2015 State of Poverty in Ohio Report by Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

State of Poverty O A C A A

2015 Understanding Economic Hardship Across Generations

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies Philip E. Cole, Executive Director 50 West Broad Street, Suite 1616 Columbus, OH 43215 phone: 614-224-8500 fax: 614-224-2587 www.oacaa.org The Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies (OACAA) exists to support, unify, and strengthen the Community Action Network in Ohio. Serving the needs of low-income families and individuals, Ohioâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s forty-eight Community Action Agencies provide resources and opportunities to alleviate poverty and help all Ohioans become fully self-sufficient. Each independent nonprofit agency is locally controlled and provides services unique to their communities so that low-income households can overcome their unique barriers. Agencies take a holistic approach to not only assist with the emergency needs of today but to build a foundation for long-term success tomorrow. Our network employs 6,000 people who administer over $450 million and serve nearly 800,000 Ohioans annually. Our 50-year history of helping people and changing lives not only seeks solutions to strengthen families but also communities. Community Research Partners Lynnette Cook, PhD, Executive Director Megan Johanson, PhD, Director of Research and Data Services Devin Keithley, Senior Research Associate Becky Zwickl, Senior Research Associate Marcus Erridge, Research Associate 399 E. Main Street, Suite 100 Columbus, Ohio 43215 phone: 614-224-5917 www.researchpartners.org Community Research Partners is a nonprofit research center that strengthens Ohio communities through data, information, and knowledge. CRP is a partnership of the City of Columbus, United Way of Central Ohio, The Ohio State University, and the Franklin County Commissioners. CRP is the Columbus partner in the National Neighborhood Indicators Partnership.

This report is supported in whole are in part through a grant from the Ohio Development Services Agency (ODSA). However, the information contained in the report does not necessarily reflect the views or policies of ODSA.

O A C A A

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

State of Poverty

2015

Understanding Economic Hardship Across Generations

Letter from the Executive Director

overty does not discriminate. It can affect people of all ages, all nationalities, all races and all religions. Poverty can strike when you least expect it, and it can quickly become something you struggle to overcome for years or even a lifetime. Even for those who have made â&#x20AC;&#x153;all the right decisionsâ&#x20AC;?, an unexpected loss of employment, sudden illness, or other circumstances can take the nearly half of Ohio households who lack the liquid assets needed to stay out of poverty for three months, to a situation they never anticipated. Community Action Agencies in Ohio work in all 88 counties to alleviate poverty and strengthen communities. Whether a household is facing a temporary emergency situation or one that will take a little longer to create a sustainable and self-sufficient household, there are over 6,000 Community Action employees throughout the state available to help. Together with our communities, we are committed to breaking down barriers and building solid foundations for the success of low-income families and individuals across Ohio.

Throughout this report, you will read about just a few of the situations that could cause a household to slip into poverty. Whether it be a child aging out of foster care with little or no support to maintain safe shelter or continue their education, grandparents unexpectedly raising their grandchildren, or even a shift in employment industries, this State of Poverty report aims to shed a light on some of the issues affecting millions of our family, friends, colleagues and neighbors. We encourage you to get involved in the conversation, ask questions and learn more about what we do as a network and what we can do together as Ohioans.

Sincerely,

Philip E. Cole Executive Director Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Defining Poverty In order to discuss poverty it is important to first understand some of the most frequently used defintions. The measures described in this section highlight the different ways we speak about poverty and provide important context to the remainder of the report. The federal poverty measure (FPM) was developed in the early 1960s when President Lyndon Johnson declared the “War on Poverty.” It is the official measure of poverty in the United States and reports that cite the number or percentage “in poverty” are generally referring to the FPM. However, there is growing recognition that the FPM fails to sufficiently describe the population in poverty. Several other measures have been developed to provide a more holistic understanding of poverty in the United States.

Federal Poverty Measure is based on 3 times the minimum food budget

Supplemental Poverty Measure considers food, clothing, housing, and utilities

See Table 2, p. 12

The Supplemental Poverty Measure (SPM) was first developed in 2010 to take into account factors that the official FPM does not consider. The differences between the official and the supplemental measures include: how needs are measured, local housing costs, and available resources. The Self-Sufficiency Standard is a measure that identifies the minimum amount of income a given household would need to adequately meet basic needs without receiving any additional public or private assistance. The measure takes into account family composition— including the age of dependent children— and area cost of living to determine the minimum amount of income needed to meet basic needs.

See Table 5, p. 14

State of Poverty 2015

Use the Self-Sufficency Calculator to determine income needed to meet the basic needs of a particular family type in a specific county in Ohio: www.oacaa.org/self-sufficiencycalculator/

Defining Poverty Asset poverty is a measure of the financial cushion needed to withstand a financial crisis (i.e. medical emergency, job loss, etc.) and stay out of poverty for three months. Assets can be liquid or non-liquid. Liquid assets are those which can be easily exchanged for cash (e.g., gold, savings accounts, government bonds). Nonliquid assets typically must be sold (e.g., cars, homes, businesses). A household is considered asset poor if its combined assets are worth less than three monthsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; living expenses at the federal poverty level (FPL) threshold. Similarly, a household is considered liquid asset poor if its liquid assets alone are insufficient to

Nearly half of Ohio households lack the liquid assets needed to stay out of poverty for 3 months

See Table 7, p. 15

A family of two adults and two school-age children in Ohio needs an annual income of at least 146% of the federal poverty level to be self-sufficient.

16% 32%

official annual poverty rate episodic poverty rate

The episodic poverty rate in the United States is twice as high as the official annual poverty rate. See Table 3, p. 13

The FPM is based on annual household income, and as such, fails to distinguish between longterm and short-term poverty. Using a monthly poverty threshold along with data from the Survey of Income and Program Participation (SIPP), a national household survey designed to track participants over multiple years, the Census Bureau estimates the number of Americans experiencing chronic and episodic poverty. The chronic poverty rate is defined as the percentage of the population in poverty every month in a 36-month period, whereas episodic poverty is defined as those in poverty for at least two consecutive months in a 36-month period.

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Geography of Poverty Ohio’s poor are more likely to live in the suburbs than in the denser urban neighborhoods more commonly associated with poverty.

1 in 3 poor Ohioans are concentrated in the dense urban cores of Ohio’s cities. One example is Cleveland’s urban core with over 150,000 people living below the poverty line.

44102: most urban poor (17,397)

Conneaut Ashtabula

Toledo Port Clinton

Sandusky

Cleveland

Norwalk Findlay

Youngstown

Akron

Tiffin Ashland

Lima

Mansfield

Orrvile

Wooster

Canton

Marion

Sidney

Dover

East Liverpool

New Philadelphia

Steubenville

Springfield Columbus

Dayton

Zanesville

Marietta Athens

Cincinnati

Urban and suburban ZIP codes in Ohio by number of poor

Portsmouth Ironton South Point

At the same time, nearly half of Ohio’s poor live in low-density suburbs. Suburban Columbus, for example, has more 140,000 people living in poverty. State of Poverty 2015

10,000 1,000

n ba Ur rban bu Su

43228: most suburban poor (13,789)

Large metro area See Table 12, p. 36

Labor Market 30 years ago, manufacturing was Ohio’s #1 industry sector with with over 1 million jobs making up nearly a quarter of total employment in 1984

Today, the #1 industry sector in Ohio is education & health services with almost 900,000 jobs—nearly double the number 30 years ago—making up one-sixth of the workforce in 2014

5.4 million total jobs

goods-producing industry sectors

4.3 million total jobs

service-providing industry sectors

manufacturing wholesale trade

retail trade transportation & utilities information financial activities

#6 #4 #5

1984

natural resources construction

professional & business services

education & health services

leisure & hospitality

government other services

2014

See Table 34, p. 48

Since 1984, Ohio’s manufacturing jobs have declined by 36.6%. Over the same period, Ohio has seen employment in education and health services grow by 97.9%. 4

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Child Food Insecurity While SNAP benfits are available to Ohio households earning less than 130% FPL, the threshold for other nutrion programs is 185%, leaving 7.5% of Ohio’s kids both food insecure and ineligible for assistance.

75.8%

16.7% 7.5%

1,995,376 (75.8%) of Ohio’s children have enough food to eat at all times 450,853 (16.7%) have limited or uncertain access to food and depend on federal food assistance such as food stamps, WIC benefits, or school meals 202,557 (7.5%) have limited or uncertain access to food and are ineligible for federal food assistance based on their family’s income See Table 25, p. 43

State of Poverty 2015

Aging Out of Foster Care B

etween the ages of seven and eighteen, Olivia moved in and out of over thirty foster homes across Ohio. She was abused by her step-father and later diagnosed with Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, depression, and anxiety. Olivia’s mother refused to give up her parental rights which prevented Olivia from being adopted. And, because county restrictions prohibited her from getting her driver’s license while she was in foster care, when she aged out of the system she had not learned to drive nor did she have the means to begin learning. Because Highland County, a rural area, does not have a public transportation system, this left her with few travel options. Olivia struggled to graduate high school and her added emotional distress combined with a lack of a support system made it difficult to make the adult decisions necessary, now that she was on her own.

system they are unprepared to make the decisions necessary. “I kept running away. I didn’t know how to make it work,” Olivia recalled. “I know I can’t do that anymore.”

Olivia, however, is no longer alone. With the help and encouragement of Highland County Community Action Organization, her path to stability and a self-sufficient future has begun. Case managers at HCCAO have connected Olivia to shelter, food, and workforce development services all within walking distance of each other—including the local college in which she is working towards enrollment.

“I have had some great people in my life, including my last foster mom, Brenda,” Olivia said. “It was Brenda who connected me with HCCAO to work on getting my life together. “When I aged out of the system, all I could She and the staff here have been the guiding think was ‘I’m free!’” Olivia said. “I made deci- force I need. I can’t say that I’m perfect, but sions but was never taught how to make them they’ve always accepted my flaws and welresponsibly. I didn’t know how to budget or comed me with open arms to take the next write a resume. I couldn’t drive and had no step together.” way to practice for the test. And I had no job and no way to get to one.” Olivia continues to break down the barriers created by her childhood; she has wide Olivia’s story is not unlike many others who aspirations and is determined to succeed. grew up in the foster system. PTSD is a com- With the help and encouragement of HCCAO mon diagnosis for children due to the trauand her former foster mother, Olivia’s goal in matic experience of the loss of a parent. Many the future is to give back to the community times, development stops at the age of the and help other children who are aging out of trauma, and when children age out of the foster care.

Only three out of 10 foster youth in Ohio are employed full-time by age 21 6

See Table 23, p. 42

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Grandparent Caregivers One in five grandparent caregiver families in Ohio live below the poverty line.

See Table 32, p. 46

1 in 5 grandparent caregiver families in Ohio live below the poverty line

hen Patrick and Cecilia’s* oldest grandson was born, they never expected that someday they would be raising him as they had raised their daughter. However, before he turned five, they were unexpectedly granted full custody of him and his two younger brothers. Retired and on a fixed income, they had no time to prepare for what was ahead of them as grandparent caregivers. Items like diapers and formula for their infant grandson, and school supplies and clothing for the oldest who was about to start kindergarten, were now needed along with groceries and medicine for three additional people. Unsure of where to turn, they were connected to Washington-Morgan Community Action.

grandparent caregivers. This program has allowed them to direct their limited resources towards other basic needs like food, shelter and even transportation costs to and from work. This assistance has allowed families to continue working toward becoming fully self-sufficient in their new household dynamic.

In Morgan County, WMCA’s Kinship Care program served fifty-five households with 107 children last year. While each agency administers programs as unique as the families they serve, Community Action’s collective mission is to help people break down barriers to alleviate poverty and strengthen communities. Ohio’s CAAs have developed programs which have allowed families to maintain a safe environment for their children or grandchildren, Programs like Kinship Care are available at WMCA to help grandparent caregivers, created new opportunities to increase income or expand their education, and like Patrick and Cecilia, purchase taxable lend a helping hand on unique paths to items that they would otherwise be unable to obtain. Necessities like school fees, self-sufficiency. shoes, and even a haircut—things that often are overlooked until they are need- *Names have been changed to protect privacy ed—are now within reach for low-income 7 State of Poverty 2015 7

Income Mobility

...and at worst, a 2.5% chance of climbing to the top, and a 51.3% chance of remaining at the bottom

top fifth bottom fifth

second fifth

...had, at best, an 18.4% chance of making it to the top as an adult, and a 9.5% chance of staying at the bottom

middle fifth

fourth fifth

A child from Ohio who was born in the early 1980s and grew up in the bottom fifth of the income distribution...

Best place in Ohio to grow up

On average, 5.4% of children from Ohio born in the early 1980s who grew up in the bottom fifth of the income distribution climbed to the top as adults, while 38.1% stayed at the bottom. 8

See Table 24, p. 42

Ohio average

Worst place in Ohio to grow up

Probabilities are based on the current family income of adults born between 1980 and 1982 whose family income 30 years ago was in the bottom fifth of the national income distribution. 9

Appendix List of Tables

Defining Poverty Table 1. Federal poverty level thresholds by household size and number of related children, in dollars, 2013......................................................................................................................................12 Table 2. Comparison between the Official and Supplemental Poverty Measures...............................................12 Table 3. Chronic and episodic poverty rates, United States, 2005–2007 and 2009–2011..................................13 Table 4. Items included in the Self-Sufficiency Standard for Ohio.......................................................................13 Table 5. Monthly expenses and self-sufficiency wages, three Ohio counties, 2015............................................14 Table 6. Asset poverty rates for Ohio and the United States, 2002–2011...........................................................15 Table 7. Liquid asset poverty rates for Ohio and the United States, 2006–2011................................................15

Geography of Poverty Table 8. Poverty rates for Ohio and the United States, 2008–2013....................................................................16 Table 9. Change in poverty in Ohio, 2008–2013.................................................................................................16 Table 10. Population, poverty rates, and other measures of economic need, Ohio counties..............................17 Table 11. Change in poverty in Ohio’s urban, suburban, and rural areas, 2000–2013.......................................35 Table 12. Change in poverty the urban cores and suburbs of Ohio’s largest metro areas, 2000–2013.............36

Ohioans in Poverty Table 13. Income to poverty ratio by age group in Ohio, 2013............................................................................37 Table 14. Poverty by race/ethnicity, Ohio, 2013..................................................................................................37 Table 15. Poverty by race/ethnicity and age, Ohio, 2013....................................................................................38 Table 16. Poverty by family type, Ohio, 2013......................................................................................................39 Table 17. Poverty by race/ethnicity of householder and family type, Ohio, 2013................................................39 Table 18. Poverty by work experience, Ohio, 2013.............................................................................................39 Table 19. Poverty by number of wage-earners, work experience, and family type, Ohio, 2013..........................40 Table 20. Poverty by educational attainment, Ohio, 2013...................................................................................40

