23.11.2014 Views

Higher Education: Gaps in Access and Persistence Study

Higher Education: Gaps in Access and Persistence Study

Higher Education: Gaps in Access and Persistence Study

SHOW MORE
SHOW LESS

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

YUMPU automatically turns print PDFs into web optimized ePapers that Google loves.

Figure 1-2.<br />

Percent<br />

100<br />

Percentage of children under age 18 liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> poverty with a female parent <strong>and</strong> no spouse present, by<br />

race/ethnicity <strong>and</strong> sex: 2010<br />

1<br />

80<br />

60<br />

40<br />

20<br />

0<br />

44 44<br />

35 35<br />

52 51 50 50<br />

Race/ethnicity<br />

Male<br />

29 29 29<br />

Total¹ White Black Hispanic Asian Native<br />

Hawaiian/<br />

Pacific<br />

Isl<strong>and</strong>er<br />

Female<br />

39<br />

53 53<br />

American<br />

Indian<br />

36 36<br />

Alaska<br />

Native<br />

42<br />

40<br />

Two or<br />

more races<br />

Demographics<br />

1<br />

¹ Total <strong>in</strong>cludes other racial/ethnic groups not shown separately <strong>in</strong> the figure.<br />

NOTE: To determ<strong>in</strong>e liv<strong>in</strong>g arrangements, children are classified either by their parent’s marital status or, if no parents are present <strong>in</strong> the household, by the<br />

marital status of the related householder. Poverty <strong>in</strong>formation was available only for children who were related to the householder. Therefore, this figure<br />

excludes any children who were not related to the householder or who are recorded as the householder or spouse of the householder. To def<strong>in</strong>e poverty, the<br />

U.S. Census Bureau uses a set of money <strong>in</strong>come thresholds that vary by family size <strong>and</strong> composition. A family, along with each <strong>in</strong>dividual <strong>in</strong> it, is considered<br />

poor if the family’s total <strong>in</strong>come is less than that family’s threshold. The poverty thresholds do not vary geographically <strong>and</strong> are adjusted annually for <strong>in</strong>flation<br />

us<strong>in</strong>g the Consumer Price Index. The official poverty def<strong>in</strong>ition counts money <strong>in</strong>come before taxes <strong>and</strong> does not <strong>in</strong>clude capital ga<strong>in</strong>s <strong>and</strong> noncash benefits<br />

(such as public hous<strong>in</strong>g, Medicaid, <strong>and</strong> food stamps). Race categories exclude persons of Hispanic ethnicity.<br />

SOURCE: U.S. Department of Commerce, Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2010.<br />

The percentage of Hispanic children liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> poverty<br />

differed by nativity. In 2010, the percentage of Hispanic<br />

children who were liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> poverty was higher for<br />

children born outside of the United States than for those<br />

born with<strong>in</strong> the United States (39 vs. 31 percent). The<br />

same pattern by nativity was found <strong>in</strong> the poverty rates for<br />

children liv<strong>in</strong>g with a s<strong>in</strong>gle mother. Of those children <strong>in</strong><br />

this liv<strong>in</strong>g arrangement, 54 percent of Hispanic children<br />

born outside of the United States were liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> poverty,<br />

compared with 49 percent of those born with<strong>in</strong> the<br />

United States.<br />

Overall, a higher percentage of children were liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong><br />

poverty <strong>in</strong> 2010 than <strong>in</strong> 2005 (21 vs. 18 percent). This<br />

f<strong>in</strong>d<strong>in</strong>g was true for both male <strong>and</strong> female children. Some<br />

differences were found by race/ethnicity: the percentages<br />

of White, Black, Hispanic, <strong>and</strong> American Indian children,<br />

<strong>and</strong> children of two or more races liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> poverty were<br />

higher <strong>in</strong> 2010 than <strong>in</strong> 2005. For example, 30 percent of<br />

American Indian children were liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> poverty <strong>in</strong><br />

2005 compared with 36 percent <strong>in</strong> 2010. The poverty rate<br />

for all children liv<strong>in</strong>g with a s<strong>in</strong>gle mother was also higher<br />

<strong>in</strong> 2010 than 2005 (44 vs. 42 percent). The percentage<br />

of Black children liv<strong>in</strong>g with a s<strong>in</strong>gle mother who were<br />

liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> poverty was higher <strong>in</strong> 2010 than <strong>in</strong> 2005 (51 vs.<br />

50 percent). In addition, the percentage of White children<br />

liv<strong>in</strong>g with a s<strong>in</strong>gle mother who were liv<strong>in</strong>g <strong>in</strong> poverty was<br />

higher <strong>in</strong> 2010 than <strong>in</strong> 2005 (35 vs. 32 percent).<br />

Technical Notes<br />

To determ<strong>in</strong>e liv<strong>in</strong>g arrangements, children are classified<br />

either by their parent’s marital status or, if no parents<br />

are present <strong>in</strong> the household, by the marital status of the<br />

related householder. Children were identified as liv<strong>in</strong>g<br />

with a s<strong>in</strong>gle mother if they were liv<strong>in</strong>g with a female<br />

parent with no spouse present <strong>in</strong> the household. Poverty<br />

<strong>in</strong>formation was available only for children who were<br />

related to the householder. Therefore, estimates exclude<br />

any children who were not related to the householder<br />

or who are recorded as the householder or spouse of the<br />

householder. To def<strong>in</strong>e poverty, the U.S. Census Bureau<br />

uses a set of money <strong>in</strong>come thresholds that vary by<br />

family size <strong>and</strong> composition. A family, along with each<br />

<strong>in</strong>dividual <strong>in</strong> it, is considered poor if the family’s total<br />

<strong>in</strong>come is less than that family’s threshold. The poverty<br />

thresholds do not vary geographically <strong>and</strong> are adjusted<br />

annually for <strong>in</strong>flation us<strong>in</strong>g the Consumer Price Index.<br />

The official poverty def<strong>in</strong>ition counts money <strong>in</strong>come<br />

before taxes <strong>and</strong> does not <strong>in</strong>clude capital ga<strong>in</strong>s <strong>and</strong><br />

noncash benefits (such as public hous<strong>in</strong>g, Medicaid, <strong>and</strong><br />

food stamps). Born with<strong>in</strong> the United States <strong>in</strong>cludes the<br />

50 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, Guam,<br />

the U.S. Virg<strong>in</strong> Isl<strong>and</strong>s, the Northern Marianas, <strong>and</strong><br />

those born abroad of American parents.<br />

Demographic Context 9

Hooray! Your file is uploaded and ready to be published.

Saved successfully!

Ooh no, something went wrong!