2013 kids count data book

7/28/2019 2013 Kids Count Data Book

1/56

D ook

stat trnds in cild wll-bing

kIDSCoUN


2/56


3/56

D ook

state trends in child well-being

kIDSCoUN


4/56

Te Annie E. Casey FoundationsKIDS COUNT Data Bookcould notbe produced and distributed without thehelp o numerous people. Te publication

was assembled and produced under the

general direction o Laura Speer. OtherCasey sta who contributed to this reportinclude Sue Lin Chong, Arin Gencer,Florencia Gutierrez, Lisa Hamilton,

John Hodgins, Michael Laracy andNorris West. Nancy Cauthen provided

writing and research support.Te Population Reerence Bureau

was instrumental in the developmento the KIDS COUN index and inthe collection and organization o datapresented in this book. We are especially

grateul to Rachel Cortes, Jean DAmicoand Kelvin Pollard.Special thanks are also due the sta

at KINEIK, or design and productionservices; the sta at Hager Sharp, orhelping to promote the Data Book;Connie Dykstra o Te Hatcher Group,

or managing production; and JaysonHait o eye4detail, or prooreadingand copyediting.

Finally, we would like to thank the stateKIDS COUN projects (see page 50), or

making the Data Bookavailable to national,state and local leaders across the country.

Permission to copy, disseminate orotherwise use inormation rom thisData Bookis granted as long as appropriateacknowledgment is given.

outreach PartnersTe Annie E. Casey Foundation wishesto thank our Outreach Partners or theirsupport and assistance in promoting anddisseminating the 2013 KIDS COUNTData Book

. With the help o our partners,data on the status and well-being o kidsand amilies are shared with policymakers,advocates, practitioners and citizensto help enrich local, state and nationaldiscussions on ways to improve outcomesor Americas most vulnerable children.

CkNowlDNS

he 2013 kIDS CoUN Data bcan be vieed,

dnaded r rdered n the Internet at:

.idscunt.rg

earn mre abut the nnie . Casey Fundatins

2013 kIDS CoUN outreach Partners, pease visit:

.aecf.rg/ajrInitiatives/kIDSCoUN/

outreachPartners.aspx
http://www.kidscount.org/http://www.aecf.org/MajorInitiatives/KIDSCOUNT/OutreachPartners.aspxhttp://www.aecf.org/MajorInitiatives/KIDSCOUNT/OutreachPartners.aspxhttp://www.aecf.org/MajorInitiatives/KIDSCOUNT/OutreachPartners.aspxhttp://www.aecf.org/MajorInitiatives/KIDSCOUNT/OutreachPartners.aspxhttp://www.kidscount.org/


5/56

CoNNS

4 FowoD

10 kIDS CoUN D CN

12 NDS

16 overa Chid we-eing

18 cnmic we-eing

24 ducatin

28 Heath

32 Famiy and Cmmunity

37 CoNClUSIoN

40 PPNDICS

46 but the Index

47 Denitins andData Surces

50 Primary Cntacts frState kIDS CoUN Prjects

53 but the nnie . CaseyFundatin and kIDS CoUN
http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/http://.pdf/


6/56

FowoD


7/56

5he nnie . Casey Fundatin | .aecf.rgState trendS in child well-being

With the national economy now out o

crisis, we have an opportunity to reocusour attention on improving outcomes orthe next generation. odays children liter-ally represent our uture as tomorrowsleaders, citizens, workers and the nextgeneration o parents and it is impera-tive that we attend to their well-being inthe present. Research shows that smartinvestments in the early years o child-hood can increase the odds o success orall children, especially our nations mostdisadvantaged. In this years Data Book,

we highlight indicators on the well-being

o our youngest children to help urtherthe conversation about opportunities orand the benets o early intervention.

Te Annie E. Casey Foundation haspublished the Data Bookor each o thepast 24 years, tracking the well-being o

Americas children nationally and by state.As you read the 2013 Data Book, we wantto remind you o an important change

made last year. o take advantage o

the tremendous growth in research anddata on child development, we improvedhow we measure child well-being andrank states. Te KIDS COUN indexnow includes 16 child-level indicatorsacross our domains: (1) Economic Well-Being, (2) Education, (3) Health and(4) Family and Community. Tis multi-aceted index provides a more complexpicture o child well-being in each state,especially in cases where a state excels inone or two areas but lags behind in others.

ains fr Chidren overa,with Critica xceptins

Examining national changes in childwell-being over the past ve or six years,we observe modest gains in the Educationand Health domains, some o which buildon longer-term, incremental improve-ments. But when we turn to the Economic

fter many years f caamitus ecnmic trends, this

years kIDS CoUN Data breveas sme mdest but

hpefu signs f recvery and imprvement fr mericas

chidren and famiies. whie the natin certainy has nt

fuy recvered frm the recessin, e are ding the hard

r f digging ut and mving ahead.

2013 kIDS CoUN D ook
http://www.aecf.org/http://www.aecf.org/


8/56

6 he nnie . Casey Fundatin | .aecf.rg 2013 kids count data book

Well-Being and Family and Communitydomains, three troubling trends emerge.First, we see lingering eects o the reces-sion and continued high unemployment.Second, disparities among children by

income and amily structure continue togrow. (In contrast, while some disparitiesby race and ethnicity have increased,others have narrowed.) Tird, our nationsyoungest children are disproportionatelyaected by these negative trends.

Here are some o the specics behindthe overall ndings rom this yearsData Book. We oten hear that our publiceducation system is ailing, but the realityis more complex. Overall, national mathand reading scores have steadily improved

over time or students o all races andincome levels,1 and the testing gapbetween Arican-American and whitestudents has declined.2 Te charge thatAmerican students are alling behindcomes rom international comparisons,

which typically rank the United Statesin the top third or hal, depending onthe age o students and subject matterbeing tested. But when researchers disag-gregate the data, it becomes clear thatour nations overall achievement levelsare limited by the perormance o our

lowest-income students.Controlling or poverty, American

students rank much higher.3 In 2009,students at U.S. schools with ewerthan 10 percent o students in povertyranked number one in reading.4 Tus,our education problem is twoold. First,at 23 percent in 2011, the U.S. childpoverty rate was much higher than that

in countries with the highest overallacademic achievement levels. Second,the gap in standardized test scoresbetween auent and low-income studentsin the United States has grown about

40 percent since the 1960s, even as theracial gap has narrowed.5

Comprehensive early childhood pro-grams and high-quality preschool canhelp improve school readiness amonglow-income children, but nationally, ewerthan hal (46 percent) o 3- and 4-year-olds attended preschool. Only a smallpercentage o poor children participatedin programs o sucient quality andintensity to overcome the developmentaldecits associated with chronic economic

hardship and low levels o parentaleducation. Clearly, we are ar rom ensur-ing that all children have the opportunityto enter kindergarten ready to succeed.

Many child health and saety indica-tors have steadily improved over the pastcouple o decades, with additional gainsin recent years. Despite declines inemployer-sponsored health insurancecoverage, the overall rate o insured chil-dren has increased because o expandingpublic health coverage or kids. Mortalityrates or children o all ages continue to

all as a result o medical advances andincreased saety measures, such as more

widespread use o seat belts, car seatsand bike helmets. One growing healthproblem is childhood obesity. Rateso childhood obesity have skyrocketedin recent decades, especially among low-income and minority children. Given thatobesity in childhood is associated with


9/56


he chid pverty rate increased t 23 percent in 2011,t years after the recessin had ended. ven mredisturbing is the fact that the pverty rate fr very yung

chidren thse under 3 years d as 26 percent.

short- and long-term health problems, thisarea is ripe or early intervention.6

Perhaps the most troubling ndingin this years report is in the area oEconomic Well-Being. Te child poverty

rate increased to 23 percent in 2011, twoyears ater the recession had ended. Evenmore disturbing is the act that the povertyrate or very young children thoseunder 3 years old was 26 percent. Tesestatistics are based on a very conservativemeasure o hardship, meaning the per-centage o children living in economicallyragile homes is considerably higher. Teocial poverty line in 2011 was $22,811or a amily o two adults and two chil-dren, while researchers estimate that

amilies typically need twice that amountto meet their basic needs.7

A lingering concern post-recession isthe impact o unemployment on children.

Although the overall unemployment ratecontinues to decline, ve years ater thecrisis, unemployment remains high, at 7.5percent, with almost 12 million Americansout o work.8 Furthermore, long-termunemployment is increasingly a problem:

A total o 4.5 million workers were unem-ployed or more than six months, andmore than 3 million were without work

or a year or more.9

Adults with the lowestlevels o education are most likely tosuer long-term unemployment, whichthen creates hardship or their children.

As employment gures slowly returnedto near pre-recession levels, more childrenlived in concentrated poverty. About 12percent o children lived in neighborhoods

where 30 percent or more o households

have incomes below the poverty line,putting those children at higher risk oexperiencing crime, violence and physicaland mental health problems.10

Meanwhile, the percentage o children

living in single-parent amilies continuesto climb. In 2011, more than one-third(35 percent) o all children lived in asingle-parent household, as did 37 percento inants and toddlers. Such children areat higher risk o negative outcomes laterin lie because they typically have ewereconomic and emotional resources thanchildren growing up in two-parent ami-lies. Te one bright spot among the Familyand Community indicators is a recordlow level o births to teens.

