What U.S. Census 2000 Data Tell Us About The Number of Children Per Housing Unit

Similar documents
TECHNICAL REPORT NO. 11 (5 TH EDITION) THE POPULATION OF SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN PRELIMINARY DRAFT SOUTHEASTERN WISCONSIN REGIONAL PLANNING COMMISSION

Socio-economic Series Long-term household projections 2011 update

Poverty in the United Way Service Area

Health Insurance Coverage in 2013: Gains in Public Coverage Continue to Offset Loss of Private Insurance

Evaluating the BLS Labor Force projections to 2000

UNEMPLOYMENT RATES IMPROVING IN THE DISTRICT By Caitlin Biegler

CRS Report for Congress Received through the CRS Web

Small Area Health Insurance Estimates from the Census Bureau: 2008 and 2009

West Valley City: Fair Housing Equity Assessment

E APPENDIX METHODOLOGY FOR LAND USE PROJECTIONS IN THE BOSTON REGION INTRODUCTION

Yukon Bureau of Statistics

2017 Regional Indicators Summary

Rental housing affordability in Pennsylvania. Eileen Divringi Community Development Research Analyst Federal Reserve Bank of Philadelphia

OVERVIEW OF THE SAN DIEGO REGION Current Conditions and Future Trends

Ravenna s most significant growth occurred before Between 1960 and 1980 the city s population declined by 8.5%.

Sandy: Fair Housing Equity Assessment

Cumberland Comprehensive Plan - Demographics Element Town Council adopted August 2003, State adopted June 2004 II. DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS

Women in the Labor Force: A Databook

SLUGGISH HOUSEHOLD GROWTH

Population and Housing Demand Projections for Metro Boston Regional Projections and Provisional Municipal Forecasts

Community and Economic Development

AUGUST THE DUNNING REPORT: DIMENSIONS OF CORE HOUSING NEED IN CANADA Second Edition

Wyoming Economic and

Fast Facts & Figures About Social Security, 2005

Rifle city Demographic and Economic Profile

LISC Building Sustainable Communities Initiative Neighborhood Quality Monitoring Report

Demographic Drivers. Joint Center for Housing Studies of Harvard University 11

From Crisis to Transition Demographic trends and American housing futures, with lessons from Texas

Urban Action Agenda Community Profiles COVER TO GO HERE. City of Beacon

Taylorsville: Fair Housing Equity Assessment

How the Census Bureau Measures Poverty With Selected Sources of Poverty Data

POVERTY IN THE 50 STATES:

City of Edmonton Population Change by Age,

State Profile: Utah. Utah Indicators: Aging & Work. State Perspectives. State Profile Series. Quick Fact Check for Utah.

Mid - City Industrial

APPENDIX F. Port of Long Beach Pier S Labor Market Study. AECOM July 25, 2011

GAO GENDER PAY DIFFERENCES. Progress Made, but Women Remain Overrepresented among Low-Wage Workers. Report to Congressional Requesters

Pro-growth Agenda PART ONE: PROBLEMS & STEPHEN MOORE

Population and Labor Force Projections for New Jersey: 2008 to 2028

The state of the nation s Housing 2013

REPORT. Hispanics and the Social Security Debate. Richard Fry. Rakesh Kochhar. Jeffrey Passel. Roberto Suro. March 16, 2005

Demographic and Service Need Projections for the Aging Population:

Socio-Demographic Projections for Autauga, Elmore, and Montgomery Counties:

Population & Demographic Analysis

State Perspectives. Kansas Indicators: Aging & Work years 23.2% 41.6 years 66.3% 25.1% 3.0%

Policy makers and the public frequently debate how fast government spending

Older Workers: Employment and Retirement Trends

Women in the Labor Force: A Databook

COMMUNITY REPORT CARD Nine-County Region

DEMOGRAPHIC DRIVERS. Household growth is picking up pace. With more. than a million young foreign-born adults arriving

A Look Behind the Numbers: Foreclosures in Allegheny County, PA

Clay County Comprehensive Plan

Economic Security Programs Cut Poverty Nearly in Half Over Last 50 Years, New Data Show

Health Economics Program

Gender Pay Differences: Progress Made, but Women Remain Overrepresented Among Low- Wage Workers

Draper: Fair Housing Equity Assessment

Appendix C-5 Environmental Justice and Title VI Analysis Methodology

Census Variables Available For YOUNG ENGLISH LANGUAGE LEARNERS: A DEMOGRAPHIC PROFILE by Donald J. Hernandez

Methods and Data for Developing Coordinated Population Forecasts

The coverage of young children in demographic surveys

Business in Nebraska

Recent trends in numbers of first-time buyers: A review of recent evidence

Westwood Country Club Redevelopment

A LOOK BEHIND THE NUMBERS

SHARE OF WORKERS IN NONSTANDARD JOBS DECLINES Latest survey shows a narrowing yet still wide gap in pay and benefits.

