U.S. Department of Commerce

Economics and Statistics Administration 

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU 

U.S. Department of Health and Human Services

National Institutes of Health

NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING

90+ in the United States: 2006–2008

American Community Survey Reports

By

Wan He 

and 

Mark N. Muenchrath

ACS-17

Issued November 2011
Acknowledgments This report was prepared by Wan He and Mark N. Muenchrath

under the general direction of Peter O. Way, Assistant Division 

Chief, International Programs Center for Demographic and Economic 

Studies, Population Division. Enrique J. Lamas, Chief, Population 

Division, provided overall direction. Additional direction was provided by Loraine A. West, Acting Chief, Aging Studies Branch (ASB), 

Population Division.

The authors are grateful to many people both within and outside 

the Census Bureau who have generously provided insights and 

assistance to the making of this report. The authors give special 

thanks to Mary Beth Kennedy, ASB, for verifying various materials; 

David A. Raglin, Special Studies Staff, American Community Survey 

Office, for technical guidance in calculating estimates and margins of 

error using replicate weighting; Marc J. Perry, Thomas Fischetti, 

Geoffrey Hatchard, and Steven G. Wilson, Population Distribution 

Branch, Population Division, for creating the maps and the scatter 

plot in this report; Sirius C. Fuller, ACS Variance Estimation and 

Statistical Support Branch, Decennial Statistics Studies Division, 

and Luke J. Larsen, Foreign-Born Population Branch, Population 

Division, for data analysis assistance; and J. Gregory Robinson, 

Estimates and Projections, Population Division, for guidance in evaluating sampling and nonsampling error. Among the many people 

who provided information on a wide range of topics are Matthew 

W. Brault, Katherine Giefer, and Kirby Posey, Social, Economic 

and Housing Statistics Division; and Lynn Fisher and Arthur Kahn, 

Social Security Administration.

Reviewers from Census Bureau’s Population Division and National 

Institute on Aging (NIA) provided valuable comments and suggestions, Dana A. Glei, Karen Humes, Marlene A. Lee, Amy S. 

Smith, and Victoria A. Velkoff. The authors are particularly thankful to Frank B. Hobbs for his thorough review.

The sampling review was conducted by Michael J. Roebuck, 

ACS Variance Estimation and Statistical Support Branch, Decennial 

Statistics Studies Division.

Musbaw Alawiye and Christine E. Geter of the Census Bureau’s 

Administrative and Customer Services Division (ACSD), Francis 

Grailand Hall, Chief, provided publication and printing management, graphics design and composition, and editorial review for 

print and electronic media. General direction and production 

management were provided by Claudette E. Bennett, Assistant 

Division Chief.

Funding for the production of this report was provided by the NIA’s 

Behavioral and Social Research Program, Richard M. Suzman, 

Director.
ACS-17

90+ in the United States: 

2006–2008 Issued November 2011

U.S. Department of Commerce

John E. Bryson,

Secretary

Rebecca M. Blank,

Acting Deputy Secretary

Economics and Statistics Administration

Rebecca M. Blank, 

Under Secretary for Economic Affairs

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

Robert Groves, 

Director
Suggested Citation

Wan He and Mark N. Muenchrath,

U.S. Census Bureau, 

American Community Survey Reports,

 ACS-17, 90+ in the United States: 

2006–2008, 

U.S. Government Printing Office, 

Washington, DC,

2011.

Economics and Statistics

Administration

Rebecca M. Blank,

Under Secretary for Economic Affairs

U.S. CENSUS BUREAU

Robert Groves,

Director

Thomas L. Mesenbourg,

Deputy Director and Chief Operating Officer

Howard Hogan,

Acting Associate Director for Demographic Programs

Enrique J. Lamas,

Chief, Population Division

ECONOMICS

AND STATISTICS

ADMINISTRATION
U.S. Census Bureau 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 iii

Contents

Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

The 90+ population will continue to grow both in size and

 proportion of the older population. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

Findings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Some states with the highest share of 90+ are not among the most

 populous states in size of the older population. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

The 90+ population is overwhelmingly White. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

Most 90+ are high school graduates or beyond. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Social Security represents almost half of total personal income for

 the 90+. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

The poverty rate for the 90+ is higher than that for those

 aged 65–89. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Woman aged 90+ outnumber 90+ men nearly 3 to 1. . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Over 80 percent of the 90+ women are widowed, while more than

 40 percent of the 90+ men are married. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Asian and Hispanic 90+ are least likely to live alone. . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Difficulty doing errands alone and mobility-related limitations are

 the two most common types of disability for the 90+. . . . . . . . . . . 15

The 90+ are almost universally covered by health insurance. . . . . . . 18

Summary . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Source of the Data and Accuracy of the Estimates . . . 20

Sampling and Nonsampling Error . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20

Contact . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

References . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22

Figures

Figure 1. Population Aged 90 and Over: 1980 to 2050 . . . . . . . . . 3 

Figure 2. Percentage Change of Populations Aged 65 to 89 and

 Aged 90 and Over: 1980 to 2050 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3

Figure 3. Percentage Aged 90 and Over of State Population Aged

 65 and Over: 2006–2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Figure 4. Percentage Aged 65 and Over of Total State

 Population: 2006–2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5

Figure 5. Percentage Aged 90 and Over of 65 and Over, and

 Percentage Aged 65 and Over of Total Population

 by State: 2006–2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6

Figure 6. Age Distribution of Population Aged 65 and Over by

 Race and Hispanic Origin: 2006–2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8

Figure 7. Income Source of Population Aged 90 and Over:

 2006–2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Figure 8. Percentage in Poverty of Population Aged 90 and Over

 by Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin: 2006–2008 . . . . . . 11

Figure 9. Sex Ratio of Population Aged 65 and Over by Age:

 2006–2008 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
iv 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 U.S. Census Bureau

Figure 10. Marital Status of Population Aged 90 and Over by Sex: 2006–2008. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13

Figure 11. Living Arrangements of Population Aged 90 and Over by Sex: 2006–2008. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Figure 12. Percentage Living Alone of Population Aged 90 and Over by Race and Hispanic Origin:

 2006–2008. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16

Figure 13. Percentage With Disability for Population Aged 90 and Over by Living Arrangement and

 Type of Disability: 2008. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Figure 14. Percentage With Health Insurance Coverage of Population Aged 90 and Over by Type of

 Insurance: 2008. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18

Tables

Table 1. Ten States With Highest Population Aged 90 and Over, and Percentage Aged 90 and Over of

 Aged 65 and Over: 2006–2008. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4

Table 2. Educational Attainment of Population Aged 90 and Over by Sex, Race, and

 Hispanic Origin: 2006–2008. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9

Table 3. Life Expectancy by Age and Sex: 1929–31 and 2006. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11

Table 4. Ten States With Highest and Lowest Sex Ratios for Population Aged 90 and Over: 2006–2008. . . . 12

Table 5. Marital Status for Population Aged 15 and Over by Age Group: 2006–2008. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14

Table 6. Percentage With Disability of Population Aged 85 and Over by Age and Sex: 2008. . . . . . . . . . . . . 17

Text Boxes

Why 90+?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1

What Is the American Community Survey (ACS)?. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2

Race and Hispanic Origin. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7

How Poverty Is Measured. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10

Group Quarters. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15

Measurement of Disability in the 2008 American Community Survey (ACS). . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

Appendix Tables

Appendix Table 1-A. Selected Characteristics of Population Aged 90 and Over by Sex: 2006–2008. . . . . . . . . . 24

Appendix Table 1-B. Margin of Error for Selected Characteristics of Population Aged 90 and Over by Sex:

 2006–2008. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

Appendix Table 2-A. Marital Status for Population Aged 15 and Over by Age, Sex, and Status: 2006–2008. . . . 26

Appendix Table 2-B. Marital Status for Population Aged 65 and Over by Age and Sex: 2006–2008. . . . . . . . . . 26

Appendix Table 3-A. Living Arrangements for Population Aged 65 and Over by Age, Sex, and Type:

 2006–2008. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

Appendix Table 3-B. Living Arrangements for Population Aged 65 and Over by Age and Sex: 2006–2008. . . . . 27
U.S. Census Bureau 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 1

INTRODUCTION

An increasingly important feature 

of population aging in the United 

States is that the older population 

itself is getting older.1 That is, the 

proportion of the population aged 

90 and over among the older population has been increasing. Thanks 

to increases in life expectancy at 

older ages, the oldest segments of 

the older population are growing 

the fastest. A nation’s oldest-old 

population consumes resources 

disproportionately to its overall 

population size, and its growth has 

a significant impact on societal and 

family resources, including pension 

and retirement income, health care 

costs, and intergenerational relationships (Kinsella and He, 2009; 

Zhou, Norton, and Stearns, 2003). 

This report presents an overview 

of the population aged 90 and over 

in the United States and a comparative analysis of selected characteristics between the 90-and-older 

and other older age groups. Data 

for this report primarily come from 

the 2006–2008 and 2008 American 

Community Surveys (ACS). Because 

the 2006–2008 ACS 3-year estimates are based on a larger sample 

than 1-year estimates and therefore 

are more reliable, they are used for 

analysis of the 90-and-over population by age, sex, race, and Hispanic 

origin at the national level and by 

age and sex at the state level.2

The 2008 ACS 1-year estimates in 

this report supplement the 3-year 

data at the national level with information from the changed questions 

1 In this report, “older population” refers 

to people aged 65 and over. 2 Multiyear estimates should, in general, 

be used when single-year estimates have 

large coefficients of variation or when the 

precision of the estimates is more important 

than the currency of the data. Multiyear 

estimates should also be used when analyzing data for smaller geographies and smaller 

populations in larger geographies. Multiyear 

estimates are also of value when examining 

change over nonoverlapping time periods and 

for smoothing data trends over time. 

on disability and the newly added 

question on health insurance 

coverage.3

The 90+ population will 

continue to grow both in 

size and proportion of the 

older population.

The gains in life expectancy at 

older ages over the past century are impressive. According 

to the National Center for Health 

3 The single-year and 3-year ACS estimates are period estimates that represent 

data collected over a period of time. The 

2008 estimates used in this report were collected over a 12-month period in 2008 and 

the 2006–2008 estimates used in this report 

were collected over a 36-month period during 

2006 to 2008. For more information on the 

methodology of the ACS, see text box “What 

Is the American Community Survey (ACS)?” 

Statistics, life expectancy at age 

65 in the United States increased 

from 12.2 years in 1929–1931 to 

18.5 years in 2006 (Arias, 2010, 

Table 11). People at very old ages 

are also expected to live longer. 

Today a person 90 years of age 

is expected to live on average 

another 4.6 years (versus 3.2 years 

in 1929–1931), and those who pass 

the century mark are projected to 

live another 2.3 years. 

The prolonged life expectancy at 

older ages has led to the growing size of the oldest segments of 

the population.4 Decennial census 

4 In this report, the terms “oldest” and 

“population aged 90 and over” are used 

interchangeably. 

Why 90+?

“Oldest old” in the United States is often defined as people aged 85 

and over (Suzman and Riley, 1985).* However, the 90-and-older population has been growing more rapidly than those aged 85–89 and 

other younger age groups among the older population aged 65 and 

over. Furthermore, not only has the 90-and-older population grown 

in size, but its proportion within the older population has

also expanded. 