In sum, there are some positive develop-ments in child well-being to celebrate.But the number o low-income childrencontinues to increase, and the gap betweentheir well-being and that o their middle-class and auent peers continues to

widen. In part, thats because children inlow-income households oten experiencemultiple risks or example, living inpoverty, having a single parent and lackingaccess to quality early care and educationprograms and well-resourced public schools.

he dvantages f Starting ary

In a recent study o 29 economicallyadvanced countries, the United Statesranked 26th in overall child well-being.Only Lithuania, Latvia and Romaniaranked below us.11 Now that the worst othe economic crisis is behind us, we musttake this opportunity to think strategically


10/56


about the uture. We know that vibrantand prosperous communities requirestrong amilies, who, together with all osociety, have a commitment to the care,health and education o our youngest

children. Te early years o a child s lieare critically important, and when thecommunity partners with parents topromote healthy early childhood develop-ment, we all benet. Our nations childrenbecome healthy and productive adults; oureconomy becomes stronger because busi-nesses can nd the skilled workers theyneed; and our democracy can thrive asa new generation o inormed Americanscontinues to enrich civil society.

why the eary years matter.Early relation-ships and experiences help shape the

architecture and wiring o the brain,creating either a sturdy or ragile oun-dation or a young childs cognitive,emotional and behavioral development.Nurturing relationships with parents andother caregivers, as well as stimulatingand educationally rich environments, helpyoung children thrive. But the experienceo poverty and related risk actors suchas poor parenting, inadequate nutrition,requent moves and changes in non-

parental caregivers, insucient cognitivestimulation and unsae environments can actually suppress brain developmentand have lasting eects.

From even the youngest age, there aremeasurable dierences in how childrenrom lower-income amilies and theirmiddle-class peers develop and learn.Tese dierences persist ater children

enter school, where a lack o high-qualityearly childhood experiences is linked toailure to read at grade level by the endo third grade a strong predictor obecoming a high school dropout.12 Te

eects o poverty and inadequate early careextend beyond the school years. Children

who are persistently poor are more likelyto live in poverty between ages 25 and 30,become teen and/or unmarried parentsand have spotty employment records.13

he benets f eary interventin. A childsearliest relationships and experiencesmatter. Early intervention can prevent,or at least reduce, some o the negativeeects associated with living in poverty.

Parents are their childs rst and primaryteachers and caregivers, but some low-income, new and expecting parents needsupport to succeed in these roles. Although

we still have a lot to learn in this area,research suggests that high-quality earlychildhood programs can help reduce thestresses o poverty by providing better,more sensitive care and by teachingparents how to interact more positively

with their young children. Evidencealso suggests that highly targeted incomesupports can help reduce the eects o

poverty and improve childrens outcomes,particularly academic perormance.

All children benet rom high-qualityearly care and education, but researchindicates that the quality o care is mostimportant or children at highest risko poor developmental outcomes.

According to Nobel Prize-winning econo-mist James Heckman, early childhood

thugh the eary years are criticay imprtant, emust cntinue t identify ther ey devepmentamments hen interventin pays ff in the ng term.


11/56


interventions are some o the best invest-ments we can make as a nation, with areturn on investment at 7 to 10 percentannually by reducing crime, improvingacademic achievement and building a

skilled workorce.14

he imprtance f t-generatin strategies.oo oten, low-income parents struggle togain and retain employment. Many experi-ence violence and trauma, battle substanceabuse, and have physical and mental healthproblems. Given the enormous infuencethat parents have on their children,especially when those children are inantsand toddlers, we need to nd better waysto support parents o young children.

Early childhood strategies alone will notsuccessully reduce disparities amongchildren; we must also assist their parents.

he Need fr Smart Investments

Given the consensus on the need toreduce the countrys long-term debt,simply adding more public dollars toexisting strategies is neither wise noreasible. Although we will need to investmore in early childhood, we should ocusour resources on strategies with evidence

o high returns in child well-being andhealthy development. For example, weshould weave together existing programsthat support new parents such ashome visiting programs and programsthat help parents ulll their roles astheir childrens rst and most importantteachers with high-quality early child-hood and prekindergarten programs, to

ensure that every child enters schoolready to learn. Tese strategies should, inturn, be integrated into the curricula andlearning supports o the early elementaryyears, thus increasing the odds that all

o our children are reading procientlyby the end o third grade.

Compared to the drivers o the nationaldebt, the additional resources requiredto improve opportunities or our nationsyoungest children are relatively modest.I we invest those resources wisely, along

with reocusing existing resources onapproaches with strong evidence o suc-cess, the return on investment will aroutweigh the costs. Te same is true oinvestments in older children: Smarter

spending on programs and services thatwe know increase childrens long-termchances or success is essential. Althoughthe early years are critically important,

we must continue to identiy other keydevelopmental moments when interven-tion pays o in the long term.

Te ollowing pages illustrate some othe progress we have made as a nation inimproving child well-being, while identiy-ing areas where our eorts are alling short.

As we celebrate long-term gains in Healthand Education, we must nd eective ways

to halt and reverse the wideningdisparities among childrens access toeconomic resources and ensure that theygrow up in strong, stable amilies andcommunities. Tats the challenge ahead.

Patric . cCarthyPresident and Cohe nnie . Casey Fundatin


12/56


kIDS CoUN D CN

Mobile Site

indicatrs currenty fund n thekIDS CoUN Data Center can be accessed

quicy and easiy anytime, anyhere n yur

mbie device at: mbie.idscunt.rg

he nnie . Casey Fundatins updated kIDS CoUN

Data Center maes it easier t access hundreds

f chid e-being indicatrs reated t educatin,

empyment and incme, heath, pverty and yuth

ris factrs. Data are avaiabe fr the natin and fr

states, as e as fr cities, cunties and cngressina

districts. Ne site features incude imprved search

ptins; mre attractive and easier t create tabes,

maps and graphs; and better ays t share infrmatin

thrugh scia media n h chidren are faring.

datacenter.idscunt.rg

ccess Data n Chid we-eing hrughthe Imprved kIDS CoUN Data Center
http://www.aecf.org/http://mobile.kidscount.org/http://datacenter.kidscount.org/http://datacenter.kidscount.org/http://mobile.kidscount.org/http://www.aecf.org/


13/56

KIDS COUNT Data Center


nter any catin,tpic and/r eyrdin the cmprehensivene search functin.

learn h chidrenare faring hereyu ive by using thene interactive map.

Search by tpict nd the datayu need.

Use the quic inst access ideyused infrmatin.

datacenter.idscunt.rg
http://www.aecf.org/http://datacenter.kidscount.org/http://datacenter.kidscount.org/http://www.aecf.org/


14/56

NDS


15/56


SUS oF CHIlDN

Since 1990, kIDS CoUN has raned states annuay n

vera chid e-being using an index f ey indicatrs. last

years Data bincuded an updated index t tae advantage

f advances in nedge abut chid devepment and the

avaiabiity f ne state-eve data t create a mre rbust

t t better trac trends in chid e-being.

Prole Pages Online

Natina and state pres

prviding current and trend data

fr a 16 indicatrs are avaiabeat datacenter.idscunt.rg/

datab/2013/pres.

Natina and state data are

as avaiabe in ppendix 2,

n page 42.

Te KIDS COUN index now consists

o our domains that capture what chil-dren need most to thrive: (1) EconomicWell-Being, (2) Education, (3) Health and(4) Family and Community. Each domaincomprises our indicators, or a total o 16.(For a more thorough description o theKIDS COUN index review and revisionprocess, visit datacenter.kidscount.org/databook/2013.)

Tis years Data Bookpresents recenttrends, generally comparing data rom2005 with data rom 2011, which are otenthe most recent available. Te national

trend data allow us to compare how thecountrys children were aring mid-decade,prior to the economic crisis, with how theyare doing in its atermath. State rankingsocus only on the most recent data.

Natina rends in Chid we-eing

Comparing data rom beore and aterthe recession reveals positive and nega-tive developments in child well-beingnationally (see Figure 1). Broadly speak-ing, children experienced gains in theEducation and Health domains, butsetbacks in the Economic Well-Beingand Family and Community domains.

Tree o the our Economic Well-Beingindicators got substantially worse, whichis not surprising, given the depth andseverity o the economic crisis. Although

still not on par with their pre-recessionrates, there is a glimmer o hope in thisyears economic data, with several indica-tors improving slightly since 2010. Notethat in 2011, the year o our most recent
http://www.aecf.org/http://datacenter.kidscount.org/databook/2013/profileshttp://datacenter.kidscount.org/databook/2013/profileshttp://datacenter.kidscount.org/databook/2013http://datacenter.kidscount.org/databook/2013http://datacenter.kidscount.org/databook/2013http://datacenter.kidscount.org/databook/2013http://datacenter.kidscount.org/databook/2013/profileshttp://datacenter.kidscount.org/databook/2013/profileshttp://www.aecf.org/


16/56

National Trends in 16 Key Indicators of Child Well-Being by Domain

FIU 1


High school studentsnot graduating on time

Eighth graders notproficient in math

Fourth graders notproficient in reading

Children not attendingpreschool

EDUCTION

Teens who abusealcohol or drugs

Child and teen deathsper 100,000

Children withouthealth insurance

Low-birthweight babies

HELTH

Teen births per 1,000Children in families wherethe household head lacks

a high school diploma

Children in single-parentfamilies

Children living inhigh-poverty areas

FMIL NDCOMMUNIT

ECONOMICWELL- BEIN

Children living inhouseholds with a high

housing cost burden

Children whose parentslack secure employment

Children in povertyTeens not in school

and not working

2009/10

22%870,542STUDENTS

Improved

2005/06 27%

2011

66%N.A.