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Appendix

Food Insecurity and Youth Table 21. Child poverty by age group, Ohio 2013...............................................................................................41 Table 22. Child poverty by householder relationship and age group, Ohio, 2013...............................................41 Table 23. Selected outcomes of youth transitioning out of foster care by age, Ohio, 2011–2015.......................42 Table 24. Intergenerational income mobility, Ohio, 1980–2012..........................................................................42 Table 25. Child food insecurity in Ohio and the United States, 2011–13............................................................43 Table 26. Free or reduced-price lunch eligibility in Ohio and the United States, 2013/14 school year...............43 Table 27. Average monthly infant and child WIC participation, Ohio and the United States, FY 2013...............44 Table 28. Average monthly participation in the SNAP Program, Ohio and the United States, FY 2013.............44

Baby Boomers and Older Adults Table 29. Senior poverty by disability status and age group, Ohio 2013.............................................................45 Table 30. Senior poverty by veteran status, Ohio, 2013......................................................................................45 Table 31. Seniors living alone in poverty by age group, Ohio 2013....................................................................46 Table 32. Grandparent caregivers in poverty by age group, Ohio, 2013.............................................................46 Table 33. Employment for all workers and workers age 55 and older by industry supersector, Ohio, 2013.......47 Table 34. Employment change by industry supersector, Ohio, 1984–2014........................................................48

Unemployment and Homelessness Table 35. Unemployment rates for Ohio and the United States, 2009–2013......................................................49 Table 36. Homelessness in Ohio, 2013...............................................................................................................49

State of Poverty 2015

Appendix Defining Poverty Table 1. Federal poverty level thresholds by household size and number of children, in dollars, 2013 Household size

Number of related children under age 18 0

One person, under age 65 Age 65 and over

12,119 11,173

Two people, under age 65 Age 65 and over

15,600

16,057

14,081

15,996

Three people

18,222

18,751

18,769

Four people

24,028

24,421

23,624

23,707

Five people

28,977

29,398

28,498

27,801

27,376

Six people

33,329

33,461

32,771

32,110

31,128

30,545

Seven people

38,349

38,588

37,763

37,187

36,115

34,865

33,493

Eight people

42,890

43,269

42,490

41,807

40,839

39,610

38,331

38,006

Nine people or more

51,594

51,844

51,154

50,575

49,625

48,317

47,134

46,842

45,037

Source: U.S. Census Bureau

▪▪ ▪▪

The U.S. Census Bureau calculates the federal poverty level (FPL) thresholds and estimates annually for the previous year The FPL is based on the cash resources shared by related individuals in a household and varies based on the number of adults and related children

Table 2. Comparison between the Official and Supplemental Poverty Measures Official Poverty Measure

Supplemental Poverty Measure All related individuals who live at the same address and any co-resident unre-

Measurement Units

Families and unrelated individuals

lated children who are cared for by the family (such as foster children) and any co-habiters and their relatives

Poverty Threshold

3 times the cost of a minimum food diet

Threshold Adjustments Updating Thresholds

Vary by family size, composition, and age of householder Consumer Price Index

Mean of the 30th and 36th percentile of expenditures on food, clothing, shelter, and utilities of consumer units with exactly 2 children, multiplied by 1.2 Geographic adjustments for differences in housing costs by tenure and a 3-parameter equivalence scale for family size and composition 5-year moving average of expenditures on food, clothing, shelter, and utilities Sum of cash income; plus noncash benefits that families can use to meet their

Resource Measure

Gross pre-tax cash income

food, clothing, shelter, and utilities needs; plus tax credits; minus taxes, work expenses, out-of-pocket medical expenses, and child support paid to another household

Source: U.S. Census Bureau

▪▪ ▪▪

The official measure does not account for differences in housing costs in different parts of the country The supplemental measure considers government assistance and necessary expenses to establish a more accurate amount of resources available Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Appendix Defining Poverty, continued Table 3. Chronic and episodic poverty rates, United States, 2005–2007 and 2009–2011 2005–2007

2009–2011

3.0%

3.5%

27.1%

31.6%

Percentage of population in poverty every month in a 36-month period (chronic poverty rate) Percentage of population in poverty for at least 2 consecutive months in a 36-month period (episodic poverty rate) Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Survey of Income and Program Participation

Notes: Monthly poverty thresholds were calculated by multiplying the base-year annual poverty thresholds by an inflation factor relevant to the reference month and then dividing the calculated annual threshold by 12. Study was based on three-year longitudinal panels of noninstitutionalized civilians participating for 36 consecutive months.

▪▪ ▪▪ ▪▪ ▪▪

Using a monthly poverty threshold as opposed to an annual one allows for a deeper understanding of the duration of poverty The episodic poverty rate (31.6%) is twice as high as the official annual poverty rate (16.0%, see Table 8 on page 16) Eight out of nine Americans who have lived in poverty experience poverty short-term Given the nature of episodic poverty, many who get out of poverty only to fall back in are not accounted for in the official poverty counts

Table 4. Items included in the Self-Sufficiency Standard for Ohio Cost Housing Child care Food

What is included in each budget item Yes: Rent, utilities, and property taxes No: Cable, internet, or telephone services (telephone service is included under miscellaneous costs) Yes: Full-time family day care for infants, full-time center care for preschoolers, and before and after school care for school-age children No: After school programs for teenagers, extracurricular activities, babysitting when not at work Yes: Groceries No: Take-out, fast-food, restaurant meals, or alcoholic beverages Yes: car ownership cost (per adult)—insurance, gasoline (including gasoline taxes), oil, registration, repairs, monthly payments—or public

Transportation

transportation when adequate (assuming only commuting to and from work and day care plus a weekly shopping trip) No: Non-essential travel or vacations

Health care

Yes: Employer-sponsored health insurance and out-of-pocket costs No: Health savings account, gym memberships, individual health insurance Yes: Federal and state income tax and tax credits, payroll taxes, and state and local sales taxes

Taxes

No: Itemized deductions, tax preparation fees or other taxes (property taxes and gasoline taxes are included under housing and transportation costs, respectively) Yes: Clothing, shoes, paper products, diapers, nonprescription medicines, cleaning products, household items, personal hygiene items, and

Miscellaneous

telephone service No: Recreation, entertainment, pets, gifts, savings, emergencies, debt repayment (including student loans), or education

Source: University of Washington, Center for Women’s Welfare, Self-Sufficiency Standard for Ohio

▪▪ ▪▪

The Self-Sufficiency Standard is a measure that identifies the minimum amount of income a given household needs to adequately meet basic needs without receiving any additional public or private assistance It only provides the minimum to meet daily needs and does not include any allowance for savings, college tuition, debt payments, or emergencies

State of Poverty 2015

Appendix Defining Poverty, continued Table 5. Monthly expenses and self-sufficiency wages, three Ohio counties, 2015 Coshocton County (low)

Tuscarawas County (middle)

Warren County (high)

Housing

$634

$643

$958

Child Care

$491

$716

$1,014

Food

$696

$782

$812

Transportation

$482

$535

Health Care

$473

$475

$462

Miscellaneous

$278

$310

$378

Taxes

$352

$487

$793

Monthly expenses

Self-sufficiency wages $8.30

$9.88

$13.31

Monthly household income

Hourly wage per working adult

$2,923

$3,478

$4,685

Annual household income

$35,078

$41,730

$56,220

$8.10

$24,008

Minimum wage and poverty threshold (for comparison) 2015 Ohio Minimum Wage (hourly) 2014 federal poverty level threshold (annual)

Sources: University of Washington, Center for Women’s Welfare, Self-Sufficiency Standard for Ohio; Ohio Department of Commerce; U.S. Census Bureau Notes: Figures represent the monthly expenses and self-sufficiency wages for a family of two adults and two school-age children. Coshocton, Tuscarawas, and Warren Counties were chosen because they represent the low end (least expensive self-sufficiency wage), the middle (closest to the median of the self-sufficiency wages of all 88 counties), and high end (most expensive self-sufficiency wage) for that family type. Taxes were calculated as total tax burden minus tax credits (i.e., (the Earned Income Tax Credit, the Child and Dependent Care Tax Credit, and the Child Tax Credit).

▪▪ ▪▪ ▪▪

The Self-Sufficiency Standard calculates the full costs of basic needs without help from public subsidies or informal assistance The measure takes into account an area’s cost of living to determine the minimum amount of income needed to meet basic needs A family of two adults and two school-age children in Ohio needs an annual household income of at least 146% FPL to be self-sufficient

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Appendix Defining Poverty, continued Table 6. Asset poverty rates for Ohio and the United States, 2002–2011 2002

2004

2006

2009

2010

2011

Ohio

22.0%

24.2%

21.9%

27.3%

26.3%

23.7%

United States

25.2%

22.4%

27.1%

26.0%

25.4%

Source: Corporation for Enterprise Development, Assets & Opportunity Scorecard

▪▪ ▪▪

Asset poverty is a measure of the financial cushion needed to withstand a financial crisis (i.e. medical emergency, job loss, etc.) Nearly one out of four households in Ohio are asset poor, meaning their combined assets are worth less than three months’ living expenses at the FPL threshold

Table 7. Liquid asset poverty rates for Ohio and the United States, 2006–2011 2006

2009

2010

2011

Ohio

39.5%

43.6%

43.2%

44.7%

United States

41.4%

43.1%

43.9%

43.5%

Source: Corporation for Enterprise Development, Assets & Opportunity Scorecard

▪▪ ▪▪

Liquid assets are those which can be easily exchanged for cash (e.g., gold, savings accounts, government bonds) Nearly half of Ohio households lack the liquid assets needed to stay out of poverty for three months

State of Poverty 2015

Appendix Geography of Poverty Table 8. Poverty rates for Ohio and the United States, 2008–2013 2008

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

Ohio

13.4%

15.2%

15.8%

16.4%

16.3%

16.0%

United States

13.2%

14.3%

15.3%

15.9%

15.8%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 1-year estimates

Since the Great Recession, Ohio’s poverty rate has remained higher than the national rate

Table 9. Change in poverty in Ohio, 2008–2013

Population for whom poverty status is determined Persons below the poverty level

2008

2013

Change 2008–2013

% Change 2008–2013

11,172,113

11,248,753

+76,640

+0.7%

1,492,154

1,796,942

+304,788

+20.4%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 1-year estimates

The increase in Ohio’s poor population has substantially outpaced the overall population growth rate in the state over the past five years

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Appendix Geography of Poverty, continued Table 10. Population, poverty rates, and other measures of economic need, Ohio counties Ohio

Adams

Allen

Ashland

Ashtabula

11,594,163

28,129

105,040

53,035

99,175

19.9%

3.4%

18.5%

4.0%

9.9%

+135,152

−269

−1,833

−1,023

−3,977

+1.2%

−0.9%

−1.7%

−1.9%

−3.9%

1,793,523

6,670

15,963

6,526

18,129

Population and population change 1

Total population, 2014

Percentage minority population, 2014

Population change, 2004–14

Percentage population change, 2004–14

Individual poverty rates 2

Population in poverty, 2013

Overall poverty rate, 2013

15.9%

24.1%

16.1%

12.9%

18.9%

Child (under age 18) poverty rate, 2013

22.7%

35.2%

22.9%

19.8%

29.2%

Senior (age 65 and older) poverty rate, 2013

8.4%

13.1%

7.7%

6.6%

10.6%

White (non-Hispanic) poverty rate, 2013

12.7%

22.2%

14.6%

16.0%

16.8%

Black/African American poverty rate, 2013

33.6%

41.5%

42.9%

42.8%

Asian poverty rate, 2013

11.4%

6.0%

26.9%

3.7%

Hispanic/Latino (of any race) poverty rate, 2013

27.4%

20.9%

35.9%

14.6%

41.9%

Families in poverty, 2013

339,646

1,376

3,693

1,738

3,635

11.6%

17.8%

13.6%

12.2%

14.2%

7.3%

15.7%

7.8%

13.9%

10.5%

44.7%

49.8%

50.2%

49.4%

56.5%

Family poverty rates 3 3

Family poverty rate, 2013

Married couples with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

Single women with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

Other measures of economic need 3

Percentage of population below 50% FPL, 2013

7.5%

10.2%

8.3%

5.3%

9.1%

Percentage of population below 200% FPL, 2013

34.4%

48.8%

39.2%

38.4%

42.0%

Median household income, 2013

$48,138

$37,259

$43,274

$48,196

$40,899

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth rose to the top fifth, 1980–2012

5.4%

8.1%

3.2%

11.0%

7.3%

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth stayed in the bottom fifth, 1980–2012

38.1%

34.1%

38.5%

23.7%

33.3%

Child food insecurity rate, 2013

24.2%

30.5%

26.6%

27.7%

27.6%

Percentage of children who are both food insecure and ineligible for food assistance, 2013

7.5%

4.6%

6.1%

5.8%

Percentage of public school students K–12 eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 2013/14

44.3%

59.9%

54.5%

42.7%

58.7%

Percentage of population receiving SNAP benefits, 2014

14.8%

22.4%

13.9%

8.9%

19.2%

Percentage of population who are enrolled in Medicaid, December 2014

25.0%

38.6%

25.2%

18.1%

29.8%

Percentage of population with no health insurance, 2013

11.0%

18.5%

12.0%

14.9%

13.9%

Unemployment rate, 2014

5.7%

9.1%

5.7%

5.8%

7.0%

Percentage of households receiving HEAP benefits, 2015

8.8%

25.4%

10.6%

5.5%

14.1%

Percentage of renters cost-burdening (spending >30% of income on rent), 2013

47.1%

50.6%

52.3%

42.2%

51.8%

Percentage of all home mortagage loans in foreclosure, 2014

2.2%

1.6%

1.8%

1.6%

2.8%

Sources: (1) U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates; (2) U.S. Census Bureau, Small Area Income and Poverty Estimates (SAIPE); (3) U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey (ACS); (4) Equality of Opportunity Project; (5) Feeding America, Map the Meal Gap; (6) National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data; (7) Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, Public Assistance Monthly Statistics; (8) Ohio Department of Medicaid, Medicaid Expenditures and Eligibles Report; (9) U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Local Area Unemployment Statistics; (10) Ohio Development Services Agency; (11) Ohio Supreme Court, New Foreclosure Case Filings Notes: The first column identifies the source of the data by number. For (3), Ohio numbers and percentages represent 2013 ACS one-year estimates, whereas all county numbers and percentages represent 2009–2013 ACS five-year estimates. For county poverty rates by race, ethnicity, and family type, data are suppressed here if the denominator is less than 100 individuals, as indicated with the letter “N.” For (4), probabilities are based on the current family income of a cohort adults born between 1980 and 1982 whose family income 30 years ago was in the bottom quintile of the national income distribution at that time. State-level probability is derived by weighting county-level probabilities based on annual birth data from the U.S. Census Bureau. For (11), percentages are derived using data on the number of housing units with a mortgage, contract to purchase, or similar debt from the U.S. Census Bureau.

