Tracking the COVID-19 Recession’s Effects on Food, Housing, and Employment Hardships

Joblessness remains high and millions report that their households did not get enough to eat or are not caught up on rent payments. We are able to track the extent of this hardship thanks to nearly real-time data from several sources on the unfolding economic crisis.

The impacts of the pandemic and the economic fallout have been widespread, but are particularly prevalent among Black, Latino,[1] Indigenous, and immigrant households. These disproportionate impacts reflect harsh, longstanding inequities — often stemming from structural racism — in education, employment, housing, and health care that the current crisis is exacerbating.

The data below, which we will update periodically, drive home the need for substantial, continued relief measures. The extent and severity of continued hardships like hunger, eviction, and homelessness will depend on whether such relief is robust and reaches those in need, as well as the trajectory of the pandemic and the pace of economic recovery. The implications for children in particular are significant: households with children face especially high hardship rates, which research has shown can have serious effects on children’s long-term health and financial security.

Emerging Data Show High Rates of Hardship

The Census Bureau’s Household Pulse Survey, launched in April 2020, has provided nearly real-time weekly data on how the unprecedented health and economic crisis is affecting the nation. Data from this and other sources, such as unemployment data from Census’ Current Population Survey and the Department of Labor, show that tens of millions of people are out of work and struggling to afford adequate food and pay the rent. The impacts on children are large (see figures 1, 4, and 5).

For more on our methodology and data by state, see tables 1-5 at the end of this document.

Difficulty Getting Enough Food

Data from several sources show a dramatic increase in the number of households struggling to put enough food on the table. Some 24 million adults — 11 percent of all adults in the country — reported that their household sometimes or often didn’t have enough to eat in the last seven days, according to Household Pulse Survey data collected February 3-15. This was far above the pre-pandemic rate: a recent survey released by the Agriculture Department found that 3.4 percent of adults reported that their household had “not enough to eat” at some point over the full 12 months of 2019.[2] When asked why, 79 percent said they “couldn’t afford to buy more food,” rather than (or in addition to) non-financial factors such as lack of transportation or safety concerns due to the pandemic.

FIGURE 1

Adults in households with children were likelier to report that the household didn’t get enough to eat: 14 percent, compared to 10 percent for households without children. (See Figure 1.) And 9 to 14 percent of adults with children reported that their children sometimes or often didn’t eat enough in the last seven days because they couldn’t afford it, well above the pre-pandemic figure. Households typically first scale back on food for adults before cutting back on what children have to eat. (The 9-14 percent range reflects the different ways to measure food hardship in the Household Pulse Survey.)

Also, analysis of more detailed data from the Pulse survey collected January 20–February 1 shows that between 7 and 11 million children live in a household where children didn’t eat enough because the household couldn’t afford it. These figures are approximations; the Pulse Survey was designed to provide data on adult well-being, not precise counts of children.

Black and Latino adults were more than twice as likely as white adults to report that their household did not get enough to eat: 20 percent and 18 percent, respectively, compared to 8 percent of white adults. Adults who identify as American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, or as multiracial, taken together, were twice as likely as white adults to report that their household did not get enough to eat, at 16 percent. (See Figure 2.)

FIGURE 2

Inability to Pay Rent or Mortgage

The Household Pulse data also show that millions are not caught up on their rent or mortgage payments. Unfortunately, there are two concerns with the housing questions. First, the Census Bureau reworded the rent payment question starting with the late-August survey, making the results non-comparable to earlier weeks of the survey. Second, Census at the same time made the entire survey longer, which led more respondents to skip questions toward the end of the survey, including the housing questions. This “non-response” is higher among groups that are younger, have lower levels of education, and identify as Black or Latino — groups that are more likely to struggle to afford rent, due to longstanding inequities often stemming from structural racism in education, employment, and housing. For these reasons, the Pulse data likely understate the number of people struggling to pay rent.

Even with these issues, however, the data indicate that millions are having difficulty paying rent. An estimated 13.0 million adults living in rental housing — nearly 1 in 5 adult renters — were not caught up on rent, according to data collected February 3-15.[3] Here, too, renters of color were more likely to report that their household was not caught up on rent: 29 percent of Black renters, 22 percent of Latino renters, and 16 percent of Asian renters said they were not caught up on rent, compared to 13 percent of white renters. The rate was 19 percent for American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, and multiracial adults taken together. (See Figure 3.)