Improved

2005 72%

2011

68%N.A.

Improved

2005 70%

200911

54%4,325,000CHILDEN

Improved

200507 56%

201011

7%1,752,000TEENS

Improved

200506 8%

2010

2620,482DETHS

Improved

2005 32

2011

7%5,528,000CHILDEN

Improved

2008 10%

2010

8.1%325,563BBIES

Improved

2005 8.2%

2010

34367,678BITHS

Improved

2005 40

2011

15%11,131,000CHILDEN

Improved

2005 16%

2011

35%24,718,000CHILDEN

WorseNed

2005 32%

200711

12%8,591,000CHILDEN

WorseNed

2000 9%

2011

40%29,486,000 CHILDEN

WorseNed

2005 37%

2011

32%23,777,000 CHILDEN

WorseNed

2008 27%

2011

23%16,387,000 CHILDEN

WorseNed

2005 19%

2011

8%1,497,000 TEENS

UNchANged

2008 8%

N.. Data nt avaiabe.


17/56

National Key Indicators by ace and Hispanic Origin


FIU 2

ECONOMIC WELL-BEIN

Chidren in pverty: 2011

Chidren hse parents acsecure empyment: 2011

Chidren iving in husehds itha high husing cst burden: 2011

eens nt in sch andnt ring: 2011

EDUCTION

Chidren nt attendingpresch: 200911

Furth graders nt prficientin reading: 2011

ighth graders nt prficientin math: 2011

High sch students ntgraduating n time: 2009/10

HELTH

l-birtheight babies: 2010

Chidren ithut heathinsurance: 2011

Chid and teen deathsper 100,000: 2010

eens h abuse achr drugs: 2011^

FMIL ND COMMUNIT

Chidren in singe-parentfamiies: 2011

Chidren in famiies here the husehdhead acs a high sch dipma: 2011

Chidren iving in high-pvertyareas: 200711

een births per 1,000: 2010

National

Average

African

American

American

Indian

Asian and

Pacific

Islander Hispanic

Non-

Hispanic

White

Two

More R

23% 39% 37% 14% 34% 14% 24

32% 49% 51% 22% 39% 25% 37

40% 53% 36% 40% 52% 31% 43

8% 13% 15% 4% 11% 7% 9

54% 51% 58% 48% 63% 50% 53

68% 84%* 81%* 51%* 82% 58% 63

66% 87%* 83%* 45%* 80% 57% 63

22% 34%* 31%* 6%* 29% 17% N.

8.1% 13.2% 7.6% 8.5% 7.0% 7.1% N.

7% 6% 17% 8% 13% 5% 6

26 36 30 14 21 25 N.

7% 6%* 13%* 3%*+ 7% 7% 9

35% 67% 53% 17% 42% 25% 42

15% 14% 20% 12% 37% 6% 11

12% 28% 27% 7% 21% 4% 10

34 51 39 11 56 23 N.

*Data are fr nn-Hispanics ny in each respective grup. ther rates fr these racia grups incude bth Hispanics and nn-HispanicsPrvisina data.

^ hese are singe-year race data fr 2011. Data in index are 201011 mutiyear data.+Data resuts d nt incude Native Haaiians/Pacic Isanders.

N.. Data nt avaiabe.

data, the national unemployment rate wasnearly 9 percent, but has since come downto 7.5 percent, so next years data shouldrefect more improvement in this domain.

In contrast, all our Education

indicators which cover preschool tohigh school graduation showed someimprovement in recent years. Child healthcontinued to improve, with gains inchildrens health insurance coverage andreductions in child and teen mortality andteen substance abuse. Te percentage olow-birthweight babies improved slightly.

rends in the Family and Communitydomain were mixed. Tere was a sub-stantial drop in the teen birth rate and asmall decline in the percentage o children

living with parents without a high schooldiploma. However, the percentage ochildren living in high-poverty neighbor-hoods increased, as did that o childrenin single-parent amilies.

Overall, developments in child well-being during the past ve or six yearsdemonstrate important progress in someareas, while highlighting the substantial

work that remains to improve the pros-pects or the next generation.

Perhaps the most striking nding isthat despite tremendous gains during

recent decades or children o all races andincome levels, inequities among childrenremain deep and stubbornly persistent(see Figure 2). Te recession exacerbatedsome socioeconomic inequities that werealready on the rise, with potential negativeconsequences or the uture.


18/56


1 Ne Hampshire

2 Vermnt

3 assachusetts

4 innesta

5 Ne Jersey6 Nrth Data

7 Ia

8 Nebrasa

9 Cnnecticut

10 aryand

11 Virginia

12 wiscnsin

13 aine

14 Utah

15 wyming

16 kansas

17 Pennsyvania

18 Suth Data

19 washingtn

20 Idah

21 Crad

22 Deaare

23 Iinis

24 ohi

25 Haaii

26 hde Isand

27 issuri

28 ntana

29 Ne Yr

30 Indiana31 ichigan

32 oregn

33 asa

34 kentucy

35 Nrth Carina

36 oahma

37 west Virginia

38 Frida

39 ennessee

40 ransas

41 Caifrnia

42 exas

43 ergia

44 abama

45 Suth Carina

46 luisiana

47 rizna

48 Nevada

49 ississippi

50 Ne exic

Overall ank

Natina data mas a great dea f state-by-

state and regina variatins in chid e-being.

state-eve examinatin f the data reveas a

hard truth: chids chances f thriv ing depend

nt just n individua, famiia and cmmunity

characteristics, but as n the state in hich

she r he is brn and raised. States vary cn-

sideraby in their amunt f eath and ther

resurces. State picy chices as strngy

inuence chidrens chances fr success.

we derive a cmpsite index f vera chid

e-being fr each state by cmbining

data acrss the fur dmains: (1) cnmic

we-eing, (2) ducatin, (3) Heath and

(4) Famiy and Cmmunity. hese cmpsite

scres are then transated int a singe

state raning fr chid e-being. he threehighest-raned states are Ne Hampshire,

Vermnt and assachusetts; the three

est raned are Nevada, ississippi and

Ne exic.

s is apparent in Figure 3, distinct regina

patterns emerge frm the state ranings.

f the nrtheastern states ran in the tp 15

in terms f vera chid e-being, except fr

Pennsyvania, hde Isand and Ne Yr,

hich fa in the midde. st f the states in

the industria idest ran in the midde n

vera chid e-being, hie sme f the

states farther est innesta, Nrth Data,

Ia and Nebrasa are in the tp 10.

States in the Sutheast, Suthest and

ppaachia here the prest states are

cated ppuate the bttm f the vera

ranings. In fact, ith the exceptin f

Caifrnia, the 17 est-raned states are

cated in these regins. Fr the rst time, Ne

exic raned rst amng states fr vera

chid e-being in this years kIDS CoUN

Data b. ng ith Nevada and rizna,

states in the Suthest n ccupy three f

the ve est ranings fr chid e-being.

Hever, as is bvius in Figure 3, the vera

ranings bscure sme imprtant variatins

ithin states. he graphic highights statesthat ran best vera and in each dmain

(represented by cncentric circes) in dar

crs and thse raning rst in ight crs.

thugh mst states ranings did nt vary

dramaticay acrss dmains, there ere a fe

exceptins. Fr exampe, hde Isand raned

amng the tp ve states in the Heath dmain,

but as amng the bttm 20 states in terms f

the cnmic we-eing f its chidren. Cn-

versey, wyming raned secnd fr cnmic

we-eing, but as amng the rst 12 states

fr Heath. Fr a states, the index identies

bright spts and rm fr imprvement.

oVll CHIlD wll-IN


19/56

Overall Child Well-Being by State

FIU 3


SOUTH

WEST

NOrTHEaST

MIDWEST

MIKS

IA

IN

IL

WY

WA

UT

OR

NM

NV

MT

ID

HI

CO

CA

AZ

AK

WV

VA

TX

TN

SCOK

NC MSMD

LA

KY

GA

FL

DE

AR

AL

VT

RI

PA

NY

NJ

NH

MA

ME

CT

WI

SD

OH

ND

NEMO

MN

idest

Nrtheast

Suth

west

Vie an interactive versin n the Data Center at:

datacenter/idscunt.rg/datab/2013/

we derive a cmpsite index f vera chid e-being fr each

state by cmbining data acrss the fur dmains: (1) cnmic we-eing, (2) ducatin, (3) Heath and (4) Famiy and Cmmunity.

see h each state raned vera and by dmain, see ppendix 1.

