Transcript Slide 1

COMMUNITY PROFILE 2011
EARLY CHILDHOOD INDICATORS OF
GARFIELD COUNTY
Commissioned by …….
Prepared by the Community Service Council
February 2011
GARFIELD COUNTY
Demographic Trends
 Economics and Employment
 Child Indicators

Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS
DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS
Population change--migration to suburban
areas of Tulsa and Oklahoma City MSA with an
overall decrease in new births
 Age--aging population
 Race and ethnicity--more culturally diverse
 Living arrangements--transitional for family
living arrangement

Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Population Trends for Total Population and Under Age 5
Garfield County, 1980 through 2030
70,000
60,000
50,000
40,000
30,000
20,000
10,000
0
Total population
Under age 5
1980
1990
2000
2010 (total)/
2009 est. (<5)
2020
(proj)
2030
(proj.)
62,820
5,286
56,735
3,905
57,813
3,874
60,580
4,791
61,001
3,980
62,546
3,888
Source: US Census Bureau, 1980, 1990, 2000 & 2010 Censuses; Population Estimates Program.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Race for Total Population and Children under 18
Oklahoma and Garfield County, 2010
Oklahoma
Garfield County
17.0%
18.0%
1.7%
0.9%
11.6%
Under 18
3.0%
3.2%
61.3%
74.7%
8.5%
Hispanic
14.3%
N = 929,666
N = 14,948
Hispanic
15.1%
10.1%
1.7%
8.6%
Total
Population
9.9%
7.4%
1.0%
2.3%
3.0%
83.9%
72.2%
N = 3,751,351
White
Hispanic
8.9%
Black
American Indian
N = 60,580
Asian
Source: US Census Bureau, 2010 Census.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Hispanic
8.8%
Other/2+ races
Types of Families with Ow n Children Under 6,
by Race & Hispanic Origin
Garfield County, 2000
Total
White
Black
50.5%
6.5%
6.8%
9.2%
74.7%
18.5%
76.0%
17.5%
40.4%
ACS 2005-09 estimates indicate that 70.7% of families with children under 6 in Garfield County
are married couple, 6.0% are male-headed and 23.3% are female-headed families.
5.7%
11.0%
8.4%
64.4%
11.4%
77.9%
82.9%
13.7%
24.7%
American Indian
Married couple
Asian
Female-headed
Hispanic
Male-headed
American Community Survey data are midpoint estimates within a 90% confidence range, which can be very wide. Estimates with margins of error exceeding +/10% of estimate are shown in italics.
Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 Census; US Census Bureau, 2005-09 American Community Survey.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
ECONOMICS AND EMPLOYMENT
THE ROOTS OF THE CHALLENGE
THIRTY 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
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
The Overall Dominant Trend...
The Shrinking Middle Class
100%
80%
Rich - 5%
Rich - 10%
Middle - 20%
Rich - 20%
Middle - 60%
60%
Middle - 80%
40%
Poor - 75%
20%
0%
1900 - 1940
(Pre-War)
Poor - 10%
Poor - 20%
1940 - 1990
(Post WWII)
1990 - ?
(New Millenia)
The trend: housing patterns and income mirror the job structure, with
more rich, more poor, and f ewer in the middle -- the "hourglass ef f ect"
Source: Hodgkinson, Harold, "The Client," Education Demographer, 1988.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
THE SELF-SUFFICIENCY STANDARD
…The level of income required for a family to
meet its own needs




