Upload
conrad-rose
View
216
Download
0
Tags:
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
Community Profile 2007Community Profile 2007Wagoner County and Broken ArrowWagoner County and Broken Arrow
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater TulsaJanuary, 2007
How Well do You Know Your How Well do You Know Your Community?Community?
1. How did Wagoner County’s population change between 2000 & 2005?a. down 8% b. no change c. up 12%
2. What percentage of Broken Arrow’s 65+ population live alone?a. 10% b. 22% c. 36%
3. What percentage of Wagoner County’s elementary school children participate in the school free & reduced lunch program?
a. 28% b. 41% c. 55%
4. What percentage of Oklahoma’s working age population have no health insurance?
a. 13% b. 25% c. 48%
5. What percentage of Broken Arrow’s population with disabilities are employed?
a. 68% b.46% c. 29%
Community Profile 2007Community Profile 2007
Demographic TrendsHuman DevelopmentPanel TopicsBest Practices
Demographic Trends in Wagoner County Demographic Trends in Wagoner County & Broken Arrow (part 1)& Broken Arrow (part 1)
Wagoner County, Broken Arrow and Coweta have all experienced high rates of population growth since 2000.
Growing cultural diversity, particularly among the population <25
Living arrangements are changing significantly with more children living with a single parent, especially the mother, and living with other relatives, especially grandparents
Wagoner County’s population 65+ projected to make up 22% of population by 2030 (up from 10% in 2000)
Population <18 projected to account for 23% of population by 2030 (down from 28% in 2000)
As working age population’s share declines, the 2030 projected dependency ratio climbs to 81 per 100, up from 61 per 100 in 2000
Demographic Trends in Wagoner County Demographic Trends in Wagoner County & Broken Arrow (part 2)& Broken Arrow (part 2)
Larger number of people over 65 years of age are living alone, especially women
Median family income varies by race
Large population of mobile renters
Demographic Trends in Wagoner County Demographic Trends in Wagoner County & Broken Arrow (part 3)& Broken Arrow (part 3)
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Population Trends: Wagoner County, TAUW Service Area and Tulsa Metropolitan Statistical Area
1970, 1980, 1990, 2000 and 2005 (est.)
Source: US Census Bureau, 1970, 1980, 1990 & 2000 Censuses; Population Estimates Program, 2005.
1970 1980 1990 2000 2005(est.)
0100,000200,000300,000400,000500,000600,000700,000800,000900,000
1,000,000
Wagoner Co.
TAUW
Tulsa MSA
Wagoner Co. 22,163 41,801 47,883 57,491 64,200
TAUW 561,210 696,342 745,444 842,920 870,900
Tulsa MSA 572,548 711,652 761,019 859,532 887,800
Wagoner County’s population grew 12% between 2000 and 2005, while those of TAUW service area and Tulsa MSA increased only 3%.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Population of Selected Cities in Wagoner County1970, 1980, 1990, 2000 and 2005 (est.)
Source: US Census Bureau, 1970, 1980, 1990 & 2000 Censuses; Population Estimates Program, 2005.
Broken Arrow
Wagoner
Coweta
0 20,000 40,000 60,000 80,000 100,000
1970
1980
1990
2000
2005 (est.)
Broken Arrow Wagoner Coweta
1970 11,787 4,959 2,457
1980 35,761 6,191 4,554
1990 58,043 6,894 6,159
2000 79,871 7,698 7,531
2005 (est.) 86,230 7,880 8,350
Coweta’s population increased 11% between 2000 and 2005, while Broken Arrow grew 7% and Wagoner grew 2%.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Population by Race and Hispanic OriginWagoner County and Broken Arrow, 2000
Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 Census.
46,03280.1%
2960.5%
5,3939.4%
2,1583.8%
3,1105.4%
5020.9%
63,88685.3%
1,4251.9%
3,0074.0%
2,7933.7%
2,7973.7%
9511.3%
White Asian* American Indian*
Black Two or more races Some other race
Notes: Persons of Hispanic origin may be of any race, and therefore are not included separately in pie chart. Native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders are Included in "Asian" race category Alaska Natives are included in "American Indian" race category.
Hispanic Origin*(N=1,437) 2.5%
Hispanic Origin*(N=2,664) 3.6%
Wagoner County Broken Arrow
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Population by Race and Hispanic OriginWagoner County, 2005 Estimates
Source: US Census Bureau, US Census Bureau, Population Estimates Division, 2005 Population Estimates by Age.
51,89480.9%
4690.7%
5,9329.2%
2,6934.2%
3,1925.0%
30.0%
White Asian* American Indian*
Black Two or more races Some other race
Notes: Persons of Hispanic origin may be of any race, and therefore are not included separately in pie chart. Native Hawaiians and other Pacific Islanders are Included in "Asian" race category Alaska Natives are included in "American Indian" race category.
Hispanic Origin*N=2,240 (3.5%)
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Births by Race of MotherWagoner County, 2005
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Health, Vital Statistics.
White613 (79.8%)
Black32 (4.2%)
Amer. Indian115 (15.0%)
Asian/Pacific Islander8 (1.0%)
Total births=768Hispanic origin: 23 (3.0%)
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Age DistributionWagoner County, 2000 & 2005 Estimate
Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 Census; US Census Bureau, Population Estimates Division, 2005 Population Estimates by Age.
4,056(7.1%)
12,104(21.1%)
4,531(7.9%)
30,962(53.9%)
5,381(9.4%)
457(0.8%)
3,735(5.8%)
11,818(18.4%)
6,653(10.4%)
35,503(55.3%)
5,946(9.3%)
527(0.8%)
0-4 5-17 18-24 25-64 65-84 85+
2000 2005 Estimate
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Age DistributionBroken Arrow and Wagoner, 2000
Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 Census.
5,954(8.0%)
17,134(22.9%)5,749
(7.7%)
40,397(54.0%)
5,020(6.7%)
605(0.8%)
627(8.2%)
1,531(20.0%)
756(9.9%)
3,625(47.3%)
972(12.7%)
158(2.1%)
0-4 5-17 18-24 25-64 65-84 85+
Broken Arrow Wagoner
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Living Arrangements of Children Under 18Wagoner County and Broken Arrow, 2000
Source: U. S. Bureau of the Census.
72.2%
4.8%
13.6%7.6%
79.1%
3.6%
12.4%
3.8%
Married Couple Male-headed Female-headed Other relatives0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%Wagoner County Broken Arrow
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Children in Non-Traditional SettingsWagoner County and Broken Arrow, 2000
Source: U. S. Bureau of the Census; Department of Human Services.
Living withgrandparents
Living withother relatives
Foster care(Sept. 2005)
Juvenileinstitutions
0
500
1,000
1,500
Number of children
Children inWagoner Co.
Children in BA
Children inWagoner Co.
1,056 180 122 3
Percentage ofchildren <18
6.5% 1.1% 0.8% 0%
Children in BA 683 199 NA 0
Percentage ofchildren <18
3% 0.9% NA 0%
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Living Arrangements of Persons Age 65 & OlderWagoner County and Broken Arrow, 2000
Source: U. S. Census Bureau, Census 2000.
24.2%
71.7%
2.3%
1.9%
21.7%
68.2% 8.6%1.5%
Live alone Family households Group quarters Other
73% of the 65+ population in Wagoner County living alone are female; 81% of
those in Broken Arrow are female.