FIGURE 3

In addition, 25 percent of renters who are parents or otherwise live with children reported that they were not caught up on rent, compared to 13 percent among adults not living with anyone under age 18. (See Figure 4.)

Figure 4

Children in renter households also face high rates of food hardship. Over 1 in 4 children living in rental housing live in a household that didn’t have enough to eat, according to data for January 20–February 1 (the latest detailed data that allow us to make these estimates). And more than 4 in 10 children living in rental housing live in a household that either isn’t getting enough to eat or is not caught up on rent. (See Figure 5.)

Figure 5

While households that don’t rent their homes but have mortgage payments typically have higher incomes than renters, they, too, can face difficulties, especially if they have lost their jobs or seen their incomes fall significantly. An estimated 10.0 million adults are in a household that is not caught up in its mortgage payment.[4]

Difficulty Covering Household Expenses

Since late August, the Household Pulse Survey has provided data on the overall number of adults struggling to cover usual household expenses such as food, rent or mortgage, car payments, medical expenses, or student loans. Some 81 million adults — 35 percent of all adults in the country — reported it was somewhat or very difficult for their household to cover usual expenses in the past seven days, according to data collected February 3-15. While we don’t have comparable data from before the pandemic, the data noted above on rising levels of food hardship over pre-pandemic rates suggest that economic insecurity has increased.

Adults in households with children were more likely to report difficulty paying for usual expenses: 41 percent, compared to 31 percent for adults without children. Financial hardship can have serious effects on children’s long-term health and education, research shows.[5]

In addition, Black and Latino adults reported difficulty covering expenses at higher rates: 49 percent and 47 percent, respectively, compared to 33 percent for Asian adults and 29 percent for white adults. (See Figure 6.) Although the survey does not provide data for other individual racial groups, 47 percent of American Indian, Alaska Native, Native Hawaiian, Pacific Islander, and multiracial adults taken together reported difficulty paying for usual expenses.

figure 6

An estimated 43 percent of children live in households that have trouble covering usual expenses, according to our analysis of detailed data from the Pulse survey collected January 20–February 1. They include 61 percent of children in Black households, 59 percent of children in Latino households, 33 percent of children in Asian households, and 32 percent of children in white households. (The Pulse survey asks the race of the adult respondent, not the children.)

Unemployment Is High, With Job Losses Concentrated in Low-Paid Industries

The unemployment rate jumped in April 2020 to a level not seen since the 1930s — and still stood at 6.3 percent in January 2021. Some 9.2 percent of Black workers and 8.6 percent of Latino workers were unemployed in January, compared to 5.7 percent of white workers. Unemployment has also risen faster among workers who were born outside the United States (this includes individuals who are now U.S. citizens) than U.S.-born workers. Changes in unemployment going forward will likely heavily depend on both how well the nation does in controlling the spread of the virus and the steps policymakers take to provide effective stimulus that boosts overall demand for goods and services.

The majority of jobs lost in the crisis have been in industries that pay low average wages, with the lowest-paying industries accounting for 30 percent of all jobs but 57 percent of the jobs lost from February 2020 to January 2021, the latest month of Labor Department employment data. Jobs in low-paying industries were down more than twice as much between February and January (11.3 percent) as jobs in medium-wage industries (5.2 percent) and nearly four times as much as in high-wage industries (2.9 percent). (See Figure 7.)

Figure 7

Data from the Census Bureau’s basic monthly Current Population Survey released February 10, 2021 provide more detail on unemployed workers and their family members. Some 28 million people either met the official definition of “unemployed” (meaning they actively looked for work in the last four weeks or were on temporary layoff) or lived with an unemployed family member in January. This figure includes nearly 7 million children.

The official definition of “unemployed” leaves out many workers deprived of pay amid the pandemic, including some 4.7 million workers in January who did not look for work “because of the coronavirus pandemic,” according to the Labor Department. The official definition also omits close to 800,000 workers who reported that they had a job but that they were absent from work without pay and lost pay in the last four weeks “because their employer closed or lost business due to the coronavirus pandemic,” we calculate.

When family members are considered, as many as 40 million people in January, including nearly 10 million children, lived in a family where at least one adult did not have paid work in the last week because of unemployment or the pandemic, we estimate.