Customized by specific family composition
Customized by geographic location
Based on all expense categories
Updated annually using consumer price index
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Comparison of Self-Sufficiency Wage to
Poverty Guidelines, by Size of Family
Garfield County, 2011*
One
person
Two
persons
Three
persons
Four
persons
SelfSufficiency
Wage
(annual)
Poverty
Guidelines
(annual)
Dollar
Difference
SelfSufficiency
Percent of
Poverty
$16,717
$10,830
$5,887
154%
($7.92 per hour)
($5.13 per hour)
$25,962
$14,570
$11,392
178%
($12.29 per hour)
($6.90 per hour)
$30,506
$18,310
$12,196
167%
($14.44 per hour)
($8.67 per hour)
$37,956
$22,050
$15,906
172%
($8.99 per hour per adult)
($5.22 per hour per adult)
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. Hourly wages given assume full-time,
year-round employment. The 2009 poverty guidelines are being used until at least March 1, 2010.
Source: Oklahoma Association of Community Action Agencies and the Oklahoma Asset Building Coalition, December 2009, The Self-Sufficiency Standard for
Oklahoma 2009; 2009 HHS Poverty Guidelines, Federal Register, Vol. 74, No. 14, January 23, 2009, p. 4200.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Comparison of Wages: Self-Sufficiency, Welfare, Minimum,
Poverty, 185% of Poverty, and Median Family Income
Family of Three, Garfield County, 2011*
Annual Wage
$60,000
$50,000
($26.03/hr)
Married-couple
families w/
children <18
$41,990
All families w/
children <18
$54,974
Self-Sufficiency Wage = $30,506
($14.44/hr)
$40,000
($19.88/hr)
$33,874
$30,000
$32,431
($15.36/hr)
Male-headed
families w/
children <18
$20,000
$10,000
$0
$15,312
$18,310
$17,238
($8.16/hr)
$10,309
($4.88/hr)
($7.25/hr)
($8.67/hr)
($16.04/hr)
Welfare
Wage
Minimum
Wage
Poverty
Wage
185% Poverty
Wage
Female-headed
families w/
children <18
Estimated
Median Family
Income*
(2005-09 ACS)
Notes: For the self-sufficiency wage, family of three consists of one adult, one preschooler and one schoolage child. Hourly wages given assume full-time,
year-round employment. The 2009 poverty guidelines are being used until at least March 1, 2010. Welfare wage is the combined value of TANF, SNAP, & WIC.
Values shown for median family income are midpoint estimates within a 90% confidence range, which can be very wide.Estimates with margins of error
exceeding +/- 10% of estimate are shown in italics.
Source: Oklahoma Association of Community Action Agencies and the Oklahoma Asset Building Coalition, December 2009, The Self-Sufficiency Standard for
Oklahoma 2009; 2009 HHS Poverty Guidelines, Federal Register, Vol. 74, No. 14, January 23, 2009, p. 4200; Oklahoma State Dept. of Human Services; US Census
Bureau, 2005-09 American Community Survey.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Monthly Budget Distribution for Typical Family of Three
Earning Self-Sufficiency Wage
Garfield County, 2011
Housing
$592
Self -suf f iciency
wage = $2,542
per month.
Tax credit
Miscellaneous
$114
$241
22%
9%
15%
Health Care
$399
25%
Child Care
$658
9%
19%
Transportation
$251
Food
$512
Notes: Family of three in this example consists of one adult, one preschooler and one schoolage child.
Source: Oklahoma Association of Community Action Agencies and the Oklahoma Asset Building Coalition, December 2009, The Self-Sufficiency Standard for
Oklahoma 2009.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Income Eligibility for Public Assistance Programs (part 1)
Maximum Income Levels as Percentage of Poverty
185%
Medicaid
(children & preg. women)
185%
WIC
185%
Child care subsidy
185%
School reduced lunch
130%
School free lunch
130%
Food Stamps
100%
Medicaid
(aged, blind & disabled)
50%
TANF
0%
50%
100%
150%
Approximately 65%
of women giving
birth in Oklahoma
qualify for Medicaid.
200%
Income as a Percent of Pov erty
Source: Oklahoma Department of Human Services and U.S. Department of Agriculture
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
250%
Income Eligibility for Public Assistance Programs (part 2)
Maximum Income Levels as Percentage of Median Family Income
80%
Public housing
50%
Section 8
rental assistance
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Income as a Percent of Median Family Income
Source: Tulsa Housing Authority
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
100%
Participation in Public Assistance Programs
Number of Participants and Percentage of Population Participating
Garfield County, August 2010
Medicaid Total (185%/100%)
18.7%
11,039
42.3%
6,232
Medicaid <18 (185%)
11.5%
1,044
Medicaid 65+ (100%)
WIC Infants (185%)
(Dec. 2010)
56.4%
540
WIC age 1-5 (185%)
(Dec. 2010)
23.8%
1,109
10.7%
511
Child Care Subsidy <5 (185%)
Food Stamps Total (130%)
58.5%
2,803
Medicaid <5 (185%)
18.1%
10,675
162
TANF <18 (50%)
Elem. School Free Lunch (130%)
(2010-11)
1.1%
59.5%
3,457
Elem. School Reduced Lunch (185%)
(2010-11)
10.9%
633
15,000
10,000
5,000
Number of Participants
0%
0
20%
40%
60%
80%
Percent of Population
Source: Oklahoma Dept. of Human Services, Statistical Bulletin, August 2010; Oklahoma State Dept. of Education, Low Income Report for 2010-11; US Census
Bureau, Pop. Estimates Division, 2009 Estimates; Oklahoma State Department of Health-WIC Service, Caseload Report, Dec. 2010.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Ratio of Income to Poverty Level
Percentage of Total Population and Children
Oklahoma and Garf ield County , 2005-09 Estimates
Percentage of population
75%
Below 100%
Below 185%
Below 200%
50%
25%
0%
Oklahoma Garfield
County
Below 100%
17%
22.2%
Below 185%
35.9%
47.5%
Below 200%
39%
54%
Total
Oklahoma Garfield
County
23%
24.7%
45.1%
48.8%
48.6%
55.1%
Under 18
Oklahoma Garfield
County
27.1%
30.8%
50.8%
54.5%
54.6%
61%
Under 6
Oklahoma Garfield
County
20.8%
21.2%
42.1%
45.5%
45.5%
51.7%
6 to 17
Note: Values shown are midpoint estimates within a 90% confidence range, which can be very wide. Estimates with margins of error exceeding +/- 10% of
estimate are shown in italics.
Source: US Census Bureau, 2005-09 American Community Survey.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Ratio of Income to Poverty Level