Wagoner County Broken Arrow
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Median Family Income, by RaceWagoner County and Broken Arrow, 1999
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000.
Total White Black AmericanIndian
Asian Hispanic$0
$20,000
$40,000
$60,000
$80,000
$100,000Annual Income
Wagoner Co. Broken Arrow
Wagoner Co. $47,062 $48,934 $27,778 $40,734 $46,250 $40,550
Broken Arrow $58,891 $59,180 $60,481 $53,900 $77,704 $52,552
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Occupied Housing Units by TenureWagoner County, 2000 & Broken Arrow, 2000 & 2005 (est.)
Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 Census; US Census Bureau, American Community Survey, 2005.
81.0%
19.0%
78.9%
21.1%
80.4%
19.6%
Owner-occupied Renter-occupied
Wagoner County Broken Arrow2000 2005 (est.)
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Housing Units by Householder's Length of Residence and by TenureWagoner County and Broken Arrow, 2000
Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 Census.
12.6%
27.9%59.5%
41.4%
37.8%
20.8%
13.5%
31.4% 55.1%48.8%
37.0%
14.2%
15 months or less 16 months to 4 years 5 years or more
Wagoner Co. owner-occupied
Broken Arrow owner-occupied
Wagoner Co. renter-occupied
Broken Arrow renter-occupied
In Wagoner County, median household income for owner-occupied housing units =
$46,107; for renter-occupied = 23,209
In Broken Arrow, median household income for owner-occupied housing units =
$60,188; for renter-occupied = 32,056
Tulsa Area Human Development IndustryTulsa Area Human Development IndustryWhat is it?What is it?
Independent and collective action of efforts to address the education, health, housing, family support, emergency financial, and transportation needs of families and individuals in the Tulsa area.
Increasingly these efforts seek to prevent needs through promoting increased self-sufficiency among people in the Tulsa area while still intervening to respond to crises and other concerns.
The Roots of the ChallengeThe Roots of the ChallengeThirty Year of Economic and Social ChangesThirty Year of Economic and Social Changes
Emergence of new persistent poor in late 1960's and early 1970's
Massive loss of low skill/high pay jobs Sharp rise in working poor Decline in young male workers' wages Increase in female headed families Impact of substance abuse
All trends disproportionately affected:~African-Americans~young children & young families
Human Development: Human Development: Key PointsKey Points
Middle class is disappearingMany households lack adequate
incomeStress of inadequate income and
related conditions is widespreadStarting life in Wagoner County for
many is risky business
Human Development: Human Development: Key Points…Key Points…continuedcontinued
Populations of aging and persons with disabilities are large and growing
Health challenges are critical to individual and community well-being
Poor human conditions impact crime and growing incarcerations
Overall progress in human development is tied to educational success
The Middle Class is DisappearingThe Middle Class is Disappearing
~Lower income groups greatly expand, middle shrinks,
highest income group increases dramatically
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Source: Hodgkinson, Harold, "The Client," Education Demographer, 1988.
1900 - 1940 1940 - 1990 1990 - ?0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Poor - 75%
Poor - 20%Poor - 10%
Rich - 20%
Middle - 60%
Rich - 5% Rich - 10%
Middle - 20%
Middle - 80%
The trend: housing patterns and income mirror the job structure, with more rich, more poor, and fewer in the middle -- the "hourglass effect"
The Overall Dominant Trend...The Shrinking Middle Class
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2005.
Distribution of Wealth: Household IncomeU.S., Oklahoma, Tulsa MSA and Broken Arrow, 2005 Estimates
43.5%53.1% 49.4%
31.5%
40.1%
37.5%38.6%
53.2%
16.3%9.4% 12% 15.3%
U.S. Oklahoma Tulsa MSA Broken Arrow0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
<$40,000/year
$40,000-$99,999/year
$100,000+/year
1% of U.S. households have
39.3% of the assets, making the U.S. the #1 country in the
world in inequality of income.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Income disparity between rich and poor grows wider beyond 1993
Mean Family Income by Quintile and Top 5% (2003 dollars)United States, 1966-2003
Source: Economic Policy Institute website.
1966
1968
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
$0
$50,000
$100,000
$150,000
$200,000
$250,000
$300,000
Real hourly wage (2003 dollars)
Lowest Second Middle Fourth Highest Top 5%
Many Households Lack Many Households Lack Adequate IncomeAdequate Income
~More and more households lack adequate income to meet
living needs
The Self-Sufficiency StandardThe Self-Sufficiency Standard
Customized by specific family composition Customized by geographic location Based on all expense categories Updated annually using consumer price index
…The level of income required for a family to meet its own needs
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Self-Sufficiency
Wage(annual)
Poverty Guidelines
(annual)
Dollar Difference
Self-SufficiencyPercent of
Poverty
One person
$18,291 $9,800 $8,491 187%
Two persons
$30,672 $13,200 $17,472 232%
Three persons
$35,050 $16,600 $18,450 211%
Four persons
$43,706 $20,000 $23,706 219%
Comparison of Self-Sufficiency Wage to Poverty Guidelines, by Size of Family
Wagoner County, 2006
Source: Wider Opportunities for Women, with Community Action Project of Tulsa County, "The Self-Sufficiency Standard for Oklahoma;" 2006 HHS Poverty Guidelines, Federal Register, Vol. 71, No. 15, January 24, 2006, pp. 3848-3849; Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index, November 2006.
($4.71 per hour)
($6.35 per hour)
($7.98 per hour)
($9.62 per hour)
($8.79 per hour)
($14.75 per hour)
($16.85 per hour)
($21.01 per hour)
Notes: For the self-sufficiency wages shown in table, family of two consists of one adult and one preschooler; family of three consists of one adult, one preschooler and one schoolage child; family of four consists of two adults, one preschooler and one schoolage child. Per hour wages given assume pay for 40 hours per week for 52 weeks.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Family of Three, Wagoner County, 2006
Source: Wider Opportunities for Women, with Community Action Project of Tulsa County, "The Self-Sufficiency Standard for Oklahoma;" 2006 HHS Poverty Guidelines, Federal Register, Vol. 71, No. 15, January 24, 2006, pp. 3848-3849; Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index, November 2006. Oklahoma State Dept. of Human Services; U.S. Census Bureau, 2000 Census.
$8,400$10,712
$16,600
$30,710
$45,623
WelfareWage
MinimumWage
PovertyWage
185% PovertyWage
Median Family Income (2000 census)
$0
$10,000
$20,000
$30,000
$40,000
$50,000Annual Wage
Self-Sufficiency Wage = $35,050 ($16.85/hr.)
Note: For the self-sufficiency wage, family of three consists of one adult, one preschooler and one schoolage child. The hourly wages given assume employment at 40 hours per week and 52 weeks per year.
Comparison of Wages: Self-Sufficiency, Welfare, Minimum, Poverty, 185% of Poverty, and Median Family Income
All families with children <18
($4.04/hr.)($5.15/hr.)
($7.98/hr.)
($14.76/hr.)
($21.93/hr.)
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Monthly Budget Distribution for Typical Family of Three Earning Self-Sufficiency Wage
Wagoner County, 2006
Source: Wider Opportunities for Women, with Community Action Project of Tulsa County, "The Self-Sufficiency Standard for Oklahoma;" Bureau of Labor Statistics, Consumer Price Index, November 2006.
