ZOIO KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK STATE TRENDS IN WELL-BEING ACKNOWLEDGMENTS The Annie E. Casey Foundation’s KIDS COUNT Data Book is made possible by the contributions of many. Jean D’Amico, Kelvin Pollard and Alicia VanOrman of the Population Reference Bureau were instrumental in the development of the KIDS COUNT® index, as well as in the collection and organization of data presented. In addition, the Foundation’s KIDS COUNT organizations (see page 63) and national outreach partners (see www.aecf.org/ outreachpartners) are critical to making the Data Book available to national, state and local leaders across the country. TABLE OF CONTENTS 4 FOREWORD 12 TRENDS 18 OVERALL CHILD WELL-BEING 22 ECONOMIC WELL-BEING 28 EDUCATION 34 HEALTH 40 FAMILY AND COMMUNITY 46 ENDNOTES 51 KIDS COUNT DATA CENTER 52 APPENDICES 58 ABOUT THE INDEX 59 DEFINITIONS AND DATA SOURCES 63 STATE KIDS COUNT ORGANIZATIONS 65 ABOUT THE ANNIE E. CASEY FOUNDATION FOREWORD BY LISA M. HAMILTON PRESIDENT AND CEO THE ANNIE E. CASEY FOUNDATION 4 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK When the Annie E. Casey Foundation published its first KIDS COUNT Data Book in 1990, there were 64 million children in America. Now, almost three decades later, there are close to 74 million. That’s millions more young lives with boundless potential and infinite worth. Millions more contributors to our economy, our communities and our nation. This 30th edition of the Data Book examines how America’s child population has changed, demographically and geographically. Many of the contrasts are dramatic: • In 1990, 69 percent of kids in America were white. By 2017, that figure was 53 percent.1 Clearly, the nation’s future depends on creating opportunity for all kids. • Some 18 million children are immigrants or the sons and daughters of immigrants.2 The share of children with at least one immigrant parent has doubled since 1990, from 13 to 26 percent.3 • Every state where child population growth has outpaced the national average is in the South or West. Texas alone has nearly 2.5 million more kids, accounting for more than a quarter of the national increase. A lot has changed since 1990, but the Casey Foundation’s goal remains the same. We want all children to have a bright future — not only because every child ought to have the chance to enjoy a happy, healthy life but also because when kids do well, America is stronger. Today’s kids will be tomorrow’s community leaders, workers and parents. And in many ways, today’s kids are doing better: More are graduating from high school, avoiding drugs and alcohol and delaying pregnancy until after their teenage years. But are we as a nation doing better by children compared to a generation ago? While we have stepped up for kids in some areas, we have fallen profoundly short in other ways. Notably, we have failed to reduce racial and ethnic disparities among children and dismantle the obstacles that so many children of color encounter on the road to adulthood. STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 5 Addressing these failures remains critical, as many states that have continually been near the bottom of the Foundation’s annual KIDS COUNT index rankings are the same ones that have seen tremendous growth in their child population. The best news revealed by the data is that when we as a nation make children our priority, we equip them for success in school and beyond. If we can do more to enable all kids to do well, then all of us must — for their sake and for America’s. As the opening sentence of the first Data Book put it, “Children make up one-quarter of this nation’s population and all of its future.” TABLE 1 Many States With Tremendous Growth in Their Child Population Continue to Perform Poorly on the KIDS COUNT Index Rankings for States With Child Population Growth That Outpaced the 1990–2017 National Average4 State 1990 2019 KIDS COUNT Ranking KIDS COUNT Ranking 39 28 26 42 49 31 32 37 21 45 46 43 11 22 19 46 20 25 37 38 18 47 33 31 39 36 41 7 10 16 Arizona Colorado Delaware Florida Georgia Idaho Nevada North Carolina Oregon South Carolina Tennessee Texas Utah Virginia Washington Note: This table reflects point-in-time KIDS COUNT rankings, not a direct data comparison. 6 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK GROWTH IN THE CHILD POPULATION: AN OVERVIEW The country looked a lot different when the Casey Foundation published the first KIDS COUNT Data Book. In 1990, Cleveland, Ohio, was more populated than Austin, Texas; nearly three decades later, Cleveland’s population was far less than half that of Austin.5 In 1990, Michigan had just one less seat in the U.S. House of Representatives than Florida, but in the last reapportionment, Michigan had only 14 seats, while Florida had 27.6 Although the U.S. population rose from 250 million in 1990 to 326 million in 2017, neither the overall increase nor the growth of the child population was distributed evenly among states. Geography The number of children actually peaked in 2009, at 74.1 million,7 and declined slightly since then to 73.7 million in 2017. Texas (which added 2.5 million kids), Florida (1.2 million) and California (1.1 million) accounted for half the total growth in the number of kids since 1990 (see Table 2). Every state but four in the South and West saw its child population grow; 8,9 conversely, a majority of states in the Northeast and four states in the Midwest saw theirs decrease. 1860 and 1920.12 In 38 states and the District of Columbia, the percentage of children in immigrant families at least doubled from 1990 through 2017. In 20 states, it at least tripled. In 12 states — led by North Carolina, Tennessee, Nebraska and Arkansas — the share of children in immigrant families at least quadrupled.13 Race and Ethnicity America is much more diverse than it was in 1990, and the nation’s child population reflects that trend. In 2017, Latino kids represented 25 percent of children in the United States, up from 12 percent; Asian and Pacific Islander kids were 6 percent of the total, up from 3 percent. The percentages of African-American and American Indian children held steady at 15 percent and 1 percent, respectively. • In 11 of the 15 states whose child population growth surpassed the national average since 1990, the influx of people from other states — not international immigration — was the biggest factor in overall population growth since 2010.10 In the other four, natural increases (births exceeding deaths) have been the largest driver.11 • Immigration may not be the primary factor behind growth, but it has unquestionably changed the child population in most states, as it always has in America. In percentage terms, immigration in 2017 was comparable to individual years during the period between STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 7 TABLE 2 California, Florida and Texas Account for Half of the Nation’s Recent Child Population Growth Change in the Number of Children by Location: 1990–2017 Location United States Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming Number of Children: 1990 Number of Children: 2017 Change in Number of Children Percentage Change 64,218,512 1,050,041 177,502 1,006,040 620,933 7,980,501 881,640 752,666 165,628 112,632 2,988,807 1,747,363 279,983 313,373 2,940,837 1,437,209 719,366 662,641 945,951 1,205,984 308,066 1,180,426 1,353,806 2,459,633 1,176,680 733,660 1,316,423 223,677 430,068 316,406 277,454 1,818,187 453,538 4,281,643 1,625,804 170,920 2,778,491 841,715 742,436 2,799,168 N.A. 225,923 921,041 199,453 1,220,200 4,906,220 627,122 143,296 1,520,670 1,301,545 436,797 1,302,869 136,078 73,655,378 1,095,473 184,928 1,633,490 705,540 9,060,136 1,261,833 743,826 204,484 124,492 4,201,983 2,514,698 305,744 443,792 2,897,185 1,573,409 731,947 712,538 1,010,539 1,108,403 252,634 1,347,506 1,369,955 2,176,649 1,298,657 713,567 1,382,971 228,889 475,733 685,463 258,773 1,979,018 488,090 4,154,497 2,302,346 175,772 2,605,235 959,285 873,619 2,664,515 656,796 207,332 1,104,674 214,856 1,507,502 7,366,039 926,699 116,825 1,869,176 1,645,816 369,718 1,282,644 136,483 9,436,866 45,432 7,426 627,450 84,607 1,079,635 380,193 -8,840 38,856 11,860 1,213,176 767,335 25,761 130,419 -43,652 136,200 12,581 49,897 64,588 -97,581 -55,432 167,080 16,149 -282,984 121,977 -20,093 66,548 5,212 45,665 369,057 -18,681 160,831 34,552 -127,146 676,542 4,852 -173,256 117,570 131,183 -134,653 N.A. -18,591 183,633 15,403 287,302 2,459,819 299,577 -26,471 348,506 344,271 -67,079 -20,225 405 15% 4% 4% 62% 14% 14% 43% -1% 23% 11% 41% 44% 9% 42% -1% 9% 2% 8% 7% -8% -18% 14% 1% -12% 10% -3% 5% 2% 11% 117% -7% 9% 8% -3% 42% 3% -6% 14% 18% -5% N.A. -8% 20% 8% 24% 50% 48% -18% 23% 26% -15% -2% <.5% Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics Bridged-Race Population Estimates, https://wonder.cdc.gov/bridged-race-population.html. N.A.: Not available. 8 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK Every state has a greater percentage of children of color than three decades ago,14 but changes have not occurred uniformly across the country. Here’s a sampling: • Since 1990, California and New Mexico have become states where the majority of children are Latino. Texas will soon follow. • The Sun Belt in particular is changing: In 1990, Latino kids made up only 1 percent of children in Alabama, Arkansas, North Carolina, South Carolina and Tennessee. By 2017, the percentage of Latino children in those states ranged from 8 percent (Alabama) to 16 percent (North Carolina). • Three decades ago, Asian and Pacific Islander kids accounted for at least 5 percent of the child population in only three states: California, Hawaii (where they have long been the majority) and Washington. Since then,12 more states have joined the list.15 • Idaho, Maine, Montana, North Dakota, South Dakota and Vermont saw the largest percentage increases in their African-American child population. HOW KIDS ARE FARING NATIONALLY By 11 of the 16 KIDS COUNT index measures of child well-being, things have improved since 1990. The teen birth rate has fallen 68 percent and is at an all-time low. The percentage of children without health insurance has dropped by 62 percent. The percentages of 3- and 4-yearolds attending preschool and teens graduating from high school have increased. But the progress seen in some areas indicates that our nation has few excuses for not supporting the well-being of America’s children in every way possible. The child poverty rate was 18 percent in 1990. It was also 18 percent in 2017, representing 13.4 million children living in poverty. Parents were working hard to provide for their families: Children were more likely in 2017 to have at least one parent who had full-time, year-round employment. But more families faced high housing costs, and a greater percentage lived in high-poverty areas. Even as the economy has grown, many kids and their families are still being left behind. We as a country also have failed to eliminate the racial and ethnic inequities that in part prompted the publication of the first Data Book. Because these barriers persist even with the broad progress of the past three decades, it is more urgent than ever for policymakers and other leaders at all levels to fulfill their responsibility to address them. For an analysis of the latest data, see page 12 in the Trends section. STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 9 A CALL TO ACTION The growth and changes we see in the child population, and in how kids are faring, present a reality that the nation’s leaders can’t ignore: More children find themselves living in states that historically have not led in providing all kids with what they need to thrive — as the KIDS COUNT Data Book has shown over the past three decades. This is an important trend to understand, as our focus remains on ensuring all children in the United States, no matter where they live, can succeed and thrive. We have the data, knowledge and evidence of what it takes to make that vision a reality. It’s not impossible to achieve. Count All Kids The premise of KIDS COUNT has always been that good data can help drive good decisions. The U.S. census is one of the most important tools for learning how children, families and communities are faring, and the 2020 count offers a critical opportunity to collect the data necessary to guide policymakers and other leaders over the next decade. The 2010 census missed more than 2 million children younger than 5, many of them kids of color or in low-income families.16 If we as a nation don’t make a concerted effort to count every child in 2020, we could miss even more. About 4.5 million kids live in places — from dense urban areas to rural expanses to tribal communities — where completing an accurate count is especially challenging. The stakes are high: Fifty-five major federal programs — including Head Start and children’s health insurance — allocate more than $880 billion each year based on census data.17 10 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK Complete count committees — groups established at the national, state, local and tribal levels with leaders from government, education, business, health care and other fields — will be essential. These committees must develop specific plans to ensure every child is counted. This should include outreach to families who are regularly left out and education to help people complete census forms correctly. An accurate census requires all of us to participate, and it demands leaders in every sector and community get involved. After all, we’ll have to live with the results for 10 years.18 Use Data to Develop and Invest in Policies That Work The troubling trends we see in child and family well-being reflect policy choices made over decades. By using reliable data to make smart decisions, federal, state and local leaders can improve the lives of kids and families. We’ve seen this happen in a variety of ways. To name a few: • More children have health insurance coverage than in 1990, primarily because of the Children’s Health Insurance Program and the Affordable Care Act with state Medicaid expansion. States that have not expanded access to Medicaid should do so, and they should cover all children, regardless of their immigration status.19 • Federal and state earned income tax credit (EITC) and child tax credit programs have been effective tools for reducing poverty, enabling parents to use more of their income to meet their children’s needs.20 States without these programs should adopt them, and those