Health Insurance Data

Women in the Labor Force: A Databook

COMMUNITY REPORT CARD Nine-County Region

AARP WORKFORCE PROFILES:

AARP WORKFORCE PROFILES:

Camden Industrial. Minneapolis neighborhood profile. About this area. Trends in the area. Neighborhood in Minneapolis.

The Province of Prince Edward Island Employment Trends and Data Poverty Reduction Action Plan Backgrounder

Meeting the Energy Needs of Low-Income Households in Connecticut Final Report

CRP 566 DEMOGRAPHIC ANALYSIS INTRODUCTION. Dave Swenson Department of Economics College of Agriculture and Life Sciences Iowa State University

MetroWest Health Foundation Trends and Projections

AARP WORKFORCE PROFILES:

2011 Community Development Halton, all rights reserved.

PROPERTY TAXES IN PERSPECTIVE. By David H. Bradley

Roundtable on Income Equality, Social Inclusion and Mobility OECD Paris

Older Workers: Employment and Retirement Trends

Poverty in the United States in 2014: In Brief

Deteriorating Health Insurance Coverage from 2000 to 2010: Coverage Takes the Biggest Hit in the South and Midwest

Florida: An Economic Overview

State Profile: Iowa. Iowa Indicators: Aging & Work. State Perspectives. State Profile Series. Quick Fact Check for Iowa.

2013 STA Passenger Survey Results. Attachment E Title VI Attachment E

Appendix G Defining Low-Income Populations

Did States Maximize Their Opportunity Zone Selections?

2. Demographics. Population and Households

2017:IIIQ Nevada Unemployment Rate Demographics Report*

2018:IIQ Nevada Unemployment Rate Demographics Report*

Having a Retirement Plan Can Depend on Industry or Hours Worked

2017:IVQ Nevada Unemployment Rate Demographics Report*

DEMOGRAPHY AND THE ECONOMY

State Profile: Michigan

Introduction OUT OF REACH 2013

Georgia Per Capita Income: Identifying the Factors Contributing to the Growing Income Gap with Other States

Demographics. Housing Security in the Washington Region. Fairfax County, Fairfax City and Falls Church Cities

Demographics. Housing Security in the Washington Region. District of Columbia

Demographics. Housing Security in the Washington Region. Arlington County

Projections of Florida Population by County,

Transcription:

What U.S. Census 2000 Data Tell Us About The Number of Children Per Housing Unit Jeanne Gobalet Lapkoff & Gobalet Demographic Research, Inc. September 2008 DRAFT A student yield is the average number of children enrolled in a particular district s schools per housing unit. 1 Yield measurements are extremely useful in school demography: among other things, school administrators need to understand their district s yields in order to assure that facilities are adequate to handle future enrollments. All the analyses reported here measure what we call child yields. A child yield is the number of children in a particular age group (say 5 to 17 to reflect possible K-12 enrollments) divided by the number of housing units in that area. When we use Census data to compute yields, we label them child yields to underscore the fact that they are for the child population, regardless of whether the children are enrolled in school. Note that some children may be enrolled in private rather than public school, some children may be enrolled in a public school outside their district (an inter-district transfer student), and some may not be attending school at all. For all these reasons, child yields are higher than student yields. 2 In order to explore factors that affect yields, we analyzed special tabulations of Census 2000 PUMS data. 3 We studied how and why yields vary over time, how yields vary by the type and age of housing, how yields vary across states, and how yields may vary by the population s ethnic mix. Variation Over Time U.S. child yields have declined over time: they dropped 40 percent between 1940 and 2000, except during the post-world War II Baby Boom. The decline reflects increases in the share of people living alone and the varying share of the population that is young (see Figures 1 and 2). 1 Student yields are also sometimes called student generation factors, student generation rates, or student housing unit multipliers. 2 Approximately 11 percent of students are enrolled in private schools nationwide, so one could reduce the child yields by 11 percent to get a better indication of actual public school student yields. However, the purpose of this report is to clarify the factors that influence yields, and to that end, adjusting for private schooling is unnecessary. 3 See Burchell, Listoken, and Dolphin, The New Practitioner s Guide to Fiscal Analysis, 1986, for a comprehensive discussion of household multipliers. 2008 by Lapkoff & Gobalet Demographic Research, Inc., all rights reserved 1

