CFI COVID-19 Survey of Consumers — Wave 4 Tracks How the Vulnerable Are Affected More by Job Interruptions and Income Disruptions
Summary
A report by Tom Akana of the Consumer Finance Institute at the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, dated September 2020, presenting results of the fourth wave of its CFI COVID-19 Survey of Consumers, fielded in July. The national survey tracks changes in job status, income and personal financial security during the pandemic, along with respondents' attitudes toward and use of relief efforts. The report updates job loss and financial security data, covers job interruptions in the early months of the crisis and employer communications about remote work and reduced hours, and reports on income disruptions. It states that the survey will be conducted up to six times through the end of 2020.
Summary drafted by a model from the document's text below and checked by script against that text before publication. It is a navigation aid, not a reading of what the document proves. Where AI is used
Full text
CFI COVID-19 Survey of Consumers — Wave 4 Tracks How the
Vulnerable Are Affected More by Job Interruptions and Income
Disruptions
by Tom Akana, September 2020
In an effort to gain insights into the impact of COVID-19 on financial security in the U.S., the Consumer
Finance Institute at the Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia is conducting a series of national surveys of
consumers that focus on changes in job status, income levels, and personal financial security.
Additionally, we sought respondents’ attitudes toward and use of various relief efforts proposed or
enacted to support citizens during the pandemic. Data presented here represent results from the fourth
wave of the survey conducted between July 2 and 13, 2020. 1 The survey will be conducted up to six times
through the end of 2020 to track changes in impact and attitudes as the situation progresses.
The first section of this report updates high-level job loss and financial security data with results from
Wave 4 of the survey. The second section covers new findings relating to job interruptions during the
early months of the crisis, employer communications about remote work and reduced hours, and potential
* Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia, Ten Independence Mall, Philadelphia, PA 19106-1574; email:
tom.akana@phil.frb.org.
Disclaimer: This Philadelphia Fed report represents research that is being circulated for discussion purposes. The
views expressed in this paper are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Federal
Reserve Bank of Philadelphia or the Federal Reserve System. Nothing in the text should be construed as an
endorsement of any organization or its products or services. Any errors or omissions are the responsibility of the
author. No statements here should be treated as legal advice. Philadelphia Fed publications relating to COVID-19
are free to download at https://www.philadelphiafed.org/covid-19.
1
Wave 1 results were published in May 2020 as CFI COVID-19 Survey of Consumers — An Assessment of the
Financial Health and Stability of U.S. Consumers (Akana, 2020). Wave 2 results were published in June 2020 as
CFI COVID-19 Survey of Consumers — Wave 2 Updates, Impact by Race/Ethnicity, and Early Use of Economic
Impact Payments (Akana, 2020a). Wave 3 results were published in August 2020 as CFI COVID-19 Survey of
Consumers — Wave 3 Reveals Improvements, but Not for Everyone (Akana, 2020b).
barriers to returning to work. The third section updates data on how incomes have been affected and
reports new information on income disruptions during the crisis, including findings on racial/ethnic
disparities in income loss and recovery. The fourth section discusses receipt and usage of Economic
Impact Payments (EIP). The final section reviews data on financial security and spending expectations.
Each successive wave of the survey has continued to reinforce the outsized economic effects the
pandemic has had on traditionally more vulnerable populations, and Wave 4 is no exception. The new
data collected on job and income disruptions provide more evidence that Black respondents in particular
have been experienced the crisis differently than other racial/ethnic groups, as will be called out in later
sections.
Survey Description and Notes Regarding Reweighting of Data
The survey is conducted by Dynata, an online market research firm that provides access to survey panels
that are nationally representative of the U.S. Respondents completed a survey designed by the author that
collected information on income, employment, and financial security both before and after the COVID-19
crisis began. Responses were managed throughout the survey process to mirror census demographic
distributions and to ensure that certain survey populations were appropriately represented (e.g., higher
incomes, urban and rural residents, and self-employed individuals). While geographic distributions at the
state level are consistent with general population distributions, we recognize that finer subsets of the
sample may not be fully representative.
It is important to note that this is a cross-sectional survey, not a panel. Therefore, we expected to see
changes in subsegment distributions between waves, and we do observe variations in the respondent
demographic mix across the waves of the survey. For instance, the percentage of respondents reporting
pre-crisis incomes less than $40,000 ranges from a high value of 34.9 percent in Wave 2 to a low value of
19.3 percent in Wave 4 (Table 1). The percentage of respondents 66 years of age or older peaked at 16.5
percent in Wave 2 compared with a low value of 12.4 percent in Wave 1. The percentage of female
respondents ranges from a high value of 58.1 percent in Wave 3 to a low value of 48.3 percent in Wave 4.
While variances in any one of these categories may lead to minor shifts in the averages for our survey
results, combined, they lead to large variances in the top-level averages for the national sample because of
the change in the mix.
To account for the variances in the core demographic distributions and generate more level wave-to-
wave comparisons, we have chosen in this report to reweight the results of Waves 2–4 to reflect the
income, age, and gender distributions of Wave 1. This allows a more direct comparison of high-level
results across surveys. After reweighting, each wave now reflects identical distributions of income, age,
2
and gender (Table 2). Reweighting did not lead to changes in previously reported relationships. All data
referenced in this report will reflect the reweighted version of each wave’s results; therefore, values
reported previously may be different than those referenced here.
Wave 4 of the survey was administered July 2–13 and generated 4,000 responses from a national
panel of online survey takers aged 18 or older. After data cleansing, exclusions, and reweighting, 3,494
responses remained from the national sample to be analyzed. As with the previous waves’ results, we
clearly see subgroups of the population that continue to be more dramatically affected by social and
workplace changes since the crisis began and who expect to be affected further as the crisis stretches into
the foreseeable future.
This paper discusses the results in the context of five primary levels of segmentation:
• Income Range — All income range references that follow refer to respondents’ self-reported
personal incomes in 2019, prior to any impact from the crisis. Similarly, references to
employment (e.g., type of employment or source of income) refer to respondents’ self-reported
employment status prior to the beginning of the crisis.
• Age Range — The respondents selected their current age range.
• Gender — Respondents selected from Male, Female, or Other to identify their gender. Because
of a small number of respondents (three of 3,494) who selected Other, they are excluded from
result summaries.
• Residence Location — Respondents identified their residence location as Urban, Suburban, or
Rural.
• Race/Ethnicity — Respondent racial/ethnic background is collected by Dynata and appended to
the response data. Because of limitations in our sample size for some racial/ethnic groups, this
analysis will focus on White, Black, and Hispanic respondents. 2
Job Security, Ability to Work, and Financial Security
The survey’s primary goal is to elicit information relating to respondents’ employment and financial
health during the crisis. To that end, we focus on three higher-level concepts: Job Security (whether
respondents employed prior to the crisis are currently working), Ability to Work (how the crisis has
affected respondents’ ability to perform the jobs they currently hold), and Financial Security (the effects
the crisis has had on respondents’ income and financial outlook). In Wave 4, we included new questions
2
For the remainder of this paper, White will refer to respondents categorized as such and non-Hispanic White.
Hispanic refers to respondents listed as having Hispanic ethnicity, regardless of their racial category.
3
to collect data on respondents’ expectations around the future of their Ability to Work (e.g., switching
from remote to onsite work, or being rehired after a lay off); concerns about returning to work or
increasing hours in the short term; and more information about temporary losses of income.
Wave 4 data continue to indicate that job and financial security are improving, although some of the
indicators have leveled off, implying that some positive trends have plateaued between June and July.
Generally, the trends and relationships observed in prior waves have remained consistent in Wave 4.
High-level results are as follows, with detailed segment-level results found in the Appendix:
• Wave 4 respondents reported the lowest rate of job loss across the waves, 12.5 percent compared
with the peak of 17.9 percent in Wave 1 (Table 3).
• A majority of respondents (51.7 percent) reported working onsite for the first time since the
survey began in April, when only 40.0 percent of respondents reported working onsite.
• Onsite employment increases do not appear to be primarily driven by remote workers returning to
their workplaces, rather they were driven by those who were not working regaining employment
onsite. The rate of remote working reported in Wave 4 was down only slightly from Wave 3 (29.2
percent versus 29.9 percent, respectively) and remains close to the peak of 33.1 percent in Wave
2.
• Respondents who are employed are working at normal or increased hours at the highest rate since
the beginning of the crisis; of working respondents, 60.7 percent reported normal or increased
work hours, compared with 54.5 percent in Wave 3 and 48.3 percent in Wave 1.
• Income stability showed improvement from Wave 3 to Wave 4 as well (Table 4). While the
percentage of respondents reporting partial or full income loss improved only slightly (32.1
percent compared with 32.7 percent in Wave 3), fewer respondents reported full income loss (4.9
percent versus 7.3 percent in Wave 3 and a peak of 11.3 percent in Wave 1).
• Respondents in Wave 4 were asked whether their income was lower at any point prior in the
crisis; 33.1 percent responded that their income was lower at some point, further supporting the
evidence that incomes are beginning to recover, even if they are still low (Table 4).
• Respondents reported continued improvements in their financial outlook over the next three to 12
months; however, there was no improvement in the percentage who feel less secure than they did
prior to the crisis: 42.3 percent reported feeling less secure now compared with 41.9 percent in
Wave 3 (although this metric peaked at 59.7 percent in Wave 1) (Table 5).
• More respondents reported that they do not anticipate needing additional financial assistance, at
59.2 percent compared with 55.8 percent in Wave 3 and 39.4 percent in Wave 1 (Table 6).
4
• When asked about spending, 40.2 percent of respondents indicated that their recent spending is
less than they normally spend, with 12.4 percent reporting that their spending is less than half of
normal (Table 6). While 13.6 percent expect to increase their spending over the next 90 days,
28.8 percent expect they will be decreasing their spending in the coming months.
• At the segment level, the demographic populations most heavily affected by job loss and income
disruptions remain consistent. Black respondents, those who earn less, younger respondents, and
women all continue to report experiencing more adverse effects.
New Data on the Ability to Work
Wave 4 included new questions designed to collect more detail on respondents’ current and previous
ability to work during the crisis. These questions provide some insight into the ability of respondents to
find new employment and the level of knowledge they have regarding their future ability to work.
