Figure 21. Adequacy of social transfers in OECD/EU countries for two family types Out-of-work couple with 2 children Average earner couple with 2 children 89.0% DK 70.3% NZ 69.7% 16% PL 13% IT CZ 10% LU 68.2% LU 10% SI 68.0% KR 10% CY IE 62.7% DE JP 61.8% AT 61.2% LT 10% 9% 9% LT 58.9% KR 8% RO PL 55.9% BE 7% FI 55.4% EE 7% AT 55.1% LV 7% 53.2% SE 6% 53.0% MT DK 6% IS 51.8% IE 6% AU 51.7% CA NO 51.5% SI 5% GB 6% LV 51.3% JP 5% SE 50.1% HU 5% DE 49.8% CH 5% 5% EE 48.4% FI CZ 48.3% SK NL 47.6% CY 4% 5% CH 47.3% GB 4% IT 47.1% MT 4% FR 4% NO 4% 44.4% FR 42.3% BE 39.5% ES 4% NL 37.4% CA 3% GR GR 34.7% IL PT 33.5% PT 2% 1% IL 31.8% IS HR 31.2% ES 0% 1% SK 27.3% US 0% US 26.5% AU 0% BG 0% NZ 0% 18.9% RO 17.5% BG TR 10.7% HR 0% HU 9.8% TR 0% 0% 20% 40% 60% 80% Source: See Technical Appendix Note: For country codes used on the y axis, see Technical Appendix. 0% Other social assistance Family benefits Housing benefits 5% 10% 15% 20% Average wage (%) Not only overall expenditure, but also the adequacy of transfers has changed throughout the past decade in Report Card countries. The absolute change (as a percentage of the national average wage) in the total adequacy of non-contributory social protection is shown in Figure 22, with blue bars depicting adequacy for the out-of-work model family and orange bars showing the average earner couple with children. The generosity of social transfers for a poor household has improved in 13, stagnated in 5 and worsened in 21 out of 39 countries with available data. This suggests that most Report Card countries have reduced their efforts to support households with children that are among the most economically vulnerable. In Latvia, the adequacy of social protection decreased by 27 percentage points of 39 Child Poverty in the Midst of Wealth Innocenti Report Card 18