People aged 90 and over have become an increasingly larger and 

more important population group that merits a closer look. However, 

little is known about their characteristics. Where do they live, and 

which states have the highest concentration? What are their distributions by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin? Are they different in 

socioeconomic and health characteristics from their younger counterparts (ages 65–89) in the older population, especially those just 

a 5-year age group younger (ages 85–89)? These questions have 

not been addressed before, primarily because the relatively small 

numbers of people aged 90 and over in survey data do not allow a 

statistically significant and meaningful analysis.

This report provides answers to these questions, using American 

Community Survey 3-year (2006–2008) and 1-year (2008) data. It 

aims at contributing to the research on those 90 and older in order 

to enhance our understanding of this fast-growing population and to 

serve as a starting point for future research and trend analyses.

*

 Suzman and Riley (1985) defined “oldest old” as those aged 85 and over. Pointing to the 

fast growth of the 85-and-older population and their unique features that were in contrast 

to other segments of the older population, they called for more valid and reliable information on the oldest-old population. Now, more than 25 years later, the population aged 90 

and over is the fastest growing segment among the older population.
2 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 U.S. Census Bureau

data from 1980 to 2010 show that 

the 90-and-older population has 

steadily increased and this trend 

is expected to continue into the 

middle of the century. The 720,000 

people aged 90 and over in 1980 

almost tripled to 1.9 million in 

2010. The total population aged 

90 and over is projected to more 

than quadruple from 2010 to 2050 

(Figure 1), compared to a doubling 

of the population aged 65 to 89.5

Not only has the 90-and-older 

population grown in size, it has 

also increased as a proportion

of the older population (aged 65 

5 The projections data came from

Vincent and Velkoff, 2010, Table A-1. The

projections originate with a base population 

from Census 2000 and are not based on

data from the 2010 Census. For more

information on projections methodology,

see <www.census.gov/population/www

/projections/methodstatement.html>. 2010 

Census based projections are currently 

planned for release in 2012.

and over). They accounted for

2.8 percent of the older population

in 1980 and in 2010, they represented 4.7 percent. The increase 

in the proportion 90 and over of 

the older population is projected 

to slow down between 2020 and 

2030 when the baby boomers 

join the ranks of the 65 and over 

population and swell the younger 

segments of the older population.6

However, the percentage of 90

and older is expected to rise 

again—reaching 7.1 percent in 

2040 and 9.9 percent in 2050—

when all of the baby boomers 

become 85 years of age and

older. The U.S. population 40

years from now is projected to 

have 20 percent aged 65 and

over, and one-tenth of them aged 

6

1946 and 1964.

 Baby boomers are those born between 

90 and over (that is, 2 percent of 

the total population).

The baby boomers’ impact on the 

growth of the older and oldest 

populations is also apparent from 

the percent change over time 

for ages 65–89 and 90 and older 

(Figure 2). Between 2020 and 2030, 

growth of the population aged 

65–89 is projected to outpace that 

of the population aged 90 and 

over when the 65–89 age group is 

projected to increase by 32 percent 

and the 90 and over by 21 percent. 

However, in the following decade 

(2030s) the 90-and-older population is projected to experience a 

71 percent jump, as opposed to a 

10 percent increase for those aged 

65–89 years old. The momentum of 

aging within the older population 

propelled by the baby boomers will 

be significant.

What Is the American Community Survey (ACS)?

The ACS, a nationwide survey sponsored and collected by the U.S. Census Bureau, is designed to provide 

communities with reliable and timely demographic, social, economic, and housing data every year. It has a 

total annual sample size of about 3 million addresses across the United States and Puerto Rico, and includes 

both housing units and group quarters. 

The American Community Survey began in 1996 in a sample of counties across the country. Today the 

survey is conducted in every county throughout the nation and every municipio in Puerto Rico. Beginning 

in 2006, ACS 1-year estimates for 2005 were released for geographic areas with populations of 65,000 and 

greater. In 2008, the first set of multiyear estimates was released for data collected between January 2005 

and December 2007. These 3-year estimates were published for geographic areas with populations of

20,000 and greater. Single-year and 3-year estimates from the ACS are all “period” estimates that represent 

data collected over a period of time (as opposed to “point-in-time” estimates, such as the decennial census, 

that approximate the characteristics of an area on a specific date). While a single-year estimate includes 

information collected over a 12-month period, a 3-year estimate represents data collected over a 36-month 

period. The Census Bureau released the first 5-year estimates (2005–2009) in late 2010 for the smallest 

geographic areas based on data collected during the 60 months between January 2005 and December 2009. 

These multiyear estimates are updated annually, with data published for the largest areas in 1-, 3-, and 

5-year formats, and for those meeting the 3-year threshold in both 3- and 5-year formats.

The 2006–2008 3-year estimates contained in this report are based on the ACS sample interviewed in 2006, 

2007, and 2008. The 2008 1-year data and the 2006–2008 3-year data used in this report were released in 

2009. This report does not include Puerto Rico in its analysis. For information on the ACS sample design and 

other topics, visit <www.census.gov/acs/www/>.
U.S. Census Bureau 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 3

Figure 1.

Population Aged 90 and Over: 1980 to 2050

Note: The projections originate with a base population from Census 2000 and are not based on data from the 2010 Census.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau. 1980: 1980 Census of Population, PC80-1-B1, Table 41; 1990: 1990 Census of Population, CP-1-1, 

Table 13; 2000: Census 2000, Summary File 2, PCT3; 2010: 2010 Census, Summary File 1, PCT12; 2020–2050: 2008 National 

Population Projections, Table 12.

0

2

4

6

8

10

1980 1990 2000 2010 2020 2030 2040 2050

0

2

4

6

8

10

12

90+ population (left scale) 90+ as proportion of 65+ (right scale)

Millions Percent

Figure 2.

Percentage Change of Populations Aged 65 to 89 and Aged 90 and Over: 

1980 to 2050

Note: The projections originate with a base population from Census 2000 and are not based on data from the 2010 Census.

Sources: U.S. Census Bureau. 1980: 1980 Census of Population, PC80-1-B1, Table 41; 1990: 1990 Census of Population, CP-1-1, 

Table 13; 2000: Census 2000, Summary File 2, PCT3; 2010: 2010 Census, Summary File 1, PCT12; 2020–2050: 2008 National 

Population Projections, Table 12.

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

1980–1990 1990–2000 2000–2010 2010–2020 2020–2030 2030–2040 2040–2050

65–89 90+ Percent
4 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 U.S. Census Bureau

had 50,000 or more people aged Rhode Island, and South Dakota) FINDINGS

90 and older—California, Florida, were among those which had the 

Some states with the Illinois, Massachusetts, Michigan, highest shares of 90 and older 

highest share of 90+ New Jersey, New York, Ohio, among the older population. This 

are not among the most Pennsylvania, and Texas (Table 1).9 finding is consistent with these 

populous states in size of However, when using the percent- states being among the top older 

the older population. age of the 65-and-older population states measured by the share of 

aged 90 and older as an indicator population aged 65 and over of the In 2006–2008, there were an of being oldest (Figure 3), most total state population (Figure 4). estimated 1.8 million people aged of the states, with the exception 90 and over in the United States 

7, 8 of Massachusetts, with the larg- (Appendix Table 1-A). Ten states est number of 90 and older were 

7 Although the ACS produces population, not ranked in the top 10 (Table 1). 

demographic, and housing unit estimates, it In contrast, some of the smallest is the Census Bureau’s Population Estimates 

Program that produces and disseminates the states in terms of population size 

official estimates of the population for the of 90 and older (North Dakota, nation by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin. 8 See Appendix Table 1-B for the margin 

of error for variables included in Appendix 9 States in this report include the 50 states 

Table 1-A. and the District of Columbia.

Table 1.

Ten States With Highest Population Aged 90 and Over, 

and Percentage Aged 90 and Over of Aged 65 and Over: 

2006–2008

(Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling 

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

Rank Population aged 90 and over Percentage aged 90 and over of 

aged 65 and over

State Number State Percent

1 California . . . . . . . . 186,448 North Dakota . . . . . . . . 6 .9

2 Florida . . . . . . . . . . 141,922 Connecticut . . . . . . . . . 6 .2

3 New York . . . . . . . . 130,549 Iowa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 .1

4 Texas . . . . . . . . . . . 96,693 South Dakota . . . . . . . . 6 .0

5 Pennsylvania . . . . . 94,444 District of Columbia . . . 6 .0

6 Illinois . . . . . . . . . . . 78,800 Minnesota . . . . . . . . . . 5 .9

7 Ohio . . . . . . . . . . . . 72,077 Nebraska . . . . . . . . . . . 5 .8

8 Michigan . . . . . . . . 58,387 Massachusetts . . . . . . . 5 .8

9 New Jersey . . . . . . 54,130 Kansas . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 .5

10 Massachusetts . . . . 50,214 Rhode Island . . . . . . . . 5 .4

Note: Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic, and 

housing unit estimates, it is the Census Bureau’s Population Estimates Program that produces and 

disseminates the official estimates of the population for the nation, states, counties, cities, and towns .

Source: U .S . Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2006–2008 .
U.S. Census Bureau 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 5

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2006–2008.

Figure 3.

Percentage Aged 90 and Over of State Population Aged 65 and Over: 

2006–2008

(Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, 

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

MT

NM

OR MN

KS

SD

ND

MO

WA

FL

IL IN

WI NY

PA

MI

OH

IA

ME

MA 

CT 

AZ

NV

TX

CA CO

WY

UT

ID

NE

OK

GA

AR

AL

NC

MS

LA

TN

KY

VA

SC

WV

RI 

DE 

MD 

NJ 

AK

DC

HI

VT NH

U.S.

percent 

4.6

4.6 to 4.9

5.0 or more

4.0 to 4.5

Less than 4.0

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2006–2008.

Figure 4.

Percentage Aged 65 and Over of Total State Population: 2006–2008

(Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, 

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

HI

VT NH MT

NM

OR MN

KS

SD

ND

MO

WA

FL

IL IN

WI NY

PA

MI

OH

IA

ME

MA 

CT 

AZ

NV

TX

CA CO

WY

UT

ID

NE

OK

GA

AR

AL

NC

MS

LA

TN

KY

VA

SC

WV

RI 

DE 

MD 

NJ 

AK

DC

U.S. 

percent

12.6

12.6 to 13.9

14.0 or more

11.3 to 12.5

Less than 11.3
6 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 U.S. Census Bureau

Figure 5 plots the percentage of 

the older population aged 90 and 

over, and the percentage of the 

total population aged 65 and older 

for each state. The horizontal blue 

line represents the share aged 90 

and older of population aged 65 

and over at the national level (4.6 

percent), and the vertical orange 

line represents the national level of 

the percentage aged 65 and older 

of total population (12.6 percent). 

Often, the top older states are also 

the oldest. Among states with the 

largest share of population aged 65 

and older of the total population as 

well as the largest share of 90 and 

older among the older population, 

sitting in the upper right quadrant (II), are Connecticut, Iowa, 

Nebraska, North Dakota, and South 

Figure 5.