Number of Persons: Total Population and Children
Oklahoma and Garfield County, 2005-09 Estimates
Oklahoma
Garfield
County
Population
Cohort
All Income
Lev els
100% of
pov erty
lev el
185% of
pov erty lev el
200% of
pov erty lev el
Total population
4,068,831
692,403
1,459,620
1,588,232
Under 18 years
882,088
202,558
397,744
428,784
Under 6 years
303,644
82,266
154,321
165,849
6-17 years
578,444
120,292
243,423
262,935
Total population
50,367
11,188
23,949
27,178
Under 18 years
14,146
3,493
6,903
7,797
Under 6 years
5,166
1,590
2,813
3,153
6-17 years
8,980
1,903
4,090
4,644
Note: Values shown are midpoint estimates within a 90% confidence range, which can be very wide. Estimates with margins of error exceeding +/- 10% of
estimate are shown in italics.
Source: US Census Bureau, 2005-09 American Community Survey.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Ratio of Income to Poverty Level for Total Population
Oklahoma and Garfield County, 1989, 1999 and 2005-09 Estimates
Percentage of population
Below 100%
60%
Below 185%
Below 200%
50%
40%
30%
20%
10%
0%
Oklahoma
Below 100%
Below 185%
Below 200%
16.7%
36.1%
39.4%
Garfield
County
14.1%
32.7%
36.9%
1989
Oklahoma
14.7%
33.8%
36.9%
Garfield
County
13.9%
32.7%
36.3%
1999
Oklahoma
17%
35.9%
39%
Garfield
County
22.2%
47.5%
54%
2005-09 estimates
Note: Values shown for 2005-09 estimates are midpoint estimates within a 90% confidence range, which can be very wide.
Source: US Census Bureau, 1990 & 2000 Censuses, 2005-09 American Community Survey.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Median Family Income
By Family Type and Presence of Children under 18
Oklahoma and Garfield County, 2005-09 Estimates
Oklahoma
All families
Married-couple
$48,050
$55,479
$63,597
$60,520
Female-headed
$19,457
Male-headed
$34,906
$32,159
$41,883
Garfield Co.
All families
Married-couple
$41,990
$54,974
$59,231
$17,238
Female-headed
$34,974
$32,431
Male-headed
$75,000
$56,450
$50,000
$25,000
Families WITH children
$39,167
$0
$25,000
$50,000
$75,000
Families WITHOUT children
Note: Values shown are midpoint estimates within a 90% confidence range, which can be very wide. Estimates with margins of error exceeding +/- 10% of
estimate are shown in italics.
Source: US Census Bureau, 2005-09 American Community Survey.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Poverty Status by Family Type & Age of Related Children
Garfield County, 2005-09 Estimates
Married-couple
6.9%
Total
11.4%
with children <18
8.5%
with children <5 only
15.1%
with children <5 & 5-17
11.1%
with children 5-17 only
Female-headed
42.6%
Total
52%
with children <18
55.4%
with children <5 only
75.4%
with children <5 & 5-17
44.2%
with children 5-17 only
Male-headed
16.6%
Total
18.3%
with children <18
19.2%
with children <5 only
28.7%
with children <5 & 5-17
15%
with children 5-17 only
0%
20%
40%
60%
80%
Note: Values shown are midpoint estimates within a 90% confidence range, which can be very wide. Estimates with margins of error exceeding +/- 10% of
estimate are shown in italics.
Source: US Census Bureau, 2005-09 American Community Survey.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Educational Attainment for Persons Age 25 & Older
Garfield County, 2005-09 Estimates
14.1%
Less than
high school
35.8%
High school
graduate
21.9%
Some
college
6.7%
Associate
degree
15.1%
Bachelor's
degree
4.5%
Master's
degree
1.5%
Professional
school degree
0.4%
Doctorate
degree
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
Percent of persons 25+
Note: Values shown are midpoint estimates within a 90% confidence range, which can be very wide. Estimates with margins of error exceeding +/- 10% of
estimate are shown in italics.
Source: US Census Bureau, 2005-09 American Community Survey.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Real Hourly Wage by Educational Attainment
United States, 1973-2007
Real hourly wage (2007 dollars)
$40
$30
$20
$10
$0
3
7
19
75 977 979 981 983 985 987 989 991 993 995 997 999 001 003 005 007
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
Less than high school
College degree
High school
Advanced degree
Source: The State of Working America 2008-10, table 3.15.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Some college
Real Hourly Wage by Educational Attainment for Men
United States, 1973-2007
Real hourly wage (2007 dollars)
$40
$30
$20
$10
$0
3
7
19
75 977 979 981 983 985 987 989 991 993 995 997 999 001 003 005 007
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
Less than high school
College degree
High school
Advanced degree
Source: The State of Working America 2008-10, table 3.16.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Some college
Real Hourly Wage by Educational Attainment for Women
United States, 1973-2007
Real hourly wage (2007 dollars)
$40
$30
$20
$10
$0
3
7
19
75 977 979 981 983 985 987 989 991 993 995 997 999 001 003 005 007
9
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
1
2
2
2
2
Less than high school
College degree
High school
Advanced degree
Source: The State of Working America 2008-10, table 3.17.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Some college
Real Hourly Wage by Educational Attainment, by Sex
United States, 2007
Real hourly wage (2007 dollars)
$40.00
Both sexes
Men
Women
$30.00
$20.00
$10.00
$0.00
Less than high school
Both sexes
$11.38
Men
$12.32
Women
$9.43
High school
$15.01
$16.68
$13.10
College degree
$26.51
$30.36
$22.63
Source: The State of Working America 2008-10, tables 3.15 through 3.17.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Advanced degree
$33.57
$38.10
$28.77
Unemployment Rates
Garfield County, 1990 - 2010
5.0
4.0
3.0
2.0
1.0
0.0
Garfield Co.
1990 1991 1992 1993 1994 1995 1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 Nov
'10
4.5 4.2 3.9 3.9 3.9 3.7 3.5 3.3 3.7 3.2 2.8 3.1 3.6 4.2 3.7 3.6 3.1 2.9 2.5 4.4 4.7
Source: U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
CHILD INDICATORS
WHY ARE CHILDREN AT RISK?
Lack of health insurance
 Limited access to preventative services
 Living in high risk families
 Living in a state with a high level of
premature death

Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
THE ADVERSE CHILDHOOD
EXPERIENCES (ACE) STUDY

Major American research project that poses the question of
whether and how childhood experiences affect adult health
decades later

Provides compelling evidence that:




Adverse childhood experiences are surprisingly common
ACE’s happen even in “the best of families”
ACE’s have long-term, damaging consequences
Findings reveal powerful relationships between emotional
experiences as children and physical and mental health as
adults
Source: The Adverse Childhood Experiences Study website: www.acestudy.org, “About the Adverse Childhood Experiences Study.”
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
THE ADVERSE CHILDHOOD EXPERIENCES (ACE)
STUDY PYRAMID
Death
Early Death
Disease,
Disability and
Social Problems
Adoption of Health-risk
Behaviors
Social, Emotional and Cognitive
Impairment
Disrupted Neurodevelopment
Adverse Childhood Experiences
Conception
Mechanisms by which Adverse Childhood Experiences Influence
Health and Well-being throughout the Lifespan
Source: The Adverse Childhood Experiences Study website: www.acestudy.org, “About the Adverse Childhood Experiences Study.”
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
ADVERSE CHILDHOOD EXPERIENCES…
…GROWING UP IN A HOUSEHOLD WITH:





Recurrent physical abuse
Recurrent emotional
abuse
Sexual abuse
An alcohol or drug
abuser
An incarcerated
household member




Someone who is
chronically depressed,
suicidal, institutionalized
or mentally ill
Mother being treated
violently
One or no parents
Emotional or physical
neglect
Source: The Adverse Childhood Experiences Study website: www.acestudy.org, “What are Adverse Childhood Experieinces (ACE’s).”
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
…LEAD TO HEALTH-RISK BEHAVIORS…






Smoking
Overeating
Physical inactivity
Heavy alcohol use
Drug use
Promiscuity
Source: The Adverse Childhood Experiences Study website: www.acestudy.org
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
…WHICH CAUSE DISEASE, DISABILITY AND SOCIAL
PROBLEMS IN ADULTHOOD








Nicotine addiction
Alcoholism
Drug addiction
Obesity
Depression
Suicide
Injuries
Unintentional pregnancy