OELL NKECONOMIC WELL- BEIN

EDUCTIONHELTH

FMIL ND COMMUNIT 3850

2637

1425

113

20

21

ID

CO

N 48

49MS

Ne Hampshire

Utah

hde Isand

Frida

Ne exic50

38

26

14

11

5

10

15

30

35

40

45

cl ankin an

i t fat tat t

iffn btwn

tat an ay

wily. F xal,

t itan btwn

Ia, ank 20, an

cla, ank 21,

i u all tan

t itan btwnNaa, ank 48, an

miiii, ank 49
http://www.aecf.org/http://datacenter/kidscount.org/databook/2013/http://datacenter/kidscount.org/databook/2013/http://www.aecf.org/


20/56

18 The Annie E. Casey Foundation | www.aecf.org 2013 kids count data book

Ecmc We-BeDma Rak

To help children grow into successful, productive

adults, their parents need well-paying jobs,

affordable housing and the ability to invest in their

childrens future. When parents are uneployed

or their incoes are low, they ay struggle to

eet their childrens ost basic needs for food,

safe housing, edical care and quality child care.

They ay be unable to provide books, toys and

activities that are developentally enriching.

Inadequate faily incoe and econoic uncer-

tainty also increase parental stress, which,

in turn, can cause depression and anxiety

and increase the risk of substance abuse and

doestic violence all of which can coproiseparenting.15 While the negative effects of poverty

on children are troubling in their own right,

they also increase the chances of poor outcoes

for youth and young adults, such as teen preg-

nancy, failure to graduate fro high school,

poor health and lack of secure eployent.16

Fro 2005 to 2011, thechild poverty rate rosefro 19 to 23 percent,representing an increaseof 3 illion children.

Poverty rates for childrenage 5 and under are

even higher than overallrates, at 26 percent.

+3Million

CilDREn

ECmIC WE-EI

1in4Young CilDREn

Chdre Pverty

SURCE U.S. Census ureau, 2011 AericanCounity Survey.

1 orth Dakota

2 Wyoing

3 South Dakota

4 ebraska

5 Iowa6 minnesota

7 ew Hapshire

8 Kansas

9 Veront

10 Virginia

11 Utah

12 Wisconsin

13 massachusetts

14 maryland

15 montana

16 Connecticut

17 Pennsylvania

18 ew Jersey19 Colorado

20 maine

21 Delaware

22 missouri

23 Idaho

24 Alaska

25 klahoa

26 Indiana

27 hio

28 Washington

29 Illinois

30 Texas31 Rhode Island

32 Kentucky

33 West Virginia

34 Hawaii

35 ew York

36 michigan

37 Tennessee

38 orth Carolina

39 Arkansas

40 Alabaa

41 regon

42 ouisiana

43 eorgia44 South Carolina

45 Florida

46 California

47 Arizona

48 evada

49 ew mexico

50 mississippi


21/56

19The Annie E. Casey Foundation | www.aecf.orgState trendS in child well-being

ScoreS and rankingS

A State-t-State Cmpars f Ecmc We-Be

The ap below illustrates how states ranked on the Econoic

Well-eing doain. The bar on the right displays the scores

behind the rankings and the relative distance between state

scores, deonstrating that not all ranks are created equal.

KS

mississippi50

orth Carolina38

Indiana26

maryland14

orth Dakota1

8

23

24

9VT

iD

AK

Close rankings can

hide the fact that the

differences between

state scores can vary

widely. For example,

the distance between

Kansas, ranked 8, and

Vermont, ranked 9,

is much larger than


Idaho, ranked 23, and

Alaska, ranked 24.

1

5

15

30

35

40

45

50

States ranked 113

States ranked 1425

States ranked 2637

States ranked 3850


22/56

ECmIC WE-EI


Children in poverty

Growing up in poverty is one o the great-est threats to healthy child development.Poverty and nancial stress can impedechildrens cognitive development and theirability to learn. It can contribute to behav-

ioral, social and emotional problems andpoor health. Te risks posed by economichardship are greatest among children whoexperience poverty when they are youngand among children who experience per-sistent and deep poverty.17 Already highcompared with other developed nations,the child poverty rate in the United Statesincreased dramatically as a result o theeconomic crisis. Te ocial poverty linein 2011 was $22,811 or a amily o twoadults and two children.

ationally, 23 percent of children (16.4

illion) lived in poor failies in 2011, up fro

22 percent in 2010 (15.7 illion). This eans

that the nuber of poor children continued to

clib even as the national uneployent rate

was gradually declining. Fro 2005 to 2011, the

child poverty rate rose fro 19 to 23 percent,

representing an increase of 3 illion children.

The rate of child poverty for 2011 ranged fro

a low of 12 percent in ew Hapshire, to a high

of 32 percent in mississippi.

The child poverty rate aong African

Aericans (39 percent) was alost three ties

the rate for non-Hispanic whites (14 percent)

in 2011.

natay, 23 percet f chdre(16.4 m) ved pverty 2011, pfrm 22 percet 2010 (15.7 m).

PERCETAE F CHIDRE WH IVEDI PVERTY: 2011

SURCE U.S. Census ureau, 2011 Aerican Counity Survey.

The nuber of poorchildren continued toclib even as the nationaluneployent ratewas gradually declining.

%2316.4

oR

Million CilDREn


23/56

A Better Measre f Pverty ad the Re f the Sca Safety net


The KIDS CUnT Data bookuses theofcial federal poverty easure for statechild poverty rates. However, this statisticeasures only the cash incoe availableto failies, without accounting for anysupports that a faily ight receive,such as federal tax credits, child care andhousing assistance and food aid throughthe Suppleental utrition AssistanceProgra (forerly food staps).

The ofcial easure also fails to adequatelyreect the ways in which costs such as

housing and child care vary by regionand have changed draatically over thepast half century.

Researchers have quantied basic livingexpenses in specic localities and foundthat, on average, failies need an incoeof roughly twice the federal poverty levelto cover basic expenses for housing, food,transportation, health care and childcare.18 In 2011, 45 percent (32.7 illion) ofU.S. children lived in failies with incoes

below 200 percent of the federal povertylevel ($45,622 for a faily of four).

To better understand how failies arefaring, the U.S. Census ureau createda Suppleental Poverty measure (SPm),which easures the ipact of socialprogras and accounts for rising costs,aong other changes. While the Censusureau does not yet have sufcient data(or funding) to calculate the SPm at thestate level, this new national easureis an iportant advance in understanding

child poverty and the effects of safetynet progras and tax policies on theeconoic well-being of failies.

For exaple, revised poverty easuresdeonstrate that our existing social safetynet lifts illions of Aericans out of pov-erty every year. According to the Centeron udget and Policy Priorities, when keysafety net progras were included in apoverty easure, soe 40 illion peoplein 2011 rose above the poverty line.19

In 2011, 45 percent(32.7 illion) of U.S.children lived in failieswith incoes below200 percent of the federalpoverty level ($45,622

for a faily of four).


24/56

ECmIC WE-EI


Children living in amilies lacking secureparental employment, dened as those ami-lies where no parent works ull time, yearround, are particularly vulnerable. Withoutat least one parent employed ull time, chil-

dren are more likely to all into poverty. Yettoo many parents who want ull-time workare orced to piece together part-time ortemporary jobs that do not provide sucientor stable income; some lack the educationand skills needed to secure a good job. Terecession exacerbated both unemploymentand underemployment. Even a ull-time jobat low wages does not necessarily lit a amilyout o poverty. Without access to benetsand tax credits, one adult in a two-parentamily with two children would need to

earn about $11.41 per hour $4.16 morethan the ederal minimum wage working40 hours per week or 50 weeks per year

just to reach the poverty line.

In 2011, nearly one-third of all children in the

United States (23.8 illion) lived in failies where

no parent had full-tie, year-round eployent.

Since 2008, the nuber of such children clibed

by 3.6 illion.

orth Dakota had the lowest percentage

of children in failies without secure parental

eployent in 2011 (22 percent), followedby ew Hapshire, at 23 percent. mississippi

had the highest rate, at 38 percent.

Roughly half of all Aerican Indian children

(51 percent) and African-Aerican children (49

percent) had no parent with ful l-tie, year-round

eployent in 2011, copared with 25 percent of

white children and 39 percent of atino children.

Children whose parentslack secure eployent

i 2011, e three chdre the uted States(23.8 m) ved fames where parethad f-tme, year-rd empymet. Rhyhaf f Afrca-Amerca ad Amerca idachdre ad 39 percet f lat chdre ackedsecre pareta empymet.

1in3 CilDREn

Naona Aag

Afrca Amerca

Amerca ida

Asa ad Pacfc isader

spac

n-spac Whte

Tw r Mre Races


PERCETAE F CHIDRE WHSE PARETS ACK SECUREEmPYmET Y RACE AD HISPAIC RII: 2011

%37

%32

%25

%49

%22

%51

%39


25/56

ECmIC WE-EI ECmIC WE-EI


Teens not in schooland not working

Children living in

households with a highhousing cost burden

Family income is only one actor o nan-cial security; the cost o basic expenses alsomatters. Housing is typically one o thelargest expenses that amilies ace. Tismeasure identies the proportion o chil-

dren living in households that spend morethan 30 percent o their pretax incomeon housing, whether they are renters orhomeowners. Low-income amilies, inparticular, are unlikely to be able to meetall o their basic needs i housing consumesnearly one-third or more o their income.

Across the nation, 40 percent of children

(29.5 illion) lived in households with a high

housing cost burden in 2011, copared with 37

percent in 2005 (27.4 illion). The 2011 gure

represents a slight iproveent fro the prior

year, when 41 percent of children lived in fail ies

facing disproportionately high housing costs.