that have them should make them available to more individuals, including young parents and other young adults.21 Of the 15 states where child population growth exceeded the 1990–2017 national average, 10 did not have a state EITC,22 and child poverty matched or was worse than the national average in all of them except Idaho and Utah. • Education is the only area in which all KIDS COUNT index measures of child well-being showed improvement since 1990 — but the United States ranks only in the middle of the pack among affluent countries in science, math and reading proficiency.23 States should continue to prioritize investments in education, from preschool through high school and beyond. High-growth states must ensure their public schools keep up with increases in the child population. Address Racial and Ethnic Inequities In 1990, when the first Data Book was published, many politicians, academic experts and nonprofit and philanthropic leaders focused on what was wrong with kids. Often, they were thinking primarily about children of color. The result was not only narratives but also public policies that reflected this thinking — and that ignored, reinforced or erected even more obstacles that often derail African-American, American Indian and Latino kids. They discounted the incredible individual potential of these children. It’s no wonder that, three decades later, we still see the same disparities. Our nation can do better. Public policies must acknowledge and tear down the long-standing obstacles that perpetuate racial and ethnic disparities, and conversations about reshaping those policies must include the children, families and communities they will affect. THE NEXT 30 YEARS This foreword to the 30th KIDS COUNT Data Book is my first as president and CEO of the Annie E. Casey Foundation. I assumed leadership of the Foundation with great excitement and a profound sense of responsibility. The challenges facing our nation’s children are considerable — but so too are the opportunities. Whatever changes the next 30 years bring, Casey’s mission will remain as clear and unwavering as when we released our first Data Book: creating a brighter future for all kids, where children have the chance to realize their full potential. I want that for my child, and we should want that for all children, regardless of their ZIP code, their family’s income or their race, ethnicity or immigration status. Ensuring all kids have opportunity is our collective responsibility — yours, mine and ours as a nation. STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 11 TRENDS The Casey Foundation sees promising improvements in the wellbeing of the nation’s children and families as a result of expanded public investments and an improved economy. Data for 2017 show that more parents were financially stable and had reasonable housing costs, more children had access to health insurance and more teens graduated from high school on time and avoided becoming parents themselves. Broadly speaking, the nation helped children experience gains in the Economic Well-Being domain, with promising but mixed results in the Health, Education and Family and Community domains. 12 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK Since 1990, the Casey Foundation has ranked states annually on overall child well-being using an index of key indicators. The KIDS COUNT index captures what children need most to thrive, using four domains: (1) Economic Well-Being, (2) Education, (3) Health and (4) Family and Community. Each domain includes four indicators, for a total of 16. These indicators represent the best available data to measure the status of child well-being at the state and national levels. (For a more thorough description of the KIDS COUNT index, visit www. aecf.org/resources/the-new-kids-count-index/.) This year’s Data Book presents current data and multiyear trends, which — whenever possible — compare data from 2010 with those from 2017, the most recent year available for most indicators. State rankings are based on the data. NATIONAL TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING Data over a recent period of seven or so years reveal encouraging trends in child well-being nationally, with improvements in 11 out of the 16 indicators (see Table 3). Data for 2017 show that more parents were financially stable and lived without burdensome housing costs, more teens graduated from high school and delayed childbearing, and gains in children’s health insurance coverage continue to be something to celebrate. Broadly speaking, the nation helped children experience progress in the Economic Well-Being domain, with promising but mixed results in the Health, Education and Family and Community domains. All four Economic Well-Being indicators improved since 2010. Fewer children were living in poverty, more parents were employed and fewer families were spending a disproportionate amount of their income on housing costs. The most improvement was in the percentage of children living in households with a high housing cost burden, where the rate dropped from 41 percent in 2010 to 31 percent in 2017. Nonetheless, families continue to struggle to make ends meet. In 2017, nearly one in five children lived in poverty. In 2017, the national unemployment rate was 4.4 percent; it has since declined to 3.6 percent.24 Given this change in unemployment — one of the key factors to improving the financial stability of families — the Foundation expects to see ongoing progress in this area. Meanwhile, two of the four Education indicators — fourth-grade reading proficiency and high school graduation — showed improvement. Notably, with 85 percent of high school students graduating on time in the 2016–17 school year, the nation’s graduation rate reached an all-time high. The Health domain saw mixed results. Far fewer children lacked access to health insurance in 2017. The Foundation attributes this drop to expanded public health coverage (i.e., the Affordable Care Act, the Children’s Health Insurance Program and Medicaid expansion). Even with these advancements, between 2016 and 2017, the number of children without insurance increased for the first time in the past decade. Data also show that the percentage of babies born with a low birth weight had increased for the third year in a row. These recent trends are something to watch. Trends in the Family and Community domain, for the most part, were encouraging. The teen birth rate continued its decline, reaching a new low, and a smaller percentage of children were living with parents who lacked a high school diploma. The percentage of children living in single-parent families remained unchanged between 2010 and 2017. During this period, more than one-third of children lived in singleparent families, which tend to have fewer resources in terms of time and money and the opportunities those often provide. STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 13 TABLE 3: NATIONAL TRENDS 16 Key Indicators of Child Well-Being by Domain ECONOMIC WELL-BEING CHILDREN IN POVERTY US: 13,353,000 CHILDREN WHOSE PARENTS LACK SECURE EMPLOYMENT US: 20,075,000 CHILDREN LIVING IN HOUSEHOLDS WITH A HIGH HOUSING COST BURDEN US: 22,908,000 TEENS NOT IN SCHOOL AND NOT WORKING US: 1,171,000 22% 2010 33% 2010 41% 2010 9% 2010 18% 2017 BETTER 27% 2017 BETTER 31% 2017 2017 BETTER 7% BETTER EDUCATION YOUNG CHILDREN (AGES 3 AND 4) NOT IN SCHOOL US: 4,223,000 FOURTH-GRADERS NOT PROFICIENT IN READING US: N.A. EIGHTH-GRADERS NOT PROFICIENT IN MATH US: N.A. HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS NOT GRADUATING ON TIME US: N.A. N.A.: Not available 14 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK 52% 2009–11 68% 2009 67% 2009 21% 2010–11 52% 2015–17 SAME 65% 2017 BETTER 67% 2017 SAME 15% 2016–17 BETTER HEALTH LOW BIRTH-WEIGHT BABIES US: 318,873 CHILDREN WITHOUT HEALTH INSURANCE US: 3,925,000 CHILD AND TEEN DEATHS PER 100,000 US: 20,337 TEENS WHO ABUSE ALCOHOL OR DRUGS US: 1,028,000 8.1% 2010 8% 2010 26 2010 5% 2015–16 8.3% 2017 2017 2017 WORSE 5% BETTER 26 SAME 4% 2016–17 BETTER FAMILY AND COMMUNITY CHILDREN IN SINGLE-PARENT FAMILIES US: 24,001,000 CHILDREN IN FAMILIES WHERE THE HOUSEHOLD HEAD LACKS A HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA US: 9,557,000 CHILDREN LIVING IN HIGH-POVERTY AREAS US: 8,545,000 TEEN BIRTHS PER 1,000 US: 194,377 34% 2010 15% 2010 13% 2008–12 34 2010 34% SAME 2017 13% 2017 BETTER 12% 2013–17 2017 BETTER 19 BETTER STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 15 Especially troubling was the number of kids growing up in high-poverty neighborhoods, which can signal a lack of community resources and economic challenges for the children who live there. Although the percentage of children in high-poverty neighborhoods declined for the second year in a row, 12 percent of the nation’s children continued to live in communities where poverty rates were at or above 30 percent in 2013–17. Overall, the positive strides in some areas of child well-being, driven by effective policies, provide encouragement that the nation can advance the substantial work needed to improve the prospects of its youngest generation. RACIAL INEQUITIES IN CHILD WELL-BEING Despite gains for children of all races during the reporting period, the nation’s racial inequities remain deep, systemic and stubbornly persistent (see Table 4). Data show that children of color lack the opportunities and support they need to thrive, in large part because of national, state and local policies and practices that undermine their well-being and success. As a result, nearly all index measures show that children with the same potential experience disparate outcomes. A few notable exceptions: African-American kids were more likely than the national average to be in school as young children and to live in families in which the head of the household has at least a high school diploma. American Indian families with children were less likely to be burdened with high housing costs. Latino kids were more likely to be born at a healthy birth weight, and Latino children and teens had a lower death rate than the national average. 16 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK As a result of generations-long inequities and systemic barriers that persist, children of color face high hurdles to success on many indicators. African-American children were significantly more likely to live in single-parent families and high-poverty neighborhoods. American Indian kids were almost three times as likely to lack health insurance and more than twice as likely to live in neighborhoods with more limited resources than the average child. And Latino children were the most likely to live with a head of household who lacked a high school diploma and to not be in school when they were young. Although Asian and Pacific Islander children tend to fare better than their peers, disaggregated data show that stark differences exist within this population. For example, 41 percent of Burmese and 32 percent of Hmong children lived in poverty compared with 11 percent of Asian and Pacific Islander children overall. And 63 percent of Burmese children lived in a family where the head of household lacked a high school diploma — almost five times higher than the national average.25 In 2017, kids of color were the majority of the child population in 14 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico. Demographers predict children of color will represent the majority of all U.S. kids by 2020.26 The future success of our nation depends on our ability to ensure all children have the chance to be successful. NATIONAL AND STATE DATA PROFILES ONLINE National and state profiles providing current and trend data for all 16 indicators are available for download at www.aecf.org/databook. In addition, the KIDS COUNT Data Center features an interactive look at the KIDS COUNT index at datacenter.kidscount.org. TABLE 4: KEY INDICATORS By Race and Hispanic Origin National Average African American American Indian Asian and Pacific Islander Latino White (Not Hispanic) Two or More Races ECONOMIC WELL-BEING Children in poverty 2017 18% 33% 33% 11% 26% 11% 19% Children whose parents lack secure employment 2017 27% 42% 47% 21% 32% 21% 31% Children living in households with a high housing cost burden 2017 31% 45% 30% 31% 42% 22% 34% Teens not in school and not working 2017 7% 10% 13% 4% 8% 5% 7% 2013–17* 52% 49% 56% 46% 59% 51% 51% Fourth-graders not proficient in reading 2017 65% 81%† 79%† 44%† 78% 54% 60%† Eighth-graders not proficient in math 2017 67% 87%† 81%† 38%† 80% 57% 64%† 2016–17 15% 22%† 28%† 9%† 20% 11% N.A. Low birth-weight babies 2017 8.3% 13.4% 8.3% 8.5% 7.4% 7.0% 8.9% Children without health insurance 2017 5% 5% 13% 4% 8% 4% 4% Child and teen deaths per 100,000 2017 26 38 29 15 21 25 N.A. Teens who abuse alcohol or drugs 2017‡ 4% 3%† 5%† 2%†§ ẟ 4% 4% 5%† Children in single-parent families 2017 34% 65% 54% 15% 41% 24% 41% Children in families where the household head lacks a high school diploma 2017 13% 12% 16% 10% 31% 5% 8% Children living in high-poverty areas 2013–17 12% 28% 28% 6% 19% 4% 10% 2017 19 29 22 6 29 13 19 EDUCATION Young children (ages 3 and 4) not in school High school students not graduating on time HEALTH FAMILY AND COMMUNITY Teen births per 1,000 * Data are from five-year American Community Survey (ACS) data and are not comparable to the national average using three years of pooled one-year ACS data. † Data are for non-Hispanic children. ‡ These are single-year data for 2017. Data in index are 2016–17 multiyear data. § Data results do not include Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander children. N.A.: Not available STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 17 OVERALL CHILD WELL-BEING National data mask a great deal of state and regional variations in child well-being. A child’s chances of thriving depend not only on individual, family and community characteristics but also on the state in which she or he is born and raised. States vary considerably in their wealth and other resources. Policy choices and investments by state officials and lawmakers also strongly influence children’s chances for success. 