Employment Consistency
All respondents who indicated they are currently working onsite or remotely, regardless of the number of
hours worked, were asked, “Did you have to stop working or stop receiving your pay for longer than two
weeks at any time since March 1?” The majority of respondents (75.9 percent) reported that they have
been employed consistently over that period (Table 7). Of those who experienced a job disruption, most
reported that they are now working again at their previous job (19.8 percent), and 4.3 percent reported
working at a new job. Respondents working at their previous employer likely represent those who were
temporarily laid off during mandatory business closures.
Job disruption has been a larger issue for lower earning, younger, and Black respondents. Only 66.8
percent of respondents who are currently working and earning less than $40,000 have been consistently
employed since the start of the crisis, compared with 76.4 percent or higher for respondents in higher
income brackets. Only 57.8 percent of respondents less than 36 years of age reported consistent
employment, while older groups indicated rates of 81.2 percent and higher. And in the largest disparity,
only 48.1 percent of Black respondents reported consistent employment; Hispanic respondents indicated
more consistency at 69.1 percent, while White respondents reported 81.3 percent.
To determine if the large variance in job disruption between racial/ethnic groups, particularly for
Black respondents, arises from differences in the industries represented across each population, we
compared the job disruption rates by industry for White, Black, and Hispanic respondents (Table 8).
Because of small cell sizes in many of the industries, we created two groups for comparison. Industries
with a minimum of 25 currently employed Black respondents (Professional, Business Services,
Information Technology; Health Services; Retail Sales; and Education) are reported together with a total
5
of 146 Black currently employed Black respondents; the remaining industries comprise 98 Black
respondents.
Overall, 52 percent of currently employed Black respondents reported a job interruption, compared
with 31 percent and 19 percent of Hispanic and White respondents, respectively (Table 8). This
relationship holds for nearly every individual industry. Combining industries to account for cell sizes does
not change the relationship. Black respondents in the four most represented industries reported 46 percent
job interruptions, compared with 22 percent and 18 percent for Hispanic and White respondents,
respectively. For all remaining industries, 61 percent of Black respondents reported job interruptions, with
Hispanic and White respondents reporting 40 percent and 20 percent, respectively. The racial/ethnic
discrepancies that appear even within industry indicate that non-White respondents appear to hold
positions that are more likely to be affected by business disruptions and temporary layoffs if states are
forced to begin closing segments of the economy again. 3
Returning to Onsite Work or Previous Schedule
Respondents who indicated they are working remotely were asked, “Has your employer told you when
you should expect to return to working onsite or in your office?” Less than one-quarter (22.5 percent)
have not been told anything by their employer, while 32.7 percent have been told that there are no plans
yet to return to the workplace (Table 9). Of the remaining 44.8 percent, most expect to return to their
workplace before September 1 (31.5 percent), with the remaining 13.3 expecting to return after that date.
Remote workers who are also lower earners, older, or female are more likely to not have received
information about returning to the workplace or to have been told there are no plans. Of those who earn
less than $40,000, 73.2 percent do not know if or when they will return to their workplace (all other
income brackets reported at 59.1 percent or less). Remote workers who are 66 years old or older reported
not have return-to-work plans 67.7 percent of the time (all other age brackets reported 56.9 percent or
less). Among female respondents, 57.5 percent do not have return-to-workplace plans, compared with
52.9 percent of male respondents.
Respondents who indicated they are working reduced hours were asked, “Has your employer told you
if or when you will be able to return to your previous work schedule or hours?” Nearly half (49.8 percent)
have not received information or have been told there are no plans yet to return to their previous
3
Research from the Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City in 2017 found that “the rate at which individuals
transition from employment to unemployment - that is, the job separation rate is nearly a percentage point higher (or
nearly two times larger) for black individuals than for white individuals” across a 21-year research window
(Economic Research Department, 2017, p. 18). This would be consistent with the observation that Black
respondents have experienced layoffs and separations at a higher rate during this crisis, although the gap appears
much larger in the current data.
6
schedules, while 25.3 percent have been told that a return will depend on local reopening rules (Table 10).
Only 13.5 percent have been told to expect to return to their old schedules within the next 30 days.
Unfortunately, 11.4 percent of respondents to this question have been told they will not be getting their
previous schedule or hours back.
Unexpectedly, higher earners (those making $75,000–$124,999 and $125,000 or higher) are more like
to have been told they are not returning to their previous schedules, at 15.8 percent and 14.8 percent,
respectively. Younger workers in this category have overwhelmingly received this message — 18.5
percent of those 35 years of age or younger are not getting their previous hours back, with older age
brackets reporting 8.0 percent or less. Black respondents reported losing their hours permanently at the
highest rate of any segment — 19.0 percent.
Returning to Work After Layoffs and Furloughs
Respondents who reported that they have been laid off or furloughed were asked, “Do you know if or
when you will be able to begin working again?” Of the 442 respondents who received this question, less
than half (41.7 percent) reported that they expect to be rehired when their employer reopens (Table 11). 4
Just over one-third are currently looking for new jobs, with 21.4 percent seeking a role similar to their
former job and 14.7 percent seeking a different type of job. Just under one-quarter (22.2 percent) of those
who are currently out of work reported that they are not currently seeking employment; unfortunately, we
did not collect data relating to why these respondents have chosen to not seek a new job.
Respondents from segments that have proven to be more highly affected by the crisis are the least
likely to report expecting to be rehired by their former employer. Of the low earners (those earning less
than $40,000 annually), 32.9 percent reported expecting to be rehired; higher-earning respondents
reported this expectation at 42.1 percent and higher. Respondents 35 years of age and younger expect to
be rehired 27.9 percent of the time, compared with 47.9 percent and higher for older respondents. Of
Black respondents, only 28.8 percent expect to be rehired, compared with 44.6 percent and 45.4 percent
of White and Hispanic respondents, respectively.
Lower-earning respondents (in this case, those earning less than $75,000) were more likely to report
not seeking a new job — 24.9 percent of that group is not currently seeking a job, compared with 17.3
percent or lower in higher-earning groups. Older respondents are also more likely to have opted out of
searching for employment, with 32.3 percent of those 56 years or older responding that they are not
looking, compared with 24.5 percent or less in younger cohorts. Female respondents were more likely to
4
Data collected through an Associated Press-NORC Center for Public Affairs Research poll indicate that “nearly
half of unemployed workers believe their jobs are not coming back” (Liu, 2020).
7
report no longer seeking employment: 24.2 percent versus 18.9 percent for males. Across race/ethnicity,
White respondents are the most likely to have opted out of seeking a job at 27.1 percent, compared with
Black and Hispanic respondents at 15.3 percent and 18.2 percent, respectively.
Barriers to Increasing Employment
Respondents who reported being employed prior to the crisis were asked about potential concerns they
have about either returning to work, increasing their hours, or returning to onsite employment. They
identified their level of concern from 1 (not concerned at all) to 5 (significantly concerned) across six
items (Table 12).
• Exposure to COVID-19 at Work — Exposure to the pandemic drives the highest level of
concern among respondents, with 55.0 percent citing this as an issue. This concern is higher for
respondents who earn more; those earning greater than $125,000 reported COVID-19 exposure
concerns at rates of 70.4 percent, with concern decreasing steadily to 33.7 percent in the lowest
earning cohort. Younger respondents reported higher exposure concerns as well, with those 35
years of age and younger reporting 65.8 percent. Male respondents reported 58.0 percent
compared with female respondents at 52.2 percent. And non-White respondents reported higher
concern about exposure; Black and Hispanic respondents reported 60.7 percent and 62.4 percent,
respectively.
• Another Shutdown Impacting My Employer ― The risk of another shutdown is a concern for
44.6 percent of respondents. While this may not prevent an individual from taking an available
job or increased hours, it certainly affects their level of financial comfort and security. At the
segment level, we see results similar to COVID-19 exposure: higher-earning, younger, male, and
non-White respondents all reported higher levels of concern. Indeed, for all areas of concern,
these segment-level relationships are consistent.
• My Employer’s Ability to Stay in Business ― General concerns about whether companies will
be able to remain in business were reported by 32.8 percent of respondents.
• Public Transportation (Access and Safety) ― Concerns about public transportation were
reported by 29.8 percent of respondents.
• Finding Childcare ― Concerns about finding childcare were reported by 19.1 percent of
respondents who were employed prior to the crisis.
• Finding Elder/Senior Care ― Care for older relatives is slightly less of a concern than
childcare, with 17.0 percent of respondents reporting concerns.
8
The relationships between segments noted here indicate that, in general, higher earners, younger
respondents, men, and non-White respondents are more likely to have concerns about the risks of
reentering the workforce, regardless of the specific risk cited.
Impact to Income
In Wave 4, respondents reported only minor improvements in the percentage of those who are
experiencing impacts to their personal income, with 32.1 percent of respondents indicating that their
income is gone or they are earning less than they were before the crisis, compared with 32.7 percent in
Wave 3 (Table 4). Underlying that number, however, there are signs of improvement; the percentage of
respondents earning more than half their previous income increased to 19.9 percent from 17.4 percent,
while the percentage of those reporting no income decreased to 4.9 percent from 7.3 percent. This implies
that, while incomes are still suppressed for a large portion of the population, they are beginning to shift
higher.
That observation is reinforced by the responses to a new question in Wave 4. Respondents were
asked, “At any point since March 1st, did your personal income drop below where it is today?” The
majority (66.9 percent) reported that their income has not dropped below its current level, meaning that
nearly one-third of respondents (33.1 percent) have seen their incomes drop, then recover at least
somewhat (Table 13). For respondents currently earning less than they did prior to the crisis, 73.6 percent
were earning less at earlier points during the crisis. Those reporting incomes that are equal to or greater
than before the crisis reported more consistency in their incomes ― 86.1 percent of that population has
not experienced a decrease in income.
At the segment level, the largest differences in results are found among age range and race/ethnicity.
Respondents 35 years of age or younger reported income recovery more frequently than older age groups
(Table 14). For those in the youngest age group whose current income is equal to or greater than precrisis,
30.4 percent indicated that their income had been disrupted earlier in the crisis, compared with 12.3
percent or less for older groups. For young respondents whose income is currently depressed, 79.4 percent
indicated that it had been even lower, compared with 71.3 percent or less for older groups.
Black respondents reported the highest rates of previously lower incomes among racial/ethnic groups.
