Workforce Analysis. Erie Lorain. Stark Richland. Coshocton Delaware. Muskingum Clark Madison. Noble Greene. Monroe Fayette.

Transcription

1 Workforce Analysis Williams Defiance Fulton Henry Putnam Lucas Wood Hancock Ottawa Sandusky Paulding Seneca Huron Medina Erie Lorain Cuyahoga Summit Lake Geauga Portage Ashtabula Trumbull Mahoning Van Wert Wyandot Crawford Ashland Wayne Allen Stark Richland Columbiana Hardin Mercer Auglaize Marion Morrow Holmes Knox Logan Shelby Union Coshocton Delaware Darke Champaign Licking Miami Franklin Muskingum Clark Madison Carroll Jefferson Tuscarawas Harrison Guernsey Belmont Preble Montgomery Fairfield Perry Noble Greene Monroe Fayette Pickaway Morgan Butler Warren Clinton Hocking Washington Ross Athens Vinton Hamilton Highland Clermont Pike Meigs Jackson Brown Gallia Adams Scioto Lawrence Workforce Analysis WORKFORCE

2 Workforce Analysis Table of Contents Preface... ii Highlights...iii I. Understanding the Local Labor Market... 1 Figure 1: Regional Commuting Patterns... 1 Figure 2: Net Flow of Ohio Commuters... 2 II. Key Trends... 3 Figure 3: Population Trends... 3 Figure 4: Demographic Characteristics... 3 Figure 5: Employment Trends... 4 Figure 6: Employment in the Employment Source Area by Major Industry... 4 Figure 7: Unemployment Trends... 5 Figure 8: Per Capita Income... 6 Figure 9: Number of New Residential Building Permits... 7 Figure 10: Valuation of New Residential Building Permits... 7 III. Industry Analysis... 8 Figure 11: Employment by Major Sector, Figure 12: Employment by Industry Sector, Figure 13: Employment Prospects by Industry Sector Figure 14: Sectors Ranked by 2005 Average Weekly Earnings IV. Educational Infrastructure Figure 15: Educational Attainment Technical Notes References Appendix A: Ohio Workforce Investment Areas Appendix B: Metropolitan and Micropolitan Areas Appendix C: Major County-to-County Commuting Patterns Appendix D: Major Employers by County... 20

3 Preface Over the last few years, the Bureau of Labor Market Information (BLMI) has prepared several sets of customized regional publications to help workforce professionals and others gain a better understanding of their local economy and how it has fared compared to other areas. In June 2002, Demographic, Labor Force and Industry Trends were published for Ohio s 12 Economic Development Regions; Market Analysis of Key Workforce Trends was published for all of Ohio s Workforce Investment Areas in This current set of Workforce Analysis publications is an update of these efforts to produce reports for all nineteen WIAs in the state, including all One-Stops in WIA 7. This workforce analysis report provides a summary snapshot of, the Workforce Investment Area for Stark and Tuscarawas Counties. This presentation also examines some of the key trends compared to state and national trends. The first section begins with a review of the area s basic demographic and economic characteristics. The second section shows trends in important statistics for the area, including population, employment, unemployment rates, income and housing. Employment characteristics by industry receive a detailed examination in the third section. The fourth and final section looks briefly at the area s educational characteristics. A careful review of this information can yield important insights about the local economy. One may assess the health of the local economy by examining key economic trends and comparing them to the state or the nation. Or an examination of industry composition will yield insights into the strengths and weaknesses that local economic development policy might address. Please refer to the Technical Notes and References sections at the end of this publication for reference and documentation of the wide variety of statistical data presented. Keith Ewald, Ph.D., Chief Bureau of Labor Market Information Office of Workforce Development Ohio Department of Job and Family Services ii

