Community Needs Assessment, Volume 1 Environmental Scan
2013
Sedgwick, Butler, Cowley, Harper, Harvey, Kingman, Reno and Sumner counties of Kansas
COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT SOUTH CENTRAL KANSAS
2013
NEEDS ASSESSMENT, VOLUME 1 Part I: Environmental Scan
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ______
Members of the United Way's Community Planning Committee deserve special recognition for the time, energy and talent they shared in the completion of this Needs Assessment report.
COMMUNITY PLANNING COMMITTEE
Tom Docking; Morris, Laing, Evans, Brock & Kennedy, Chartered, Chair
John Allison, Wichita Public Schools, USD 259 Jack Focht; Foulston Siefkin, LLP Terri Moses; Wichita Public Schools, USD 259 Tim Norton; Sedgwick County Lynnette RauvolaBouta; Via Christi Health, Inc. Marilyn Richwine; Community Volunteer
UNITED WAY OF THE PLAINS STAFF
Pat Hanrahan Beth Oaks Gloria Summers
Hundreds of individuals played a role in sharing their priorities and goals for our community, and United Way of the Plains, Via Christi Health and the Sedgwick County Health Department wish to recognize the efforts of those individuals from the community who have volunteered -- and continue to volunteer -- their time and expertise in both the initial work (visioning process and development of priorities) and the continuing work of ongoing re-evaluation. Their insights into the gifts and talents of other community members have strengthened the process far beyond United Way's initial outreach -- and for that, United Way, Via Christi Health, the Sedgwick County Health Department and the community are grateful.
2013
Table of Contents
Page
Acknowledgements Table of Contents…………………………………………………………………………………. i Table of Tables……………………………………………………………………………………. vii Table of Figures…………………………………………………………………………………… xii
Introduction………………………………………...………………………………… 1 United Way of the Plains Service Area...……………………………………………………….. 3
Demographics……………………………………...………………………………… 4 Population Characteristics……………………………………………………………………….. 4 Area Population…………………………………………..……………………………….. 4 Population Density…………………………………………………..…………………….. 5 Rural/Urban Populations………………………………………………………………….. 5 Rural/Urban Land Area……………..…………………………………………………….. 5 Agricultural Land Use……………………………………………….…………………….. 6 Population Trends....………………………………………………..……………………. 6 Population Projections……………………………………………………………………. 7 Composition of Population by Gender…………………………….……………………. 8 Composition of Population by Age………………………………...... 8 Distribution Trend of Sedgwick County Population, by Age and Gender…………… 10 Kansas Population Projections by Age Group…………………………………………. 10 Sedgwick County Senior Population Estimates……………………………………….. 10 Composition of Population by Race…………………………………………………….. 12 Composition of Population by Hispanic Origin..……………………………………….. 13 Wichita Minority Residence Patterns……………………………...... 14 Summary...………………………………………………………………………………………… 14
Economic Outlook……………………………………………………………...... 15 National Economy………………………………………………………………………………… 15 Changes in Health Care Coverage (Affordable Care Act/Obamacare)……………... 15 Sequester…………………………………………………………………………………... 17 State Economy…………………………………………………………………...... 19 Kansas Budget Process………………………………………………………………….. 20 Kansas Budget for Fiscal Years 2014 and 2015………………………………………. 21 Impacts of Legislative Actions..………………………………………………………….. 21