Housing$701
Child Care$614
Food$438
Transportation$263
Health Care$292
Miscellaneous$234
Taxes$351
24%
21%
15%
9%
10%
8%
12%Self-sufficiency wage = $2,921 per month.
Notes: Family of three in this example consists of one adult, one preschooler and one schoolage child.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Ratio of Income to Poverty LevelPercentage of Total Population and Selected Age Groups
Wagoner County, 1999
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000.
Total population
Under 18 Under 5 5-17 18-64 65+0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Percentage of population
100% 130% 185%
100% 8.9% 11.7% 14.3% 10.8% 7.6% 9.2%
130% 14.1% 18.3% 24.1% 16.3% 11.9% 16.1%
185% 26.3% 34% 39.8% 32% 22.2% 30.4%
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Ratio of Income to Poverty LevelPercentage of Total Population and Selected Age Groups
Broken Arrow, 1999
Source: US Census Bureau, Census 2000.
Total population
Under 18 Under 5 5-17 18-64 65+0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Percentage of population
100% 130% 185%
100% 4.5% 5.4% 5.8% 5.2% 3.8% 6.9%
130% 7.5% 9.4% 10.1% 9.1% 6.3% 10.6%
185% 15.1% 18.8% 22.5% 17.5% 12.5% 21.9%
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Ratio of Income to Poverty Level for Total PopulationBroken Arrow, 1989, 1999 & 2005 Estimates
Source: US Census Bureau, 1990 & 2000 Censuses; US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2005.
1989 1999 2005 (est.)0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Percentage of population
Below 100% Below 185% Below 200%
Below 100% 6.5% 4.5% 9.3%
Below 185% 17.9% 15.1% 20%
Below 200% 20.4% 17.9% 23.4%
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Median Family IncomeBy Family Type and Presence of Children under 18
Wagoner County, 1999
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000.
$45,623
$52,066
$21,235
$24,012
$48,603
$51,766
$28,432
$37,813
All families
Married-couplefamilies
Female-headedfamilies
Male-headedfamilies
$0$20,000$40,000$60,000
Families WITH children
$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000
Families WITHOUT children
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Median Family IncomeBy Family Type and Presence of Children under 18
Broken Arrow, 1999
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000.
$58,573
$64,491
$26,318
$38,929
$59,311
$62,053
$37,717
$50,417
All families
Married-couplefamilies
Female-headedfamilies
Male-headedfamilies
$0$20,000$40,000$60,000
Families WITH children
$0 $20,000 $40,000 $60,000
Families WITHOUT children
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Labor Force Participation among Adults, Age 20-64Wagoner County, 1999
Source: US Census Bureau, Census 2000; Oklahoma Employment Security Commission.
25,75675.9%
8,17424.1%
In armed forces
Employed
Unemployed
45 (0.2%)
24,955 (96.9%)
756 (2.9%)
NOT in labor force
In labor force
Unemployment rate (all ages) for October 2006 = 3.1%.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Labor Force Participation among Adults, Age 20-64Broken Arrow, 1999
Source: US Census Bureau, Census 2000; Oklahoma Employment Security Commission.
36,20282.0%
7,96418.0%
In armed forces
Employed
Unemployed
48 (0.1%)
35,272 (97.4%)
882 (2.4%)
NOT in labor force
In labor force
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Unemployment RatesTulsa MSA, 1991 - 2006
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 Oct.2006
0.0
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
6.0
7.0
Rate 5.9 5.3 6.3 5.8 4.2 3.3 3.5 3.5 3.2 2.8 3.4 4.9 6.5 5.0 4.4 3.5
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Many families in poverty have employed worker(s)Families in Poverty by Family Type and Employment Status
Wagoner County, 1999
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000.
20.223.5
34.1
11.6
44.2 38.9
48.5
49.8
35.6 37.5 17.4 38.7
All familiesin poverty
Married-couplefamilies in poverty
Male-headedfamilies in poverty
Female-headedfamilies in poverty
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Percent of impoverished families
Employment Status of Householder or SpouseFull-time Part-time Did not work
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Many families in poverty have employed worker(s)Families in Poverty by Family Type and Employment Status
Broken Arrow, 1999
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000.
24.9 25.5 28.223.5
49.7 51.9
40.849.5
25.4 22.7 31 26.9
All familiesin poverty
Married-couplefamilies in poverty
Male-headedfamilies in poverty
Female-headedfamilies in poverty
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
Percent of impoverished families
Employment Status of Householder or SpouseFull-time Part-time Did not work
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Population Living in Poverty, by AgeBroken Arrow, 1989, 1999 & 2005 Estimates
Source: US Census Bureau, 1990, & 2000 Censuses; US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2005.
1989 1999 2005 (est.)0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
Percentage of population
Total <18 18-64 65+
Total 6.5% 4.5% 9.3%
<18 8.1% 5.4% 13%
18-64 5.3% 3.8% 8.2%
65+ 11.6% 6.9% 4.5%
<18
Total
18-64
65+
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Poverty Rates by Race and Hispanic OriginTotal Population and Under Age 5, Wagoner County, 1999
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000.
Total White Black AmericanIndian
Asian Hispanic0%
10%
20%
30%
40%Total population Under 5
Total population 8.9% 7.2% 24.3% 14.2% 8.6% 15.5%
Under 5 14.3% 10.6% 35.4% 23.5% 8.7% 12.1%
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Poverty Rates by Race and Hispanic OriginTotal Population and Under Age 5, Broken Arrow, 1999
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000.
Total White Black AmericanIndian
Asian Hispanic0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%Total population Under 5
Total population 4.5% 4% 12.4% 4.1% 4.4% 4.1%
Under 5 5.8% 5.1% 21.9% 3.7% 14% 3.5%
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Poverty Rates for Families by Family Type and Age of ChildrenWagoner County, 1999
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000.
5.2%7.1%
8.5%
3.5% 3.1%
20.1% 19.8%
36.6%
16.4%
5.2%
29.3%32.2%
50.8%
24.3%
5%
w/ children <18w/ children <5 only
w/ children <5 & 5-17w/ children 5-17 only
no children
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%Poverty rate
Married-couple
Male-headed
Female-headed
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Poverty Rates for Families by Family Type and Age of ChildrenBroken Arrow, 1999
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000.
2.2% 1.4%
5.1%
1.4% 1.2%
10.6%
7.1% 6.4%
12.6%
3.5%
16.8%
39.7%37.6%
10.9%
7.1%
w/ children <18w/ children <5 only
w/ children <5 & 5-17w/ children 5-17 only
no children
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%Poverty rate
Married-couple
Male-headed
Female-headed
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater TulsaPrepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Real Hourly Wage by Educational AttainmentUnited States, 1973-2005
Source: Economic Policy Institute website.
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
$0
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
$30
$35
Real hourly wage (2005 dollars)
Less than high school High school College degree Advanced degree
Additional Indicators of Economic Additional Indicators of Economic DistressDistress
Public assistance programsFree & reduced school lunch
programHomeless sheltersHelpline and Babyline referrals
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Participation in Public Assistance ProgramsNumber of Participants and Percentage of Population Participating
Wagoner County, August 2006
Source: Oklahoma Dept. of Human Services, County Profiles August, 2006; Oklahoma State Dept. of Education, Low Income Report for 2005-2006; US Census Bureau, Pop. Estimates Division, 2005 Estimates; Oklahoma State Department of Health-WIC Service, Caseload Report, August, 2006.
