Experimental Poverty Measures
Under Alternate Treatments of Medical Out-of-Pocket Expenditures:
An Application of the Consumer Expenditure Survey1
Kathleen Short and Thesia I. Garner
May 28, 2002
For additional information contact:
Kathleen Short
Senior Research Economist
HHES Division, Room 1065
U.S. Census Bureau
Washington, D.C. 20233-8500
301-763-8921
kshort@census.gov
Thesia I. Garner
Senior Research Economist
Division of Price and Index Number
Research
Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)
U.S. Department of Labor
Postal Square Building, Room 3105
2 Mass. Ave., N.E.
Washington, D.C. 20212
202-691-6576
garner_t@BLS.gov
1 We thank Jessica Banthin, Richard Bavier, David Betson, David Johnson, and Barbara Wolfe for their
input into our research. This paper reports the results of research and analysis undertaken by BLS and
Census Bureau staff. This study is to inform interested parties of research and to encourage discussion. All
views expressed in this paper are those of the authors and do not reflect the views or policies of their
respective agencies or the views of other staff therein. The authors accept responsibility for all errors.
1
2
Abstract
This paper presents experimental poverty measures that update those presented
in Current Population Report, P60-216, “Experimental Poverty Measures: 1999”.
Estimates for 2000 are presented and compared with the official measure. In this
paper we emphasize the difference in two of the measures that use Consumer
Expenditure (CE) data to estimate medical out-of-pocket expenses. Poverty
rates, poverty gaps, and income-to-poverty-threshold ratios are computed and
compared across poverty measures for various subgroups, particularly children
and the aged. Results show that alternate methods of measuring medical
expenses affect our perception of the relative incidence of poverty, the depth of
poverty experienced by these groups, and the number of people who are
classified in extreme poverty (those with family income below one-half of the