Heart disease
Cancer
Chronic lung and liver
disease
Stroke
Diabetes
Sexually transmitted
diseases
Source: Felitti, Vincent J., “The Relationship of Adverse Childhood Experiences to Adult Health: Turning gold into lead;” CDC Media Relations, May 14, 1998,
“Adult Health Problems Linked to Traumatic Childhood Experiences.”
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Summary of Risk Factors for Infants
Garfield County and Oklahoma, 2008
12.9%
13.7%
Teen mother
(age 15-19)
41.9%
42.3%
Unmarried mother
3.8%
5.4%
Poor prenatal care
(3rd trimester/no care)
23.5%
21.4%
Mother w/ <12th grade
education
Garfield Co.
Oklahoma
7%
6.9%
Low birthweight
(1500-2499 grams)
1.7%
1.4%
Very low birthweight
(<1500 grams)
36.8%
34.8%
Short birth spacing
(<24 mos. apart)
23.8%
20.5%
Very short birth spacing
(<18 mos. apart)
11.9%
11%
Premature
(<37 weeks gest.)
0%
10%
20%
Garfield County births: 999
Oklahoma births:
54,753
30%
Percent of Births
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Health, Vital Statistics.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
40%
50%
Characteristics of Births to Teen Mothers (Age 15-19)
Garfield County and Oklahoma, 2008
84.5%
81.6%
Unmarried
3.9%
7.1%
Poor prenatal care
(3rd trimester/no care)
50.4%
54.1%
Mother w/ <12th grade
education
Garfield Co.
Oklahoma
14%
Low birthweight
(1500-2499 grams)
7.9%
3.9%
1.8%
Very low birthweight
(<1500 grams)
59%
Short birth spacing
(<24 mos. apart)
67.6%
33.3%
Very short birth spacing
(<18 mos. apart)
46.9%
13.2%
11.6%
Premature
(<37 weeks gest.)
Garfield County births to teens:
Garfield County teen birth rate:
22.5%
20.8%
1+ previous births
(per 100,000 females age 15-19)
Oklahoma births to teens:
Oklahoma teen birth rate:
3.1%
3.6%
2+ previous births
0%
129
72.1
7,492
61.6
(per 100,000 females age 15-19)
20%
40%
60%
Percent of Teen Births
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Health, Vital Statistics.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
80%
100%
Resident Births, by Trimester of Entry into Prenatal Care
Garfield County, 1980, 1990, 2000 and 2008
1980
1990
76.9%
78.2%
0.9%
1.5%
3.3%
2.0%
0.8%
4.0%
17.3%
14.9%
67.4%
9.9%
0.1%
2.0%
75.7%
0.1%
0.8%
12.3%
2000
1st trimester
2008
2nd trimester
3rd trimester
No care
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Health, Vital Statistics.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
28.7%
Unknown
3.0%
Resident Births by Marital Status of Mother
Garfield County, 1980, 1990, 2000 and 2008
Number of births
1,400
1,200
1,108
1,000
800
657
532
600
580
418
400
200
283
186
84
Single
Married
0
% Married
% Single
1980
1990
2000
2008
93
7
77.9
22.1
65.3
34.7
58.1
41.9
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Health.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Resident Births to Teens Age 15-17 and 18-19
Garfield County, 1980, 1990, 2000 and 2008
Number of births
Specif ic birth rate
150
150
100
100
50
50
0
0
Births 15-17
Births 18-19
Birth rate 15-17
Birth rate 18-19
1980
1990
2000
2008
75
127
47.1
129.1
38
93
33.5
138.6
38
84
29.1
110.5
41
88
34.3
148.6
Note: Specific birth rate is the number of births to females in specified age group per 1,000 females in age group.
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Health, Vital Statistics.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Resident Births to Teens
Garfield County, 1980, 1990, 2000 and 2008
Number of births
150
1980
1990
2000
2008
127
93
100
75
38
50
2
1
38
84
41
3
0
% 1980
% 1990
% 2000
% 2008
10-14
15-17
18-19
0.2%
0.1%
0.4%
0%
6.3%
4.6%
4.7%
4.1%
10.6%
11.2%
10.3%
8.8%
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Health, Vital Statistics.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
88
Infant Mortality Rates (5-year averages)
Garfield County and Oklahoma, 1980 through 2007
15
Number of inf ant deaths per 1,000 liv e births
Garfield Co.
From 2003 through 2007, there was an
average of 10 infant deaths per year in
Garfield County, for a rate of 10.7 per 1,000
live births. In Oklahoma, the average was
425 infant deaths, for a rate of 8.1.
Oklahoma
10
5
2003-07
8.5
8.2
2002-06
9.2
8.2
2001-05
1994-98
8.9
8.4
2000-04
1993-97
7.9
8.6
1999-2003
1992-96
7.7
8.7
1998-2002
1991-95
7.8
8.7
1997-2001
1990-94
6.9
8.7
1996-2000
1989-93
7.8 7.3
9 8.9
1995-99
1988-92
7.5
9.3
1987-91
1985-89
Garfield Co. 10.3 10.3 10.7 9.9 8.9
Oklahoma 11.2 10.9 10.6 10.1 9.8
1986-90
1984-88
1983-87
1982-86
1981-85
0
1980-84
“Healthy People 2010”
goal = 4.5 per 1,000
9.1 10.4 10.1 10.4 10.2 10 9.3 10.4 10.7
8.2 8.3
8 8.1
8 7.9 7.8
8 8.1
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Health
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Average Daily Membership and Percentage of Children