State of Poverty 2015

Appendix Geography of Poverty, continued Table 10. Population, poverty rates, and other measures of economic need, Ohio counties, continued Athens

Auglaize

Belmont

Brown

Butler

Population and population change 1

Total population, 2014

64,713

45,841

69,461

44,116

374,158

Percentage minority population, 2014

10.2%

3.6%

7.0%

3.4%

17.3%

Population change, 2004–14

+1,526

−1,097

+95

−123

+27,598

Percentage population change, 2004–14

+2.4%

−2.3%

+0.1%

−0.3%

+8.0%

17,112

4,401

11,014

7,724

47,855

Individual poverty rates 2

Population in poverty, 2013

Overall poverty rate, 2013

31.0%

9.7%

16.8%

17.8%

13.3%

Child (under age 18) poverty rate, 2013

29.5%

13.7%

25.2%

25.7%

17.4%

Senior (age 65 and older) poverty rate, 2013

9.8%

5.4%

8.0%

9.1%

5.7%

White (non-Hispanic) poverty rate, 2013

30.4%

8.5%

13.7%

14.1%

11.3%

Black/African American poverty rate, 2013

61.9%

46.9%

18.7%

11.2%

25.6%

Asian poverty rate, 2013

45.8%

0.6%

4.9%

15.9%

Hispanic/Latino (of any race) poverty rate, 2013

29.3%

26.0%

48.3%

11.9%

32.2% 9,086

Family poverty rates 3

Families in poverty, 2013

2,087

808

1,944

1,324

Family poverty rate, 2013

17.1%

6.4%

10.6%

11.1%

9.6%

Married couples with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

10.2%

5.8%

6.8%

7.0%

6.0%

Single women with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

66.2%

34.6%

62.7%

41.3%

39.2%

Other measures of economic need 3

Percentage of population below 50% FPL, 2013

18.8%

2.7%

5.6%

6.5%

6.7%

Percentage of population below 200% FPL, 2013

49.4%

28.9%

35.5%

39.0%

29.7%

Median household income, 2013

$35,783

$54,010

$39,264

$43,050

$55,992

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth rose to the top fifth, 1980–2012

8.4%

11.3%

13.7%

7.2%

5.4%

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth stayed in the bottom fifth, 1980–2012

38.7%

22.7%

23.7%

25.2%

39.8%

Child food insecurity rate, 2013

28.6%

21.2%

25.8%

25.5%

22.6%

Percentage of children who are both food insecure and ineligible for food assistance, 2013

5.7%

5.5%

7.5%

6.1%

8.4%

Percentage of public school students K–12 eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 2013/14

51.8%

36.8%

43.2%

60.0%

44.8%

Percentage of population receiving SNAP benefits, 2014

16.7%

7.8%

12.9%

15.1%

12.0%

Percentage of population who are enrolled in Medicaid, December 2014

24.0%

16.9%

24.4%

30.6%

22.1%

Percentage of population with no health insurance, 2013

10.7%

7.7%

11.0%

14.0%

10.6%

Unemployment rate, 2014

6.8%

4.3%

6.6%

7.2%

5.4%

Percentage of households receiving HEAP benefits, 2015

13.4%

5.5%

8.7%

12.9%

5.8%

Percentage of renters cost-burdening (spending >30% of income on rent), 2013

61.7%

32.7%

36.9%

45.1%

50.5%

Percentage of all home mortagage loans in foreclosure, 2014

1.2%

1.6%

1.0%

2.3%

2.1%

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Appendix Geography of Poverty, continued Table 10. Population, poverty rates, and other measures of economic need, Ohio counties, continued Carroll

Champaign

Clark

Clermont

Clinton

28,187

39,128

136,554

201,560

41,835

3.5%

6.5%

15.4%

5.8%

6.5%

Population and population change 1

Total population, 2014

Percentage minority population, 2014

Population change, 2004–14

−1,389

−517

−6,059

+12,946

−445

Percentage population change, 2004–14

−4.7%

−1.3%

−4.2%

+6.9%

−1.1%

19,151

7,047

Individual poverty rates 2

Population in poverty, 2013

4,330

4,612

24,381

Overall poverty rate, 2013

15.5%

12.0%

18.2%

9.7%

17.3%

Child (under age 18) poverty rate, 2013

23.5%

18.5%

28.3%

14.1%

25.3%

Senior (age 65 and older) poverty rate, 2013

6.9%

4.5%

7.7%

5.5%

9.4%

White (non-Hispanic) poverty rate, 2013

15.6%

12.6%

15.9%

9.5%

15.0%

Black/African American poverty rate, 2013

20.5%

28.5%

33.8%

23.3%

37.4%

Asian poverty rate, 2013

Hispanic/Latino (of any race) poverty rate, 2013

0.0%

5.8%

1.5%

24.0%

2.7%

35.4%

40.1%

24.8%

48.5%

941

4,802

4,044

1,563

Family poverty rates 3

Families in poverty, 2013

821

Family poverty rate, 2013

10.5%

8.7%

13.4%

7.6%

13.8%

Married couples with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

11.5%

11.4%

10.4%

4.5%

11.1%

Single women with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

64.4%

36.4%

45.9%

34.2%

55.2%

Other measures of economic need 3

Percentage of population below 50% FPL, 2013

7.4%

6.6%

8.9%

4.6%

7.7%

Percentage of population below 200% FPL, 2013

38.2%

31.0%

39.8%

25.9%

36.9%

Median household income, 2013

$44,622

$48,516

$44,029

$61,398

$46,541

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth rose to the top fifth, 1980–2012

8.9%

5.0%

4.8%

9.1%

7.3%

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth stayed in the bottom fifth, 1980–2012

35.7%

36.3%

42.3%

37.2%

36.6%

Child food insecurity rate, 2013

26.3%

25.2%

26.5%

22.2%

27.6%

Percentage of children both food insecure and ineligible for food assistance, 2013

3.4%

8.1%

5.6%

9.5%

6.9%

Percentage of public school students K–12 eligible for free/reduced-price lunch, 2013/14

44.4%

39.2%

58.7%

40.1%

49.0%

Percentage of population receiving SNAP benefits, 2014

11.4%

10.5%

18.7%

9.4%

17.3%

Percentage of population who are enrolled in Medicaid, December 2014

22.4%

21.9%

31.1%

19.5%

28.2%

Percentage of population with no health insurance, 2013

14.8%

10.6%

11.9%

10.7%

11.8%

Unemployment rate, 2014

6.0%

5.0%

5.6%

5.3%

7.6%

Percentage of households receiving HEAP benefits, 2015

8.6%

9.3%

9.8%

4.1%

15.5%

Percentage of renters cost-burdening (spending >30% of income on rent), 2013

40.2%

44.9%

51.4%

45.0%

45.9%

Percentage of all home mortagage loans in foreclosure, 2014

1.2%

2.0%

1.9%

1.7%

2.2%

State of Poverty 2015

Appendix Geography of Poverty, continued Table 10. Population, poverty rates, and other measures of economic need, Ohio counties, continued Columbiana

Coshocton

Crawford

Cuyahoga

Darke

105,686

36,516

42,480

1,259,828

52,196

5.6%

3.8%

4.1%

39.8%

3.7%

Population and population change 1

Total population, 2014

Percentage minority population, 2014

Population change, 2004–14

−5,833

−523

−3,481

−91,181

−1,064

Percentage population change, 2004–14

−5.2%

−1.4%

−7.6%

−6.7%

−2.0%

18,157

5,208

7,629

237,268

7,532

Individual poverty rates 2

Population in poverty, 2013

Overall poverty rate, 2013

17.8%

14.4%

18.2%

19.2%

14.6%

Child (under age 18) poverty rate, 2013

27.4%

24.8%

27.1%

28.1%

21.2%

Senior (age 65 and older) poverty rate, 2013

6.8%

7.2%

6.2%

10.8%

6.7%

White (non-Hispanic) poverty rate, 2013

16.4%

16.9%

15.8%

10.0%

13.2%

Black/African American poverty rate, 2013

38.9%

9.9%

39.0%

33.5%

51.8%

Asian poverty rate, 2013

Hispanic/Latino (of any race) poverty rate, 2013

0.0%

58.4%

11.3%

31.7%

4.6%

36.2%

32.5%

27.3%

Families in poverty, 2013

3,541

1,325

1,489

43,781

1,437

12.4%

13.1%

12.6%

14.1%

10.1%

9.4%

12.8%

11.8%

7.4%

10.2%

54.9%

54.0%

53.2%

44.7%

46.5%

Family poverty rates 3 3

Family poverty rate, 2013

Married couples with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

Single women with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

Other measures of economic need 3

Percentage of population below 50% FPL, 2013

6.2%

6.5%

7.8%

8.8%

4.3%

Percentage of population below 200% FPL, 2013

38.4%

41.4%

40.1%

36.7%

35.5%

Median household income, 2013

$41,996

$39,496

$38,421

$43,653

$43,465

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth rose to the top fifth, 1980–2012

6.5%

3.5%

7.9%

3.9%

12.3%

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth stayed in the bottom fifth, 1980–2012

29.9%

40.3%

34.5%

39.9%

23.3%

Child food insecurity rate, 2013

27.2%

28.7%

28.3%

23.6%

24.3%

Percentage of children who are both food insecure and ineligible for food assistance, 2013

6.5%

4.9%

5.9%

7.6%

5.8%

Percentage of public school students K–12 eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 2013/14

47.6%

54.0%

47.6%

52.4%

36.2%

Percentage of population receiving SNAP benefits, 2014

16.4%

17.6%

15.8%

21.0%

7.6%

Percentage of population who are enrolled in Medicaid, December 2014

27.0%

29.7%

29.9%

30.4%

19.5%

Percentage of population with no health insurance, 2013

12.3%

15.9%

11.5%

12.4% 5.2%

Unemployment rate, 2014

6.4%

7.3%

6.5%

6.4%

Percentage of households receiving HEAP benefits, 2015

12.8%

13.5%

11.3%

12.0%

8.3%

Percentage of renters cost-burdening (spending >30% of income on rent), 2013

40.3%

37.4%

42.8%

52.4%

41.0%

Percentage of all home mortagage loans in foreclosure, 2014

2.0%

2.9%

2.1%

3.3%

1.7%

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Appendix Geography of Poverty, continued Table 10. Population, poverty rates, and other measures of economic need, Ohio counties, continued Defiance

Delaware

Erie

Fairfield

Fayette

Population and population change 1

Total population, 2014

38,510

189,113

75,828

150,381

28,800

Percentage minority population, 2014

13.3%

13.1%

16.0%

12.4%

6.8%

Population change, 2004–14

Percentage population change, 2004–14

−528

+46,610

−3,164

+14,318

+666

−1.4%

+32.7%

−4.0%

+10.5%

+2.4%

4,278

10,290

11,166

17,067

5,020

Individual poverty rates 2

Population in poverty, 2013

Overall poverty rate, 2013

11.4%

5.6%

15.0%

11.8%

17.9%

Child (under age 18) poverty rate, 2013

17.3%

6.4%

22.7%

15.3%

28.2%

Senior (age 65 and older) poverty rate, 2013

5.7%

4.4%

5.8%

5.7%

9.1%

White (non-Hispanic) poverty rate, 2013

12.4%

4.6%

9.9%

11.5%

19.8%

Black/African American poverty rate, 2013

24.1%

7.1%

33.7%

15.6%

16.7%

Asian poverty rate, 2013

31.7%

2.5%

14.8%

5.7%

10.3%

Hispanic/Latino (of any race) poverty rate, 2013

27.5%

15.6%

30.7%

13.6%

46.0%

Families in poverty, 2013

1,199

1,669

1,939

3,302

1,223

11.0%

3.4%

9.2%

8.4%

16.1%

7.2%

1.5%

3.1%

5.2%

11.3%

42.6%

20.8%

47.6%

36.8%

46.8%

Family poverty rates 3 3

Family poverty rate, 2013

Married couples with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

Single women with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

Other measures of economic need 3

Percentage of population below 50% FPL, 2013

6.8%

2.0%

5.8%

4.9%

7.3%

Percentage of population below 200% FPL, 2013

34.5%

14.2%

31.5%

27.6%

44.0%

Median household income, 2013

$48,971

$89,016

$46,495

$56,697

$40,031

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth rose to the top fifth, 1980–2012

11.8%

7.5%

5.8%

6.0%

2.5%

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth stayed in the bottom fifth, 1980–2012

27.1%

27.4%

37.3%

34.6%

51.3%

Child food insecurity rate, 2013

23.8%

16.9%

24.0%

22.1%

27.6%

Percentage of children who are both food insecure and ineligible for food assistance, 2013

5.5%

10.8%

8.6%

8.8%

6.1%

Percentage of public school students K–12 eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 2013/14

44.4%

16.2%

45.6%

36.6%

55.9%

Percentage of population receiving SNAP benefits, 2014

3.3%

14.5%

11.8%

19.8%

Percentage of population who are enrolled in Medicaid, December 2014

22.4%

8.0%

24.2%

21.8%

34.0%

Percentage of population with no health insurance, 2013

11.2%

5.3%

11.4%

9.1%

15.2%

Unemployment rate, 2014

5.4%

4.0%

6.2%

5.0%

5.8%

Percentage of households receiving HEAP benefits, 2015

8.8%

2.4%

8.6%

7.8%

16.7%

Percentage of renters cost-burdening (spending >30% of income on rent), 2013

39.7%

40.5%

42.4%

48.9%

52.4%

Percentage of all home mortagage loans in foreclosure, 2014

1.2%

0.9%

2.7%

1.6%

2.2%

State of Poverty 2015

Appendix Geography of Poverty, continued Table 10. Population, poverty rates, and other measures of economic need, Ohio counties, continued Franklin

Fulton

Gallia

Geauga

Greene

1,231,393

42,580

30,397

94,295

163,820

34.3%

10.2%

6.1%

4.3%

15.6%

Population and population change 1

Total population, 2014

Percentage minority population, 2014

Population change, 2004–14

Percentage population change, 2004–14

+142,422

−339

−859

−307

+11,587

+13.1%

−0.8%

−2.7%

−0.3%

+7.6%

210,322

4,523

6,033

6,944

19,773

Individual poverty rates 2

Population in poverty, 2013

Overall poverty rate, 2013

17.7%

10.8%

20.3%

7.4%

12.8%

Child (under age 18) poverty rate, 2013

25.4%

14.5%

33.2%

10.3%

15.7%

Senior (age 65 and older) poverty rate, 2013

8.8%

7.8%

12.8%

5.3%

6.3%

White (non-Hispanic) poverty rate, 2013

12.5%

9.9%

17.5%

7.9%

12.4%

Black/African American poverty rate, 2013

32.8%

51.8%

26.6%

17.5%

32.1%

Asian poverty rate, 2013

12.8%

0.0%

4.7%

14.1%

Hispanic/Latino (of any race) poverty rate, 2013

30.3%

22.3%

15.5%

10.9%

13.1%

1,038

992

1,208

3,777

Family poverty rates 3

Families in poverty, 2013

35,611

Family poverty rate, 2013

13.0%

8.6%

12.0%

4.7%

9.0%

Married couples with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

8.1%

8.5%

10.8%

4.3%

6.6%

Single women with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

40.8%

36.2%

41.3%

27.8%

42.0%

Other measures of economic need 3

Percentage of population below 50% FPL, 2013

9.0%

5.6%

7.3%

3.2%

7.4%

Percentage of population below 200% FPL, 2013

35.5%

29.2%

41.7%

22.9%

27.5%

Median household income, 2013

$51,456

$51,454

$39,447

$69,078

$60,093

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth rose to the top fifth, 1980–2012