State-by-State Food, Housing, and Employment Hardship Data

Data by state show that hardship is widespread. The following tables provide state-level data on:

  • the share of adults reporting that their household didn’t have enough to eat (Table 1);
  • the share of adults saying children in their household were not eating enough because they couldn’t afford enough (Table 1);
  • the increase in SNAP caseloads (Table 2);
  • the share of adults not caught up on rent (Table 3);
  • the share of adults saying their household had difficulty paying for their usual expenses (Table 4); and
  • the three-month moving average unemployment rate and recent jobless claim data (Table 5).

For data from the Pulse survey we average data collected January 20–February 1 and February 3-15 to improve the accuracy of the state estimates.

Differences in Pulse hardship rates between states may reflect sampling error, so we suggest not drawing strong conclusions from modest differences between states. The data do show, however, that high levels of hardship are widespread across the country.

The Pulse survey asks adult respondents if their household did not have enough to eat and if children in the household were not eating enough because the household couldn’t afford it.

TABLE 1
High Shares of Households Report Difficulty Getting Enough Food

Among adults; data collected January 20–February 15.

How to read this table: In the United States, some 24 million adults reported that their household sometimes or often didn’t have enough to eat in the last seven days. This represents 11 percent of all adults in the country. Some 16 million adults living with children reported that “the children were not eating enough because we just couldn’t afford enough food.” This represents 20 percent of adults living with children.

  Adults Reporting That Household Didn’t Have Enough to Eat Adults Reporting That Children in Household Weren’t Eating Enough Because Household Couldn’t Afford Enough
State Number As a Percent of Adults Number As a Percent of Adults Living with Children
United States 24,236,000 11% 16,347,000 20%
Alabama 400,000 13% 261,000 21%
Alaska 62,000 13% 40,000 21%
Arizona 546,000 11% 352,000 20%
Arkansas 235,000 12% 159,000 21%
California 3,287,000 13% 2,458,000 22%
Colorado 339,000 9% 269,000 19%
Connecticut 181,000 8% 148,000 19%
Delaware 69,000 10% 56,000 22%
District of Columbia 46,000 9% 28,000 18%
Florida 1,954,000 13% 975,000 19%
Georgia 960,000 14% 544,000 20%
Hawai’i 94,000 10% 82,000 21%
Idaho 99,000 8% 75,000 16%
Illinois 860,000 11% 784,000 24%
Indiana 493,000 11% 311,000 19%
Iowa 175,000 8% 142,000 19%
Kansas 158,000 9% 103,000 15%
Kentucky 384,000 13% 253,000 23%
Louisiana 440,000 16% 213,000 21%
Maine 93,000 10% 67,000 20%
Maryland 382,000 10% 318,000 20%
Massachusetts 337,000 7% 268,000 17%
Michigan 696,000 11% 439,000 19%
Minnesota 343,000 9% 231,000 17%
Mississippi 255,000 14% 135,000 18%
Missouri 384,000 9% 307,000 19%
Montana 38,000 5% 42,000 16%
Nebraska 128,000 10% 113,000 24%
Nevada 304,000 15% 190,000 24%
New Hampshire 66,000 7% 39,000 12%
New Jersey 510,000 9% 469,000 22%
New Mexico 182,000 13% 112,000 20%
New York 1,673,000 13% 746,000 17%
North Carolina 783,000 11% 666,000 24%
North Dakota 39,000 8% 30,000 16%
Ohio 969,000 13% 419,000 16%
Oklahoma 298,000 12% 193,000 19%
Oregon 282,000 10% 190,000 20%
Pennsylvania 701,000 9% 521,000 19%
Rhode Island 58,000 8% 37,000 15%
South Carolina 424,000 12% 304,000 24%
South Dakota 57,000 10% 40,000 19%
Tennessee 525,000 12% 377,000 21%
Texas 2,316,000 13% 1,668,000 22%
Utah 161,000 8% 137,000 15%
Vermont 30,000 7% 20,000 15%
Virginia 503,000 9% 387,000 18%
Washington 413,000 8% 339,000 17%
West Virginia 139,000 12% 78,000 17%
Wisconsin 334,000 9% 186,000 15%
Wyoming 30,000 8% 27,000 18%

Note: Figures are averages of data collected January 20–February 1 and February 3-15. In the latest data, collected February 3-15, 11.4 percent of all adults reported that their household “sometimes” or “often” in the last seven days had “not enough to eat,” while 13.8 percent of adults living with children reported that the children sometimes or often in the last seven days were “not eating enough because we just couldn't afford enough food.” As recommended by the Census Bureau, percentages exclude persons not replying to the question.

