49.1 1.0 6.4 0.6 *37.8 1.3 *–4.9 1.0

Massachusetts . . . . . . . 10.0 0.7 45.7 1.0 5.6 0.6 *35.7 1.2 *–4.4 0.9

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . 19.4 0.7 61.0 0.7 14.0 0.6 *41.6 1.0 *–5.4 0.9

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . 13.0 0.8 48.8 1.4 7.1 0.7 *35.8 1.6 *–5.9 1.1

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . 22.9 1.6 63.2 1.5 19.7 1.5 *40.3 2.2 *–3.2 2.2

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.5 0.9 56.3 1.3 11.0 0.9 *39.8 1.6 *–5.5 1.3

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.5 2.5 51.5 3.4 10.2 2.2 *35.0 4.2 *–6.3 3.3

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . 13.5 1.7 47.0 2.6 7.7 1.4 *33.5 3.1 *–5.8 2.2

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.7 1.6 54.5 2.0 9.7 1.3 *38.8 2.6 *–6.0 2.1

New Hampshire . . . . . . 8.4 1.4 45.4 2.5 3.6 1.1 *37.0 2.9 *–4.8 1.8

New Jersey . . . . . . . . . 9.5 0.6 47.9 0.9 6.0 0.5 *38.4 1.1 *–3.5 0.8

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . 21.3 1.7 61.3 1.8 16.6 1.5 *40.0 2.5 *–4.7 2.3

New York . . . . . . . . . . . 14.2 0.4 51.6 0.6 9.7 0.4 *37.4 0.7 *–4.5 0.6

North Carolina . . . . . . . 19.3 0.9 59.1 1.1 13.4 0.8 *39.8 1.4 *–5.9 1.2

North Dakota . . . . . . . . 11.9 2.8 38.9 3.7 7.3 2.1 *27.0 4.6 *–4.6 3.5

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.8 0.6 56.5 0.9 10.8 0.6 *40.7 1.1 *–5.0 0.8

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . 19.4 1.1 58.9 1.3 14.2 1.0 *39.5 1.7 *–5.2 1.5

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20.5 1.4 57.3 1.5 10.6 1.1 *36.8 2.1 *–9.9 1.8

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . 13.7 0.6 51.6 0.8 9.3 0.6 *37.9 1.0 *–4.4 0.8

Rhode Island . . . . . . . . 11.7 1.9 47.7 2.7 6.9 1.6 *36.0 3.3 *–4.8 2.5

South Carolina . . . . . . . 20.4 1.1 60.3 1.6 16.7 0.9 *39.9 1.9 *–3.7 1.4

South Dakota . . . . . . . . 16.1 2.5 53.0 3.9 12.0 2.5 *36.9 4.6 *–4.1 3.5

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . 20.0 1.1 60.6 1.3 14.9 0.9 *40.6 1.7 *–5.1 1.4

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17.0 0.6 58.7 0.7 13.1 0.5 *41.7 0.9 *–3.9 0.8

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.2 1.5 59.4 1.7 9.6 1.3 *44.2 2.3 *–5.6 2.0

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.9 2.0 45.2 2.9 4.9 1.7 *34.3 3.5 *–6.0 2.6

Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.9 0.6 51.2 1.1 6.7 0.5 *39.3 1.3 *–5.2 0.8

Washington . . . . . . . . . 16.2 0.9 54.1 1.2 8.9 0.8 *37.9 1.5 *–7.3 1.2

West Virginia . . . . . . . . 17.6 1.7 59.4 2.0 11.8 1.5 *41.8 2.6 *–5.8 2.3

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . 14.1 1.0 50.1 1.2 8.6 0.9 *36.0 1.6 *–5.5 1.3

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . 13.6 3.5 47.8 4.4 5.6 2.0 *34.2 5.6 *–8.0 4.0

* Statistically different from zero at the 90 percent confidence level. 1 Individual poverty was calculated by comparing personal income (and spousal income) to the appropriate poverty threshold. The individual or subfamily rate 

accounts for individuals, their spouses, and dependent children. In 2011, the annual average poverty threshold for one person under the age of 65 was $11,698. For 

two adults and one child the average value was $18,098. 2 Household poverty was calculated by comparing the combined income of all household members to the appropriate poverty threshold based on the total 

number of household residents. 3

 An additional adult is defined as a resident aged 18 or older who is not a householder, nor the householder’s spouse or cohabiting partner. Students aged 

18–24 enrolled in school are not counted as additional adults. 4

 A margin of error is a measure of an estimate’s variability. Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability.The larger the margin of error in 

relation to the size of the estimate, the less reliable the estimate.This number when added to or subtracted from the estimate forms the 90 percent confidence interval. Note: Poverty status is determined for individuals in housing units and noninstitutional group quarters. The poverty universe excludes children under the age of 

15 who are not related to the householder, people living in institutional group quarters, and people living in college dormitories or military barracks. Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2011 American Community Survey.
16 U.S. Census Bureau

Table 9. 

