Costs of living vary tremendously across the US. Yet, historically, our measurement of poverty and our major antipoverty programs have not accounted for this variation. The Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM) considers a variety of important factors that the official measure does not, including geographic variation in costs of living. This translates into different poverty thresholds for different regions. These geographic variations in the SPM poverty line have a substantial effect on the estimated antipoverty impacts of government programs. In our latest brief, we find that the main reason antipoverty programs seem to make less of a difference in high-cost areas is simply that the costs in those areas are greater. It takes more to make ends meet in high-cost areas, but government benefits do not generally reflect this fact. Ultimately, our analyses show that costs of living are critical to the accurate assessment of state-level poverty rates and the true impact of antipoverty programs.

The CPSP has released a data table featuring the poverty rates from 1967 to 2017 measured under the Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM). The data table includes the historical SPM poverty rates and SPM poverty rates anchored to the 2012 SPM poverty thresholds with and without taxes and transfers. Results are calculated at the population level, as well as for children, working-age adults, and the elderly. This data table allows researchers to determine poverty rates in a given year without needing to download the historical SPM public-use data files.

With the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP / food stamps) up for renewal, its critics are rallying behind efforts to expand SNAP work requirements to all recipients that they consider to be “work capable.” These critics argue that “work-capable” adults are increasingly taking up SNAP benefits while working less. But are these claims valid? In light of the far-reaching impacts that changes to work requirements would have, our latest research brief provides new empirical evidence regarding benefit take up and work effort of “work-capable” adults. We find that “work-capable” adults do not represent a growing segment of the SNAP caseload and a majority of “work-capable” adults who receive SNAP are working during the year that they receive benefits. Our results reinforce a body of research indicating that families receive SNAP in times of distress and unemployment, or times for which the safety net was designed. Access our brief to learn more.

The Department of Homeland Security recently proposed a regulation allowing for officials to consider the take-up of non-cash public benefits when deciding whether to admit or deport non-citizens. Immigrant parents, many of whom have citizen children who are entitled to SNAP benefits, are increasingly fearful that any interaction with the government will lead to arrest and deportation. In this brief, we present estimates of the potential impact of this proposal on child poverty.

In an effort to reduce spending and deficits, lawmakers are considering major reforms to entitlement programs like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Cuts to the safety net have drastic consequences for low-income Americans. The CPSP estimated the potential impacts of the House budget proposal to cut SNAP by 40% and found that such a cut would impact 24 million people and cause the poverty rate among SNAP recipients to increase by up to 10.9%. Read the full brief to see all of our results.