8,232
1,886
5,634
613
189
359
269
5,215
242
1,663
400
12.8%
50.5%
36.2%
9.5%
25.3%
9.3%
7.2%
8.1%
1.6%
44.6%
10.7%
Medicaid Total
Medicaid <5
Medicaid <18
Medicaid 65+
WIC Infants
WIC age 1-5
Child Care Subsidy <5
Food Stamps Total
TANF <18
Elem. School Free Lunch(2005-06)
Elem. School Reduced Lunch(2005-06)
02,0004,0006,0008,00010,000
Number of Participants
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60%
Percent of Population
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Elementary School Students Eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch Program
By School District, Wagoner County, 2005-2006 School Year
Source: Oklahoma State Dept. of Education, Low Income Report for 2005-2006.
44.6%
62.2%
56.2%
59.1%
28.1%
23.5%
10.7%
10.3%
14.6%
9.5%
10.9%
10.3%
Wagoner County Total
Okay
Porter
Wagoner
Coweta
Broken Arrow
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Percent of Students Eligible
Free Reduced
Free lunch eligibility requirement: annual household income below 130% of poverty, which currently is $21,580 for a family of three.
Reduced lunch eligibility requirement: annual household income below 185% of poverty, which currently is $30,710 for a family of three.
Populations of Aging and Persons with Populations of Aging and Persons with Disabilities are Large and GrowingDisabilities are Large and Growing
~~These populations will These populations will significantly test the capacity of significantly test the capacity of
resources needed to enable them resources needed to enable them to be most self-sufficientto be most self-sufficient
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Disability Prevalence by Age and Level of DisabilityOklahoma, 1997
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2001, Americans with Disabilities: 1997 (Aug.-Nov. 1997 data from Survey of Income and Program Participation).
2%
3.4%
11.2%
10.7%
13.4%
22.6%
35.7%
49%
73.6%
4.8%
5.3%
8.1%
13.9%
24.2%
31.8%
57.6%
0 to 2
3 to 5
6 to 14
15-24
25-44
45-54
55-64
65-79
80+
Age Group
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Percent with Specified Level of Disability
Level of disabilityAny Severe
Health Challenges are Critical to Health Challenges are Critical to Individual and Community Well-beingIndividual and Community Well-being
~Inadequate income, high risks of starting life and poor lifestyle
choices contribute to major health concerns
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Oklahoma's Rankings in Outcomes Associated with Poor Health, 1990 and 2006
According to United Health Foundation's State Health Rankings
Source: United Health Foundation.
#31
#27
#31
#24
#27
#44
#41
#44
#43
#50
#44
#43
Overall ranking
Poor mental health days
Poor physical health days
Infant mortality
Cardiovascular deaths
Cancer deaths
Premature death
1990 2006
Ranking: 1=best, 50=worst
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Age-Adjusted Death RatesTulsa County, Oklahoma and US, 1980 - 2002
Source: CDC Wonder.
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
800
900
1,000
1,100
1,200
Death rates
Tulsa Co OK US
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Percentage of the Population that is ObeseOklahoma and US, 1990 - 2002
Source: Lapolla, Health Policy Analysis of the Tulsa Metropolitan Area, Center for Health Policy Research and Development, OUCPH, 2005; NCHS, CDC; THD;
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
Percent obese
Oklahoma US
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Percentage of Adults who SmokeTulsa County, Oklahoma and US, 2003
Source: NCHS, CDC; THD;Tulsa County Health Profile; NIH; BRFSS, CDC
22.7%
25.1%
22%
Tulsa Co. Oklahoma US0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
Percent adult smokers
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Health Insurance Status, by AgeOklahoma, 2004-2005
Source: Kaiser Family Foundation.
1,648,530 (47.9%)
137,050 (4.0%)444,630 (12.9%)
553,150 (16.1%)
659,370 (19.2%)
424,880 (47.2%)
36,520 (4.1%)
283,680 (31.5%)
23,450 (2.6%)
130,780 (14.5%)
1,222,600 (59.3%)
100,090 (4.9%)123,040 (6.0%)
90,420 (4.4%)
524,320 (25.4%)
1,050 (0.2%)440 (0.1%)
37,910 (7.8%)
439,280 (91.0%)
4,270 (0.9%)
Employer Individual Medicaid Medicare/Other Public Uninsured
Total Population Under Age 19
Age 19-64 Age 65 & over
Tulsa’s uninsured and Medicaid beneficiaries seek primary care in Tulsa hospital ERs. ER visits by Medicaid recipients actually exceeded uninsured visits by 25%.
Tulsa hospital ER patient survey found that 73% were not true emergencies: 30% treated for non-emergency conditions – another 43% could have been treated in non-emergency facilities within 48 hours.
Using hospital ERs for non-emergency care is a costly and inefficient.
Non-emergency ER use is a major contributor to overload and frequent divert status of Tulsa hospital ERs — especially in the last 2 years.
THD – Patel/Woodruff 9/05
Lapolla, Health Policy Analysis of the Tulsa Metropolitan Area, Center for Health Policy Research and Development, OUCPH, 2005; THD CAP
Poor health conditions create huge inefficient Poor health conditions create huge inefficient demand on resources - Misuse of Hospitals demand on resources - Misuse of Hospitals
and Emergency Roomsand Emergency Rooms
Poor Human Conditions Impact Poor Human Conditions Impact Crime and Growing Crime and Growing
IncarcerationsIncarcerations
~Trends greatly affected by substance abuse
0
2,500
5,000
7,500
10,000
12,500
15,000
17,500
20,000
22,500
25,000
'50
'52
'54
'56
'58
'60
'62
'64
'66
'68
'70
'72
'74
'76
'78
'80
'82
'84
'86
'88
'90
'92
'94
'96
'98
'00
'02
'04
Oklahoma’s prison population was relatively stable until 1980 when laws passed to curb illegal drug use
came into effectOklahoma’s Prison Population
1950-2005
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Corrections, Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa for the Metropolitan Human Services Commission in Tulsa.
Note: Number of inmates in Oklahoma prisons, data as of June 30 of each year
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Methamphetamine Labs Seized by AuthoritiesOklahoma and City of Tulsa, 1994 - 2005
Source: Oklahoma State Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs Website, Tulsa Police Department Website.
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 20050
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
Number of labs discovered
Tulsa
Oklahoma
Tulsa 0 0 6 13 47 132 150 124 178 214 131 51
Oklahoma 10 34 125 241 275 781 946 1,193 1,254 1,235 812 274
Overall Progress in Human Overall Progress in Human Development is Tied to Development is Tied to
Educational SuccessEducational Success
~From preschool through post secondary education
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Educational Attainment for Persons Age 25 & OlderWagoner County, 2000
Source: U. S. Census Bureau, Census 2000.
18.7%
35.8%
23.7%
6.3%
11.4%
3%
0.7%
0.3%
Less than high school
High school graduate
Some college
Associate degree
Bachelor's degree
Master's degree
Professional school degree
Doctorate degree
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
Percent of persons 25+
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Educational Attainment for Persons Age 25 & OlderBroken Arrow, 2000 & 2005 Estimates
Source: US Census Bureau, Census 2000; US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2005..