3.6%

11.4%

6.3%

10.0%

4.8%

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth stayed in the bottom fifth, 1980–2012

41.8%

22.9%

37.7%

18.9%

38.8%

Child food insecurity rate, 2013

22.9%

26.3%

20.6%

23.3%

Percentage of children who are both food insecure and ineligible for food assistance, 2013

7.6%

6.9%

6.0%

7.4%

9.1%

Percentage of public school students K–12 eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 2013/14

44.4%

39.7%

58.6%

20.5%

34.3%

Percentage of population receiving SNAP benefits, 2014

17.3%

8.4%

23.4%

3.7%

8.0%

Percentage of population who are enrolled in Medicaid, December 2014

26.8%

18.8%

34.9%

9.3%

16.2%

Percentage of population with no health insurance, 2013

13.3%

7.9%

14.7%

12.1%

8.4%

Unemployment rate, 2014

4.8%

5.8%

7.5%

5.1%

5.2%

Percentage of households receiving HEAP benefits, 2015

7.7%

6.5%

16.1%

3.0%

5.3%

Percentage of renters cost-burdening (spending >30% of income on rent), 2013

49.1%

39.7%

32.7%

38.8%

47.6%

Percentage of all home mortagage loans in foreclosure, 2014

2.8%

1.1%

1.0%

1.1%

1.5%

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Appendix Geography of Poverty, continued Table 10. Population, poverty rates, and other measures of economic need, Ohio counties, continued Guernsey

Hamilton

Hancock

Hardin

Harrison

39,590

806,631

75,337

31,796

15,543

5.1%

33.3%

10.0%

4.7%

4.8%

Population and population change 1

Total population, 2014

Percentage minority population, 2014

Population change, 2004–14

−1,714

−7,980

+1,735

−375

−395

Percentage population change, 2004–14

−4.1%

−1.0%

+2.4%

−1.2%

−2.5%

8,868

146,764

9,280

4,602

2,538

Individual poverty rates 2

Population in poverty, 2013

Overall poverty rate, 2013

22.6%

18.7%

12.6%

15.7%

16.5%

Child (under age 18) poverty rate, 2013

33.9%

25.8%

16.2%

22.2%

26.1%

Senior (age 65 and older) poverty rate, 2013

8.9%

9.2%

4.4%

9.0%

11.0%

White (non-Hispanic) poverty rate, 2013

20.3%

10.7%

12.3%

17.9%

17.7%

Black/African American poverty rate, 2013

15.6%

35.0%

57.9%

43.1%

46.6%

Asian poverty rate, 2013

0.0%

15.7%

11.9%

18.9%

Hispanic/Latino (of any race) poverty rate, 2013

1.1%

34.0%

28.8%

16.8%

19.8%

1,941

884

601

Family poverty rates 3

Families in poverty, 2013

1,754

26,055

Family poverty rate, 2013

16.3%

13.4%

9.6%

11.4%

13.7%

Married couples with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

11.7%

5.5%

11.5%

13.9%

Single women with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

68.3%

47.6%

49.0%

28.7%

54.9%

Other measures of economic need 3

Percentage of population below 50% FPL, 2013

10.3%

9.2%

6.5%

8.7%

7.1%

Percentage of population below 200% FPL, 2013

42.4%

34.5%

32.2%

40.1%

42.3%

Median household income, 2013

$39,760

$47,123

$48,729

$42,474

$40,343

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth rose to the top fifth, 1980–2012

9.5%

3.7%

13.2%

8.4%

8.3%

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth stayed in the bottom fifth, 1980–2012

31.4%

43.6%

25.7%

27.4%

21.7%

Child food insecurity rate, 2013

29.8%

23.4%

23.2%

26.4%

28.0%

Percentage of children who are both food insecure and ineligible for food assistance, 2013

5.7%

8.2%

7.4%

6.1%

7.0%

Percentage of public school students K–12 eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 2013/14

59.1%

48.0%

33.4%

47.2%

56.8%

Percentage of population receiving SNAP benefits, 2014

15.8%

16.1%

8.8%

11.5%

14.1%

Percentage of population who are enrolled in Medicaid, December 2014

31.6%

27.7%

19.5%

23.1%

26.1%

Percentage of population with no health insurance, 2013

14.2%

11.3%

10.7%

14.6%

11.5%

Unemployment rate, 2014

6.7%

5.3%

4.4%

5.6%

5.9%

Percentage of households receiving HEAP benefits, 2015

15.2%

5.6%

7.3%

9.8%

13.2%

Percentage of renters cost-burdening (spending >30% of income on rent), 2013

49.8%

51.8%

44.8%

48.5%

51.5%

Percentage of all home mortagage loans in foreclosure, 2014

1.7%

2.4%

1.7%

2.2%

1.0%

State of Poverty 2015

Appendix Geography of Poverty, continued Table 10. Population, poverty rates, and other measures of economic need, Ohio counties, continued Henry

Highland

Hocking

Holmes

Huron

27,937

43,045

28,725

43,898

58,714

9.4%

4.4%

3.3%

2.1%

9.2%

Population and population change 1

Total population, 2014

Percentage minority population, 2014

Population change, 2004–14

−1,445

+435

−113

+2,625

−1,690

Percentage population change, 2004–14

−4.9%

+1.0%

−0.4%

+6.4%

−2.8%

3,090

9,030

4,568

5,291

8,459

Individual poverty rates 2

Population in poverty, 2013

Overall poverty rate, 2013

11.2%

21.2%

16.2%

12.4%

14.6%

Child (under age 18) poverty rate, 2013

15.6%

33.2%

26.8%

20.2%

21.6%

Senior (age 65 and older) poverty rate, 2013

4.3%

9.6%

10.3%

11.0%

6.8%

White (non-Hispanic) poverty rate, 2013

Black/African American poverty rate, 2013

Asian poverty rate, 2013

Hispanic/Latino (of any race) poverty rate, 2013

11.7%

18.5%

15.5%

11.1%

41.0%

38.2%

19.2%

32.9%

0.0%

2.9%

1.3%

32.2%

37.1%

31.8%

33.8%

47.7%

Families in poverty, 2013

817

1,687

973

1,241

1,557

10.7%

14.4%

12.2%

12.5%

9.9%

6.4%

15.8%

8.4%

15.4%

6.4%

58.6%

50.3%

42.0%

52.8%

40.6%

Family poverty rates 3 3

Family poverty rate, 2013

Married couples with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

Single women with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

Other measures of economic need 3

Percentage of population below 50% FPL, 2013

5.1%

7.7%

7.6%

4.4%

6.5%

Percentage of population below 200% FPL, 2013

32.0%

45.6%

38.2%

44.1%

34.6%

Median household income, 2013

$51,105

$40,419

$42,376

$49,118

$44,825

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth rose to the top fifth, 1980–2012

12.2%

14.1%

7.6%

10.0%

7.2%

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth stayed in the bottom fifth, 1980–2012

12.2%

30.4%

39.1%

17.9%

29.3%

Child food insecurity rate, 2013

23.9%

29.6%

25.9%

24.1%

26.5%

Percentage of children who are both food insecure and ineligible for food assistance, 2013

7.2%

3.3%

5.7%

0.5%

7.2%

Percentage of public school students K–12 eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 2013/14

41.3%

44.0%

59.8%

41.1%

46.3%

Percentage of population receiving SNAP benefits, 2014

7.7%

18.4%

0.0%

3.8%

13.5%

Percentage of population who are enrolled in Medicaid, December 2014

Percentage of population with no health insurance, 2013

19.0%

32.8%

10.6%

25.4%

9.8%

16.3%

12.7%

45.7%

11.4%

Unemployment rate, 2014

6.3%

7.6%

6.3%

3.9%

7.9%

Percentage of households receiving HEAP benefits, 2015

6.4%

17.7%

16.0%

4.2%

11.6%

Percentage of renters cost-burdening (spending >30% of income on rent), 2013

35.8%

44.9%

47.4%

27.4%

41.7%

Percentage of all home mortagage loans in foreclosure, 2014

1.3%

1.8%

1.6%

0.6%

1.5%

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Appendix Geography of Poverty, continued Table 10. Population, poverty rates, and other measures of economic need, Ohio counties, continued Jackson

Jefferson

Knox

Lake

Lawrence

32,748

67,694

61,167

229,230

61,623

3.8%

9.2%

4.5%

10.6%

5.0%

Population and population change 1

Total population, 2014

Percentage minority population, 2014

Population change, 2004–14

Percentage population change, 2004–14

−663

−3,726

+3,382

−2,831

−1,082

−2.0%

−5.2%

+5.9%

−1.2%

−1.7%

21,402

12,594

Individual poverty rates 2

Population in poverty, 2013

6,919

12,079

8,307

Overall poverty rate, 2013

21.4%

18.4%

14.5%

9.4%

20.6%

Child (under age 18) poverty rate, 2013

30.1%

26.7%

22.3%

13.1%

28.5%

Senior (age 65 and older) poverty rate, 2013

10.3%

6.9%

8.3%

6.2%

13.5%

White (non-Hispanic) poverty rate, 2013

23.7%

14.4%

14.1%

7.9%

17.5%

Black/African American poverty rate, 2013

46.0%

42.7%

32.5%

25.3%

38.5%

Asian poverty rate, 2013

Hispanic/Latino (of any race) poverty rate, 2013

6.9%

0.0%

7.7%

8.3%

53.7%

27.3%

8.2%

23.1%

14.5%

1,554

2,238

1,731

3,970

2,208

Family poverty rates 3

Families in poverty, 2013

Family poverty rate, 2013

17.5%

12.0%

11.0%

6.5%

13.4%

Married couples with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

12.3%

7.0%

7.2%

4.3%

9.1%

Single women with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

54.6%

56.3%

56.1%

31.5%

39.9%

Other measures of economic need 3

Percentage of population below 50% FPL, 2013

12.1%

8.1%

6.1%

4.3%

6.3%

Percentage of population below 200% FPL, 2013

49.4%

37.4%

34.6%

24.5%

40.0%

Median household income, 2013

$37,823

$38,074

$47,053

$55,477

$41,137

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth rose to the top fifth, 1980–2012

11.9%

6.6%

9.4%

10.0%

5.7%

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth stayed in the bottom fifth, 1980–2012

37.1%

34.7%

20.6%

27.5%

35.1%

Child food insecurity rate, 2013

32.1%

28.4%

25.0%

21.3%

26.0%

Percentage of children who are both food insecure and ineligible for food assistance, 2013

2.9%

6.2%

6.0%

8.9%

5.7%

Percentage of public school students K–12 eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 2013/14

68.6%

56.2%

37.7%

33.4%

58.5%

Percentage of population receiving SNAP benefits, 2014

20.5%

20.3%

10.5%

8.7%

21.1%

Percentage of population who are enrolled in Medicaid, December 2014

36.3%

30.3%

23.0%

16.7%

33.8%

Percentage of population with no health insurance, 2013

14.2%

11.1%

14.9%

9.7%

12.8%

Unemployment rate, 2014

8.6%

8.0%

5.2%

5.6%

6.5%

Percentage of households receiving HEAP benefits, 2015

19.8%

15.0%

8.6%

4.6%

18.7%

Percentage of renters cost-burdening (spending >30% of income on rent), 2013

40.6%

41.4%

46.2%

45.8%

41.8%

Percentage of all home mortagage loans in foreclosure, 2014

2.7%

1.8%

2.1%

1.9%

2.1%

State of Poverty 2015

Appendix Geography of Poverty, continued Table 10. Population, poverty rates, and other measures of economic need, Ohio counties, continued Licking

Logan

Lorain

Lucas

Madison

169,390

45,507

304,216

435,286

43,918

8.5%

6.1%

20.8%

30.1%

11.0%

Population and population change 1

Total population, 2014

Percentage minority population, 2014

Population change, 2004–14

+16,524

−1,109

+9,892

−15,346

+2,805

Percentage population change, 2004–14

+10.8%

−2.4%

+3.4%

−3.4%

+6.8%

18,467

5,910

42,733

92,013

4,671

Individual poverty rates 2

Population in poverty, 2013

Overall poverty rate, 2013

11.2%

13.2%

14.6%

21.6%

12.2%

Child (under age 18) poverty rate, 2013

17.1%

18.7%

22.6%

29.7%

17.9%

Senior (age 65 and older) poverty rate, 2013

5.3%

6.6%

7.1%

9.2%

6.1%

White (non-Hispanic) poverty rate, 2013

11.4%

15.0%

10.2%

14.0%

9.7%

Black/African American poverty rate, 2013

18.9%

21.1%

38.5%

40.3%

55.0%

Asian poverty rate, 2013

Hispanic/Latino (of any race) poverty rate, 2013

5.3%

5.5%

12.2%

22.6%

14.5%

16.6%

45.6%

31.0%

31.1%

12.8%

1,463

9,098

17,459

781

Family poverty rates 3

Families in poverty, 2013

3,944

Family poverty rate, 2013

8.7%

11.6%

11.3%

16.2%

7.6%

Married couples with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

5.4%

13.8%

5.8%

9.5%

5.9%

Single women with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

40.9%

39.8%

47.7%

49.8%

37.3%

Other measures of economic need 3

Percentage of population below 50% FPL, 2013

5.3%

7.8%

6.9%

10.1%

4.2%

Percentage of population below 200% FPL, 2013

28.6%

37.5%

31.0%

40.6%

28.7%

Median household income, 2013

$54,909

$50,077

$52,762

$40,751

$54,039

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth rose to the top fifth, 1980–2012

6.7%

6.5%

5.0%

4.4%

9.7%

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth stayed in the bottom fifth, 1980–2012

33.5%

30.9%

38.4%

44.4%

35.5%

Child food insecurity rate, 2013

23.1%

26.0%

24.4%

26.0%

22.7%

Percentage of children who are both food insecure and ineligible for food assistance, 2013

8.5%

6.5%

8.1%

7.0%

8.9%

Percentage of public school students K–12 eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 2013/14