Enrolled in Special Education, by School District
Garfield County County, School Year 2008-09
10,000
ADM
Percent in Special Education
ADM
20%
% Spec. Ed.
7,500
15%
5,000
10%
Cleveland County total ADM
= 40,686; percentage in
special education = 14.6%
2,500
5%
0
0%
ADM
% Spec. Ed.
Waukomis
KremlinHillsdale
Chisholm
Garber
338
17.8%
279
11.5%
891
10.7%
353
12.5%
PioneerPleasant
Vale
589
16%
Enid
6,636
12.5%
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Education, Office of Accountability.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Drummond CovingtonDouglas
398
8.3%
275
14.9%
DHS Licensed Child Care Services
Provided to Children Under Age 5, by Age
Garfield County, October 2001 - October, 2010
150
100
50
0
Age <1
Age 1
Age 2
Age 3
Age 4
October
2001
81
91
128
124
105
October
2002
68
111
101
125
101
October
2003
95
107
106
116
98
October
2004
68
132
127
105
105
October
2005
68
104
136
107
89
October
2006
76
100
113
116
96
October
2007
69
100
95
104
104
Source: Oklahoma Department of Human Services, Monthly Statistical Bulletins.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
October
2008
72
103
131
110
102
October
2009
60
105
120
138
102
October
2010
62
113
125
135
114
DHS Child Care Licensed Facilities and Subsidized Care, by Stars
Garfield County, October 2010
1 Star
34
34
1+ Star
13
4
2 Star
587
26
3 Star
194
3
50
40
30
20
10
Facilities
0
200
400
600
Subsidized Care
Source: Oklahoma Department of Human Services, Monthly Statistical Bulletin.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
800
1,000
DHS Child Care Licensed Facilities and Capacity, by Type
Garfield County, October 2010
Total
1,863
67
DHS Contract Total
1,472
40
Total Centers
1,479
20
DHS Contract Centers
1,264
16
Total Homes
384
47
DHS Contract Homes
208
24
100
80
60
40
20
0
500
Facilities
Source: Oklahoma Department of Human Services, Monthly Statistical Bulletin.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
1,000
Capacity
1,500
2,000
Early Childhood (Pre-K) Enrollment, by School District
Garfield County, October 2001
Half day
Waukomis
Full day
0
20
Kremlin-Hillsdale
0
0
Chisholm
20
Garber
17
Pioneer-Pleasant Vale
0
0
0
20
Drummond
0
13
Covington Douglas
18
0
Enid
0
271
500
400
300
Garfield County total
half day pre-K
enrollment = 361;
full day = 18.
200
100
0
100
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Education, Accreditation and Data Processing/Research Services.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
200
300
400
500
Early Childhood (Pre-K) Enrollment, by School District
Garfield County, October 2010
4 year old half day
3 year old half day
4 year old full day
3 year old full day
21
Waukomis
Garfield County total 4
year old half day pre-K =
485; full day = 152; 3
year old half day pre-K =
12; full day = 10.
21
Kremlin-Hillsdale
Chisholm
43
Garber
20
Pioneer-Pleasant Vale
24
31
Drummond
14
Covington Douglas
Enid
75
410
500
400
300
200
100
0
100
Source: Oklahoma State Department of Education, Accreditation and Data Processing/Research Services.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
200
300
400
500
Child Deaths Due to Abuse
Oklahoma, Fiscal Years 1978 - 2008
60
51
50
45
47 48
42
38
40
38
31
31
24
21
18
20
16 16
23
25
39
41
35
34
30
40
32
29
27
23
18
20
12 13
0
7
5
1978
1979
1980
1981
1982
1983
1984
1985
1986
1987
1988
1989
1990
1991
1992
1993
1994
1995
1996
1997
1998
1999
2000
2001
2002
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
10
Source: Oklahoma Dept. of Human Services, Children & Family Services Division.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Child Deaths Due to Abuse, by Age of Child
Oklahoma, FY 2008
Under 1
20 (48.8%)
12 & older
4 (9.8%)
7-11
2 (4.9%)
3-6
5 (12.2%)
1-2
10 (24.4%)
Source: Oklahoma Dept. of Human Services, Child Abuse and Neglect Statistics Addendum: Child Deaths and Near Deaths, State FY 2008.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Age of Children of Confirmed Abuse and Neglect
Oklahoma, FY 2009
1-2
1,480 (17.2%)
Under 1
1,492 (17.3%)
3-6
2,351 (27.3%)
12 & older
1,399 (16.3%)
7-11
1,883 (21.9%)
Source: Oklahoma Department of Human Services, Child Abuse and Neglect Statistics, State FY 2009.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Perpetrators of Confirmed Abuse and Neglect
Oklahoma, FY 2009
Mother
7,153 (44.2%)
All other categories
1,318 (8.1%)
CC Center Employee
331 (2.0%)
Grandparent
543 (3.4%)
Stepparent
952 (5.9%)
Father
4,781 (29.5%)
No relation
1,112 (6.9%)
Source: Oklahoma Department of Human Services, Child Abuse and Neglect Statistics, State FY 2009.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
CHILD ABUSE & NEGLECT