Less than high school
High school graduate
Some college
Associate degree
Bachelor's degree
Master's degree
Professional school degree
Doctorate degree
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
Percent of persons 25+
2000
2005 (est.)
Less than high school
High school graduate
Some college
Associate degree
Bachelor's degree
Master's degree
Professional school degree
Doctorate degree
2000 8.3% 24.4% 27.1% 9.4% 22.7% 6% 1.5% 0.7%
2005 (est.) 7.1% 25.1% 27.1% 9.8% 24.2% 4.6% 1.4% 0.7%
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Educational Attainment for Persons Age 25 & Older, by SexWagoner County, 2000
Source: U. S. Census Bureau, Census 2000.
17.8%
35.7%
24.4%
6.1%
11.8%
2.8%
0.9%
0.5%
19.5%
36%
23.2%
6.5%
11%
3.1%
0.6%
0.1%
Less than high school
High school graduate
Some college
Associate degree
Bachelor's degree
Master's degree
Professional school degree
Doctorate degree
0%10%20%30%40%50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Males Females
Percent of persons 25+
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Educational Attainment for Persons Age 25 & Older, by SexBroken Arrow, 2000
Source: US Census Bureau, Census 2000.
7.1%
21.3%
26.7%
9.1%
25.6%
7%
2.1%
1.1%
9.4%
26.9%
27.5%
9.7%
20.1%
5.2%
1%
0.3%
Less than high school
High school graduate
Some college
Associate degree
Bachelor's degree
Master's degree
Professional school degree
Doctorate degree
0%10%20%30%40%50% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Males Females
Percent of persons 25+
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Educational Attainment for Persons Age 25 & Older, by SexBroken Arrow, 2005 Estimates
Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2005.
Less than high school
High school graduate
Some college
Associate degree
Bachelor's degree
Master's degree
Professional school degree
Doctorate degree
Percent of persons 25+
0%5%10%15%20%25%30% 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50%
Males Females
Less than high school
High school graduate
Some college
Associate degree
Bachelor's degree
Master's degree
Professional school degree
Doctorate degree
Males 8.8% 22.6% 28.9% 8.7% 22.9% 4.7% 2.2% 1.2%
Females 5.6% 27.4% 25.4% 10.8% 25.5% 4.4% 0.7% 0.2%
Education Success: Preschool
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Large pre-K enrollment in surrounding counties, as emphasis increasingly turns to assuring high quality
Enrollment in Public Pre-K Programs, by Full and Part DayCreek, Osage, Rogers and Wagoner Counties, October 2005
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Education; US Census Bureau, Population Estimates Division, 2005 Estimates.
30%
33%
19%
28%
64%
60%
10%
52%
21%
11%
10%
58%
29%
51%
24%
Creek Co.
Osage Co.
Rogers Co.
Wagoner Co.
Okmulgee Co.
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Percent of all four year olds
Full-day Part-day Not enrolled
839
Total four year olds:
439
936
747
511
Education Success: Kindergarten – 12th Grade
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Growth in ADM in Tulsa County public schools has leveled off since 2000
Average Daily Membership (ADM), Tulsa County, 1997-2005
1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 200590,000
95,000
100,000
105,000
110,000
Tulsa Co. 99,957 101,216 103,950 105,693 106,126 105,518 106,112 106,142 106,640
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Education, Data Services; Education Oversight Board, Office of Accountability: Profiles State Reports
Note: Average daily membership is the average number of students enrolled on any given day during the school year.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Public School Average Daily MembershipTulsa County School Districts, 2005
1,142
4,030
14,961
2,102
2,179
9,190
484
75
588
7,934
5,177
2,332
1,261
41,349
13,836
Berryhill
Bixby
Broken Arrow
Collinsville
Glenpool
Jenks
Keystone
Leonard
Liberty
Owasso
Sand Springs
Skiatook
Sperry
Tulsa
Union
0 10,000 20,000 30,000 40,000 50,000
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Education, Data Services; Education Oversight Board, Office of Accountability: Profiles State Reports
Note: Average daily membership is the average number of students enrolled on any given day during the school year.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Percent growth in area school districts varies greatlyPercent Change in Average Daily Membership
Tulsa County School Districts, 1997-2005
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Education, Data Services; Education Oversight Board, Office of Accountability: Profiles State Reports
12.6%
30.1%
2.6%
33.3%
2%
3.9%
5.4%
-19.2%7.2%
33.3%
-3%16.8%
12.7%
0.1%
16.3%
6.7%
Berryhill
Bixby
Broken Arrow
Collinsville
Glenpool
Jenks
Keystone
Leonard
Liberty
Owasso
Sand Springs
Skiatook
Sperry
Tulsa
Union
Tulsa County
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%-10%-20%-30%-40%
Note: Average daily membership is the average number of students enrolled on any given day during the school year.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Growth in Hispanic students greatly contributes to changes in enrollmentPercent Change in Enrollment of Students of Hispanic Origin from 1998 to 2005
Tulsa County School Districts
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Education, Data Services; Education Oversight Board, Office of Accountability: Profiles State Reports
136.4%
84.2%
187.8%
-31.3%40%
108.4%
-44.4%
36.8%
123.3%
164.5%
27.8%
130.4%
141.9%
180.4%
142.5%
Berryhill
Bixby
Broken Arrow
Collinsville
Glenpool
Jenks
Keystone
Leonard
Liberty
Owasso
Sand Springs
Skiatook
Sperry
Tulsa
Union
Tulsa County
0% 100% 200% 300%-100%-200%
Hispanic enrollment 2005:
26
5
0
26
422
201
46
53
6,995
1,946
11,390
210
757
11
98
594
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Enrollment in full-day kindergarten growingPublic School Full and Half Day Kindergarten Enrollment
Tulsa County School Districts, 2005-06
28
287
10
143
1
55
0
7
37
512
0
0
0
0
796
39
0
1,166
44
176
556
32
0
0
0
373
184
109
3,888
77
Berryhill
Bixby
Broken Arrow
Collinsville
Glenpool
Jenks
Keystone
Leonard
Liberty
Owasso
Sand Springs
Skiatook
Sperry
Tulsa
Union
01,0002,0003,0004,000 0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000
Half day Full day
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Education, Data Services.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Many 9th graders do not make it to graduationPercent Change in Average Daily Membership
from 9th Grade to 2005 Graduating ClassTulsa County School Districts
-26%
-20.8%
-10.2%
-9.6%
-8.5%
-14.7%
-8.5%
-24.7%
-18.5%
-23.7%
-11.9%
-29%
-43.7%
-15.9%
Tulsa County
Berryhill
Bixby
Broken Arrow
Collinsville
Glenpool
Jenks
Liberty
Owasso
Sand Springs
Skiatook
Sperry
Tulsa
Union
0% 10%-10%-20%-30%-40%-50%
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Education, Data Services Alternative Education.
Number change in ADM
-22
-29
-109
-12
-22
-62
-14
-111
-115
-30
-29
-1,424
-159
-2,137
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Attrition rates high for every race & Hispanic OriginAttrition Rates from 9th Grade to 12th Grade for 2005 Graduating Class,
based on October 1 Enrollment Totals, by Race and Hispanic OriginTulsa County
-22.6%
-46.4%
-31.7%
-44.5%
White Black Native American Hispanic Origin
0%
-10%
-20%
-30%
-40%
-50%
-60%
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Education, Data Services Alternative Education.