39.5%

44.2%

44.7%

41.7%

36.6%

Percentage of population receiving SNAP benefits, 2014

11.7%

13.1%

13.5%

20.8%

10.1%

Percentage of population who are enrolled in Medicaid, December 2014

22.1%

23.4%

23.2%

31.6%

18.9%

Percentage of population with no health insurance, 2013

10.9%

14.3%

9.7%

12.6%

12.1%

Unemployment rate, 2014

5.1%

4.9%

6.6%

6.3%

4.7%

Percentage of households receiving HEAP benefits, 2015

6.6%

10.7%

7.3%

11.2%

9.3%

Percentage of renters cost-burdening (spending >30% of income on rent), 2013

46.4%

42.6%

49.8%

52.5%

40.2%

Percentage of all home mortagage loans in foreclosure, 2014

1.6%

2.0%

1.9%

2.2%

2.1%

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Appendix Geography of Poverty, continued Table 10. Population, poverty rates, and other measures of economic need, Ohio counties, continued Mahoning

Marion

Medina

Meigs

Mercer

233,204

65,720

176,029

23,331

40,831

23.2%

11.1%

5.8%

3.0%

3.9%

−16,551

−590

+10,952

+45

−244

−6.6%

−0.9%

+6.6%

+0.2%

−0.6% 3,783

Population and population change 1

Total population, 2014

Percentage minority population, 2014

Population change, 2004–14

Percentage population change, 2004–14

Individual poverty rates 2

Population in poverty, 2013

40,786

9,746

11,524

4,781

Overall poverty rate, 2013

18.0%

16.3%

6.6%

20.6%

9.4%

Child (under age 18) poverty rate, 2013

26.8%

24.2%

8.9%

31.4%

11.7%

Senior (age 65 and older) poverty rate, 2013

8.9%

7.9%

4.6%

14.2%

6.4%

White (non-Hispanic) poverty rate, 2013

11.7%

17.2%

6.8%

21.0%

8.8%

Black/African American poverty rate, 2013

40.6%

42.4%

33.3%

38.6%

44.2%

Asian poverty rate, 2013

18.4%

20.7%

7.0%

23.4%

Hispanic/Latino (of any race) poverty rate, 2013

36.5%

43.2%

10.3%

88.9%

20.0%

2,437

1,131

853

Family poverty rates 3

Families in poverty, 2013

8,294

2,280

Family poverty rate, 2013

13.4%

13.5%

5.0%

17.2%

7.4%

Married couples with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

7.9%

8.3%

3.8%

13.2%

4.4%

Single women with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

53.3%

52.8%

27.1%

66.1%

50.6%

Other measures of economic need 3

Percentage of population below 50% FPL, 2013

7.3%

6.9%

3.1%

9.1%

3.8%

Percentage of population below 200% FPL, 2013

38.9%

40.0%

20.1%

45.9%

27.1%

Median household income, 2013

$41,076

$42,862

$66,720

$40,023

$55,110

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth rose to the top fifth, 1980–2012

6.0%

11.3%

10.0%

12.2%

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth stayed in the bottom fifth, 1980–2012

33.8%

39.1%

29.4%

25.0%

19.4%

Child food insecurity rate, 2013

25.8%

27.6%

20.2%

31.5%

20.0%

Percentage of children who are both food insecure and ineligible for food assistance, 2013

6.2%

6.3%

10.1%

6.0%

8.8%

Percentage of public school students K–12 eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 2013/14

51.0%

49.1%

21.9%

57.4%

24.4%

Percentage of population receiving SNAP benefits, 2014

19.6%

17.1%

5.8%

24.6%

6.5%

Percentage of population who are enrolled in Medicaid, December 2014

28.6%

30.8%

12.2%

37.1%

14.3%

Percentage of population with no health insurance, 2013

11.0%

13.4%

8.2%

15.5%

7.9% 3.8%

Unemployment rate, 2014

6.6%

5.9%

5.2%

9.0%

Percentage of households receiving HEAP benefits, 2015

11.7%

12.5%

4.1%

17.0%

5.7%

Percentage of renters cost-burdening (spending >30% of income on rent), 2013

50.6%

49.5%

44.5%

41.5%

43.2%

Percentage of all home mortagage loans in foreclosure, 2014

2.8%

2.1%

1.3%

1.5%

1.0%

State of Poverty 2015

Appendix Geography of Poverty, continued Table 10. Population, poverty rates, and other measures of economic need, Ohio counties, continued Miami

Monroe

Montgomery

Morgan

Morrow

103,900

14,465

533,116

14,843

35,152

7.0%

2.5%

28.1%

7.5%

3.9%

Population and population change 1

Total population, 2014

Percentage minority population, 2014

Population change, 2004–14

+3,103

−598

−16,947

−98

+905

Percentage population change, 2004–14

+3.1%

−4.0%

−3.1%

−0.7%

+2.6%

10,330

2,404

97,443

3,342

4,608

Individual poverty rates 2

Population in poverty, 2013

Overall poverty rate, 2013

10.1%

16.7%

18.8%

22.8%

13.3%

Child (under age 18) poverty rate, 2013

15.8%

25.5%

28.7%

33.1%

21.9%

Senior (age 65 and older) poverty rate, 2013

5.4%

8.1%

8.7%

11.1%

10.2%

White (non-Hispanic) poverty rate, 2013

11.9%

18.8%

12.9%

19.2%

13.6%

Black/African American poverty rate, 2013

30.9%

32.2%

31.4%

27.3%

Asian poverty rate, 2013

Hispanic/Latino (of any race) poverty rate, 2013

5.8%

11.0%

24.7%

31.0%

29.1%

17.8%

2,760

582

18,194

773

850

Family poverty rates 3

Families in poverty, 2013

Family poverty rate, 2013

9.8%

13.7%

13.5%

17.4%

8.7%

Married couples with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

7.5%

16.9%

7.4%

13.9%

8.8%

Single women with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

48.4%

64.5%

45.4%

64.5%

40.8%

Other measures of economic need 3

Percentage of population below 50% FPL, 2013

4.8%

8.0%

8.2%

9.8%

6.1%

Percentage of population below 200% FPL, 2013

31.6%

40.2%

37.9%

42.7%

32.5%

Median household income, 2013

$51,892

$41,000

$43,103

$36,057

$49,980

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth rose to the top fifth, 1980–2012

4.4%

16.4%

3.5%

7.0%

8.3%

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth stayed in the bottom fifth, 1980–2012

30.2%

29.1%

40.9%

28.1%

25.0%

Child food insecurity rate, 2013

24.9%

31.8%

25.1%

29.2%

25.2%

Percentage of children who are both food insecure and ineligible for food assistance, 2013

7.5%

6.0%

6.8%

7.9%

7.1%

Percentage of public school students K–12 eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 2013/14

35.7%

56.9%

52.6%

58.4%

45.9%

Percentage of population receiving SNAP benefits, 2014

7.9%

14.1%

17.0%

18.1%

12.1%

Percentage of population who are enrolled in Medicaid, December 2014

18.1%

25.6%

29.0%

31.7%

25.2%

Percentage of population with no health insurance, 2013

10.7%

11.9%

12.3%

13.6%

12.2%

Unemployment rate, 2014

5.3%

10.8%

6.0%

7.8%

5.8%

Percentage of households receiving HEAP benefits, 2015

6.4%

13.3%

8.1%

19.0%

10.2%

Percentage of renters cost-burdening (spending >30% of income on rent), 2013

41.8%

31.9%

51.2%

41.8%

45.6%

Percentage of all home mortagage loans in foreclosure, 2014

1.6%

0.8%

2.2%

0.9%

1.7%

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Appendix Geography of Poverty, continued Table 10. Population, poverty rates, and other measures of economic need, Ohio counties, continued Muskingum

Noble

Ottawa

Paulding

Perry

85,818

14,363

41,154

18,989

35,812

8.2%

4.8%

7.5%

7.1%

3.0%

Population and population change 1

Total population, 2014

Percentage minority population, 2014

Population change, 2004–14

Percentage population change, 2004–14

+149

+342

−253

−497

+772

+0.2%

+2.4%

−0.6%

−2.6%

+2.2%

17,249

2,042

4,207

2,347

6,316

Individual poverty rates 2

Population in poverty, 2013

Overall poverty rate, 2013

20.6%

17.3%

10.4%

12.3%

17.8%

Child (under age 18) poverty rate, 2013

30.3%

21.7%

14.8%

18.6%

27.1%

Senior (age 65 and older) poverty rate, 2013

8.6%

10.6%

6.8%

7.8%

9.3%

White (non-Hispanic) poverty rate, 2013

17.0%

15.2%

9.5%

13.0%

19.0%

Black/African American poverty rate, 2013

30.9%

49.9%

41.7%

Asian poverty rate, 2013

22.0%

0.0%

Hispanic/Latino (of any race) poverty rate, 2013

19.2%

33.1%

26.3%

27.1%

360

873

530

1,489

Family poverty rates 3

Families in poverty, 2013

3,241

Family poverty rate, 2013

14.1%

10.5%

7.2%

9.8%

14.8%

Married couples with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

8.3%

10.7%

5.0%

9.1%

8.6%

Single women with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

50.4%

36.9%

40.0%

48.3%

59.6%

Other measures of economic need 3

Percentage of population below 50% FPL, 2013

7.5%

4.2%

3.7%

5.7%

9.5%

Percentage of population below 200% FPL, 2013

43.0%

42.5%

27.2%

38.3%

41.7%

Median household income, 2013

$40,399

$42,425

$51,787

$46,921

$41,586

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth rose to the top fifth, 1980–2012

6.3%

18.4%

11.2%

14.6%

8.3%

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth stayed in the bottom fifth, 1980–2012

33.9%

16.3%

18.7%

14.6%

31.4%

Child food insecurity rate, 2013

28.7%

28.3%

24.9%

24.0%

28.9%

Percentage of children who are both food insecure and ineligible for food assistance, 2013

5.5%

7.1%

9.5%

4.8%

6.6%

Percentage of public school students K–12 eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 2013/14

56.8%

46.4%

29.9%

43.6%

52.1%

Percentage of population receiving SNAP benefits, 2014

22.7%

9.1%

9.4%

20.3%

Percentage of population who are enrolled in Medicaid, December 2014

35.0%

20.5%

16.9%

22.6%

33.9%

Percentage of population with no health insurance, 2013

12.0%

12.9%

10.7%

8.3%

13.8%

Unemployment rate, 2014

7.0%

7.6%

7.4%

5.4%

7.2%

Percentage of households receiving HEAP benefits, 2015

14.9%

11.3%

5.7%

11.9%

17.2%

Percentage of renters cost-burdening (spending >30% of income on rent), 2013

45.9%

51.2%

46.8%

41.8%

46.2%

Percentage of all home mortagage loans in foreclosure, 2014

2.1%

3.5%

1.3%

1.7%

2.2%

State of Poverty 2015

Appendix Geography of Poverty, continued Table 10. Population, poverty rates, and other measures of economic need, Ohio counties, continued Pickaway

Pike

Portage

Preble

Putnam

56,876

28,256

161,882

41,586

34,171

7.0%

4.5%

9.8%

3.4%

7.3%

Population and population change 1

Total population, 2014

Percentage minority population, 2014

Population change, 2004–14

+3,220

−38

+7,118

−967

−547

Percentage population change, 2004–14

+6.0%

−0.1%

+4.6%

−2.3%

−1.6%

Individual poverty rates 2

Population in poverty, 2013

6,990

6,752

25,907

5,390

2,419

Overall poverty rate, 2013

13.6%

24.3%

16.9%

13.1%

7.2%

Child (under age 18) poverty rate, 2013

19.0%

36.0%

18.4%

19.8%

9.2%

Senior (age 65 and older) poverty rate, 2013

6.6%

13.7%

5.6%

6.0%

5.4%

White (non-Hispanic) poverty rate, 2013

13.1%

23.9%

14.5%

11.7%

5.8%

Black/African American poverty rate, 2013

39.1%

3.5%

33.1%

32.7%

Asian poverty rate, 2013

Hispanic/Latino (of any race) poverty rate, 2013

0.0%

29.5%

12.2%

23.1%

30.3%

26.6%

37.8%

22.1%

975

468

Family poverty rates 3

Families in poverty, 2013

1,441

1,330

4,219

Family poverty rate, 2013

10.1%

17.5%

10.5%

8.4%

4.9%

Married couples with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

8.6%

10.9%

7.0%

7.5%

2.8%

Single women with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

42.7%

55.3%

46.5%

34.5%

40.1%

Other measures of economic need 3

Percentage of population below 50% FPL, 2013

5.7%

11.1%

8.3%

5.8%

3.1%

Percentage of population below 200% FPL, 2013

29.8%

47.1%

31.3%

32.7%

22.5%

Median household income, 2013

$52,666

$41,092

$52,576

$47,251

$60,562

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth rose to the top fifth, 1980–2012

3.3%

4.4%

8.4%

10.6%

9.5%

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth stayed in the bottom fifth, 1980–2012

45.8%

38.6%

29.6%

29.2%

9.5%

Child food insecurity rate, 2013

24.5%

32.3%

24.4%

24.6%

19.4%

Percentage of children who are both food insecure and ineligible for food assistance, 2013

7.8%

3.2%

8.8%

6.4%

10.5%

Percentage of public school students K–12 eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 2013/14

46.0%

57.9%

36.5%

41.4%

27.7%

Percentage of population receiving SNAP benefits, 2014

13.3%

27.4%

9.5%

11.0%

6.8%

Percentage of population who are enrolled in Medicaid, December 2014

23.4%

40.3%

17.8%

23.5%

13.7%

Percentage of population with no health insurance, 2013

9.7%

14.4%

10.3%

11.9%

4.9%

Unemployment rate, 2014

5.6%

9.0%

5.8%

5.6%

4.5%

Percentage of households receiving HEAP benefits, 2015

11.0%

24.8%

6.6%

8.3%

6.4%

Percentage of renters cost-burdening (spending >30% of income on rent), 2013

43.5%

51.8%

53.6%

43.4%

29.8%

Percentage of all home mortagage loans in foreclosure, 2014

1.7%

2.1%

1.5%

1.9%

0.6%

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Appendix Geography of Poverty, continued Table 10. Population, poverty rates, and other measures of economic need, Ohio counties, continued Richland