Of Black respondents currently earning the same or more than they did prior to the crisis, 40.0 percent
had previously earned less, compared with 20.4 percent for Hispanic respondents and only 9.9 percent of
White respondents. Of those currently earning less, 82.3 percent of Black respondents reported earning
lower incomes earlier in the crisis, compared with 78.1 percent of Hispanic respondents and 69.4 percent
of White respondents. While the higher-income recovery rates implied by these numbers are encouraging,
9
recovery is happening at least in part because non-White populations continue to experience larger and
perhaps more consistent impacts to their income.
Receiving and Accessing Economic Impact Payments
As of Wave 4, 79.6 percent of respondents reported having received their Economic Impact Payment
(EIP) as part of the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, a slight increase from
Wave 3 at 78.6 percent (Table 15). By early July, when Wave 4 was conducted, the majority of EIP
payments had been distributed, so it is unlikely that the rate of receipt will increase much beyond the
current level. Most of those who received the payments received them through direct deposit (59.1
percent), with 16.0 percent receiving paper checks and 4.5 percent receiving prepaid cards. Use of the
payments remains relatively consistent, with the highest selection being essential purchases such as food
or health-care supplies at 42.3 percent. The least selected use remains cash withdrawals at 22.7 percent.
The rate of respondents indicating no specific plans for the payments remained flat at 19.0 percent, versus
19.2 percent in Wave 3.
Those who indicated receiving their payments via paper check or prepaid card were asked an
additional question relating to how they chose to access the funds. Of those who received paper checks,
46.3 percent deposited the check into a bank account at a physical branch location, whereas 47.2 percent
deposited it electronically (30.0 percent at an ATM and 17.2 percent through a mobile app) (Table 16). A
small percentage (2.9 percent) reported using a check-cashing firm or other business and paying a fee to
access the money, while 2.6 percent reported not doing anything with their check.
The lowest earners (less than $40,000) and highest earners (more than $125,000) were less likely to
deposit their checks at a bank branch (39.7 percent and 43.2 percent, respectively). Older respondents
relied more heavily on bank branches at 78.2 percent, with branch usage decreasing in conjunction with
respondent age. Non-White respondents use electronic deposit tools more frequent than White
respondents; Black and Hispanic respondents used ATM or mobile deposits at 66.9 percent and 64.0
percent rates, respectively, compared with White respondents at 40.3 percent. Those earning less than
$75,000 were more likely to pay a check-cashing fee (3.3 percent of those respondents on average), as
were White respondents at 3.8 percent.
Only 142 respondents reported receiving a prepaid card, making segmentation challenging because of
cell counts. Of the respondents who received the cards, 49.9 percent reported using the card directly to
make purchases, while 24.2 percent transferred the money to a bank account and 21.1 percent withdrew
cash from an ATM (Table 17).
10
Financial Security and Spending Outlook
Responses to questions about financial security and outlook reveal continued improvements similar to
those observed in Wave 3. The percentage of respondents reporting that they are very concerned about
their ability to make ends meet over the next three months decreased from 14.6 percent in Wave 3 to 11.5
percent in Wave 4 (Table 5). Similar improvements are seen in the 12-month outlook, which decreased to
19.8 percent from 24.8 percent in Wave 3. Likewise, the percentage of respondents reporting that they do
not expect to need additional resources increased to 59.2 percent (Table 6). Despite those improvements,
the percentage of respondents reporting a stable or improved feeling of financial security remained flat
between Waves 3 and 4; of all respondents, 57.7 percent report feeling as secure or more secure now than
they did prior to the crisis, compared with 58.1 percent in Wave 3 (Table 5).
Generally, there has been no change in the relationship between subsegments regarding financial
security; respondents with lower incomes, who are younger, who are female, or who are members of
minority groups continued to report higher levels of concern over the next three to 12 months and lower
feelings of security than prior to the crisis when compared with respondents from other segments.
In addition to asking respondents to project their spending over the next 90 days, we asked them in
Wave 4 to estimate how their current spending compares with what they would normally spend at this
time of year. The largest portion of the population (42.4 percent) indicated that they are spending about
the same they normally do, while 17.4 percent reported spending more (Table 6). Just over one-quarter
(27.8 percent) said their spending is down but still greater than half of their normal spend, while 12.4
percent are spending less than half their normal amount. With 40.2 percent of respondents indicating
reduced spending, it is sobering to see that 28.8 percent of respondents are expecting to decrease their
spending over the next 90 days — 8.1 percent expect to reduce it by more than half.
Conclusion
Wave 4 of the CFI COVID-19 Survey of Consumers provided continued evidence of improvement in
employment rates, income, and outlook for respondents. These results are sensible, based on the timing of
the survey — in early July, most of the aid provisions of the CARES Act, including enhancements to
unemployment insurance, were still active, and state and local governments were continuing their
reopening efforts. It is possible that some of the positive gains seen in successive waves of the survey to
date may be tempered in Wave 5, which launched on September 1: No new stimulus package was in place
by that time, a number of states were beginning to roll back their reopening efforts, and infection rates
had risen in many regions. The Wave 5 survey will continue to collect employment and income data
11
along with new questions relating to savings impacts and the effect of school reopening on respondent
households.
12
References
Akana, Tom. 2020. CFI COVID-19 Survey of Consumers — An Assessment of the Financial Health and
Stability of U.S. Consumers. Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Consumer Finance Institute
Special Report (May 2020). https://www.philadelphiafed.org/-/media/covid/cfi/cfi-covid-19-survey-
of-consumers.pdf.
Akana, Tom. 2020a. CFI COVID-19 Survey of Consumers — Wave 2 Updates, Impact by Race/Ethnicity,
and Early Use of Economic Impact Payments. Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Consumer
Finance Institute Special Report (June 2020). https://www.philadelphiafed.org/-/media/covid/cfi/cfi-
covid-19-survey-of-consumers-wave2-updates.pdf.
Akana, Tom. 2020b. CFI COVID-19 Survey of Consumers — Wave 3 Reveals Improvements, but Not for
Everyone. Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia Consumer Finance Institute Special Report (August
2020). https://www.philadelphiafed.org/-/media/covid/cfi/cfi-covid-19-survey-of-consumers-wave3-
updates.pdf.
Economic Research Department. 2017. “Assessing Differences in Labor Market Outcomes Across Race,
Age, and Educational Attainment.” Federal Reserve Bank of Kansas City, Research Working Paper
no. 17-03 (April, 2017). https://doi.org/10.18651/RWP2017-03.
Liu, Jennifer. 2020. “Nearly Half of All Furloughed Workers Now Believe Their Temporary Layoff Will
Become Permanent.” CNBC.com (August 3, 2020). Accessed August 31, 2020.
https://www.cnbc.com/2020/08/03/nearly-half-of-workers-believe-temporary-layoff-will-become-
permanent.html.
13
Appendix A
This Appendix contains the significant data tables relating to the information collected in Wave 4 of the
CFI COVID-19 Consumer Survey and referenced in the main body of this paper.
Notes
• Unless otherwise stated, incomes referenced in this document are respondents’ self-reported
personal incomes in 2019, prior to any impact from the crisis.
• Statistics relating to respondents’ current job status (e.g., remote working, laid off, essential
company) are calculated only over the subset of respondents who indicated their income came
from employment of some sort; respondents who indicated government benefits, pensions, and
similar forms of income are not included in those calculations.
• Statistics relating to Gender exclude respondents who selected Other because of small numbers;
four respondents are excluded from these statistics.
With the exception of Table 1, all tables that follow reflect data that have been reweighted to match Wave
1 respondent distributions by age, income, and gender, as described previously.
