placestats

Poverty rate and Years of potential life lost

Where Poverty rate is higher, Years of potential life lost tends to be higher. The link is moderate: +0.49 across 2,872 counties, on a scale from −1 (opposite) to +1 (in step). That figure compares places with the same population density, income and education, so those differences can't explain it. It holds inside states too. Measured separately within each of 39 states, the middle value of the link is +0.65.

Holds after adjusting

Every place, plotted

One dot for each place reporting both measures. Hover over or tap a dot to see its name and values. The thin line is the straight line that best fits the dots. The bold line, shown for counties, is the link after adjusting for density, income and education. A dot far from the lines is a place that does not follow the pattern.

Loading every place…

What each measure is

Poverty rate

The percentage of people whose family income is below the federal poverty line. The line depends on how many people are in the family and their ages.

Census ACS 5-year · ACS table B17001_002, divided by population for whom poverty status is determined

Years of potential life lost

Years of life lost before age 75, per 100,000 people. A death at 25 counts as fifty years lost and a death at 70 as five, so earlier deaths count for more.

County Health Rankings · County Health Rankings v001

Highest and lowest

Where each measure is highest and lowest among the places reporting both (2023), with the other measure beside it. This is shown for every size of place where both are published. Metro-area values are added up from their counties. A measure that cannot be added up across counties, such as a middle value (median), has no metro figure. Counts are shown per 1,000 residents, since raw totals would only list the largest places. Cities and towns and ZIP codes are shown where the Census survey or the CDC publishes them; most other sources stop at the county. They are shown for places of 5,000 residents or more, and only where the survey’s margin of error is small enough for the figure to be usable. The CDC publishes its health estimates for cities in a version adjusted for age, so places with older or younger people can be compared fairly, but not for ZIP codes.

Counties

By poverty rate

Poverty rateYears of potential life lost
Highest
Oglala Lakota County, SD52.8%40,417
Todd County, SD49%34,850
Mellette County, SD46.2%32,895
Corson County, SD45.2%37,698
Dimmit County, TX44.8%14,362
Lowest
Nantucket County, MA3.03%4,855
Douglas County, CO3.23%4,121
Powhatan County, VA3.26%7,780
Falls Church city, VA3.64%6,199
Hunterdon County, NJ3.85%4,363

By years of potential life lost

Poverty rateYears of potential life lost
Highest
Buffalo County, SD32.5%46,418
Dewey County, SD32.3%41,916
Oglala Lakota County, SD52.8%40,417
Corson County, SD45.2%37,698
Sioux County, ND42.7%35,129
Lowest
San Juan County, WA10.5%3,315
Loudoun County, VA3.96%3,355
Pitkin County, CO7.15%3,488
Arlington County, VA7.12%3,513
Fairfax County, VA5.94%3,772
States

By poverty rate

Poverty rateYears of potential life lost
Highest
Mississippi19.1%13,328
Louisiana18.9%12,185
New Mexico18.1%12,363
West Virginia16.6%13,324
Kentucky16.1%11,687
Lowest
New Hampshire7.16%6,622
Utah8.56%6,429
Minnesota9.2%6,462
Maryland9.35%8,091
Colorado9.38%7,405

By years of potential life lost

Poverty rateYears of potential life lost
Highest
Mississippi19.1%13,328
West Virginia16.6%13,324
New Mexico18.1%12,363
Louisiana18.9%12,185
Alabama15.6%11,853
Lowest
Massachusetts9.98%5,975
Hawaii9.97%6,299
Utah8.56%6,429
Minnesota9.2%6,462
Rhode Island10.9%6,529
Metro areas

By poverty rate

Poverty rateYears of potential life lost
Highest
Zapata, TX37.4%9,589
Clarksdale, MS36.3%22,826
Gallup, NM35.7%27,593
Cleveland, MS33.7%19,769
Rio Grande City-Roma, TX33.5%9,793
Lowest
Nantucket, MA3.03%4,855
Heber, UT4.82%4,487
Vineyard Haven, MA5.38%4,473
Hood River, OR5.49%5,187
Lexington Park, MD5.89%7,490

By years of potential life lost

Poverty rateYears of potential life lost
Highest
Gallup, NM35.7%27,593
Clarksdale, MS36.3%22,826
Show Low, AZ24.7%21,728
Española, NM20.1%21,299
Selma, AL29%20,427
Lowest
Corvallis, OR19.2%4,158
San Jose-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara, CA6.9%4,202
Bozeman, MT10.2%4,276
Edwards, CO8.27%4,321
State College, PA16.9%4,450
Cities and towns — Years of potential life lost is not published for cities and towns