4 Highlights Stark County appears to be the economically and demographically dominant county in this region. area is a net out-commuting area with most commuters from Stark County traveling to jobs in Summit County. Population has grown 1.5 percent in the past ten years. Demographically, the two counties differ slightly in terms of age distributions. Employment rolls have grown 2.3 percent in the last decade, despite job losses from the 2001 recession. The unemployment rate has not declined much yet. Nominal per capita income has grown at a 3.3 percent annual compound rate, reaching about $28,000 by Residential construction has undergone some highs and lows since 1995, with more than 1,500 permits granted in Valuation has been steadily increasing during this period. The dominant employment sectors in 2005 for this area were trade, transportation and utilities; manufacturing; and education and health services. Mining and manufacturing are more concentrated here than the rest of the state. Health care and social assistance experienced the most job growth from 2000 to The utilities sector has the area s highest average weekly earnings at $1,331. Average weekly earnings for the entire region were $607 for Generally, the area has a lower level of overall educational attainment than the rest of the state. iii

5 Workforce Analysis I. Understanding Local Labor Markets Labor economists define a labor market as a geographic area in which both the demand and supply for labor are met primarily within that region. 1 In other words, it is an area where there are jobs and the majority of workers needed for those jobs. An important first step in identifying local labor markets is to examine the commuting patterns of individuals who live or work in the area. These patterns are one of the primary inputs used to define metropolitan and micropolitan areas. 2 Overall, the Employment Source region is a net out-commuting area. Stark County has a slightly higher net outflow of commuters, though it comprises a smaller proportion of total commuting. This is consistent with the county s inclusion in the Canton-Massillon Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA). Many residents of Stark County commute to jobs in Summit County. Figure 1: Regional Commuting Patterns Stark Tuscarawas In Commuters Total Working in the County 171,642 37,247 In Commuters 31,105 6,440 Percent of In Commuters 18.1% 17.3% Out Commuters Total Employed Living in the County 177,234 42,093 Out Commuters 36,697 11,286 Percent of Out Commuters 20.7% 26.8% Net Comparison Statistics Commuting Balance: Net Flow -5,592-4,846 Percent of Total Comuters -8.2% -27.3% Figure 2 on the next page shows a visual summary of the net flow of commuters from the 2000 decennial census. Most workers commuting into a county to work usually do so from adjacent counties. Detailed county-to-county commuting is shown in Appendix C. Tuscarawas County has been designated as economically transitional by the Appalachian Regional Commission for FY This means that at least one special economic indicator is worse than the national average. 1 Goldstein 2005, p Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Area definitions are excerpted from the Office of Management and Budget s Federal Register Notice (65 FR ). See Appendix B for detailed definitions. 3 Appalachian Regional Commission, August 2006.

6 Understanding Local Labor Markets, continued Figure 2: Net Flow of Ohio Commuters *Net flow equals in commuters minus out commuters. A negative number means more people are commuting to work outside the county than are in commuting. For more detailed information, please visit on the web. Source: Bureau of Labor Market Information 2

7 II. Key Trends Population: Population growth has been very slow in the past ten years, especially in Stark County, which saw a combined increase of only 0.9 percent. For comparison, statewide population growth was about 2.3 percent for the same period. Tuscarawas County experienced population growth of 4.1 percent. Figure 3: Population Trends 500,000 Stark Tuscarawas 450, , , , , , , ,000 50, , , , , , , , , , , ,552 Stark 377, , , , , , , , , , ,608 Tuscarawas 88,318 88,994 89,534 90,172 90,501 91,044 91,227 91,598 91,745 92,073 91,944 Demographic Traits: Data from the 2000 Census, shown in Figure 4 below, reveal some interesting differences between the counties. Both counties have higher median ages than the state median age of Stark County has a larger total proportion of working-age adults 18 to 64. Figure 4: Demographic Characteristics Age Demographics Stark Tuscarawas Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Total Population 461, % 373, % 88, % Under 5 years 28, % 22, % 5, % 5 to 17 years 84, % 67, % 17, % 18 to 24 years 38, % 31, % 6, % 25 to 44 years 133, % 108, % 25, % 45 to 64 years 106, % 86, % 20, % 65 years or older 70, % 56, % 13, % Median Age

