Supplemental Security Income (SSI) provides federally funded cash assistance to help low-income seniors and people with disabilities pay for housing, food, and other necessities. The maximum monthly SSI grant for most recipients in California is currently $735 per month — less than 75% of the federal poverty line for an individual. Also, California funds a State Supplementary Payment (SSP), which provides up to an additional $160.72 per month for most recipients. Yet, the combined maximum SSI/SSP grant for an individual — $895.72 per month — is still equal to only about 90% of the poverty line. Total funding for SSI/SSP will reach nearly $10 billion in 2016-17, with the federal government providing $7.2 billion and the state, $2.5 billion. SSI/SSP recipients live in all 53 of California’s congressional districts. For example, in the 23rd District, represented by House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Bakersfield), 3.6% of residents rely on SSI/SSP to help make ends meet. In the 12th District, represented by House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-San Francisco), 5.2% of residents are enrolled in SSI/SSP. The efforts of Republican leaders in Washington to scale back federal support for the safety net could include reductions to SSI. Any such cuts would be a further blow to SSI/SSP recipients who already struggle with California’s high cost of living.
There was a problem processing your signup. Please try again. Or contact us
Please check your email to confirm your signup.
Endnotes are available in the PDF version of this Fact Sheet.
People in many communities across the state are not sharing in California’s recent economic gains. Statewide, nearly 6 million people (15.3 percent), including almost 2 million children (21.2 percent), lived in poverty in 2015, based on the US Census Bureau’s official poverty line, which is about $19,000 in annual income for a family of three. Among California’s counties, there are stark differences in people’s economic well-being. The latest Census figures show that:
The share of people struggling to make ends meet varies widely throughout the state. The official 2015 poverty rates ranged from a low of 7.1 percent to a high of 27.6 percent, while the 2015 child poverty rates ranged from a low of 7.4 percent to a high of 38.5 percent. (See tables in this companion Fact Sheet for poverty rates and child poverty rates in each county).
In 11 counties, more than 1 in 5 people lived in poverty in 2015 (see Map 1, below). This includes four counties — Fresno, Imperial, Merced, and Tulare — where more than one-quarter of all residents lived in poverty. Such high poverty rates are particularly striking given that 2015 marked the sixth year of recovery from the Great Recession, which ended nationally in 2009.
In 21 counties, more than 1 in 5 children lived in poverty in 2015 (see Map 2, below). This includes five counties — Fresno, Madera, Merced, Tulare, and Yuba — where more than one-third of all children lived in poverty and another eight counties where between one-quarter and one-third of all children lived in poverty.
There was a problem processing your signup. Please try again. Or contact us
Please check your email to confirm your signup.
Endnotes are available in the PDF version of this Fact Sheet.
The share of Californians facing severe economic hardship remains higher than at the onset of the Great Recession, in 2007, in many communities throughout the state. Statewide, 15.3 percent of residents struggled to get by in 2015 — the most recent year for which data are available — based on the US Census Bureau’s official poverty measure. This was 2.9 percentage points higher than in 2007 (12.4 percent), when the state poverty rate fell to a recent low. In addition, 21.2 percent of California children lived in poverty in 2015 — 3.9 percentage points higher than in 2007 (17.3 percent). Specifically, the latest Census figures show that:
Poverty remained more widespread in 2015 than at the onset of the recession in 30 out of the 40 counties for which data are available (see Map 1, below). This is especially notable given that 2015 marked the sixth year since the end of the national recession. There was no statistically significant difference in poverty rates between 2007 and 2015 in the remaining 10 counties for which data are available.
Three counties stand out with severely higher poverty rates. In Kings, Madera, and Sutter counties the 2015 poverty rate was more than 8.0 percentage points higher than in 2007.
Another 11 counties have poverty rates that substantially exceed 2007 levels. These counties, which include both Inland Empire counties and several counties in the Central Valley, had 2015 poverty rates that were between 4.1 and 8.0 percentage points higher than in 2007.
In 16 counties, poverty rates modestly exceed 2007 levels. These counties had 2015 poverty rates that exceeded 2007 levels by up to 4.0 percentage points. Notably, these include counties, such as San Francisco and San Mateo, where the local job market has been booming for several years.
Also, child poverty rates in 19 counties are significantly higher than in 2007 (see Map 2, below). Specifically:
Six counties stand out with severely higher child poverty rates. In Kings, Madera, Merced, and Sutter counties the 2015 child poverty rate was more than 12.0 percentage points higher than in 2007, and in San Bernardino and Stanislaus counties the 2015 child poverty rate was between 8.1 and 12.0 percentage points higher than in 2007.
Another nine counties have child poverty rates that are substantially higher than in 2007. These counties, which include parts of the Central Valley, central coast, and southern California, had 2015 child poverty rates that were between 4.1 and 8.0 percentage points higher than in 2007.
In four counties, child poverty rates are modestly higher than in 2007. Los Angeles, San Diego, San Mateo, and Sonoma counties had 2015 child poverty rates up to 4.0 percentage points higher than in 2007.