Percentage Aged 90 and Over of 65 and Over, and Percentage Aged 65 and Over

of Total Population by State: 2006–2008

(Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error,

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

Percentage aged 90 and over of population 

aged 65 and over

Percentage aged 65 and over of total population

U.S. percent = 4.6 

U.S. percent = 12.6

Notes:

Percentage 90+ = 90+ of percentage 65+ population, percentage 65+ = percentage 65+ of total population.

I = percentage 90+: above U.S. level, percentage 65+: below U.S. level.

II = percentage 90+: above U.S. level, percentage 65+: above U.S. level.

III = percentage 90+: below U.S. level, percentage 65+: above U.S. level.

IV = percentage 90+: below U.S. level, percentage 65+: below U.S. level.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2006–2008. 

I

IV

II

III

6 8 10 12 14 16 18

2

3

4

5

6

7

AL

AK

AZ

CA AR

CO

CT

DE

DC

FL

GA

HI

ID

IL

IN

IA

KS

KY

LA

ME

MD

MN NE

MO

MT

MA

NV

NH NJ

NM

WY

ND

OKOH

OR

PA

RI

SD

TN TX

UT

VT

VA

WA

WV

WI

NC

NY

MI

MS

SC
U.S. Census Bureau 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 7

Dakota. In the opposite corner, the 

lower left quadrant (IV), are states 

that are below the national level 

on both measures. Alaska is in this 

category and had among the lowest values for both measures. The 

other two quadrants include states 

that are above the national level 

in one measure but below it in the 

other measure. Minnesota in the 

upper left quadrant (I), for example, had a 5.9 percent share aged 

90 and older of the older population (higher than the national level) 

but a percentage aged 65 and older 

of 12.3 (lower than the national 

level). West Virginia in the lower 

right quadrant (III) is an opposite 

example. Its share aged 65 and 

older was among the highest in 

the nation, 15.5 percent, but its 

percentage aged 90 and older of 

the older population was among 

the lowest, 4.1. The top older state, 

Florida (17.1 percent 65 and older), 

had a share of the older population aged 90 and older right at the 

national level, 4.6 percent.

Whether a state with a high percentage of 65 and older of total 

population is also among the top 

oldest based on the percentage 

aged 90 and over of the older 

population depends on various 

factors. The age distribution of 

a state is shaped by decades of 

fertility and mortality changes.10

In addition, net interstate migration of the young, older, as well as 

the oldest populations also plays 

a role. Even though most older 

people do not move, past research 

has shown retirement migration for 

10 For an example of studies on mortality rate differentials at the state level, see 

Wilmoth, Boe, and Barbieri, 2010.

older people for climate or amenities (such as favorable property 

tax rates or specialized health care 

access), and return migration of 

some of the oldest people to their 

state of origin to be closer to other 

family members. He and Schachter 

(2003) documented that people 

aged 85 and over were more 

mobile than the near old (aged 

55–64) and the younger old (aged 

65–74 and 75–84), and that there 

were variations in net migration of 

older people among states. Further 

analysis and trend data are needed 

to assess the effects of domestic 

migration of the older and oldest 

on the composition of a state’s 

older population.

The 90+ population is

overwhelmingly White.

In 2006–2008, Whites represented 

88.1 percent of the total 90-andover population (see Appendix 

Table 1-A).11 This proportion was 

higher than their share of the 

65-and-older population (85.2 

percent) and the total population 

(74.3 percent).12 Blacks represented 

7.6 percent of the 90-and-over 

population and Asians represented 

2.2 percent. About 4 percent of the 

11 In this report, the terms “White” and 

“White alone,” “Black” and “Black alone,” and 

“Asian” and “Asian alone” are used interchangeably to refer to people who reported 

one race only.

The terms White alone, Black or

African American alone, American Indian 

and Alaska Native alone, Asian alone, Native 

Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone, 

and Some Other Race alone refer to people 

who reported one race only. The term Two 

or More Races is used to refer to people who 

reported more than one race. The use of six 

single-race populations and one multiple-race 

population in this report does not imply that 

this is the preferred method of presenting 

or analyzing data. The Census Bureau uses a 

variety of approaches to report race.

In this report, due to the small sample 

size of the 90-and-over population of some 

race groups, a group “Other races” is used for 

analysis which combines all race groups other 

than White alone, Black alone, or Asian alone, 

and includes Two or More Races. 12 The percentages were derived from 

special tabulations from ACS 2006–2008. 

Race and Hispanic Origin

The U.S. Census Bureau collects race and ethnicity data in accordance with guidelines provided by the U.S. Office of Management and 

Budget (OMB). Starting in 1997, OMB required federal agencies to use 

a minimum of five race categories: White, Black or African American, 

American Indian or Alaska Native, Asian, and Native Hawaiian or 

Other Pacific Islander. For respondents unable to identify with any of 

these five race categories, OMB approved the Census Bureau’s inclusion of a sixth category—Some Other Race—on the Census 2000, 

2010 Census, and ACS questionnaires.

Race data are based on self-identification. The question on Hispanic 

origin asks respondents if they are of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish 

origin. The question on race asks respondents to report the race or 

races they consider themselves to be. People who identify their origin 

as Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish may be of any race. 
8 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 U.S. Census Bureau

90-and-older population reported 

themselves to be of Hispanic origin 

(can be of any race). 

The age distribution of the older 

population also varies by race and 

Hispanic origin. At 4.8 percent, 

Whites had the highest percentage aged 90 years and older of 

the older population (Figure 6). 

Blacks had the next highest share, 

with 4.2 percent aged 90 and over. 

Asians, Other races, and Hispanics 

were similar at 3 percent. Whites 

also had the lowest proportion of 

the youngest-older ages (65–69). 

Most 90+ are high school 

graduates or beyond.

Given that people aged 90 and 

over included in this report (as of 

2008) were born in 1918 or earlier, 

a considerable proportion (61.3 

percent) of them had completed 

high school or above (Table 2).13

Among the 90-and-older population, about one-third (33.7 percent) stopped after high school 

graduation. Nearly 28 percent 

continued their education beyond 

high school, about half of whom 

completed a bachelor’s degree or 

higher.

Education is linked to many aspects 

of a person’s well-being, and 

people with higher education tend 

13 According to the 1940 Census,

39 percent of people aged 20 to 30

had completed high school or above

(U.S. Census Bureau, 1943. 1940 Census

of Population and Housing, Vol. 4,

“Characteristics by age: Marital Status,

Relationship, Education, and Citizenship.” 

<www2.census.gov/prod2/decennial

/documents/33973538v4p1ch1.pdf>).

to have lower mortality rates and 

better overall health than their 

less-educated counterparts as they 

are more likely to have better jobs 

and living conditions and more 

likely to have healthy behavior and 

utilize health care (Kinsella and He, 

2009).14 The educational attainment of those aged 65 to 79 in 

2006–2008 provides a glimpse of 

what educational attainment might 

look like for those aged 90 and 

older in 10–25 years time.15 About 

77 percent of those aged 65–79 

years old in 2006–2008 had com14 For additional research on how education affects health, see Dupre, 2007; Lynch, 

2006. 15 The current cohort’s educational attainment is only an indication, not a projection, 

of the educational attainment of the same 

cohort in the future, as mortality plays an 

important role in the cohort’s survival rate.

Figure 6.

Age Distribution of Population Aged 65 and Over by Race and Hispanic Origin: 

2006–2008

(In percent. Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error,

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

65–69 70–74 75–79 80–84 85–89 90+

Not Hispanic (any race)

Hispanic (any race)

Other races

Asian alone

Black alone

White alone

Total

4.8

4.2

4.8

3.1

3.0

3.1

9.2

6.5

9.4

6.2

7.3

6.7

28.3

32.4

27.8

35.0

31.6

32.9

22.6

25.0

22.4

25.4

25.1

25.2

19.7

19.9

20.0

18.5

18.5

19.2

15.4

13.1

15.7

12.0

13.3

12.9

28.5 22.8 19.8 15.3 9.0 4.6

Notes: 

“Other races” combines all race groups other than White alone, Black alone, or Asian alone, and includes Two or More Races.

Percents shown may not sum to 100.0 due to rounding.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2006–2008. 
U.S. Census Bureau 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 9

pleted high school, and about 43 

percent of them had at least some 

college education.16

Educational attainment varies 

among the 90-and-older population by race and Hispanic origin. 

In 2006–2008, Whites had a higher 

proportion (14.9 percent) of having 

obtained some college education 

than all other race groups as well 

as Hispanics (Blacks, Asians, Other 

races, and Hispanics had similar 

percentages at around 7 percent). 

In addition, 14.3 percent of 90-andolder Whites had a bachelor’s 

degree, higher than other race 

groups and Hispanics except for 

Asians (17.0 percent). 

While a slightly higher proportion 

of 90-and-older men had at least 

graduated from high school compared with women (62.9 percent 

vs. 60.8 percent), a further breakdown of the educational attainment 

by high school graduate, some 

college, and bachelor’s degree or 

higher, reveals that the gender difference in educational level is more 

salient after high school completion. About one in five 90-andolder men had a bachelor’s degree 

or higher, almost twice that of the 

90-and-older women, even though 

the proportions that pursued 

some college education differed 

slightly. A possible contributor to 

this noteworthy difference may 

be the Servicemen’s Readjustment 

Act of 1944 (the GI Bill of Rights).17

According to the 2006–2008 ACS, 

among men aged 90 and over, 42 

percent served in the military during World War II (about 1 percent 

of 90-and-older women did), and 

another 6 percent were in active 

duty prior to November 1941. The 

16 The percentages were calculated from 

special tabulations from ACS 2006–2008. 17 For information on the Servicemen’s 

Readjustment Act of 1944, visit

<www.archives.gov/historical-docs

/todays-doc/?dod-date=633>.

GI Bill, designed to help veterans 

when they returned to civilian life 

after World War II, provided educational benefits including some 

tuition waivers and living allowance for the veterans pursuing 

or continuing their education. “In 

the peak year of 1947, veterans 

accounted for 49 percent of college 

admissions. By the time the original GI Bill ended on July 25, 1956, 

7.8 million of 16 million World War 

II veterans had participated in an 

education or training program” 

(Department of Veterans Affairs, 

2010).18

18 Research has documented the major 

changes in the scope of American higher education institutions, including the emergence 

of the research universities and great expansion of enrollments in public schools between 

1890 and 1940. This expansion facilitated 

the large influx of WWII veterans into higher 

education institutions. For an example, see 

Goldin and Katz, 1999.

Social Security represents 

almost half of total 

personal income for the 

90+.

The annual median personal 

income for people aged 90 and 

over during 2006–2008 was 

$14,760 (in 2008 inflation-adjusted 

dollars). Men had significantly 

higher income than women, 

$20,133 versus $13,580.

According to the Social Security 

Administration (SSA), receipt 

of Social Security has become 

nearly universal for people aged 

65 and over, and Social Security 

provides the largest share of 

their aggregate income (Social 

Security Administration, 2010). In 

2006–2008, 92.3 percent of the 

90-and-older population received 

income from the SSA—86.2 percent received Social Security 

income only, 3.0 percent collected 

Supplemental Security Income 

(SSI) only, and a similar 3.1 percent 

Table 2.