Official, Individual,1 and Household Poverty2 Rates for Householders in Shared 

Households3 by State: 2011

(For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see www.census.gov/acs/www)

State

Poverty status for householders in shared housesholds3 Difference: 

Official poverty Individual poverty1 Household poverty2 measure less official poverty

Percent

Margin of 

error4 (±) Percent

Margin of 

error4 (±) Percent

Margin of 

error4 (±)

Individual

poverty1

Margin of 

error4 (±)

Household

poverty2

Margin of 

error4 (±)

 United States . . 13.5 0.1 19.1 0.2 11.0 0.1 *5.6 0.2 *–2.5 0.1

Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . 17.2 1.2 24.0 1.1 15.4 1.0 *6.8 0.7 *–1.8 1.6

Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.8 1.9 12.2 2.5 5.6 1.6 *4.4 1.5 –2.2 2.5

Arizona . . . . . . . . . . . . 17.6 1.1 20.9 1.3 14.8 1.1 *3.3 0.8 *–2.8 1.6

Arkansas . . . . . . . . . . . 16.3 1.2 23.1 1.6 13.8 1.2 *6.8 1.0 *–2.5 1.7

California . . . . . . . . . . . 13.0 0.3 19.9 0.4 10.2 0.3 *6.9 0.2 *–2.8 0.4

Colorado . . . . . . . . . . . 13.0 1.0 17.5 1.1 8.8 0.8 *4.5 0.7 *–4.2 1.3

Connecticut . . . . . . . . . 8.9 1.0 14.3 1.1 7.1 0.9 *5.4 0.7 *–1.8 1.3

Delaware . . . . . . . . . . . 9.5 2.2 14.2 2.2 6.8 1.9 *4.7 1.3 –2.7 2.9

District of Columbia . . . 14.7 2.6 20.6 2.8 12.2 2.6 *5.9 1.7 –2.5 3.7

Florida . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.0 0.6 21.3 0.6 12.6 0.5 *6.3 0.4 *–2.4 0.8

Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . 17.4 0.8 22.9 0.9 15.3 0.7 *5.5 0.5 *–2.1 1.1

Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.7 1.1 12.9 1.6 5.5 1.0 *6.2 1.0 –1.2 1.5

Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.8 2.2 21.8 2.7 12.2 2.0 *5.0 1.6 *–4.6 3.0

Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.4 0.5 17.7 0.6 10.6 0.5 *5.3 0.4 *–1.8 0.7

Indiana . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.4 0.8 16.9 0.9 11.5 0.8 *3.5 0.5 *–1.9 1.1

Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.9 1.4 15.7 1.5 8.9 1.2 *3.8 0.9 *–3.0 1.8

Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.7 1.2 15.4 1.3 9.3 1.2 *3.7 0.8 *–2.4 1.7

Kentucky . . . . . . . . . . . 15.1 0.9 21.8 1.0 13.3 0.9 *6.7 0.6 *–1.8 1.3

Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . 18.2 1.0 24.0 1.1 16.0 1.0 *5.8 0.7 *–2.2 1.4

Maine . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.0 1.8 16.6 1.9 6.8 1.2 *4.6 1.2 *–5.2 2.2

Maryland . . . . . . . . . . . 8.9 0.7 13.1 0.9 6.5 0.5 *4.2 0.5 *–2.4 0.9

Massachusetts . . . . . . . 9.0 0.7 14.8 0.9 6.3 0.6 *5.8 0.5 *–2.7 0.9

Michigan . . . . . . . . . . . 15.6 0.6 19.8 0.7 13.4 0.5 *4.2 0.4 *–2.2 0.8

Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . 9.8 0.8 13.9 0.9 7.5 0.6 *4.1 0.5 *–2.3 1.0

Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . 20.8 1.5 28.5 1.6 19.4 1.3 *7.7 1.0 –1.4 2.0

Missouri . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.9 0.9 19.2 1.0 11.0 0.8 *5.3 0.6 *–2.9 1.2