8 Key Trends, continued Employment: The region has still not recovered job losses from the 2001 recession, though there has still been a net employment increase in the last decade of 2.3 percent. Most of the boom and bust of the late 1990s and early 2000s was felt in Stark County, which gained about 2.2 percent in this period. Tuscarawas County s employment was more stable, growing 3.0 percent. Figure 5: Employment Trends 250,000 Stark Tuscarawas 200, , ,000 50, , , , , , , , , , , ,961 Stark 162, , , , , , , , , , ,073 Tuscarawas 34,846 35,240 35,425 35,777 36,020 36,792 36,290 35,589 36,488 36,024 35,888 The table below shows major sectors in the area since In total the region has lost about ten thousand jobs since 2000 (-4.8%), most of them in manufacturing. The greatest employment gains were in education and health services (11.8%). Figure 6: Employment in the Employment Source Area by Major Industry Major Sector Net Growth Percent Growth Total All Sectors 212, ,961-10, % Natural Resources and Mining 1,319 1, % Construction 9,995 10, % Manufacturing 51,996 37,895-14, % Trade, Transportation and Utilities 40,347 39,252-1, % Information 2,528 2, % Financial Activities 7,961 8, % Professional and Business Services 16,941 17, % Education and Health Services 29,629 33,115 3, % Leisure and Hospitality 19,166 20, % Other Services, except Public Administration 8,056 7, % Government, including Public Schools 24,065 24, % 4

9 Key Trends, continued Unemployment: For the most part, unemployment in Stark and Tuscarawas Counties has followed the same patterns as state and national unemployment over the past decade. Until 2000, Tuscarawas County had higher unemployment rates than Stark County, but has been lower since then. Area unemployment, 6.2 percent in 2005, has generally been higher than rates in Ohio (5.9%) and the U.S. (5.1%). Figure 7: Unemployment Trends 8.0% U.S. Ohio Stark Tuscarawas 7.0% 6.0% 5.0% 4.0% 3.0% 2.0% 1.0% 0.0% U.S. 5.6% 5.4% 4.9% 4.5% 4.2% 4.0% 4.7% 5.8% 6.0% 5.5% 5.1% Ohio 4.9% 5.0% 4.6% 4.3% 4.3% 4.0% 4.4% 5.7% 6.2% 6.2% 5.9% 5.1% 5.5% 5.0% 4.4% 4.7% 4.1% 4.4% 5.8% 6.6% 6.5% 6.2% Stark 5.0% 5.5% 4.9% 4.2% 4.5% 4.1% 4.3% 5.9% 6.7% 6.6% 6.4% Tuscarawas 5.5% 5.6% 5.3% 5.3% 5.2% 4.1% 4.5% 5.7% 6.2% 6.1% 5.6% 5

10 Key Trends, continued Income: Per capita income has been rising steadily over the past ten years at a 3.3 percent annual compound rate of growth, reaching nearly $28,000 by This has been slower than the national rate of 4.1 percent and statewide 3.7 percent. Both counties have had lower per capita incomes than statewide. Tuscarawas County has had the lowest income over this period, reaching only about $24,800 by Figure 8: Per Capita Income $35,000 U.S. Ohio Stark Tuscarawas $30,000 $25,000 $20,000 $15,000 $10,000 $5,000 $ U.S. $23,076 $24,175 $25,334 $26,883 $27,939 $29,845 $30,574 $30,810 $31,484 $33,050 Ohio $22,495 $23,322 $24,656 $26,017 $26,859 $28,207 $28,601 $29,212 $29,954 $31,161 $20,832 $21,547 $22,523 $24,000 $24,623 $25,909 $25,943 $26,272 $26,778 $27,817 Stark $21,417 $22,106 $23,094 $24,679 $25,319 $26,746 $26,736 $27,056 $27,506 $28,551 Tuscarawas $18,337 $19,177 $20,117 $21,160 $21,719 $22,435 $22,654 $23,027 $23,764 $24,787 6