18 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK A STATE-TO-STATE COMPARISON OF OVERALL CHILD WELL-BEING: 2019 RANKINGS AND KEY 1. New Hampshire 2. Massachusetts 3. Iowa 4. Minnesota 5. New Jersey 6. Vermont 7. Utah 8. Connecticut 9. Maine 10. Virginia 11. North Dakota 12. Nebraska 13. Wisconsin 14. Maryland 15. Kansas 16. Washington 17. Pennsylvania 18. Idaho 19. Rhode Island 20. Colorado 21. Wyoming 22. Montana 23. Illinois 24. Hawaii 25. Delaware 26. South Dakota 27. Ohio 28. Missouri 29. Indiana 30. New York 31. Oregon 32. Michigan 33. North Carolina 34. Kentucky 35. California 36. Tennessee 37. Florida 38. Georgia 39. South Carolina 40. Arkansas 41. Texas 42. Oklahoma 43. West Virginia 44. Alabama 45. Alaska 46. Arizona 47. Nevada 48. Mississippi 49. Louisiana 50. New Mexico STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 19 The Foundation derives a composite index of overall child well-being for each state by combining data across four domains: (1) Economic Well-Being, (2) Education, (3) Health and (4) Family and Community. These composite scores are then translated into a state ranking for child well-being. This year, New England states hold two of the top three spots for overall child wellbeing. New Hampshire ranks first, followed by Massachusetts and Iowa. Mississippi (at 48th place), Louisiana (49th) and New Mexico (50th) are the three lowest-ranked states. 20 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK The map on page 19 shows the distinct regional patterns that emerge from the state rankings. Six of the top 10 states in terms of overall child well-being are in the Northeast, including New Jersey (fifth), Vermont (sixth), Connecticut (eighth) and Maine (ninth). States rounding out the top 10 are Minnesota (fourth), Utah (seventh) and Virginia (10th). States in Appalachia, as well as the Southeast and Southwest — where families have the lowest levels of household income — populate the bottom of the overall rankings. In fact, except for California and Alaska, the 18 lowest-ranked states are in these regions. Although they are not ranked against states, children in the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico experienced some of the worst outcomes on many of the indicators the Foundation tracks. When available, the data for the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico are included on pages 53–57. In addition to differences across states, the overall rankings obscure important variations within states. Although most state rankings did not vary dramatically across domains, there are a few exceptions. For example, Wyoming ranks ninth for Family and Community but 49th for Health. California ranks seventh for Health but 46th for Economic Well-Being. For all states, the index identified bright spots and room for improvement. STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 21 ECONOMIC WELL-BEING To help children grow into prepared, productive adults, parents need jobs with family-sustaining pay, affordable housing and the ability to invest in their children’s future. When parents are unemployed or earn low wages, their access to resources to support their kids’ development is more limited, which can undermine their children’s health and prospects for success in school and beyond.27 The negative effects of poverty on kids can extend into their teenage years and young adulthood, as they are more likely to contend with issues such as teen pregnancy and failing to graduate from high school.28 22 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK A STATE-TO-STATE COMPARISON OF ECONOMIC WELL-BEING: 2019 RANKINGS AND KEY 1. North Dakota 2. Iowa 3. Minnesota 4. Utah 5. Nebraska 6. Kansas 7. Wisconsin 8. Maine 9. South Dakota 10. New Hampshire 11. Idaho 12. Colorado 13. Virginia 14. Wyoming 15. Massachusetts 16. Maryland 17. Vermont 18. Connecticut 19. Montana 20. Pennsylvania 21. Washington 22. Missouri 23. Ohio 24. Indiana 25. Delaware 26. Rhode Island 27. Illinois 28. New Jersey 29. Oregon 30. Michigan 31. North Carolina 32. Tennessee 33. Alaska 34. Hawaii 35. Oklahoma 36. Arkansas 37. Kentucky 38. South Carolina 39. Texas 40. Georgia 41. Nevada 42. New York 43. Arizona 44. Alabama 45. Florida 46. California 47. Mississippi 48. West Virginia 49. New Mexico 50. Louisiana STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 23 Black and American Indian Children More Likely to Grow Up in Poverty Children in Poverty by Race: 2017 18% National Average African American 33% American Indian 33% 11% Asian and Pacific Islander 26% Latino 11% White (Not Hispanic) 19% Two or More Races 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2017 American Community Survey. 24 CHILDREN IN POVERTY Data Highlights Growing up in poverty is one of the greatest threats to healthy child development. It increases the likelihood that a child will be exposed to factors that can impair brain development and lead to poor academic, cognitive and health outcomes. It also can result in higher rates of risky health-related behaviors among adolescents.29 Extended exposure to poverty also contributes to worse economic and health outcomes for adults.30 The official poverty level in 2017 was $24,858 for a family of two adults and two children. The risks posed by economic hardship are greatest among children who experience poverty when they are young and among those who experience persistent and deep poverty.31 • Nationally, 18 percent of children (13.4 million) lived in families with incomes below the poverty line in 2017, down from 22 percent (15.7 million) in 2010, representing 2.4 million fewer kids in poverty. After climbing for several years, the child poverty rate has fallen for three consecutive years. As a result, the poverty rate almost reached levels not seen since before the Great Recession. 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK • The child poverty rate for 2017 ranged from a low of 10 percent in New Hampshire to a high of 28 percent in Louisiana. In Puerto Rico, 58 percent of children lived in poverty. • The poverty rate among African-American and American Indian children (33 percent for both) was three times the rate for white and Asian and Pacific Islander children (11 percent for both) in 2017. The poverty rate for Latino kids (26 percent) was higher than the national average. 35 CHILDREN WHOSE PARENTS LACK SECURE EMPLOYMENT Secure employment is a key contributor to the financial stability and well-being of families. Yet since 2010, many middle- and low-income families have experienced high rates of job instability.32 Employment insecurity and the accompanying income loss can disrupt daily living and relationships and limit families’ access to resources to invest in their children’s development, which can, in turn, diminish children’s achievement in school and chances of future success.33 Current education systems and training programs fail to provide all people with the highquality education and preparation needed to access jobs that pay enough to support a family. Those without such skills most often can secure only low-wage jobs that don’t pay well, provide benefits or offer the security and stability to enable families to get ahead. Too many parents lack the education, skills and access needed to gain consistent employment that provides a family-supporting wage and, therefore, are forced to piece together part-time or temporary work that does not provide sufficient or stable income. Even a full-time job at a low wage does not necessarily lift a family out of poverty. Not only does the federal minimum wage — last increased in July 2009 — fail to provide a livable income, it is insufficient to provide families with any possible mobility out of poverty. Without access to benefits and tax credits, a single parent with two children would need to earn $9.87 per hour — $2.62 more than the current federal minimum wage — working full time for 50 weeks per year just to reach the poverty level. Data Highlights • In 2017, more than one in four children (20.1 million) lived in families where no parent had full-time, year-round employment. The rate of parents without secure employment has steadily declined since 2010, finally reaching its prerecession level. Despite this positive trend, many families continued to struggle economically. • At 19 percent, Iowa and Utah had the lowest percentage of children in families without secure parental employment in 2017. West Virginia had the highest rate (37 percent). The share was even greater in the District of Columbia (42 percent) and Puerto Rico (56 percent). • Roughly half of all American Indian (47 percent) and 42 percent of AfricanAmerican children had no parent with full-time, year-round employment in 2017, compared with 32 percent of Latino children, 31 percent of multiracial children and 21 percent of white and Asian and Pacific Islander children. STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 25 A Third of Kids in the United States Are in Families Burdened by Housing Costs Children Living in Households With a High Housing Cost Burden: 2017 18% NORTH DAKOTA SOUTH DAKOTA (LOWEST) 18%–23% 24%–27% 28%–31% 32%–43% 43% CALIFORNIA (HIGHEST) Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2017 American Community Survey. Map 1: Economic Well Being Map 18%-23% Light Gray  CHILDREN LIVING IN HOUSEHOLDS California 43% Darkest Green 24%-27% Med Gray WITH A HIGH HOUSING COST BURDEN • Across the nation, 31 percent of children Data Highlights North Dakota 18% Light green (22.9 million) lived in families with 28%-31% a high Gray Housing is typically one of the largest family South Dakota  18%cost Lightburden green in 2017, compared housing 32%-43% Darkest Gray  expenses. High housing costs weigh more with 41 percent (30.1 million) in 2010. The heavily on low-income families, who are more percentage of families with disproportionately likely to struggle with finding affordable housing, high housing costs peaked in 2010, at the often spending more than 30 percent of pretax height of the foreclosure crisis, and has income on a home, whether they rent or own. steadily declined since. Paying too much for housing limits the resources families have for other necessities such as • At 43 percent, California had the highest rate child care, food, health care and transportation, of children in families who spent more than as well as their ability to save and achieve 30 percent of income on housing in 2017. financial stability.34 North Dakota and South Dakota had the lowest rate, at 18 percent. 26 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK • Compared to 2010, fewer children across all racial and ethnic groups lived in families with high housing costs. Yet even with these improvements, disparities remained. In 2017, 45 percent of African-American children and 42 percent of Latino children lived in households with a high housing cost burden, compared with 22 percent of white kids. TEENS NOT IN SCHOOL AND NOT WORKING Teens ages 16 to 19 who are not in school or working are at high risk of experiencing negative outcomes as they transition to adulthood. Young people who drop out of high school, are involved in the juvenile or criminal justice system, become parents at a young age or age out of foster care are most likely to be out of school and work. Limited skills and work history — combined with few financial resources to invest in developing the necessary skills or qualifications — restrict access to good jobs as well as future higher wages.35 While students who drop out of school clearly face obstacles, many young people who have graduated from high school but are not working are also at a disadvantage in terms of achieving financial stability in adulthood. Data Highlights • Nationally, 7 percent of teens ages 16 to 19, or 1.2 million youths, were not in school or working in 2017. • At 4 percent, Massachusetts, Minnesota and North Dakota had the lowest rate of teens not in school or working in 2017. In contrast, West Virginia had the highest rate, at 11 percent. Although not ranked among states, Puerto Rico had the highest rate (12 percent) of teens not in school or working. • American Indian (13 percent), AfricanAmerican (10 percent) and Latino (8 percent) teens had considerably higher rates of neither being in school nor working than their white (5 percent) and Asian and Pacific Islander (4 percent) counterparts. STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 27 EDUCATION The early years of a child’s life lay the foundation for lifelong success. Establishing the conditions that promote educational achievement for children is critical, beginning with quality prenatal care and continuing through the early elementary years. With a strong and healthy beginning, children can more easily stay on track to remain in school and graduate on time, pursue postsecondary education and training and successfully transition to adulthood. Yet our country continues to have significant gaps in educational achievement by race and income along all age groups of child development.36 Closing these gaps will be key to ensuring the nation’s future workforce can compete on a global scale. 28 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK A STATE-TO-STATE COMPARISON OF EDUCATION: 2019 RANKINGS AND KEY 1. Massachusetts 2. New Jersey 3. Connecticut 4. New Hampshire 5. Vermont 6. Virginia 7. Iowa 8. Nebraska 9. Pennsylvania 10. Minnesota 11. Maryland 12. Illinois 13. Utah 14. Wyoming 15. Wisconsin 16. Ohio 17. New York 18. Kansas 19. Colorado 20. Montana 21. Indiana 22. North Carolina 23. Maine 24. Florida 25. Missouri 26. Delaware 27. Kentucky 28. Rhode Island 29. Washington 30. Texas 31. South Dakota 32. Arkansas 33. Tennessee 34. Georgia 35. North Dakota 36. California 37. Michigan 38. Alabama 39. Idaho 40. Hawaii 41. Oregon 42. South Carolina 43. West Virginia 44. Mississippi 45. Oklahoma 46. Arizona 47. Nevada 48. Louisiana 49. Alaska 50. New Mexico STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 29 YOUNG CHILDREN NOT IN SCHOOL High-quality preschool programs for 3- to 4-year-olds help set the stage for future skill development, well-being and learning, particularly for those from low-income households.37 These programs play an important role in preparing children for success and lead to higher levels of educational attainment, career advancement and earnings. Although Head Start and the expansion of state-funded programs since the 1990s have greatly increased access to preschool and kindergarten,38 many kids — especially 3-year-olds and children living in low-income families — continued to be left out, exacerbating socioeconomic differences in educational achievement. Among member countries of the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, the United States has the third-lowest percentage of young children enrolled in early childhood programs.39 Data Highlights • During 2015–17, 4.2 million kids ages 3 and 4 were not in school, representing more than half (52 percent) of all children in that age group. The rate of participation has remained unchanged since 2009–11. • In 2015–17, Connecticut had the lowest share of 3- and 4-year-olds not in school, at 35 percent. The state with the highest percentages of young children not in school in 2015–17 was North Dakota (69 percent). Although the District of Columbia is not ranked among states, it had the best rate, at 25 percent — a result of the city’s free, universal preschool for 3- and 4-year-olds. • Roughly half of African-American, white and multiracial 3- and 4-year-olds were not in any school programs; the percentage was slightly lower for Asian and Pacific Islander kids (46 percent). The rates were noticeably higher for Latino (59 percent) and American Indian (56 percent) children. 