Ross

Sandusky

Scioto

Seneca

Population and population change 1

Total population, 2014

121,942

77,159

60,179

77,258

55,669

Percentage minority population, 2014

13.8%

10.1%

14.9%

6.4%

9.6%

Population change, 2004–14

−6,154

+2,693

−1,769

+212

−2,120

Percentage population change, 2004–14

−4.8%

+3.6%

−2.9%

+0.3%

−3.7%

20,198

13,869

7,636

18,263

7,412

Individual poverty rates 2

Population in poverty, 2013

Overall poverty rate, 2013

17.6%

19.4%

12.9%

24.5%

13.9%

Child (under age 18) poverty rate, 2013

25.6%

28.1%

19.5%

32.1%

20.3%

Senior (age 65 and older) poverty rate, 2013

8.2%

7.9%

7.7%

12.2%

8.1%

White (non-Hispanic) poverty rate, 2013

13.9%

18.9%

12.0%

23.4%

13.8%

Black/African American poverty rate, 2013

29.5%

31.2%

39.7%

21.9%

42.9%

Asian poverty rate, 2013

13.6%

8.1%

38.8%

11.2%

71.3%

Hispanic/Latino (of any race) poverty rate, 2013

24.6%

18.9%

25.5%

28.8%

27.7%

2,796

1,718

3,361

1,796

Family poverty rates 3

Families in poverty, 2013

3,849

Family poverty rate, 2013

12.3%

14.6%

10.5%

17.5%

11.9%

Married couples with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

9.8%

13.3%

8.8%

16.7%

5.8%

Single women with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

46.7%

49.5%

45.8%

50.3%

58.4%

Other measures of economic need 3

Percentage of population below 50% FPL, 2013

6.8%

7.2%

6.8%

8.6%

7.7%

Percentage of population below 200% FPL, 2013

37.2%

40.5%

35.7%

46.0%

36.2%

Median household income, 2013

$40,210

$42,730

$46,800

$36,682

$47,121

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth rose to the top fifth, 1980–2012

5.3%

5.1%

10.4%

9.0%

7.5%

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth stayed in the bottom fifth, 1980–2012

36.1%

36.5%

30.6%

38.2%

33.2%

Child food insecurity rate, 2013

26.4%

28.5%

23.8%

30.7%

25.5%

Percentage of children who are both food insecure and ineligible for food assistance, 2013

6.6%

5.1%

5.0%

6.1%

6.9%

Percentage of public school students K–12 eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 2013/14

52.5%

47.1%

52.0%

67.1%

41.6%

Percentage of population receiving SNAP benefits, 2014

16.7%

0.0%

10.3%

26.8%

13.2%

Percentage of population who are enrolled in Medicaid, December 2014

27.7%

32.2%

23.6%

38.6%

23.5%

Percentage of population with no health insurance, 2013

12.2%

13.0%

11.1%

14.8%

11.0% 5.6%

Unemployment rate, 2014

6.4%

6.3%

5.6%

8.7%

Percentage of households receiving HEAP benefits, 2015

10.9%

18.1%

7.3%

22.3%

7.8%

Percentage of renters cost-burdening (spending >30% of income on rent), 2013

41.6%

46.1%

44.3%

46.5%

42.5%

Percentage of all home mortagage loans in foreclosure, 2014

3.9%

1.6%

2.5%

1.5%

State of Poverty 2015

Appendix Geography of Poverty, continued Table 10. Population, poverty rates, and other measures of economic need, Ohio counties, continued Shelby

Stark

Summit

Trumbull

Tuscarawas

48,951

375,736

541,943

205,175

92,788

6.7%

12.9%

21.6%

12.5%

4.9%

Population and population change 1

Total population, 2014

Percentage minority population, 2014

Population change, 2004–14

Percentage population change, 2004–14

+434

−5,493

−5,371

−15,311

+567

+0.9%

−1.4%

−1.0%

−6.9%

+0.6%

4,836

56,543

78,879

37,805

13,014

Individual poverty rates 2

Population in poverty, 2013

Overall poverty rate, 2013

10.0%

15.4%

14.8%

18.7%

14.3%

Child (under age 18) poverty rate, 2013

14.9%

23.1%

20.6%

32.3%

21.7%

Senior (age 65 and older) poverty rate, 2013

8.0%

6.6%

7.9%

7.5%

7.6%

White (non-Hispanic) poverty rate, 2013

11.3%

12.5%

11.3%

14.5%

13.7%

Black/African American poverty rate, 2013

16.4%

35.0%

33.8%

41.6%

53.7%

Asian poverty rate, 2013

Hispanic/Latino (of any race) poverty rate, 2013

2.0%

7.6%

19.1%

27.2%

0.0%

19.7%

29.0%

21.6%

39.4%

38.7%

1,035

10,876

15,472

7,473

2,619

Family poverty rates 3

Families in poverty, 2013

Family poverty rate, 2013

7.8%

11.0%

11.2%

13.4%

10.4%

Married couples with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

5.8%

8.0%

5.9%

9.6%

9.8%

Single women with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

36.0%

45.7%

45.6%

52.5%

49.6%

Other measures of economic need 3

Percentage of population below 50% FPL, 2013

3.3%

6.5%

7.2%

7.6%

5.7%

Percentage of population below 200% FPL, 2013

31.7%

34.2%

32.2%

36.6%

Median household income, 2013

$51,529

$45,199

$49,353

$41,951

$44,121

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth rose to the top fifth, 1980–2012

9.5%

5.0%

5.8%

6.3%

8.3%

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth stayed in the bottom fifth, 1980–2012

26.3%

37.6%

40.3%

34.2%

26.1%

Child food insecurity rate, 2013

22.3%

25.1%

23.5%

27.8%

25.4%

Percentage of children who are both food insecure and ineligible for food assistance, 2013

7.1%

7.3%

7.8%

6.1%

5.1%

Percentage of public school students K–12 eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 2013/14

38.4%

46.1%

41.9%

55.7%

41.7%

Percentage of population receiving SNAP benefits, 2014

7.7%

13.9%

15.1%

15.3%

11.8%

Percentage of population who are enrolled in Medicaid, December 2014

19.6%

24.2%

24.6%

27.0%

22.1%

Percentage of population with no health insurance, 2013

10.5%

11.2%

11.1%

12.9%

12.7%

Unemployment rate, 2014

5.0%

5.7%

5.8%

7.0%

5.4%

Percentage of households receiving HEAP benefits, 2015

9.1%

8.1%

7.3%

8.3%

8.2%

Percentage of renters cost-burdening (spending >30% of income on rent), 2013

43.0%

47.2%

50.7%

48.3%

43.9%

Percentage of all home mortagage loans in foreclosure, 2014

1.5%

1.8%

2.3%

2.4%

1.1%

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Appendix Geography of Poverty, continued Table 10. Population, poverty rates, and other measures of economic need, Ohio counties, continued Union

Van Wert

Vinton

Warren

Washington

53,776

28,462

13,234

221,659

61,213

8.9%

5.4%

3.1%

12.2%

4.7%

Population and population change 1

Total population, 2014

Percentage minority population, 2014

Population change, 2004–14

+9,289

−814

−118

+32,383

−1,364

Percentage population change, 2004–14

+20.9%

−2.8%

−0.9%

+17.1%

−2.2%

3,930

3,703

2,923

15,483

9,667

Individual poverty rates 2

Population in poverty, 2013

Overall poverty rate, 2013

7.8%

13.3%

22.2%

7.3%

16.3%

Child (under age 18) poverty rate, 2013

9.5%

17.6%

35.1%

8.8%

22.3%

Senior (age 65 and older) poverty rate, 2013

4.1%

8.1%

7.5%

5.2%

10.4%

White (non-Hispanic) poverty rate, 2013

7.9%

11.7%

20.4%

6.2%

14.8%

Black/African American poverty rate, 2013

22.3%

53.2%

12.1%

17.4%

Asian poverty rate, 2013

0.0%

0.8%

0.0%

Hispanic/Latino (of any race) poverty rate, 2013

7.7%

18.4%

12.5%

33.6%

740

741

680

2,596

1,648

Family poverty rates 3

Families in poverty, 2013

Family poverty rate, 2013

5.5%

9.3%

18.5%

4.4%

10.0%

Married couples with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

3.9%

9.4%

15.0%

2.7%

8.9%

Single women with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

28.5%

39.8%

56.8%

29.7%

42.5%

Other measures of economic need 3

Percentage of population below 50% FPL, 2013

3.0%

6.1%

8.9%

2.6%

6.0%

Percentage of population below 200% FPL, 2013

22.6%

34.1%

47.1%

17.4%

37.2%

Median household income, 2013

$68,650

$47,169

$37,842

$75,041

$41,236

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth rose to the top fifth, 1980–2012

10.2%

4.7%

10.9%

9.6%

10.2%

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth stayed in the bottom fifth, 1980–2012

34.7%

34.9%

25.5%

29.4%

30.9%

Child food insecurity rate, 2013

19.9%

23.7%

31.5%

19.2%

24.4%

Percentage of children who are both food insecure and ineligible for food assistance, 2013

10.0%

6.2%

3.8%

11.3%

5.9%

Percentage of public school students K–12 eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 2013/14

23.2%

45.8%

77.9%

17.6%

49.5%

Percentage of population receiving SNAP benefits, 2014

6.4%

9.5%

4.3%

12.8%

14.0%

20.4%

40.0%

11.9%

24.6%

8.7%

9.3%

13.6%

7.0%

11.6%

Percentage of population who are enrolled in Medicaid, December 2014

Percentage of population with no health insurance, 2013

Unemployment rate, 2014

4.3%

4.8%

7.9%

4.8%

6.2%

Percentage of households receiving HEAP benefits, 2015

6.3%

9.8%

25.0%

3.1%

11.1%

Percentage of renters cost-burdening (spending >30% of income on rent), 2013

38.7%

40.8%

41.7%

42.5%

45.1%

Percentage of all home mortagage loans in foreclosure, 2014

1.7%

1.2%

1.4%

1.1%

State of Poverty 2015

Appendix Geography of Poverty, continued Table 10. Population, poverty rates, and other measures of economic need, Ohio counties, continued Wayne

Williams

Wood

Wyandot

115,537

37,291

129,590

22,353

5.8%

6.9%

11.2%

4.8%

Population and population change 1

Total population, 2014

Percentage minority population, 2014

Population change, 2004–14

+1,960

−1,621

+6,312

−525

Percentage population change, 2004–14

+1.7%

−4.2%

+5.1%

−2.3% 2,482

Individual poverty rates 2

Population in poverty, 2013

14,584

4,420

15,799

Overall poverty rate, 2013

13.1%

12.1%

13.0%

11.2%

Child (under age 18) poverty rate, 2013

20.1%

18.8%

12.7%

14.8%

Senior (age 65 and older) poverty rate, 2013

6.9%

9.4%

5.0%

8.9%

White (non-Hispanic) poverty rate, 2013

11.8%

13.1%

13.6%

10.7%

Black/African American poverty rate, 2013

25.5%

25.8%

34.9%

Asian poverty rate, 2013

13.1%

5.5%

13.2%

5.2%

Hispanic/Latino (of any race) poverty rate, 2013

21.0%

22.3%

19.8%

26.6%

2,866

471

Family poverty rates 3

Families in poverty, 2013

2,673

1,015

Family poverty rate, 2013

8.9%

10.0%

9.1%

7.7%

Married couples with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

8.1%

8.3%

6.6%

6.4%

Single women with related children in their care, poverty rate, 2013

42.3%

44.3%

42.8%

37.0%

Other measures of economic need 3

Percentage of population below 50% FPL, 2013

5.0%

6.0%

8.0%

4.7%

Percentage of population below 200% FPL, 2013

34.8%

41.4%

30.0%

32.9%

Median household income, 2013

$49,580

$45,510

$52,578

$46,568

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth rose to the top fifth, 1980–2012

7.1%

9.4%

9.1%

11.8%

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth stayed in the bottom fifth, 1980–2012

25.2%

22.4%

26.8%

11.8%

Child food insecurity rate, 2013

23.6%

25.0%

22.2%

23.4%

Percentage of children who are both food insecure and ineligible for food assistance, 2013

3.5%

3.3%

8.9%

8.4%

Percentage of public school students K–12 eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, 2013/14

41.4%

34.2%

35.3%

37.5%

Percentage of population receiving SNAP benefits, 2014

10.1%

12.4%

5.9%

7.4%

Percentage of population who are enrolled in Medicaid, December 2014

18.9%

23.5%

14.6%

18.3%

Percentage of population with no health insurance, 2013

15.1%

11.2%

8.2%

10.1% 4.3%

Unemployment rate, 2014

4.6%

5.4%

5.2%

Percentage of households receiving HEAP benefits, 2015

7.5%

6.6%

4.3%

8.0%

Percentage of renters cost-burdening (spending >30% of income on rent), 2013

41.4%

45.7%

47.8%

36.3%

Percentage of all home mortagage loans in foreclosure, 2014

1.0%

1.7%

1.4%

1.1%

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Appendix Geography of Poverty, continued Table 11. Change in poverty in Ohio’s urban, suburban, and rural areas, 2000–2013

Geography

Population for whom poverty can be determined, 2000

Population in poverty, 2000

Poverty rate, 2000

Share of Ohio’s poor, 2000

Population for whom poverty can be determined, 2013

Population in poverty, 2013

Poverty rate, 2013

Share of Ohio’s poor, 2013

% Change in population, 2000–2013

% Change in poor population, 2000–2013

Ohio

10,956,170

1,147,329

10.5%

100.0%

11,177,058

1,765,228

15.8%

100.0%

+2.0%

+53.9%

Urban areas Suburban areas

2,075,971

436,702

21.0%

38.1%

1,871,270

584,108

31.2%

33.1%

−9.9%

+33.8%

6,176,860

458,648

7.4%

40.0%

6,557,475

801,977

12.2%

45.4%

+6.2%

+74.9%

Rural areas

2,703,339

251,979

9.3%

22.0%

2,748,313

379,143

13.8%

21.5%

+1.7%

+50.5%

Source: Community Research Partners analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data Notes: Urban, suburban, and rural areas are defined by ZIP code boundaries and classified based on density of development. Classification was developed by Trulia, the real estate website using a variety of thresholds including the density of households, business establishments, and jobs, as well as the share of auto commuters and single family homes.

▪▪ ▪▪ ▪▪

Ohio’s poor are more likely to live in the suburbs (45.4%) than in the denser urban neighborhoods (33.1%) more commonly associated with poverty. The number of poor in Ohio’s urban areas has grown by 33.8% since 2000, while the total population in those areas has declined by 9.9%. While the poverty rate in Ohio’s urban areas (31.2%) is still more than twice the rate in the suburbs (12.2%), the poor population in the suburbs has grown by 74.9%, more than twice as fast as it has in the state’s urban areas (up 33.8%).