By poverty rate

Poverty rateYears of potential life lost
Highest
Isla Vista CDP, CA69.3%—
University of California-Davis CDP, CA67.7%—
Caño Martin Peña comunidad, PR63%—
Guánica zona urbana, PR62.1%—
Utuado zona urbana, PR62%—
Lowest
Linton Hall CDP, VA1.54%—
Huntington Woods city, MI1.65%—
Trussville city, AL1.65%—
Hugo city, MN1.73%—
Franklin Farm CDP, VA1.8%—
ZIP codes — Years of potential life lost is not published for ZIP codes

By poverty rate

Poverty rateYears of potential life lost
Highest
ZIP 22807 (Harrisonburg city, VA)100%—
ZIP 33620 (Tampa city, FL)100%—
ZIP 48825 (East Lansing city, MI)100%—
ZIP 55455 (Minneapolis city, MN)100%—
ZIP 80310 (Boulder city, CO)100%—
Lowest
ZIP 92136 (San Diego city, CA)0%—
ZIP 12222 (Albany city, NY)0%—
ZIP 54913 (Outagamie County, WI)1.42%—
ZIP 55038 (Hugo city, MN)1.52%—
ZIP 76226 (Denton County, TX)1.53%—

Counties furthest from the pattern

Compared with the straight line that best fits all 2,877 counties: the five with far more years of potential life lost than their poverty rate would suggest, and the five with far less.

Poverty rateYears of potential life lost
Above the line
Buffalo County, SD32.5%46,418
Dewey County, SD32.3%41,916
Benson County, ND22.2%35,011
Kingman County, KS9.38%27,595
Thurston County, NE18%27,026
Below the line
Presidio County, TX36.3%7,193
Zapata County, TX37.4%9,589
Madison County, ID26.8%5,018
Radford city, VA33.7%8,739
Dimmit County, TX44.8%14,362

Two series, one county

Both measures over time for a county you pick. The two charts are stacked, so they share only the years along the bottom. You can pick from the thirty largest counties reporting both. This panel covers 2010–2024, and a measure published only once shows as a single dot.

Loading…

Every version of the link

Each row measures the same link, from −1 to +1, in a different way. If the rows mostly agree, the link does not depend on one choice of method.

Before adjusting for anything+0.7202,872 counties reporting both
After adjusting for density, income and education+0.492the part of the link that is not just how urban, rich and educated a place is
Also adjusting for population size+0.494size taken out as well as density
Also comparing only within each state+0.425each county is compared only with others in its own state, so this is no longer a comparison between states
Giving bigger counties more weight+0.320the adjusted link for the average resident rather than the average county. With this weighting, the data counts for about 281 equally weighted counties
Middle value inside single states+0.653the link worked out inside each of 39 states with at least 20 counties reporting
Using ranks, after adjusting+0.271uses each county’s rank, not its value, so a few extreme counties cannot create the link

How much to believe it

Could it be chance?

The p-value is the chance of seeing a link this strong if there were really none. A value of 0.05 or less means the link is unlikely to be chance. Very small values are written in short form: 3.1e-16 means 0.00000000000000031, and the bigger the number after “e-”, the smaller the value. Treating every county as a separate case gives p = 7.3e-175. But counties in the same state tend to resemble each other, so the better figure allows for that: p = 1.0e-5. The site tested 20,910 pairs, and testing so many turns up some flukes. The q-value allows for that too. For this pair it is 7.9e-174.

Do nearby places look alike?

Moran’s I measures how much nearby places look alike: 0 means no map pattern, and higher means neighbours are more similar. For the part of each county that the adjustment leaves unexplained, it is +0.26 (p = 0.001). That unexplained part still clusters on the map. So some regional factor shared by both measures is not accounted for.

Did they change together?

The figures above compare counties at one moment. This asks a different question: where poverty rate rose most, did years of potential life lostmove too? Each county’s change is compared with the average change in its own state. That takes out ups and downs that hit a whole region at once. Each change is the gap between two estimates that both contain some error. That error pulls these links towards zero, so a weak one is weak partly for that reason. The q column shows whether a link could be a fluke, allowing for the many pairs tested: 0.05 or less means it is unlikely to be chance.

PeriodCountiesChange togetherWithin statesq
2014–2019 the main test: each Census survey figure averages five years, and these two do not overlap; before the pandemic2,835-0.05-0.050.077
2019–2023 a repeat check: its two five-year survey figures both include 2019, and it covers the COVID years2,824-0.06-0.030.541

Measured over the nearest years published: Years of potential life lost: 2019–2022 for the 2019–2023 row.

Over the main period, any link between the changes could easily be chance. How change is measured.

Related pairs

Association only. Nothing here shows that either measure changes the other. This describes counties, not the people in them. Two measures going together across places does not mean the same people have both. How the US county data works · Explore Poverty rate and Years of potential life lost