Concentrated Poverty

The Concentrated Poverty indicator measures the percentage of the population that falls below the federal poverty line threshold, which is updated annually and reported in the U.S. Census. Poverty strongly influences well-being, at the individual level. Individuals who experience poverty, especially consistently throughout their life-course, are at a greater risk of unemployment, obesity, and a host of other chronic illnesses. Furthermore, those who grow up in high poverty neighborhoods are less likely to escape from poverty, especially if they live in low-income neighborhoods during adolescence, and into adulthood. Hence, the effect of place-based poverty is also consequential. As the distribution of poverty and affluence has become more spatially isolated throughout the United States, social and financial capital has also become more concentrated, which impedes the ability for many poor Americans, to access ladders of opportunity. For example, neighborhoods with higher rates of poverty have high demand for expensive social services, which often significantly underserve local residents. Also, high poverty neighborhoods typically have higher preventable deaths, lower life expectancies, more environmental hazards, and poor quality school systems. Furthermore, freeways and other busy roadways often run through low-income neighborhoods resulting in disproportionately higher exposure to noise and air pollution. Data for this indicator is available from the U.S. Census.

Neighborhoodsort ascending Indicator Value Rank
Zion City 46.0% -
Wylam 37.7% -
Woodlawn 36.5% -
Woodland Park 15.3% -
West Goldwire 40.3% -
West End Manor 28.9% -
West Brownville 41.6% -
Wahouma 43.3% -
Tuxedo 60.7% -
Thomas 24.3% -
Tarpley City 40.4% -
Sun Valley 24.7% -
Spring Lake 10.4% -
Southside 83.9% -
South Woodlawn 34.0% -
South Titusville 37.1% -
South Pratt 13.6% -
South East Lake 36.3% -
Smithfield Estates 13.7% -
Smithfield 46.7% -
Sherman Heights 21.1% -
Sandusky 16.8% -
Roosevelt 25.7% -
Roebuck Springs 9.7% -
Roebuck 23.9% -
Rising - West Princeton 53.3% -
Riley 25.2% -
Redmont Park 9.6% -
Powderly 37.5% -
Pine Knoll Vista 6.1% -
Penfield Park 25.2% -
Oxmoor 16.2% -
Overton 10.6% -
Oakwood Place 33.9% -
Oak Ridge Park 39.8% -
Oak Ridge 16.2% -
Norwood 54.2% -
North Titusville 53.0% -
North Pratt 17.1% -
North East Lake 42.2% -
North Birmingham 23.6% -
North Avondale 66.2% -
Mason City 47.7% -
Maple Grove 25.1% -
Liberty Highlands 20.5% -
Kingston 50.7% -
Killough Springs 22.7% -
Jones Valley 21.1% -
Inglenook 42.6% -
Industrial Center 43.3% -
Huffman 18.0% -
Hooper City 25.9% -
Hillman Park 33.7% -
Hillman 18.3% -
Highland Park 19.1% -
Harriman Park 57.2% -
Green Acres 13.7% -
Graymont 65.6% -
Grasselli Heights 34.8% -
Glen Iris 32.4% -
Germania Park 32.4% -
Gate City 82.8% -
Garden Highlands 39.6% -
Fountain Heights 47.8% -
Forest Park 26.2% -
Five Points South 33.4% -
Fairview 33.3% -
Fairmont 49.1% -
Evergreen 34.2% -
Ensley Highlands 32.1% -
Ensley 43.3% -
Enon Ridge 34.0% -
Echo Highlands 20.9% -
Eastwood 27.2% -
East Thomas 25.1% -
East Lake 26.2% -
East Brownville 33.8% -
East Birmingham 52.5% -
East Avondale 29.4% -
Druid Hills 28.7% -
Dolomite 16.4% -
Crestwood South 6.2% -
Crestwood North 14.0% -
Crestline 11.1% -
Collegeville 67.1% -
College Hills 28.9% -
Central Pratt 31.8% -
Central Park 35.5% -
Central City 31.7% -
Bush Hills 19.6% -
Brummitt Heights 6.1% -
Brownsville Heights 16.1% -
Brown Springs 31.7% -
Bridlewood 26.0% -
Belview Heights 19.6% -
Arlington - West End 36.1% -
Apple Valley 17.2% -
Airport Highlands 15.6% -
Acipco-Finley 24.3% -

Key Citations:
1. Williams, DR, Collins, C. Racial residential segregation: a fundamental cause of racial disparities in health. Public Health Reports. 2001; 116: 404-416.
2. Wilson, WJ. The Truly Disadvantaged: The Inner City, the Underclass, and Public Policy. Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press; 1987.
3. Lannin, DR, Matthews, HF, Mitchell, J, Swanson, FH, Edwards, MS. Influence of Socioeconomic and Cultural Factors on Racial Differences in Late-stage Presentation of Breast Cancer. JAMA: Journal of the American Medical Association. 1998; 279(22): 1801-1807.