aapi nexus
aapi nexus Vol. 13, No. 1 & 2 (Fall 2015): 14-24

Resource Paper

Financial Distress among
Pacific Islanders in Southern California
Sora Park Tanjasiri, Lois Takahashi,
and Lola Sablan-Santos
Abstract
Pacific Islanders experience enduring and growing poverty in the
United States, yet our understanding of their financial distress and needs
is limited. Financial institutions, government agencies, and communitybased organizations in areas with large Pacific Islander communities
need better information with which to develop tailored programs, improve outreach and education, and improve economic security for these
and other underserved populations. This paper describes the results
from a unique in-language survey that asked detailed questions regarding the financial knowledge, status, and needs of Pacific Islanders, including poverty and wealth questions beyond those in the Census, in
Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego counties of Southern California.

Introduction
Although increasing attention is being paid to enduring financial distress in ethnic/racial populations, Pacific Islanders remain hidden with significant needs. Pacific Islanders in the United States originate from Melanesia, Micronesia, and Polynesia, and over the past ten
years represent the racial group with the fastest growth (40 percent) in
the continental United States and Hawaii (Empowering Pacific Islander
Communities, 2014). While Pacific Islanders contribute greatly to the economic vitality in this country, they face significant economic and educational challenges that make them highly vulnerable to disease and death.
Nationally in aggregate, only 18 percent of Pacific Islanders have a bachelor’s degree; also, 15 percent have been diagnosed with diabetes and 20
percent with heart disease (ibid.). Native Hawaiians comprise the largest
population with only 2 percent who are limited English proficient (LEP),
followed by Samoans (12 percent), Chamorros (8 percent), and Tongans
14

Tanjasiri, Takahashi, and Sablan-Santos

(19 perc; ent). Although at least one previous study found high financial
distress among Native Hawaiians (Naya, 2007), reports commonly omit
Pacific Islanders from analyses (e.g., Bocian, Li, and Ernst, 2010).

Background
As shown in Table 1, Pacific Islander adults in poverty vary from
68 percent for Fijians to 51 percent for Tongans. Between 2007 and 2011,
the number of Pacific Islanders living under the poverty level grew by
60 percent, compared to 37 percent for Asian Americans, 20 percent for
African Americans, 26 percent for Native Americans, 42 percent for
Hispanics, and 27 percent for the general population (Ishimatsu, 2013).
Data indicate that Pacific Islanders in poverty are younger, with higher
rates of child (under eighteen) poverty than Asian Americans. About
half of the Pacific Islanders in poverty live in the western and mountain
states. In 2010, the states with over 1,000 Pacific Islanders and the highest Pacific Islander poverty rates were Arkansas (43.9 percent), Oklahoma (33.8 percent), and Oregon (26.5 percent). Sixty four percent of
Pacific Islanders in poverty were concentrated in the Pacific States of the
Western Region, with the largest numbers in Hawaii (22,809), California
(16,898), and Washington (6,529). Eleven percent of Pacific Islanders
in poverty were concentrated in the Mountain States of the Western
Region, with the largest numbers in Utah (4,117) and Nevada (2,058).
Table 1: Percent Poverty by Pacific Islander Ethnicity
and Age Range, United States
Poverty Population
by Ethnicity
Native Hawaiians
and Other Pacific
Islanders
Samoan
Tongan
Guamanian/
Chamorro
Fijian

% in Poverty
18–64

% in Poverty
under 18

% in Poverty
65 and Older

54%

43%

3%

57%
51%

41%
42%

3%
6%

59%

39%

2%

68%

30%

2%

Source: American Community Survey, 2010.

These poverty statistics indicate a high and growing need to address the economic security of Pacific Islander communities. Unfortunately, very little disaggregated information exists regarding the unique
financial characteristics, behaviors, and beliefs of Pacific Islanders