11 Key Trends, continued Housing Permits: New permits for residential construction are shown in Figure 9 below. While construction in Tuscarawas County has been relatively flat since 1995, Stark County has undergone some highs and lows during this period, granting 1,400 permits in The average valuation for these new permits, shown in Figure 10, has been increasing during this period with Stark County building more highly-valued units. Figure 9: Number of New Residential Building Permits 2,000 Stark Tuscarawas 1,800 1,600 1,400 1,200 1, ,410 1,459 1,559 1,579 1,619 1,428 1,301 1,555 1,747 1,722 1,568 Stark 1,206 1,213 1,335 1,386 1,463 1,255 1,116 1,395 1,550 1,493 1,404 Tuscarawas Figure 10: Valuation of New Residential Building Permits $180,000 Stark Tuscarawas $160,000 $140,000 $120,000 $100,000 $80,000 $60,000 $40,000 $20,000 $ $109,494 $121,892 $114,557 $136,353 $138,978 $147,343 $161,432 $154,879 $158,257 $159,666 $160,043 Stark $114,173 $129,276 $119,631 $142,136 $141,803 $150,417 $169,282 $159,111 $161,595 $165,299 $162,711 Tuscarawas $81,833 $85,484 $84,317 $94,825 $112,482 $125,041 $114,079 $117,978 $131,997 $122,943 $137,204 7

12 III. Industry Analysis Employment by Sector: Figure 11 below shows the distribution of industry employment in These statistics do not include most farmers, other self-employed workers, and others not covered by unemployment insurance. This pie chart shows a very diverse mix of employment in region. The area s three dominant employment sectors, together accounting for 54.6 percent of all local workers, are trade, transportation and utilities, which includes retail and trucking; manufacturing; and education and health services, including hospitals, clinics, and private schools. The other major sectors shown on this chart are government, including public schools (12.1%); leisure and hospitality, which includes restaurants, hotels and certain recreation facilities (10.0%); professional and business services such as law and accounting firms, corporate offices and administrative support (8.4%); construction (5.0%); financial activities like banking, insurance and real estate (4.2%); other defined service industries like laundries, repair services and certain non-profit organizations (3.8%); information, including publishing and telecommunications (1.2%); and finally a small number of workers in natural resources and mining (0.6%). Figure 11: Employment by Major Sector, 2005 Government 12.1% Natural Resources and Mining 0.6% Construction 5.0% Other Services 3.8% Manufacturing 18.8% Leisure and Hospitality 10.0% Education and Health Services 16.4% Trade, Transportation and Utilities 19.4% Professional and Business Services 8.4% Information 1.2% Financial Activities 4.2% Figure 12 on the next page shows more detailed information about sector employment in The Employment Source region and how it compares with the state. In addition to the area s industry mix relative to the state, the proportion of total state employment for each sector helps identify the importance of a sector s employment in Ohio. The sector that stands out the most is mining, which employs about 0.4 percent in this area compared to only 0.2 percent statewide. Though it 8

13 Industry Analysis, continued is small (only about 750 workers), local mining employment accounts for 7.0 percent of the state total. Another highly-concentrated sector is manufacturing, which accounts for 15.3 percent of statewide workers and 18.8 percent of local workers (4.7 percent of the state total). Likewise, there are a few sectors that appear less concentrated in this region compared to the state, such as transportation and warehousing or management of companies and enterprises. Going into greater detail on sector employment, we can see that many of the major industries from Figure 11 are dominated by more specific sectors. For example, the trade, transportation and utilities category is comprised mostly of retail trade employment (13.0%). Another example is education and health services, which is mostly health care and social assistance (14.8%). Figure 12: Employment by Industry Sector, 2005 Industry Sector Employment Percent State State Percent of Distrib. Employment Distrib. State Total Total All Sectors 201, % 5,308, % 3.8% Natural Resources and Mining 1, % 24, % 4.8% Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting % 14, % 3.1% Mining % 10, % 7.0% Construction 10, % 232, % 4.4% Manufacturing 37, % 811, % 4.7% Trade, Transportation and Utilities 39, % 1,035, % 3.8% Wholesale Trade 8, % 235, % 3.7% Retail Trade 26, % 613, % 4.3% Transportation and Warehousing 3, % 165, % 2.3% Utilities % 20, % 3.3% Information 2, % 89, % 2.8% Financial Activities 8, % 299, % 2.8% Finance and Insurance 6, % 229, % 2.8% Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 1, % 69, % 2.8% Professional and Business Services 17, % 643, % 2.6% Professional, Scientific and Technical Services 5, % 231, % 2.4% Management of Companies and Enterprises % 98, % 1.0% Administrative and Waste Services 10, % 313, % 3.3% Education and Health Services 33, % 750, % 4.4% Education Services 3, % 85, % 3.7% Health Care and Social Assistance 29, % 664, % 4.5% Leisure and Hospitality 20, % 499, % 4.0% Arts, Entertainment and Recreation 2, % 67, % 3.3% Accommodation and Food Services 17, % 431, % 4.2% Other Services, except Public Administration 7, % 165, % 4.7% Government, including Public Schools 24, % 753, % 3.2% Federal Government 1, % 76, % 1.7% State Government 1, % 132, % 1.4% Local Government 21, % 544, % 3.9% 9