(-1,206)
(-676)
(-282)
(-235)
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Education.
THD – Patel/Woodruff 9/05Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Average Daily Number & Percent of Students AbsentBy Tulsa County School Districts, 2005
49.2
218.8
774.4
103.9
136.6
456.4
39.7
2
26.1
367.7
308.1
117.4
77.3
3,150.7
693.3
4.3%
5.4%
5.2%
4.9%
6.3%
5%
8.2%
2.6%
4.4%
4.6%
6%
5%
6.1%
7.6%
5%
Berryhill
Bixby
Broken Arrow
Collinsville
Glenpool
Jenks
Keystone
Leonard
Liberty
Owasso
Sand Springs
Skiatook
Sperry
Tulsa
Union
0%2%4%6%8%10%
Percent absent
0 1,000 2,000 3,000 4,000
Number absent
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Education.Note: Average daily absent is the average daily membership minus the average daily attendance.
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Education.
THD – Patel/Woodruff 9/05Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Average Daily Percent of Students AbsentBy Grade, 2005
248.5
197.5
557.7
472
400.9
369.8
375.2
377.6
437.9
484.4
505.8
659.5
526.1
440.6
445.8
7.6%
9.7%
6.8%
5.5%
5.1%
4.8%
4.9%
4.7%
5.6%
6%
6.3%
7.7%
7.1%
6.7%
7.3%
Pre-K half day
Pre-K full day
Kindergarten
1st
2nd
3rd
4th
5th
6th
7th
8th
9th
10th
11th
12th
0%2%4%6%8%10%12%
Percent absent
0 200 400 600 800
Number absent
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Education.Note: Average daily absent is the average daily membership minus the average daily attendance.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
12th Grade ACT Participation Rates in Relation to 9th Grade Average Daily Membership for Graduating Class of 2005
Tulsa County School Districts, 2005
66
160
735
71
83
514
26
423
235
81
32
1,121
660
63%
56.2%
64.5%
49.7%
55%
70.8%
47.1%
70.7%
48.5%
48.7%
32.1%
34.4%
65.7%
Berryhill
Bixby
BA
Collinsville
Glenpool
Jenks
Liberty
Owasso
S. Springs
Skiatook
Sperry
Tulsa
Union
03006009001,2001,500
Number of seniors taking ACT
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Percent taking ACT*
ACT # ACT %
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Education, Data Services.Note: Percent taking ACT is the number of seniors who took the ACT as a percent of 9th grade ADM for the 2005 graduating class.
Education Success: Education Success: Post-Secondary-Higher EducationPost-Secondary-Higher Education
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Percent Distribution of Tulsa Area Higher Education Enrollment
Tulsa Area Public Colleges, Fall 2003
Source: Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education.
63.9%
13.1%9.4% 8%
3.2% 2.4%
TCC RSU OSU-Tulsa NSU-BA OU-Tulsa LU-Tulsa0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Public College Head Count Enrollment of Tulsa County 2002-03 HS Graduates
By School District
Source: Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education.
933
162
454
157
343
44 65 31
430
44
241
7413
TPS
Sand
Spring
s BABixb
y
Jenk
s
Collins
ville
Skiato
ok
Sperry
Union
Berry
hill
Owas
so
Glen
pool
Liber
ty0
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Oklahoma Public College Going Rate of Tulsa County 2002-03 HS Graduates
By School District
Source: Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education.
54.2%51.4%
48.9%
59.3%55.6%
32.8%
52%
39.7%
56.7%
49.4%
60.1%56.9%
35.1%
TPS
Sand
Spring
s BABixb
y
Jenk
s
Collins
ville
Skiato
ok
Sperry
Union
Berry
hill
Owas
so
Glen
pool
Liber
ty0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
70%
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Public College Remediation Rates Among HS GraduatesTulsa County and Oklahoma, 1999-2003
Source: Oklahoma State Regents for Higher Education.
37%
32.4%35.1%
38.1%
33.6%
36.5%34.1%
36.5% 36.2%35%
1999 2000 2001 2002 20030%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%Tulsa County Oklahoma
Human Development: Human Development: Key PointsKey Points
Middle class is disappearingMany households lack adequate
incomeStress of inadequate income and
related conditions is widespread
Human Development: Human Development: Key Points…Key Points…continuedcontinued
Populations of aging and persons with disabilities are large and growing
Health challenges are critical to individual and community well-being
Poor human conditions impact crime and growing incarcerations
Overall progress in human development is tied to educational success
Special TopicsSpecial Topics
Adults and Families at Risk
Adults and Families at Risk…Adults and Families at Risk…
Top Risk Factors for Adults Top Risk Factors for Adults and Familiesand Families
Single-parent households Low educational attainment Illiteracy Childhood abuse and other adverse childhood experiences Substance abuse/addiction Lack of health insurance/poor health care Poor diet & lack of exercise Tobacco use & excessive alcohol use
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Types of Families with Own Children Under 18, by RaceWagoner County, 2000
Source: U. S. Bureau of the Census.
80%
46.5%
74.4%
83.3%80.9%
5.6%
12.3%6.8%
2.8%6%
14.4%
41.2%
18.8%13.9% 13.1%
White Black American Indian Asian Hispanic0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%Percent of families within each race
Married Couple Male-headed Female-headed
Note: "Own Children" refers to children (including step and adopted) of the householder in a family.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Types of Families with Own Children Under 18, by RaceBroken Arrow, 2000
Source: U. S. Bureau of the Census.
81.7%
70.6%75.2%
92.9%
81.5%
4.2% 4.9% 6.1%0.9%
5.5%
14.1%
24.5%18.7%
6.2%13%
White Black American Indian Asian Hispanic0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
100%
120%Percent of families within each race
Married Couple Male-headed Female-headed
Note: "Own Children" refers to children (including step and adopted) of the householder in a family.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Educational Attainment for Persons Age 25 & OlderWagoner County, 2000
Source: U. S. Census Bureau, Census 2000.
18.7%
35.8%
23.7%
6.3%
11.4%
3%
0.7%
0.3%
Less than high school
High school graduate
Some college
Associate degree
Bachelor's degree
Master's degree
Professional school degree
Doctorate degree
0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
Percent of persons 25+
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Educational Attainment for Persons Age 25 & OlderBroken Arrow, 2000 & 2005 Estimates
Source: US Census Bureau, Census 2000; US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2005..
Less than high school
High school graduate
Some college
Associate degree
Bachelor's degree
Master's degree
Professional school degree
Doctorate degree
0% 5% 10% 15% 20% 25% 30%
Percent of persons 25+
2000
2005 (est.)
Less than high school
High school graduate
Some college
Associate degree
Bachelor's degree
Master's degree
Professional school degree
Doctorate degree
2000 8.3% 24.4% 27.1% 9.4% 22.7% 6% 1.5% 0.7%
2005 (est.) 7.1% 25.1% 27.1% 9.8% 24.2% 4.6% 1.4% 0.7%
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Rates of Adult Level 1 LiteracyBy County
Source: Oklahoma Literacy Resource Office.