15

aapi nexus

that can inform education and intervention efforts. A nonprobability
English-language survey of Pacific Islanders in Los Angeles, Oakland,
Houston, Chicago, and Jackson Heights by Condon et al. (2015) found
that 23 percent turned to family and friends for financial advice, 27.2
percent reported using alternative financial services in the last twelve
months, and 62 percent relied on a friend or family member for their
source of emergency funds. Other reports focus on Asians only (e.g.,
Tippett et al., 2014), or aggregate Asians with Pacific Islanders (e.g., National Council of La Raza, 2014).
This paper describes the results from a unique survey of the financial knowledge, status, and needs of Pacific Islanders in Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego counties of Southern California. The project was funded by a grant from the National Coalition for Asian Pacific
American Community Development AAPI Communities Taking Initiative
in Our Neighborhoods (ACTION) program to the Guam Communications
Network (GCN). The community survey assessed the level of financial
distress and financial knowledge, with the goal of obtaining baseline
information to inform future housing counseling and asset-building
programs. Results from the survey (n = 205) indicate important needs
regarding low household income, high community-related expenses,
and low knowledge about tax-deferred savings accounts or savings accounts with tax benefits. The remainder of this paper describes the survey methods, detailed results, and implications for future research and
programs.

Methods
The financial needs assessment questionnaire was developed
using a collaborative process. The resource organization (Takahashi/
Asian Pacific AIDS Intervention Team) created a rough draft of the questionnaire based on existing measures and previous survey questionnaires used by the initiator organization (GCN). This draft was then
used by GCN to discuss measures and financial issues with community
experts and advocates who work with Pacific Islanders in Southern California. Suggestions and revisions by GCN and community advocates
were then incorporated into the final English version.
The English version of the financial needs assessment questionnaire was translated into Chamorro, Samoan, and Tongan. The translated and English versions were self-administered to a convenience
sample of Pacific Islander adults (eighteen years and older), particularly
heads of households, in community settings in Southern California (in16

Tanjasiri, Takahashi, and Sablan-Santos

cluding Los Angeles, Orange, and San Diego counties) from November
through December 2010. A total of 205 questionnaires were completed
and a copy sent to the resource organization for data entry in Microsoft
Excel, with data cleaning and analysis using STATA. Frequency and
descriptive analyses were run on the total sample.

Results
Demographic Characteristics
The characteristics of the respondents are shown in Tables 2 and
3. Almost half of the sample was fifty years or older, with about onequarter between the ages of forty to forty-nine years. A larger proportion of the sample was female than male. More than half of the sample
identified their ethnic group as Chamorro or Guamanian, and most of
the respondents reported being born on Guam or other Pacific Islands.
Almost half of the respondents reported that they were currently married, while one-fifth (19 percent) reported that they had never been married, 13 percent reported that they were widowed and 13 percent reported that they were divorced. On average, about 3.8 persons live with
the respondent, and about 78 percent reported that they had children.
Respondents who reported having children reported an average of 3.3
children, with an average of 1.8 children living with the respondents.
Two-thirds of the respondents reported having no children in college,
with one-quarter reporting one child in college, and 10 percent reporting having two or more children in college. A large proportion (63 percent) reported belonging to a religious institution.
Table 2: Demographic Characteristics of
Respondents—Means (N = 205)
Variable

Mean (Range)

Median

Number of people living with respondent (n = 199)

3.8 (0–12)

3

Number of children (n = 157)

3.3 (1–8)

3

Number of children living with respondent (n = 150)

1.8 (0–11)

1

Source: Guam Communications Network Survey (authors’ calculations)

Financial Status
Information regarding financial status is shown in Table 4. About
two-thirds of the respondents reported that they rent their homes, and

17

aapi nexus

Table 3: Demographic Characteristics of
Respondents—Frequencies (N = 205)

Variable
Age (n = 202)

Gender (n = 202)
Ethnicity (n = 188)

Educational attainment
(n = 201)

Non-English language
usually spoken at home
(n = 138)

Place of birth (n = 198)

Marital status (n = 202)

Have children (n = 203)
Number of children in
college (n = 130)
Belong to a church
(n = 200)

Categories
18-29
30–39
40–44
45–49
50+
Female
Male
Chamorro or Guamanian
Tongan
Samoan
Pacific Islander
Other (Fijian, Filipino, Italian, Polynesian,
Spanish, white)

5%

HS diploma or GED

44%

Bachelor’s degree
Graduate college/university degree (MA,
MS, PhD)
Associate’s degree
Vocational or trade school
Primary school
Other (military, certificate)