State of Poverty 2015

Appendix Geography of Poverty, continued Table 12. Change in poverty in the urban core and suburbs of Ohio’s largest metro areas, 2000–2013 Population for whom poverty can be determined, 2000

Population in poverty, 2000

Poverty rate, 2000

Population for whom poverty can be determined, 2013

Akron

159,072

31,303

19.7%

143,050

44,938

31.4%

−10.1%

+43.6%

Canton

57,216

12,316

21.5%

49,868

16,722

33.5%

−12.8%

+35.8%

Geography

Population in poverty, 2013

Poverty rate, 2013

% Change in % Change in population, poor population, 2000–2013 2000–2013

Urban core

Cincinnati

234,431

57,675

24.6%

210,522

74,230

35.3%

−10.2%

+28.7%

Cleveland

612,933

135,198

22.1%

515,499

157,684

30.6%

−15.9%

+16.6%

Columbus

341,681

71,529

20.9%

327,776

100,630

30.7%

−4.1%

+40.7%

Dayton

110,025

24,076

21.9%

119,107

44,250

37.2%

+8.3%

+83.8%

Lima

40,376

8,001

19.8%

37,613

11,828

31.4%

−6.8%

+47.8%

Springfield

37,452

6,893

18.4%

32,832

10,103

30.8%

−12.3%

+46.6%

Toledo

199,199

41,283

20.7%

180,448

57,094

31.6%

−9.4%

+38.3%

Youngstown

142,757

24,928

17.5%

123,530

33,663

27.3%

−13.5%

+35.0%

Suburbs Akron

482,061

32,523

6.7%

510,062

57,392

11.3%

+5.8%

+76.5%

Canton

270,594

19,041

7.0%

273,009

34,291

12.6%

+0.9%

+80.1%

Cincinnati

1,160,750

76,379

6.6%

1,256,126

139,753

11.1%

+8.2%

+83.0%

Cleveland

1,354,579

83,112

6.1%

1,373,170

141,060

10.3%

+1.4%

+69.7%

Columbus

984,610

67,491

6.9%

1,209,278

144,164

11.9%

+22.8%

+113.6%

Dayton

579,184

41,892

7.2%

595,426

76,260

12.8%

+2.8%

+82.0%

Lima

22,329

2,378

10.6%

23,475

3,698

15.8%

+5.1%

+55.5%

Springfield

60,318

5,659

9.4%

57,575

10,535

18.3%

−4.5%

+86.2%

Toledo

310,772

25,698

8.3%

328,820

45,129

13.7%

+5.8%

+75.6%

Youngstown

254,917

23,621

9.3%

240,000

33,468

13.9%

−5.9%

+41.7%

Source: Community Research Partners analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data Notes: Urban cores and suburbs are defined as the urban and suburban areas within metropolitan areas. Urban and suburban areas are defined by ZIP code boundaries and classified based on density of development. Classification was developed by Trulia, the real estate website using a variety of thresholds including the density of households, business establishments, and jobs, as well as the share of auto commuters and single family homes.

▪▪

Dayton’s urban core—the only one among the Ohio’s largest metro areas to experience any population growth since 2000 (up 8.3%)—has experienced the fastest growth in urban poverty (up 83.8%) and has the state’s highest urban poverty rate (37.2%), while Cleveland still has the greatest concentration of urban poor (157,684) Between 2000 and 2013, Columbus’s suburbs have experienced both the fastest population growth (up 22.8%) and the fastest growth in suburban poverty (up 113.6%) in Ohio, and have the greatest concentration of suburban poor (144,164), while Springfield has the state’s highest suburban poverty rate (18.3%)

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Appendix Ohioans in Poverty Table 13. Income to poverty ratio by age group in Ohio, 2013

Total

Under age 6

Under age 18

Ages 18 to 64

Age 65 and over

Total all ages

827,637

100.0%

2,600,819

100.0%

6,966,702

100.0%

1,681,232

100.0%

11,248,753

100.0%

Percentage below 50% FPL

110,068

13.3%

285,573

11.0%

511,860

7.3%

44,234

2.6%

841,667

7.5%

Percentage below 100% FPL

216,951

26.2%

591,328

22.7%

1,064,327

15.3%

141,287

8.4%

1,796,942

16.0%

Percentage below 200% FPL

408,713

49.4%

1,150,353

44.2%

2,201,060

31.6%

512,963

30.5%

3,864,376

34.4%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 1-year estimates

▪▪ ▪▪

About 1.8 million Ohioans live in poverty 841,667 Ohioans live in extreme poverty, with household incomes that are less than half of the federal poverty level

▪▪

3.9 million Ohioans live in households with incomes below 200% FPL, a common standard for identifying low-income households Nearly half of Ohio’s children under the age of 6 live in low-income households

▪▪

Table 14. Poverty by race/ethnicity, Ohio, 2013

Total In poverty

White (nonHispanic)

Black/ AfricanAmerican

Asian

Mixed race

Hispanic/ Latino (of any race)

9,065,011

100.0%

1,343,725

100.0%

206,666

100.0%

284,009

100.0%

370,247

100.0%

1,149,533

12.7%

451,107

33.6%

23,554

11.4%

79,241

27.9%

101,310

27.4%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 1-year estimates

▪▪ ▪▪ ▪▪

Blacks or African-Americans experience the highest poverty rate of the population groups (33.6%) Hispanics or Latinos and Ohioans of mixed race also have high rates of poverty at 27.4% and 27.9% respectively Although there are more non-Hispanic Whites living in poverty in Ohio than any other race or ethnicity, this group also has the lowest poverty rate (12.7%)

State of Poverty 2015

Appendix Ohioans in Poverty, continued Table 15. Poverty by race/ethnicity and age, Ohio, 2013 Total

White (non-Hispanic)

Black/AfricanAmerican

Asian

Mixed race

Hispanic/Latino (of any race)

1,796,942

1,149,533

451,107

23,554

79,241

101,310

Persons in poverty All age groups Under age 6

216,951

109,570

67,442

1,451

22,754

19,573

Under age 18

591,328

319,547

178,983

3,301

49,471

47,406

Ages 18 to 64

1,064,327

720,794

246,647

18,428

27,899

51,210

141,287

109,192

25,477

1,825

1,871

2,694

Age 65 and older Poverty rates All age groups

16.0%

12.7%

33.6%

11.4%

27.9%

27.4%

Under age 6

26.2%

18.6%

55.1%

8.7%

39.4%

38.5%

Under age 18

22.7%

16.7%

48.0%

6.9%

32.7%

34.2%

Ages 18 to 64

15.3%

12.7%

29.8%

13.0%

22.7%

23.9%

8.4%

7.3%

17.8%

10.5%

19.1%

15.8%

Age 65 and older

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 1-year estimates

▪▪ ▪▪ ▪▪ ▪▪

Children in Ohio—especially younger children—are more likely to live below the poverty level than other age groups Nearly half of the Black/African-American population in Ohio under 18 live in poverty Hispanics or Latinos and Ohioans of mixed race also have high child poverty rates at 34.2% and 32.7% respectively Asian children are the least likely to live in poverty—6.9% of Asians in Ohio under age 18 are poor

Table 16. Poverty by family type, Ohio, 2013

Total In poverty

Married couples with no related children in their care

Married couples with related children in their care

Single men with related children in their care

Single women with related children in their care

1,280,656

100.0%

837,553

100.0%

121,189

100.0%

396,342

100.0%

39,854

3.1%

60,954

7.3%

30,336

25.0%

177,117

44.7%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 1-year estimates

▪▪ ▪▪

Single women with related children in their care make up more than half of the total number of Ohio families living below the poverty level Also, single women with related children experience the highest poverty rate among all family types in Ohio (44.7%)

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Appendix Ohioans in Poverty, continued Table 17. Poverty by race/ethnicity of householder and family type, Ohio, 2013 Total

White (non-Hispanic)

Black/AfricanAmerican

Asian

Mixed race

Hispanic/Latino (of any race)

339,646

218,950

90,736

3,238

8,671

18,700

Families in poverty All families Married couples with no related children in their care

39,854

33,919

4,204

783

250

574

Married couples with related children in their care

60,954

46,663

7,779

1,301

903

4,256

Single men with related children in their care Single women with related children in their care Poverty rates All families

30,336

19,456

7,437

162

1,055

2,383

177,117

97,860

62,486

614

6,008

10,774

11.6%

8.9%

28.6%

6.8%

23.0%

25.6%

Married couples with no related children in their care

3.1%

2.9%

6.2%

4.4%

2.8%

3.8%

Married couples with related children in their care

7.3%

6.4%

15.1%

5.5%

8.9%

17.7%

Single men with related children in their care

25.0%

21.2%

39.3%

14.6%

39.5%

33.6%

Single women with related children in their care

44.7%

40.9%

50.9%

23.9%

48.9%

53.0%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 1-year estimates

▪▪ ▪▪ ▪▪

339,646 Ohio families live below the federal poverty level Regardless of race or ethnicity, single women in Ohio with related children in their care experience poverty at a higher rate than other family types More than half of single Hispanic/Latina and Black/African-American women with related children are living in poverty—53.0% and 50.9% respectively

Table 18. Poverty by work experience, Ohio, 2013

Total persons age 16 and older In poverty

Worked full-time, year round

Worked part-time or part-year

3,676,652

100.0%

2,225,374

95,619

2.6%

443,130

Unemployed

Not in workforce

100.0%

464,529

100.0%

3,175,152

100.0%

19.9%

173,258

37.3%

697,763

22.0%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 1-year estimates

▪▪ ▪▪

Ohioans who only work part-time or part of the year are nearly eight times more likely to be in poverty than those who work full-time, year-round Nearly two out of five unemployed workers in Ohio live below the poverty level

State of Poverty 2015

Appendix Ohioans in Poverty, continued Table 19. Poverty by number of wage-earners, work expeirence, and family type, Ohio, 2013

2 wage-earners

Total families

Families in poverty

Poverty rate

1,165,278

18,644

1.6%

Both full-time, year-round

591,758

1,285

0.2%

1 full-time, year-round; 1 part-time or part-year

474,297

7,170

1.5%

Both part-time or part-year 1 wage-earner Spouse did not work

99,223

10,189

10.3%

1,172,291

181,277

15.5%

595,768

45,399

7.6%

Full-time, year-round

406,127

16,438

4.0%

Part-time or part-year

189,641

28,961

15.3%

576,523

135,878

23.6%

No spouse present Full-time, year-round

366,459

35,340

9.6%

Part-time or part-year

210,064

100,538

47.9%

No wage-earners

585,835

139,725

23.9%

Married couple

357,163

36,765

10.3%

Single caregiver

228,672

102,960

45.0%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 1-year estimates

▪▪ ▪▪ ▪▪

Ohio families with one wage-earner are nearly 10 times more likely (15.5%) to live in poverty than those with two wage-earners (1.6%) Nearly half of single caregivers in Ohio who work only part-time or part of the year live below the federal poverty level Less than 1% of families with two wage-earners—at least one of whom is employed full-time, year-round—are living in poverty

Table 20. Poverty by educational attainment, Ohio, 2013

Total persons age 25 and older In poverty

No high school diploma or GED

High school diploma or GED

Some college or associate degree

Bachelor’s degree or higher

814,822

100.0%

2,609,238

100.0%

2,207,197

100.0%

2,027,097

100.0%

240,875

29.6%

353,153

13.5%

258,586

11.7%

86,017

4.2%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 1-year estimates

▪▪ ▪▪

Ohioans age 25 and older without a high school diploma or GED are more than twice as likely (29.6%) to live in poverty as those who graduated from high school (13.5%) 4.2% of Ohio college graduates live below the federal poverty level

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Appendix Food Insecurity and Youth Table 21. Child poverty by age group, Ohio, 2013

Total In poverty

Under age 6

Ages 6 to 11

Ages 12 to 17

All children under 18

827,637

100.0%

861,380

100.0%

911,802

100.0%

2,600,819

100.0%

216,951

26.2%

197,981

23.0%

176,396

19.3%

591,328

22.7%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 1-year estimates

▪▪ ▪▪

Younger children are experience higher poverty rates than older children Children under age 6 in Ohio experience poverty at the highest rate (26.2%) among child age groups

Table 22. Child poverty by householder relationship and age group, Ohio, 2013 Children in poverty

Total

Married relatives

Single male relative

Single female relative

Nonrelative or self

All age groups

591,328

153,112

57,215

369,360

11,641

Under age 6

216,951

54,477

20,201

142,273

N/A

Ages 6 to 17

374,377

98,635

37,014

227,087

11,641

All age groups

22.7%

9.2%

28.9%

51.0%

89.2%

Under age 6

26.2%

10.4%

31.0%

59.5%

N/A

Ages 6 to 17

21.1%

8.6%

27.9%

46.8%

89.2%

Poverty rates

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 1-year estimates Note: Nonrelatives include foster parents, unmarried partners, and other nonrelated householders of children ages 15 to 17. Foster children and other nonrelated children under age 15 are not included in the population for whom poverty status is determined.

▪▪ ▪▪

Half of Ohio’s children in the care of a single female relative are living in poverty; and nearly 60% of those under age 6 9 out of 10 teenagers in Ohio (ages 15 to 17) who live on their own or with a nonrelative (such as a foster parent or unmarried partner) live in poverty

State of Poverty 2015

Appendix Food Insecurity and Youth, continued Table 23. Selected outcomes of youth transitioning out of foster care by age, Ohio, 2011–2015 Outcome Area

Age 17

Age 19

Age 21

Financial Self-Sufficiency Employed full-time

30%

Employed part-time

14%

23%

16%

Receiving employment-related skills training

20%

26%

23%

Receiving student financial aid

14%

16%

Receiving Social Security

13%

17%

Has Medicaid

85%

73%

66%

Receiving cash public assistance

10%

Receiving public food assistance

29%

31%

Receiving public housing assistance

14%

Have not received high school diploma or GED

N/A

57%

27%

Homeless at some point in lifetime (age 17) or in the past two years (ages 19 and 21)

13%

24%

10%

Incarcerated at some point in lifetime (age 17) or in the past two years (ages 19 and 21)

52%

36%

37%

Other Selected Outcomes

Source: Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, National Youth in Transition Database Ohio Data Notes: Outcomes are based a longitudinal cohort of youths surveyed three times over a five year period.

▪▪ ▪▪ ▪▪

Three out of 10 foster youth in Ohio are employed full-time by the age of 21 By age 21, two-thirds of Ohio’s youth who have transitioned out of foster care are enrolled in Medicaid, while 3 out of 10 rely on food stamps By age 17, half of Ohio’s foster youth have been incarcerated

Table 24. Intergenerational income mobility, Ohio and the United States, 1980–2012 Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth rose to the top fifth

Probability a child raised in the bottom fifth stayed in the bottom fifth

Ohio

5.4%

38.1%

United States

7.5%

33.7%

Sources: Equality of Opportunity Project; Community Research Partners analysis of data from the Equality of Opportunity Project Notes: Probabilities are based on the current family income of a cohort of adults born between 1980 and 1982 whose family income 30 years ago was in the bottom quintile of the national income distribution at that time. State-level probability was derived by weighting county-level probabilities based on annual birth data from the U.S. Census Bureau.

