Although the share of Oregonians living below the federal poverty line stands near a record low, the reality is that the share of Oregonians struggling to make ends meet is far greater. The federal poverty measure is outdated, failing to capture what it actually takes for families to afford the basics such as food, utilities, and more. By one estimate, about two in five Oregonians do not earn enough to cover a “survival budget.”[1]

Relying solely on the official poverty measure masks the widespread economic insecurity that afflicts Oregonians. And yet, despite the fact that the poverty measure severely understates what it takes to make ends meet, nearly half-a-million Oregonians live below the poverty line.

Among families with children living in poverty, a large majority of them had at least one working parent. In other words, among families with children, poverty despite work is the norm. And for those families in poverty without a working parent, the need to care for a child or a loved one, coupled with the lack of affordable child care, prevents them from holding down a job.

The fact that so many hardworking Oregonians are struggling to make ends meet reveals structural problems with the economy. Although the economy continues growing, most of those gains are flowing to those at the top.[2] As state lawmakers look to write the next chapter in Oregon’s economic story, they must focus on policies that support hardworking Oregon families.

Despite poverty being near record lows, many more Oregonians struggle to get by

About one in every nine Oregonians lived below the federal poverty line in 2024, the most recent year with data.[3] That amounted to about 494,000 people across the state. The 11.8 percent of Oregonians who lived in poverty in 2024 was a near record low according to Census data.

While nearly half-a-million Oregonians living in poverty is a sobering figure in its own regard, the reality is the official federal poverty measure fails to account for what it actually takes for families to get by.[4] The federal poverty measure was created in the mid-1960’s by an economist at the Social Security Administration. Based on survey data showing U.S. households spent about a third of their income on food, Mollie Orshansky set the poverty line at the cost of a modest basket of food multiplied by three.[5] While the official poverty line is adjusted annually for inflation, it still is based off that initial measure, meaning it fails to account for the rising costs of living facing families in the generations since its creation.

When accounting for the true costs facing Oregon families, the reality is starker. About 42 percent of Oregonians live in a household earning too little to afford a “survival budget,” according to the United Way.[6] There are several studies that attempt to account for what it actually takes for families to get by. The ALICE Index published by the United Way is unique in that it offers a “survival budget” in addition to its “stability budget.” Even at the lower “survival” threshold, more than two in five Oregonians earn too little to meet the basics.[7]

Most families with children living in poverty are working poor

Despite their hard work, many Oregon families still live in poverty. In 2024, about seven in 10 poor families with children had at least one parent in the household who worked.[8] About one in four families in poverty had at least one parent working full time.

For many families in poverty, the need to care for a child or a loved one, coupled with the lack of affordable child care, prevents them from holding down a job or working more hours. In a recent survey, two in five parents in Oregon said, “they or their partner had to quit, turn down or ‘greatly change’ their job in the last year due to difficulty finding child care.”[9] Access to quality child care is a particular challenge for Oregon families with infants and toddlers. Nearly every county in the state — 34 of 36 — is considered a child care desert for infants and toddlers.[10] According to some estimates, Oregon parents stand to lose more than $3 billion in wages over the next decade as a result of inadequate child care access.[11]

Poverty afflicts some groups of Oregonians more than others

The topline poverty figure can hide disparities in how Oregonians experience poverty. The reality is that poverty is more pronounced among certain groups of Oregonians, including Oregonians of color and Oregonians living in rural areas.

Many communities of color are more likely to live in poverty when compared to their white neighbors. In 2024, about 10.7 percent of non-Hispanic white Oregonians lived below the poverty line.[12] Compare that to the 14.7 percent of American Indian and Alaska Native, 15.3 percent of Latino, and 18.9 percent of Black Oregonians that year. In 2024, 10.2 percent of Asian Oregonians and 16.5 percent of Native Hawaiian and Pacific Islander Oregonians lived in poverty, though those rates were not statistically different from the rate for white Oregonians.

The poverty measure also masks broader economic hardship at the local level. The share of households struggling to afford a survival budget is far greater across all counties in Oregon. Of the five counties with the highest shares of households struggling to afford the basics in 2023, all were rural counties.[13] Of the five performing best in terms of household economic security, four were urban counties. Rural communities in Oregon face challenges relative to their urban counterparts. Their workforces tend to be older, and people are forced to travel greater distances to get to work, see a doctor, or access basic services.[14] Conversely, Oregonians in urban areas often face higher costs of living.[15]

Oregon lawmakers can improve the economic security of Oregonians

Although large numbers of Oregonians are currently economically insecure, there are steps Oregon lawmakers can take to improve the situation. This includes enacting policies that boost wages, expand cash supports for struggling families, and increase access to affordable child care.