Table 1 ― Demographic Segment Distributions ― Unweighted Samples ................................................ 15
Table 2 ― Demographic Segment Distributions ― Reweighted Samples ................................................ 16
Table 3 ― Ability to Work ......................................................................................................................... 17
Table 4 ― Impact to Personal Income........................................................................................................ 18
Table 5 ― Financial Security and Outlook ................................................................................................ 19
Table 6 ― Financial Need and Spending Outlook ..................................................................................... 20
Table 7 ― Employment Consistency ......................................................................................................... 21
Table 8 ― Job Interruptions by Race/Ethnicity and Industry..................................................................... 22
Table 9 ― Timeline to Return Onsite ......................................................................................................... 23
Table 10 ― Timeline to Return to Previous Schedule ............................................................................... 24
Table 11 ― Timeline to Return to Work .................................................................................................... 25
Table 12 ― Concerns About Returning to Work or Increasing Hours....................................................... 26
Table 13 ― Previous Income Disruptions .................................................................................................. 27
Table 14 ― Previous Income Disruptions by Segment .............................................................................. 28
Table 15 ― Economic Impact Payment Receipt and Usage ...................................................................... 29
Table 16 ― EIP Paper Check Access ......................................................................................................... 30
Table 17 ― EIP Prepaid Card Access ........................................................................................................ 31
Table 1 ― Demographic Segment Distributions ― Unweighted Samples
Demographic Segment Distributions,
Waves 1 -- 4 Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3 Wave 4
(April 3 - 10, 2020) (May 1 - 12, 2020) (June 5 - 16, 2020) (July 2 - 13, 2020)
UNWEIGHTED SAMPLES
# of Total Respondents 3,504 3,439 3,399 3,497
by Income Range
< $40,000 29.5% 34.9% 29.0% 19.3%
$40,000 - < $75,000 26.7% 26.4% 27.6% 29.2%
$75,000 - < $125,000 25.6% 23.9% 25.4% 28.6%
$125,000+ 18.3% 14.9% 18.0% 22.8%
by Age Range
18-35 26.4% 24.6% 26.4% 28.5%
36-55 42.0% 37.4% 35.1% 36.9%
56-65 19.1% 21.5% 22.2% 20.0%
66+ 12.4% 16.5% 16.3% 14.5%
by Gender
Male 47.0% 44.1% 41.7% 51.6%
Female 52.8% 55.7% 58.1% 48.3%
by Race/Ethnicity
White (Non-Hispanic) 69.8% 69.9% 71.4% 71.2%
African American / Black 10.3% 11.7% 11.0% 10.7%
Hispanic 12.2% 9.9% 8.4% 10.0%
Other 7.0% 7.4% 8.4% 7.5%
Unknown 0.6% 1.2% 0.7% 0.6%
15
Table 2 ― Demographic Segment Distributions ― Reweighted Samples
Demographic Segment Distributions
Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3 Wave 4
(April 3 - 10, 2020) (May 1 - 12, 2020) (June 5 - 16, 2020) (July 2 - 13, 2020)
RE-WEIGHTED SAMPLES
# of Total Respondents 3,517 3,435 3,394 3,494
by Income Range
< $40,000 29.5% 29.5% 29.5% 29.5%
$40,000 - < $75,000 26.6% 26.6% 26.6% 26.6%
$75,000 - < $125,000 25.6% 25.6% 25.6% 25.6%
$125,000+ 18.3% 18.3% 18.3% 18.3%
by Age Range
18-35 26.5% 26.5% 26.5% 26.5%
36-55 42.0% 42.0% 42.0% 42.0%
56-65 19.1% 19.1% 19.1% 19.1%
66+ 12.4% 12.4% 12.4% 12.4%
by Gender
Male 47.0% 47.0% 47.0% 47.0%
Female 53.0% 53.0% 53.0% 53.0%
by Residence Location
Urban 31.4% 29.5% 27.8% 28.2%
Suburban 50.8% 52.2% 55.3% 53.7%
Rural 17.8% 18.2% 17.0% 18.1%
by Race/Ethnicity
White (Non-Hispanic) 69.8% 68.9% 70.5% 71.1%
African American / Black 10.3% 11.6% 11.0% 11.0%
Hispanic 12.3% 10.6% 9.1% 9.8%
Other 7.0% 7.7% 8.7% 7.5%
Unknown 0.6% 1.2% 0.8% 0.6%
16
Table 3 ― Ability to Work
Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3 Wave 4
Ability to Work
(April 3 - 10, 2020) (May 1 - 12, 2020) (June 5 - 16, 2020) (July 2 - 13, 2020)
# of Total Respondents (includes those with employment prior to the crisis) 2,134 2,430 2,445 2,769
Working normal/increased hours at a place of business (office/retail location/etc.) 25.4% 28.1% 32.1% 38.3%
Working reduced hours at a place of business (office/retail location/etc.) 14.6% 15.3% 15.4% 13.3%
Telecommuting/Remote working normal/increased hours 22.9% 23.4% 22.4% 22.4%
Telecommuting/Remote working reduced hours 9.4% 9.7% 7.5% 6.8%
Primary employment is open, but I am temporarily laid off or furloughed 5.1% 4.9% 5.1% 4.3%
Primary employment is open, but I am permanently laid off or furloughed 1.9% 2.5% 3.2% 2.1%
Primary employment is closed; I am still being paid 5.9% 4.5% 3.9% 3.5%
Primary employment is closed; I am no longer being paid 10.9% 8.9% 6.6% 6.1%
Can not work due to COVID-19 illness (personal illness or caring for diagnosed person)* 4.0% 2.6% 3.8% 3.2%
Working Onsite 40.0% 43.4% 47.5% 51.7%
Working Remotely 32.3% 33.1% 29.9% 29.2%
Laid off, Furloughed, No Longer Paid 17.9% 16.3% 14.9% 12.5%
Normal/Increased Hours 48.3% 51.6% 54.4% 60.7%
Reduced Hours 24.0% 25.0% 23.0% 20.2%
*Excludes respondents who did not provide an explanation for this response in Waves 2 - 4.
17
Table 4 ― Impact to Personal Income
Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3 Wave 4
Impact to Personal Income
(April 3 - 10, 2020) (May 1 - 12, 2020) (June 5 - 13, 2020) (July 2 - 13, 2020)
# of Total Respondents 3,517 3,435 3,394 3,494
My personal income has increased 7.7% 9.9% 11.8% 12.0%
No impact to my personal income 53.1% 54.3% 55.5% 55.9%
My personal income is lower, but is more than half of what it was previously 17.7% 18.0% 17.4% 19.9%
My personal income is less than half of what it was previously 10.2% 8.5% 8.0% 7.4%
I no longer have personal income 11.3% 9.3% 7.3% 4.9%
Income Reduced or Gone 39.2% 35.8% 32.7% 32.1%
At any point since March 1st, did your personal income drop below where it is
today?
No. 66.9%
Yes, my income was lower, but more than half of what it is today. 17.3%
Yes, my income was less than half what it is today. 9.1%
Yes, my income was temporarily gone. 6.8%
18
Table 5 ― Financial Security and Outlook
Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3 Wave 4
Financial Security and Outlook
(April 3 - 10, 2020) (May 1 - 12, 2020) (June 5 - 13, 2020) (July 2 - 13, 2020)
# of Total Respondents 3,517 3,435 3,394 3,494
How concerned are you about your ability to make ends meet over these
time periods, on a scale of 1 (not at all concerned ) to 5 (very concerned)?
Slightly Concerned Over Next 3 Months 13.8% 14.6% 14.6% 11.5%
Slightly Concerned Over Next 6 Months 17.1% 18.3% 18.6% 13.9%
Slightly Concerned Over Next 9 Months 16.1% 18.4% 17.6% 15.1%
Slightly Concerned Over Next 12 Months 13.3% 15.7% 16.7% 14.4%
Very Concerned Over Next 3 Months 23.4% 22.7% 19.1% 14.6%
Very Concerned Over Next 6 Months 23.8% 23.0% 19.2% 14.7%
Very Concerned Over Next 9 Months 26.0% 25.2% 21.8% 16.2%
Very Concerned Over Next 12 Months 29.9% 28.8% 24.8% 19.8%
Has the COVID-19 crisis impacted your response to the previous
question?
I feel more secure than I did prior to the crisis. 8.9% 10.5% 10.2% 11.2%
I feel the same now as I did prior to the crisis. 31.4% 40.4% 47.9% 46.4%
I feel slightly less secure than I did prior to the crisis. 31.9% 28.7% 27.3% 26.7%
I feel significantly less secure than I did prior to the crisis. 27.8% 20.4% 14.6% 15.6%
Same or Better 40.3% 50.9% 58.1% 57.7%
19
Table 6 ― Financial Need and Spending Outlook
Wave 1 Wave 2 Wave 3 Wave 4
Financial Need and Spending Outlook
(April 3 - 10, 2020) (May 1 - 12, 2020) (June 5 - 13, 2020) (July 2 - 13, 2020)
# of Total Respondents 3,517 3,435 3,394 3,494
If you believe you will need to access additional resources, how soon do
you believe that will be necessary?
I have already had to seek additional resources 10.3% 9.7% 7.7% 6.2%
1-2 Weeks 9.1% 7.0% 7.1% 6.5%
2-4 Weeks 14.8% 13.3% 12.4% 10.5%
4-8 Weeks 10.6% 9.5% 7.0% 7.4%
2 or more months 15.8% 11.3% 10.0% 10.2%
I don't anticipate needing to seek additional resources 39.4% 49.3% 55.8% 59.2%
How do you expect your household spending per month to change over the
next 90 days (excluding housing payments)?
I expect to spend more per month 13.4% 14.3% 13.6% 13.6%
I expect my spending to remain about the same 29.7% 43.9% 53.5% 57.7%
I expect my spending to decrease 43.8% 33.3% 25.9% 20.7%
I expect to spend less than half of what I used to spend 13.1% 8.6% 7.0% 8.1%
Think about your overall spending over the last 30 days. How does the
amount you spent compare to what you would normally spend over that
period?
I spent more than I normally would 17.4%
I spent about the same 42.4%
I spent less, but more than half the normal amount 27.8%
I spent less than half of what I would normally spend 12.4%
20
Table 7 ― Employment Consistency
No, I have been Yes, but I have
Yes, but I have
Employment Consistency (Asked of those currently working on site # of employed started working at
started working at
or remotely) Respondents consistently since my previous job
a new job.
March 1. again.
# of Total Respondents 2,338 75.9% 19.8% 4.3%
Income Range
< $40,000 480 66.8% 27.2% 6.0%
$40,000 - < $75,000 594 76.4% 20.6% 3.0%
$75,000 - < $125,000 654 79.5% 16.6% 3.9%
$125,000+ 510 79.4% 16.1% 4.5%
Age Range
18-35 632 57.8% 33.8% 8.4%
36-55 1,084 81.2% 15.5% 3.4%
56-65 403 87.9% 11.3% 0.8%
66+ 119 84.0% 14.0% 1.9%
Gender
Male 1,145 76.0% 19.4% 4.6%
Female 1,093 75.8% 20.2% 3.9%
Race/Ethnicity
White (Non-Hispanic) 1,558 81.3% 15.4% 3.3%
African American / Black 245 48.1% 41.4% 10.5%
Hispanic 236 69.1% 25.6% 5.3%
Other 186 75.9% 21.1% 3.0%
Unknown 14 81.0% 19.0% 0.0%
21
Table 8 ― Job Interruptions by Race/Ethnicity and Industry
Currently Employed Currently Employed, Previous Job Interuption % Experiencing Job Interruptions
White Black Hispanic Total White Black Hispanic Total White Black Hispanic Total
Construction 50 8 13 72 16 5 4 25 32% 59% 33% 35%
Education 174 29 31 234 14 13 1 28 8% 45% 3% 12%
Health Services 177 40 21 238 26 21 7 55 15% 54% 35% 23%
Finance, Insurance 115 19 27 162 17 15 10 42 15% 77% 38% 26%
Real Estate 38 9 12 59 10 6 6 22 27% 65% 46% 37%
Manufacturing 112 13 16 141 19 10 8 37 17% 76% 51% 26%
Retail Sales 178 36 23 237 53 18 6 78 30% 50% 28% 33%
Leisure, Hospitality, Arts, Entertainment 67 13 8 89 25 10 4 38 36% 76% 49% 43%
Trade, Transportation, Utilities, Labor 104 15 15 134 24 7 4 34 23% 44% 25% 25%
Professional, Business Services, Information Technology 395 41 47 483 74 14 13 101 19% 34% 27% 21%
Other (max 25 characters) 29 2 3 34 3 2 2 6 10% 100% 61% 19%
Government 92 15 15 122 6 5 6 18 7% 33% 43% 15%
Military, Law Enforcement, Fire Dept 27 4 4 34 5 2 1 8 19% 42% 28% 23%
Total 1,558 245 236 2,038 291 127 73 491 19% 52% 31% 24%
Currently Employed
White Black Hispanic Total
Industries w/ 25+ Black Respondents 924 146 122 1,193
Remaining Industries 634 98 113 846
Total 1,558 245 236 2,038
Currently Employed, Previous Interuption
White Black Hispanic Total
Industries w/ 25+ Black Respondents 167 67 27 261
Remaining Industries 124 60 45 230
Total 291 127 73 491
% Experiencing Interruptions
White Black Hispanic Total
Industries w/ 25+ Black Respondents 18% 46% 22% 22%
Remaining Industries 20% 61% 40% 27%
Total 19% 52% 31% 24%
22
Table 9 ― Timeline to Return Onsite
We could begin We could begin
They have said
No, they have not working on-site working on-site
Timeline to Return Onsite (Asked # of there are no plans
communicated before September after September 1st
of those currently working remotely) Respondents yet to return to the
anything. 1st (depending on (depending on local
office.
local guidelines). guidelines).
