Boosting the Life Chances of Young Men of Color: Evidence From Promising Programs

In light of the momentum building to improve the fortunes of young men of color, this review examines what is known about this population -- particularly related to their struggles in the labor market -- and highlights programs that are shown by randomized controlled trials to be making a difference

Child Care Expenses Push Many Families Into Poverty

In this fact sheet, authors Marybeth Mattingly and Christopher Wimer use the Supplemental Poverty Measure to assess the extent to which child care costs are pushing families with young children into poverty or preventing them from escaping it. They focus on families with at least one child under age 6 who report any child care expenditures. They report that one third of poor families who pay for child care for their young children are pushed into poverty by their child care expenses. Families most often pushed into poverty by child care expenses include households with three or more children, those headed by a single parent, those with a black or Hispanic head of household, and those headed by someone with less than a high school degree or by someone who does not work full time. Their findings suggest that lowering out-of-pocket child care expenses for families with young children would serve to reduce poverty. Additionally, things like increased subsidies may expand access to higher quality child care or open the door to increased labor force participation

Child Care Expenses Make Middle-Class Incomes Hard to Reach

In this brief, authors Robert Paul Hartley, Marybeth Mattingly, and Christopher Wimer present estimates of the number of families that cannot maintain a middle-class income as a result of child care expenses. Estimates are based on 2013–2017 data from the Current Population Survey’s Annual Social and Economic Supplement, which corresponds to income and expenses during 2012–2016. They report that approximately 9 percent of working families with children under age 6 are pushed out of the middle class as a result of child care expenses. For working families with very young children (under age 3), 8 percent are pushed below the middle-class threshold. If all middle-class working families with young children were to pay what typical upper-middle and middle-class families pay for child care, roughly $6,900 per year on average, an additional 21 percent would be pushed below the middle-class threshold. They report that the current funding infrastructure for helping parents find and pay for affordable, quality child care is woefully inadequate. One way to support working families would be to increase funding for the Child Care and Development Fund, which is currently targeted toward families below the middle class

Data Snapshot: Poorer Working Families with Young Children and No Out-of-Pocket Child Care Struggle Financially

Low-income families with working parents face significant burdens paying for child care, which can function as a barrier to work and often means parents must rely on child care arrangements that are less formal and less stable

Doing More for Our Children: Modeling a Universal Child Allowance or More Generous Child Tax Credit

Child poverty in the United States remains stubbornly high, with 12.2 million children living in poverty in 2013. Nearly 17 percent of children in the United States lived in poverty in 2013 -- a higher rate than for other age groups, and considerably higher than the child poverty rate in other advanced industrialized countries. The U.S. deep child poverty rate -- children who live in families with incomes less than half of the poverty line -- was 4.5 percent of all children in 2013, meaning nearly 1 in 20 children live in families that cannot even afford half of what is considered a minimally adequate living.One key policy for reducing child poverty is the child tax credit (CTC) -- which reduces the child poverty rate from 18.8 percent to 16.5 percent of American children. There is broad acceptance of the importance of the CTC, and key expansions to the CTC were made permanent at the end of 2015. At a moment when leaders ranging from President Barack Obama to Speaker Paul Ryan are talking about poverty, now is an opportune time to explore policy options that would build on this success. This report models two approaches to reduce child poverty in the United States even further -- a universal child allowance and an expanded CTC.A universal child allowance is a cash benefit that is provided to all families with children without regard to their income, earnings, or other qualifying conditions, and that could be subject to taxes for families with high incomes. The U.S. child tax credit, in contrast, is provided only to families that meet a threshold for earnings, phasing in as earnings increase and then phasing out as earnings rise higher. While most other advanced industrialized countries have some kind of universal support for children, the United States does not.For each approach, we begin with a modest reform, and then model increasingly generous versions. In our simulations, we find that even the modest reforms generate important poverty reductions. Our results also make clear that the more we spend on these programs, the greater the reduction in poverty the United States can achieve

The Cost of Free Assistance: Why Low-Income Individuals Do Not Access Food Pantries

Non-governmental free food assistance is available to many lowincome Americans through food pantries. However, most do not use this assistance, even though it can be worth over $2,000 per year. Survey research suggests concrete barriers, such as lack of information, account for non-use. In contrast, qualitative studies focus on the role of cultural factors, such as stigma. Drawing on interviews with 53 low-income individuals in San Francisco who did not use food pantries, we reconcile these findings by illustrating how the two types of barriers are connected. Reasons for non-use such as need, information, long lines, and food quality were rooted in respondents\u27 subjective understandings of those for whom the service was intended, those perceived to use the service, and the service\u27s respect for the community. Increasing nonprofit service utilization requires attention to how potential users relate seemingly objective barriers to subjective interpretations

Trends in Child Poverty by Race/Ethnicity: New Evidence Using an Anchored Historical Supplemental Poverty Measure