Map 1
Map 2
The following tables provide the underlying data for 2007, 2012, and 2015 that this Fact Sheet is based on.
There was a problem processing your signup. Please try again. Or contact us
Please check your email to confirm your signup.
Endnotes are available in the PDF version of this Fact Sheet.
Federal dollars support a wide array of public services and systems that touch the lives of all Californians — from Social Security and health care to highway construction and public schools. A large share, but less than a majority, of this federal funding flows through California’s state budget. The current state budget includes nearly $96 billion in federal funds for 2016-17, the fiscal year that began last July 1. This is more than one-third (36 percent) of the total state budget, which also includes more than $170 billion in state funds for the current fiscal year.
More than 7 in 10 federal dollars that flow through California’s state budget — $69.3 billion in 2016-17 — support health and human services (HHS) for children, seniors, and many other Californians (see chart). Most of these federal dollars, roughly $58 billion, go to Medi-Cal (California’s Medicaid program), which provides health care services to more than 13 million Californians with low incomes. The second-largest share of federal funding for HHS programs — $7.7 billion — goes to the state Department of Social Services. These funds support child welfare services, foster care, the CalWORKs welfare-to-work program, and other services that assist low-income and vulnerable Californians.
The remaining federal funds that flow through the state budget — an estimated $26.6 billion in 2016-17 — support a broad range of public services and systems. This includes $7.6 billion for K-12 education; $6.6 billion for labor and workforce development programs, primarily for unemployment insurance benefits for jobless Californians; $5.0 billion for higher education (the California State University and the University of California); $4.9 billion for transportation, primarily to improve state and local transportation infrastructure; and $2.5 billion for additional public services and systems, including environmental protection, the state court system, and state corrections.
The outcome of the November 2016 national election portends major cuts to federal funding for key public services. For example, Republicans have vowed to repeal the Affordable Care Act (ACA), which would include rolling back the recent expansion of Medicaid coverage to low-income parents and childless adults. This change alone would reduce annual federal funding for Medi-Cal by more than $15 billion. Other services are also at risk, including some that are funded with federal dollars that flow directly to Californians outside of the state budget — such as federal food assistance provided through the state’s CalFresh program and federal Supplemental Security Income (SSI) payments for low-income seniors and people with disabilities. Republicans are likely to succeed in scaling back federal support in a number of policy areas. If so, state policymakers will face difficult choices about how to fill the resulting funding gaps in order to prevent the erosion of public services and systems that promote economic security and opportunity for millions of Californians.
There was a problem processing your signup. Please try again. Or contact us
Please check your email to confirm your signup.
Endnotes are available in the PDFversion of this Fact Sheet.
Parents with low- and moderate-incomes often struggle to stay afloat, balancing the soaring cost of child care against the high price of housing and other expenses. California’s subsidized child care and development programs, which are funded by both the state and federal governments, help many families make ends meet and allow them to avoid difficult choices about where to leave their children while at work. Yet, seven years after the end of the Great Recession, these programs as a whole continue to operate at below pre-recession levels, with inflation-adjusted funding well down from 2007-08 levels due to state budget cuts. This means that far fewer families with low and moderate incomes receive subsidized child care today than before the Great Recession began in 2007.
There is tremendous unmet need in California for subsidized child care. In 2015, an estimated 1.5 million children from birth through age 12 were eligible for care, according to a Budget Center analysis of federal survey data. However, only 218,000 children were enrolled in programs that could accommodate families for more than a couple of hours per day and throughout the entire year (see chart). Child care subsidies provide job stability and have been shown to increase parents’ earnings. Subsidies also allow families to afford higher-quality child care where their children can learn and grow. Boosting support for families struggling to afford child care is critical, especially given that the cost of child care and nursery school nationally has outpaced overall inflation since the end of the Great Recession. In California, more than two out of three families with children who are living in poverty include someone who is working. Yet, in 2015 the cost of child care for an infant and school-age child in a licensed center was equal to 99 percent of the annual income for a single mother and two children living at the federal poverty line ($19,096).
Recent years have seen bipartisan support for subsidized child care at the federal level. In 2014, Republicans and Democrats worked together to reauthorize the Child Care and Development Block Grant (CCDBG) – the primary source of federal funding for subsidized child care. This reauthorization included reforms to ensure the health and safety of children, enhance the quality of programs, and simplify families’ access to and retention of services. However, this reauthorization did not provide sufficient federal funding to fully implement these new provisions. In addition, President-elect Trump’s child care proposal falls short in helping low- and moderate-income families afford the high cost of care and, furthermore, would primarily benefit higher-income families. The President-elect’s plan does nothing to address the vast unmet need for subsidized child care.
State and federal policymakers must increase public investment in subsidized child care and development programs. Affordable child care is critical to supporting low- and moderate-income families while parents are at work and is vital to helping families achieve economic security.