Educational Attainment of Population Aged 90 and Over 

by Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin: 2006–2008

(In percent. Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, 

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

Sex, race, and 

Hispanic origin

Not a 

high school 

graduate

High 

school

Some 

college

Bachelor’s 

degree or 

higher

 Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 .7 33 .7 14 .0 13 .6

Male . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 37 .1 29 .1 14 .6 19 .1

Female . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 .2 35 .3 13 .7 11 .7

White alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 .4 35 .5 14 .9 14 .3

Black alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . 64 .8 20 .3 7 .3 7 .6

Asian alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 .8 22 .3 7 .9 17 .0

Other races . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67 .1 20 .3 7 .0 5 .6

Hispanic (any race) . . . . . . . 69 .4 16 .6 6 .1 7 .8

Not Hispanic (any race) . . . . 37 .3 34 .5 14 .3 13 .9

Notes:

“Other races” combines all race groups other than White alone, Black alone, or Asian alone, and 

includes Two or More Races .

Percents shown may not sum to 100 .0 due to rounding .

Source: U .S . Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2006–2008 .
10 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 U.S. Census Bureau

received both Social Security and 

SSI.19, 20

Social Security income represented almost half (47.9 percent) 

of personal income for people 

aged 90 years and over (Figure 7). 

Retirement pension income was 

the second largest single source at 

18.3 percent. A combined category 

“Other income” accounted for 

about 30 percent of income for the 

90-and-older population.21 Earnings 

(2.2 percent) and SSI (1.9 percent) 

comprised the remaining portions 

of the personal income sources.

The poverty rate for the 

90+ is higher than that for 

those aged 65–89.

In 2006–2008, 14.5 percent of the 

people aged 90 and over lived in 

poverty. Among those in poverty, 

81.2 percent were women, disproportionately higher than their share 

of the 90-and-older population 

(74.1 percent).22 This translates to 

16.5 percent of women and 9.6 

percent of men aged 90 and older 

in poverty (Figure 8). 

Poverty rates for the 90-and-older 

population also vary by race and 

Hispanic origin. Whites had the 

lowest poverty rate (13.3 percent), 

followed by Asians (16.0 percent). 

Blacks had the highest poverty 

rate, with about a quarter of them 

19 Social Security income includes Social 

Security pensions and survivor benefits, permanent disability insurance payments made 

by the SSA prior to deductions for medical 

insurance, and railroad retirement insurance 

checks from the U.S. government. Medicare 

reimbursements are not included.

SSI is a nationwide assistance program 

administered by the SSA that guarantees a 

minimum level of income for needy aged, 

blind, or disabled individuals.

For more information about Social Security 

income and SSI, visit <www.ssa.gov>. 20 The percentages receiving income from 

the SSA were derived from special tabulations 

from ACS 2006–2008. 21 “Other income” includes interest, 

dividends, or net rental or royalty income, 

or income from estates and trusts; public 

assistance or welfare payments; and all other 

income. 22 The percentages were derived from 

special tabulations from ACS 2006–2008.

Notes:

Income is annual personal income in 2008 inflation-adjusted dollars.

“Other income” includes interest, dividends, or net rental or royalty income or income

from estates and trusts; public assistance or welfare payments; and all other income.

Percents shown do not sum to 100.0 due to rounding.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2006–2008. 

Figure 7. 

Income Source of Population Aged 90 and Over:

2006–2008

(Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling

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

Other income

29.8%

Supplemental Security Income

1.9%

Social Security

47.9%

Retirement

18.3%

Earnings

2.2%

How Poverty Is Measured

The Office of Management and Budget (OMB) determined the official 

definition of poverty in Statistical Policy Directive 14. Poverty status 

is determined by comparing annual income to a set of dollar values 

called thresholds that vary by family size, number of children, and 

age of householder. If a family’s before-tax money income is less 

than the dollar value of their threshold, then that family and every 

individual in it are considered to be in poverty. For people not living 

in families, poverty status is determined by comparing the individual’s income to his or her threshold. The poverty thresholds are 

updated annually to allow for changes in the cost of living using the 

Consumer Price Index (CPI-U). They do not vary geographically. 

For more information on how poverty is measured, visit

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

/overviewmeasure.html>.
U.S. Census Bureau 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 11

falling below the poverty line during 2006–2008. About 21 percent 

of Hispanics aged 90 and older 

were poor.

The 90-and-older population had 

a higher poverty rate than their 

younger counterparts within the 

older population. In 2006–2008, 

people aged 65 to 89 had a poverty rate of 9.6 percent, 5 percentage points lower than the poverty 

rate of 14.5 percent for people 

aged 90 and over (12.4 percent for 

those aged 85–89).23 The ACS data 

also showed that in 2006–2008, 

the poverty rate for children (under 

18) was 18.2 percent and for 

those aged 18 to 64, 11.8 percent. 

Compared with these younger age 

groups, the older population (aged 

65 and over) had a lower poverty 

rate (9.8 percent). However, those 

aged 90 and older are poorer than 

the rest of the older population.

Women aged 90+ 

outnumber 90+ men

nearly 3 to 1.

Older women not only can expect 

to live longer than men, but they 

have experienced more rapid 

improvements in life expectancy 

than males during the period from 

1929–1931 to 2006. Life expectancy at age 65 in 2006 was 19.7 

years for women and 17.0 years for 

men. In the past 8 decades older 

women have added almost 7 years 

to their life expectancy or a 54 

percent extension, compared to 5.3 

years or 45 percent for men (Table 

3).24 This female advantage in life 

expectancy has resulted in fewer 

men at older ages relative to the 

number of women, most prominent 

in the oldest age groups. As shown 

23 The poverty rates were derived from 

special tabulations from ACS 2006–2008. 24 Studies on life expectancy in the United 

States point to the slowing in gains of life 

expectancy for women and a narrowing in the 

mortality gap at birth as well as at older ages 

between men and women since the 1980s. 

For examples of the research, see Glei, Mesle, 

and Vallin, 2010; Preston and Wang, 2006.

Note: “Other races” combines all race groups other than White alone, Black alone, or Asian

alone, and includes Two or More Races.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2006–2008. 

Figure 8. 

Percentage in Poverty of Population Aged 90 and Over

by Sex, Race, and Hispanic Origin: 2006–2008

(Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling

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

0 5 10 15 20 25 30

Not Hispanic

(any race)

Hispanic

(any race)

Other races

Asian alone

Black alone

White alone

Female

Male

U.S. percent = 14.5

Percent

Table 3.

Life Expectancy by Age and Sex: 1929–31 and 2006

Sex and age Average number of years of life remaining

1929–1931 2006

BOTH SEXES

0 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 59.2 77.7

65 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.2 18.5

75 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.3 11.6

85 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.2 6.4

90 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 4.6

100 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.5 2.3

MALE

0 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57.7 75.1

65 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11.7 17.0

75 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.0 10.4

85 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.0 5.7

90 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.1 4.1

100 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.5 2.0

FEMALE

0 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 60.9 80.2

65 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12.8 19.7

75 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7.6 12.3

85 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4.3 6.8

90 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3.2 4.8

100 years . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1.5 2.3

Source: Arias, 2010, Table 11.
12 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 U.S. Census Bureau

in Appendix Table 1-A, about threefourths (74.1 percent) of the total 

population aged 90 and older in 

2006–2008 were women. 

For the population aged 90 and 

over, the sex ratio, that is the number of men per 100 women was 

stunningly low at 35. The sex ratio 

decreased steadily with age among 

the older population (Figure 9). 

The youngest cohort (aged 65 to 

69) had a ratio of 87. Even at ages 

85 to 89, men were about half the 

number of women. By the extreme 

oldest ages of 95–99 and 100 and 

older, there was about one man for 

every four women.

Sex ratios of the 90-and-older 

population varied greatly across 

states (Table 4). Among the lowest 

was the District of Columbia (19) 

and among the highest was Hawaii 

(51).25 Despite being a relatively 

“young” state with among the 

lowest percentage of the older 

population aged 90 and older 

as well as the lowest percentage 

of state total population aged 

65 and older, Alaska has one of 

the lowest sex ratios at 90 and 

older (less than 30). Other states 

that ranked lowest in sex ratio 

included Alabama, the District 

of Columbia, Georgia, Louisiana, 

Massachusetts, Mississippi, North 

Carolina, Tennessee, and Wyoming. 

At the other end of the spectrum, 

there were relatively high numbers of 90-and-older men per 100 

women (40 or above) in Arizona, 

California, Florida, Hawaii, Idaho, 

Montana, Nevada, New Mexico, 

Oregon, and Utah.

25 For data presentation purposes, the 

District of Columbia is considered a state 

equivalent.

Note: Sex ratio is the number of men per 100 women.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2006–2008.

Figure 9. 

Sex Ratio of Population Aged 65 and Over by Age: 

2006–2008

13.7 11.7

65–69 70–74 75–79 80–84 85–89 90–94 95–99 100+

24 26

38

52

63

74

82

87

(Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling 

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

65–89 90+

Table 4.

Ten States With Highest and Lowest Sex Ratios for 

Population Aged 90 and Over: 2006–2008

(Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, 

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

Rank Highest Lowest

State Sex ratio State Sex ratio

1 Hawaii . . . . . . . . . . . 51 District of Columbia . . . 19

2 Florida . . . . . . . . . . . 47 Alaska . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23

3 Arizona . . . . . . . . . . 46 Tennessee . . . . . . . . . . 26

4 Utah . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 Georgia . . . . . . . . . . . . 27

5 Montana . . . . . . . . . . 43 North Carolina . . . . . . . 27

6 Idaho . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 Louisiana . . . . . . . . . . . 29

7 Oregon . . . . . . . . . . . 41 Mississippi . . . . . . . . . . 29

8 New Mexico . . . . . . . 41 Alabama . . . . . . . . . . . 29

9 California . . . . . . . . . 40 Wyoming . . . . . . . . . . . 30

10 Nevada . . . . . . . . . . 40 Massachusetts . . . . . . . 30

Notes:

Sex ratio is the number of men per 100 women .

For statistical purposes, the District of Columbia is treated as a state equivalent .

Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demograp

housing unit estimates, it is the Census Bureau’s Population Estimates Program that produces and

disseminates the official estimates of the population for the nation, states, counties, cities, and towns .

Source: U S Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2006–2008 . . .

hic, and 
U.S. Census Bureau 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 13

Over 80 percent of the 90+ 

women are widowed, while 

more than 40 percent of 

the 90+ men are married.

The impact of the higher male 

mortality is seen in the considerable differences in marital status 

between men and women. As 

illustrated in Figure 10, 90-andolder men differed significantly 

from their female counterparts in 

the likelihood of being widowed 

and of being married. About half 

of the men aged 90 and over were 

widowers, while 42.9 percent 

of them were married. In stark 

contrast, more than eight in ten 

(84.2 percent) of women aged 90 

and over were widows, and a very 

low percentage (6.3 percent) were 

married.

Table 5 shows the marital status 

by age groups starting with age 

15. The likelihood of being married 

reached over 60 percent by ages 

35–44, peaked at ages 55–64, and 

declined rapidly at the oldest ages, 

down to 9 percent for people aged 

95–99 and 7 percent for those 

aged 100 and over. On the other 

hand, the likelihood of widowhood 

stayed extremely low until ages 

65–74, and then rose sharply when 

people reached the oldest ages. 