14 Industry Analysis, continued Employment Prospects: The table below looks at industry classifications and is color coded to more quickly identify those sectors most important to the region. The left column ranks all 22 sectors shown by their employment levels in The top ten sectors in this column are printed in blue. The right column ranks sectors by the net number of new jobs created since The top ten growth sectors in the second column are printed in red. Sectors that appear at the top of both lists are printed in purple. Sectors with high employment levels are often a major source of job openings because seven of ten openings are expected to be replacement needs. 4 In terms of employment, manufacturing is the largest single sector in the region, with nearly 38,000 workers. Unfortunately, it was also the sector to lose the most jobs between 2000 and 2005: over 14,000. The second-largest employment sector, health care and social assistance, was also the sector to add the most jobs during the period of analysis, employing about 30,000 and hiring over 3,000 new workers. The third-largest employment sector was retail trade. Other sectors to see large job growth were accommodation and food services and transportation and warehousing. Figure 13: Employment Prospects by Industry Sector 2005 Employment New Jobs: Manufacturing Health Care and Social Assistance Health Care and Social Assistance Accommodation and Food Services Retail Trade Transportation and Warehousing Local Government Local Government Accommodation and Food Services Professional, Scientific and Technical Services Administrative and Waste Services Finance and Insurance Construction Education Services Wholesale Trade State Government Other Services, except Public Administration Construction Finance and Insurance Real Estate and Rental and Leasing Professional, Scientific and Technical Services Management of Companies and Enterprises Transportation and Warehousing Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting Education Services Utilities Information Information Arts, Entertainment and Recreation Mining Real Estate and Rental and Leasing Arts, Entertainment and Recreation State Government Other Services, except Public Administration Federal Government Federal Government Management of Companies and Enterprises Administrative and Waste Services Mining Wholesale Trade Utilities Retail Trade Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting Manufacturing 4 Ohio Job Outlook to 2012, p

15 Industry Analysis, continued Average Weekly Earnings: Figure 14 below ranks the sectors in area by their average weekly earnings total wage or salary regardless of hours worked and shows how much the sectors have grown or declined in Statewide average weekly earnings for all employers were $718 in 2005, compared to $607 for this region. This table also uses the same color-coding system as Figure 13 on the previous page, with sectors printed in purple being large sectors with growth. The utilities sector had the highest average weekly earnings for the area: $1,331. The second and third highest-paying sectors were management of companies and enterprises and federal government, with average earnings of $1,078 and $963 per week, respectively. The highest paying sector to have added jobs in the last five years was state government, with average weekly earnings of $886. The highest paying major employment sector was manufacturing, which paid an average $860 per week. The highest paying large employment sector that also added jobs (that is, a sector printed in purple) was finance and insurance at $779 per week. Figure 14: Sectors Ranked by 2005 Average Weekly Earnings Industry Sector 2000 Employment 2005 Employment Net Change Percent Change Average Weekly Earnings Utilities % $1,331 Management of Companies and Enterprises % $1,078 Federal Government 1,638 1, % $963 State Government 1,717 1, % $886 Mining % $869 Manufacturing 51,996 37,895-14, % $860 Wholesale Trade 9,021 8, % $836 Finance and Insurance 6,115 6, % $779 Professional, Scientific and Technical Services 5,288 5, % $713 Construction 9,995 10, % $695 Information 2,528 2, % $679 Transportation and Warehousing 3,041 3, % $657 Health Care and Social Assistance 26,799 29,943 3, % $637 Local Government 20,710 21, % $634 Agriculture, Forestry, Fishing and Hunting % $485 Real Estate and Rental and Leasing 1,847 1, % $484 Education Services 2,830 3, % $434 Administrative and Waste Services 10,776 10, % $411 Retail Trade 27,605 26,177-1, % $401 Other Services, except Public Administration 8,056 7, % $360 Arts, Entertainment and Recreation 2,364 2, % $246 Accommodation and Food Services 16,803 17,910 1, % $206 Bear in mind that industry size and growth do not always coincide with earnings potential. Accommodation and food services was one of the area s large employers and added about 1,100 jobs, yet it had the lowest average weekly earnings: only $206. This is because this sector tends to hire large numbers of part-time workers and tips are not included in earnings figures. 11