▪▪ ▪▪

One out of every 20 children born in the bottom fifth of the income distribution in Ohio climbs to the top as an adult, while eight remain at the bottom Children raised in the bottom fifth in Ohio are more likely to stay at the bottom (38.1%)—and less likely to rise to the top (5.4%)—than the national average for both probabilities (33.7% and 7.5%, respectively)

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Appendix Food Insecurity and Youth, continued Table 25. Child food insecurity in Ohio and the United States, 2011–13

Ohio United States

Population under age 18, 2011–13

Number of children experiencing food insecurity

Child food insecurity rate

Food insecure children likely ineligible for any federal food assistance

% Children who are both food insecure and ineligible for any federal food assistance

2,648,786

653,410

24.2%

202,557

7.5%

73,700,935

15,772,000

21.4%

3,154,400

4.3%

Source: Feeding America, Map the Meal Gap Notes: Food insecurity is defined by the U.S. Department of Agriculture as having limited or uncertain access to adequate food. Federal food assistance programs include: the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), or food stamps; the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC); the National School Lunch Program (NSLP); and various other federal child nutrition programs. The income eligibility criteria for federal food assistance varies by state and program. For instance, in Ohio the SNAP threshold is 130% FPL, while the threshold for other nutrion programs (such as WIC and NSLP) is 185% FPL. Nationally, the highest threshold for any federal food assistance varies by state and is either 185% or 200% FPL.

▪▪ ▪▪ ▪▪ ▪▪

1 in 4 children in Ohio do not regularly have enough food to eat Two-thirds of Ohio’s food insecure children depend on food stamps, WIC benefits, school-provided meals, or various other federal programs for nutrition 1 in 12 Ohio children are both food insecure and ineligible for any federal food assistance, based on their family’s income A child in Ohio is more likely (7.5%) to experience food insecurity than the average American child (4.3%)

Table 26. Free or reduced-price lunch eligibility, Ohio and the United States, 2013/14 school year Public school students K–12 eligible for free lunch

Public school students K–12 eligible for reduced-price lunch

Public school students K–12 eligible for free or reduced-price lunch

675,108

39.2%

88,340

5.1%

763,448

44.3%

21,747,144

45.0%

3,224,840

6.7%

24,971,984

51.7%

Ohio United States

Source: National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Common Core of Data Notes: National data do not include Arizona or West Virginia due to NCES data quality standards. As such, the total number of public school students in Arizona and West Virginia are not included in the denominator for the calculation of percentages.

▪▪ ▪▪

Four out of nine public school students in Ohio are eligible for free or reduced-price lunch Ohio’s public school students are less likely (44.3%) to be eligible for school lunch assistance than the national average (51.7%)

State of Poverty 2015

Appendix Food Insecurity and Youth, continued Table 27. Average monthly infant and child WIC participation, Ohio and the United States, FY 2013

Ohio United States

Infants (under age 1) participating in WIC

% Population under age 1

Children (ages 1–4) participating in WIC

% Population ages 1–4

All infants and children participating in WIC

% Population under age 5

69,004

50.2%

143,431

25.8%

212,435

30.7%

2,067,788

52.4%

4,746,305

29.8%

6,814,093

34.3%

Source: Food Research & Action Center, National and State Program Data

▪▪ ▪▪ ▪▪

Half of Ohio’s infants (under age 1) participate in the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) One in four toddlers and preschool-age children in Ohio (ages 1 to 4) participates in the WIC program Infants and children under age 5 in Ohio have lower WIC participation rates than the national averages

Table 28. Average monthly participation in the SNAP Program, Ohio and the United States, FY 2013

Ohio United States

Individuals eligible for food stamps

Individuals receiving food stamps

% Eligible individuals receiving food stamps

% Total popualtion receiving food stamps

2,073,494

1,824,675

88.0%

15.8%

57,392,880

47,636,090

83.0%

15.1%

Source: Food Research & Action Center, National and State Program Data

▪▪ ▪▪

One in seven Ohio residents receive food stamps as part of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Eligible Ohioans are slightly more likely (88.0%) to participate in the SNAP program than eligible Americans in general (83.0%)

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Appendix Baby Boomers and Older Adults Table 29. Senior poverty by disability status and age group, Ohio, 2013 Seniors in poverty

Total

All age groups

With a disability

No disability

141,287

69,106

72,181

Ages 65 to 74

71,069

29,435

41,634

Age 75 and older

70,218

39,671

30,547

Poverty rates All age groups

8.4%

11.7%

6.6%

Ages 65 to 74

7.5%

12.3%

5.8%

Age 75 and older

9.6%

11.2%

8.1%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 1-year estimates

▪▪ ▪▪

Ohio’s seniors age 75 and older are more likely (9.6%) to live in poverty than younger seniors (7.5%) Disabled seniors in Ohio are also more likely (11.7%) to live below the poverty line than seniors without a disability (6.6%)

Table 30. Senior poverty by veteran status, Ohio, 2013

Total persons age 65 and older In poverty

Total

Veterans

Nonveterans

1,681,232

100.0%

371,098

100.0%

1,310,134

100.0%

141,287

8.4%

19,012

5.1%

122,275

9.3%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 1-year estimates

The poverty rate among Ohio’s veterans age 65 and older (5.1%) is much lower than the rate among seniors who are not veterans (9.3%).

State of Poverty 2015

Appendix Baby Boomers and Older Adults, continued Table 31. Seniors living alone in poverty by age group, Ohio, 2013

Total seniors living alone

Ages 65 to 74

Age 75 and older

Total, age 65 and older

276,000

100.0%

327,000

100.0%

603,000

100.0%

24,000

8.7%

44,000

13.5%

68,000

11.3%

In poverty Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey

▪▪ ▪▪ ▪▪

About 600,000 of Ohio’s seniors live alone—a little more than one third of the state’s population over 65. Ohio’s seniors who live alone are more likely (11.3%) to live in poverty than than the state’s senior population in general (8.4%, see Table 29 on the previous page). Seniors in Ohio who are age 75 and older and live alone are more likely (13.5%) to live below the poverty line than younger seniors living alone (8.7%).

Table 32. Grandparent caregivers in poverty by age group, Ohio, 2013

Total grandparent caregivers In poverty

Under age 60

Age 60 and older

Total, all ages

66,889

100.0%

32,088

100.0%

98,977

100.0%

16,369

24.5%

4,698

14.6%

21,067

21.3%

Source: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 1-year estimates Notes: Grandparent caregivers are defined as householders with their own grandchildren in their care

▪▪ ▪▪ ▪▪

Nearly 100,000 grandparents in Ohio are responsible for taking care of their own grandchildren. One in five grandparent caregiver families in Ohio live below the poverty line. Ohio’s grandparent caregivers under age 60 are more likely (24.5%) to live in poverty than older grandparent caregivers (14.6%).

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Appendix Baby Boomers and Older Adults, continued Table 33. Employment for all workers and workers age 55 and older by industry supersector, Ohio, 2013 Industry supersector All sectors Natural Resources

Employment, all ages

Share of total employment

Workers age 55 and older

Share of all workers age 55 and older

Workers age 55 and older as share of industry supersector

4,736,505

100.0%

1,059,440

100.0%

22.4%

27,695

0.6%

6,682

0.6%

24.1%

Construction

170,717

3.6%

32,706

3.1%

19.2%

Manufacturing

662,224

14.0%

169,011

16.0%

25.5%

Wholesale Trade

222,979

4.7%

54,977

5.2%

24.7%

Retail Trade

519,576

11.0%

111,175

10.5%

21.4%

Transportation and Utilities

202,429

4.3%

49,406

4.7%

24.4%

Information Financial Activities Professional and Business Services

85,395

1.8%

19,159

1.8%

22.4%

258,297

5.5%

56,346

5.3%

21.8%

662,172

14.0%

134,787

12.7%

20.4%

1,169,621

24.7%

301,943

28.5%

25.8%

Leisure and Hospitality

453,081

9.6%

46,923

4.4%

10.4%

Government

165,145

3.5%

42,453

4.0%

25.7%

Other Services

137,174

2.9%

33,872

3.2%

24.7%

Education and Health Services

Source: Longitudinal Employer-Household Dynamics (LEHD) Origin-Destination Employment Statistics Notes: Dataset only includes civilian employment covered by unemployment insurance, which excludes military, certain farm and domestic workers, the self-employed, unpaid workers in familyowned businesses, employees of certain nonprofit organizations, and raildroad workers. The following are descriptions for the industry supersectors in Tables 32 and 33: •

Natural Resources: establishments primarily engaged in growing crops; raising animals; harvesting timber; harvesting fish and other animals from a farm, ranch, or their natural habitats; and extracting naturally occurring mineral solids, liquid minerals, and gases

•

Construction: establishments primarily engaged in the construction of buildings or engineering projects

•

Manufacturing: establishments engaged in the mechanical, physical, or chemical transformation of materials, substances, or components into new products

•

Wholesale Trade: establishments engaged in the distribution of merchandise to retailers, generally without transformation, and rendering services incidental to the sale of merchandise

•

Retail Trade: establishments engaged in the sale of merchandise to final consumers, generally without transformation, and rendering services incidental to the sale of merchandise

•

Transportation and Utilities: establishments providing transportation of passengers and cargo; providing warehousing and storage for goods; providing scenic and sightseeing transportation; providing support activities related to modes of transportation; and engaged in the provision of utility services

•

Information: establishments engaged in producing and distributing information and cultural products, providing the means to transmit or distribute these products as well as data or communications, and processing data

•

Financial Activities: establishments primarily engaged in facilitating financial transactions; and renting, leasing, or otherwise allowing the use of tangible or intangible assets

•

Professional and Business Services: establishments specializing in performing professional, scientific, and technical activities for others; holding the securities of—or other equity interests in—other firms; administering, overseeing, and managing establishments of other firms; and performing routine support activities for the day-to-day operations of other firms

•

Education and Health Services: establishments providing instruction and training in a wide variety of subjects; and providing health care and social assistance for individuals

•

Leisure and Hospitality: establishments operating facilities or providing services to meet varied cultural, entertainment, and recreational interests of their patrons; providing customers with lodging; and providing customers with prepared meals, snacks, and beverages for immediate consumption

•

Government: establishments of federal, state, and local government agencies that administer, oversee, and manage public programs and have executive, legislative, or judicial authority over other institutions within a given area

•

Other Services: establishments providing repair services, drycleaning and laundry services, personal care services, death care services, pet care services, photofinishing services, temporary parking services, and dating services; and promoting or administering religious activities, grantmaking, and advocacy

▪▪ ▪▪ ▪▪

Workers age 55 and older make up 22.4% of Ohio’s workforce. These older workers account for more than a quarter of jobs in education and health services, government, and manufacturing. Ohio firms engaged in leisure and hospitality, construction, and professional and business services are the least likely to have workers age 55 and older

State of Poverty 2015

Appendix Baby Boomers and Older Adults, continued Table 34. Employment change by industry supersector, Ohio, 1984–2014 Industry Supersector

Employment, 1984

Share of total, 1984

Employment, 2014

Share of total, 2014

% Change, 1984–2014

4,342,600

100.0%

5,372,900

100.0%

+23.7%

Natural Resources

110,300

2.5%

56,900

1.1%

–48.4%

Construction

144,800

3.3%

194,100

3.6%

+34.0%

All sectors

Manufacturing

1,061,900

24.5%

673,000

12.5%

–36.6%

Wholesale Trade

238,000

5.5%

232,400

4.3%

–2.4%

Retail Trade

488,800

11.3%

564,400

10.5%

+15.5%

Transportation and Utilities

151,800

3.5%

196,400

3.7%

+29.4%

Information

117,200

2.7%

72,600

1.4%

–38.1%

Financial Activities

211,500

4.9%

288,300

5.4%

+36.3%

Professional and Business Services

261,600

6.0%

708,400

13.2%

+170.8%

Education and Health Services

449,700

10.4%

889,800

16.6%

+97.9%

Leisure and Hospitality

288,900

6.7%

528,800

9.8%

+83.0%

Government

655,200

15.1%

758,700

14.1%

+15.8%

Other Services

162,900

3.8%

209,100

3.9%

+28.4%

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Current Employment Survey; U.S. Census Bureau, Decennial Census Notes: 1984 employment data, originally classified by discontinued Standard Industrial Classification (SIC) categories, has been converted into North American Industry Classification System (NAICS) categories for comparison. In a few instances when 1984 industry employment data were unavailable, estimates from the 1980 Decennial Census or the 1988 Current Employment Survey were used. See the notes for Table 32 on the previous page for descriptions of industry supersectors.

▪▪ ▪▪ ▪▪ ▪▪ ▪▪ ▪▪

30 years ago, manufacturing was Ohio’s #1 industry supersector with over 1 million jobs making up nearly a quarter of total employment in 1984. Other major industry supersectors in 1984 were government and retail trade. Today, the #1 industry supersector in Ohio is education and health services with almost 900,000 jobs—nearly double the number 30 years ago—making up one-sixth of the workforce in 2014. Government and professional & business services are currently the second and third largest industry supersectors, respectively, in Ohio Since 1984, professional and business services have added the most jobs (446,800) and grown faster than other industry supersector in the state (up 170.8%) Over the past 30 years, manufacturing has lost the most jobs (388,900), while natural resources jobs have experienced the sharpest decline (down 48.4%) among industry supersectors in the state

Ohio Association of Community Action Agencies

Appendix Unemployment and Homelessness Table 35. Unemployment rates for Ohio and the United States, 2009–2013

Ohio United States

2009

2010

2011

2012

2013

2014

10.1%

10.0%

8.6%

7.4%

7.5%

5.7%

9.3%

9.6%

8.9%

8.1%

7.4%

6.2%

Source: U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics, Local Area Unemployment Statistics

▪▪ ▪▪

The unemployment rates for Ohio and the United States are both down from their respective peaks during the Great Recession Ohio’s unemployment rate is currently lower than the national rate

Table 36. Homelessness in Ohio, 2013 Continuum of Care county

Chronic homeless

Ohio, total

Homeless veterans

Total homeless

Homeless per 10,000 pop.

Share of all Ohio homeless 100.0%

1,658

13.5%

1,373

11.1%

12,325

10.7

Cuyahoga

303

14.2%

313

14.7%

2,129

16.9

17.3%

Franklin

309

20.8%

309

20.8%

1,488

12.3

12.1%

Hamilton

274

20.7%

175

13.2%

1,326

16.5

10.8%

Lucas

149

16.6%

6.0%

900

20.6

7.3%

Mahoning

18.5%

6.6%

227

9.7

1.8%

Montgomery

6.1%

131

12.6%

1,041

19.4

8.4%

Stark Summit Remainder of Ohio

13.6%

10.0%

522

13.9

4.2%

116

13.5%

11.3%

862

15.9

7.0%

330

8.6%

227

5.9%

3,830

6.2

31.1%

Source: Coalition on Homelessness and Housing in Ohio, 2013 Homelessness Report

▪▪ ▪▪

Among Ohio’s eight Continuum of Care counties, Lucas has the highest number of homeless for every 10,000 people (20.6) and Mahoning has the lowest (9.7) Among the same counties, Franklin has the highest percentage of homeless who are veterans (20.8%) as well as the highest percentage who are chronically homeless (also, 20.8%)

State of Poverty 2015