While those aged 85–89 were about 

twice more likely to be widowed 

than married, by ages 90–94 they 

were four times as likely. Note also 

the significant difference in widowhood by sex between ages 85–89 

and ages 90–94, only a 5-year age 

group gap (Appendix Table 2-A). 

These findings indicate that people 

aged 90 and over have different 

marital characteristics than those 

aged 85–89. 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2006–2008.

Figure 10. 

Marital Status of Population Aged 90 and Over by

Sex: 2006–2008

(Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling

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

Widowed

84.2%

Married

6.3%

Never married

5.4%

Divorced or separated

4.1%

Female

Married

42.9%

Widowed

49.3%

Never married

3.8%

Divorced or separated

4.0%

Male
14 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 U.S. Census Bureau

Asian and Hispanic 90+ are 

least likely to live alone.

ACS data encompass group quarters, which include institutionalized as well as noninstitutionalized 

populations. In 2006–2008, half of 

the men aged 90 and over lived in 

a household with family members 

and/or unrelated individuals, less 

than one-third lived alone, and 

about 15 percent were institutionalized in facilities such as nursing 

facilities/skilled-nursing facilities 

(Figure 11). In contrast, 40 percent 

of the women aged 90 and over 

lived alone, and another quarter of them lived in institutional 

group quarters. Given the large 

number of women at these ages, 

this translates into about 520,000 

Table 5.

Marital Status for Population Aged 15 and Over by

Age Group: 2006–2008

(In percent. Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, 

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

Age Total Married Widowed Divorced Separated

Never

married

15–24.............. 100.0 7.6 0.1 0.6 0.5 91.2

25–34.............. 100.0 48.0 0.3 6.4 2.7 42.7

35–44.............. 100.0 63.6 0.7 13.0 3.4 19.3

45–54.............. 100.0 65.1 2.1 17.2 3.1 12.5

55–64.............. 100.0 66.8 6.0 17.4 2.2 7.5

65–74.............. 100.0 63.5 17.3 12.9 1.5 4.8

75–84.............. 100.0 49.2 38.1 7.5 0.8 4.3

85–89.............. 100.0 30.7 59.7 4.8 0.5 4.3

90–94.............. 100.0 17.9 73.1 3.8 0.4 4.8

95–99.............. 100.0 9.0 82.0 3.3 0.4 5.3

100 years and over . . . 100.0 6.9 80.5 4.0 0.5 8.1

Note: Percentages may not sum to the row totals due to rounding.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2006–2008.

Figure 11. 

Living Arrangements of Population Aged 90 and Over by Sex: 2006–2008

(In percent. Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error,

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

 Both sexes Male Female

37.1

37.3

22.7

2.9

53.1

30.2

14.5

2.1

31.5

39.8

25.5

3.2

Group quarters—Institutionalized

Group quarters—Noninstitutionalized

Household—Living with others

Household—Living alone

Note: Percents shown may not sum to 100.0 due to rounding.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2006–2008. 
U.S. Census Bureau 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 15

women aged 90 and over living 

alone and 330,000 living in institutions. Contrasting the number of 

90-and-older women with their 

male counterparts reveals great 

sex imbalances for living alone, a 

sex ratio of only 27, and for living 

in institutions, an even lower sex 

ratio of 20.

Special attention is needed when 

comparing the proportion living 

alone from this report to results 

reported in past studies. In this 

report, percent living alone was 

calculated as a proportion of the 

entire population aged 90 and 

older, including those living in 

group quarters (e.g., nursing facilities). On the other hand, almost all 

past studies focused on older people’s living arrangements used only 

the noninstitutionalized population 

as the base to estimate the proportion living alone. The much larger, 

but all inclusive, denominator used 

in this report yields a smaller percentage living alone but provides 

a more accurate depiction of the 

living arrangements of the oldest age groups of the population. 

For example, in 2006–2008, 39.8 

percent of all women aged 90 and 

older lived alone (Figure 11), compared to 53.4 percent of noninstitutionalized 90-and-older women. 

An older person’s likelihood of 

living in a nursing home increases 

sharply with age. The share institutionalized remained extremely 

low from ages 65–69 (1.0 percent) 

and ages 75–79 (3.0 percent), then 

began to rise markedly, reaching 11.2 percent at ages 85–89, 

19.8 percent at ages 90–94, 31.0 

percent at ages 95–99, and 38.2 

percent at 100 years of age and 

older (Appendix Table 3-A). Living 

arrangements vary greatly across 

race groups and Hispanic origin. 

Three-quarters of Whites and 

Blacks aged 90 and older lived in 

households, while over 85 percent of Asians and Hispanics did. 

Most notably, almost 40 percent of 

Whites lived alone, compared with 

half of that proportion (about 20 

percent) for Asians and Hispanics 

(Figure 12). 

Difficulty doing errands 

alone and mobility-related 

limitations are the two 

most common types of 

disability for the 90+.

Disability is one of the most

commonly used indicators for 

health of the older population. 

According to the 1990 Americans 

With Disabilities Act, disability is 

defined as a substantial limitation 

in a major life activity. Research 

shows that age is positively associated with the presence of physical difficulty, and the oldest have 

the highest levels of physical and 

cognitive disability (Administration 

on Aging, 2010; Pleis, Lucas, and 

Ward, 2009; Wolf, Mendes de Leon, 

and Glass, 2007).26

The 2008 ACS asked several questions about disabilities, including 

difficulties in hearing; seeing; 

concentrating or remembering, 

or making decisions; walking or 

climbing stairs; dressing or bathing; and doing errands alone. 

26 Research has documented declines in 

old-age disability in recent decades in the 

United States. For examples, see Schoeni, 

Freedman, and Martin, 2008; Spillman, 2003.

Group Quarters 

A group quarters is a place where people live or stay in a group living arrangement, which is owned or managed by an entity or organization providing housing and/or services for the residents. These services may 

include custodial or medical care as well as other types of assistance, and residency is commonly restricted 

to those receiving these services. This is not a typical household-type living arrangement. People living in 

group quarters usually are not related to each other. Group quarters include places such as college residence 

halls, residential treatment centers, skilled-nursing facilities, group homes, military barracks, correctional 

facilities, and workers’ dormitories. 

Institutional Group Quarters—Includes facilities for people under formally authorized, supervised care or 

custody at the time of interview, such as correctional facilities, nursing/skilled-nursing facilities, in-patient 

hospice facilities, mental (psychiatric) hospitals, group homes for juveniles, and residential treatment centers 

for juveniles. 

Noninstitutional Group Quarters—Includes facilities that are not classified as institutional group quarters, 

such as college/university housing, group homes intended for adults, residential treatment facilities for 

adults, workers’ group living quarters and Job Corps centers, and religious group quarters. 

A complete description of the types of group quarters included in the 2008 ACS is located on the U.S. Census 

Bureau’s Internet site at <www.census.gov/acs/www/UseData/GQ/def.htm>.
16 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 U.S. Census Bureau

According to the ACS, the vast 

majority (84.7 percent) of those 

aged 90 and older reported having 

one or more types of limitations.27

Difficulty doing errands alone, 

which represents an instrumental 

activity of daily living (IADL) such 

as visiting a doctor’s office or 

shopping, was the most common 

27 The disability rates for the total

90-and-older population were derived from 

special tabulations from the ACS 2006–2008.

type of limitation (67.7 percent). 

Difficulty in performing the general 

mobility-related activities of walking or climbing stairs (66.3 percent) was a close second. Difficulty 

dressing or bathing (45.8 percent) 

reflects a limitation in activities of 

daily living (ADL), and about 40 

percent had cognitive difficulties. 

For communication limitations, 

there were far more aged 90 and 

older who had difficulty hearing 

(43.3 percent) than difficulty seeing 

(25.5 percent). 

Nursing facilities and other healthrelated institutional facilities serve 

people who cannot fully take care 

of their own needs because of 

health and aging (Brault, 2008). 

People with higher disabilities

tend to live in a nursing home. 

Figure 13 illustrates the differentials in disability rate between the 

institutionalized population and 

noninstitutionalized population 

(including those living in households and noninstitutional group 

quarters). Almost everyone (98.2 

percent) residing in institutional 

group quarters (e.g., nursing 

homes) had some type of disability, compared with 80.8 percent of 

those who lived in households or 

noninstitutional group quarters. 

For most measures of disability, 

rates for those institutionalized 

were drastically higher than for 

those not institutionalized.28 The 

largest differences were in cognitive ability (concentrating, remembering, or making decisions) and 

limitations in dressing or bathing 

(indicator for ADL), with the institutionalized population aged 90 and 

older more than twice as likely to 

have those limitations than their 

noninstitutionalized counterparts.

The older a person, the more likely 

he or she is to have disabilities. 

When comparing people aged 

90–94 with those aged 85–89, 

28 The percentage of institutionalized aged 

90 and older having difficulty hearing is lower 

than those noninstitutionalized.

Note: “Other races” combines all race groups other than White alone, Black alone, or Asian

alone, and includes Two or More Races.

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2006–2008.

Figure 12. 

Percentage Living Alone of Population Aged 90 and 

Over by Race and Hispanic Origin: 2006–2008

(Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling

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

0.0 5.0 10.0 15.0 20.0 25.0 30.0 35.0 40.0

Not Hispanic

(any race)

Hispanic 

(any race)

Other races

Asian alone

Black alone

White alone

U.S. percent = 37.3

Percent
U.S. Census Bureau 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 17

the 5-year age group gap again 

resulted in significant differences 

(Table 6). The proportion of people 

aged 90–94 having disabilities is 

about 13 percentage points higher 

than that of those aged 85–89 

years old, and this difference is 

seen in both men and women.

Table 6.

Percentage With Disability of Population Aged 85 and Over 

by Age and Sex: 2008

(In percent. Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, 

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

Age Both sexes Male Female

85–89 . . . . . . . . . . 

90–94 . . . . . . . . . . 

95 years and over

 . . . . 

 . . . . 

 . . . .

69 .4

82 .7

91 .2

65 .4

77 .8

85 .5

71 .5

84 .6

92 .7

Source: U .S . Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2006–2008 .

Figure 13.

Percentage With Disability for Population Aged 90 and Over by 

Living Arrangement and Type of Disability: 2008 (Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and

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

Note: “Institutionalized” includes population aged 90 and over living in institutional group quarters such as nursing 

facilities/skilled-nursing facilities. 

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2008.

40.5

24.3

72.8

80.8

98.2

44.1

29.4

89.2

30.5

94.0

85.2

59.8

34.6

60.2

Noninstitutionalized Institutionalized

Difficulty 

doing 

errands 

alone 

(IADL)

Difficulty 

dressing/

bathing (ADL)

Difficulty 

walking/

climbing 

stairs

Difficulty 

remembering/ 

concentrating/ 

making decisions

Difficulty 

seeing

Difficulty 

hearing

With any 

disability
18 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 U.S. Census Bureau

The 90+ are almost 

universally covered by 

health insurance.