This analysis is the first part of a multiphase effort to analyze subsidized child care and development programs in California. Future phases of this work will examine the unmet need for subsidized child care across different age groups and by race and ethnicity, and will also include an analysis of the number of children and families that would be eligible if the income eligibility limit were updated to reflect the most recent data.
For more information about the methodology used to calculate the estimates provided in this Fact Sheet, see the Technical Appendix.
There was a problem processing your signup. Please try again. Or contact us
Please check your email to confirm your signup.
Medi-Cal, our state’s Medicaid program, is the cornerstone of California’s health care system. Funded with both state and federal dollars, Medi-Cal provides health care services to more than 13 million low-income Californians, including children, working parents, seniors, and others. Enrollment in Medi-Cal increased by several million after state policymakers fully implemented the federal Affordable Care Act (ACA) in 2014, in part by expanding coverage to low-income parents and other adults who previously were ineligible. Medi-Cal enrollees live in all 58 California counties and comprise more than one-quarter of the population in 49 counties. Of the 10 counties with the highest shares of residents enrolled in Medi-Cal, six are in the San Joaquin Valley: Tulare (55.0%), Merced (51.5%), Fresno (49.9%), Madera (45.3%), Kern (45.1%), and Stanislaus (44.5%). However, millions of Californians are at risk of losing Medi-Cal coverage if President-elect Trump and the Republican-led Congress enact, as expected, proposals to repeal the ACA and cut annual federal funding for Medicaid.
There was a problem processing your signup. Please try again. Or contact us
Please check your email to confirm your signup.
The federal Affordable Care Act (ACA), signed into law by President Obama in 2010, has helped to substantially reduce uninsured rates in California. The latest US Census Bureau data show that:
3 out of every 100 children (3.3%) lacked health care coverage in 2015. This is down by nearly two-thirds since 2010 and by more than half since 2013, the year before California fully implemented the ACA.
The uninsured rate for adults under age 65 also has fallen, but remained at a relatively high 12.1% in 2015.
Uninsured rates for Asian, black, and white Californians declined by more than half from 2013 to 2015 (see chart below).
The share of Latinos without coverage also has dropped, though Latinos’ uninsured rate remained in double digits in 2015 (14.1%).
Further reducing uninsured rates would require the state and federal governments to not only continue implementing the ACA, but also to improve it, such as by expanding coverage options for undocumented immigrants. However, President-elect Trump’s vow to repeal the ACA raises the prospect that millions of low- and middle-income Californians will lose access to affordable coverage.
There was a problem processing your signup. Please try again. Or contact us
Please check your email to confirm your signup.
The federal Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM), which improves on the official poverty measure (see note), shows that:
1 in 5 Californians (20.6%) struggle to afford basic necessities, up from 14.9% under the official poverty measure.
Nearly one-quarter of children (23.8%) live in families struggling to get by — a larger share than for adults regardless of which poverty measure is used.
Seniors are nearly twice as likely to lack adequate resources under this more accurate measure.
1 in 4 black Californians (25.1%) and 3 in 10 Latinos (30.4%) are struggling financially based on the SPM (see chart below).
Black Californians and Latinos are more likely to face economic hardship than whites, regardless of how poverty is measured.
The share of Latinos struggling to get by is 9 percentage points higher based on this better measure of hardship.
One-third of Latino children (33.2%) live in poverty based on the SPM, compared to 29.7% under the official measure (see chart below).
Over one-quarter of black children (25.7%) live in poverty based on the SPM. Although this is unacceptably high, it is nearly 8 percentage points lower than the official poverty rate (33.5%) due to the impact of public supports like CalFresh food assistance and housing assistance.
Latino and black children are more than twice as likely as white children to live in families that are struggling to get by.
The share of seniors struggling to make ends meet is substantially higher under the SPM (see chart below).
Nearly one-third of Latino seniors (32.4%) and nearly one-quarter of other seniors of color (23.7%) struggle financially.
Seniors of color are more likely than white seniors to live in poverty regardless of which measure of hardship is used.
Note:The SPM is a better measure of economic hardship than the official poverty measure because it:1) Better accounts for differences in the cost of living by establishing different poverty lines within each metropolitan area and for all non-metropolitan areas within a state combined for people who rent their home, own their home with a mortgage, or own their home without a mortgage;2) Factors in a broader array of resources that people use to make ends meet by adding to people’s incomes the value of non-cash benefits, such as food and housing assistance, as well as personal income tax credits, including the Earned Income Tax Credit; and3) More accurately estimates people’s disposable income by subtracting from income the cost of basic expenses, including work-related expenses, such as child care, and out-of-pocket medical expenses.Three years of data were pooled together to increase the reliability of the estimates for demographic groups based on small samples, such as seniors of color.
There was a problem processing your signup. Please try again. Or contact us
Please check your email to confirm your signup.
This website uses cookies to analyze site traffic and to allow users to complete forms on the site. The California Budget & Policy Center does not share, trade, sell, or otherwise disclose personal information. By using our website you agree to our Privacy Policy.