# of Total Respondents 808 22.5% 32.7% 31.5% 13.3%
Income Range
< $40,000 112 37.7% 35.5% 21.5% 5.3%
$40,000 - < $75,000 187 24.4% 34.7% 30.7% 10.2%
$75,000 - < $125,000 272 16.1% 29.2% 39.9% 14.8%
$125,000+ 237 21.2% 33.8% 27.2% 17.8%
Age Range
18-35 172 15.7% 34.8% 37.4% 12.1%
36-55 438 22.2% 32.9% 31.4% 13.5%
56-65 152 24.1% 32.8% 28.0% 15.1%
66+ 46 45.1% 22.6% 22.6% 9.8%
Gender
Male 400 20.1% 32.8% 31.3% 15.8%
Female 409 24.9% 32.6% 31.7% 10.8%
Race/Ethnicity
White (Non-Hispanic) 581 23.3% 33.2% 30.3% 13.2%
African American / Black 67 20.4% 34.3% 38.4% 6.9%
Hispanic 74 20.1% 30.9% 36.1% 12.8%
Other 83 21.3% 29.9% 30.7% 18.0%
Unknown 4 0.0% 31.2% 23.6% 45.2%
23
Table 10 ― Timeline to Return to Previous Schedule
They have told me They have told me Returning to my I will be returning
Timeline to Return to Previous No, they have not
# of there are no plans I will not be previous schedule to my previous
Work Schedule (Asked of those communicated
Respondents yet to return to my returning to my will depend on local schedule within the
currently working reduced hours) anything.
previous schedule. previous schedule. re-opening rules. next 30 days.
# of Total Respondents 558 29.1% 20.7% 11.4% 25.3% 13.5%
Income Range
< $40,000 170 46.6% 15.3% 8.2% 21.3% 8.7%
$40,000 - < $75,000 154 27.6% 23.4% 9.0% 27.9% 12.2%
$75,000 - < $125,000 142 16.6% 22.9% 15.8% 26.7% 18.1%
$125,000+ 92 18.8% 22.6% 14.8% 26.5% 17.3%
Age Range
18-35 208 20.7% 26.8% 18.5% 22.4% 11.7%
36-55 241 35.2% 16.9% 8.0% 28.2% 11.7%
56-65 78 30.0% 16.9% 6.2% 26.7% 20.2%
66+ 32 35.8% 18.1% 4.7% 19.7% 21.8%
Gender
Male 262 26.7% 19.3% 12.4% 26.9% 14.7%
Female 297 31.2% 21.9% 10.6% 23.9% 12.4%
Race/Ethnicity
White (Non-Hispanic) 355 30.6% 19.2% 8.5% 25.6% 16.1%
African American / Black 92 19.1% 33.0% 19.0% 15.3% 13.6%
Hispanic 56 33.7% 18.2% 12.8% 29.3% 6.0%
Other 51 31.0% 12.9% 17.2% 35.0% 3.8%
Unknown 3 40.0% 0.0% 0.0% 60.0% 0.0%
24
Table 11 ― Timeline to Return to Work
I am actively
Timeline to Return to Work I expect to be I am actively I am not currently
# of seeking a job
(Asked of those not currently rehired when my seeking a different seeking
Respondents similar to my
working) employer reopens. type of job. employment.
previous one.
# of Total Respondents 442 41.7% 21.4% 14.7% 22.2%
Income Range
< $40,000 168 32.9% 21.9% 20.3% 24.9%
$40,000 - < $75,000 127 42.1% 19.1% 13.9% 24.9%
$75,000 - < $125,000 90 47.7% 24.8% 10.2% 17.3%
$125,000+ 57 57.3% 19.7% 7.3% 15.7%
Age Range
18-35 150 27.9% 40.9% 20.0% 11.3%
36-55 168 47.9% 13.6% 14.0% 24.5%
56-65 75 50.7% 11.0% 9.6% 28.7%
66+ 49 49.0% 4.0% 9.1% 37.9%
Gender
Male 168 44.0% 24.9% 12.3% 18.9%
Female 274 40.2% 19.3% 16.3% 24.2%
Race/Ethnicity
White (Non-Hispanic) 277 44.6% 14.6% 13.8% 27.1%
African American / Black 77 28.8% 42.7% 13.2% 15.3%
Hispanic 50 45.4% 25.5% 11.0% 18.2%
Other 32 47.1% 24.9% 25.3% 2.7%
Unknown 7 15.0% 12.6% 50.0% 22.3%
25
Table 12 ― Concerns About Returning to Work or Increasing Hours
Concerns About Returning to
Another Shutdown My Employer’s Public
Work or Increasing Hours # of Finding Exposure to
Finding Childcare Impacting My Ability to Stay In Transportation
(Asked of those employed prior Respondents Elder/Senior Care COVID-19 at Work
Employer Business (Access and Safety)
to the crisis)
# of Total Respondents 2,769 19.1% 17.0% 55.0% 44.6% 32.8% 29.8%
Income Range
< $40,000 689 8.7% 8.0% 33.7% 27.4% 20.8% 18.4%
$40,000 - < $75,000 741 14.7% 12.7% 55.3% 44.0% 32.0% 26.3%
$75,000 - < $125,000 760 24.1% 20.9% 62.4% 50.2% 36.3% 31.5%
$125,000+ 580 30.4% 28.1% 70.4% 58.3% 43.6% 45.5%
Age Range
18-35 821 35.7% 32.2% 65.8% 56.2% 50.0% 47.0%
36-55 1,280 17.3% 14.0% 51.0% 41.5% 27.7% 25.2%
56-65 488 2.7% 4.9% 50.2% 37.9% 21.7% 18.9%
66+ 180 0.6% 2.2% 47.7% 31.6% 21.1% 13.3%
Gender
Male 1,351 23.6% 21.8% 58.0% 49.0% 37.8% 35.8%
Female 1,418 14.7% 12.4% 52.2% 40.3% 28.1% 24.0%
Race/Ethnicity
White (Non-Hispanic) 1,885 14.6% 13.2% 52.0% 41.8% 28.7% 23.7%
African American / Black 342 30.1% 31.2% 60.7% 49.9% 47.6% 48.2%
Hispanic 300 33.0% 25.4% 62.4% 55.4% 41.0% 41.4%
Other 221 21.2% 17.6% 61.9% 43.4% 33.9% 38.0%
Unknown 20 19.6% 4.9% 58.8% 63.7% 34.3% 29.4%
26
Table 13 ― Previous Income Disruptions
Respondents
At any point since March 1st, did your personal income drop below Respondents
All Respondents Earning Same or
where it is today? Earning Less
More
# of Total Respondents 3,494 2,371 1,122
No. 66.9% 86.1% 26.4%
Yes, my income was lower, but more than half of what it is today. 17.3% 7.9% 37.1%
Yes, my income was less than half what it is today. 9.1% 3.2% 21.4%
Yes, my income was temporarily gone. 6.8% 2.8% 15.1%
27
Table 14 ― Previous Income Disruptions by Segment
Respondents Earning Same or More Respondents Earning Less
Proportion of Respondents Reporting Lower % With No Lower % With Previously % With No Lower % With Previously
Income at Prior Point in the Crisis Income Lower Income Income Lower Income
by Income Range
< $40,000 84.8% 15.2% 23.3% 76.7%
$40,000 - < $75,000 88.3% 11.7% 33.8% 66.2%
$75,000 - < $125,000 87.2% 12.8% 23.1% 76.9%
$125,000+ 83.6% 16.4% 23.9% 76.1%
by Age Range
18-35 69.6% 30.4% 20.6% 79.4%
36-55 87.7% 12.3% 28.7% 71.3%
56-65 94.6% 5.4% 29.4% 70.6%
66+ 96.3% 3.7% 31.6% 68.4%
by Gender
Male 85.5% 14.5% 23.4% 76.6%
Female 86.8% 13.2% 28.6% 71.4%
by Race/Ethnicity
White (Non-Hispanic) 90.1% 9.9% 30.6% 69.4%
African American / Black 60.0% 40.0% 17.7% 82.3%
Hispanic 79.6% 20.4% 21.9% 78.1%
Other 88.2% 11.8% 16.0% 84.0%
Unknown 81.4% 18.6% 12.9% 87.1%
28
Table 15 ― Economic Impact Payment Receipt and Usage
Wave 2 Wave 3 Wave 4
Economic Impact Payment Receipt and Usage
(May 1 - 12, 2020) (June 5 - 13, 2020) (July 2 - 13, 2020)
# of Total Respondents 3,435 3,394 3,494
% Received (Direct Deposit) 53.4% 58.9% 59.1%
% Received (Paper Check) 9.2% 15.1% 16.0%
% Received (Prepaid Card) 0.0% 4.6% 4.5%
% Received (Total) 62.6% 78.6% 79.6%
# of Respondents (Received) 2,151 2,669 2,781
No Specific Plans 18.2% 19.2% 19.0%
# Uses Selected 2.8 2.5 2.5
Housing Payments (Mortgage or Rent) 40.0% 36.8% 34.4%
Debt Payments (Credit Card, Personal Loan, Student Loan, etc.) 43.6% 37.9% 38.7%
Utility Bills (Power, Water, etc.) 40.2% 34.9% 33.9%
Essential Purchases (Food, health care supplies, etc.) 47.9% 42.8% 42.3%
General Purchases 43.3% 41.7% 39.5%
Withdraw Cash from Accounts to Have on Hand 28.7% 23.9% 22.7%
Transferred to Savings 42.7% 41.3% 39.4%
Note: The EIP program began after Wave 1 was fielded.