30 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK FOURTH-GRADERS NOT PROFICIENT IN READING Reading proficiency by the end of third grade is a critical marker in a child’s educational development. By fourth grade, children are expected to use reading to learn other subjects. Therefore, mastery of reading at this level becomes important for students to keep up academically. Children who reach fourth grade without being able to read proficiently are more likely to struggle academically and eventually drop out of school. Low reading proficiency also can reduce earning potential and chances for career success as adults.40 Although there have been some improvements since the early 1990s, progress has been slow on literacy gains, and racial and income disparities remain. Data Highlights • Sixty-five percent of fourth-graders in public school were not proficient readers in 2017 — an alarming rate though slightly improved from 2009, when 68 percent scored not proficient. Pre-K and Higher Family Incomes Boost Reading Proficiency for Children Young Children Not in School (2013–17) and Fourth-Graders Not Proficient in Reading (2017) by Family Income 80% 78% 70% 60% 50% 60% 46% 40% 48% 30% Young Children Not in School 20% Fourth-Graders Not Proficient in Reading 10% 0% Children in Low-Income Families Children in Moderate- and High-Income Families Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013–17 American Community Survey and U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2017 National Assessment of Educational Progress. Notes: For young children not in school, low income is defined as children living below 200 percent of poverty. For fourth-graders not proficient in reading, low income is defined as those eligible for free or reduced-price lunch, which is 185 percent of poverty. • State differences in fourth-grade reading levels among public school students were wide. In 2017, Massachusetts was the only state where more than half of fourth-graders were proficient in reading. It had the lowest percentage of fourth-graders who were not proficient in reading, at 49 percent, compared with a high of 75 percent in New Mexico. • In 2017, 81 percent of African-American, 79 percent of American Indian, 78 percent of Latino and 60 percent of multiracial fourthgraders were not proficient in reading, compared with 54 percent of white and 44 percent of Asian and Pacific Islander students. EIGHTH-GRADERS NOT PROFICIENT IN MATH As technology continues to transform the economy, the demand grows for a workforce with aligned math and science skills and training that can keep pace with technological advancement. Students with strong math and science skills are more likely to graduate from high school, attend and complete college, earn higher incomes and take advantage of the future opportunities available to them.41 Even for young people who do not attend college, basic math skills and numerical literacy help with everyday tasks and personal financial management and improve employability. STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 31 Two-Thirds of Eighth-Graders Are Not Proficient in Math; Racial Disparities in Achievement Persist Eighth-Graders Not Proficient in Math by Race: 2017 100 87% 80 60 81% 80% 67% 57% 40 64% 38% 20 0 National Average African American* American Indian* Asian and Pacific Islander* Latino White* Two or More Races* Source: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, 2017 National Assessment of Educational Progress. * Data are for non-Hispanic children. Ensuring kids have early and ongoing access to high-quality math education is critical for their success in school and life. Data Highlights • Nationwide, two-thirds (67 percent) of public school eighth-graders were not proficient in math in 2017. This rate was the same in 2009. • At 50 percent, Massachusetts students performed best in math, with the lowest percentage of eighth-graders not proficient in 2017. Louisiana had the highest rate, at 81 percent. 32 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK • In 2017, 38 percent of Asian and Pacific Islander and 57 percent of white eighthgraders scored below proficiency, compared with 87 percent of African-American, 81 percent of American Indian and 80 percent of Latino eighth-graders. • Eighth-grade math achievement improved for African-American, Asian and Pacific Islander, Latino and multiracial students between 2009 and 2017 but remained the same for white students while worsening slightly for American Indian children. HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS NOT GRADUATING ON TIME A high school diploma is critical for entering today’s workforce. Students who graduate from high school on time have many more choices in young adulthood. They are more likely to pursue postsecondary education and training, make healthier decisions and engage in less risky behaviors. They also are more employable and have higher incomes than students who fail to graduate.42 In 2017, median annual earnings for someone without a high school diploma ($23,031) were 75 percent of the earnings of a high school graduate ($30,624) and 44 percent of the earnings of someone with a bachelor’s degree ($52,484).43 Data Highlights • Steady improvements occurred since 2010–11, when 21 percent of high school students failed to graduate in four years. Nationally, about one in seven (15 percent) did not graduate on time in the 2016–17 school year, an all-time low. • In the 2016–17 school year, among the states, the percentage of students not graduating from high school in four years ranged from a low of 9 percent in Iowa to a high of 29 percent in New Mexico. • In 2016–17, 11 percent of white students did not graduate from high school on time. The rates for American Indian and AfricanAmerican students were at least twice as high, at 28 percent and 22 percent, respectively. The rate for Latino students was 20 percent. STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 33 HEALTH Children’s good health is fundamental to their overall development, and ensuring kids are born healthy is the first step toward improving their life chances. Exposure to violence, family stress, inadequate housing, lack of preventive health care, poor nutrition, poverty and substance abuse undermine children’s health. Poor health in childhood affects other critical aspects of a child’s life, such as school readiness and attendance, and can have lasting consequences on their future health and well-being. 34 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK A STATE-TO-STATE COMPARISON OF HEALTH: 2019 RANKINGS AND KEY 1. Massachusetts 2. New Hampshire 3. New Jersey 4. Rhode Island 5. New York 6. Minnesota 7. California 8. Iowa 9. Vermont 10. Hawaii 11. Washington 12. Pennsylvania 13. Connecticut 14. Wisconsin 15. Maryland 16. Maine 17. Virginia 18. Michigan 19. Nebraska 20. Oregon 21. Utah 22. Delaware 23. Idaho 24. Kansas 25. Kentucky 26. Indiana 27. Illinois 28. North Carolina 29. Ohio 30. North Dakota 31. West Virginia 32. Missouri 33. Tennessee 34. Georgia 35. Arizona 36. Alabama 37. Arkansas 38. South Carolina 39. Texas 40. Florida 41. Colorado 42. Louisiana 43. Oklahoma 44. Montana 45. South Dakota 46. Nevada 47. Mississippi 48. New Mexico 49. Wyoming 50. Alaska STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 35 Black, Asian and Multiracial Families More Likely to Have Low Birth-Weight Babies 15 Low Birth-Weight Babies by Race: 2017 13.4% 12 9 6 8.3% 8.3% 8.5% American Indian Asian and Pacific Islander 8.9% 7.4% 7.0% Latino White (Not Hispanic) 3 0 National Average African American Two or More Races Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, 2017 Vital Statistics. 36 LOW BIRTH-WEIGHT BABIES Data Highlights Birth weight is an important indicator of an infant’s health. Babies born at a low birth weight (less than 5.5 pounds) have a high probability of experiencing developmental problems and short- and long-term disabilities. They also are at greater risk of dying within the first year of life. Infections, multiple births, obesity, poor nutrition, poverty, smoking, stress and violence can increase the chances of a baby being born at a low birth weight.44 Compared with other affluent countries, the United States has one of the highest percentages of babies born at a low birth weight.45 • Nationally, low birth-weight babies represented 8.3 percent of all live births in 2017. This was the third year in a row that the percentage of babies born at a low birth weight increased. The 2017 rate matched 2006’s four-decade high of 8.3 percent.46 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK • Alaska had the lowest percentage of low birthweight babies in 2017 — 6.2 percent of live births — while Mississippi had the highest, at 11.6 percent. • Among racial and ethnic groups, AfricanAmerican babies were most likely to be born at a low birth weight, at 13.4 percent of live births in 2017. This number was close to twice the rates for Latino (7.4 percent) and white (7.0 percent) infants. The rate increased from 2016 for all groups except white babies, for whom the rate remained the same. CHILDREN WITHOUT HEALTH INSURANCE Children with health insurance are more likely to have a regular source of health care they can access for preventive care services and developmental screenings, to treat acute and chronic conditions or to address injuries when they occur. Children without coverage are less likely than insured children to receive care when they need it. Although employers were less likely to provide health insurance in 2017, and most low-wage and part-time workers lacked employer-sponsored coverage, public health insurance increased coverage among children during the past decade. Having health insurance can protect families from financial crisis when a child experiences a serious or chronic illness and can help kids remain active, healthy and in school ready to learn. Data Highlights • Across the nation, 5 percent of children ages 18 and under (3.9 million) lacked health insurance in 2017. Coverage Rates Increased for Kids in 45 States Since 2010; Now 95 Percent of U.S. Kids Are Insured Change in Children Without Health Insurance: 2010–17 -70% – -50% -33% – -49% -1% – -32% 0% – 25% (children without coverage increased) Sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 2010 and 2017 American Community Surveys. STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 37 • In 37 states, the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico, the percentage of children without health coverage was 5 percent or less in 2017. Massachusetts and the District of Columbia had the lowest rate, 1 percent, compared with a high of 11 percent in Texas. • American Indian (13 percent) and Latino (8 percent) children were far more likely to be uninsured than their African-American (5 percent), Asian and Pacific Islander (4 percent), multiracial (4 percent) and white (4 percent) peers. CHILD AND TEEN DEATHS The child and teen death rate (deaths per 100,000 children ages 1 to 19) reflects a broad array of factors: physical and mental health; access to health care; community issues, such as violence and environmental toxins; use of safety practices; and, especially for younger children, the level of adult supervision. Accidents, primarily those involving motor vehicles, were the leading cause of death for children and youth, accounting for 30 percent of all deaths among children ages 1 to 14.47 As children move further into their teenage years, they encounter new, and potentially deadly, risks. In 2017, accidents, homicides and suicides accounted for 76 percent of deaths for teens ages 15 to 19.48 Data Highlights • In 2017, 20,337 children and youths ages 1 to 19 died in the United States, which translates into a mortality rate of 26 per 100,000 children and teens. Although unchanged since 2010, the rate has declined dramatically since 1990, when it was 46 per 100,000. 38 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK • New Jersey and Rhode Island had the lowest rate, at 16 deaths per 100,000 children and youths in 2017. At the other end of the spectrum, Alaska had a child and teen death rate of 52 per 100,000. • The 2017 mortality rate for African-American children and teens (38 per 100,000) was noticeably higher than the death rates for children and youth of other racial and ethnic groups. TEENS WHO ABUSE ALCOHOL OR DRUGS Experimenting with alcohol or drugs is common among teens across all subgroups. While some teens experiment and stop, others develop a dependency on these substances. This dependency occurs during a critical time of development that can negatively affect their cognitive growth.49 Substance abuse is associated with a variety of negative consequences, including increased likelihood of using such substances later in life, poor academic performance and inappropriate decision making that may put teens at higher risk for accidents, suicide, unplanned and unsafe sex and violence.50 Abuse of alcohol and drugs also can cause physical and mental health problems and disengagement from family, peers, schools and community. All of these negative consequences can carry over into early and later adulthood. Data Highlights • In 2016–17, 4 percent of teens ages 12 to 17, or just over 1 million youths, had abused or were dependent on alcohol or drugs during the past year. • Substance abuse rates are low throughout the country, but there is some variation across states, ranging from a low of 3 percent in Georgia, Indiana, Maryland, Mississippi, New Jersey and Pennsylvania to a high of 7 percent in Alaska. • Among racial and ethnic groups, Asian teens were the least likely (2 percent) to abuse or be dependent on alcohol or drugs, while American Indian and multiracial teens were the most likely (5 percent). Latino and white teens had a 4 percent alcohol and drug abuse rate, while African-American youth were at 3 percent. STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 39 FAMILY AND COMMUNITY Children who live in nurturing families and supportive communities have stronger personal connections and higher academic achievement. Parents struggling with financial hardship have fewer resources available to foster their children’s development and are more prone to face severe stress and depression, which can interfere with effective parenting. These findings underscore the importance of two-generation approaches to ending poverty, which address the needs of parents and children at the same time so that both can succeed together. Where families live also matters. When communities are safe and have strong institutions, good schools and quality support services, families and their children are more likely to thrive. 