Picturing poverty: Ontario's new Material Deprivation Index

“Before you even start, I want to ask you what your definition of poverty is. When people talk about poverty, I find they mean all kinds of different things. I want to know what you mean by poverty.”

A colleague and I were visiting a Member of Parliament to discuss the need for a poverty elimination strategy in Canada, and this is how he started the conversation. The MP was absolutely right that people mean different things when they talk about poverty – Canada has no official definition of poverty. There are a number of definitions and measures that are commonly but unofficially used for social policy discussions, but no formal agreement as to what we are seeking to eliminate in Canada.

For this reason, provincial poverty reduction strategies have had to choose their own definition and measurement of poverty. Measuring is essential to tracking movement and providing accountability.

Ontario chose to develop a new measure, the Ontario Material Deprivation Index. Ontario’s strategy will use this measure in conjunction with two other measures: 40% of median income as a measurement of the depth of poverty, and 50% of median income to measure low income. (Although both of these are relative measures, Ontario chose to fix its target of 25% reduction of poverty in 5 years according to the 50% low income measure fixed at its 2008 level and adjusted by inflation only).

The Deprivation Index fits in the context of these other two measures as a way of understanding standard of living. It is not considered to be a complete description of poverty, but a way of recognizing common symptoms of poverty. It includes multiple elements of poverty, including deprivation that leads to social isolation, issues of economic security, and the ability to make changes in your life.

It was developed by the Daily Bread Food Bank in conjunction with people living in poverty. The process began with a survey of food bank users in the GTA to create a list of items they thought were necessary for an adequate standard of living. This list was then taken to a series of focus groups across the province that included people living in poverty to refine and shorten the list. Finally, an Ipsos-Reid survey contacted Ontarians of all income levels to ask which items they thought were necessary, but also which items they were likely to have in their own households.

This data was then used to create a list of ten items. At least 50% of Ontarians believed that each item was necessary, and items that were not likely to be present in a higher-income home were excluded. Thus, each item on the list is seen as a basic necessity and households that do not have that item are very likely to be poor.

If a family’s income is below 50% of the median income and they are missing two or more of the items on the deprivation index, they are considered to be persistently poor.

The Deprivation Index consists of the following items:

1. Do you eat fresh fruit and vegetables every day?
2. Are you able to get dental care if needed?
3. Do you eat meat, fish or a vegetarian equivalent at least every other day?
4. Are you able to replace or repair broken or damaged appliances such as a vacuum or a toaster?
5. Do you have appropriate clothes for job interviews?
6. Are you able to get around your community, either by having a car or by taking the bus or an equivalent mode of transportation?
7. Are you able to have friends or family over for a meal at least once a month?
8. Is your house or apartment free of pests, such as cockroaches?
9. Are you able to buy some small gifts for family or friends at least once a year?
10. Do you have a hobby or leisure activity?

Support for the Deprivation Index has been strong, in no small part because it is based on the lived experience of people in poverty. The Deprivation Index also has the advantage of being a good communication tool, since the items on the list represent a visceral image of what it means to live in poverty.

I have heard some criticism of the Index though. Following a presentation on the Index at the USBIG Congress in February, one participant worried that “It’s not enough for poor people to be poor; now they have to prove they suffer because of it.” The Index should also not be seen as a list of issues that need to be “solved” in order to solve poverty. Simply giving people fresh fruit and vegetables every day doesn’t really address the issue of poverty.

However, when used in conjunction with other measures of poverty, the Index is a good way of understanding the most basic impact of poverty on daily living. For those of us who take our standard of living for granted, it is a very visual reminder that many of our fellow Ontarians do not have that luxury.