Official poverty statistics have been criticized, however, for being based on an outdated measure of poverty (Blank, 2008; Citro and Michael, 1995). First put into use in the 1960s, the official poverty measure’s (OPM) concept of needs has been updated for inflation but still reflects the living standards, family budgets, and family structures of that time. Moreover, when tallying family resources, the OPM misses key government programs such as Food Stamps and tax credits that have expanded since the 1960s. For these reasons, the Census Bureau and the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) implemented an improved “supplemental poverty measure” (SPM) in 2011 (Short 2011) for calendar years 2009 and 2010. This SPM is now released annually alongside the OPM (see Short 2015 for the latest data as of this writing), but the Census Bureau has no plans to produce the measure historically. However, historical data on levels and trends in poverty are essential for better understanding the progress the country has made since Lyndon B. Johnson’s famous declaration of the War on Poverty in the 1960s. Understanding what has been successful in the past is important for assessing what might be successful in the future for amelioration of economic disadvantage. What’s more, success and its sources may vary by race/ethnicity. We use a historical version of the SPM to provide the first estimates of racial/ethnic differences in child poverty for the period 1970 to the present using this improved measure. We begin our analysis in 1970 because that is the first year we can reliably distinguish non-Hispanic whites, African-Americans, and Latinos (unfortunately, data limitations prevent us from examining other groups over the long term). We detail below our data and methods, then describe our main results, and conclude briefly. Data and Methods We use data from multiple years of the Current Population Survey’s Annual Social and Economic Supplement (also known as the March CPS) combined with data from the Consumer Expenditure Survey (CEX) to produce SPM estimates for the period 1970 to 2014. We use a methodology similar to that used by the Census Bureau and the Bureau of Labor Statistics in producing their SPM estimates, but with adjustments for differences in available data over time. Our methodology differs from the SPM in only one respect. Instead of using a poverty threshold that is re-calculated over time, we use today’s threshold and carry it back historically by adjusting it for inflation using the CPI-U-RS. Because this alternative measure is anchored with today’s SPM threshold, we refer to it as an anchored supplemental poverty measure, or anchored SPM for short. An advantage of an anchored SPM is that poverty trends resulting from such a measure can be explained only by changes in income and net transfer payments (cash or in kind). Trends in poverty based on a relative measure (e.g. SPM poverty), on the other hand, could be due to over time changes in thresholds. Thus, an anchored SPM arguably provides a cleaner measure of how changes in income and net transfer payments have affected poverty historically (Wimer et al., 2013).[1] [1] All analyses in this paper are also available using quasi-relative poverty thresholds; results are available upon request

Giving Unto Others: Private Financial Transfers and Hardship Among Families With Children

Prior research shows that financial assistance from family and friends is an important source of support for families with children. Research on financial transfers has largely focused on the recipients of transfers, however. In this study, using longitudinal data from the Fragile Families and Child Wellbeing Study (n ∼ 16,000 person‐waves), the authors examine the association between the provision of financial assistance to family and friends and material hardship. The results from pooled regression and fixed effects models indicate that providing financial transfers is associated with an increased risk of hardship. The most economically disadvantaged groups, single mothers, those in the bottom income tertile, and Black mothers are the most likely to experience hardship after giving a transfer. These findings have important implications for understanding why families may have difficulty meeting basic and essential needs and how social networks may exacerbate the challenges of escaping poverty and establishing economic self‐sufficiency.Peer Reviewedhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/136679/1/jomf12392_am.pdfhttps://deepblue.lib.umich.edu/bitstream/2027.42/136679/2/jomf12392.pd

Data Snapshot: Working Families With Young Children Are Unlikely to Afford Child Care

Working families with young children face substantial barriers in accessing and affording quality child care. Figure 1 shows that among working families with a child under age 3, those who do not pay for child care are more likely to live in poor or low-income families than those who do pay for child care (61 percent versus 45 percent)

Cost of living, Healthy Food Acquisition, and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program

We tested the hypothesis that high costs of living, such as from high housing rents, reduce the healthfulness of food acquisitions. Using the National Household Food Acquisition and Purchase Survey (2012-13), we examined the relationships between cost of living and food acquisition patterns among both SNAP participants and non-participants (N = 5,414 individuals from households participating in SNAP, 3,863 individuals from non-participating households \u3c185% of the federal poverty threshold, and 5,036 individuals from non-participating households \u3e185% of the federal poverty threshold). Indices for cost of living included county-level Regional Price Parities for major classes of expenditures and the geographic adjustment to the Supplemental Poverty Measure, which is based on rent prices. We regressed the cost of living indices against measures of food acquisitions per person per day in each of several standard food categories, controlling for individual-, household-, and county-level characteristics. Using endogenous treatment effects models to potentially address unmeasured confounders influencing both the propensity to live in high-cost areas and patterns of food acquisition, we observed that higher area-level costs of living were associated with less healthy food acquisitions, including significantly fewer acquisitions of vegetables, fruits, and whole grains, and significantly greater acquisitions of refined grains, fats and oils, and added sugars. Overall, living in a high-cost area was associated with an 11% reduction in the Healthy Eating Index—a composite nutritional index previously associated with obesity, type II diabetes, and all-cause mortality. Additionally, we found that SNAP participation was associated with a significantly improvement in the healthfulness of food acquisitions among persons living in high-cost counties