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page i United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook (continued) Page Local Economy…………………………………………………………………...... 24 Kansas Star Casino……………………………………………………………………….. 24 Boeing Defense, Space & Security………………………...……………………………. 26 Regional Commuting Patterns…………………………………………………………………… 27 Area Employment…………………………………………………………………………………. 28 Area Layoffs……………………………………………………………………………………….. 29 Aviation and the Local Economy………………………………………………………………… 30 Aviation Employment……………………………………………………………………… 35 Household Income………………………………………………………………………………… 38 Characteristics of the Unemployed……………………………………………………………… 39 Public Assistance.………………………………………………………………………………… 43 Temporary Assistance for Needy Families……..……………………………………… 44 Food Assistance Program………………………………………………………………... 47 Child Care Assistance Program…………………………………………………………. 49 Local Indicators of Poverty………………………………………………………………………. 51 Poverty Guidelines……………………………………………………………………….. 52 Underemployment………………………………………………………………………………… 52 Philanthropic Giving……………………………………………………………...... 53 Summary...………………………………………………………………………………………… 54
Education…………………………………………………………...... 55 Kindergarten through 12th Grade……………………………………………………………….. 55 The No Child Left Behind Act……………………………………………………………. 56 No Child Left Behind State Waivers…………………………………………………….. 56 Elementary and Secondary Education Act……………………………………………... 56 School Enrollment Five-Year Trends……………………………...... 57 Kansas………...…………………………………………………………………… 57 Sedgwick County………………………………………………………………….. 58 Wichita Public Schools (USD 259)…………………………………………….. 58 Student Enrollment - Racial and Ethnic Composition…………...... 59 United Way of the Plains Service Area…………………………………………………. 59 Sedgwick County………………………………………………………………………….. 61 County Public School Districts…………………………………………………………… 62 Sedgwick County………………………………………………………………….. 64 Butler County………………………………………………………………………. 68 Cowley County…………………………………………………………………….. 71 Harper County……………………………………………………………………… 73 Harvey County……………………………………………………………………... 74
Environmental Scan 2013 - Page ii Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Table of Contents
Education (continued) Page County Public School Districts (continued)…..………………………………………… Kingman County…………………………………………………………………… 76 Reno County……………………………………………………………………….. 77 Sumner County……………………………………………………………………. 79 Indicator of Poverty - Free and Reduced Meals (FARM)………………………….………….. 81 Free and Reduced Meals (FARM) – United Way of the Plains Service Area………. 83 Dropouts……………………………………………………………...... 86 Black Dropouts..………………………………………………….………………………... 88 Hispanic Dropouts…………………………………….…………………………………… 88 Non-Public Education in the United States…………..………………………………………… 89 Private Schools…………...……………………………………………….………………. 89 Catholic Schools…………………………………………………………………… 90 Homeschooling…………………………….………...... ………………………..………… 93 Homeschooling in Kansas………………...……………………………………… 94 Charter Schools……………………………………………………………………………. 94 Virtual Schools…………………………………………………………………………….. 95 Post-Secondary Education……………………………………………………...... 96 Colleges and Universities–United Way of the Plains Service Area………………….. 97 Level of Educational Attainment…………………………………...... 97 Nationwide, Kansas, Sedgwick County and Wichita...... 97 United Way of the Plains Service Area………………………………………….. 98 Impact of Post-Secondary Education…………………………………………………… 100 Average Annual Earnings…………………...... ………………………………… 100 Median Annual Earnings by Level of Educational Attainment……………….. 100 Relationship between Educational Attainment and Unemployment Rate…… 102 Technical Education and Skills…..………………………………...... 103 National Center for Aviation Training (NCAT)………………………………………….. 103 Wichita Area Technical College (WATC)……………………………………………….. 103 Workforce Alliance of South Central Kansas…………………………………………… 104 Summary...………………………………………………………………………………………… 106
Crime……………………………………………………………………………...... 107 Crime Index Offenses…………………………………………………………………………….. 107 Violent Crime………………………………………………………...... 107 Property Crime…………………………………………………………………………….. 108 Statistical Summary of Criminal Offenses……………………………………………………… 108 United States………………………………………………………...... 108 Kansas……………………………………………………………………………………… 109 Kansas-Juvenile Arrests……..…………...... …………………………………. 110
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page iii United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Table of Contents