29
Table 16 ― EIP Paper Check Access
Deposited in a Deposited in a Cashed through a
You stated that you received a Deposited in a Have not done
# of bank account at a bank account check-cashing or
paper check. How did you access bank account anything with the Other
Respondents branch or other through a mobile other business and
the funds from that check? through an ATM. check yet.
physical location. app. paid fees.
# of Total Respondents 439 46.3% 30.0% 17.2% 2.9% 2.6% 1.0%
Income Range
< $40,000 135 39.7% 38.7% 13.8% 3.4% 3.3% 1.1%
$40,000 - < $75,000 121 53.6% 20.1% 18.5% 3.2% 4.0% 0.7%
$75,000 - < $125,000 112 48.1% 23.5% 22.8% 2.6% 1.3% 1.6%
$125,000+ 71 43.2% 40.6% 12.7% 2.2% 1.2% 0.0%
Age Range
18-35 150 23.0% 46.5% 24.0% 3.8% 2.6% 0.0%
36-55 161 53.6% 27.7% 12.4% 2.7% 3.7% 0.0%
56-65 87 58.2% 16.6% 15.3% 3.3% 1.8% 4.8%
66+ 40 78.2% 6.2% 15.7% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
Gender
Male 223 45.8% 31.2% 16.5% 3.6% 2.5% 0.4%
Female 216 46.7% 28.7% 18.0% 2.3% 2.7% 1.6%
Race/Ethnicity
White (Non-Hispanic) 298 52.4% 25.1% 15.2% 3.8% 2.3% 1.1%
African American / Black 68 25.9% 43.3% 23.6% 2.2% 3.7% 1.2%
Hispanic 38 33.2% 35.6% 28.4% 0.0% 2.9% 0.0%
Other 27 49.2% 38.0% 9.3% 0.0% 3.6% 0.0%
Unknown 8 40.6% 46.4% 13.1% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
30
Table 17 ― EIP Prepaid Card Access
Used to make
You stated that you received a Have not done
# of Withdrew cash purchases like I Transferred money
prepaid card. How did you access anything with the Other
Respondents from an ATM. would any other to a bank account.
the funds from that card? card yet.
payment card.
# of Total Respondents 142 21.1% 49.9% 24.2% 4.8% 0.0%
Income Range
< $40,000 38 20.1% 50.8% 23.5% 5.6% 0.0%
$40,000 - < $75,000 30 31.0% 45.7% 20.6% 2.8% 0.0%
$75,000 - < $125,000 42 19.8% 54.0% 21.0% 5.2% 0.0%
$125,000+ 32 15.0% 47.2% 32.7% 5.1% 0.0%
Age Range
18-35 86 19.6% 55.4% 21.5% 3.5% 0.0%
36-55 40 31.1% 50.2% 13.5% 5.2% 0.0%
56-65 9 8.4% 25.6% 47.0% 18.9% 0.0%
66+ 7 0.0% 11.3% 88.7% 0.0% 0.0%
Gender
Male 74 23.3% 48.9% 22.2% 5.6% 0.0%
Female 68 18.8% 50.9% 26.4% 3.9% 0.0%
Race/Ethnicity
White (Non-Hispanic) 60 23.2% 40.3% 30.2% 6.3% 0.0%
African American / Black 44 19.5% 59.1% 18.9% 2.4% 0.0%
Hispanic 22 22.7% 44.9% 27.5% 4.9% 0.0%
Other 15 16.5% 65.8% 12.0% 5.7% 0.0%
Unknown 1 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0.0%
31
Appendix B
This Appendix contains additional data tables relating to demographic subsegments from Wave 4 of the
CFI COVID-19 Consumer Survey. Data contained here are not specifically referenced in the paper but are
provided for continuity to data tables from previous waves of the survey.
Notes
• Unless otherwise stated, incomes referenced in this document are respondents’ self-reported
personal incomes in 2019, prior to any impact from the crisis.
• Statistics relating to respondents’ current job status (e.g., remote working, laid off, essential
company) are calculated only over the subset of respondents who indicated their income came
from employment of some sort; respondents who indicated government benefits, pensions, and
similar forms of income are not included in those calculations.
• Statistics relating to Gender exclude respondents who selected Other because of small numbers;
four respondents are excluded from these statistics.
All tables that follow reflect data that have been reweighted to match Wave 1 respondent distributions by
age, income, and gender, as described previously. For this reason, the data in these tables may not match
data previously published reports.
32
Table 18 ― Ability to Work by Segment, Waves 3–4
Wave 4 Wave 3
(July 2 - 13, 2020) (June 5 - 16, 2020)
Can not work Can not work
due to COVID- due to COVID-
Ability to Work, Waves 3-4
Laid off, 19 illness Laid off, 19 illness
# of Working on Working Furloughed, Normal/Increa Reduced (personal # of Working on Working Furloughed, Normal/Increa Reduced (personal
(includes those with
Respondents Site Remotely No Longer sed Hours Hours illness or Respondents Site Remotely No Longer sed Hours Hours illness or
employment prior to the
Paid caring for Paid caring for
crisis)
diagnosed diagnosed
person) person)
# of Total Respondents 2,769 51.7% 29.2% 12.5% 60.7% 20.2% 3.2% 2,440 47.6% 30.0% 14.9% 54.5% 23.0% 3.6%
by Income Range
< $40,000 689 53.5% 16.2% 20.2% 45.1% 24.7% 5.8% 542 52.5% 15.9% 20.5% 41.8% 26.6% 6.9%
$40,000 - < $75,000 741 54.9% 25.3% 13.4% 59.4% 20.8% 2.7% 670 48.6% 28.4% 16.6% 50.7% 26.3% 1.9%
$75,000 - < $125,000 760 50.4% 35.8% 8.4% 67.4% 18.7% 2.0% 695 43.5% 35.5% 14.2% 58.2% 20.9% 3.8%
$125,000+ 580 47.0% 40.9% 7.5% 72.0% 15.9% 2.3% 534 46.7% 39.0% 7.9% 67.6% 18.1% 2.2%
by Age Range
18-35 821 56.0% 21.0% 13.8% 51.7% 25.3% 4.7% 768 51.0% 23.2% 15.9% 46.6% 27.6% 5.0%
36-55 1,280 50.5% 34.2% 9.8% 65.9% 18.8% 2.2% 1,154 46.3% 35.5% 12.2% 60.6% 21.2% 2.9%
56-65 488 51.4% 31.2% 12.3% 66.6% 16.0% 2.1% 377 44.0% 30.0% 18.2% 55.4% 18.7% 3.0%
66+ 180 40.6% 25.7% 26.1% 48.4% 17.8% 6.5% 142 49.2% 21.6% 22.7% 46.0% 24.8% 3.7%
by Gender
Male 1,351 55.2% 29.6% 9.9% 65.4% 19.4% 2.7% 1,213 50.9% 29.4% 12.5% 57.2% 23.1% 3.4%
Female 1,418 48.3% 28.8% 14.9% 56.2% 20.9% 3.6% 1,227 44.3% 30.5% 17.3% 51.9% 23.0% 3.8%
by Residence Location
Urban 840 53.2% 29.0% 11.0% 59.1% 23.1% 4.2% 728 49.5% 28.9% 13.6% 54.0% 24.5% 3.9%
Suburban 1,486 48.5% 32.4% 12.7% 61.5% 19.4% 2.5% 1,357 43.6% 33.8% 15.5% 54.7% 22.7% 3.4%
Rural 443 59.4% 18.7% 14.6% 61.0% 17.1% 3.6% 355 58.7% 17.6% 15.3% 55.1% 21.2% 3.8%
by Race/Ethnicity
White (Non-Hispanic) 1,885 51.9% 30.8% 11.6% 63.8% 18.9% 2.6% 1,651 47.9% 31.1% 14.8% 57.9% 21.1% 3.0%
African American / Black 342 51.9% 19.5% 15.8% 44.4% 27.0% 6.2% 289 46.6% 20.9% 18.8% 41.0% 26.5% 6.6%
Hispanic 300 53.9% 24.7% 13.3% 59.9% 18.7% 4.7% 237 50.7% 24.8% 15.2% 43.8% 31.8% 3.6%
Other 221 46.5% 37.6% 12.2% 60.8% 23.3% 1.5% 243 43.5% 38.1% 11.0% 59.3% 22.3% 4.3%
Unknown 20 50.9% 17.2% 31.9% 52.6% 15.5% 0.0% 20 48.5% 28.8% 12.7% 42.1% 35.2% 4.6%
33
Table 19 ― Impact to Personal Income by Segment, Waves 3–4
Wave 4 Wave 3
(July 2 - 13, 2020) (June 5 - 16, 2020)
My personal My personal
My personal My personal
income is income is
Impact to Personal My personal No impact to income is less I no longer My personal No impact to income is less I no longer
# of lower, but is # of lower, but is
Income, income has my personal than half of have personal income has my personal than half of have personal
Respondents more than half Respondents more than half
Waves 3-4 increased. income. what it was income. increased. income. what it was income.
of what it was of what it was
previously. previously.
previously. previously.