40 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK A STATE-TO-STATE COMPARISON OF FAMILY AND COMMUNITY: 2019 RANKINGS AND KEY 1. Utah 2. New Hampshire 3. Vermont 4. North Dakota 5. Maine 6. Minnesota 7. Idaho 8. Iowa 9. Wyoming 10. Massachusetts 11. Montana 12. Connecticut 13. New Jersey 14. Virginia 15. Hawaii 16 Washington 17. Colorado 18. Wisconsin 19. Maryland 20. Oregon 21. Alaska 22. Nebraska 23. Kansas 24. South Dakota 25. Pennsylvania 26. Rhode Island 27. Illinois 28. Missouri 29. Michigan 30. Delaware 31. Ohio 32. Indiana 33. Florida 34. West Virginia 35. New York 36. North Carolina 37. South Carolina 38. Georgia 39. Tennessee 40. Oklahoma 41. California 42. Nevada 43. Kentucky 44. Alabama 45. Arkansas 46. Arizona 47. Texas 48. Louisiana 49. Mississippi 50. New Mexico STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 41 CHILDREN IN SINGLE-PARENT FAMILIES Even with the best efforts of parents, children growing up in single-parent families typically have access to fewer economic resources and valuable time with adults than children in two-parent families in which child-raising responsibilities can be shared. For example, in 2017, 31 percent of single-parent families had incomes below the poverty line, compared with 7 percent of married couples with children.51 The effects of growing up in single-parent families go beyond economics, increasing the likelihood of children dropping out of school, being disconnected from the labor market and becoming teen parents.52 Data Highlights • The percentage of children living in singleparent families remained unchanged between 2010 and 2017. In 2017, 34 percent of children (24 million) lived in single-parent families. • At the state level, the percentage of children living in single-parent families in 2017 ranged from a low of 19 percent in Utah to a high of 46 percent in Mississippi. The share was even greater in Puerto Rico (62 percent) and the District of Columbia (51 percent). • Two-thirds of African-American children (65 percent), more than half of American Indian children (54 percent) and two-fifths of Latino and multiracial children (41 percent) lived in single-parent families in 2017. By comparison, 24 percent of white children and 15 percent of Asian and Pacific Islander children lived in single-parent households. 42 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK CHILDREN IN FAMILIES WHERE THE HOUSEHOLD HEAD LACKS A HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA Children growing up in households with highly educated adults are better positioned for future success. These parents often are better able to provide the financial stability and security they need to foster their children’s development. Higher levels of parental education also are strongly associated with better outcomes for children, including kids’ own higher educational attainment and achievement.53 Kids who grow up with parents who have not graduated from high school not only have fewer socioeconomic advantages but also are more likely to be born with a low birth weight, have other health problems, enter school unprepared and have limited educational and employment opportunities as adults.54 As jobs require more skills and education, it is encouraging to see that parental education at all levels has steadily increased over the past several decades. Data Highlights • In 2017, 13 percent of children lived in households headed by an adult without a high school diploma. This was the first improvement seen in this indicator since 2013. While that is only slightly better than the rate in 2010 (15 percent), it was a substantial improvement since 1990, when 22 percent of children lived with parents who lacked a high school diploma.55 • In Maine, 4 percent of children lived with parents who lacked a high school diploma, the lowest rate in the country. At 21 percent, California had the highest rate. More Than 8 Million Kids Live in Poor Neighborhoods, Undermining Their Development Children Living in High-Poverty Areas by State: 2013–17 <0.5%–5% 6%–9% 10%–13% 14%–25% Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2013–17 American Community Survey. • Almost one-third of Latino children (31 percent) lived in households headed by someone without a high school diploma. That is more than 2.5 times the rate for African-American children (12 percent), more than three times the rate for Asian and Pacific Islander children (10 percent) and more than six times the rate for white children (5 percent). CHILDREN LIVING IN HIGH-POVERTY AREAS High-poverty neighborhoods — where poverty rates for the total population are 30 percent or more — come with a number of challenges that affect the children and families who live there. Residents of these neighborhoods contend with poorer health, higher rates of crime and violence, poor-performing schools due to inadequate funding and limited access to support networks and job opportunities. They also experience higher levels of financial instability. These barriers make it much harder for families to move up the economic ladder.56 Concentrated neighborhood poverty negatively affects all kids living in the area — not only children in households with low incomes but also those whose parents are economically better off.57 STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 43 Teen Birth Rate at an All-Time Low Teen Births per 1,000 Females: 1990–2017 80 68% 75 70 65 DECREASE 60 2007 55 41 1990 50 60 45 40 PER 1,000 PER 1,000 35 2017 19 30 25 PER 1,000 20 15 10 5 1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 2015 Source: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, 1990–2017 Vital Statistics. Data Highlights • During the period from 2013 to 2017, 12 percent of children lived in high-poverty areas, a total of 8.5 million. Between 1990 and 2000, the likelihood that a child would grow up in an area of concentrated poverty declined from 11 percent to 9 percent.58 After rising as high as 14 percent in 2009–13, the rate has leveled off and dropped for the second consecutive year. • Variation among the states was wide: Less than 1 percent of children in Wyoming lived in high-poverty areas, compared with 24 percent of Mississippi’s and New Mexico’s children. Puerto Rico (84 percent) and the District of Columbia (25 percent) had the highest rates. 44 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK • African-American (28 percent), American Indian (28 percent) and Latino (19 percent) children were much more likely to have lived in high-poverty areas than their multiracial (10 percent), Asian and Pacific Islander (6 percent) and white (4 percent) counterparts. TEEN BIRTHS Teenage childbearing can have long-term negative effects for mother and child. Babies born to teens are far more likely to be born preterm and at a low birth weight — and into families with limited educational attainment and economic resources, which undermines their future success.59 Children born to teen mothers tend to have poorer academic and behavioral outcomes and are more likely to engage in sexual activity and become teen parents themselves. Although the teen birth rate has decreased over the past few years and is currently at a historic low, the teen birth rate in the United States remains the highest among affluent countries.60 Data Highlights • In 2017, 194,377 babies were born to mothers ages 15 to 19. That translates into a birth rate of 19 births per 1,000 teens, which is less than one-third the rate in 1990 (60 births per 1,000 teens).61 • Among the states, the teen birth rate for 2017 ranged from a low of eight births per 1,000 teens ages 15 to 19 in Massachusetts and New Hampshire to a high of 33 births per 1,000 in Arkansas. • Latina and African-American teens had the highest birth rates (29 births per 1,000) across major racial and ethnic groups. Although still high, the 2017 teen birth rate was the lowest on record for both groups.62 STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 45 ENDNOTES 1. 7. To facilitate comparisons between 1990 and 2017, the racial Child Trends. (2018). Number of children. Bethesda, MD: and ethnic composition statistics in this foreword reflect the Author. Retrieved from www.childtrends.org/indicators/ racial and ethnic categories used by the U.S. Census Bureau number-of-children prior to 2000 — after which the bureau allowed census respondents to select more than one race — and are drawn from a data source that bridges this difference. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. (2018, June 27). Bridged-race population estimates. U.S. Census Bureau. (n.d.). Census regions and divisions of the United States. Retrieved from www2.census.gov/geo/pdfs/ maps-data/maps/reference/us_regdiv.pdf Retrieved March 15, 2019, from https://wonder.cdc.gov/ 9. bridged-race-population.html One state, West Virginia, borders two states (Ohio and 2. The Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2017). Race for results: Building a path to opportunity for all children (KIDS COUNT policy report). Baltimore, MD: Author. Retrieved from www. aecf.org/resources/2017-race-for-results Pennsylvania) that lost children and is often considered part of the “industrial heartland.” Federal Reserve Bank of Cleveland. (n.d.). The industrial heartland from 1969 to the present. Retrieved April 15, 2019, from www.clevelandfed.org/ region/industrial-heartland.aspx. Two others, Louisiana and Mississippi, lost significant populations of all ages following 3. Hurricane Katrina. Frey, W. H., & Singer, A. (2006, June). Zong, J., Batalova, J., & Burrows, M. (2019, March 14). Katrina and Rita impacts on Gulf Coast populations: First Frequently requested statistics on immigrants and immigration census findings. Washington, DC: The Brookings Institution. in the United States. Migration Information Source. Retrieved Retrieved April 15, 2019, from www.brookings.edu/wp-content/ from www.migrationpolicy.org/article/frequently-requested- uploads/2016/06/20060607_hurricanes.pdf. The fourth state, statistics-immigrants-and-immigration-united-states Wyoming, saw an insignificant change in the number of 4. children. Due to changes in the list of indicators between 1990 and 10. 2019 and underlying data collection strategies for the These states are Arizona, Colorado, Delaware, Florida, Idaho, indicators, this side-by-side is a reflection only of point-in-time Nevada, North Carolina, Oregon, South Carolina, Tennessee KIDS COUNT rankings, not a direct data comparison. and Washington. U.S. Census Bureau. (2018, December). 5. Cleveland, Ohio, population: 505,616 (1990), 385,525 (2017). Austin, Texas, population: 465,622 (1990), 950,715 (2017). 2017 data source: U.S. Census Bureau. (2018, May). Annual estimates of the resident population for incorporated Table 4. Cumulative estimates of the components of resident population change for the United States, regions, states, and Puerto Rico: April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2018. Retrieved April 15, 2019, from www2.census.gov/programs-surveys/popest/ tables/2010-2018/state/totals/nst-est2018-04.xlsx places of 50,000 or more, ranked by July 1, 2017 population: 11. April 1, 2010 to July 1, 2017. Retrieved April 15, 2019, from The three mechanisms by which states can gain (or lose) https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/ population are international immigration, domestic migration productview.xhtml?src=bkmk; 1990 data source: U.S. Census and natural growth/decline (birth/death rates). The four Bureau. (1995, October 10). Table 1. 1980 and 1990 census high-growth states in which natural growth accounted for the counts for cities with 1990 population greater than 100,000. largest of the three figures were Georgia, Texas, Utah and Retrieved April 10, 2019, from www.census.gov/population/ Virginia. www/censusdata/files/c1008090.txt 6. Office of the Historian, U.S. House of Representatives. (n.d.). Representatives apportioned to each state (1st to 23rd census, 1790–2010). Retrieved from https://history.house.gov/ Institution/Apportionment/state_apportionment 46 8. 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK 12. 17. From 1860 through 1920, immigrants accounted for between Reamer, A. (2019, February 19). Counting for dollars 2020: a low of 13 percent and a high of 15 percent of the U.S. The role of the decennial census in the geographic distribution population. In 2017, immigrants accounted for 13.7 percent of federal funds. Retrieved from https://gwipp.gwu.edu/ of the U.S. population. Migration Policy Institute. (n.d.). U.S. counting-dollars-2020-role-decennial-census-geographic- immigrant population and share over time, 1850-present. distribution-federal-funds Retrieved April 15, 2019, from www.migrationpolicy.org/ programs/data-hub/charts/immigrant-population-over-time?wi dth=1000&height=850&iframe=true 13. In share order: North Carolina (6.7 times the share, from 3 percent of all children in 1990 to 20 percent in 2017), Tennessee (6.5 times the share, from 2 percent to 13 percent), Nebraska (5.7 times the share, from 3 percent to 17 percent in 2017), Arkansas, Georgia, Iowa, South Carolina, 18. For more information about the young child undercount, see Count All Kids — Census 2020. (n.d.). What is the census? Retrieved from https://countallkids.org/what-is-the-census 19. For more policy recommendations specific to children in immigrant families, see the Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2017). Race for results. Kentucky, Minnesota, Delaware, Indiana and Alabama. 