Crime (continued) Page Counties……………………………………………………………………………………. 110 Peer Cities/Peer Metropolitan Statistical Areas…………………...... 112 Kansas Cities/Kansas Metropolitan Statistical Areas…………………...... 114 Wichita……………………………………………………………………………………… 116 Wichita-Arrests………………...... …………………………………………...…... 117 Wichita-Juvenile Arrests……………...... ……………………………………….. 120 Wichita-Reported Crimes………………...... ………………………………...…. 121 Gang Activity...... 124 Crimes Against Children (Wichita - Sedgwick County Exploited and Missing Child Unit).... 125 Technology-Based Crime ………………………………………………...... 126 Social Networking Media…………………..……...... …………………………………... 127 Computer (“Cyber”) and Intellectual Property Crimes………………………………… 128 Identity Theft……………………………………………………………………………….. 128 Elder Abuse/Neglect………………………………………………………………...……………. 130 Public Safety...... 131 Wichita Police Department……………………………………………………….………. 131 Wichita Fire Department………………………………………………………………….. 132 Sedgwick County Sheriff’s Office………………………………………………………... 132 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………… 134
Housing……………………….…………………………………………………….…. 135 Home Values………………………………………………………………………………………. 136 Affordable Housing…………………………………………….………………………………….. 136 Sedgwick County Homeowners………………………………………………………….. 137 Rent Expense……………………………………………………………………………………… 139 Sedgwick County Renters…………………………………...…………………………… 139 Public Housing - Wichita………………………………………………………...... 140 Section 8 Housing - Wichita……………………………………………………………… 141 Section 8 Housing – Sedgwick County….………………………..…………….……… 141 Housing Choice Voucher Program-Wichita/Sedgwick County……………………….. 141 Community Investment Division-Wichita………………………………………………... 142 HOME Investment Partnerships Program-Wichita…………………………………… 142 Homeownership-Sedgwick County……………………………………………………… 143 National Housing Market…………………………………………………………………………. 143 Wichita Housing Market………………………………………………………………………….. 146
Environmental Scan 2013 - Page iv Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Table of Contents
Housing (continued) Page Homelessness…………………………………………………………………………..………… 149 Point-In-Time Count of Homeless Individuals...... 152 United States………………………………………………………...... 152 Kansas……………………………………………………………………………………… 153 Wichita and Sedgwick County…………………………………………………………… 153 United Way of the Plains Service Area…………………………………………………. 155 Task Force to End Chronic Homelessness (TECH)…………………………………… 156 Homeless Management Information System (HMIS)…………………………………. 158 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………… 159
Life Cycle……………………………………………..……………………………….. 160 Issues Associated with Age Groups……………………………………..……………….…….. 160 Pre-School: Infants and Toddlers……………………………………………………..… 161 Head Start………………………………………………………………………….. 161 Early Head Start…………………………………………………………………… 163 Youth……………………………………………………………………………………….. 163 Births to Single Mothers………………………………………………………….. 164 Runaways………………………………………………………………………….. 166 Adults……………………………………………………………………………………….. 167 Family Composition………………………………………………….……………. 168 Marriages…………………………………………………………………………… 169 Marriage Dissolutions……………………………………………………………... 169 Attaining Economic Goals………………………………………………………… 170 “Baby Boomers”……………………………………………………………………. 176 Older Persons……………………………………………………………………………… 177 Grandparents Raising Grandchildren…………………………………………… 178 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………… 178
Health Care and Health Access…………..……………………………………….. 179 Overview..………………………………………………………………………………………….. 179 Health Care for the Uninsured and Underinsured.…………………………………………….. 179 State Children's Health Insurance Program (KanCare)…..……………...…………………... 183 Incidence of Health Care Providers...... 184 Area Shortages of Health Professionals………………………..……………………… 186 Incidence of Physicians…………………………………………………..….…………… 188 The Future of Health Care……………………………………………………..…….…... 189 Incidence of Dentists……………………………………………………………….…..… 190
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page v United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Table of Contents
