The 2025 Encovi (National Survey of Living Conditions), conducted primarily by researchers at Universidad Católica Andrés Bello and allied institutions, finds that poverty in Venezuela remains widespread even as some indicators improve slightly compared with previous years. Across coverage, outlets agree that roughly two-thirds of households are still classified as poor, with about one in three lacking enough income to cover basic food needs, and that extreme poverty has fallen modestly toward pre-crisis levels. They concur that access to public services is severely degraded: only around a fifth of households report continuous piped water, fewer than a third get daily water, and nearly four in ten experience frequent electricity interruptions. Reports also align that educational outcomes are deteriorating, with only about 44% of students attending classes regularly and a marked “de-schooling” of adolescents and young adults; similar patterns are observed across regions, with the capital no longer enjoying significantly better educational coverage than smaller cities and rural areas. Both sides accept Encovi’s portrayal of strained healthcare access, low insurance coverage, and rising out-of-pocket costs, as well as sustained large-scale emigration, with close to nine million Venezuelans abroad and only a small minority planning to return.

Both opposition and government-aligned coverage present Encovi as an independent academic instrument that has tracked Venezuela’s living conditions over multiple years and is seen as a key reference for socioeconomic data in the absence of consistent official statistics. They agree that the survey captures long-term structural issues involving the collapse of real incomes, uneven dollarization, and persistent inflation that restrict household purchasing power despite some recovery in food availability. Reports from both sides similarly note that deficiencies in essential services such as water, electricity, transport, and school infrastructure directly undermine education, contribute to school dropout, and reduce quality of life beyond mere income measures. There is also shared acknowledgment that migration, demographic shifts, and the erosion of the public health and education systems interact with labor-market informality to entrench vulnerability, even when headline poverty rates show incremental improvement. Finally, both camps accept that Encovi’s data will likely inform debates about social policy design, targeting of assistance, and the effectiveness of past reforms, even if they differ strongly on how to interpret responsibility and what policy lessons should follow.

Areas of disagreement

Responsibility and blame. Opposition-aligned outlets depict Encovi’s figures as proof of systemic failure by the Maduro government, arguing that mismanagement, corruption, and deliberate underinvestment in public services and social programs are the primary causes of persistent poverty and service collapse. Government-aligned coverage, by contrast, tends to diffuse responsibility, framing the data within a context of external sanctions, economic warfare, and inherited structural weaknesses, suggesting that current authorities are managing a constrained situation rather than causing it. While opposition sources would likely highlight the survey as an indictment of existing economic and social policy, pro-government narratives emphasize resilience, partial improvements, and the idea that adverse conditions are largely imposed from abroad.

Interpretation of trends. Opposition reporting is inclined to treat the modest reduction in extreme poverty and slight improvements in food supply as fragile, potentially statistical noise that does little to change daily hardship or structural exclusion. Government-aligned coverage gives greater weight to these positive movements, stressing that poverty is approaching pre-crisis levels and presenting this as evidence that policies, stabilization efforts, or new social programs are gradually working. Both sides cite the same indicators on income, services, and education, but opposition outlets frame them as confirmation that any progress is marginal and reversible, while government-aligned sources highlight them as signs of an ongoing recovery trajectory.

Role and credibility of institutions. Opposition media generally emphasize Encovi’s independence from the state, the academic rigor of UCAB and associated researchers, and the survey’s function as a counterweight to scarce or unreliable official statistics. Government-aligned coverage, while using the data, is more measured in foregrounding its independence and tends to integrate Encovi into a broader mosaic of information that includes government initiatives, official statements, and state social programs. In doing so, opposition outlets implicitly use Encovi to challenge the government’s narrative of social progress, whereas government-aligned outlets present the same survey as compatible with, or at least not fundamentally contradicting, official claims of gradual improvement under difficult conditions.

Policy implications and proposed solutions. Opposition-aligned sources typically interpret Encovi as a call for deep political and economic change, including broad reforms, greater transparency, and often a shift in national leadership to reverse service failures and halt de-schooling and migration. Government-aligned coverage, on the other hand, frames the findings as justification for strengthening existing social missions, targeted subsidies, and infrastructure upgrades, arguing that continuity and refinement of current policies will consolidate recent gains. Thus, while both sides see Encovi as a tool for policy debate, opposition outlets treat it as evidence for the need of a substantive break with current governance, whereas government-aligned media see it as a guide to fine-tune and expand ongoing programs.

In summary, opposition coverage tends to use Encovi 2025 as a stark indictment of the Maduro government’s management of the economy, public services, and social policy, while government-aligned coverage tends to acknowledge the same problems but stress external constraints and incremental improvements as validation of the current policy course.