20. Migration Policy Institute tabulation of data from U.S. Census Tax Policy Center. (n.d.). Tax Policy Center briefing book: Bureau, 2017 American Community Survey (ACS) and 1990 Decennial Census; 1990 data source: Ruggles, S., Alexander, J. T., Genadek, K., Goeken, R., Schroeder, M. B., & Sobek, M. (2010). Integrated public use microdata series: Version 5.0 (Machine-readable database). Minneapolis: University of Minnesota. Retrieved from www.migrationpolicy.org/sites/ default/files/datahub/MPI-Data-Hub-Children-in-immigrant- Key elements of the U.S. tax system. Retrieved from www. taxpolicycenter.org/briefing-book/how-does-earned-incometax-credit-affect-poor-families. And, Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. (2019, April 8). Policy basics: The Child Tax Credit. Retrieved from www.cbpp.org/research/federal-tax/ policy-basics-the-child-tax-credit families_2017.xlsx 21. 14. and their children, see the Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2018). In the District of Columbia, the share of non-Hispanic white children increased during this time period (from 13 percent to 24 percent). Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics. (2018, June 27). Bridged-race population estimates. Retrieved March 15, 2019, For more policy recommendations specific to young parents Opening doors for young parents (KIDS COUNT policy report). Baltimore, MD: Author. Retrieved from www.aecf.org/ resources/opening-doors-for-young-parents 22. from https://wonder.cdc.gov/bridged-race-population.html South Carolina enacted a state EITC in 2017. Washington has 15. is counted among the states that do not have an EITC. Tax Alaska, Connecticut, Illinois, Maryland, Massachusetts, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New York, Oregon, Texas and Virginia. a state EITC, but has not been funded; therefore, Washington Credits for Workers and Their Families. (n.d.). State tax credits. Retrieved from www.taxcreditsforworkersandfamilies. org/state-tax-credits 16. 23. To learn more about why, see the Annie E. Casey Foundation. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2018). 2018 KIDS COUNT Data Book. Baltimore, MD: Author. Retrieved from www.aecf.org/resources/2018-kids-count-databook (2016). Country note: Key findings from PISA 2015 for the United States. Paris, France: Author. Retrieved from www. oecd.org/pisa/PISA-2015-United-States.pdf. And, Factsmaps. com. (n.d.). PISA worldwide ranking – Average score of math, science and reading. Retrieved April 15, 2019, from http:// factsmaps.com/pisa-worldwide-ranking-average-score-ofmath-science-reading STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 47 24. 31. U.S. Department of Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2019, Copper, K., & Steward, I. (2017). April). Employment status of the civilian noninstitutional population, 1947 to date (Table). Retrieved from http:// stats.bls.gov/cps/cpsaat01.pdf. And, U.S. Department of Hernandez, D. J., & Napierala, J. S. (2017, February 6) Labor, Bureau of Labor Statistics. (2019, May). Labor force 33. statistics from the Current Population Survey, unemployment Hernandez, D. J., & Napierala, J.S. (2017, February 6) rate (Table). Retrieved from http://data.bls.gov/timeseries/ LNS14000000 34. 25. landscape 2015: An annual look at the housing affordability Population Reference Bureau’s analyses of data from the 2013–2017 American Community Surveys, PUMS Five-Year Estimates. 26. Ault, M., Sturtevant, L., & Viveiros, J. (2015, March). Housing challenges of America’s working households. Washington, DC: Center for Housing Policy. Retrieved from www. novoco.com/sites/default/files/atoms/files/chp_housing_ landscape_2015.pdf U.S. Census Bureau. (2017). 2017 national population 35. projections tables (Table 6. Race and Hispanic origin by age Fernandes-Alcantara, A. L. (2015, October 1). Disconnected group). Retrieved from www.census.gov/data/tables/2017/ demo/popproj/2017-summary-tables.html 27. Hernandez, D. J., & Napierala, J. S. (2017, February 6). Children’s experience with parental employment insecurity youth: A look at 16 to 24 year olds who are not working or in school. Washington, DC: Congressional Research Service. Retrieved from www.fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/R40535.pdf. And, Opportunity Nation. (n.d.). Youth disconnection. Retrieved from https://opportunitynation.org/disconnected-youth and family income inequality. New York, NY: Foundation for 36. Child Development. Retrieved from www.fcd-us.org/childrens- Garcia, E., & Weiss, E. (2017, September 27) Education experience-parental-employment-insecurity-family-incomeinequality. And, Yeung, W. J., Linver, M. R., & Brooks-Gunn, J. (2002, November/December). How money matters for young children’s development: Parental investment and family inequalities at the school starting gate. Washington, DC: Economic Policy Institute. Retrieved from www.epi.org/ publication/education-inequalities-at-the-school-starting-gate processes. Child Development, 73(6), 1861–1879. 37. 28. R., Espinosa, L. M., Gormley, W. T.,…Zaslow, M. J. (2013, Copper, K., & Stewart, K. (2017, July). Does money affect children’s outcomes? An update. London, England: The London School of Economics and Political Science. Retrieved from http://sticerd.lse.ac.uk/dps/case/cp/casepaper203.pdf 29. Child Trends Databank. (2015, December). Children in poverty. Retrieved from www.childtrends.org/wp-content/ uploads/2014/01/04_Poverty.pdf 30. Ratcliffe, C., & McKernan, S. M. (2012, September). Child poverty and its lasting consequence. Washington, DC: The Urban Institute. Retrieved from www.urban.org/sites/default/ files/publication/32756/412659-Child-Poverty-and-Its-LastingConsequence.PDF 48 32. 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK Yoshikawa, H., Weiland, C., Brooks-Gunn, J., Burchinal, M. October). Investing in our future: The evidence base on preschool education. New York, NY: Foundation for Child Development; Washington, DC: Society for Research in Child Development. Retrieved from http://fcd-us.org/sites/ default/files/Evidence%20Base%20on%20Preschool%20 Education%20FINAL.pdf 38. 43. Higgins, L. B., Stagman, S., & Smith, S. (2010, September). U.S. Census Bureau. (2019). 2017 American Community Improving supports for parents of young children: State- Survey one-year estimates (Summary table S2001). level initiatives. New York, NY: National Center for Children Retrieved from https://factfinder.census.gov/faces/ in Poverty, Mailman School of Public Health, Columbia tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?pid=ACS_17_1YR_ University. Retrieved from www.nccp.org/publications/ S2001&prodType=table pub_966.html. And, Gormley, Jr., W., Gayer, T., Phillips, D., & Dawson, B. (2004, November). The effects of Oklahoma’s universal pre-kindergarten program on school readiness: An executive summary. Washington, DC: Center for Research on Children in the United States, Georgetown University. Retrieved from https://georgetown.app.box.com/s/ hxy0bp4dr3xrjyuqbimi 39. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2017, June). Starting strong 2017: Key OECD indicators on early childhood education and care (Table 1.1). Paris, France: 44. The Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2009, July). Preventing low birthweight (KIDS COUNT indicator brief). Baltimore, MD: Author. Retrieved from www.aecf.org/resources/kids-countindicator-brief-preventing-low-birthweight 45. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development Family Database. (2017, October 30). CO1.3: Low birth weight. Retrieved from www.oecd.org/els/family/CO_1_3_ Low_birth_weight.pdf Author. Retrieved from www.oecd.org/education/school/ 46. starting-strong-2017-9789264276116-en.htm Population Reference Bureau’s analysis of data from the 40. The Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2010, January). Early warning! Why reading by the end of third grade matters (KIDS Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, 1990–2017 Vital Statistics, Public Use Data File. COUNT special report). Baltimore, MD: Author. Retrieved from 47. www.aecf.org/resources/early-warning-why-reading-by-the- Population Reference Bureau’s analysis of data from the end-of-third-grade-matters 41. Child Trends Databank. (2014). Mathematics proficiency. Retrieved from www.childtrends.org/wp-content/ uploads/2016/03/indicator_1458984627.833.pdf 42. Alliance for Excellent Education. (2011, November 1). The high cost of high school dropouts: What the nation pays for inadequate high schools (Issue brief). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from https://all4ed.org/reports-factsheets/ the-high-cost-of-high-school-dropouts-what-the-nation-pays- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS) [online] 2017. Retrieved from https://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/ leadcause.html; https://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/ leadcaus10_us.html; www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars 48. Population Reference Bureau’s analysis of data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Web-based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS) [online] 2017. for-inadequate-high-schools. And, Alliance for Excellent 49. Education. (2006, November 1). Healthier and wealthier: McNeely, C., & Blanchard, J. (2009). The teen years Decreasing health care costs by increasing educational attainment (Issue brief). Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from https://all4ed.org/reports-factsheets/healthier-andwealthier-decreasing-health-care-costs-by-increasingeducational-attainment explained: A guide to healthy adolescent development. Baltimore, MD: Center for Adolescent Health at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health. Retrieved from www.jhsph.edu/research/centers-and-institutes/center-foradolescent-health/_includes/_pre-redesign/Interactive%20 Guide.pdf STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 49 50. 57. American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry. The Annie E. Casey Foundation. (2012, February). Children (2013, July). Facts for families — Teens: Alcohol and other living in America’s high-poverty communities (KIDS COUNT drugs. Washington, DC: Author. Retrieved from www.aacap. data snapshot on high-poverty communities). Baltimore, org/App_Themes/AACAP/docs/facts_for_families/03_teens_ MD: Author. Retrieved from www.aecf.org/resources/data- alcohol_and_other_drugs.pdf snapshot-on-high-poverty-communities 51. 58. The Annie E. Casey Foundation, KIDS COUNT Data Center Population Reference Bureau’s analyses of data from the (2018, September). Families with related children that are following sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 1990 and 2000 below poverty by family type (Table). Retrieved from https:// Census of Population and Housing, Summary Files; 2006– datacenter.kidscount.org/data/tables/55-families-with-related- 2010 through 2013–2017 American Community Surveys, children-that-are-below-poverty-by-family-type?loc=1&loct=2# Five-Year Estimates. detailed/2/2-53/true/871,870,573,869,36,868,867,133,38,35/9 94,1297,4240/345,346 Child Trends Databank. (2015, December). Teen births. 52. Retrieved from https://www.childtrends.org/indicators/teen- Mather, M. (2010, May). Data brief: U.S. children in single- births mother families. Washington, DC: Population Reference Bureau. Retrieved from www.prb.org/pdf10/singlemotherfamilies.pdf. And, Amato, P. R. (2005, Fall). The impact of family formation change on the cognitive, social, and emotional well-being of the next generation. The Future of Children, 15(2), 75–96. And, Child Trends Databank. (2017). 60. UNICEF Office of Research. (2013). Child well-being in rich countries: A comparative overview (Innocenti report card 11). Florence, Italy: Author. Retrieved from www.unicef-irc.org/ publications/pdf/rc11_eng.pdf Family structure. Retrieved from https://www.childtrends. 61. org/?indicators=family-structure Population Reference Bureau’s analysis of teen birth rate data 53. Child Trends Databank. (2015, December). Parental education. Retrieved from https://www.childtrends.org/ indicators/parental-education 54. Child Trends Databank. (2015, December). Parental education. from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, 1990–2017 Vital Statistics, Public Use Data File. 62. Martin, J. A., Hamilton, B. E., Osterman, M. J. K., Driscoll, A. K., & Drake, P. (2018, November 7). Births: Final data for 2017. National Vital Statistics Reports, 67(8). Retrieved from www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr67/nvsr67_08-508.pdf. And, 55. Martin, J. A., Hamilton, B. E., Osterman, M. J. K., Driscoll, A. Population Reference Bureau’s analyses of data from the K., & Drake, P. (2018, January 31). Births: Final data for 2016. following sources: U.S. Census Bureau, 1990 Census of National Vital Statistics Report, 67(1), Table A. Retrieved from Population and Housing, Public Use Microdata Samples; 2000 www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr67/nvsr67_01.pdf and 2001 Census Supplementary Survey One-Year Microdata Files; and 2002–2017 American Community Surveys. 56. Kneebone, E., & Holmes, N. (2016, March 31). U.S. concentrated poverty in the wake of the Great Recession. Washington, DC: Brookings Institution. Retrieved from www. brookings.edu/research/u-s-concentrated-poverty-in-thewake-of-the-great-recession 50 59. 