In Garfield County in FY 2009, there were 480 reports of child abuse and/or
neglect accepted for investigation or assessment. 787 children were involved in
these reports (duplicated count).

116 children were confirmed victims of child abuse and/or neglect. Eight were
abused, 94 were neglected, 14 were victims of both abuse and neglect.

Eight of every 1,000 children in Garfield County are victims of abuse and/or
neglect. In Oklahoma, the rate is 10 of every 1,000 children.

Oklahoma ranks #35 in the nation in the rate of children who are victims of
abuse and/or neglect.

Parents make up 73.7% of all perpetrators, followed by “no relation” at 6.9%,
step-parents at 5.9%, and grandparents at 3.4%.

Substance abuse is a major contributing factor to child neglect.
Source: Oklahoma Department of Human Services, Child Abuse and Neglect Statistics, State FY 2009.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Child Abuse and Neglect Report Progression
Part 1: Reports Received
Garf ield County , FY 2009
1,182 Reports
receiv ed by
OKDHS...
Investigation
207 (43.0%)
Not Accepted
702 (59.4%)
=
410 children
(duplicated
count)
=
377 children
(duplicated
count)
Accepted for...
480 (40.6%)
Assessment
274 (57.0%)
Source: Oklahoma Department of Human Services, Child Abuse and Neglect Statistics, State FY 2009.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Child Abuse and Neglect Report Progression
Part 2: Investigations
Garf ield County , FY 2009
410 children
(dup. count) inv olv ed
in inv estigations
8 of every 1,000 children in
Garfield County are victims of
abuse and/or neglect compared to
10 of 1,000 in the state.
Services
recommended
184 (44.9%)
Abuse & Neglect
14 (12.1%)
Confirmed
116 (28.3%)
Neglect
94 (81.0%)
Abuse
8 (6.9%)
Services
not needed
104 (25.4%)
Failed to
cooperate
6 (1.5%)
Source: Oklahoma Department of Human Services, Child Abuse and Neglect Statistics, State FY 2009.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Child Abuse and Neglect Report Progression
Part 3: Assessments
Garf ield County , FY 2009
377 children
(dup. count) inv olv ed
in assessments
None
199 (52.8%)
Failed to cooperate
12 (3.2%)
Services provided
3 (0.8%)
Services recommended
85 (22.5%)
Services
provided & recommended
78 (20.7%)
Source: Oklahoma Department of Human Services, Child Abuse and Neglect Statistics, State FY 2009.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Reports and Confirmations of Child Abuse and Neglect
Garfield County, Fiscal Year 2002 - 2009
1,400
Number of reports and confirmations
Confirmation rate
35%
1,200
30%
1,000
25%
800
20%
600
15%
400
10%
200
5%
0
Reports received
Reports accepted
Confirmations
Confirmation rate
0%
2002
1,331
714
199
18%
2003
1,371
750
210
19%
2004
1,325
704
289
23%
2005
1,244
834
325
25%
2006
1,025
717
150
12%
2007
1,151
768
223
17%
2008
1,192
582
121
13%
2009
1,182
480
116
15%
Notes: Each “report” of child abuse and/or neglect “received” and “accepted” may involve multiple children. Each “confirmation” of child abuse and/or
neglect indicates one child. Since a child may be confirmed abused and/or neglected multiple times in a year, “confirmations” is not an unduplicated
count of children. “Confirmation rate” is the number of children confirmed abused and/or neglected per 100 children investigated or assessed.
Source: Oklahoma Department of Human Services, Child Abuse and Neglect Statistics.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Elementary School Students Eligible for Free and
Reduced Lunch Program
By School District, Garfield County, 2010-2011 School Year
Garfield County Total
59.5%
10.9%
63.6%
Enid
9.3%
49.3%
Covington-Douglas
20.9%
54.2%
Pioneer-Pleasant Vale
13.2%
51.2%
Drummond
14.5%
45.3%
Waukomis
Kremlin-Hillsdale
Chisholm
0%
12.1%
34.7%
28.7%
20%
Reduced lunch
eligibility requirement:
annual household
income below 185%
of poverty, which
currently is $33,874
for a family of three.
15.8%
48.1%
Garber
Free lunch eligibility
requirement: annual
household income
below 130% of
poverty, which
currently is $23,803
for a family of three.
18%
Free
9.3%
40%
60%
Percent of Students Eligible
Source: Oklahoma State Dept. of Education, Low Income Report for 2010-2011.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
80%
Reduced
100%
Juvenile Arrests, by Type of Crime
Garfield County, 2001 through 2009
Number of arrests
600
2001
2002
500
2003
2004
2005
2006
2007
2008
2009
A total of 527 juvenile arrests were
made in Garfield County in 2009, for
a rate of 89.9 per 1,000 juveniles age
10-17, down from 667 arrests for a
rate of 103.1 in 2001.
400
300
200
100
0
Index crimes
Drug related
Includes murder, rape,
robbery aggravated
assault, burglary, larceny,
and motor vehicle theft.
Includes sale/
manufacturing
and possession
of drugs.
Alcohol related
Includes driving under
the influence, liquor
law violations, and
drunkenness.
Source: Oklahoma State Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime Reports.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Other crimes
Includes other assaults,
disorderly conduct, curfew
& loitering, runaway and all
other non-traffic offenses
Youth Risk Behavior Survey:
Summary of Alcohol, Other Drug & Tobacco Use
High School Students, Oklahoma, 2003 through 2009, and U.S., 2007
47.8%
40.5%
43.1%
39%
44.7%
Alcohol
Used once or
more during
past 30 days...
Ever
used...
22%
18.7%
15.9%
17.2%
19.7%
Marijuana
9.9%
7.1%
5.5%
4.8%
4.4%
Methamphetamine
22.2%
18.4%
19.1%
16.8%
22.3%
26.5%
28.6%
23.2%
22.6%
20%
17.5%
12.3%
13.3%
11%
10.5%
30.6%
25.8%
26.8%
23.1%
29.1%
Offered/sold/given
illegal drugs at school
Smoked cigarettes
during past month
Drove after drinking
alcohol in past month
Rode with drinking
driver in past month
0%
20%
40%
2003 Oklahoma
2005 Oklahoma
2007 Oklahoma
2009 Oklahoma
2007 US
60%
Note: National 2009 YRBSS data have not yet been released.
Source: Centers for Disease Control, Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System; Oklahoma State Department of Health, OK2SHARE.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
80%
100%
Youth Risk Behavior Survey:
Summary of Sexual Behaviors, Suicide & Physical Health
High School Students, Oklahoma, 2003 through 2009, and U.S., 2007
50%
49.3%
50.9%
51.1%
47.8%
Ever had
sexual intercourse
5.8%
6.5%
5.8%
4.7%
7.1%
Had sex before age 13
64.3%
61.7%
59.6%
56.7%
61.5%
Used condom last time
17.7%
16.4%
16.7%
22.7%
16%
Used birth control
pills last time
7%
7.9%
5.9%
7%
6.9%
Attempted suicide
in past year
Overweight
(according to BMI)
Physical activity for
60 min/day 5 of past 7 days
2003 Oklahoma
2005 Oklahoma
2007 Oklahoma
2009 Oklahoma
2007 US
14.2%
15.9%
15.2%
16.4%
15.8%
na
38.2%
34.7%
0%
20%
40%
49.6%
47.4%
60%
Note: National 2009 YRBSS data have not yet been released.
Source: Centers for Disease Control, Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance System; Oklahoma State Department of Health, OK2SHARE.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
80%
100%
HEALTH INDICATORS
Health Status
25%
50
Oklahoma
Rank
US
20%
40
15%
30
10%
20
5%
10
0%
0
'96
'97
'98
'99
'00
'01
'02
'03
'04
'05
'06
'07
'08
'09
'10
US 12.9% 12.9% 12.8% 12.6% 13% 13.9% 14% 14.7% 14.7% 14.9% 14.8% 14.7% 14.9% 14.4% 14.5%
Rank
26
32
28
25
42
34
45
41
41
44
42
46
43
42
42
Oklahoma 13.1% 14% 13.4% 12.6% 17.4% 15.3% 19.6% 17.7% 17.8% 19.7% 18.7% 20.2% 19.2% 18.7% 19.5%
Source: United Health Foundation, “America’s Health Rankings.“
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
State rank
Percent adults reporting fair or poor health
Oklahoma and United States, 1996 - 2010
Prevalence of Obesity
35%
50
Oklahoma
Rank
US
30%
40
25%
30
20%
15%
20
10%
10
5%
0%
'90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10
US 11.6% 11.6% 12.6% 12.6% 13.7% 14.4% 15.9% 16.8% 16.5% 18.3% 19.6% 20% 20.9% 21.9% 22.9% 23.2% 24.4% 25.1% 26.3% 26.6% 26.9%
Rank
23
23
22
37
14
14
12
27
14
35
37
22
38
29
37
37
38
44
43
46
46
Oklahoma 11.6% 11.6% 11.9% 14.1% 12.1% 13.2% 13.5% 16.8% 15.1% 19.5% 21.1% 19.7% 22.6% 22.9% 24.4% 24.9% 26.8% 28.8% 28.8% 30.9% 32%
Source: United Health Foundation, “America’s Health Rankings.“
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
0
State rank
Percent of population estimated to be obese
Oklahoma and United States, 1990 - 2010
Prevalence of Smoking
35%
60
Oklahoma
30%
US