• Boost wages. The reality that so many families struggle to afford the basics of life is, to a large extent, the result of the fact that many jobs don’t pay enough. According to the United Way, “of all workers in the top 20 occupations [in Oregon], 37 percent lived in households” making too little to afford a survival budget.[16] There are, however, policy levers that the state can pull to boost wages. These include making it easier for workers to form unions, creating workforce standards boards that give workers in hard-to-unionize sectors a voice in their workplace, and raising the minimum wage.
• Increase cash supports. At the end of the day, poverty and economic insecurity are the result of families not having enough money to afford the essentials. The Oregon legislature can boost the cash resources of families by expanding the Oregon Kids’ Credit, which lowers taxes on hardworking Oregon families and puts cash back in their pockets. It can also establish cash supports for parents of new babies to help them through an expensive transition in their lives. Among other benefits, research on one such program in Flint, Michigan – RxKids – has found reductions in preterm births and improved birth weights among babies, significant reductions in evictions of families unable to afford their rent, and reduced involvement of child protective services in the first year of life.[17]
• Increase access to affordable child care. For parents with young children, the high cost of child care can present a barrier to entering or staying in the workforce, or working more hours to support the family. Oregon needs to invest more in child care. This means adequately funding Employment Related Day Care, the state’s subsidized child care program. It also means establishing a system of universal preschool, a move that would not only make it easier for many parents to re-enter the workforce, but also improve educational outcomes for children and strengthen the long-term economic outlook for the state.

[1] United Way, The State of ALICE in Oregon, United for ALICE, 2025.

[2] Tyler Mac Innis and Juan Carlos Ordóñez, Oregon Economy: Strong Growth, Uneven Gains, Oregon Center for Public Policy, May 12, 2026.

[3] OCPP analysis of American Community Survey data, 2024 1-year estimates.

[4] Tyler Mac Innis, You wouldn’t know it from Oregon figures, but child poverty just skyrocketed, Oregon Center for Public Policy, September 30, 2023.

[5] Gordon M. Fischer, The Development of the Orshansky Poverty Thresholds and Their Subsequent History as the Official U.S. Poverty Measure, U.S. Census Bureau, 1992.

[6] United Way, The State of ALICE in Oregon, United for ALICE, 2025.

[7] There are other credible alternative measures of income adequacy, notably, the Living Wage Calculator of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, and the Family Budget Calculator of the Economic Policy Institute. All three have the benefit of findings for various family compositions and at the county level. We chose to use the ALICE index because we prefer its “survival budget,” which reflects the bare minimum required to meet basic needs, as opposed to what a “living wage” suggests. In addition, unlike the other indices, ALICE offers two threshold options rather than just one – the “survival” threshold and the “stability” threshold, the latter being more reflective of “living wage” income.

[8] OCPP analysis of American Community Survey Public Use Microdata Sample data, 1-year 2024 estimates.

[9] Gemma DiCarlo, Oregon child care shortage is impacting parents’ employment, survey shows, Oregon Public Broadcasting, December 6, 2023.

[10] A county is considered a child care desert when there are more than three children for every regulated child care slot. For more, see Megan Pratt and Michaella Sektnan, Oregon’s Child Care Deserts 2024: Mapping Supply by Age Group and Percentage of Publicly Funded Slots, Oregon State University: College of Health, July 2025.

[11] Child Care Trust, Child Care Gaps in 2025: Oregon.

[12] OCPP analysis of American Community Survey data, 1-year estimates.

[13] OCPP analysis of United for ALICE data. The 2023 estimates use 1-year American Community Survey data where possible, and 5-year estimates for smaller population counties where necessary.

[14] For more on Oregon’s aging workforce in rural counties see Gail Krumenauer, Oregon’s Aging Workforce by Industry and County in 2024, Oregon Employment Department, June 1, 2026. For more on how transportation barriers impact economic opportunity see Laurel Schwartz, Overcoming Employment Transportation Barriers in Rural America, Coordinating Council on Access and Mobility, October 30, 2024. For more on how inadequate transit options can impact healthcare access see Rural Health Information Hub, Needs Related to Transportation in Rural Areas.

[15] For a zip code-level view of economic security, select “Oregon” and “Zip Code” at Mapping Financial Hardship, United for ALICE.

[16] United Way, The State of ALICE in Oregon, United for ALICE, 2025.

[17] For more on RxKids’ impacts on preterm birth and birth outcomes see Agarwal, Sumit et al., Perinatal Cash Transfers and Birth Outcomes: A Population-Based, Quasi-Experimental Study of the Rx Kids Unconditional Cash Prescription During Pregnancy and Infancy,  SSRN, September 08, 2025. For more on RxKids’ impacts on evictions and economic well-being see Hanna, Mona et. al, Hardship and Hope: The Relationship Between Unconditional Prenatal and Infant Cash Transfers, Economic Stability, and Maternal Mental Health and Well-Being, American Journal of Public Health, July 4, 2025. For more on RxKids’ impacts on investigations of child maltreatment see, Agarwal, Sumit et al., Cash Transfers in the Perinatal Period and Investigations of Infant Maltreatment, JAMA Pediatrics, May 7, 2026. To explore the broader literature on the impacts of basic income programs on family well-being, health, employment, food security, and housing, see Oregon Center for Public Policy, Guaranteed Income: What the Research Tells Us.