The share of people living alone has risen over the decades. In 1940, about eight percent of households consisted of one person. By 2000, the rate more than tripled, to 26 percent. The second important influence on child yields is the percentage of children in the population. Even small changes in the percentage of children can elevate or reduce child yields. The post-world War II baby boom included peaks in the child population share, reflected in the 1960 and 1970 U.S. Census counts (Figure 2). In 1960 and 1970, 20 percent of the population was between five and 14 years of age, up from 16 percent in 1950. By 1980, the percentage had dropped and it remained fairly stable through 2000. Figure 1 The Number of One-Person Households in the United States, 1900-2000 (no data for 1910-1930) 30.0% Percentage of All U.S. Households Consisting of One Person, 1900 and 1940-2000 Decennial Censuses 25.0% 22.7% 24.6% 25.8% 20.0% 17.6% 15.0% 13.3% 10.0% 7.7% 9.3% 5.0% 5.1% 0.0% 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Data Source: Hobbs, Frank and Nicole Stoops, U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Special Reports, Series CENSR-4, Demographic Trends in the 20th Century, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 2002. 2008 by Lapkoff & Gobalet Demographic Research, Inc., all rights reserved 2

Figure 2: Percentage of the Population Aged 5-17 in the United States, 1900-2000 Percentage of the U.S. Population Aged 5-14, 1900-2000 Decennial Censuses 25.0% 22.3% 20.0% 20.5% 20.8% 20.0% 19.8% 20.1% 15.0% 17.0% 16.1% 15.4% 14.2% 14.6% 10.0% 5.0% 0.0% 1900 1910 1920 1930 1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Data Source: Hobbs, Frank and Nicole Stoops, U.S. Census Bureau, Census 2000 Special Reports, Series CENSR-4, Demographic Trends in the 20th Century, U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington, DC, 2002. These two population changes, in combination, lie behind the varying overall child yields reported in Figure 3, which shows the child yield (children aged 5 to 14) for the nation from 1940 through 2000. 4 Child yields dipped in 1950, and then declined significantly after 1970: this decrease is associated with the drop in the number of children per housing unit that is discussed above. The yield was fairly stable between 1980 and 2000. Individual school districts yields have varied historically partly as a result of these national population trends. 4 Note that we report child yields for all housing units, not just occupied ones. This is mostly because when we use yields to estimate enrollments for new housing, we do not take occupancy into account. When we measure yields in a particular neighborhood (that is not brand new), we don t account for occupancy. Similarly when we apply the student yield to new houses, we do so for all the units, not some estimated occupancy of units. The only time we care about occupancy at the local level with regard to student yields is when the development is under construction. THEN it s important to know which houses have been occupied. 2008 by Lapkoff & Gobalet Demographic Research, Inc., all rights reserved 3

Figure 3: Child Yields in the United States, 1940-2000 Number of Children Aged 5 to 14 Divided by Total Number of Housing Units, 1940-2000 0.70 0.60 0.60 0.53 0.61 0.59 0.50 Child Yield 0.40 0.30 0.40 0.34 0.35 0.20 0.10-1940 1950 1960 1970 1980 1990 2000 Census Year Data Source: U.S. Decennial Censuses, 1940-2000. Housing data: http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/housing.html Variation by Housing Characteristics Housing Type Yields vary greatly by housing type: in our experience, this the most important determinant of yields. Census data confirm this point. Analysis of PUMS household records shows how child yields vary by housing type (Figure 4). 5 The denser the housing, the lower the yields. Single-family housing units have the highest child yield (.58), with yields gradually declining for progressively greater numbers of units in the structure. In housing with 50 units or more ( 50+ family s ), the yield is only.21. 5 The Census Bureau distinguishes among 10 housing types. 2008 by Lapkoff & Gobalet Demographic Research, Inc., all rights reserved 4