25%   
20%
Rank










   

50









40



15%

30
20
10%

5%
10
0%
0
'90 '91 '92 '93 '94 '95 '96 '97 '98 '99 '00 '01 '02 '03 '04 '05 '06 '07 '08 '09 '10
Source: United Health Foundation, “America’s Health Rankings.“
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
State rank
Percent of population over 18 that smoke regularly
Oklahoma and United States, 1990 - 2010
Oklahoma's Rankings in Health Determinants,
2010 (part 1)
According to United Health Foundation's State Health Rankings
1990
Personal Behav iors
2010
Prevalence of smoking
#48
Prevalence of Binge Drinking
#10
Prevalence of obesity
#46
Community & Env ironment
High school graduation
#23
Violent crime
#40
Occupational fatalities
#44
Infectious disease
#28
Children in poverty
#31
Air pollution
#24
#0
#10
#20
#30
Ranking: 1=best, 50=worst
Source: United Health Foundation, “America’s Health Rankings.“
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
#40
#50
Oklahoma's Rankings in Health Determinants,
2010 (part 2)
According to United Health Foundation's State Health Rankings
1990
Public & Health Policies
2010
Lack of health insurance
#35
Public health funding (per capita)
#14
Immunization coverage
#18
Clinical Care
Early prenatal care
#47
Primary Care Physicians
#49
Preventable Hospitalizations
#46
All Determinants
#45
#0
#10
#20
#30
Ranking: 1=best, 50=worst
Source: United Health Foundation, “America’s Health Rankings.“
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
#40
#50
Oklahoma's Rankings in Health Outcomes,
2010
According to United Health Foundation's State Health Rankings
Oklahoma’s overall health ranking for 2010 is
1990
Poor mental health days
# 46
2010
#48
Poor physical health days
#46
Geographic disparity
#21
Infant mortality
#44
Cardiovascular deaths
#48
Cancer deaths
#40
Premature death
#46
All Health Outcomes
#46
#0
#10
#20
#30
Ranking: 1=best, 50=worst
Source: United Health Foundation, “America’s Health Rankings.“
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
#40
#50
Health Insurance Status, by Age
Oklahoma, 2008-09
Total Population
Under Age 19
530,700
(14.8%)
146,900
(4.1%)
Employer
525,200
(14.7%)
471,300
(21.6%)
100,900
(10.7%)
578,500
(16.2%)
78,700
(2.2%)
1,716,200
(48.0%)
Age 19-64
100,100
(4.6%)
370,600
(39.4%)
1,289,200
(59.0%)
34,600
(3.7%)
Individual
85,900
(3.9%)
129,100
(5.9%)
108,400
(5.0%)
435,500
(46.3%)
Medicaid
Medicare
Other public
Uninsured
Estimated uninsured non-elderly population, May 2009
(Oklahoma Health Care Authority):
~ Garfield County: 19.3%
Source: Kaiser Family Foundation, StateHealthFacts.org; Oklahoma Health Care Authority, Oklahoma County Chartbook, May 2009.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
ADVERSE CHILDHOOD EXPERIENCES
GARFIELD COUNTY RANKINGS
Parental separation or divorce
70
Incarcerated household member
75
Mentally ill household member
1*
Substance abusing household member
31*
Violence against mother
32
Psychological, physical & sexual abuse
50
Emotional & physical neglect
50
Overall ranking
58
Rankings: 1 = best, 77 = worst
*Indicates a tie with at least one other county
Source: Oklahoma KIDS COUNT Factbook, 2006-2007, Oklahoma Institute for Child Advocacy
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
…IN SUMMARY
BEST PRACTICES STRATEGIES


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
Continuum of Intervention
Source: Institute of Medicine, Reducing Risk for Mental Disorders, 1994.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Best Practices
Strategic Prevention Framework
1: Assessment
Organize community to
profile needs, including
community readiness
5: Evaluation
2: Capacity
Evaluate for results and
sustainability
Mobilize community and
build capacity to address
needs
Sustainability &
cultural competence
4: Implementation
3: Planning
Implement prevention
plan
Develop the prevention
plan (activities,
programs & strategies
Source: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration (SAMHSA.).
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
Best Practices
Risk and Protective Factor Framework
Risk Factors
Characteristics that
increase the
likelihood of
negativ e outcomes
Domains
~Community
~Family
~School
~Indiv idual/Peer
Protective Factors
Characteristics that
protect or prov ide a
buf f er to moderate the
inf luence of negativ e
characteristics, and
reduce potential of
negativ e outcomes
Source: Hawkins, Catalano, Miller, University of Washington Social Marketing Research Group, 1992, “Communities that Care” model of prevention.
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
COMMUNITY PROFILE 2011
EARLY CHILDHOOD INDICATORS OF
GARFIELD COUNTY
Prepared by the Community Service Council of Greater Tulsa
February 2011
…is available on our website:
www.csctulsa.org