In 2011, California had the highest percentage

of children a startling 52 percent living in

households that spent ore than 30 percent of

incoe for housing. orth Dakota had the lowest,

at 21 percent.

more than half of African-Aerican children

(53 percent) and Hispanic children (52 percent)

lived in households with a high housing cost

burden in 2011, copared with 31 percent of non-Hispanic white children.

eens who leave school and do not becomepart o the workorce are at high risk oexperiencing negative outcomes as theytransition to adulthood. Te percentageo teens not in school and not working

(sometimes reerred to as disconnectedyouth or idle teens) includes youngpeople ages 16 to 19 who are not engagedin school or the workorce. While those

who have dropped out o school are clearlyvulnerable, many young people who havenished school but are not working arealso at a disadvantage in terms o achievingeconomic success in adulthood.

ationally, 8 percent of youth were

disconnected fro both work and school in

2011. About 1.5 illion teens between the ages

of 16 and 19 were neither enrolled in school nor

working, up fro 1.4 illion in 2008, but down

fro 1.6 illion in 2010.

At 4 percent, Wyoing had the lowest

rate of teens not in school and not working

in 2011. massachusetts, minnesota, ebraska

and South Dakota were close behind, at

5 percent. In contrast, evada had the highest

rate, at 13 percent.

Aerican Indian, African-Aerican and atino

teens had considerably higher rates of beingneither in school nor working than their white

and Asian and Pacic Islander counterparts.

i 2011, Cafra had the hhestpercetae f chdre a start52 percet v hsehdssped mre tha 30 percet fcme fr hs, whereas nrthDakta had the west, 21 percet.

PERCETAE F CHIDRE IVI I HUSEHWITH A HIH HUSI CST URDE: 2011


52%

21%

orth Dakota

California


26/56


EdcatDma Rak

1 massachusetts

2 ew Jersey

3 Veront

4 ew Hapshire

5 maryland6 Connecticut

7 minnesota

8 Pennsylvania

9 Colorado

10 Virginia

11 Kansas

12 Wisconsin

13 montana

14 Illinois

15 Iowa

16 orth Dakota

17 ebraska

18 hio19 ew York

20 maine

21 missouri

22 South Dakota

23 Delaware

24 Rhode Island

25 Washington

26 Wyoing

27 orth Carolina

28 Kentucky

29 Idaho

30 Utah31 Texas

32 michigan

33 Hawaii

34 Indiana

35 Florida

36 Arkansas

37 regon

38 eorgia

39 California

40 klahoa

41 South Carolina

42 Tennessee

43 Alaska

44 Alabaa

45 ouisiana

46 Arizona

47 West Virginia

48 mississippi

49 ew mexico

50 evada

Establishing the conditions that proote success-

ful educational achieveent for children begins

with quality prenatal care and continues into

the early eleentary school years. With a strong

and healthy beginning, children can ore easily

stay on track to reain in school and graduate,

pursue postsecondary education and training

and successfully transition to adulthood. Yet the

United States continues to have signicant gaps

in educational achieveent by race and incoe.

Although the achieveent gap between black

and white students has narrowed considerably

over the past four decades, the gap by incoe

has steadily increased.20

Addressing this gapwill be key to ensuring our future workforce

can copete on a global scale, given that ost

of the new jobs that will be created over the

next decade will require soe postsecondary

education, training or certication.

EDUCATI

Fro 2009 to 2011, orethan half of 3- and 4-year-olds were not enrolled inpreschool, representing4.3 illion children.

In 2011, ew Jersey, at38 percent, had the lowest

percentage of 3- and4-year-olds not enrolledin preschool. The highestwas evada, at 70 percent.

54

38

70 ew Jerseyevada

Chdre ntAtted Presch



27/56


ScoreS and rankingS

A State-t-State Cmpars f Edcat

The ap below illustrates how states ranked on the Education

doain. The bar on the right displays the scores behind

the rankings and the relative distance between state scores,

deonstrating that not all ranks are created equal.

evada50

eorgia38

Wyoing26

Illinois14

massachusetts1

Close rankings can


differences between




New Jersey, ranked 2,

and Vermont, ranked 3

is much larger than


Michigan, ranked 32,

and Hawaii, ranked 33

nJ 2

32

33

3VT

Mi

i

5

10

15

20

25

40

45

50

States ranked 113

States ranked 1425

States ranked 2637

States ranked 3850


28/56

EDUCATI EDUCATI


Fourth graders notprocient in readingChildren not attendingpreschool

High-quality prekindergarten programsor 3- and 4-year-olds can improve schoolreadiness, with the greatest gains accru-ing to the highest-risk children. HeadStart and the expansion o state-unded

programs since the 1990s have greatlyincreased access to preschool.21 But manychildren, especially 3-year-olds, continueto be let out, exacerbating socioeconomicdierences in educational achievement.Because o small sample sizes in somestates, we combined data collected overa three-year period or this measure.

Fro 2009 to 2011, ore than 4.3 illion

3- and 4-year-olds were not enrolled in

preschool, representing ore than half

(54 percent) of all children in that age group.

This is a slight iproveent over 200507,

when nearly 4.7 illion children (56 percent)

did not participate in a pre-K progra.

In 200911, ew Jersey and Connecticut,

at 38 and 39 percent, respectively, had the

lowest percentages of 3- and 4-year-olds not

enrolled in preschool. The states with the

highest percentages of children not enrolled

in 200911 were evada (70 percent) and

Arizona (67 percent).

Half of African-Aerican and white 3- and4-year-olds were not in pre-K progras; the

percentage was nearly the sae for Asian and

Pacic Islander children (48 percent). The rates

were noticeably higher for atinos (63 percent)

and Aerican Indians (58 percent).

Prociency in reading by the end o thirdgrade is a crucial marker in a childs edu-cational development. In the early years,learning to read is a critical componento education. But beginning in ourth

grade, children use reading to learn othersubjects, and thereore, mastery o read-ing becomes a critical component in theirability to keep up academically. Children

who reach ourth grade without being ableto read prociently are more likely to dropout o high school, reducing their earningpotential and chances or success.22

A stunning 68 percent of fourth graders

in public school were reading below procient

levels in 2011, a slight iproveent fro 2005,

when the gure was 70 percent.

State differences in fourth-grade reading

levels aong public school students were

wide. In 2011, massachusetts had the lowest

percentage of public school fourth graders not

procient in reading, 50 percent, copared

with a high of 79 percent in ew mexico.

more than 80 percent of African-Aerican,

Aerican Indian and atino fourth graders

were not procient in reading, copared with

58 percent of non-Hispanic whites. Although

these gures are deeply troubling, fourth-grade reading levels have iproved by 3 to 4

percentage points since 2005 for three of these

four groups; reading prociency stayed the

sae for Aerican Indian fourth graders.

Aong low-incoe fourth graders, 82 percent

were not procient in reading in 2011, copared

with 52 percent of their higher-incoe peers.23

Naona Aag

Afrca Amerca

Amerca ida

Asa ad Pacfcisader

spac

n-spac Whte

Tw r Mre Races

SURCE U.S. Departent of Education, ational Center for EducationStatistics, 2011 ational Assessent of Educational Progress.

PERCETAE F FURTH RADERS T PRFICIETI READI Y RACE AD HISPAIC RII: 2011

%63

%68

%58

%

84

%51

%81

%82

Chdre wh reach frth radewtht be abe t read prcetyare mre key t drp t f hhsch, redc ther earpteta ad chaces fr sccess.


29/56

EDUCATI EDUCATI


High school studentsnot graduating on tieEighth graders notprocient in ath

Competence in mathematics is essential orsuccess in the workplace, which increasinglyrequires higher-level technical skills. Teinfuence o high school students math pro-ciency on later earnings has grown steadily

over time. Students who take advanced mathand science courses that require a strong mas-tery o math undamentals are more likelyto attend and complete college.24 But evenor young people who do not attend college,basic math skills improve employability.

Aong public school students, ath

prociency levels in eighth grade and reading

prociency levels in fourth grade were quite

siilar in 2011, but there was greater iproveent

in eighth-grade ath achieveent. ationwide,

two-thirds (66 percent) of public school eighth

graders scored below procient ath levels in

2011, copared with 72 percent in 2005.

At 49 percent, massachusetts had the lowest

percentage of public school eighth graders

not procient in ath in 2011. mississippi had

the highest rate, at 81 percent.

In 2011, 57 percent of non-Hispanic white

eighth graders were below the procient level,

copared with 80 percent of atinos, 83 percent

of Aerican Indians and 87 percent of African

Aericans. ut eighth-grade ath achieveentiproved for all racial and ethnic groups fro

2005 to 2011, including a 7 percentage point

iproveent for atinos.

Incoe disparities were siilarly wide.

In 2011, 81 percent of low-incoe eighth graders

were not procient in ath, copared with

53 percent of higher-incoe eighth graders.25

Students who graduate rom high schoolon time are more likely to continue topostsecondary education and training;they are more employable and have higherincomes than students who ail to gradu-

ate.26 In 2011, median annual earnings orsomeone without a high school diploma($18,800) were 70 percent o those o ahigh school graduate ($26,700) and 39percent o the median earnings o someone

with a bachelors degree ($48,300).27High school graduates have better healthoutcomes, make healthier choices and areless likely to engage in risky behavior.28

ationally, for the 2009/10 school year,

roughly 871,000 high school students

(22 percent) did not graduate on tie. However,

this is an iproveent fro 2005/06, when

27 percent did not graduate in four years.