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK KIDS COUNT DATA CENTER THE KIDS COUNT DATA CENTER PROVIDES DATA ON CHILD WELL-BEING The Annie E. Casey Foundation’s KIDS COUNT Data Center provides access to 4,315 child well-being indicators related to education, employment and income, health, poverty and youth risk factors. Data are available for the nation and for states, as well as for cities, counties and congressional districts. Site features include powerful search options; attractive and easy-to-create tables, maps and graphs; and ways to share information through social media on how children are faring. SEARCH Enter any location, topic or keyword into the search engine to find the statistics most relevant to your community. DISAGGREGATE Seamlessly connect to state and national statistics in three areas: age, family nativity and race and ethnicity. The largest of these areas — race and ethnicity — includes a game-changing 77 markers for evaluating child and family well-being. VISUALIZE Create custom profiles, maps, line graphs and bar charts with the data you find. SHARE Post data visualizations on Facebook, add custom graphics to Instagram and tweet about how the well-being of your state’s children compares with the region and nation. ACCESS The KIDS COUNT Data Center works on any mobile device and any screen. Find hundreds of child well-being indicators at your fingertips to support smart decision making and good policies for children and families. datacenter.kidscount.org STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 51 APPENDICES APPENDIX A Child Well-Being Rankings LOCATION Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming OVERALL RANK 44 45 46 40 35 20 8 25 N.R. 37 38 24 18 23 29 3 15 34 49 9 14 2 32 4 48 28 22 12 47 1 5 50 30 33 11 27 42 31 17 N.R. 19 39 26 36 41 7 6 10 16 43 13 21 ECONOMIC WELL-BEING RANK 44 33 43 36 46 12 18 25 N.R. 45 40 34 11 27 24 2 6 37 50 8 16 15 30 3 47 22 19 5 41 10 28 49 42 31 1 23 35 29 20 N.R. 26 38 9 32 39 4 17 13 21 48 7 14 EDUCATION RANK 38 49 46 32 36 19 3 26 N.R. 24 34 40 39 12 21 7 18 27 48 23 11 1 37 10 44 25 20 8 47 4 2 50 17 22 35 16 45 41 9 N.R. 28 42 31 33 30 13 5 6 29 43 15 14 HEALTH RANK 36 50 35 37 7 41 13 22 N.R. 40 34 10 23 27 26 8 24 25 42 16 15 1 18 6 47 32 44 19 46 2 3 48 5 28 30 29 43 20 12 N.R. 4 38 45 33 39 21 9 17 11 31 14 49 FAMILY AND COMMUNITY RANK 44 21 46 45 41 17 12 30 N.R. 33 38 15 7 27 32 8 23 43 48 5 19 10 29 6 49 28 11 22 42 2 13 50 35 36 4 31 40 20 25 N.R. 26 37 24 39 47 1 3 14 16 34 18 9 N.R.: Not ranked STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 53 APPENDIX B Economic Well-Being Indicators LOCATION United States Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming 54 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK CHILDREN WHOSE PARENTS LACK SECURE EMPLOYMENT: 2017 CHILDREN IN POVERTY: 2017 CHILDREN LIVING IN HOUSEHOLDS WITH A HIGH HOUSING COST BURDEN: 2017 TEENS NOT IN SCHOOL AND NOT WORKING: 2017 Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 13,353,000 265,000 27,000 332,000 156,000 1,619,000 149,000 93,000 37,000 32,000 840,000 519,000 34,000 67,000 486,000 282,000 88,000 104,000 223,000 307,000 33,000 160,000 182,000 419,000 150,000 190,000 252,000 33,000 66,000 125,000 26,000 272,000 131,000 803,000 481,000 19,000 513,000 203,000 141,000 444,000 377,000 34,000 245,000 34,000 315,000 1,525,000 98,000 16,000 258,000 232,000 94,000 182,000 18,000 18 25 15 21 22 18 12 13 18 26 20 21 12 15 17 18 12 15 22 28 13 12 14 20 12 27 19 15 14 19 10 14 27 20 21 11 20 21 16 17 58 17 23 17 21 21 11 14 14 14 26 14 13 20,075,000 336,000 61,000 469,000 201,000 2,661,000 286,000 195,000 54,000 52,000 1,219,000 689,000 81,000 105,000 755,000 412,000 141,000 146,000 316,000 371,000 67,000 314,000 365,000 639,000 276,000 242,000 380,000 68,000 95,000 186,000 65,000 479,000 174,000 1,236,000 643,000 37,000 736,000 270,000 239,000 696,000 369,000 53,000 331,000 53,000 426,000 1,921,000 176,000 29,000 439,000 429,000 139,000 287,000 33,000 27 31 33 29 28 29 23 26 26 42 29 27 26 24 26 26 19 21 31 33 26 23 27 29 21 34 27 30 20 27 25 24 36 30 28 22 28 28 27 26 56 26 30 25 28 26 19 25 23 26 37 22 24 22,908,000 263,000 58,000 517,000 168,000 3,859,000 385,000 259,000 60,000 49,000 1,593,000 745,000 111,000 107,000 880,000 365,000 139,000 160,000 237,000 330,000 52,000 437,000 433,000 549,000 280,000 189,000 327,000 50,000 104,000 222,000 67,000 739,000 136,000 1,646,000 621,000 31,000 639,000 250,000 282,000 725,000 187,000 68,000 308,000 39,000 406,000 2,297,000 225,000 37,000 544,000 510,000 84,000 295,000 30,000 31 24 31 32 24 43 31 35 29 39 38 30 36 24 30 23 19 22 23 30 20 32 32 25 22 26 24 22 22 33 26 37 28 40 27 18 25 26 32 27 29 33 28 18 27 31 24 31 29 31 22 23 22 1,171,000 24,000 2,000 31,000 14,000 142,000 16,000 10,000 3,000 2,000 74,000 48,000 6,000 6,000 43,000 27,000 8,000 9,000 18,000 27,000 3,000 18,000 16,000 34,000 12,000 15,000 21,000 4,000 6,000 13,000 4,000 30,000 12,000 57,000 38,000 2,000 34,000 18,000 12,000 41,000 23,000 4,000 19,000 2,000 27,000 134,000 12,000 2,000 23,000 22,000 10,000 15,000 3,000 7 9 7 8 8 7 5 5 6 8 7 8 9 6 6 7 5 5 7 10 5 6 4 6 4 8 6 7 5 9 5 7 10 6 7 4 5 8 6 6 12 6 7 5 7 8 6 5 5 6 11 5 8 Education Indicators LOCATION United States Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming YOUNG CHILDREN (AGES 3 AND 4) NOT IN SCHOOL: 2015–17 FOURTH-GRADERS NOT PROFICIENT IN READING: 2017 EIGHTH-GRADERS NOT PROFICIENT IN MATH: 2017 HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS NOT GRADUATING ON TIME: 2016–17 Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent 4,223,000 66,000 13,000 111,000 39,000 522,000 67,000 27,000 12,000 4,000 222,000 134,000 20,000 31,000 142,000 102,000 41,000 43,000 67,000 61,000 16,000 75,000 62,000 122,000 78,000 36,000 82,000 14,000 29,000 48,000 13,000 78,000 29,000 200,000 139,000 14,000 154,000 60,000 52,000 152,000 26,000 12,000 62,000 16,000 100,000 464,000 59,000 6,000 107,000 107,000 27,000 75,000 9,000 52 57 64 61 51 51 50 35 51 25 49 50 54 65 45 59 52 53 59 48 57 50 41 52 54 47 55 58 56 63 50 36 56 42 58 69 55 56 54 52 37 53 53 63 61 57 57 45 52 57 65 56 58 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 65 69 72 70 69 69 60 57 64 71 59 65 68 62 65 59 64 63 62 74 64 60 49 68 61 73 63 62 62 69 57 51 75 64 61 66 61 71 67 60 N.A. 61 71 64 67 71 59 57 57 61 68 65 59 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 67 79 71 66 75 71 62 64 72 79 71 69 73 65 68 62 63 65 71 81 64 67 50 69 54 78 70 63 59 73 55 56 80 66 65 60 60 76 66 62 N.A. 70 74 62 70 67 61 61 60 59 76 61 62 N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. N.A. 15 11 22 22 12 17 21 12 13 27 18 19 17 20 13 16 9 14 10 22 13 12 12 20 17 17 12 14 11 19 11 10 29 18 13 13 16 17 23 13 N.A. 16 16 16 10 10 14 11 13 21 11 11 14 N.A.: Not available STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 55 Health Indicators LOCATION United States Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming N.A.: Not available 56 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK LOW BIRTH-WEIGHT BABIES: 2017 CHILDREN WITHOUT HEALTH INSURANCE: 2017 TEENS WHO ABUSE ALCOHOL OR DRUGS: 2016–17 CHILD AND TEEN DEATHS PER 100,000: 2017 Number Percent Number Percent Number Rate Number Percent 318,873 6,038 647 6,119 3,477 32,451 5,848 2,845 981 1,001 19,653 12,772 1,491 1,545 12,651 6,794 2,526 2,685 4,831 6,519 876 6,375 5,260 9,793 4,626 4,333 6,336 942 1,930 3,265 839 8,040 2,250 18,543 11,268 720 11,854 4,085 2,972 11,580 2,556 795 5,506 835 7,409 32,162 3,507 380 8,393 5,776 1,781 4,968 600 8.3 10.3 6.2 7.5 9.3 6.9 9.1 8.1 9.0 10.5 8.8 9.9 8.5 7.0 8.5 8.3 6.6 7.4 8.8 10.7 7.1 8.9 7.5 8.8 6.7 11.6 8.7 8.0 7.5 9.1 6.9 7.9 9.5 8.1 9.4 6.7 8.7 8.1 6.8 8.4 10.5 7.5 9.7 6.9 9.2 8.4 7.2 6.7 8.4 6.6 9.5 7.7 8.7 3,925,000 36,000 19,000 133,000 33,000 301,000 57,000 24,000 8,000 2,000 325,000 200,000 7,000 22,000 89,000 106,000 24,000 39,000 41,000 36,000 13,000 54,000 22,000 69,000 47,000 37,000 75,000 14,000 26,000 58,000 6,000 78,000 26,000 118,000 119,000 14,000 125,000 82,000 33,000 125,000 25,000 5,000 60,000 14,000 71,000 835,000 71,000 2,000 101,000 46,000 11,000 53,000 14,000 5 3 10 8 4 3 4 3 3 1 7 7 2 5 3 6 3 5 4 3 5 4 1 3 3 5 5 6 5 8 2 4 5 3 5 8 5 8 4 4 4 2 5 6 4 11 7 2 5 3 3 4 10 20,337 426 99 489 278 1,870 374 151 51 34 1,247 751 70 138 886 517 212 231 334 454 58 358 273 618 305 303 521 66 137 185 53 342 165 793 662 55 846 346 237 696 151 36 391 92 543 2,066 237 27 463 364 112 334 41 26 37 52 28 37 19 28 19 23 25 28 28 22 30 29 31 27 31 31 39 21 25 18 26 22 40 36 27 27 26 19 16 32 18 27 30 30 34 26 24 21 16 33 41 34 27 25 21 23 21 28 24 29 1,028,000 15,000 4,000 26,000 10,000 140,000 24,000 13,000 3,000 2,000 64,000 27,000 4,000 7,000 47,000 18,000 10,000 10,000 12,000 14,000 4,000 16,000 21,000 30,000 18,000 9,000 17,000 5,000 6,000 12,000 4,000 23,000 10,000 57,000 29,000 2,000 36,000 14,000 16,000 29,000 N.A. 3,000 15,000 4,000 20,000 88,000 12,000 2,000 23,000 28,000 6,000 19,000 2,000 4 4 7 5 4 5 6 5 4 5 5 3 4 5 5 3 4 4 4 4 5 3 4 4 4 3 4 6 4 5 4 3 6 4 4 4 4 4 5 3 N.A. 5 4 6 4 4 4 5 4 5 4 4 5 Family and Community Indicators LOCATION United States Alabama Alaska Arizona Arkansas California Colorado Connecticut Delaware District of Columbia Florida Georgia Hawaii Idaho Illinois Indiana Iowa Kansas Kentucky Louisiana Maine Maryland Massachusetts Michigan Minnesota Mississippi Missouri Montana Nebraska Nevada New Hampshire New Jersey New Mexico New York North Carolina North Dakota Ohio Oklahoma Oregon Pennsylvania Puerto Rico Rhode Island South Carolina South Dakota Tennessee Texas Utah Vermont Virginia Washington West Virginia Wisconsin Wyoming CHILDREN IN SINGLE-PARENT FAMILIES: 2017 CHILDREN IN FAMILIES WHERE THE HOUSEHOLD HEAD LACKS A HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA: 2017 CHILDREN LIVING IN HIGH-POVERTY AREAS: 2013–17 TEEN BIRTHS PER 1,000: 2017 Number Percent Number Percent Number Percent Number Rate 24,001,000 399,000 49,000 572,000 243,000 2,870,000 338,000 239,000 71,000 59,000 1,551,000 899,000 90,000 104,000 933,000 511,000 200,000 199,000 328,000 467,000 76,000 441,000 419,000 720,000 337,000 305,000 449,000 60,000 130,000 237,000 72,000 577,000 205,000 1,397,000 799,000 44,000 920,000 321,000 249,000 881,000 388,000 70,000 417,000 62,000 522,000 2,399,000 173,000 34,000 542,000 457,000 124,000 402,000 37,000 34 39 29 37 37 33 28 33 37 51 39 38 32 24 34 34 29 29 35 45 32 34 32 35 27 46 35 28 29 37 29 30 45 35 37 27 37 36 30 35 62 35 40 31 37 34 19 30 31 29 37 33 28 9,557,000 128,000 18,000 263,000 89,000 1,874,000 140,000 61,000 26,000 17,000 478,000 323,000 20,000 37,000 325,000 186,000 56,000 73,000 106,000 141,000 11,000 140,000 114,000 197,000 107,000 93,000 131,000 11,000 52,000 115,000 15,000 185,000 77,000 592,000 288,000 8,000 244,000 114,000 106,000 261,000 76,000 22,000 118,000 13,000 166,000 1,431,000 77,000 7,000 170,000 182,000 34,000 106,000 7,000 13 12 10 16 13 21 11 8 13 14 11 13 7 8 11 12 8 10 10 13 4 10 8 9 8 13 9 5 11 17 6 9 16 14 13 5 9 12 12 10 12 11 11 6 11 19 8 6 9 11 9 8 5 8,545,000 168,000 12,000 332,000 100,000 1,167,000 59,000 59,000 10,000 30,000 459,000 335,000 13,000 17,000 300,000 160,000 24,000 51,000 163,000 226,000 9,000 60,000 90,000 330,000 60,000 171,000 121,000 15,000 36,000 67,000 5,000 177,000 118,000 706,000 260,000 10,000 329,000 105,000 57,000 323,000 616,000 28,000 130,000 24,000 200,000 1,091,000 22,000 2,000 91,000 69,000 38,000 116,000 1,000 12 15 6 20 14 13 5 8 5 25 11 13 4 4 10 10 3 7 16 20 4 4 6 15 5 24 9 7 8 10 2 9 24 17 11 6 13 11 7 12 84 13 12 11 13 15 2 2 5 4 10 9 <.5 194,377 4,241 486 5,025 3,178 18,935 2,790 1,053 552 408 10,708 7,778 714 1,106 7,103 5,091 1,678 2,057 4,060 4,269 504 2,667 1,827 5,307 2,113 3,137 4,301 645 1,158 1,906 353 2,837 1,896 7,480 6,845 368 7,788 3,793 1,809 5,899 2,650 414 3,408 614 5,516 26,971 1,801 206 3,987 3,191 1,416 2,564 424 19 27 22 22 33 15 16 9 18 21 18 22 19 19 17 23 16 21 29 29 13 14 8 16 12 31 22 21 18 22 8 10 28 12 21 16 21 30 15 15 24 11 22 23 27 28 15 10 15 15 27 14 25 STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 57 ABOUT THE INDEX The KIDS COUNT index reflects child health and education outcomes as well as risk and protective factors, such as economic well-being, family structure and community context. The index incorporates a developmental perspective on childhood and includes experiences across life stages, from birth through early adulthood. The indicators are consistently and regularly measured, which allows for legitimate comparisons across states and over time. Organizing the index into domains provides a more nuanced assessment of child well-being in each state that can inform policy solutions by helping policymakers and advocates better identify areas of strength and weakness. For example, a state may rank well above average in overall child well-being, while showing the need for improvement in one or more domains. Domain-specific data can strengthen decisionmaking efforts by providing multiple data points relevant to specific policy areas. The 16 indicators of child well-being are derived from federal government statistical agencies and reflect the best available state and national data for tracking yearly changes. Many of the indicators are based on samples, and, like all sample data, they contain some random error. Other measures (such as the child and teen death rate) are based on relatively small numbers of events in some states and may exhibit some random fluctuation from year to year. 58 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK The Foundation urges readers to focus on relatively large differences across states, as small differences may simply reflect small fluctuations, rather than real changes in the wellbeing of children. Assessing trends by looking at changes over a longer period of time is more reliable. State data for past years are available on the KIDS COUNT Data Center (datacenter. kidscount.org). The KIDS COUNT Data Book utilizes rates and percentages because that is the best way to compare states and to assess changes over time within a state. However, the focus on rates and percentages may mask the magnitude of some of the problems examined in this report. Therefore, data on the actual number of children or events are provided on pages 53–57 and on the KIDS COUNT Data Center. The Foundation includes data for the District of Columbia and Puerto Rico in the appendices, but not in the state rankings because they are significantly different from any state, and comparisons are not instructive. It is more useful to look at changes for these geographies over time or to compare the District of Columbia with other large cities. Data for many child well-being indicators for the 50 largest cities (including the District of Columbia) are available on the KIDS COUNT Data Center, which also contains statistics for children and families in the U.S. Virgin Islands. DEFINITIONS AND DATA SOURCES DOMAIN RANK for each state was determined in the following manner. First, the Foundation converted the state numerical values for the most recent year for each of the four key indicators within every domain into standard scores. It summed those standard scores in each domain to get a total standard score for each state. Finally, Casey ranked the states based on their total standard score by domain in sequential order from highest/best (1) to lowest/worst (50). Standard scores were derived by subtracting the mean score from the observed score and dividing the amount by the standard deviation for that distribution of scores. All measures were given the same weight in calculating the domain standard score. OVERALL RANK for each state was calculated in the following manner. First, Casey converted the state numerical values for