17%

Chamorro or Guamanian

49%

Tongan
Samoan
Other (Spanish, Tagalog)
Guam
California
Tonga
American Samoa, 6% other U.S. states
Western Samoa
Hawaii
Other Pacific Islands (CNMI, Fiji)
Married
Never been married/single
Widowed/divorced
Living with partner
Other (separated, engaged to be married)
Yes

23%
20%
7%
36%
33%
14%
6%
3%
2%
1%
47%
19%
26%
6%
2%
78%

None

66%

1
2+

24%
10%

Yes

63%

Source: Guam Communications Network Survey (authors’ calculations)

18

Percent
14%
13%
13%
11%
48%
57%
43%
55%
15%
13%
12%

11%
8%
8%
7%
5%

Tanjasiri, Takahashi, and Sablan-Santos
Table 4: Financial Status of Respondents (N = 205)
Variable
Own or rent (n = 197)
If renter, owned a home in the past 12
months (n = 116
Currently employed (n = 203)
Benefits provided with
employmenta (n = 106)

Reasons for not being
employeda (n = 94)

Yearly household income (n = 195)

Income received not through
employmenta (n = 94)

Covered by health insurance (n = 198)
Caring for elderly/disabled
adult or child (n = 198)
Filed for bankruptcy (n = 201)
Experienced foreclosure on
home loan/mortgage (n = 196)
Ever talked with a credit
counselor (n = 193)
Variable
Number of jobs (n = 104)
Total hours worked per week (n = 103)

Rent
Own

Categories

Percent
66%
34%

Yes

16%

Yes
Health insurance
Sick leave
Vacation
Dental coverage
No benefits
Child care
Other (vision, retirement)

52%
61%
58%
56%
52%
30%
8%
12%

Retired

39%

Disabled
Full-time student
$50,000+
< $10,000
$10,000–$19,999
30,000–$39,999
$20,000–$29,999
$40,000–$49,999
Social Security
Pension
Food Stamps
SSDI
General Relief
TANF
Supplemental Security
Income (SSI)
WIC
Other (IHSS, Medical,
unemployment)
Yes

23%
9%
23%
18%
15%
15%
14%
14%
29%
23%
15%
14%
6%
5%

Yes

20%

Yes

16%

Yes

11%

Yes

25%

Mean (Range)
1.1 jobs (1–2)
36.5 hours (2–80)

4%
2%
5%
74%

Median
1
40

a
Total may add up to more than 100 percent because more than one response could be
checked.

Source: Guam Communications Network Survey (authors’ calculations)

19

aapi nexus

of those who reported that they currently rented, about 16 percent reported that they had owned a home in the previous twelve
months. About half of the respondents reported that they are currently employed, with an average of 1.1 jobs and an average of 36.5
hours worked per week. For those who reported receiving benefits
with employment (about 70 percent), more than half reported receiving health insurance, sick leave, vacation, and dental coverage.
For those who reported not being employed, a sizable proportion
reported that they are retired (about 39 percent), while another
quarter (23 percent) reported being disabled. About 20 percent of
the respondents reported that they were caring for an elderly or
disabled adult or child. About three-quarters reported that they
are covered by health insurance. In terms of annual household income, about one-quarter of respondents reported $50,000 or more;
18 percent reported household income less than $10,000 per year.
About 33 percent reported household income less than $20,000 annually. The measures for financial distress indicate that a small,
Table 5: Estimated Monthly Expenses (N = 205)
Variable
Total (n = 182)
Housing (n = 188)
Food (n = 188)
Church, temple, mosque expenses
(n = 190)
Car loan (n = 189)
Transportation (n = 190)
Credit card payment (n = 190)
Clothing (n = 190)
Telephone/cell phone/Internet (n = 190)
Utilities (n = 189)
Entertainment/bingo/poker (n = 189)
Health/insurance/medicine (n = 190)
Funeral/wedding (n = 188)
Student loan (n = 190)
Remittances/sending money home
(n = 190)
Alimony/child support (n = 190)
Family loan (n = 189)
Other (n = 190) (including auto insurance)
School (respondent or family) (n = 190)
Legal fees (n = 190)

Mean (Range)
$2,695 ($200–$12,855)
$1,072 ($0–$10,800)
$278 ($0–$2,500)
$189 ($0–$10,000)
$143 ($0–$1,180)
$135 ($0–$1,000)
$128 ($0–$2,250)
$126 ($0–$2,000)
$124 ($0–$3,000)
$124 ($0–$600)
$82 ($0–$5,000)
$80 ($0–$1,000)
$68 ($0–$6,000)
$56 ($0–$7,800)