15%16%
25%
19%
13% 13%
Tulsa Co. Creek Co. Okmulgee Co. Osage Co. Rogers Co. Wagoner Co.0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%Percent of adults at Level 1 Literacy
Level 1 Literacy is the lowest literacy level. Adults at this level display difficulty using certain reading, writing, and computational skills considered necessary for functioning in everyday life.
Oklahoma has a rate of 18%.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Methamphetamine Labs Seized by AuthoritiesOklahoma and City of Tulsa, 1994 - 2005
Source: Oklahoma State Bureau of Narcotics and Dangerous Drugs Website, Tulsa Police Department Website.
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 20050
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
1,400
Number of labs discovered
Tulsa
Oklahoma
Tulsa 0 0 6 13 47 132 150 124 178 214 131 51
Oklahoma 10 34 125 241 275 781 946 1,193 1,254 1,235 812 274
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Health Insurance Status, by AgeOklahoma, 2004-2005
Source: Kaiser Family Foundation.
1,648,530 (47.9%)
137,050 (4.0%)444,630 (12.9%)
553,150 (16.1%)
659,370 (19.2%)
424,880 (47.2%)
36,520 (4.1%)
283,680 (31.5%)
23,450 (2.6%)
130,780 (14.5%)
1,222,600 (59.3%)
100,090 (4.9%)123,040 (6.0%)
90,420 (4.4%)
524,320 (25.4%)
1,050 (0.2%)440 (0.1%)
37,910 (7.8%)
439,280 (91.0%)
4,270 (0.9%)
Employer Individual Medicaid Medicare/Other Public Uninsured
Total Population Under Age 19
Age 19-64 Age 65 & over
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Oklahoma's Rankings in Risk Factors Associated with Poor Health, 1990 and 2006
According to United Health Foundation's State Health Rankings
Source: United Health Foundation.
#44
#14
#23
#31
#24
#21
#8
#32
#46
#46
#33
#38
#24
#34
#41
#35
#22
#43
#40
#30
#44
Personal Behaviors
Prevalence of smoking
Motor vehicle deaths
Prevalence of obesity
High school graduation
Community Environment
Violent crime
Children in poverty
Occupational fatalities
Infectious disease
Health Policies
Lack of health insurance
Adequacy of prenatal care
Per capita public health spending
Immunization coverage
1990 2006
Ranking: 1=best, 50=worst
Risk Factors Increase Likelihood of Risk Factors Increase Likelihood of Adverse Health and Social OutcomesAdverse Health and Social Outcomes
~ Adverse Outcomes for Adults and Families:
Lower earnings/lack of economic self-sufficiency
Domestic violence Crime/gang violence/incarceration Disease or disability Suicide Premature death
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Real Hourly Wage by Educational AttainmentUnited States, 1973-2005
Source: Economic Policy Institute website.
1973
1975
1977
1979
1981
1983
1985
1987
1989
1991
1993
1995
1997
1999
2001
2003
2005
$0
$5
$10
$15
$20
$25
$30
$35
Real hourly wage (2005 dollars)
Less than high school High school College degree Advanced degree
Adult Literacy Levels and IncomeAdult Literacy Levels and Income
Over 20% of American adults read at or below a 5th grade level - far below the level needed to earn a living wage.
43% of people with the lowest literacy skills live in poverty.
Workers who lack a high school diploma earned an average hourly wage of $9.50 in 2001, compared to $12.81 for high school graduates and $22.58 for those with a college degree.
Source: Oklahoma Literacy Resource Office; Economic Policy Institute website.
Impact of Adult Literacy & Impact of Adult Literacy & Education Levels on ChildrenEducation Levels on Children
As the educational level of adults improves, so does their children's success in school; helping low-literate adults improve their basic skills has a direct and measurable impact on both the education and quality of life of their children.
Children of adults who participate in literacy programs improve their grades and test scores, improve their reading skills and are less likely to drop out.
Children's literacy levels are strongly linked to educational level of their parents, especially their mothers.
Children of parents who are unemployed and have not completed high school are five times more likely to drop out than children of employed parents.
Source: Oklahoma Literacy Resource Office.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Domestic Violence Cases Reported toLaw Enforcement Agencies
Oklahoma, 1994 - 2004
Source: Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation 2004 Uniform Crime Report.
1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 20040
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
30,000
Cases 18,153 18,621 21,683 23,087 21,435 21,211 22,065 23,687 25,157 23,773 24,542
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Domestic Violence Cases Reported to Law Enforcement Agencies, by Offense
Oklahoma, 2004
Source: Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation 2004 Uniform Crime Report.
54 541
4,764
19,183
Murder Sex crimes Assaults Assault & Battery0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000A total of 24,542 domestic violence cases were reported to Oklahoma law enforcement agencies in 2004.
0
2,500
5,000
7,500
10,000
12,500
15,000
17,500
20,000
22,500
25,000
'50
'52
'54
'56
'58
'60
'62
'64
'66
'68
'70
'72
'74
'76
'78
'80
'82
'84
'86
'88
'90
'92
'94
'96
'98
'00
'02
'04
Oklahoma’s prison population was relatively stable until 1980 when laws passed to curb illegal drug use
came into effectOklahoma’s Prison Population
1950-2005
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Corrections, Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa for the Metropolitan Human Services Commission in Tulsa.
1980
Note: Number of inmates in Oklahoma prisons, data as of June 30 of each year
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Source: Oklahoma Department of Corrections.
Department of Corrections Receptions from Tulsa County, FY 2005
Percent Distribution by Race
51.8%
32.5%
7.6% 7.6%
0.4% 0.1%
White Black Hispanic NativeAmerican
Other Unknown0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%Total receptions from Tulsa
County = 1,807. Drug related convictions account
for 35% of these receptions.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Oklahoma's Rankings in Outcomes Associated with Poor Health, 1990 and 2006
According to United Health Foundation's State Health Rankings
Source: United Health Foundation.
#31
#27
#31
#24
#27
#44
#41
#44
#43
#50
#44
#43
Overall ranking
Poor mental health days
Poor physical health days
Infant mortality
Cardiovascular deaths
Cancer deaths
Premature death
1990 2006
Ranking: 1=best, 50=worst
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Disability Prevalence by Age and Level of DisabilityOklahoma, 1997
Source: U.S. Bureau of the Census, 2001, Americans with Disabilities: 1997 (Aug.-Nov. 1997 data from Survey of Income and Program Participation).
2%
3.4%
11.2%
10.7%
13.4%
22.6%
35.7%
49%
73.6%
4.8%
5.3%
8.1%
13.9%
24.2%
31.8%
57.6%
0 to 2
3 to 5
6 to 14
15-24
25-44
45-54
55-64
65-79
80+
Age Group
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%
Percent with Specified Level of Disability
Level of disabilityAny Severe
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Disability Prevalence by AgeNon-institutionalized Population
Oklahoma & Broken Arrow, 2005 Estimates
Source: US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2005.
19%
7%
16.2%
47%
10.5% 9.5%
5 & older 5-15 16-64 65 & older0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Percent of population
Oklahoma % Broken Arrow %
Oklahoma # 604,245 35,300 361,145 207,800
Broken Arrow# 8,197 NA 5,335 NA
Note: Persons living in institutions or other groups quarters are not included in these estimates.