Source: Calculated by Center on Budget and Policy Priorities from Census Bureau’s Household Pulse Survey published tables “food2,” “food3,” and “food5,” for survey weeks 23 and 24, https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/household-pulse-survey/data.html

Table 2 shows the number of SNAP participants based on recent data available for each state through August compared to February 2020, the last month before the economic effects of the pandemic hit. Available data suggest that 6-7 million more people have applied and been approved for benefits since February, a 17 percent increase nationally. This rise is unprecedented: at the onset of the Great Recession it took 17 months to add this number of people to SNAP. While SNAP participation in most states is still substantially lower than during the peak months after the Great Recession, the increase so far due to COVID-19 has been rapid.

Based on this state data the number of people nationally participating in SNAP appears to have leveled at about 43 million over May through August, though in some states over the summer it continued to grow and in others it fell. The differences in the trends in caseloads across states reflect multiple factors including:

  • Differences in job losses across the months of the pandemic and the degree to which businesses were operating;
  • How quickly states adapted their SNAP application processes to almost entirely remote communications (i.e., online and telephone) and the degree to which they made use of flexibilities offered to help them manage their workloads;[6]
  • How many people received unemployment insurance since the pandemic began in the state and how quickly states processed applications for unemployment insurance (UI) in the spring and early summer (which would have provided income to people who otherwise might have qualified for SNAP);

The slower growth over the summer months may reflect states taking higher income from UI benefits into account (for households that were approved for UI in late April or May), in addition to increased earnings from the economy partially reopening in some places. But UI income fell substantially as a result of the expiration of the temporary $600-per-week federal UI supplement at the end of July, which may have resulted in more SNAP applications in August and September. SNAP caseloads also shrink when the economy is strong, as they did in the years leading up to the COVID-19-related downturn.

TABLE 2
The Number of SNAP Participants Increased Substantially in Almost All States
Preliminary, subject to change. From state- or USDA-reported data, as of October 21, 2020, in thousands
State February 2020 April 2020 May 2020 June 2020 July 2020 August 2020 Percent change:
February to May (or April if May data not available) February to August (or July if August data not available)
Alabama 705 740 755 756 747 751 7% 7%
Alaska 81 86 88 88 88 89 9% 11%
Arizona 801 867 915 902 924 937 14% 17%
Arkansas 318 375 393       24%  
California 4,031 4,451 4,689 4,801 4,600 4,600 16% 14%
Colorado 431 507 524 539 552 534 21% 24%
Connecticut 362 382 388 387 388 381 7% 5%
Delaware * 116 126         9%  
District of Columbia * 109 118         9%  
Florida 2,684 3,212 3,661 3,816 3,845 3,871 36% 44%
Georgia 1,278 1,603 1,707       34%  
Guam * 41 52         28%  
Hawai’i 152 171 178 180 177   17% 16%
Idaho 149 153 151 153 147 145 2% -3%
Illinois 1,748 1,929 2,032       16%  
Indiana 617 680 715 775 844 726 16% 18%
Iowa 296 330 338 308 301 312 14% 5%
Kansas 190 202 209 213 208 207 10% 9%
Kentucky 482 593 624 653 602 599 29% 24%
Louisiana 770 812 843 853 857 866 10% 12%
Maine 165 176 180 179 176 174 9% 6%
Maryland 591 690 782 845 854 834 32% 41%
Massachusetts 757 882 911 912 852 872 20% 15%
Michigan 1,176 1,499 1,528 1,344 1,235 1,196 30% 2%
Minnesota 370 404 424 426 416 425 14% 15%
Mississippi 424 457 479 445 396 400 13% -6%
Missouri 657 752 766 773 778 772 17% 17%
Montana 106 108 110 109 110 108 4% 3%
Nebraska* 153 166         8%  
Nevada 412 497 512 465 466 469 24% 14%
New Hampshire* 72 77         7%  
New Jersey 661 683 718 725 735   9% 11%
New Mexico 445 481 492 493 492 493 11% 11%
New York 2,560 2,683 2,736 2,774 2,750   7% 7%
North Carolina 1,224 1,329 1,383 1,407 1,432 1,466 13% 20%
North Dakota* 48 51         8%  
Ohio 1,326 1,632 1,610 1,559 1,518   21% 14%
Oklahoma 576 598 608       6%  
Oregon 586 670 691 706 713 703 18% 20%
Pennsylvania 1,737 1,861 1,907 1,904 1,839 1,843 10% 6%
Rhode Island* 146           N/A  
South Carolina 568 593 625 639 616 617 10% 9%
South Dakota 78 79 79 78 78 78 2% 0%
Tennessee 844 905 891 876 844 855 6% 1%
Texas 3,284 3,708 3,899 3,932 3,911 3,941 19% 20%
Utah 170 177 166 160 158 163 -2% -4%
Vermont* 68 72         7%  
Virginia 680 747 767 774 785 782 13% 15%
Virgin Islands* 20 22         9%  
Washington 801 898 923       15%  
West Virginiaa 282 307 299 295 282 280 6% 0%
Wisconsin 598 687 697 689 684 724 17% 21%
Wyoming* 26 27         4%  
Total these states (or territories) 36,868
(53 states)
41,300
(52)
42,400
(43)
36,900b
(38)
36,400b
(37)
31,200b
(31)
17% 17%
% U.S. participants in these states 100% 99.9% 98% 85% 85% 73%    
Extrapolated to U.S. 36,868 41,400 43,200 43,800b 42,700b 43,000b    