16 IV. Educational Infrastructure Figure 15 below shows educational attainment for persons 25 and older in the area, according to data from the 2000 decennial census. Generally, region has a slightly lower level of overall educational attainment than the rest of Ohio, especially in terms of postsecondary education. About 18 percent of adults in Stark County have a bachelor s degree or better, compared with 12.2 percent in Tuscarawas County and 21.1 percent statewide. Proportions of adults without a high school diploma are comparable in all these areas, though Tuscarawas proportion is slightly higher (19.7%). Figure 15: Educational Attainment 100% 90% 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% Ohio Stark Tuscarawas Master's Degree or Higher 547,276 17,845 15,362 2,483 Bachelor's Degree 1,016,258 34,949 30,035 4,914 Associate Degree 436,608 16,389 13,410 2,979 Some College 1,471,964 57,039 47,919 9,120 High School Graduate 2,674, , ,333 29,225 No High School Diploma 1,262,085 53,844 41,912 11,932 There are 14 postsecondary schools in region, including 10 two- and four-year colleges and universities: Aultman Hospital School of Nursing in Canton, Kent State University Stark at Canton, Malone College in Canton, Mercy Medial Center School of Nursing in Canton, Mount Union College in Alliance, National Beauty College in Canton, Raphael s School of Beauty Culture in Alliance, Stark State College of Technology in Canton, Walsh University in North Canton and Kent State University Tuscarawas at New Philadelphia. In addition, the area is host to 326 apprentices in 19 programs, covering such fields like demolition, electrical work, painting, plumbing, roofing, steel working and pipefitting. 12

17 Technical Notes Commuting data are from the 2000 Census of Population and Housing, County-to-County Worker Flow Files. Data is available at Population and demographic estimates were obtained from the U.S. Census Bureau. The figures are available online at Employment data were obtained from the Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages (QCEW), Bureau of Labor Market Information, Ohio Department of Job and Family Services. The data are based on reports filed by employers subject to the Ohio Unemployment Compensation Law, as well as those covered under Unemployment Compensation for Federal Employees, by place of work. See the NAICS-based Economic Development Profiles at or the data query menu for Employment and Wages by Industry at Total employment may include employment and wage data for non-classifiable establishments. Unemployment statistics are produced by the Local Area Unemployment Statistics (LAUS) section, Bureau of Labor Market Information, Ohio Department of Job and Family Services. Data for One-Stop areas are available for query at or for other geographies at Per capita income figures are from the Bureau of Economic Analysis and are downloadable from Information on residential construction permits and their valuation are from the U.S. Census Bureau, Construction Reports: Housing Authorized by Building Permits and Public Contracts. Data are available online at Data on education were obtained from the Ohio Department of Development, Office of Strategic Research, based on information from the 2000 decennial census. Detailed information on each of Ohio s counties is available at The Bureau of Labor Market Information also collects data on programs for the Integrated Postsecondary Educational Data System (IPEDS). These data are posted on the internet by the National Center for Education Statistics at The list of major employers in each county is available in the Ohio County Profiles produced by the Ohio Department of Development s Office of Strategic Research at For more information on Ohio workforce statistics, visit the Ohio Workforce Informer online at or the Ohio Labor Market Information Classic website at 13