Health Care and Health Access (Continued) Page Causes of Death...... 191 Mental Health...... 193 Suicide……………………………………………………………………………………… 194 Emergency Medical Services...... 195 Pre-School: Infants and Toddlers……………………………………………………………….. 196 Live Birth Rate……………………………………………………………………………... 196 Infant Mortality……………………………………………………………………………... 196 Low Birth Weight and Premature Births………………………………………………… 197 Youth...... 198 Alcohol and Drug Usage………………………………………………………………….. 198 Alcohol Use…………...... ……………….……………………………………….. 199 Drug Use - Marijuana...…...... ………….……………………………………….. 200 Drug Use - Methamphetamines…...... ………………………………………... 200 Birth to Teens and Pre-Teens……………………………………………………………. 201 Older Persons…………………………………………………………………...... 202 Needs of the Frail and Homebound Elderly……………………………………………. 202 Health Care Costs for Seniors…………………………………………………………… 203 End-of-Life Care (Hospice and Pallative Care)………………………………………… 204 Selected Health Trends…………………………………………………………………………... 206 Existing Community Health-Related Resources……………………………………….. 206 Visioneering Health Alliance…………………….……………………………………….. 207 Notifiable Diseases……………………………….……………………………………….. 208 Summary…………………………………………………………………………………………… 210
Endnotes……………………………………………………………………………….…. 211
Environmental Scan 2013 - Page vi Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Table of Tables
Table Demographics Page 1. Total Population (2007-2011)……………………………………………………………… 4 2. Population Density (1990-2010)…………………………………………………………... 5 3. Percentage of Urban Population, Census Years 1980-2010…………………………... 5 4. Land Area by Percentage Urban and Rural Residence (2000-2010)…………………. 5 5. Farms: Land Area and Number…………………………………………………………… 6 6. Total Population, 2000 and 2010…………………………………………………………. 6 7. Population Estimates and Change (2000-2012)………………………………………… 7 8. Population Projections (2011-2021)………………………………………………………. 7 9. Population by Gender, 2000 and 2010…………………………………………………… 8 10. Population by Age Category, 1990, 2000 and 2010……………………………………. 9 11. Kansas Population Projections (1995-2025)…………………………………………….. 10 12. Senior Population Estimates (Sedgwick County; 1990, 2000, 2010)…………………. 10 13. Sedgwick County Senior Population (1990, 2000, 2010)………………………………. 12 14. County Population Estimates and Percentage Difference by Race…………………… 12 15. County Population Estimates and Percentage Difference by Hispanic Origin……….. 13 16. Percent of Minority Population (Wichita, 2010)………………………………………….. 14
Economic Outlook 17. Increase in State Institution Tuition and Fees…………………………………………… 22 18. Kansas Star Casino………………………………………………………………………… 26 19. Average Annual Civilian Non-Farm Employment……………………………………….. 28 20. Top Area Employers and Number of Employees (2009 and 2012)…………………… 29 21. Area Layoffs…………………………………………………………………………………. 30 22. Number of Full-Time Wichita Area Employees at Aviation Manufacturing Firms……. 36 23. Number of Full-Time Wichita Area Employees at Aviation Subcontracting Firms…… 36 24. Non-Farm Payroll Employment (2008 – 2012)…………………………………………... 37 25. Annual Household Income…………………………………………………………………. 38 26. Average Annual Unemployment (2009 – 2012)….……………………………………… 39 27. Composition of Unemployed Civilian Work Force by Race (2010)……………………. 42 28. Unemployed Civilian Work Force by Hispanic or Latino Ethnicity (2010)…………….. 42 29. Maximum Monthly Cash Benefit-Temporary Assistance for Needy Families………... 45 30. Cash Assistance-Temporary Assistance for Needy Families………………………….. 46 31. Cash Assistance-Food Assistance – SNAP……………………………………………… 48 32. Maximum Monthly Income Guidelines For Child Care Assistance……………………. 50 33. Cash Assistance - Child Care Assistance……………………………………………….. 50 34. Poverty Status of Individuals in Past 12 Months by County…………………………… 52 35. 2013 Poverty Guidelines for the 48 Contiguous States and the District of Columbia.. 52
Environmental Scan 2013 - Page vii Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Table of Tables