Figure 4: Child Yields by Housing Type, United States, 2000 0.70 0.60 Children per Housing Unit 0.50 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 1-family house, detached Mobile home or trailer 1-family house, attached 2-family 3-4 family 5-9 family 10-19 family 20-49 family 50+ family Boat, tent, van, other Type of Housing Source: 2000 U.S. Census data, Public Use Microdata Set (PUMS) Age of Housing A further noteworthy pattern is that SFU yields vary systematically by the age of housing: newer houses tend to have the highest yields. Figure 5 shows the number of children per unit in single-family homes, by age of structure, for the entire United States in 2000. In 2000, nearly 36 million children lived in approximately 62,460,000 singlefamily detached housing units, for an overall yield of.57 per unit. However, yields varied by age of structure. Peak yields were found in units that were between six and ten years old. The lowest yields were in units that were at least 40 years old. Our school district experience suggests an even stronger age-of-housing effect than shown in these Census (PUMS) data. The cross-sectional analysis shown in Figure 5 suggests what happens to yields in houses or single-family housing neighborhoods as they age. Because data needed to conduct a longitudinal study of neighborhood yields over time are usually not available, crosssectional studies are used instead to infer age-of-housing effects on yields. 2008 by Lapkoff & Gobalet Demographic Research, Inc., all rights reserved 5

Figure 5: Child Yields by Age of Single-Family Housing Unit, United States, 2000 0.90 0.80 0.70 0.60 Child Yield 0.50 0.40 0.30 0.20 0.10 0.00 0 to 1 2 to 5 6 to 10 11 to 20 21 to 30 31 to 40 41 to 50 51 to 60 61+ Age of Structure (in years) Data Source: Census 2000 PUMS data. Some kinds of housing actually gain children as the units age. U.S. Census data show child yields increasing with age in s with 50 or more units (Figure 6). These data are consistent with our own studies of condominiums and apartments. Older apartments may have more children per unit because rents are generally lower in older complexes, making them more affordable for households with children. Apartments that are 50 years old have nearly twice the yields of newer units. Also, some of the older condominiums may convert from owner-occupied to rentals that are affordable to lower-income families with children. 2008 by Lapkoff & Gobalet Demographic Research, Inc., all rights reserved 6

Figure 6: U.S. Child Yields by Age of Housing in Buildings with 50 or more Units, 2000 U.S. Child Yields in Complexes and Buildings with 50 or more Units, 2000 0.35 0.30 0.25 Child Yield 0.20 0.15 0.10 0.05 0.00 0-1 year 2 to 5 6 to 10 11 to 20 21 to 30 31 to 40 41 to 50 51 to 60 61+ Age of Housing Data Source: Census 2000 PUMS data. Variation Across Communities Census data can be used to compare yields across geographies. Figure 7 shows child yields for each state in 2000. We see substantial variation: the highest yield was in Utah (.66), and the lowest (.30) was in the District of Columbia. Note that the highest yields do not approach levels that many might expect (page xx, Why Student Yields Usually are Lower than People Think ). 2008 by Lapkoff & Gobalet Demographic Research, Inc., all rights reserved 7

Figure 7: Children per Housing Unit by State, Census 2000 Data Source: U.S. Census 2000 Yields Vary by the Community s Ethnic Mix A further important determinant of yield is ethnic composition. Certain groups, as well as recent immigrants, tend to have larger families. Homes occupied by these families have higher child yields. In Figure 8 we show the relationship between child yields and the Hispanic share of the population for each of California s 58 counties. Each dot represents a county. Clearly, counties with higher percentages of Hispanics tend to have larger numbers of children per housing unit. 2008 by Lapkoff & Gobalet Demographic Research, Inc., all rights reserved 8

Figure 8: Yields and Hispanic Population Percentage, California Counties, 2000 Student Yield by Percent Hispanic, California Counties, 2000 Percent Hispanic 80% 70% 60% 50% 40% 30% 20% 10% 0% 0.0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 Yield Source: U.S. Census, 2000. 2008 by Lapkoff & Gobalet Demographic Research, Inc., all rights reserved 9