18 References Appalachian Regional Commission. County Economic Status Designations in the Appalachian Region, Fiscal Year September Internet August Goldstein, Harvey, University of North Carolina. Projecting State and Area Industry Employment. Prepared through a grant from the Employment and Training Administration, U.S. Department of Labor. Projections Workgroup, August Ohio Department of Development. Office of Strategic Research. Commuting Patterns by County. March Internet August Ohio Department of Development. Office of Strategic Research. Ohio County Profiles. October Internet August Ohio Department of Job and Family Services. Bureau of Labor Market Information. Demographic, Labor Force and Industry Trends. June Ohio Department of Job and Family Services. Bureau of Labor Market Information. Market Analysis of Key Workforce Trends United States. Bureau of Economic Analysis. Local Area Personal Income. Internet August United States. Bureau of Labor Statistics. Quarterly Census of Employment and Wages. June United States. Census Bureau. Building Permits. Internet August United States. Census Bureau. Population Estimates. Internet August United States. Census Bureau. Current Lists of Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas and Definitions. 23 August Internet August

19 Appendix A Ohio s Workforce Investment Areas 15

20 Appendix B Metropolitan and Micropolitan Areas 16

21 Appendix B, continued Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSAs) have at least one urbanized area with a population of 50,000 or more, plus adjacent territory that has a high degree of social and economic integration with the core as measured by commuting ties. Micropolitan Statistical Areas have at least one urban cluster with a population of at least 10,000 but less than 50,000, plus adjacent territory that has a high degree of social and economic integration with the core, measured by commuting ties. For further information on the Office of Management and Budget s 2000 Standards for Defining Metropolitan and Micropolitan Statistical Areas, please visit Metropolitan Statistical Areas in Ohio and Adjacent States A. Akron MSA: Portage and Summit Counties. B. Canton-Massillon MSA: Carroll and Stark Counties. C. Cincinnati-Middletown MSA*: Brown, Butler, Clermont, Hamilton and Warren Counties in Ohio; Dearborn, Franklin and Ohio Counties in Indiana; and Boone, Bracken, Campbell, Gallatin, Grant, Kenton and Pendleton Counties in Kentucky. D. Cleveland-Elyria-Mentor MSA: Cuyahoga, Geauga, Lake, Lorain and Medina Counties. E. Columbus MSA: Delaware, Fairfield, Franklin, Licking, Madison, Morrow, Pickaway and Union Counties. F. Dayton MSA: Greene, Miami, Montgomery and Preble Counties. G. Huntington-Ashland MSA*: Cabell and Wayne Counties in West Virginia; Boyd and Greenup Counties in Kentucky; and Lawrence County in Ohio. H. Lima MSA: Allen County. I. Mansfield MSA: Richland County. J. Parkersburg-Marietta-Vienna MSA*: Pleasants, Wirt and Wood Counties in West Virginia and Washington County in Ohio. K. Sandusky MSA: Erie County. L. Springfield MSA: Clark County. M. Toledo MSA: Fulton, Lucas, Ottawa and Wood Counties. N. Weirton-Steubenville MSA*: Jefferson County in Ohio and Brooke and Hancock Counties in West Virginia. O. Wheeling MSA*: Marshall and Ohio Counties in West Virginia and Belmont County in Ohio. P. Youngstown-Warren-Boardman MSA*: Mahoning and Trumbull Counties in Ohio and Mercer County in Pennsylvania. *Statistical areas in other states that include Ohio counties. 17

22 Appendix B, continued 1. Ashland 2. Ashtabula 3. Athens 4. Bellefontaine: Logan County 5. Bucyrus: Crawford County 6. Cambridge: Guernsey County 7. Celina: Mercer County 8. Chillicothe: Ross County 9. Coshocton 10. Defiance 11. East Liverpool-Salem: Columbiana County 12. Findlay: Hancock County 13. Fremont: Sandusky County 14. Greenville: Darke County 15. Marion 16. Mount Vernon: Knox County 17. New Philadelphia-Dover: Tuscarawas County 18. Norwalk: Huron County Micropolitan Statistical Areas in Ohio 19. Point Pleasant*: Mason County in West Virginia and Gallia County in Ohio 20. Portsmouth: Scioto County 21. Sidney: Shelby County 22. Tiffin-Fostoria: Seneca County 23. Urbana: Champaign County 24. Van Wert 25. Wapakoneta: Auglaize County 26. Washington Court House: Fayette County 27. Wilmington: Clinton County 28. Wooster: Wayne County 29. Zanesville: Muskingum County The micropolitan area name is the same as the county name unless otherwise noted. *Statistical areas in other states that include Ohio counties. 18

