Where can I find official tables and methodology for the 2026 poverty guidelines?
This fact-check may be outdated. Consider refreshing it to get the most current information.
Executive summary
Official federal poverty guidelines and the HHS methodology are published by the Department of Health and Human Services’ Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE); ASPE hosts the guidelines and background on how they relate to program eligibility [1]. State and program offices commonly repost the numeric tables for 2026 coverage (examples: North Carolina, Arkansas, Covered California), but the authoritative source and methodological discussion is ASPE’s poverty-guidelines page [1] [2] [3].
1. Where the government posts the official tables — go to ASPE
The Office of the Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation (ASPE) at HHS is the official place to find the federal poverty guidelines and the published tables used for program eligibility; ASPE’s poverty-guidelines page explains the guidelines and links to the numeric tables [1]. Many state agencies and program administrators mirror those tables for practical use — for example, North Carolina posted a FY2026 FPL chart and Covered California distributes a 2026 FPL eligibility chart — but those are reproductions of ASPE’s figures [2] [4].
2. What the official methodology is — origins and adjustments
Current practice treats the poverty guidelines as an administrative simplification of the Census Bureau’s poverty thresholds, updated for inflation; ASPE explains that the guidelines are separate from the Census “poverty thresholds” used for statistical measurement and are administratively set by HHS [1]. The research and legislative record shows there are active proposals to change the methodology — notably H.R.1428 (Poverty Line Act of 2025) would require HHS to calculate regional guidelines based on expenditures (food, clothing, utilities, transportation), rental housing, and health-insurance costs and to publish an interactive tool — signaling possible methodological shifts if enacted [5].
3. Where states and programs publish ready-to-use tables
State agencies and program offices commonly publish simplified tables for clients and eligibility workers. Examples in the available reporting include North Carolina’s FY2026 FPL chart (a downloadable table) and Covered California’s “Program Eligibility by Federal Poverty Level for 2026” PDF, which maps percent-of-FPL thresholds to program eligibility such as Medi-Cal [2] [4]. Arkansas and other state education or social services offices also republish FPL tables and note per-person add-ons for households larger than the base table [3].
4. Beware: secondary sources differ on small details (per-person add-ons, rounding)
Third-party and state materials sometimes show different per-person increments for households above eight persons and offer slightly different rounding methods for percentage-of-FPL calculations. For instance, Arkansas’ document cites adding $5,140 per additional person beyond eight [3], while other reprints and private sites show different add-on amounts (examples in the search results vary) [6] [7]. A private explainer also describes how to compute a percent of FPL (multiply the guideline dollar amount by the percent, then round), which is correct as a calculation method, but you should confirm exact numbers and rounding rules against ASPE’s official tables for program use [8].
5. Practical steps to get the official tables and method text
- Start at ASPE’s poverty-guidelines page to download the official HHS tables and background text (ASPE is the authoritative publisher) [1].
- For state-specific eligibility application, consult your state’s health or social-services site (examples: North Carolina’s FY2026 chart; Covered California’s 2026 FPL eligibility PDF) which reproduce ASPE numbers in practical formats [2] [4].
- If you need to understand how percentages of FPL are computed for program thresholds (e.g., 138% or 150%), use the published guideline numbers and multiply by the relevant percentage and round as local program guidance prescribes (method illustrated in a consumer site example) [8].
6. Political and technical caveats to watch
The basic HHS approach is administrative and inflation-linked, but there is active legislative interest to change it to a regional, expenditure-based measure (H.R.1428) that would materially alter how “poverty” is defined and applied to benefits if adopted [5]. That bill would require HHS to publish a regional tool and to use housing and health-cost inputs; the existence of that bill is a reason to treat the current ASPE guidance as the official baseline but not the final word if Congress acts [5].
Limitations and sources: This briefing relies on ASPE’s poverty-guidelines page as the official source and on state reproductions and explanatory websites in the search results; specific numeric tables and any nuanced rounding rules should be pulled directly from ASPE’s posted PDF tables or the state program PDFs cited here [1] [2] [4] [3] [8] [5].