* Preliminary Department of Agriculture (USDA) data. All others are state-reported figures. Because for February we have combined data from different sources, the state February figures do not add to USDA’s February national total. Historically, the data states reported have differed only slightly from the USDA data, but for April 2020, the most recent month for which USDA has posted preliminary data, there appear to be data reporting issues in about one-fifth of the states. Because of the data reporting issues USDA has not yet published date for May or subsequent months.

a Estimated individuals receiving SNAP based on reported households.

b These estimates for June through August 2020 should be viewed with caution as they rely on data for fewer than 40 states with 85 percent or less of total SNAP participants. The actual national figures may be higher or lower than represented here.

Sources: Compilation of state-reported number of SNAP participants. CBPP, “SNAP Online: A Review of State Government SNAP Websites,” April 23, 2020, https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/snap-online-a-review-of-state-government-snap-websites, includes links to the data on each state’s website for the states that post them. We also have obtained data for May from a handful of states that do not post their monthly data. The U.S. total for February 2020 and the February and April 2020 figures for states that do not share more recent data are from the Food and Nutrition Service, U.S. Department of Agriculture, “SNAP Data Tables,” FY16 through FY20 National View Summary, https://www.fns.usda.gov/pd/supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program-snap.

Not Caught Up on Rent

Table 3 shows the estimated number of adults whose household was not caught up on rent by state. The Census Bureau reworded the Pulse survey’s rent payment question starting with the late-August survey, so these rent hardship figures results are not comparable to data from earlier weeks of the Pulse survey. In addition, Census at the same time made the entire survey longer, which led more respondents to skip questions toward the end of the survey, including the housing questions. Non-response is higher among groups that are younger, have lower levels of education, and identify as Black or Latino — groups that are more likely to struggle to afford rent, due to longstanding inequities that often stem from structural racism in education, employment, and housing. Therefore, the Pulse data likely understate the number of people struggling to pay rent.

TABLE 3
Nearly 1 in 5 Renters Nationwide Not Caught Up on Rent
Among adults in rental housing; data collected January 20–February 15
  Not Caught Up On Rent
  Estimated Number Percent
Alabama 188,000 21%
Alaska 31,000 21%
Arizona 239,000 14%
Arkansas 82,000 13%
California 1,947,000 16%
Colorado 181,000 14%
Connecticut 91,000 11%
Delaware 51,000 27%
District of Columbia 37,000 13%
Florida 1,077,000 21%
Georgia 548,000 23%
Hawai’i 54,000 15%
Idaho 42,000 13%
Illinois 525,000 20%
Indiana 237,000 19%
Iowa 86,000 15%
Kansas 109,000 18%
Kentucky 138,000 16%
Louisiana 207,000 23%
Maine 49,000 21%
Maryland 218,000 17%
Massachusetts 284,000 17%
Michigan 437,000 25%
Minnesota 153,000 16%
Mississippi 119,000 22%
Missouri 206,000 17%
Montana 19,000 9%
Nebraska 45,000 11%
Nevada 180,000 20%
New Hampshire 37,000 15%
New Jersey 396,000 18%
New Mexico 65,000 16%
New York 1,326,000 22%
North Carolina 435,000 19%
North Dakota 21,000 11%
Ohio 569,000 23%
Oklahoma 162,000 19%
Oregon 124,000 12%
Pennsylvania 489,000 20%
Rhode Island 58,000 23%
South Carolina 223,000 23%
South Dakota 19,000 12%
Tennessee 228,000 16%
Texas 1,223,000 18%
Utah 69,000 12%
Vermont 12,000 10%
Virginia 267,000 14%
Washington 228,000 12%
West Virginia 44,000 17%
Wisconsin 156,000 13%
Wyoming 13,000 13%

