Beyond Income Poverty: Measuring Disadvantage in Terms of Material Hardship and Health

Abstract

The New York City (NYC) Longitudinal Study of Wellbeing, or "Poverty Tracker," is a survey of approximately 2300 NYC residents. Its purpose is to provide a multidimensional and dynamic understanding of economic disadvantage in NYC. Measures of disadvantage were collected at baseline and a 12-month follow-up, and include 3 types of disadvantage: 1) income poverty, using a measure on the basis of the new Supplemental Poverty Measure; 2) material hardship, including indicators of food insecurity, housing hardship, unmet medical needs, utility cutoffs, and financial insecurity; and 3) adult health problems, which can drain family time and resources. In this article initial results for NYC families with children younger than the age of 18 years are presented. At baseline, 56% of families with children had 1 or more type of disadvantage, including 28% with income poverty, 39% with material hardship, and 17% with an adult health problem. Even among nonpoor families, 33% experienced material hardship and 14% reported an adult health problem. Two-thirds of all families faced disadvantage at either baseline or follow-up, with 46% experiencing some kind of disadvantage at both time points. Respondents with a college education were much less likely to face disadvantage. Even after adjusting for educational attainment and family characteristics, the families of black and Hispanic respondents had increased rates of disadvantage. Considering income poverty alone the extent of disadvantage among families with children in NYC is greatly understated. These results suggest that in addition to addressing income poverty, policymakers should give priority to efforts to reduce material hardship and help families cope with chronic physical or mental illness. The need for these resources extends far above the poverty line.

Keywords: children; material hardship; poverty.

Figure 1

Baseline prevalence of income poverty, material hardship, adult health problems, and any disadvantage for all families with children and by family poverty; Note: All figures are weighted. Family poverty was assessed at baseline using the supplemental poverty measure.

Figure 2

Change in disadvantage status between baseline and follow-up for all families with children and by family poverty; Note: All figures are weighted. Family poverty was assessed at baseline using the supplemental poverty measure. Disadvantaged families had at least one of these three characteristics: (1) poverty as assessed using the supplementary poverty measure, (2) material hardship, or (3) adult health problem. Families with “no disadvantage” were not classified as disadvantaged in either year. Families in the “entry” category were not disadvantaged at baseline and were disadvantaged at follow-up. Families in the “exit” category were disadvantaged at baseline and were not disadvantaged at follow-up. Families in the “persistent disadvantage” category were disadvantaged at both baseline and follow-up.