Aong the states, the percentage of high

school students not graduating fro high school

in four years ranged fro a low of 9 percent in

Veront and Wisconsin, to a high of 42 percent

in evada for 2009/10.

In 2009/10, 17 percent of non-Hispanic

white students did not graduate fro high

school on tie. The rate for African Aericans

was twice as high.

Am the states, the percetaef stdets t radat frmhh sch fr years raed frma w f 9 percet Vermt adWscs, t a hh f 42 percet nevada fr 2009/10.

PERCETAE F HIH SCH STUDETSWH DT RADUATE TImE: 2009/10

SURCE U.S. Departent of Education, ational Center for Education

Statistics, 2009/10 Coon Core of Data.

42% 9%

Wisconsin

Veroevada


30/56


eathDma Rak

1 maine

2 Connecticut

3 Wisconsin

4 Veront

5 Rhode Island6 Washington

7 Iowa

8 maryland

9 ew York

10 ebraska

11 massachusetts

12 Illinois

13 ew Jersey

14 Utah

15 minnesota

16 ew Hapshire

17 regon

18 Hawaii19 Delaware

20 Virginia

21 Indiana

22 Pennsylvania

23 michigan

24 hio

25 orth Dakota

26 Kansas

27 West Virginia

28 Idaho

29 California

30 Arkansas31 Kentucky

32 missouri

33 Tennessee

34 orth Carolina

35 Alabaa

36 Texas

37 Florida

38 South Dakota

39 Wyoing

40 eorgia

41 ouisiana

42 Colorado

43 klahoa44 South Carolina

45 Arizona

46 Alaska

47 evada

48 mississippi

49 ew mexico

50 montana

Childrens health is the foundation of their overall

developent, and ensuring that they are born

healthy is the rst step toward increasing the life

chances of disadvantaged children. Poverty, poor

nutrition, lack of preventive health care, sub-

stance abuse, aternal depression and faily

violence put childrens health at risk. Poor health

in childhood ipacts other critical aspects of a

childs life, such as school readiness and atten-

dance, and can have lasting consequences on his

or her future health and well-being.

HEATH

ationally, low-birthweightbabies represented8.1 percent of all livebirths in 2010, virtuallyunchanged fro 2005.

African-Aerican babiesare ost likely to beborn with a low birth-

weight, at a rate of13.2 percent in 2010.

< 5.5 lbs

13.2

lw-brthweht babes

SURCE Centers for Disease Controland Prevention, ational Center for HealthStatistics, 2010 Vital Statistics.


31/56


ScoreS and rankingS

A State-t-State Cmpars f eath

The ap below illustrates how states ranked on the Health

doain. The bar on the right displays the scores behind

the rankings and the relative distance between state scores,

deonstrating that not all ranks are created equal.

49

22

23

50

nM

MT

PA

Mi

1

5

10

35

40

45

30

montana50

South Dakota38

Kansas26

Utah14

maine1

Close rankings can

hide the fact that thedifferences between




Pennsylvania, ranked

and Michigan, ranked

is much smaller than t

distance between New

Mexico, ranked 49, an

Montana, ranked 50.

States ranked 113

States ranked 1425

States ranked 2637

States ranked 3850


32/56

HEATH HEATH


Te birth o a baby reminds us o thepotential that exists in every new genera-tion. Yet, the odds against thriving arehigher or some newborns than or others.Babies born with a low birthweight (less

than about 5.5 pounds) have a highprobability o experiencing developmentalproblems and short- and long-term dis-abilities and are at greater risk o dying

within the rst year o lie. Althoughrecent increases in multiple births havestrongly infuenced the rise in rates olow-birthweight babies, rates have alsobeen higher among single births. Smoking,poor nutrition, poverty, stress, inectionsand violence can increase the risk o ababy being born with a low birthweight.29

ationally, low-birthweight babies represented

8.1 percent of all live births in 2010, virtually

unchanged fro 2005. After gradually increasing

over tie, the percentage of low-birthweight

babies has reained relatively stable for the past

several years, slightly below the three-decade

high of 8.3 percent reached in 2006.30

Alaska had the lowest percentage of low-

birthweight babies in 2010 5.7 percent of

live births while mississippi had the highest,

12.1 percent.

Aong racial and ethnic groups, African-

Aerican babies were ost likely to be born

with a low birthweight, at a rate of 13.2 percent

of live births in 2010. Although this represents

a slight decline fro a high of 13.6 percent in

2007, it is still close to twice the low-birthweight

rate for atinos and non-Hispanic whites.

Children without health insurance cover-age are less likely than insured childrento have a regular health care provider andto receive care when they need it. Teyare also more likely to receive treatment

ater their condition has worsened,putting them at greater risk o hospitaliza-tion. Having health insurance canprotect amilies rom nancial devastation

when a child experiences a serious orchronic illness. Although the provisiono employer-sponsored health insuranceis declining, and most low-wage andpart-time workers lack employer coverage,public health insurance has resultedin increased coverage among childrenduring the past decade.

Across the nation, 7 percent of children

(5.5 illion) lacked health insurance in 2011.

Thats a 30 percent iproveent fro 2008,

when 10 percent of children were uninsured.

In 18 states, the percentage of children

lacking health coverage was 5 percent or less

in 2011. massachusetts and Veront had the

lowest rate, 2 percent, copared with a high

of 16 percent in evada. The rate was 13 percent

in Arizona and Texas.

Aerican Indian (17 percent) and atinochildren (13 percent) were far ore likely to be

uninsured than non-Hispanic white (5 percent),

African-Aerican (6 percent) and Asian and

Pacic Islander (8 percent) children.

Children withouthealth insuranceow-birthweight babies

i 18 states, the percetae fchdre ack heath cveraewas 5 percet r ess 2011.Massachsetts ad Vermt hadthe west rate, 2 percet, cmparedt a hh f 16 percet nevada.

16%Veront

massachusetts

evada 2%


PERCETAE F CHIDRE WITHUTHEATH ISURACE: 2011


33/56

HEATH HEATH


Teens who abusealcohol or drugsChild and teen deaths

Te child and teen death rate (deaths per100,000 children ages 1 to 19) refects abroad array o actors: physical and mentalhealth; access to health care; communityactors (such as violence and environmental

toxins); use o saety practices and, espe-cially or younger children, the level o adultsupervision. Accidents, primarily thoseinvolving motor vehicles, were the leadingcause o death or children and youth,accounting or 32 percent o all deathsamong children ages 1 to 14.31 As childrenmove into their mid- and late-teenage years,they encounter new risks that can be deadly.In 2010, accidents, homicides and suicidesaccounted or 73 percent o deaths to teensages 15 to 19.32

early 20,500 children and youth ages 1 to 19

died in the United States in 2010, which translates

into a ortality rate of 26 per 100,000 children

and teens. The rate declined fro 2005, when it

was 32 per 100,000, resulting in roughly 4,600

fewer child and teen deaths in 2010.

Connecticut, massachusetts and Rhode

Island had the lowest rates, 17 deaths per

100,000 children and youth in 2010. montana

fell at the other end of the spectru, with a

child and teen death rate of 45 per 100,000.

The 2010 ortality rates for African-Aerican

and Aerican Indian children and teens (36 and

30 per 100,000, respectively) were considerably

higher than death rates for children and youth

of other racial and ethnic groups.

een alcohol and drug abuse are associ-ated with a variety o potentially harmulbehaviors, such as engaging in riskysexual activity, driving under the infuenceo drugs or a lcohol, abusing multiple

substances and committing crimes.Alcohol and drug abuse among adolescentscan cause both short- and long-termphysical and mental health problemsand exacerbate existing conditions. eensubstance abuse is also associated withpoor academic perormance and increasedrisk o dropping out o school. Te nega-tive consequences o teen alcohol anddrug abuse can carry over into adulthood.Overall, alcohol and drug use by adoles-cents has declined over the past decade,

although patterns vary by substance.

In 201011, 7 percent of teens ages 12 to 17

had abused or were dependent on alcohol

or drugs during the past year, declining fro

8 percent in 200506.

Rates of substance abuse aong teens

varied fro a low of 6 percent in 16 states for

201011, to a high of 10 percent in montana.

Aong racial and ethnic groups, Asian and

Pacic Islander and African-Aerican teens

were least likely (3 and 6 percent, respectively)to abuse or be dependent on alcohol or drugs.

Death rates fr chdre f a aerps have deced csderaby recet decades.

IFAT mRTAITY PER 1,000 IRTHS: 2010

6.1 PER 1,000 live birthsInfant ortality rate

CHID AD TEE DEATHS PER 100,000: 19902010

SURCE Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, ationalCenter for Health Statistics, 19902010 Vital Statistics.