$0
$0
$100
$45
$100
$90
$100
$0
$0
$0
$0

$25 ($0–$500)

$0

$22 ($0–$1,500)
$21 ($0–$1,067)
$20 ($0–$1,350)
$17 ($0–$500)
$1 ($0–$150)

$0
$0
$0
$0
$0

Source: Guam Communications Network Survey (authors’ calculations)

20

Median
$2,250
$900
$200

Tanjasiri, Takahashi, and Sablan-Santos

but sizable, proportion of respondents reporting that they have ever
filed for bankruptcy (16 percent), experienced foreclosure (11 percent),
or ever talked with a credit counselor (25 percent).
In terms of monthly expenditures (Table 5), the average total reported was about $2,695 with a wide range ($200–$12,855). The largest average components were housing and food, followed by church/
temple/mosque, transportation and car loans, credit card payments,
clothing, cell phone, Internet, and utilities.
Financial Knowledge
Financial knowledge results are shown in Table 6. Respondents
were most informed about the importance of purchasing insurance to
protect savings, that IRAs could be used for retirement savings, and
the complexity of purchasing a home. Respondents were less informed
about Coverdell Education Savings Accounts and about health savings
accounts.
Variable

Table 6: Financial Knowledge (N = 205)

Percent Correct

Important to protect savings by purchasing insurance (n = 180)

74%

Traditional Individual Retirement Accounts (IRAs) and Roth IRAs
both provide ways to save money for retirement, but have different
tax benefits (n = 170)

67%

Purchasing a home is a very complicated process, and can take a
long time (n = 174)

59%

Only parents can contribute (up to $2,000 per year) to Coverdell
Education Savings Accountsa (n = 172)

25%

Health savings account does NOT allow tax-free payments for
current health expensesa (n = 170)

18%

Correct answer is “false.”
Source: Guam Communications Network Survey (authors’ calculations)

a

Conclusions
This paper summarizes the results from the first-ever assessment of financial status and distress among Pacific Islander adults in
Southern California. Several study findings suggest significant ongoing financial challenges for Pacific Islanders. About one-third of the
respondents reported that their household earned less than $20,000
annually. On average, respondents reported that their total average
monthly expenditures were about $2,695, of which about 10 percent
were associated with religious institutions, remittances, and funerals/

21

aapi nexus

weddings. This reported monthly average expenditure level would require $32,340 after tax income, however, about half of the respondents
reported an annual household income of less than $30,000. Furthermore, about 16 percent reported that they had owned a home in the
previous twelve months, and now were renting their homes. About
16 percent reported that they had ever filed for bankruptcy, 11 percent
reported that they had ever experienced foreclosure, and 25 percent
reported that they had ever talked with a credit counselor. Together,
these findings indicate that a sizable proportion of Pacific Islanders
experiences significant financial distress.
Relatively higher proportions of respondents were knowledgeable
about the importance of insurance to protect savings, that IRAs could
be used for retirement savings, and that purchasing a home can be a
long and complex process. Fewer respondents were informed about taxdeferred savings accounts or savings accounts with tax benefits (e.g.,
health savings accounts, Coverdell Education Savings Accounts). Given
the reported financial distress indicators, however, it may be problematic to assume that Pacific Islanders are able to take advantage of products
and programs to create financial security over time. Given the connections between knowledge, income, savings, investment, and protection
(Corporation for Enterprise Development, 2015), our findings support
the recommendation that targeted interventions to address areas such
as expenses and savings should focus on socially and community-oriented approaches (Condon et al., 2015).
The survey was unique in its targeting of Pacific Islanders, availability in three languages to encourage LEP adult participation, and inclusion of poverty and wealth questions beyond those in the Census.
While this project is the first to report on financial distress indicators
for Pacific Islanders, limitations should be considered when generalizing to the larger Pacific Islander population. The results presented
here do not represent a random sample of Pacific Islanders in Southern California, but are drawn from a convenience sample accessed by
GCN. Therefore, though the survey data provide important information
about the financial status and needs of Pacific Islanders, they should
not be seen as representative of the general Pacific Islander population
in Southern California, California, the United States, or the Pacific Islands. Further, the survey was meant to target heads of household, but
many of the respondents did not appear to be heads of their household
(i.e., married females, older individuals, retired or disabled), and consequently, the results of the survey must be interpreted within this context.
22