In 2008, ACS began to collect 

details on health insurance coverage. Almost everyone (99.5 percent) in the population aged 90 and 

over was covered by health insurance—98.8 percent had Medicare 

coverage and 28.0 percent also 

received Medicaid benefits in 2008 

(Figure 14). There was no gender 

difference in this universality of 

health insurance coverage (data 

not shown in figure or table). 

Medicare and Medicaid are the 

two major publicly-funded health 

insurance programs that assist 

older, disabled, and poor populations—Medicare provides health 

care for older people and Medicaid 

for poor people.29 These public 

insurance programs’ benefits have 

29 Medicare is the nation’s health insurance 

program for people aged 65 or older, and 

certain people younger than age 65 with 

disabilities or specified health conditions. 

For more information on Medicare, go to 

<www.medicare.gov>. Medicaid is the health 

insurance available only to people with limited income, or other groups of people who 

meet certain requirements. For more information on Medicaid, go to <www.cms.gov>.

enabled people aged 90 and over 

to be universally covered by health 

insurance.

In addition to Medicare and/

or Medicaid coverage, about 

40 percent of the 90-and-older 

population also purchased private 

health insurance coverage from 

an insurance company. Another 

one-quarter of them were covered 

by a previous employer- or unionsponsored health insurance benefit. 

The 2008 ACS also asked whether 

the respondent was covered by 

TRICARE or other military health 

care, the Department of Veterans 

Affairs (VA), or Indian Health 

Service.30

SUMMARY 

Little research has been done on 

one of the fastest growing population segments, those aged 90 and 

over, due to data limitations.31

The ACS, which contains information similar to the long-form 

(sample) data previously collected 

in the decennial censuses, allows 

a general overview of this population. With the known age reporting 

difficulty among the oldest population, caution is needed when interpreting the findings in this report. 

For more information, see “Source 

of the Data and Accuracy of the 

Estimates.”

30 TRICARE, the triple option benefit plan 

available for military families, is the health 

care program serving active duty service 

members, National Guard and Reserve 

members, retirees, their families, survivors, 

and certain former spouses worldwide. The 

VA provides a medical benefits package to all 

enrolled Veterans. 31 Interest in the characteristics of the 

population aged 100 and over also exists; 

however, because of the small size of this 

group, data quality thus far limits in-depth 

analysis of this population.

Figure 14. 

Percentage With Health Insurance Coverage of 

Population Aged 90 and Over by Type of 

Insurance: 2008

(Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, 

sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, see

www.census.gov/acs/www)

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2008.

99.5

28.0

39.7

98.8

26.5

4.7 3.7

0.3

 Indian

Health

Service

 Employer/ VA TRICARE

union

 Purchased Medicaid

directly

With any Medicare

health

insurance
U.S. Census Bureau 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 19

Results from the 2006–2008 ACS 

3-year estimates and the 2008 ACS 

1-year estimates show that a majority of the 90-and-older population 

are White, and women who are 

much more likely than men to be 

widowed, living alone, or living in 

institutions. The majority of the 

90-and-older population are highschool graduates, a relatively high 

proportion given that they were 

born in the early twentieth century. Almost half of their personal 

income comes from Social Security. 

The vast majority reported having one or more types of disability, while almost all of them have 

health insurance coverage thanks 

to Medicare and Medicaid.

The socioeconomic, demographic, 

and health characteristics of the 

population aged 90 and over vary 

by race and Hispanic origin. Asians 

and Hispanics are less likely than 

Whites and Blacks to live alone. 

However, Hispanics have a much 

higher poverty rate than Whites 

and Asians.

The findings in this report also 

point to important differences in 

various characteristics between the 

90-and-older and the younger-older 

people, even between those aged 

90–94 and 85–89. The 90-andolder population has a much lower 

sex ratio and much higher widowhood, poverty, and disability rates 

than those aged 85–89 years old.

This report provides a general 

cross-sectional examination of 

the population aged 90 and over. 

The information may be useful for 

future discussions among researchers and policy makers on whether 

the traditional cutoff age of 85 for 

“oldest old” should be reconsidered, given the rapid growth of 

the 90-and-over population and 

their distinct characteristics. Future 

trend data are needed to assess the 

changes in their status and needs 

for their care. Domestic migration 

data will help decipher the variation among older and oldest states.

Measurement of Disability in the 2008 American Community Survey (ACS) 

In 2008, the ACS changed the way it asks about disability. There are critical distinctions between the conceptual frameworks encompassing the 2008 questions and prior ACS or Census 2000 questions. The changes 

were made in an attempt to capture more reliably the population who would be likely to experience restrictions in participation due to physical, social, and other environmental barriers. After versions of proposed 

initial questions were cognitively tested, the new disability questions were included in the 2006 ACS Content 

Test. Results showed that the test questions had equal or lower nonresponse rates and performed better 

than control questions (disability questions in the 2003–2007 ACS).

The 2008 ACS disability questions include the following categories:

Communication domain: hearing difficulty and vision difficulty.

Mental domain: cognitive difficulty (difficulty concentrating, remembering, or making decisions).

Physical domain: ambulatory difficulties (difficulty walking or climbing stairs); self-care difficulty (difficulty dressing or bathing, or ADL/Activities of Daily Living); and independent living difficulty (difficulty doing 

errands alone such as visiting a doctor’s office or shopping, or IADL/Instrumental Activities of Daily Living).

Because of the difference in measurement, the Census Bureau does not encourage data users to

make comparisons between the 2008 disability estimates and prior ACS disability estimates. For the

definition of disability in the ACS, visit <www.census.gov/acs/www/Downloads/data_documentation

/documentation_main/>. For more information on changes to the 2008 ACS disability questions, see Brault, 

Matthew W., 2009, “Review of Changes to the Measurement of Disability in the 2008 American Community 

Survey,” at <www.census.gov/hhes/www/disability/disability.html>.

A complete description of the types of group quarters included in the 2008 ACS is located on the U.S. Census 

Bureau’s Internet site at <www.census.gov/acs/www/UseData/GQ/def.htm>.
20 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 U.S. Census Bureau

SOURCE OF THE DATA 

AND ACCURACY OF THE 

ESTIMATES

The findings in this report are 

primarily based on the American 

Community Survey (ACS) data collected in 2006, 2007, and 2008. 

The population universe covered 

in this report includes the population living in either households or 

group quarters. The U.S. Census 

Bureau is both the sponsor and 

the collector of the ACS. The 

2006–2008 3-year ACS is based 

on a sample of approximately 8.7 

million housing unit addresses and 

a separate sample of just under 

approximately 560 thousand 

people living in group quarters. 

ACS figures are estimates based 

on this sample and approximate 

the actual figures that would have 

been obtained by interviewing the 

entire household and group quarters populations using the same 

methodology. The estimates from 

the 2006–2008 ACS sample may 

also differ from estimates based on 

other survey samples of housing 

units and group quarters, and the 

people living within those housing 

units and group quarters. Numbers 

in Appendix Table 1-A of this 

report are rounded and totals may 

not sum to the column total due to 

rounding.

The decennial census data from 

1980, 1990, 2000, and 2010, and 

population projections data (vintage 2008) were also used in this 

report for trend analysis of population growth.

Sampling and Nonsampling 

Error

Sampling error occurs when the 

characteristics of a sample are 

measured instead of those of 

the entire population (as from a 

census). Note that sample-based 

estimates will vary depending on 

the particular sample selected from 

the population, but all attempt to 

approximate the actual figures. 

Measures of the magnitude of 

sampling error reflect the variation 

in the estimates over all possible 

samples that could have been 

selected from the population using 

the same sampling, data collection, 

and processing methods. Estimates 

of the magnitude of sampling 

errors are provided in the form of 

margins of error for all key ACS 

estimates included in this report. 

The Census Bureau recommends 

that data users incorporate this 

information into their analyses, 

as sampling error in survey estimates could impact the conclusions 

drawn from the results. All comparative statements in this report have 

undergone statistical testing, and 

comparisons are significant at the 

90 percent confidence level unless 

noted otherwise. This means the 

90 percent confidence interval for 

the difference between the estimates being compared does not 

include zero. 

In addition to sampling error, nonsampling errors may be introduced 

during any phase of data collection or processing. For example, 

operations such as editing, reviewing, or keying data from questionnaires may introduce error into the 

estimates. The primary source of 

nonsampling error and the processes instituted to control error 

in the 2006–2008 3-year ACS are 

described in further detail in the 

2006–2008 ACS 3-year Accuracy of 

the Data document (see Web link 

on the following page).

Nonsampling error also includes 

bias introduced by undercoverage of the population in the ACS. 

To minimize this bias, the ACS 
U.S. Census Bureau 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 21

population estimates are controlled 

to the population estimates produced independently by the Census 

Bureau’s population estimates 

program (PEP). The adjustment is 

done for broad age groups, with 

a top-end age category of 75 and 

over. So the population estimates 

in column 1 of Appendix Table 1-A 

in this report (ages 90–94, 95–99, 

and 100+) are not directly controlled to the PEP estimates. Any 

differential undercoverage (or other 

types of survey nonsampling error) 

for specific age groups within the 

broad 75+ category—including the 

90+ group of this report—is not 

accounted for.

While the PEP population controls 

are intended to reduce bias in the 

ACS estimates, the PEP estimates 

themselves are subject to error. 

The Census Bureau is currently 

engaged in an evaluation of the 

accuracy of the PEP population 

estimates as compared to the 2010 

Census results. The 2010 Census 

population aged 90 and over 

(and 100 and over) is lower than 

implied by the PEP estimates used 

as controls for the 2008 ACS and 

2006–2008 ACS estimates, and we 

investigate possible reasons for 

this discrepancy.

Furthermore, nonsampling error 

specific to the oldest-old populations also stems from age misreporting. This is due to a variety of 

factors, including a gross ignorance of the true age, lack of birth 

records which makes it difficult to 

confirm or disconfirm a reported 

age, reliance by some oldest 

people on the knowledge of others 

for their own age, digital preference (such as those ending in “0” 

or “5”), and deliberate misreporting 

out of the desire to share in the 

esteem generally accorded extreme 

old age (Hobbs, 2004; Howden and 

Meyer, 2011; Krach and Velkoff, 

1999). Studies on mortality of the 

“oldest old” in the United States 

have found overestimation of oldest ages, especially over the age 

of 100, and particularly in some 

population subgroups, which 

biased the mortality rates at oldest ages (Coale and Kisker, 1986; 

Kestenbaum and Ferguson, 2002, 

2005; Preston, et al., 1996; Preston, 

Elo, and Stewart, 1999). However, 

age heaping did not appear to be 

a concern at the national level in 

Census 2000 or the 2010 Census 

(Howden and Meyer, 2011). 

This report does not focus on

population levels but rather provides analysis of the characteristics 

of the 90-and-older population 

on the national level. However, 

because of potential sampling 

and nonsampling errors discussed 

above, caution is needed when 

interpreting the results. 

Title 13, U.S. Code, Section 9,

prohibits the Census Bureau

from publishing results from

which the identity of an individual 

survey respondent could be determined. For more information on 

how the Census Bureau protects 

the confidentiality of data, see

the 2006–2008 ACS 3-year 

Accuracy of the Data document, 

available at <www.census.gov

/acs/www/Downloads

/data_documentation/Accuracy

/accuracy2006-2008ACS3-Year

.pdf>.

