When the poverty figures for 2008 are published in late August by the Census Bureau, many expect there to be an increase in the national poverty rate. The actual increase in poverty due to the recession and precise estimates of poverty for neighborhoods and communities, however, will not be known until more census data is released next year. Nevertheless, figures released later this month will provide a sense of how the recession is affecting the national poverty rate.

Typically, we think of rising and persistent poverty as a problem for cities - particularly central cities. Yet, the truth about poverty today in America may surprise you.

There is mounting evidence that poverty and need are on the rise in many suburban communities. Although overall poverty rates are higher in central cities, research suggests there are more poor people numerically living in suburbs than in cities. This was true even before the official start of the current economic recession in late-2007, as increasing numbers of suburban families were having a harder time finding good paying jobs, keeping up with rent or mortgage payments, providing food for their children. While we might not call it "poverty" because we perceive suburban residents to be working, these are the same types of problems that working poor families in cities experience.

Many factors are driving the increase in poverty across suburbs. Part of the increase is due to the rising cost of housing in cities over the 1990s and 2000s, which made areas outside of cities comparably more affordable for working poor families. Part of the increase is due to the fact that job growth, particularly low-skill jobs, has occurred outside of cities and low-income workers are moving accordingly. Working poor Latino families do not face the same patterns of racial segregation and discrimination in housing markets as do working poor blacks, and many suburban areas are home to increasing numbers of working poor Latino families as a result.

This summer I've been working with a doctoral student at the University of Chicago to interview nonprofits located in suburban areas and gathering a sense of how need is changing amidst the recession. The stories not only suggest strong patterns of rising need in many self-described affluent suburban communities, but many suburban nonprofits do not anticipate that need will subside as quickly as some might expect once the recovery starts.

What does this shift in the geography of poverty mean? A few points quickly come to mind. First, the fact that working poor families increasingly live in suburbs might provide hope that we are creating more socioeconomically-mixed communities. But being poor in a suburb, however, does not necessarily mean one is better integrated into the community. Often suburbs are segregated to some degree by race, ethnicity, and class. Second, suburbs may not be well-equipped to address the social changes that are afoot. There are often few safety net program resources in suburban communities, suggesting that the mismatches in access to help that I describe for cities in Out of Reach are also present in suburban America. This means that if the current recession ends in a jobless recovery as did the last, many suburban families may find it difficult to find the help they need until work can be found. Finally, and perhaps too optimistically, the fact that suburban communities are starting to experience higher rates of poverty could lead to greater support - at least in the short-term - for social programs that help working poor families cope with job loss and temporary periods of unemployment. After all, many of the advances in our safety net have come when the middle class sees itself as having a stake in the matter.