Table Education Page 36. State of Kansas School Enrollment by Group; Grades K – 12 for Public, Private and Religious-Based Schools…………………………………………………………. 57 37. Sedgwick County School Enrollment by Group; Grades K – 12……………………….. 58 38. Wichita School Enrollment by Group, Grades K - 12, Public Schools………………… 59 39. School Enrollment - Grades K – 12, Public, Private and Religious-Based Schools… 60 40. Sedgwick County School Enrollment , Grades K-12 - Public, Private and Religious-Based…………………………………………………………………………. 61 41. Number of Public School Districts Per County (2010)………………………………….. 62 42. White Students as a Percentage of Total Enrollment –Public School Districts In United Way of the Plains Service Area ……………………………………………………………………. 62 43. School Enrollment, Grades K – 12, Public School Districts A. Sedgwick County Public Schools …………………………………………………. 64 B. Butler County Public Schools………………………………………………………. 68 C. Cowley County Public Schools…………………………………………………….. 71 D. Harper County Public Schools……………………………………………………… 73 E. Harvey County Public 75 F. KingmanSchools…………………………………………………… County Public Schools……………………………………………………… 76 G. Reno County Public Schools……………………………………………………….. 77 H. Sumner County Public Schools……………………………………………………. 79 44. Federal Income Chart-Child Nutrition Program Benefits, July 1, 2012-June 30, 2013 82 45. Total Students and Students Qualifying to Receive Free and Reduced Enrollment and Meals (FARM) – Grades K – 12, by 83 County……………………………………… 46. Total Students and Students Qualifying to Receive Free and Reduced Enrollment and Meals – Grades K – 12, Public School 83 Districts…………………………………. 47. Total Students and Students Qualifying to Receive Free and Reduced Enrollment and Meals – Grades K – 12; Public School Districts , by Academic Year…………. 85 48. Dropouts – Public, Private and Religious-Based Schools, Grades 7 – 12 87 …………… 49. Dropouts (Black) – Public, Private and Religious-Based Schools, Grades 7 – 88 12…… 50. Dropouts (Hispanic) – Public, Private and Religious-Based Schools, Grades 7 – 89 12.. 51. Wichita Catholic Diocese Enrollment - Grades PreK – 12…………………………….. 90 52. Wichita Catholic Diocese Enrollment, Racial and Ethnic Composition, Grades PreK – 12, United Way of the Plains Service Area………………………… 90 53. Wichita Catholic Diocese Enrollment, Racial and Ethnic Composition, Grades PreK – 12, By County…………………………………………………………. 91 54. Students in Private Accredited and Non-Accredited Schools…………………………. 93 55. Home-Schooled Elementary and Secondary Age Students in the United States…… 93 56. Charter Schools in United Way of the Plains Service Area……………………………. 95 57. Virtual Schools/Educational Programs in United Way of the Plains Service Area ….. 96 58. Colleges and Universities – United Way of the Plains Service Area………………….. 97
Environmental Scan 2013 - Page viii Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Table of Tables
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page ix United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Table of Tables
Table Education (Continued) Page 59. Population 25 Years and Over – 2011 A. Count……………………………………………………………………………………. 97 B. Percent…………………………………………………………………………………. 98 60. Highest Level of Educational Attainment, Population 25 Years Old and Over………… 99 61. Attainment of High School Education and/or Bachelor’s Degree, Population 25 Years Old and Over……………………………………………………………………. 99 62. Median Annual Earnings Per Geographic Area* and Median Annual Earnings Per Highest Level of Educational Attainment Per Geographic Area……………………… 101 63. National Unemployment Rate Per Highest Level of Educational Attainment………….. 102 64. Wichita Area Technical College Annual Student Headcount and Full-Time Equivalency Enrollment……………………………………………………………….. 104