Death rate for teens ages 15 to 19Death rate for children ages 1 to 14

31

1

88

4

201990


34/56


Famy ad CmmtyDma Rak

1 ew Hapshire

2 Utah

3 Veront

4 orth Dakota

5 minnesota6 maine

7 massachusetts

8 Iowa

9 ew Jersey

10 Idaho

11 Connecticut

12 Wyoing

13 Virginia

14 montana

15 ebraska

16 Hawaii

17 Washington

18 Wisconsin19 Alaska

20 maryland

21 Colorado

22 regon

23 Kansas

24 South Dakota

25 Pennsylvania

26 missouri

27 michigan

28 Delaware

29 Illinois

30 Indiana31 hio

32 Rhode Island

33 ew York

34 West Virginia

35 Florida

36 orth Carolina

37 Tennessee

38 Kentucky

39 klahoa

40 eorgia

41 evada

42 California

43 South Carolina

44 Alabaa

45 Arkansas

46 Arizona

47 ouisiana

48 Texas

49 ew mexico

50 mississippi

When children are nurtured and well cared for,

especially during their early years, they have

better social-eotional, language and learning

outcoes. These, in turn, lead to ore positive

behavior and acadeic achieveent in later years.

ut single parents, especially those struggling

with nancial hardship, are ore prone to stress,

anxiety and depression, which can interfere with

effective parenting. These ndings underscore

the iportance of two-generation strategies that

strengthen failies by itigating their underlying

econoic distress and addressing the well-being

of both parents and children. Failies exist in and

are affected by neighborhoods and counities.When counities have strong social and cultural

institutions; good role odels for children; and

the resources to provide safety, good schools

and quality support services, failies and their

children are ore likely to thrive.

FAmIY AD CmmUITY

Young children were ore

likely to live in a single-parent faily. 37 percentof children under age 6lived with a single parent.

35 percent of all childrenlived in single-parentfailies in 2011, representingan increase of ore than3 illion children since 2005.

+3 Million

nEARlY

2oF5Young CilDREn

Chdre Se-Paret Fames



35/56


ScoreS and rankingS

A State-t-State Cmpars f Famy ad Cmmty

The ap below illustrates how states ranked on the Faily

and Counity doain. The bar on the right displays the scores

behind the rankings and the relative distance between state

scores, deonstrating that not all ranks are created equal.

mississippi50

Kentucky38

missouri26

montana14

ew Hapshire1

Close rankings can


differences between




Missouri, ranked 26,

and Michigan, ranked

27, is much smaller th


Texas, ranked 48, and

New Mexico, ranked 4

TX 48

49nM

26

27

Mo

Mi

1

5

10

15

20

40

35

45

States ranked 113

States ranked 1425

States ranked 2637

States ranked 3850


36/56

FAmIY AD CmmUITY FAmIY AD CmmUITY


Children growing up in single-parentamilies typically do not have the sameeconomic or human resources available asthose growing up in two-parent amilies.In 2011, 37 percent o single-parent amilies

had incomes below the poverty line, com-pared with 9 percent o married couples

with children. Only 30 percent o emale-headed amilies reported receiving any childsupport payments in 2010.33 Compared

with children in married-couple amilies,children raised in emale-headed householdsare more likely to drop out o school, to haveor cause a teen pregnancy and to experiencea divorce in adulthood.34 Te U.S. CensusBureau denes single-parent amilies asthose headed by an unmarried adult. A child

living with cohabiting parents is counted asliving in a single-parent amily.

The percentage of children living in single-

parent failies rose fro 32 percent in 2005 to

35 percent in 2011, representing an increase of

ore than 3 illion children. After holding steady

for several years, the percentage of children in

single-parent hoes has been rising since 2009.

At the state level, the percentage of children

living in single-parent failies in 2011 ranged

fro a low of 21 percent in Utah, to a high of

47 percent in mississippi.

Two-thirds (67 percent) of African-Aerican

children lived in single-parent failies in 2011,

copared with 53 percent of Aerican Indian

children and 42 percent of atino children. y

coparison, 25 percent of non-Hispanic white

and 17 percent of Asian and Pacic Islander

children lived in single-parent households.

Higher levels o parental education arestrongly associated with better outcomesor children. Children whose parents havenot graduated rom high school are atgreater risk o being born with a low birth-

weight and having health problems, andthey are more likely to smoke and bingedrink when they are older. Teir schoolreadiness and educational achievement arealso at risk.35 More highly educated parentsare better able to provide their children

with economic stability and security, which,in turn, enhances child development. Overthe past several decades, parental educationlevels have steadily increased.

In 2011, 15 percent of children lived in

households headed by an adult without a high

school diploa. This represents 11.1 illion

children, copared with 12 illion in 2005.

In orth Dakota, only 5 percent of children

lived in failies not headed by a high school

graduate in 2011, the lowest percentage in

the country. At 25 percent, California had the

highest rate of children living without a high-

school-educated head of household.

more than one-third (37 percent) of atino

children lived in households headed by soeone

without a high school diploa. Thats orethan two and a half ties the rate for African-

Aerican children (14 percent) and ore

than six ties the rate for non-Hispanic white

children (6 percent).

Children in failies where

the household head lacksa high school diploaChildren in single-parentfailies

i 2011, 15 percet f chdre ved hsehds headed by a adtwtht a hh sch dpma. Thsrepresets 11.1 m chdre,cmpared wth 12 m 2005.


CHIDRE I FAmIIES WHERE THE HUSEHDHEAD ACKS A HIH SCH DIPmA: 2011


37/56

FAmIY AD CmmUITY FAmIY AD CmmUITY


Concentrated poverty puts whole neighbor-hoods, and the people living in them, atrisk. High-poverty neighborhoods are muchmore likely than others to have high rateso crime and violence, physical and mental

health issues, unemployment and otherproblems. Concentrated neighborhoodpoverty negatively aects poor children,as well as those who are better o.36 High-poverty areas are dened here as censustracts where the poverty rates o the totalpopulation are 30 percent or more.

During the period fro 2007 through 2011,

12 percent of children lived in high-poverty

areas nationwide, a total of 8.6 illion. This

represents an increase of 2.3 illion children

since 2000, when the rate was 9 percent.

Variation aong the states was wide:

nly a fraction of a percent of children in

Wyoing lived in areas of concentrated

poverty fro 2007 through 2011, whereas

24 percent of mississippi's children lived

in high-poverty areas.

African-Aerican, Aerican Indian and

atino children were uch ore likely to

live in high-poverty areas than were children

fro other racial and ethnic groups. The

rates were 28 percent, 27 percent and21 percent, respectively.

eenage childbearing can have long-termnegative eects or both the mother andnewborn. eens are at higher risk o bear-ing low-birthweight and preterm babies.

And, their babies are ar more likely to be

born into amilies with limited educationaland economic resources, which unctionas barriers to uture success.37 In 2006,the United States saw the rst increase inthe teen birth rate in more than a decade,a rise that continued through 2007.But since the two-year increase, the teenbirth rate has declined to a historic low.

In 2010, there were nearly 368,000 babies

born to feales ages 15 to 19. That translates into

a birth rate of 34 births per 1,000 teens, which

represents a substantial decrease fro 2000,

when the rate was 48 bir ths per 1,000 teens.

Aong the states, the teen birth rate for

2010 ranged fro a low of 16 births per 1,000

teens ages 15 to 19 in ew Hapshire, to a

high of 55 per 1,000 in mississippi.

At 56 births per 1,000 teenage girls, the

teen birth rate for atinos was the highest

across ajor racial and ethnic groups. Although

it reained high, the 2010 rate for bir ths to

atino teens was the lowest rate on record.38

Teen birthsChildren living inhigh-poverty areas

i 2010, there were eary 368,000babes br t femaes aes 15 t 19.That trasates t a brth ratef 34 brths per 1,000 tees, whchrepresets a sbstata decreasefrm 2000, whe the rate was48 brths per 1,000 tees.

48

40

3

SURCE Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, ationalCenter for Health Statistics, 20002010 Vital Statistics.

TEE IRTHS PER 1,000 FEmAES: 20002010

2000 2005 20


38/56


39/56


Nonetheless, to improve outcomes or thenext generation, serious challenges remain.Te gul continues to widen betweenchildren growing up in strong, economi-cally secure amilies who are embeddedin thriving communities and children

who are not. And, while Arican-Americanand Latino children continue to alldisproportionately into the latter group,greater numbers o children o all racialand ethnic groups are acing conditions

that can impede long-term success.Improving outcomes or all children is

essential or our nation to remain strong,

stable and globally competitive. Researchclearly indicates that one o the mostcost-eective strategies is to reach thehighest-risk kids in their earliest years.Smart investments in programs and ser-vices with a proven record such as thosethat help low-income parents developstronger, more nurturing relationships

with their inants and toddlers and high-quality early care and education programsthat provide stimulating environments and

activities or developing young minds can expand the opportunity or children toreach their ull potential, benefting us all.

This years KIDS COUNT Data Bookrovides some hoefu

signs. The atest data show continued incrementa imrovement

in educationa achievement and chid heath and safety,

as we as a record ow eve of teen births. At the same time,

chidren and famiies are sti coing with the effects of the

recession and continued high unemoyment. Chid overty

continued to cimb in 2011, two years after the recession

ended; hoefuy, the data for 2012 wi show a decine.