Note: Figures are averages of data collected January 20–February 1 and February 3-15. To adjust for non-response in the Pulse survey, the estimated number is calculated as the Pulse survey’s estimated share not caught up on rent multiplied by the total number of adult renters ages 18 and older from the American Community Survey.

Source: Calculated by Center on Budget and Policy Priorities from Census Bureau’s Household Pulse Survey published table “housing1b” for survey weeks 23 and 24, https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/household-pulse-survey/data.html; and 2019 American Community Survey public use file.

Difficulty Covering Usual Household Expenses

The Pulse survey asks adult respondents if their household had difficulty paying for usual expenses such as food, rent or mortgage, car payments, medical expenses, or student loans in the last seven days. Table 4 shows the estimated number and percent of adults reporting that it was somewhat or very difficult for their household to pay for their usual expenses in the last seven days.

TABLE 4
More Than 1 in 3 Adults Nationwide Have Difficulty Covering Usual Household Expenses
Among adults; data collected January 20–February 15
  Difficulty Covering Usual Household Expenses
  Number Percent
United States 81,932,000 35%
Alabama 1,319,000 39%
Alaska 179,000 36%
Arizona 1,783,000 34%
Arkansas 776,000 37%
California 11,431,000 41%
Colorado 1,395,000 33%
Connecticut 815,000 32%
Delaware 236,000 33%
District of Columbia 157,000 30%
Florida 6,041,000 38%
Georgia 2,779,000 37%
Hawai’i 361,000 35%
Idaho 389,000 30%
Illinois 3,097,000 35%
Indiana 1,679,000 36%
Iowa 604,000 27%
Kansas 609,000 31%
Kentucky 1,142,000 37%
Louisiana 1,412,000 45%
Maine 284,000 28%
Maryland 1,409,000 33%
Massachusetts 1,406,000 28%
Michigan 2,222,000 31%
Minnesota 1,019,000 25%
Mississippi 793,000 39%
Missouri 1,350,000 31%
Montana 222,000 28%
Nebraska 404,000 30%
Nevada 954,000 42%
New Hampshire 240,000 24%
New Jersey 2,029,000 32%
New Mexico 568,000 38%
New York 5,311,000 38%
North Carolina 2,644,000 35%
North Dakota 141,000 27%
Ohio 2,577,000 31%
Oklahoma 1,081,000 39%
Oregon 974,000 31%
Pennsylvania 2,747,000 30%
Rhode Island 225,000 30%
South Carolina 1,400,000 37%
South Dakota 158,000 26%
Tennessee 1,853,000 38%
Texas 7,825,000 40%
Utah 564,000 26%
Vermont 120,000 26%
Virginia 1,929,000 31%
Washington 1,488,000 26%
West Virginia 441,000 34%
Wisconsin 1,219,000 29%
Wyoming 134,000 33%

Note: Figures are averages of data collected January 20–February 1 and February 3-15. In the latest data, collected February 3-15, 81 million adults nationwide (35 percent) reported difficulty paying for usual household expenses.

Source: Calculated by Center on Budget and Policy Priorities from Census Bureau’s Household Pulse Survey published table “spending1” for survey weeks 23 and 24, https://www.census.gov/programs-surveys/household-pulse-survey/data.html

High Unemployment

Table 5 provides state-by-state data on the unemployment rate over the October-December period and data on ongoing unemployment benefit claims.

Unemployment in most states has been highly elevated since April, as has the number of people claiming unemployment insurance benefits.