CONTACT

U.S. Census Bureau

Demographic Call Center Staff

For further information, call

1-866-758-1060 (toll-free) or visit 

<www.census.gov>.
22 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 U.S. Census Bureau

REFERENCES

Administration on Aging. 2010.

A Profile of Older Americans: 

2010. Available at <www.aoa

.gov/AoARoot/Aging_Statistics

/Profile/2010/16.aspx>. 

Accessed on February 28, 2011.

Arias, Elizabeth. 2010. “United 

States Life Tables, 2006.” 

National Vital Statistics Reports, 

Volume 58, Number 21, 

Hyattsville, MD: National Center 

for Health Statistics.

Brault, Matthew W. 2009. “Review 

of Changes to the Measurement 

of Disability in the 2008 

American Community Survey.” 

Available at <www.census.gov

/hhes/www/disability

/disability.html>.

Brault, Matthew W. 2008. 

“Disability Status and the 

Characteristics of People in 

Group Quarters.” Available at 

<www.census.gov/hhes/www

/disability/disability.html>.

Coale, Ansley J. and Ellen Eliason 

Kisker. 1986. “Mortality 

Crossovers: Reality or Bad 

Data?” Population Studies, 40:3, 

389–401.

Department of Veterans Affairs. 

2010. “GI Bill History.”

<www.gibill.va.gov/gi_bill_info

/history.htm>. Accessed on 

August 27, 2010.

Dupre, Matthew E. 2007. 

“Educational Differences in 

Age-Related Patterns of Disease: 

Reconsidering the Cumulative 

Disadvantage and Age-AsLeveler Hypotheses.” Journal 

of Health and Social Behavior, 

Volume 48 (March): 1–15.

Glei, Dana A., France Mesle, and 

Jacques Vallin. 2010. “Diverging 

Trends in Life Expectancy at 

Age 50: A Look at Causes of 

Death.” In National Research 

Council. 2010. International 

Differences in Mortality at Older 

Ages: Dimensions and Sources. 

E.M. Crimmins, S.H. Preston, 

and B. Cohen, Eds. Panel on 

Understanding Divergent 

Trends in Longevity in HighIncome Countries. Committee 

on Population, Division of 

Behavioral and Social Sciences 

and Education. Washington, DC: 

The National Academies Press: 

17–67. 

Goldin, Claudia and Lawrence F. 

Katz. 1999. “The Shaping of 

Higher Education: the Formative 

Years in the United States, 1890 

to 1940.” Journal of Economic 

Perspectives, Volume 13, Number 

1: 37–62.

He, Wan and Jason P. Schachter. 

2003. Internal Migration of the 

Older Population: 1995 to 2000. 

U.S. Census Bureau, Census 

2000 Special Reports. CENSR-10, 

U.S. Government Printing Office, 

Washington, DC.

Hobbs, Frank. 2004. Age and Sex 

Composition. In Siegel, Jacob 

S. and David A. Swanson, eds. 

2004. The Methods and Materials 

of Demography. San Diego and 

London, Elsevier Academic 

Press.

Howden, Lindsay M. and Julie 

A. Meyer. 2011. Age and Sex 

Composition: 2010. U.S. Census 

Bureau, 2010 Census Briefs, 

C2010BR-03, U.S. Government 

Printing Office, Washington, DC.

Kestenbaum, Bertram and B. Renee 

Ferguson. 2002. “Mortality of 

the Extreme Aged in the United 

States in the 1990s, Based on 

Improved Medicare Data.” North 

American Actuarial Journal,

Vol. 6, No. 3: 38–44.

Kestenbaum, Bertram and B. Renee 

Ferguson. 2005. “Number of 

Centenarians in the United States 

Jan. 1, 1990, Jan. 1, 2000, and 

Jan. 1, 2010 Based on Improved 

Medicare Data.” Paper presented 

at The Living to 100 and Beyond 

Symposium, Orlando, Florida, 

January 12–14, 2005.

Kinsella, Kevin and Wan He.

2009. An Aging World: 2008. 

U.S. Census Bureau, International 

Population Reports, P95/09-1, 

U.S. Government Printing Office, 

Washington, DC.
U.S. Census Bureau 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 23

Krach, Constance A. and Victoria 

A. Velkoff. 1999. Centenarians 

in the United States. U.S. Census 

Bureau, Current Population 

Reports Special Studies, P23-

199RV, U.S. Government Printing 

Office, Washington, DC.

Lynch, Scott M. 2006. “Explaining 

Life Course and Cohort Variation 

in the Relationship between 

Education and Health: The Role 

of Income.” Journal of Health 

and Social Behavior, Volume 47 

(December): 324–338.

Pleis, John R., Jacqueline W. Lucas, 

and Brian W. Ward. 2009. 

Summary Health Statistics for 

U.S. Adults: National Health 

Interview Survey, 2008. National 

Center for Health Statistics, Vital 

and Health Statistics 10(242).

Preston, Samuel H. and Haidong 

Wang. 2006. “Sex Mortality 

Differences in the United States: 

The Role of Cohort Smoking 

Patterns.” Demography, Volume 

43, Number 4: 631–646.

Preston, Samuel H., Irma T. Elo, Ira 

Rosenwaike, and Mark Hill. 1996. 

“African-American Mortality 

at Older Ages: Results of a 

Matching Study.” Demography,

Vol. 33, No. 2: 193–209.

Preston, Samuel H., Irma T. Elo, and 

Quincy Stewart. 1999. “Effects of 

Age Misreporting on Mortality 

Estimates at Older Ages.” 

Population Studies 53: 165–177.

Schoeni, Robert F., Vicki A. 

Freedman, and Linda G. Martin. 

2008. “Socioeconomic and 

Demographic Disparities in 

Trends in Old-Age Disability.” 

In David M. Cutler and David A. 

Wise, Eds. Health at Older Ages: 

The Causes and Consequences of 

Declining Disability Among the 

Elderly. Chicago: University of 

Chicago Press.

Social Security Administration. 

2010. Income of the Aged 

Chartbook, 2008.

U.S. Government Printing Office, 

Washington, DC.

Spillman, Brenda C. 2003. “Changes 

in Elderly Disability Rates and 

the Implications for Health Care 

Utilization and Cost.” Prepared 

for Office of the Assistant 

Secretary for Planning and 

Evaluation, U.S. Department of 

Health and Human Services.

Suzman, Richard and Matilda W. 

Riley. 1985. “Introducing the 

‘Oldest Old.’” Milbank Memorial 

Fund Quarterly, 63 (2): 175–186.

Vincent, Grayson K. and Victoria A. 

Velkoff. 2010. THE NEXT FOUR 

DECADES, The Older Population 

in the United States: 2010 

to 2050. Current Population 

Reports, P25-1138, U.S. Census 

Bureau, Washington, DC.

Wilmoth, John R., Carl Boe, 

and Magali Barbieri. 2010. 

“Geographic Differences in Life 

Expectancy at Age 50 in the 

United States Compared with 

Other High-Income Countries.” 

In National Research Council. 

2010. International Differences 

in Mortality at Older Ages: 

Dimensions and Sources. 

E.M. Crimmins, S.H. Preston, 

and B. Cohen, Eds. Panel on 

Understanding Divergent 

Trends in Longevity in HighIncome Countries. Committee 

on Population, Division of 

Behavioral and Social Sciences 

and Education. Washington, DC: 

The National Academies Press: 

333–366.

Wolf, Douglas A., Carlos F. Mendes 

de Leon, and Thomas A. Glass. 

2007. “Trends in Rates of Onset 

of and Recovery From Disability 

at Older Ages: 1982–1994.” 

Journal of Gerontology: Social 

Sciences 62B/1: S3-10.

Zhou, Yang, Edward C. Norton, 

and Sally C. Stearns. 2003. 

“Longevity and Health Care 

Expenditures: The Real Reasons 

Older People Spend More.” 

Journals of Gerontology Series B: 

Psychological Sciences and Social 

Sciences 59B: S2-10.
24 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 U.S. Census Bureau

Appendix Table 1-A.

Selected Characteristics of Population Aged 90 and Over by Sex: 2006–2008

(Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and definitions, 

see www.census.gov/acs/www/)

Characteristic

Both sexes Male Female

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

 Total, 90 years and over1 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

AGE1

1,761,770 100 .0 457,155 100 .0 1,304,615 100 .0

90–94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,355,390 76 .9 374,360 81 .9 981,030 75 .2

95–99 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 348,055 19 .8 71,625 15 .7 276,430 21 .2

100 years and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

RACE AND HISPANIC ORIGIN1

Race

58,325 3 .3 11,170 2 .4 47,160 3 .6

White alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,552,725 88 .1 404,830 88 .6 1,147,895 88 .0

Black or African American alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 134,485 7 .6 29,515 6 .5 104,970 8 .0

American Indian and Alaska Native alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,420 0 .3 1,265 0 .3 4,155 0 .3

Asian alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38,350 2 .2 12,980 2 .8 25,375 1 .9

Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone . . . . . . . . . . . . 420 – 35 – 385 –

Some Other Race alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19,925 1 .1 5,875 1 .3 14,050 1 .1

Two or More Races . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hispanic Origin

10,445 0 .6 2,655 0 .6 7,790 0 .6

Hispanic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 76,370 4 .3 22,015 4 .8 54,355 4 .2

Not Hispanic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,685,405 95 .7 435,140 95 .2 1,250,265 95 .8

 White alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

MARITAL STATUS

1,499,100 85 .1 389,620 85 .2 1,109,480 85 .0

Married . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 278,365 15 .8 196,285 42 .9 82,080 6 .3

Widowed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,323,345 75 .1 225,365 49 .3 1,097,985 84 .2

Divorced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65,095 3 .7 15,575 3 .4 49,520 3 .8

Separated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,135 0 .4 2,740 0 .6 4,400 0 .3

Never married . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

87,830 5 .0 17,195 3 .8 70,635 5 .4

Not high school graduate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 681,100 38 .7 169,705 37 .1 511,395 39 .2

High school graduate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 593,930 33 .7 133,215 29 .1 460,715 35 .3

Some college . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 246,155 14 .0 66,820 14 .6 179,340 13 .7

Bachelor’s degree or higher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PERSONAL INCOME

240,585 13 .7 87,415 19 .1 153,170 11 .7

Median annual income2

 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

POVERTY STATUS

$14,760 (X) $20,133 (X) $13,580 (X)

Below poverty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 198,090 14 .5 37,335 9 .6 160,750 16 .5

– Represents or rounds to 0 .0 .

(X) Not applicable .

1

 Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic, and housing unit estimates, it is the Census Bureau’s Population 

Estimates Program that produces and disseminates the official estimates of the population for the nation by age, sex, race, and Hispanic origin .

2

 In 2008 inflation-adjusted dollars .

Note: Numbers and percentages may not sum to the column or row totals due to rounding .

Source: U .S . Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2006–2008 .
U.S. Census Bureau 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 25

Appendix Table 1-B.

Margin of Error for Selected Characteristics of Population Aged 90 and Over by Sex: 

2006–2008

(Data based on 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. When added to and subtracted 

from the estimate, the margin of error forms the 90 percent confidence interval. For information on confidentiality protection, 

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

Characteristic

Both sexes Male Female

Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent

 Total, 90 years and over . . . . . . . . . . . . .