the most recent year for all 16 key indicators into standard scores. It summed those standard scores within their domains to create a domain standard score for each state. The Foundation then summed the four domain standard scores to get a total standard score for every state. Finally, it ranked the states based on their total standard score in sequential order from highest/best (1) to lowest/ worst (50). Standard scores were derived by subtracting the mean score from the observed score and dividing the amount by the standard deviation for that distribution of scores. All measures were given the same weight in calculating the total standard score. PERCENTAGE CHANGE OVER TIME ANALYSIS was computed by comparing the most recent year’s data for the 16 key indicators with the data for the base year. To calculate percentage change, the Foundation subtracted the rate for the most recent year from the rate for the base year and then divided that quantity by the rate for the base year. The results are multiplied by 100 for readability. The percentage change was calculated on rounded data, and the percentagechange figure has been rounded to the nearest whole number. ECONOMIC WELL-BEING INDICATORS CHILDREN IN POVERTY is the percentage of children under age 18 who live in families with incomes below 100 percent of the U.S. poverty threshold, as defined each year by the U.S. Census Bureau. In 2017, a family of two adults and two children lived in poverty if their annual income fell below $24,858. Poverty status is not determined for people living in group quarters (such as military barracks, prisons and other institutional quarters) or for unrelated individuals under age 15 (such as children in foster care). The data are based on income received in the 12 months prior to the survey. SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey. STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 59 CHILDREN WHOSE PARENTS LACK SECURE EMPLOYMENT is the share of all children under EDUCATION INDICATORS age 18 living in families where no parent has YOUNG CHILDREN NOT IN SCHOOL is the regular, full-time, year-round employment. percentage of children ages 3 and 4 who were For children living in single-parent families, this not enrolled in school (e.g., nursery school, means the resident parent did not work at least preschool or kindergarten) during the previous 35 hours per week for at least 50 weeks in the three months. Due to small sample size, 12 months prior to the survey. For children living these data are based on a pooled three-year in married-couple families, this means neither average of one-year American Community parent worked at least 35 hours per week Survey responses to increase the accuracy of for at least 50 weeks in the 12 months before the estimates. the survey. Children living with neither SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey. parent are also listed as not having secure parental employment because they are likely to be economically vulnerable. FOURTH-GRADERS NOT PROFICIENT IN READING is the percentage of fourth-grade SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey. public school students who did not reach the proficient level in reading as measured CHILDREN LIVING IN HOUSEHOLDS WITH A HIGH HOUSING COST BURDEN is the percentage by the National Assessment of Educational of children under age 18 who live in households include charter schools and exclude Bureau of where more than 30 percent of monthly Indian Education and Department of Defense household pretax income is spent on housing- Education Activity schools. related expenses, including rent, mortgage payments, taxes and insurance. Progress. For this indicator, public schools SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress. SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey. TEENS NOT IN SCHOOL AND NOT WORKING is the percentage of teenagers between ages 16 and 19 who are not enrolled in school (full or part time) and not employed (full or part time). SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey. EIGHTH-GRADERS NOT PROFICIENT IN MATH is the percentage of eighth-grade public school students who did not reach the proficient level in math as measured by the National Assessment of Educational Progress. For this indicator, public schools include charter schools and exclude Bureau of Indian Education and Department of Defense Education Activity schools. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, National Assessment of Educational Progress. 60 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK CHILD AND TEEN DEATHS PER 100,000 is the HIGH SCHOOL STUDENTS NOT GRADUATING ON TIME is the percentage of an entering number of deaths, from all causes, to children freshman class not graduating in four years. between ages 1 and 19 per 100,000 children The measure is derived from the adjusted cohort in this age range. The data are reported by the graduation rate (ACGR). The four-year ACGR place of residence, not the place where the is the number of students who graduate in death occurred. four years with a regular high school diploma divided by the number of students who form the adjusted cohort for the graduating class. Students entering ninth grade for the first time form a cohort that is adjusted by adding any students who subsequently transfer into the cohort and subtracting any students who subsequently transfer out. SOURCE: U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics, Common Core of Data. SOURCES: Death Statistics: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, Vital Statistics. Population Statistics: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates. TEENS WHO ABUSE ALCOHOL OR DRUGS is the percentage of teens ages 12 to 17 reporting dependence on or abuse of either illicit drugs or alcohol in the past year. Illicit drugs include marijuana, cocaine, heroin, hallucinogens, inhalants or prescription drugs used nonmedically. These data are based on HEALTH INDICATORS a two-year average of survey responses. SOURCE: Substance Abuse and Mental Health Services Administration, National Survey on Drug Use and Health. LOW BIRTH-WEIGHT BABIES is the percentage of live births weighing less than 5.5 pounds (2,500 grams). The data reflect the mother’s place of residence, not the place where the FAMILY AND COMMUNITY INDICATORS birth occurred. CHILDREN IN SINGLE-PARENT FAMILIES is the SOURCE: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, Vital Statistics. percentage of children under age 18 who live CHILDREN WITHOUT HEALTH INSURANCE is the percentage of children under age 19 not covered by any health insurance. The data are based on health insurance coverage at the time of the survey; interviews are conducted throughout the calendar year. with their own unmarried parents. Children not living with a parent are excluded. In this definition, single-parent families include cohabiting couples. Children living with married stepparents are not considered to be in a singleparent family. SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey. SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey. STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 61 CHILDREN IN FAMILIES WHERE THE HOUSEHOLD HEAD LACKS A HIGH SCHOOL DIPLOMA is the The data are based on income received in the 12 percentage of children under age 18 living in used in this analysis are only available in the households where the household head does not five-year American Community Survey. have a high school diploma or equivalent. SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey. months prior to the survey. The census tract data SOURCE: U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey. TEEN BIRTHS PER 1,000 is the number of births CHILDREN LIVING IN HIGH-POVERTY AREAS is the to teenagers between ages 15 and 19 per percentage of children under age 18 who live 1,000 females in this age group. Data reflect in census tracts where the poverty rates of the the mother’s place of residence, rather than the total population are 30 percent or more. In 2017, place of the birth. a family of two adults and two children lived in poverty if their annual income fell below $24,858. 62 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK SOURCES: Birth Statistics: Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Health Statistics, Vital Statistics. Population Statistics: U.S. Census Bureau, Population Estimates. STATE KIDS COUNT ORGANIZATIONS ALABAMA FLORIDA LOUISIANA VOICES for Alabama’s Children www.alavoices.org 334.213.2410 Florida KIDS COUNT University of South Florida www.floridakidscount.org 813.974.7411 Agenda for Children www.agendaforchildren.org 504.586.8509 GEORGIA Maine Children’s Alliance www.mekids.org 207.623.1868 ALASKA Alaska Children’s Trust www.alaskachildrenstrust.org 907.248.7676 ARIZONA Children’s Action Alliance www.azchildren.org 602.266.0707 ARKANSAS Arkansas Advocates for Children & Families www.aradvocates.org 501.371.9678 CALIFORNIA Children Now www.childrennow.org 510.763.2444 COLORADO Colorado Children’s Campaign www.coloradokids.org 303.839.1580 CONNECTICUT Connecticut Association for Human Services www.cahs.org 860.951.2212 ext. 246 DELAWARE University of Delaware www.dekidscount.org 302.831.3462 DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA DC Action for Children www.dcactionforchildren.org 202.234.9404 Georgia Family Connection Partnership www.gafcp.org 404.507.0488 HAWAII Center on the Family University of Hawaii www.uhfamily.hawaii.edu 808.956.3760 IDAHO Idaho Voices for Children Jannus, Inc. www.idahovoices.org 208.336.5533 ILLINOIS Voices for Illinois Children www.voices4kids.org 312.456.0600 INDIANA The Indiana Youth Institute www.iyi.org 317.396.2700 IOWA Child & Family Policy Center www.cfpciowa.org 515.280.9027 KANSAS Kansas Action for Children www.kac.org 785.232.0550 KENTUCKY MAINE MARYLAND Advocates for Children and Youth www.acy.org 410.547.9200 MASSACHUSETTS Massachusetts Budget and Policy Center www.massbudget.org 617.426.1228 MICHIGAN Michigan League for Public Policy www.mlpp.org 517.487.5436 MINNESOTA Children’s Defense Fund — Minnesota www.cdf-mn.org 651.227.6121 MISSISSIPPI Mississippi KIDS COUNT Social Science Research Center Mississippi State University www.kidscount.ssrc.msstate.edu 662.325.8079 MISSOURI Family and Community Trust www.mokidscount.org 573.636.3228 Kentucky Youth Advocates www.kyyouth.org 502.895.8167 STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 63 MONTANA OHIO TENNESSEE Montana KIDS COUNT Bureau of Business and Economic Research University of Montana www.montanakidscount.org 406.243.5113 Children’s Defense Fund — Ohio www.cdfohio.org 614.221.2244 Tennessee Commission on Children and Youth www.tn.gov/tccy 615.741.2633 OKLAHOMA TEXAS Oklahoma Policy Institute www.okpolicy.org 918.794.3944 Center for Public Policy Priorities www.cppp.org/kidscount 512.823.2871 OREGON Children First for Oregon www.cffo.org 503.236.9754 Community Foundation of the Virgin Islands www.cfvi.net 340.774.6031 PENNSYLVANIA UTAH New Futures KIDS COUNT www.new-futures.org 603.225.9540 Pennsylvania Partnerships for Children www.papartnerships.org 717.236.5680 Voices for Utah Children www.utahchildren.org 801.364.1182 NEW JERSEY PUERTO RICO Advocates for Children of New Jersey www.acnj.org 973.643.3876 Youth Development Institute (Instituto del Desarrollo de la Juventud) www.juventudpr.org/en 787.728.3939 Voices for Vermont’s Children www.voicesforvtkids.org 802.229.6377 NEBRASKA Voices for Children in Nebraska www.voicesforchildren.com 402.597.3100 NEVADA Children’s Advocacy Alliance www.caanv.org 702.228.1869 NEW HAMPSHIRE NEW MEXICO New Mexico Voices for Children www.nmvoices.org 505.244.9505 RHODE ISLAND NEW YORK SOUTH CAROLINA New York State Council on Children and Families www.ccf.ny.gov 518.473.3652 Children’s Trust of South Carolina www.scchildren.org 803.733.5430 NORTH CAROLINA SOUTH DAKOTA NC Child www.ncchild.org 919.834.6623 South Dakota KIDS COUNT Beacom School of Business University of South Dakota www.sdkidscount.org 605.677.6432 NORTH DAKOTA North Dakota KIDS COUNT Center for Social Research North Dakota State University www.ndkidscount.org 701.231.1060 64 2019 KIDS COUNT DATA BOOK Rhode Island KIDS COUNT www.rikidscount.org 401.351.9400 U.S. VIRGIN ISLANDS VERMONT VIRGINIA Voices for Virginia’s Children www.vakids.org 804.649.0184 WASHINGTON KIDS COUNT in Washington www.kidscountwa.org 206.324.0340 WEST VIRGINIA West Virginia KIDS COUNT www.wvkidscount.org 304.345.2101 WISCONSIN Kids Forward www.kidsforward.net 608.284.0580 WYOMING Wyoming Community Foundation www.wycf.org/partners/wy-kids-count 307.721.8300 ABOUT THE ANNIE E. CASEY FOUNDATION The Annie E. Casey Foundation is a private philanthropy that creates a brighter future for the nation’s children by developing solutions to strengthen families, build paths to economic opportunity and transform struggling communities into safer and healthier places to live, work and grow. The Annie E. Casey Foundation’s KIDS COUNT® is a national and state effort to track the status of children in the United States. By providing policymakers and advocates with benchmarks of child well-being, KIDS COUNT seeks to enrich local, state and national discussions concerning ways to build a better future for all children. Nationally, KIDS COUNT produces publications on key areas of well-being, including the annual KIDS COUNT Data Book and periodic reports on critical child and family policy issues. The Foundation’s KIDS COUNT Data Center (datacenter.kidscount.org) provides the best available data on child well-being in the United States. Additionally, the Foundation funds a nationwide network of state KIDS COUNT organizations that provide a more detailed, local picture of how children are faring.   STATE TRENDS IN CHILD WELL-BEING 65 Permission to copy, disseminate or otherwise use information from this Data Book is granted with appropriate acknowledgment. For more information, visit www.aecf.org/copyright. © 2019, The Annie E. Casey Foundation, Baltimore, Maryland KIDS COUNT® is a registered trademark of the Annie E. Casey Foundation. Printed and bound in the United States of America on recycled paper using soy-based inks. ISSN 1060-9814 Designed by Illume Communications illumecomm.com Photography by Jason E. Miczek Data compiled by Population Reference Bureau www.prb.org The 2019 KIDS COUNT Data Book can be viewed, downloaded and ordered at www.aecf.org/databook. THE ANNIE E. CASEY FOUNDATION 701 St. Paul Street Baltimore, MD 21202 410.547.6600 aecfnews aecfkidscount