23 Appendix C Major County-to-County Commuting Patterns Stark Percent of workers that work outside the county % Average commute time in minutes Number of workers 16+ years of age Number of workers 16+ years of age living in Stark County 177,234 working in Stark County 171,642 Commute Out To Number Percent Commute In From Number Percent Summit Co. OH 21, % Summit Co. OH 7, % Wayne Co. OH 3, % Tuscarawas Co. OH 5, % Cuyahoga Co. OH 2, % Carroll Co. OH 5, % Portage Co. OH 2, % Columbiana Co. OH 3, % Tuscarawas Co. OH 1, % Mahoning Co. OH 2, % Mahoning Co. OH 1, % Wayne Co. OH 1, % Carroll Co. OH % Portage Co. OH 1, % Medina Co. OH % Cuyahoga Co. OH % Columbiana Co. OH % Medina Co. OH % Holmes Co. OH % Harrison Co. OH % Tuscarawas Percent of workers that work outside the county % Average commute time in minutes Number of workers 16+ years of age Number of workers 16+ years of age living in Tuscarawas County 42,093 working in Tuscarawas County 37,247 Commute Out To Number Percent Commute In From Number Percent Stark Co. OH 5, % Stark Co. OH 1, % Holmes Co. OH 1, % Harrison Co. OH 1, % Coshocton Co. OH % Carroll Co. OH % Wayne Co. OH % Coshocton Co. OH % Summit Co. OH % Holmes Co. OH % Carroll Co. OH % Guernsey Co. OH % Harrison Co. OH % Summit Co. OH % Guernsey Co. OH % Wayne Co. OH % Cuyahoga Co. OH % Jefferson Co. OH % Muskingum Co. OH % Belmont Co. OH % Source: Ohio Department of Development, Office of Strategic Research, 2000 Census Data. 19

24 Appendix D Major Employers by County Stark Aultman Hospital Canton City Board of Education General Electric Co. Maytag Corp./Hoover Co. Mercy Medical Center Precision Castparts Corp. Republic Engineered Products Timken Co. Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Tuscarawas Allied Machine & Engineering Dover City Board of Education JLG Industries/Gradall Co. New Philadelhia City Board of Education Sanwa Shutter Corp./Genie Co. Smurfit-Stone Container Corp. Union Hospital Association Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. Zimmer Holdings, Inc. Health Care Government Finance Manufactuirng Health Care Manufactuirng Manufactuirng Manufactuirng Retail Manufactuirng Government Manufactuirng Government Manufactuirng Manufactuirng Health Care Retail Manufactuirng Source: Ohio Department of Development. Ohio County Profiles. Employers are listed in alphabetical order. 20

25 Office of Workforce Development P.O. Box 1618 Columbus, OH Bureau of Labor Market Information Business Principles for Workforce Development Partner with the workforce and economic development community. Develop and deploy new information solution tools and systems for the workforce and economic development community. Provide products and services that are customer and demand driven. Be known as an important and reliable source for information solutions that support workforce development goals and outcomes. Acknowledgements: The Workforce Research Section, under the direction of Labor Economist Larry Less, was responsible for the composition of this report. Labor Market Analyst Jonathan Calig was primarily responsible for production. Thanks are extended to the many other analysts who developed and reviewed the data presented in this report. This publication was prepared under the supervision of Labor Market Information Bureau Chief Keith Ewald and Assistant Bureau Chief Rudy Wilkinson. This report was prepared by the Ohio Department of Job and Family Services, Office of Workforce Development. For further information, visit our website at or contact the Ohio Bureau of Labor Market Information at WORK-411 or Ted Strickland, Governor State of Ohio Helen E. Jones-Kelley, Director Ohio Department of Job and Family Services Office of Workforce Development Bureau of Labor Market Information ODJFS is an Equal Opportunity Employer and Service Provider (3/2007)