The official poverty measure defines poverty by comparing pre-tax money income — gross (before taxes) income from things like earnings, Social Security, and pensions — to a threshold based on family size. Families or individuals are considered to be in poverty if their income falls below that threshold.

The SPM is a broader measure of poverty. It takes into account income plus the value of benefits from government programs designed to assist low-income families (like SNAP and housing assistance). It then subtracts medical, work and other necessary expenses.

It also accounts for state and federal taxes, adding things like tax refunds and subtracting taxes paid. Another difference: SPM thresholds vary by geography and housing tenure (renters, owners, and those without rent or a mortgage) while official poverty thresholds are the same for the whole country.  

These differences led to gaps between the SPM and official⁺ poverty rates, but not consistently across the country.

In many states, the two poverty measures were not statistically different, but in others state-level variation in housing cost, housing tenure, taxes and medical expenses can make the SPM rate higher or lower than the official⁺. 

The CPS ASEC is the official source of national poverty estimates. The Census Bureau recommends using three-year averages for state-level estimates to increase statistical reliability.

The three-year average national SPM rate for 2023 to 2025 was 13.0%, while the official⁺ rate was 10.7%.

The top panel of Figure 1 shows the three-year average official⁺ and SPM rates by state. From 2023 to 2025, Louisiana (19.6%) and Mississippi (17.6%) had among the highest official⁺ poverty rates. New Hampshire (5.4%) had the lowest.

States with the highest official⁺ poverty rates were clustered in the South.

All but one (New Mexico) of the 11 states with official⁺ poverty rates significantly above the national rate of 10.7% were in the South: Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, North Carolina, Oklahoma, Texas and West Viriginia. The District of Columbia’s poverty rate was also significantly above the national rate.

The bottom panel of Figure 1 shows the three-year average SPM rate by state. From 2023 to 2025, Louisiana (19.0%) and California (17.8%) had among the highest SPM rates, while New Hampshire (8.0%), South Dakota (8.0%), Minnesota (7.9%), Nebraska (7.5%) and Maine (6.4%) had among the lowest.

During the same period, eight states and the District of Columbia had SPM rates significantly above the national rate. Of those, five — Alabama, Louisiana, Mississippi, Texas and the District of Columbia — also had official⁺ rates significantly above the national rate.

California, Florida, New York and Nevada had SPM rates above the national rate, but their official⁺ poverty rates were not statistically different from or were below it.

Figure 2 maps the differences between the two measures from 2023 to 2025.

The SPM rate was significantly lower than the official⁺ rate in five states: Maine, New Mexico, Ohio, Oklahoma and West Virginia. 

The SPM rate was significantly higher than the official⁺ rate in the District of Columbia and 26 states: Arizona, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, Florida, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Illinois, Indiana, Maryland, Massachusetts, Montana, Nevada, New Hampshire, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Pennsylvania, Rhode Island, Texas, Utah, Vermont, Virginia and Washington.

The two measures were not statistically different in the remaining 19 states: Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Iowa, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Mississippi, Missouri, Nebraska, North Carolina, North Dakota, South Carolina, South Dakota, Tennessee, Wisconsin and Wyoming. 

CPS ASEC data are released annually in September and are the source for the official poverty measure and the SPM. The CPS ASEC collects data on income, health insurance, government benefits, migration and childcare.

The Poverty in the United States: 2025 report and accompanying data tables contain more information on poverty estimates and provide poverty estimates for several demographic groups and family types.

The technical documentation page includes information on confidentiality protection, methodology, and sampling and nonsampling error. All comparative statements have undergone statistical testing and are statistically significant at the 90% confidence level unless otherwise noted.