# of Total Respondents 3,494 12.0% 55.9% 19.9% 7.4% 4.9% 3,394 11.8% 55.5% 17.4% 8.0% 7.3%
by Income Range
< $40,000 1,030 10.7% 52.3% 17.4% 11.9% 7.7% 1,001 11.8% 50.2% 16.7% 9.7% 11.7%
$40,000 - < $75,000 931 9.7% 55.6% 22.0% 7.7% 4.9% 904 11.2% 53.8% 19.9% 8.4% 6.8%
$75,000 - < $125,000 893 12.4% 58.9% 20.8% 4.6% 3.3% 868 9.7% 59.0% 18.5% 7.3% 5.5%
$125,000+ 640 16.8% 57.8% 19.4% 3.5% 2.4% 621 15.4% 61.8% 13.2% 6.0% 3.6%
by Age Range
18-35 927 18.6% 40.9% 25.2% 8.9% 6.4% 900 21.9% 37.5% 24.3% 9.2% 7.1%
36-55 1,466 11.9% 55.9% 19.9% 7.5% 4.8% 1,424 10.7% 57.1% 16.4% 8.0% 7.8%
56-65 669 8.0% 66.3% 15.5% 6.8% 3.3% 649 5.8% 64.6% 13.5% 7.2% 8.8%
66+ 432 4.4% 71.5% 14.9% 4.8% 4.4% 420 2.7% 74.8% 11.6% 6.8% 4.1%
by Gender
Male 1,643 13.6% 56.8% 20.5% 5.5% 3.5% 1,596 13.0% 55.8% 18.1% 7.3% 5.7%
Female 1,851 10.6% 55.0% 19.3% 9.1% 6.1% 1,798 10.6% 55.3% 16.6% 8.7% 8.7%
by Residence Location
Urban 985 17.8% 47.5% 22.1% 7.1% 5.4% 942 18.4% 48.3% 16.9% 8.9% 7.5%
Suburban 1,878 10.0% 57.9% 20.2% 7.3% 4.6% 1,876 9.1% 57.7% 18.2% 8.0% 7.0%
Rural 631 8.9% 62.8% 15.2% 8.2% 4.9% 576 9.7% 60.2% 15.3% 6.8% 8.1%
by Race/Ethnicity
White (Non-Hispanic) 2,483 10.3% 60.5% 17.7% 6.8% 4.7% 2,391 9.9% 60.8% 15.5% 6.4% 7.4%
African American / Black 385 22.1% 36.7% 28.1% 8.0% 5.1% 374 22.2% 35.3% 26.2% 11.0% 5.4%
Hispanic 342 15.2% 46.6% 23.6% 9.8% 4.8% 307 16.0% 41.4% 21.9% 13.2% 7.6%
Other 263 9.8% 53.4% 23.4% 7.7% 5.6% 295 8.3% 54.9% 15.1% 11.8% 9.9%
Unknown 21 0.0% 44.8% 20.9% 25.7% 8.6% 26 22.3% 31.0% 34.7% 12.0% 0.0%
34
Table 20 ― Financial Security and Outlook by Segment, Waves 3–4
Wave 4 Wave 3
(July 2 - 13, 2020) (June 5 - 16, 2020)
Expect Expect
Slightly or Slightly or
Slightly or Very Slightly or Very Spending to Expect Slightly or Very Slightly or Very Spending to Expect
Significantly Significantly
Financial Security and Outlook, # of Concerned Concerned Increase or Spending to # of Concerned Concerned Increase or Spending to
Less Secure Less Secure
Waves 3-4 Respondents Over Next 3 Over Next 12 Remain the Decrease over Respondents Over Next 3 Over Next 12 Remain the Decrease over
than Before the than Before the
Months Months Same over Next 90 Days Months Months Same over Next 90 Days
Crisis Crisis
Next 90 Days Next 90 Days
# of Total Respondents 3,494 24.4% 32.1% 41.0% 72.6% 27.5% 3,394 26.2% 32.1% 41.9% 67.1% 32.9%
by Income Range
< $40,000 1,030 19.7% 25.9% 29.7% 44.3% 21.4% 1,001 33.4% 36.6% 43.0% 65.5% 34.5%
$40,000 - < $75,000 931 23.5% 34.7% 48.7% 75.1% 34.7% 904 25.0% 32.3% 45.7% 66.9% 33.1%
$75,000 - < $125,000 893 27.0% 32.9% 46.5% 84.4% 27.7% 868 22.5% 29.9% 43.2% 64.2% 35.8%
$125,000+ 640 29.5% 37.0% 40.2% 98.2% 26.6% 621 21.7% 27.6% 32.6% 74.0% 26.0%
by Age Range
18-35 927 40.6% 48.4% 44.2% 79.1% 28.6% 900 35.8% 43.0% 44.5% 72.4% 27.6%
36-55 1,466 24.7% 30.5% 38.8% 61.2% 26.8% 1,424 29.2% 34.6% 43.8% 62.7% 37.3%
56-65 669 12.3% 23.9% 42.9% 75.5% 29.2% 649 16.0% 23.2% 41.7% 65.8% 34.2%
66+ 432 7.4% 15.0% 38.2% 92.8% 24.8% 420 11.4% 13.8% 29.9% 72.9% 27.1%
by Gender
Male 1,643 27.0% 36.1% 40.6% 83.2% 26.7% 1,596 24.2% 31.2% 38.3% 71.1% 28.9%
Female 1,851 22.1% 28.4% 41.3% 63.2% 28.0% 1,798 28.0% 32.9% 45.1% 63.6% 36.4%
by Residence Location
Urban 985 35.7% 43.0% 38.2% 75.7% 24.0% 942 39.8% 42.0% 42.3% 69.2% 30.8%
Suburban 1,878 20.9% 28.7% 44.1% 72.7% 30.0% 1,876 20.0% 28.1% 43.3% 65.6% 34.4%
Rural 631 17.0% 25.0% 36.0% 67.3% 25.3% 576 24.4% 29.1% 36.6% 68.6% 31.4%
by Race/Ethnicity
White (Non-Hispanic) 2,483 20.7% 28.4% 39.6% 74.7% 25.5% 2,391 23.6% 27.8% 39.5% 68.0% 32.0%
African American / Black 385 37.4% 43.4% 37.7% 67.9% 29.6% 374 33.1% 44.6% 39.8% 66.5% 33.5%
Hispanic 342 34.0% 41.9% 44.5% 69.4% 32.8% 307 36.1% 42.4% 52.3% 66.7% 33.3%
Other 263 25.8% 36.4% 52.4% 64.9% 34.6% 295 28.3% 40.0% 52.9% 61.5% 38.5%
Unknown 21 41.9% 41.9% 55.8% 60.5% 41.9% 26 32.5% 35.4% 39.5% 62.7% 37.3%
35
Table 21 ― Future Assistance Needed by Segment, Waves 3–4
Wave 4 Wave 3
(July 2 - 13, 2020) (June 5 - 16, 2020)
I don't I don't
I have I have
anticipate anticipate
already had already had
Future Assistance Needed # of 2 or more needing to Will Still # of 2 or more needing to Will Still
to seek 1-2 Weeks 2-4 Weeks 4-8 Weeks to seek 1-2 Weeks 2-4 Weeks 4-8 Weeks
Waves 3-4 Respondents months seek Need Help Respondents months seek Need Help
additional additional
additional additional
resources resources
resources resources
# of Total Respondents 3,494 6.2% 6.5% 10.5% 7.4% 10.2% 59.2% 34.6% 3,394 7.7% 7.1% 12.4% 7.0% 10.0% 55.8% 36.5%
by Income Range
< $40,000 1,030 10.5% 8.7% 8.1% 7.0% 10.5% 55.2% 34.2% 1,001 13.6% 9.5% 12.2% 7.9% 10.3% 46.4% 39.9%
$40,000 - < $75,000 931 5.1% 5.9% 12.1% 7.8% 11.6% 57.5% 37.4% 904 6.3% 6.8% 12.3% 7.8% 10.4% 56.3% 37.4%
$75,000 - < $125,000 893 3.5% 5.5% 11.2% 7.3% 9.7% 62.8% 33.7% 868 5.0% 5.6% 12.5% 7.1% 9.6% 60.2% 34.8%
$125,000+ 640 4.8% 5.5% 10.8% 7.3% 8.5% 63.0% 32.2% 621 4.1% 5.6% 12.5% 4.2% 9.6% 64.0% 31.9%
by Age Range
18-35 927 8.9% 15.6% 23.9% 12.6% 7.4% 31.7% 59.4% 900 10.3% 15.8% 26.1% 10.1% 9.1% 28.6% 61.2%
36-55 1,466 7.4% 5.1% 8.7% 7.3% 11.7% 59.8% 32.8% 1,424 8.2% 5.7% 11.1% 7.6% 11.6% 55.9% 35.9%
56-65 669 3.0% 1.0% 1.5% 3.8% 12.2% 78.5% 18.5% 649 5.8% 2.3% 2.7% 4.4% 9.3% 75.5% 18.7%
66+ 432 1.6% 0.6% 1.3% 2.0% 8.2% 86.3% 12.1% 420 3.4% 0.5% 2.2% 2.5% 7.8% 83.7% 12.9%
by Gender
Male 1,643 4.5% 6.9% 12.9% 6.6% 10.2% 58.9% 36.5% 1,596 6.7% 7.3% 12.6% 7.5% 9.1% 56.8% 36.5%
Female 1,851 7.7% 6.2% 8.3% 8.1% 10.3% 59.4% 32.8% 1,798 8.6% 6.9% 12.1% 6.6% 10.8% 54.9% 36.4%
by Residence Location
Urban 985 7.7% 10.8% 14.9% 8.2% 11.0% 47.3% 44.9% 942 9.1% 10.2% 21.0% 9.6% 9.0% 41.0% 49.9%
Suburban 1,878 5.4% 4.9% 9.9% 7.0% 10.2% 62.7% 31.9% 1,876 6.5% 5.8% 10.1% 6.4% 10.9% 60.2% 33.3%
Rural 631 6.2% 4.8% 5.3% 7.2% 9.1% 67.4% 26.4% 576 9.4% 6.0% 5.5% 4.6% 8.7% 65.8% 24.8%
by Race/Ethnicity
White (Non-Hispanic) 2,483 5.4% 4.2% 6.8% 5.6% 10.8% 67.1% 27.5% 2,391 6.9% 4.9% 8.5% 5.7% 9.8% 64.1% 28.9%
African American / Black 385 12.4% 14.1% 26.6% 15.8% 5.1% 26.1% 61.6% 374 10.2% 15.2% 27.3% 11.9% 7.7% 27.7% 62.1%
Hispanic 342 3.9% 14.0% 18.0% 10.1% 11.2% 42.8% 53.3% 307 11.3% 13.5% 19.7% 10.4% 8.8% 36.3% 52.4%
Other 263 8.0% 6.9% 12.0% 6.0% 11.2% 56.0% 36.0% 295 6.3% 7.5% 16.3% 8.4% 15.5% 46.0% 47.6%
Unknown 21 5.0% 12.9% 8.8% 31.8% 3.8% 37.7% 57.3% 26 16.1% 6.8% 20.4% 8.0% 11.2% 37.5% 46.5%
36
Table 22 ― Receipt of Economic Impact Payments by Segment, Waves 3–4
Wave 4 Wave 3
(July 2 - 13, 2020) (June 5 - 16, 2020)
Yes – I No – I'm not Yes – I No – I'm not
No – I No – I know No – I No – I know
received the Yes – I sure received the Yes – I sure
Receipt of EIP Checks, Yes – I expect to I do not Yes – I expect to I do not
# of payment received a whether I Prefer not to # of payment received a whether I Prefer not to
Waves 3-4 received a receive a qualify for a received a receive a qualify for a
Respondents through prepaid qualify for a answer. Respondents through prepaid qualify for a answer.
paper check. payment at a stimulus paper check. payment at a stimulus
direct card. stimulus direct card. stimulus
later date. payment. later date. payment.
deposit. payment. deposit. payment.