CONClUSION


40/56

38 The Aie E. C aey Fuati | www.aecf.rg 2013 kids count data book

EndnoTEs

1. Ravitch, D. (2012, June 7). Doour public schools threaten nationalsecurity? New York Review of Books.Retrieved romwww.nybooks.

com/articles/archives/2012/jun/07/do-our-public-schools-threaten-national-security/?page=1#n-*

2. Reardon, S. F. (2011). Tewidening academic achievement gapbetween the rich and the poor: Newevidence and possible explanations.In R. Murnane & G. Duncan (Eds.),Whither opportunity? Rising inequal-ity and the uncertain life chances oflow-income children. New York, NY:Russell Sage Foundation Press.

3. Carnoy, M., & Rothstein,R. (2013, January 28). Whatdo international tests really showabout U.S. student performance?

Washington, DC: Economic

Policy Institute. Retrieved romwww.epi.org/publication/us-student-perormance-testing

4. Darling-Hammond, L. (2012,January 30). Redlining ourschools. Te Nation. Retrieved rom

www.thenation.com/article/165575/why-congress-redlining-our-schools

5. Reardon, S. F. (2011). Tewidening academic achievement gapbetween the rich and the poor: Newevidence and possible explanations.In R. Murnane & G. Duncan (Eds.),Whither opportunity? Rising inequal-ity and the uncertain life chances oflow-income children. New York, NY:

Russell Sage Foundation Press.6. Te KIDS COUN index doesnot include an indicator or child-hood obesity as there is no 50-statedata source available.

7. Bernstein, J., Brocht, C., & Spade-Aguilar, M. (2000). How muchis enough? Basic family budgets forworking families. Washington, DC:Economic Policy Institute. Retrievedromwww.epi.org/publications/entry/books_howmuch/

8. U.S. Department o Labor,Bureau o Labor Statist ics. (2013,May 3). Employment situationsummary(press release). Washington,DC: Author. Retrieved May 5, 2013,romwww.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm

9. U.S. Department o Labor,Bureau o Labor Statist ics. (2013).Household data not seasonallyadjusted: Unemployed total and

full-time workers by duration ofunemployment(able A-35).

Washington, DC: Author. RetrievedMay 5, 2013, rom www.bls.gov/

web/empsit/cpseea35.htm

10. Brooks-Gunn, J., Duncan, G., &Aber, J. L. (Eds.). (2000). Neighbor-hood poverty, Volume I: Context andconsequences for children. New York,NY: Russell Sage Foundation Press.

11. UNICEF Oce o Research.(2013). Child well-being in richcountries: A comparative overview(Innocenti Report Card 11). Flor-ence, Italy: Author. Retrieved rom

www.unice-irc.org/publications/pd/rc11_eng.pd

12. Annie E. Casey Foundation.(2010). Early warning! Why readingby the end of third grade matters(KIDS COUN Special Report).Baltimore, MD: Author. Retrieved

rom http://datacenter.kidscount.org/reports/readingmatters.aspx

13. Ratclife, C., & McKernan, S.(2012, September). Child povertyand its lasting consequence.

Washington, DC: Te UrbanInstitute. Retrieved romwww.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412659-Child-Poverty-and-Its-Lasting-Consequence-Paper.pd

14. Lipkin, M. (2013, March 19).Evaluating universal preschool:

James Heck man: Return oninvestment can beat stock market.

WW.com. Retrieved May 5,2013, rom http://chicagotonight.

wttw.com/2013/03/19/evaluating-universal-preschool

15. Yeung, W. J., Linver, M. R.,& Brooks-Gunn, J. (2002). Howmoney matters or childrens devel-opment: Parental investment andamily processes. Child Development,73(6), 18611879.

16. For a summary o this literature,see Gershof, E. ., Aber, J. L., &Raver, C. C. (2003). Child povertyin the U.S.: An evidence-basedconceptual ramework or programsand policies. In R . Lerner, F. Jacobs,& D. Wertlieb (Eds.), Promoting

positive child, adolescent, and familydevelopment: A handbook of programand policy innovations. Tousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

17. Ibid.

18. Bernstein, J., Brocht, C.,& Spade-Aguila r, M. (2000).How much is enough? Basic familybudgets for working families.

Washington, DC: EconomicPolicy Institute. Retrieved rom

www.epi.org/publications/entry/books_howmuch/

19. Sherman, A. (2012). Tepower of the safety net: What theSupplemental Poverty Measureshows. Exclusive commentaryor Spotlight on Poverty (www.spotlightonpoverty.org). Retrieved

romwww.spotlightonpoverty.org/ExclusiveCommentary.aspx?id=8dc0e2-ca41-4c0-be8c-640b6a0862c
http://www.aecf.org/http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/jun/07/do-our-public-schools-threaten-national-security/?page=1#fn-*http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/jun/07/do-our-public-schools-threaten-national-security/?page=1#fn-*http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/jun/07/do-our-public-schools-threaten-national-security/?page=1#fn-*http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/jun/07/do-our-public-schools-threaten-national-security/?page=1#fn-*http://www.epi.org/publication/us-student-performance-testinghttp://www.epi.org/publication/us-student-performance-testinghttp://www.thenation.com/article/165575/why-congress-redlining-our-schoolshttp://www.thenation.com/article/165575/why-congress-redlining-our-schoolshttp://www.epi.org/publications/entry/books_howmuch/http://www.epi.org/publications/entry/books_howmuch/http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htmhttp://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htmhttp://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea35.htmhttp://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea35.htmhttp://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/rc11_eng.pdfhttp://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/rc11_eng.pdfhttp://datacenter.kidscount.org/reports/readingmatters.aspxhttp://datacenter.kidscount.org/reports/readingmatters.aspxhttp://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412659-Child-Poverty-and-Its-Lasting-Consequence-Paper.pdfhttp://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412659-Child-Poverty-and-Its-Lasting-Consequence-Paper.pdfhttp://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412659-Child-Poverty-and-Its-Lasting-Consequence-Paper.pdfhttp://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412659-Child-Poverty-and-Its-Lasting-Consequence-Paper.pdfhttp://chicagotonight.wttw.com/2013/03/19/evaluating-universal-preschoolhttp://chicagotonight.wttw.com/2013/03/19/evaluating-universal-preschoolhttp://chicagotonight.wttw.com/2013/03/19/evaluating-universal-preschoolhttp://www.epi.org/publications/entry/books_howmuch/http://www.epi.org/publications/entry/books_howmuch/http://www.spotlightonpoverty.org/ExclusiveCommentary.aspx?id=8dcf0e2f-ca41-4c0f-be8c-64f0b6a0862chttp://www.spotlightonpoverty.org/ExclusiveCommentary.aspx?id=8dcf0e2f-ca41-4c0f-be8c-64f0b6a0862chttp://www.spotlightonpoverty.org/ExclusiveCommentary.aspx?id=8dcf0e2f-ca41-4c0f-be8c-64f0b6a0862chttp://www.spotlightonpoverty.org/ExclusiveCommentary.aspx?id=8dcf0e2f-ca41-4c0f-be8c-64f0b6a0862chttp://www.spotlightonpoverty.org/ExclusiveCommentary.aspx?id=8dcf0e2f-ca41-4c0f-be8c-64f0b6a0862chttp://www.spotlightonpoverty.org/ExclusiveCommentary.aspx?id=8dcf0e2f-ca41-4c0f-be8c-64f0b6a0862chttp://www.spotlightonpoverty.org/ExclusiveCommentary.aspx?id=8dcf0e2f-ca41-4c0f-be8c-64f0b6a0862chttp://www.spotlightonpoverty.org/ExclusiveCommentary.aspx?id=8dcf0e2f-ca41-4c0f-be8c-64f0b6a0862chttp://www.epi.org/publications/entry/books_howmuch/http://www.epi.org/publications/entry/books_howmuch/http://chicagotonight.wttw.com/2013/03/19/evaluating-universal-preschoolhttp://chicagotonight.wttw.com/2013/03/19/evaluating-universal-preschoolhttp://chicagotonight.wttw.com/2013/03/19/evaluating-universal-preschoolhttp://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412659-Child-Poverty-and-Its-Lasting-Consequence-Paper.pdfhttp://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412659-Child-Poverty-and-Its-Lasting-Consequence-Paper.pdfhttp://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412659-Child-Poverty-and-Its-Lasting-Consequence-Paper.pdfhttp://www.urban.org/UploadedPDF/412659-Child-Poverty-and-Its-Lasting-Consequence-Paper.pdfhttp://datacenter.kidscount.org/reports/readingmatters.aspxhttp://datacenter.kidscount.org/reports/readingmatters.aspxhttp://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/rc11_eng.pdfhttp://www.unicef-irc.org/publications/pdf/rc11_eng.pdfhttp://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea35.htmhttp://www.bls.gov/web/empsit/cpseea35.htmhttp://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htmhttp://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htmhttp://www.epi.org/publications/entry/books_howmuch/http://www.epi.org/publications/entry/books_howmuch/http://www.thenation.com/article/165575/why-congress-redlining-our-schoolshttp://www.thenation.com/article/165575/why-congress-redlining-our-schoolshttp://www.epi.org/publication/us-student-performance-testinghttp://www.epi.org/publication/us-student-performance-testinghttp://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/jun/07/do-our-public-schools-threaten-national-security/?page=1#fn-*http://www.nybooks.com/articles/archives/2012/jun/07/do-our-public-schools-threaten-national-security/?page=1#fn-*http

2013 kids count data book

Documents