AGE

 . . . . . . . . . 12,874 (X) 6,118 (X) 10,944 (X)

90–94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11,895 0 .3 5,308 0 .5 9,993 0 .3

95–99 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,221 0 .2 2,228 0 .4 4,026 0 .3

100 years and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

RACE AND HISPANIC ORIGIN

Race

 . . . . . . . . . 1,915 0 .1 868 0 .2 1,742 0 .1

White alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,272 0 .2 6,261 0 .5 9,808 0 .2

Black or African American alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3,090 0 .2 1,472 0 .3 2,858 0 .2

American Indian and Alaska Native alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 697 – 271 0 .1 616 –

Asian alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,850 0 .1 973 0 .2 1,390 0 .1

Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islander alone . . . . . . . . . 182 – 40 – 174 –

Some Other Race alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1,369 0 .1 709 0 .2 1,178 0 .1

Two or More Races . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

Hispanic Origin

 . . . . . . . . . 797 – 454 0 .1 742 0 .1

Hispanic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,721 0 .2 1,425 0 .3 2,310 0 .2

Not Hispanic . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12,624 0 .2 5,838 0 .3 10,824 0 .2

 White alone . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

MARITAL STATUS

 . . . . . . . . . 11,892 0 .2 5,979 0 .5 9,767 0 .3

Married . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5,420 0 .3 3,929 0 .7 2,453 0 .2

Widowed . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10,657 0 .3 4,591 0 .7 9,871 0 .3

Divorced . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2,215 0 .1 1,074 0 .2 1,857 0 .1

Separated . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 684 – 446 0 .1 584 –

Never married . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

EDUCATIONAL ATTAINMENT

 . . . . . . . . . 3,037 0 .2 1,218 0 .3 2,924 0 .2

Not high school graduate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 7,913 0 .4 3,571 0 .6 6,887 0 .4

High school graduate . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6,477 0 .3 3,233 0 .6 6,201 0 .4

Some college . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,734 0 .2 2,295 0 .5 3,715 0 .3

Bachelor’s degree or higher . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

PERSONAL INCOME

 . . . . . . . . . 3,901 0 .2 2,715 0 .5 3,069 0 .2

Median annual income1

 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .

POVERTY STATUS

 . . . . . . . . . $76 (X) $236 (X) $76 (X)

Below poverty . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4,202 0 .3 1,695 0 .4 3,639 0 .3

– Represents or Rounds to 0 .0 .

(X) Not applicable .

1

 In 2008 inflation-adjusted dollars . 

Source: U .S . Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2006–2008 .
26 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 U.S. Census Bureau

Appendix Table 2-A.

Marital Status for Population Aged 15 and Over by Age, Sex, and Status: 2006–2008

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

Sex and age Total Married Widowed Divorced Separated

Never 

married

BOTH SEXES

15–24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 7 .6 0 .1 0 .6 0 .5 91 .2

25–34 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 48 .0 0 .3 6 .4 2 .7 42 .7

35–44 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 63 .6 0 .7 13 .0 3 .4 19 .3

45–54 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 65 .1 2 .1 17 .2 3 .1 12 .5

55–64 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 66 .8 6 .0 17 .4 2 .2 7 .5

65–74 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 63 .5 17 .3 12 .9 1 .5 4 .8

75–84 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 49 .2 38 .1 7 .5 0 .8 4 .3

85–89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 30 .7 59 .7 4 .8 0 .5 4 .3

90–94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 17 .9 73 .1 3 .8 0 .4 4 .8

95–99 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 9 .0 82 .0 3 .3 0 .4 5 .3

100 years and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 6 .9 80 .5 4 .0 0 .5 8 .1

MALE

15–24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 5 .7 0 .1 0 .4 0 .3 93 .5

25–34 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 44 .7 0 .2 5 .4 2 .0 47 .8

35–44 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 63 .4 0 .4 11 .6 2 .7 21 .9

45–54 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 66 .6 1 .0 15 .7 2 .6 14 .1

55–64 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 72 .2 2 .5 15 .3 2 .0 8 .0

65–74 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 75 .2 7 .2 11 .1 1 .6 4 .9

75–84 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 70 .2 17 .9 6 .6 1 .0 4 .2

85–89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 58 .5 32 .9 4 .1 0 .7 3 .8

90–94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 45 .6 46 .8 3 .4 0 .6 3 .5

95–99 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 31 .7 60 .9 3 .0 0 .5 4 .0

100 years and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 24 .7 57 .3 6 .3 1 .3 10 .4

FEMALE

15–24 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 9 .5 0 .1 0 .8 0 .7 88 .8

25–34 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 51 .5 0 .4 7 .4 3 .4 37 .3

35–44 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 63 .8 1 .1 14 .3 4 .1 16 .7

45–54 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 63 .7 3 .2 18 .6 3 .6 11 .0

55–64 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 61 .9 9 .2 19 .4 2 .4 7 .1

65–74 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 53 .5 25 .9 14 .4 1 .5 4 .7

75–84 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 34 .8 52 .0 8 .2 0 .7 4 .4

85–89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 16 .3 73 .6 5 .1 0 .4 4 .6

90–94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 7 .4 83 .1 3 .9 0 .3 5 .3

95–99 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 3 .1 87 .5 3 .4 0 .3 5 .6

100 years and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 2 .7 86 .1 3 .4 0 .2 7 .5

Note: Percentages may not sum to the row totals due to rounding .

Source: U .S . Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2006–2008 .

Appendix Table 2-B.

Marital Status for Population Aged 65 and Over by Age and Sex: 2006–2008

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

Sex and age Married Widowed Divorced Separated

Never 

married

BOTH SEXES

 Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0

65–74 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 61 .1 28 .5 67 .1 69 .1 53 .7

75–84 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 .4 43 .0 26 .8 25 .3 32 .9

85–89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 .2 17 .3 4 .4 3 .9 8 .4

90–94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 .2 8 .4 1 .4 1 .3 3 .7

95–99 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 .2 2 .4 0 .3 0 .3 1 .1

100 years and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – 0 .4 0 .1 0 .1 0 .3

MALE

 Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0

65–74 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 .9 29 .0 70 .1 67 .7 60 .4

75–84 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 .4 43 .6 25 .4 26 .9 31 .2

85–89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 .0 17 .3 3 .4 4 .1 6 .0

90–94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 .5 7 .9 0 .9 1 .1 1 .8

95–99 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 .2 2 .0 0 .2 0 .2 0 .4

100 years and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – 0 .3 – 0 .1 0 .2

FEMALE

 Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0

65–74 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63 .9 28 .4 65 .3 70 .5 49 .0

75–84 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31 .0 42 .8 27 .7 23 .8 33 .9

85–89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4 .2 17 .3 4 .9 3 .8 10 .3

90–94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 .8 8 .5 1 .7 1 .5 5 .0

95–99 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 .1 2 .5 0 .4 0 .4 1 .5

100 years and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – 0 .4 0 .1 0 .1 0 .4

– Represents or rounds to 0 .0 .

Note: Percentages may not sum to the column totals due to rounding .

Source: U .S . Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2006–2008 .
U.S. Census Bureau 90+ in the United States: 2006–2008 27

Appendix Table 3-A.

Living Arrangements for Population Aged 65 and Over by Age, Sex, and Type: 2006–2008

(In percent. Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and 

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

Sex and age Total

Household Group quarters

Living with others Living alone Institutionalized Noninstitutionalized

BOTH SEXES

65–69 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 78 .2 20 .3 1 .0 0 .4

70–74 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 74 .4 23 .6 1 .6 0 .4

75–79 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 67 .7 28 .7 3 .0 0 .6

80–84 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 58 .4 35 .1 5 .6 0 .9

85–89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 47 .9 39 .3 11 .2 1 .6

90–94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 38 .6 38 .9 19 .8 2 .7

95–99 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 32 .3 33 .2 31 .0 3 .5

100 years and over . . . . . .

MALE

 . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 32 .6 25 .2 38 .2 4 .0

65–69 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 83 .4 14 .9 1 .2 0 .5

70–74 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 82 .5 15 .6 1 .5 0 .4

75–79 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 79 .6 17 .3 2 .5 0 .5

80–84 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 73 .9 21 .2 4 .2 0 .7

85–89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 65 .7 25 .2 7 .9 1 .2

90–94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 54 .8 30 .1 13 .0 2 .1

95–99 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 44 .5 31 .1 22 .2 2 .2

100 years and over . . . . . .

FEMALE

 . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 52 .7 25 .6 18 .7 2 .9

65–69 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 73 .6 25 .1 0 .9 0 .4

70–74 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 67 .7 30 .2 1 .7 0 .4

75–79 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 58 .9 37 .2 3 .3 0 .6

80–84 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 48 .7 43 .8 6 .4 1 .1

85–89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 38 .6 46 .6 12 .9 1 .9

90–94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 32 .3 42 .2 22 .4 3 .0

95–99 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 29 .1 33 .7 33 .3 3 .8

100 years and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 27 .8 25 .1 42 .8 4 .3

Note: Percentages may not sum to the row totals due to rounding .

Source: U .S . Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2006–2008 .

Appendix Table 3-B.

Living Arrangements for Population Aged 65 and Over by Age and Sex: 2006–2008

(In percent. Data based on sample. For information on confidentiality protection, sampling error, nonsampling error, and 

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

Sex and age

Household Group quarters

Living with others Living alone Institutionalized Noninstitutionalized

BOTH SEXES

 Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0

65–69 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 .0 21 .1 7 .1 16 .4

70–74 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 .1 19 .6 8 .9 12 .5

75–79 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 .8 20 .7 14 .2 15 .1

80–84 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 .2 19 .5 20 .5 18 .5

85–89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 .4 12 .9 24 .2 19 .4

90–94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 .0 5 .1 17 .0 12 .9

95–99 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 .4 1 .1 6 .8 4 .2

100 years and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 .1 0 .1 1 .4 0 .8

MALE

 Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0

65–69 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 .3 26 .6 13 .3 26 .8

70–74 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25 .5 21 .6 13 .2 15 .8

75–79 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 .1 19 .6 17 .7 17 .2

80–84 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 .1 16 .8 20 .9 16 .0

85–89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 .1 10 .5 20 .3 14 .1

90–94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 .6 4 .0 10 .7 8 .1

95–99 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 .3 0 .8 3 .5 1 .6

100 years and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . – 0 .1 0 .5 0 .3

FEMALE

 Total . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0 100 .0

65–69 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 .7 19 .1 4 .6 11 .2

70–74 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24 .7 18 .8 7 .1 10 .8

75–79 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19 .5 21 .1 12 .8 14 .1

80–84 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 13 .3 20 .5 20 .3 19 .7

85–89 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6 .7 13 .8 25 .7 22 .1

90–94 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 2 .4 5 .4 19 .5 15 .4

95–99 . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 .6 1 .2 8 .2 5 .6

100 years and over . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 0 .1 0 .2 1 .8 1 .1

– Represents or rounds to 0 .0 .

Note: Percentages may not sum to the column totals due to rounding .

Source: U .S . Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2006–2008 .