# of Total Respondents 3,494 59.1% 16.0% 4.5% 4.0% 3.3% 10.9% 2.2% 3,394 58.9% 15.1% 4.2% 4.0% 11.2% 1.9% 4.6%
by Income Range
< $40,000 1,030 56.7% 19.2% 4.5% 3.9% 4.4% 7.7% 3.5% 1,001 56.0% 18.1% 5.6% 5.5% 8.0% 2.5% 4.3%
$40,000 - < $75,000 931 64.5% 16.6% 3.6% 4.7% 3.0% 5.7% 1.8% 904 65.4% 15.3% 3.7% 4.2% 4.2% 1.8% 5.4%
$75,000 - < $125,000 893 64.0% 14.3% 5.1% 4.2% 2.2% 8.9% 1.4% 868 62.6% 15.1% 3.7% 2.8% 9.3% 1.5% 5.0%
$125,000+ 640 47.9% 12.1% 5.2% 2.9% 3.5% 26.7% 1.6% 621 48.9% 10.0% 3.6% 2.8% 29.1% 1.9% 3.6%
by Age Range
18-35 927 47.4% 17.6% 9.8% 7.0% 5.0% 9.8% 3.5% 900 49.0% 14.9% 6.4% 6.2% 10.2% 3.4% 10.0%
36-55 1,466 63.4% 13.2% 2.9% 3.8% 3.2% 11.4% 2.2% 1,424 63.8% 13.5% 3.9% 3.6% 11.0% 2.0% 2.4%
56-65 669 63.5% 17.7% 1.7% 2.3% 2.2% 11.5% 1.1% 649 59.4% 15.1% 3.4% 2.9% 14.5% 0.9% 3.7%
66+ 432 62.5% 19.4% 3.3% 0.9% 1.9% 11.0% 0.9% 420 62.8% 21.2% 2.2% 2.2% 9.1% 0.4% 2.2%
by Gender
Male 1,643 56.7% 16.8% 5.0% 3.3% 3.7% 12.7% 1.8% 1,596 56.9% 16.4% 3.7% 3.1% 12.9% 1.7% 5.3%
Female 1,851 61.2% 15.3% 4.2% 4.6% 2.9% 9.3% 2.5% 1,798 60.6% 14.0% 4.7% 4.8% 9.7% 2.1% 4.0%
by Residence Location
Urban 985 58.6% 15.5% 6.5% 4.6% 3.0% 9.3% 2.5% 942 55.8% 18.1% 3.6% 4.6% 10.4% 2.2% 5.3%
Suburban 1,878 58.5% 15.6% 4.0% 3.6% 3.3% 13.0% 2.1% 1,876 58.5% 14.2% 4.2% 4.2% 12.1% 1.9% 5.0%
Rural 631 61.6% 18.0% 3.2% 4.4% 3.7% 7.3% 1.7% 576 65.2% 13.3% 5.2% 2.3% 9.7% 1.8% 2.5%
by Race/Ethnicity
White (Non-Hispanic) 2,483 63.2% 15.9% 2.9% 3.2% 2.5% 10.8% 1.5% 2,391 63.1% 14.9% 3.5% 2.9% 10.9% 1.5% 3.3%
African American / Black 385 42.4% 19.5% 12.2% 8.7% 4.6% 9.1% 3.5% 374 42.3% 17.4% 8.4% 6.9% 9.2% 2.6% 13.1%
Hispanic 342 57.1% 13.8% 6.4% 4.3% 5.4% 7.8% 5.4% 307 56.9% 16.2% 4.0% 6.6% 8.6% 1.3% 6.5%
Other 263 48.5% 12.8% 6.5% 3.9% 7.0% 19.2% 2.1% 295 49.9% 13.1% 5.2% 5.3% 18.7% 4.3% 3.4%
Unknown 21 40.3% 38.1% 3.7% 8.9% 0.0% 5.1% 4.0% 26 32.5% 14.5% 7.0% 12.2% 16.1% 17.6% 0.0%
37
Table 23 ― Use of Economic Impact Payments by Segment, Waves 3–4
Wave 4 Wave 3
(July 2 - 13, 2020) (June 5 - 16, 2020)
Debt Debt
Payments Essential Payments Essential
Withdraw Withdraw
Housing (Credit Purchases Housing (Credit Purchases
Use of EIP Checks, Utility Bills Cash from Utility Bills Cash from
# of No Specific # Uses Payments Card, (Food, General Transferred # of No Specific # Uses Payments Card, (Food, General Transferred
Waves 3-4 (Power, Accounts to (Power, Accounts to
Respondents Plans Selected (Mortgage Personal health care Purchases to Savings Respondents Plans Selected (Mortgage Personal health care Purchases to Savings
Water, etc.) Have on Water, etc.) Have on
or Rent Loan, supplies, or Rent Loan, supplies,
Hand Hand
Student etc.) Student etc.)
Loan, etc.) Loan, etc.)
# of Total Respondents 2,698 19.6% 2.3 31.5% 35.4% 31.0% 38.0% 36.3% 20.6% 38.5% 2,669 20.3% 2.5 34.3% 36.3% 33.0% 40.9% 40.0% 22.1% 40.4%
by Income Range
< $40,000 819 9.9% 2.5 21.5% 26.6% 24.4% 30.6% 26.6% 12.3% 18.9% 785 17.7% 2.8 39.3% 41.9% 40.5% 51.4% 47.8% 23.8% 34.8%
$40,000 - < $75,000 773 22.5% 2.2 31.8% 35.8% 33.5% 42.1% 36.9% 18.2% 38.8% 779 19.5% 2.4 35.2% 34.8% 34.2% 41.1% 39.7% 21.8% 42.8%
$75,000 - < $125,000 711 25.2% 2.2 33.0% 38.7% 30.5% 35.8% 37.9% 22.3% 48.8% 717 23.7% 2.2 29.4% 33.1% 26.9% 33.8% 33.5% 19.4% 40.9%
$125,000+ 395 23.8% 2.7 49.2% 46.6% 40.5% 49.4% 52.4% 39.3% 60.3% 389 20.8% 2.4 31.4% 34.2% 26.5% 32.7% 37.3% 24.4% 46.0%
by Age Range
18-35 635 9.8% 3.7 64.4% 61.0% 54.2% 63.5% 56.4% 45.4% 57.7% 665 13.1% 3.8 58.8% 56.8% 50.5% 60.0% 55.5% 43.9% 53.4%
36-55 1,156 15.1% 2.4 27.9% 30.7% 27.9% 33.8% 31.4% 17.8% 33.9% 1,134 13.8% 2.5 31.6% 30.3% 29.6% 35.9% 34.1% 17.8% 32.2%
56-65 549 25.5% 1.5 14.7% 26.2% 21.7% 28.0% 30.6% 7.5% 30.4% 508 28.7% 1.7 20.5% 27.8% 24.8% 35.0% 38.0% 11.6% 41.1%
66+ 358 42.2% 1.1 10.9% 19.0% 14.2% 21.8% 25.4% 5.9% 32.1% 362 42.0% 1.4 16.9% 29.6% 22.7% 29.9% 33.2% 10.5% 41.2%
by Gender
Male 1,236 24.0% 2.4 35.4% 40.4% 35.2% 41.3% 42.7% 25.7% 44.4% 1,255 20.5% 2.5 30.0% 32.9% 29.2% 34.2% 35.8% 22.6% 39.0%
Female 1,462 15.7% 2.3 28.3% 31.1% 27.4% 35.3% 30.9% 16.3% 33.6% 1,414 20.1% 2.4 37.9% 39.2% 36.3% 46.8% 43.7% 21.6% 41.5%
by Residence Location
Urban 754 13.3% 3.3 49.6% 48.2% 44.7% 52.1% 49.3% 37.9% 48.6% 745 14.4% 3.4 50.0% 45.9% 44.0% 53.4% 50.8% 37.6% 44.7%
Suburban 1,430 22.2% 2.0 26.8% 31.8% 26.4% 33.4% 31.8% 15.1% 35.2% 1,457 22.9% 2.1 30.0% 33.8% 28.3% 36.0% 35.2% 16.8% 38.8%
Rural 514 21.4% 1.8 18.3% 26.5% 23.6% 30.4% 30.0% 10.5% 32.9% 467 21.9% 2.0 22.5% 28.9% 29.8% 36.4% 37.9% 14.1% 38.6%
by Race/Ethnicity
White (Non-Hispanic) 2,002 21.4% 2.0 25.3% 31.2% 25.9% 33.2% 32.2% 15.7% 37.1% 1,944 22.0% 2.1 27.3% 30.8% 27.5% 35.2% 36.4% 16.2% 39.3%
African American / Black 251 10.3% 4.0 61.3% 60.9% 50.9% 59.7% 57.7% 47.7% 47.3% 272 12.5% 4.2 64.3% 64.6% 55.5% 66.8% 63.5% 48.5% 49.9%
Hispanic 260 12.3% 3.2 48.8% 46.1% 49.6% 54.6% 49.6% 33.4% 44.6% 245 14.7% 3.4 49.8% 47.4% 47.0% 52.3% 44.1% 34.3% 39.2%
Other 167 22.2% 2.2 33.0% 27.6% 33.0% 37.2% 32.4% 16.8% 34.2% 196 22.9% 2.8 40.8% 36.7% 37.7% 45.4% 38.7% 28.5% 39.8%
Unknown 18 22.6% 2.8 45.2% 56.5% 33.9% 39.5% 39.5% 33.9% 33.9% 12 0.0% 3.5 57.0% 57.0% 48.9% 65.2% 40.7% 40.7% 32.6%
38
File and source
- File
- changes-in-consumer-behaviors-and-financial-well-being-during-the-coronavirus-pandemic-results-from-the-u-s-household-pu.pdf
- Size
- 435,550 bytes
- SHA-256
- 853b99d4f5ca48af5da65482953391af46e5110011e93b20f5e5ca78b1f146af
- Original
- doi.org