Montana . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.1 2.2 17.2 2.3 9.2 2.0 *4.1 1.4 *–3.9 3.0

Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . 11.6 1.6 15.4 1.7 7.5 1.3 *3.8 1.0 *–4.1 2.1

Nevada . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.5 1.2 16.5 1.4 10.0 1.3 *5.0 0.9 –1.5 1.8

New Hampshire . . . . . . 5.9 1.4 10.8 1.8 3.6 1.1 *4.9 1.1 *–2.3 1.8

New Jersey . . . . . . . . . 8.0 0.5 13.3 0.7 6.4 0.5 *5.3 0.4 *–1.6 0.7

New Mexico . . . . . . . . . 19.7 1.7 27.1 2.3 17.1 1.5 *7.4 1.4 *–2.6 2.3

New York . . . . . . . . . . . 12.5 0.4 19.4 0.5 10.3 0.4 *6.9 0.3 *–2.2 0.6

North Carolina . . . . . . . 16.2 0.8 21.5 0.9 13.4 0.7 *5.3 0.5 *–2.8 1.1

North Dakota . . . . . . . . 9.0 2.1 14.4 2.4 7.4 1.8 *5.4 1.5 –1.6 2.8

Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13.1 0.5 17.6 0.6 10.8 0.5 *4.5 0.4 *–2.3 0.7

Oklahoma . . . . . . . . . . 17.1 1.1 22.3 1.2 14.4 0.9 *5.2 0.7 *–2.7 1.4

Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16.7 1.3 21.6 1.4 11.4 1.1 *4.9 0.9 *–5.3 1.7

Pennsylvania . . . . . . . . 11.0 0.6 16.1 0.6 9.0 0.5 *5.1 0.4 *–2.0 0.8

Rhode Island . . . . . . . . 9.6 1.9 15.5 2.2 7.3 1.5 *5.9 1.3 –2.3 2.4

South Carolina . . . . . . . 17.7 1.1 24.5 1.2 16.1 1.0 *6.8 0.7 *–1.6 1.5

South Dakota . . . . . . . . 11.9 2.0 18.3 2.6 11.1 2.1 *6.4 1.6 –0.8 2.9

Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . 16.9 1.1 22.3 0.9 14.9 1.0 *5.4 0.5 *–2.0 1.5

Texas . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15.1 0.5 21.5 0.7 13.2 0.5 *6.4 0.4 *–1.9 0.7

Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.6 1.7 17.1 1.8 9.6 1.5 *4.5 1.1 *–3.0 2.3

Vermont . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.2 2.2 12.5 2.4 4.0 1.2 *4.3 1.5 *–4.2 2.5

Virginia . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.7 0.7 14.9 0.9 7.4 0.5 *5.2 0.5 *–2.3 0.9

Washington . . . . . . . . . 12.2 0.9 16.9 1.0 8.9 0.8 *4.7 0.6 *–3.3 1.2

West Virginia . . . . . . . . 15.8 1.7 23.6 1.9 13.2 1.6 *7.8 1.2 *–2.6 2.3

Wisconsin . . . . . . . . . . 11.6 0.9 16.9 1.0 8.7 0.9 *5.3 0.6 *–2.9 1.3

Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . 10.7 2.8 14.1 3.1 5.5 1.8 3.4 1.9 *–5.2 3.3

* Statistically different from zero at the 90 percent confidence level. 1 Individual poverty was calculated by comparing personal income (and spousal income) to the appropriate poverty threshold. The householder, spouse, and 

own children under the age of 18 were included in the poverty unit. In 2011, the annual average poverty threshold for one person under the age of 65 was $11,698.

For two adults and one child the average value was $18,098. 2 Household poverty was calculated by comparing the combined income of all household members to the appropriate poverty threshold based on the total 

number of household residents. 3

 Shared households are defined by the presence of an additional adult, a resident aged 18 or older who is not the householder, nor the householder’s spouse 

or cohabiting partner. Students aged 18–24 enrolled in school are not counted as additional adults. 4

 Data are based on a sample and are subject to sampling variability. A margin of error is a measure of an estimate’s variability.The larger the margin of error in 

relation to the size of the estimate, the less reliable the estimate.This number when added to or subtracted from the estimate forms the 90 percent confidence interval.

Note: Poverty status is determined for individuals in housing units and noninstitutional group quarters. The poverty universe excludes children under age 15 who 

are not related to the householder, people living in institutional group quarters, and people living in college dormitories or military barracks.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2011 American Community Survey.