TABLE 5
Unemployment, Jobless Claims High Across Most of the Country
States Unemployment rate (October-December average)a Current jobless benefits claims for week ending January 30b
Alabama 4.7 107,000
Alaska 6.0 38,000
Arizona 7.8 223,000
Arkansas 5.6 128,000
California 8.7 2,409,000
Colorado 7.1 148,000
Connecticut 7.4 196,000
Delaware 5.3 32,000
District of Columbia 7.9 52,000
Florida 6.3 187,000
Georgia 5.3 574,000
Hawai’i 11.3 97,000
Idaho 4.9 30,000
Illinois 7.3 737,000
Indiana 5.0 424,000
Iowa 3.5 72,000
Kansas 4.6 65,000
Kentucky 6.3 97,000
Louisiana 8.4 250,000
Maine 5.1 50,000
Maryland 6.9 412,000
Massachusetts 7.2 570,000
Michigan 6.9 884,000
Minnesota 4.5 301,000
Mississippi 6.6 90,000
Missouri 5.0 125,000
Montana 4.7 44,000
Nebraska 3.0 24,000
Nevada 10.5 261,000
New Hampshire 4.0 51,000
New Jersey 8.6 612,000
New Mexico 7.8 80,000
New York 8.6 2,500,000
North Carolina 6.2 361,000
North Dakota 4.4 25,000
Ohio 5.8 782,000
Oklahoma 5.9 102,000
Oregon 6.4 243,000
Pennsylvania 7.0 969,000
Puerto Rico 8.6 394,000
Rhode Island 7.5 86,000
South Carolina 4.4 190,000
South Dakota 3.4 7,000
Tennessee 6.3 186,000
Texas 7.4 697,000
Utah 4.0 32,000
Vermont 3.1 35,000
Virgin Islands 10.2* 2,000
Virginia 5.0 321,000
Washington 6.3 269,000
West Virginia 6.3 55,000
Wisconsin 5.6 145,000
Wyoming 5.1 10,000
U.S. 6.8 16,785,000

a All rates are seasonally adjusted except for the Virgin Islands.

b Compiled from data for regular state UI benefits, Pandemic Unemployment Assistance, and Pandemic Emergency Unemployment Compensation. Including other smaller programs, 18,340,161 people were claiming benefits in that week. Per GAO recommendations, the Department of Labor now says about these data, “Continued weeks claimed represent all weeks of benefits claimed during the week being reported, and do not represent weeks claimed by unique individuals.” At the same time, delays in implementing the UI extensions in the end-of-2020 relief package may understate the number of people who will eventually be compensated.

* Rate is not seasonally adjusted.

Source: Local Area Unemployment Statistics from the Bureau of Labor Statistics; Labor Force, Employment and Unemployment for Virgin Islands from Virgin Islands Electronic Workforce System; Unemployment Weekly Claims Report, Department of Labor, February 18, 2021.

Updated

End Notes

[1] Federal surveys generally ask respondents whether they are “of Hispanic, Latino, or Spanish origin.” This report uses the term “Latino.”

[2] Brynne Keith-Jennings, “Food Need Very High Compared to Pre-Pandemic Levels, Making Relief Imperative,” CBPP, September 10, 2020, https://www.cbpp.org/blog/food-need-very-high-compared-to-pre-pandemic-levels-making-relief-imperative.

[3] The latest Pulse survey estimates that 9.2 million adults live in households not caught up on rent. To adjust for non-response in the survey, we apply the share not caught up on rent (17.9 percent) to the total number of adult renters (73 million) in the March 2020 Current Population Survey to calculate an adjusted estimate.

[4] The latest Pulse survey estimates that 8.7 million adults are in households not caught up on their mortgage. To adjust for non-response in the survey, we apply the share not caught up on their mortgage (10.0 percent) to the total number of adult homeowners (about 100 million) in the March 2020 Current Population Survey to calculate an adjusted estimate.

[5] Ajay Chaudry and Christopher Wimer, “Poverty is Not Just an Indicator: The Relationship Between Income, Poverty, and Child Well-Being,” Academic Pediatrics, Vol. 16 Issue 3 (April 1, 2016), https://www.academicpedsjnl.net/article/S1876-2859(15)00383-6/fulltext.

[6] The Families First Act, the first large-scale relief bill enacted in March, allowed the Department of Agriculture (USDA) to provide states substantial flexibility in program operations to help them manage their workloads to focus on processing new applications — flexibility that USDA had begun to phase out, but that the Continuing Resolution recently extended. “States Are Using Much-Needed Temporary Flexibility in SNAP to Respond to COVID-19 Challenges,” CBPP, updated August 6, 2020, https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/most-states-are-using-new-flexibility-in-snap-to-respond-to-covid-19; “States are Using Much-Needed Temporary Flexibility in SNAP to Respond to COVID-19 Challenges,” CBPP, Updated regularly.