NA NA
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Persons with Disabilities by Age and TypeCivilian Noninstitutionalized Population, Wagoner County, 2000
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000.
16.1%
6.4%
62.4%
15.1%
1.0%2.7%
21.7%10.9%
27.3%
36.4%
9.3%
12.5%3.3%
0.2%3.0%
27.7%
44.0%
9.0%
24.9%4.2%0.4%
8.3%
53.3%
Sensory Physical Mental Self-care Go-outside-home Employment 2 or more disabilities
Age 5-15(N=689)
Age 16-20(N=626)
Age 21-64(N=7,046)
Age 65+(N=2,745)
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Persons with Disabilities by Age and TypeCivilian Noninstitutionalized Population, Broken Arrow, 2000
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000; US Census Bureau, American Community Survey 2005..
9.2%
3.2%
65.8%
0.9%
20.8%
6.1%
2.1%
18.4%8.0%
29.6%
35.8%
9.8%
15.2%3.8%
0.1%2.9%
26.2%
42.0%
8.8%
27.0%2.0%
8.6%
53.6%
Sensory Physical Mental Self-care Go-outside-home Employment 2 or more disabilities
Age 5-15(N=865)
Age 16-20(N=625)
Age 21-64(N=5,925)
Age 65+(N=2,041)
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Labor Force Participation of People with Work DisabilitiesOklahoma, 1999
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, March 1999 Current Population Survey.
9.7%90.3%
69.5%
2.9%
27.6%
An estimated 10% of Oklahoma's population age 16-64 have a work disability.
Of those with a work disability, 31% are in labor
force and 28% are employed.
work disability
30.5% in labor force
Note: A work disability is one which prevents a person from working or limits a person in terms of kind or amount of work he or she can do.
employed
not in labor force
no work disability
unemployed2.9%
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Employment Rates by Disability TypeCivilian Noninstitutionalized Population Age 21 to 64, Wagoner County, 2000
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000.
58.1%
57%
34.2%
31.6%
16.5%
45.7%
62.4%
Any Disability
Sensory
Physical
Mental
Self-care
Go-outside-home
Employment
0% 20% 40% 60% 80%
Percent Employed
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Employment Rates by Disability TypeCivilian Noninstitutionalized Population Age 21 to 64, Broken Arrow, 2000
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000.
67.8%
64.3%
54.5%
39.6%
31.8%
51.9%
69.5%
Any disability
Sensory
Physical
Mental
Self-care
Go-outside-home
Employment
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80%
Percent Employed
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Poverty Rates by Disability Status and AgeCivilian Noninstitutionalized Population, Wagoner County, 1999
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000.
18.6%
12.6% 12.8%11.1%10.4% 9.8%
6%7.5%
Age 5-15 Age 16-20 Age 21-64 Age 65+0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%Percent of population living below poverty
Persons with a disability Persons with no disability
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Poverty Rates by Disability Status and AgeCivilian Noninstitutionalized Population, Broken Arrow, 1999
Source: U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000.
4.4%
14.9%
5.8%
9.1%
5.5% 5.5%
3.1%
5.5%
Age 5-15 Age 16-20 Age 21-64 Age 65+0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%Percent of population living below poverty
Persons with a disability Persons with no disability
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Suicide Rates Among Persons of All AgesOklahoma, 1930 - 2005
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Health, Vital Statistics; National Center for Health Statistics, National Vital Statistics Report.
1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2004 20050
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
16Rate per 100,000 persons
Rate 9.3 10.1 8 6.4 8.3 9 9.8 9.5 10.7 15.2 13.6 14.8 13.3 14.6 14.7 14.2 14.3
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Suicide Rates Among Persons of All AgesBy County, 3-Year Averages, 1991-93, 1996-98, 2001-03, 2003-05
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Health, Vital Statistics .
Tulsa Co. Creek Co. Okmulgee Co. Osage Co. Rogers Co. Wagoner Co.0
5
10
15
20
25Rate per 100,000 persons
1991-93 1996-98 2001-03 2003-05
1991-93 14.6 15 11.7 22 17.9 15.5
1996-98 14.6 10.2 8.5 10.7 10.3 12.2
2001-03 15.2 18 15.1 13.3 9.7 6
2003-05 16 18 17.6 14.7 9.7 10.6
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Age-Adjusted Death Rates for the Leading Causes of DeathUnited States, 2004, Oklahoma and Tulsa County, 2005
Source: National Center for Health Statistics, Health E-Stats; Oklahoma State Department of Health, Vital Statistics.
Heart disease
Cancer
Stroke
Chronic lowerrespiratory diseases
Accidents
Diabetes mettitus
Alzheimer's disease
Influenza & pneumonia
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Rate per 100,000 Persons
U.S.
Oklahoma
Tulsa County
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Mortality Rates for the Four Leading Causes of DeathOklahoma, 1930 - 2005
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Health, Vital Statistics.
1930 1935 1940 1945 1950 1955 1960 1965 1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 20050
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
400Rate per 100,000 persons
Heart Disease
Cancer
Stroke
Chronic LowerRespiratory Disease
Best Practices…Best Practices…
A Research Based Approach
Doing What WorksDoing What Works
Best PracticesBest PracticesStrategiesStrategies
Outcome performance measures Community coalitions
– Collaborative, public-private partnerships– Consumer/client investments
Successful outreach and recruitment Case management/Care coordination Strong social marketing Risk reduction education Access to services and care
– Child care– Transportation– Translation
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Best Practices
Source: Institute of Medicine, Reducing Risk for Mental Disorders, 1994.
Continuum of Intervention
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Best PracticesStrategic Prevention Framework
Source: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA.).
Organize community to profile needs, including community readiness
Mobilize community and build capacity to address
needs
Develop the prevention plan (activities,
programs & strategies
Implement prevention plan
Evaluate for results and sustainability
1: Assessment
2: Capacity
3: Planning4: Implementation
5: Evaluation
Sustainability & cultural competence
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Best PracticesRisk and Protective Factor Framework
Source: Hawkins, Catalano, Miller, University of Washington Social Marketing Research Group, 1992, “Communities that Care” model of prevention.
Risk FactorsCharacteristics that
increase the likelihood of
negative outcomes
Protective FactorsCharacteristics that protect or provide a
buffer to moderate the influence of negative characteristics, and reduce potential of negative outcomes
Domains~Community
~Family~School
~Individual/Peer
How Well do You Know Your How Well do You Know Your Community?Community?
1. How did Wagoner County’s population change between 2000 & 2005?a. down 8% b. no change c. up 12%
2. What percentage of Broken Arrow’s 65+ population live alone?a. 10% b. 22% c. 36%
3. What percentage of Wagoner County’s elementary school children participate in the school free & reduced lunch program?
a. 28% b. 41% c. 55%
4. What percentage of Oklahoma’s working age population have no health insurance?
a. 13% b. 25% c. 48%
5. What percentage of Broken Arrow’s population with disabilities are employed?
a. 68% b.46% c. 29%
TAUW Community Investments TAUW Community Investments Strategy Mission StatementStrategy Mission Statement
To take a leadership role in community building by investing TAUW's
community resources in the most efficient and effective delivery systems
for health and human services.
Community Profile 2007Community Profile 2007Wagoner County and Broken ArrowWagoner County and Broken Arrow
…is available on our website:
www.csctulsa.org
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
January, 2007