Crime 65. Kansas Crime Rate Per 100,000 Population………………………………………………. 110 66. State of Kansas – Juvenile Arrests, 2008 and 110 2011………………………………………. 67. Homicide Deaths by County of Residence………………………………………………… 111 68. Crime: Reported Crime Offenses, 2011 and 2008……………………………………….. 111 69. Peer Cities and Peer Metropolitan Statistical Areas……………………………………… 112 70. Population, Violent Crimes and Property Crimes in Wichita and Identified Peer Cities 113 71. Kansas Cities and Kansas Metropolitan Statistical Areas…………………………….. 114 72. Population, Violent Crimes and Property Crimes in Wichita and Other Kansas Cities.. 115 73. Juvenile Arrests, Wichita Police Department…………………………….………………… 120 74. Identity Theft Complaints, State of Kansas and Wichita Metropolitan Area……………. 129 75. Identity Theft Complaints Per 100,000 129 Population………………………………………… 76. Wichita Police Department, Total Authorized Positions………………………………….. 130 77. Patrol Division, Sedgwick County…………………………………………………………… 133 78. Judicial Division, Sedgwick County…………………………………………………………. 133
Housing 79. Housing Units…………………………………………………………………………………. 135 80. Housing Unit Vacancy Rates………………………………………………………………… 136 81. Median Home Value: Owner-Occupied Units……………………………………………… 136 82. Annual Household Income – Sedgwick 137 County……………………………………………. 83. Selected Monthly Costs As Percentage of Household Income, Sedgwick County Owner-Occupied Units……………………………………………………………………. 138 84. Percent of Homeowners at Specified Income Levels Who Pay at Least 30 Percent of Income Toward Selected Monthly Housing Costs, Sedgwick County Owner- Occupied Units…………………………………………………………………………….. 138 85. Gross Rent Expense per Household……………………………………………………….. 139
Environmental Scan 2013 - Page x Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Table of Tables
86. Gross Rent As Percentage of Household Income, Sedgwick County Renter- Occupied Households…………………………………………………………………….. 140
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page xi United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Table of Tables
Table Housing (Continued) Page 87. Maximum Family Income To Qualify for Low-To-Moderate Income Public Housing……. 140 88. Maximum Family Income Limits at 30 and 50 Percent (Wichita, KS; Federally Adjusted) 142 89. Sales of Existing Homes (Butler, Cowley, Harvey Counties)………………………………. 148 90. Sales of New Homes, Including Under Construction (Butler, Cowley, Harvey Counties) 148 91. Point In Time Count of Homeless Individuals, Wichita/Sedgwick County, Kansas……… 154 92. Number of Literally Homeless Persons………………………………………………………. 155
Life Cycle 93. Age Groups……………………………………………………………………………………… 160 94. Population: Pre School: Infants and Toddlers……………………………….………………. 161 95. Head Start Program Allocations and Enrollment , Kansas…………………………………. 162 96. Head Start Enrollment Slots Available- By County; 3- and 4-Year Olds, Living Below Poverty Threshold; Participation Rate per 100 Children………………………………… 162 97. Early Head Start Enrollment Slots Available- By County; (0 to 3-Year Olds, Living Below Poverty Threshold); Participation Rate per 100 Children ……………………… 163 98. Population: Children and Youth (2011)………………………………………………………. 164 99. Total Live Births and Out-of-Wedlock Births By Age Group of Mother……………………. 164 100. Out-of-Wedlock Births by Race of Mother…………………………………………………… 165 101. Total Live Births and Out-of-Wedlock Births by Race of Mother…………………………. 165 102. Population: Adults………………………………………………………………………………. 167 103. Household Composition – Family/Non-Family (2011)………………………………………. 168 104. Marriages by Number and Rate………………………………………………………………. 169 105. Marriage Dissolutions by Number and Rate…………………………………………………. 169 106. Marriages and Marriage Dissolutions, Five-Year 170 Rate……………………………………… 107. Housing Characteristics A. Sedgwick County, Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area, State of Kansas, United States…………………………………………………………………………. 171 B. Butler, Cowley, Harper and Harvey Counties……………………………………….. 171 C. Kingman, Reno, Sumner Counties and United Way of the Plains Service Area…. 171 108. Income and Earnings Characteristics A. Sedgwick County, Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area, State of Kansas, United States…………………………………………………………………………. 172 B. Butler, Cowley, Harper and Harvey 172 C. Kingman,Counties……………………………………… Reno and Sumner Counties………………………………………………..… 173 109. Vehicle Availability A. Sedgwick County, Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area, State of Kansas, United States…………………………………………………………………………. 173 B. Butler, Cowley, Harper and Harvey 174 C. Kingman,Counties……………………………………… Reno, Sumner Counties and United… Way of the Plains Service Area…. 174