Tanjasiri, Takahashi, and Sablan-Santos

Indeed, compared with Native Hawaiian and Other Pacific Islanders
(alone or in combination with one or more other races) in Los Angeles,
Orange, and San Diego counties, our sample had higher proportions of
adults who were women, older, married, and with high school educational attainment and beyond (U.S. Census Bureau, 2013). Hence, it is
important to keep in mind that our study may be underestimating the
magnitude of financial distress and need of Pacific Islanders in Southern California. We hope that future community assessments build upon
these findings to assess and address the unique financial needs of these
and other Pacific Islander subgroups in the United States.
In conclusion, financial institutions, government agencies, and
community-based organizations in areas with large Pacific Islander
communities should build upon our results to develop additional research and evaluation studies to ensure that programs and services
meet the growing needs of Pacific Islanders and other diversity populations. Additionally, national organizations and federal agencies designing financial security initiatives should engage Pacific Islander communities and include subgroup specific data in their analyses. Communitybased organizations that specifically serve Pacific Islanders on health,
education, arts, and/or culture have unique opportunities to address
housing and other areas of financial distress and planning, and collaborations with national/federal agencies are key to any economic security
program.

Acknowledgments
We would like to thank the following individuals and organizations for their
contributions to this project: Lisa Hasegawa, C. Aujean Lee, Guam Communications Network, Empowering Pacific Islander Communities, the Tongan Community Service Center/Special Services for Groups, and APAIT/Special Services for Groups.

References

Bocian, D. G., Li, W., and K. S. Ernst. 2010. Foreclosures by Race and Ethnicity: The
Demographics of a Crisis. Washington, DC: Center for Responsible Lending.
Corporation for Enterprise Development. 2015. Household Financial Security
Framework. Washington, DC: Corporation for Enterprise Development.
Condon, A., Duong, J., Pisnanont, J., Pech, C., Ong, P. M., and M. De La CruzViesca. 2015. Scrimping and Saving: A Report on the Financial Access, Attitudes
and Behaviors of Low- and Moderate-Income Asian Americans and Pacific Islanders. Washington, DC: National Coalition for Asian Pacific American Community Development.

23

aapi nexus

Empowering Pacific Islander Communities. 2014. A Community of Contrasts in
the United States, 2014. Los Angeles: Empowering Pacific Islander Communities and Asian Americans Advancing Justice.
Ishimatsu, J. 2013. Spotlight on Asian American and Pacific Islander Poverty: A
Demographic Profile. Washington, DC: National Coalition for Asian Pacific
American Community Development.
National Council of La Raza. 2014. Banking in Color: New Findings on Financial
Access for Low- and Moderate-Income Communities. Washington, DC: National
Council of La Raza.
Naya, S. 2007. “Income Distribution and Poverty Alleviation for the Native
Hawaiian Community.” East-West Center Working Papers, Economics Series, No. 91. Honolulu: East-West Center.
Tippett, R., Jones-DeWeever, A., Rockeymoore, M., Hamilton, D., and W. Darity. 2014. Beyond Broke: Why Closing the Racial Wealth Gap Is a Priority for
National Economic Security. Chapel Hill, NC: Center for Global Policy Solutions.
U.S. Census Bureau. 2013. Selected Population Profile in the United States; 2011–
2013 American Community Survey 3-Year Estimates. http://factfinder.census.
gov (accessed September 4, 2015).

Sora Park Tanjasiri is professor and chair of the Department of Health Science
at California State University, Fullerton, where she applies community-based
participatory research to understand and address cancer health disparities in
racial and underserved populations.
Lois Takahashi is professor in the departments of urban planning and Asian
American Studies, and interim dean of the Luskin School of Public Affairs, at
the University of California, Los Angeles. She researches public and social service delivery to vulnerable populations in the United States and Southeast Asia.
Lola Sablan-Santos is founder and Executive Director of Guam Communications Network, Inc., where she advocates for the social, cultural and health
needs of Chamorros throughout the United States and Guam.

24