Environmental Scan 2013 - Page xii Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Table of Tables
Table Life Cycle (Continued) Page 110. Household Facilities (Kitchen and Plumbing) A. Sedgwick County, Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area, State of Kansas, United States…………………………………………………………………………… 174 B. Butler, Cowley, Harper and Harvey Counties…………………………………………. 175 C. Kingman, Reno and Sumner Counties and United Way of the Plains Service Area 175 111. Telephone Service, (including Land Lines and Cellular/Mobile Telephones)……………. A. Sedgwick County, Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area, State of Kansas, United States…………………………………………………………………………… 175 B. Butler, Cowley, Harper and Harvey Counties…………………………………………. 175 C. Kingman, Reno and Sumner Counties and United Way of the Plains Service Area 176 112. Boomer 176 Population……………………………………………………………………………… 113. Population: Older Persons…………………………………………………………………….. 177 114. Grandparents Raising Grandchildren………………………………………………………… 178
Health Care and Health Access 115. Coalition of Community Health Clinics, Patient Encounters……………………………….. 180 116. Health Insurance Coverage, All People……………………………………………………… 181 117. Health Insurance Coverage, Children Under 19 At Or Below 200 Percent of Poverty…. 181 118. Estimated Uninsured Kansas Individuals, Younger than 65 Years Old………………….. 183 119. Health Care Professionals Licensed in the State of Kansas, Includes Licenses that were Active, Federal Active, Military, Exempt and Inactive…………………………….. 185 120. Health Care Professionals Registered in the State of Kansas …………………………… 185 121. License Designations for Kansas Health Care Professionals…………………………….. 186 122. Health Professional Shortage Areas and Medically Underserved Areas and Populations………………………………………………………………………………….. 187 123. Practicing Physicians* - Medical Doctors and Doctors of Osteopathy………………… 188 124. Active Dentists………………………………………………………………………………….. 191 125. Community Mental Health Centers…………………………………………………………… 193 126. Suicides…………………………………………………………………………………………. 195 127. Live Births by Number and Rate per 1,000 Population…………………………………….. 196 128. Infant Mortality Rates per 1,000 Population…………………………………………………. 196 129. Live Births by Weight in Grams by County of Residence.…………………………………. 197 130. Premature Births by County of Residence…………………………………………………… 198 131. 30-Day Prevalence Rate of Substance Use (Alcohol) by Student Grade Level…………. 199 132. 30-Day Prevalence Rate of Substance Use (Marijuana) by Student Grade Level……… 200 133. Lifetime Methamphetamine Usage, Students in Grades 6, 8, 10 and 12………………… 200 134. Teen and Pre-Teen Pregnancy Rates (2007)……………………………………………….. 201 135. Teen and Pre-Teen Pregnancy Rates (2011)……………………………………………….. 202 136. Medicare Recipients at July 1, 2010…………………………………………………………. 204 137. Cumulative Case Reports, Reportable Diseases…………………………………………… 208 138. Most Often Reported Diseases……………………………………………………………….. 209 138. Most Often Reported Diseases, United Way of the Plains Service Area 209
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page xiii United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Table of Figures
Figure Introduction Page
1. United Way of the Plains Service Area…………………………………………………….. 3
Demographics
2. Distribution Trend of Sedgwick County Population, by Age and Gender (1990, 2000, 2010)……………………………………………………………………….. 11
Economic Outlook
3. Sedgwick County Commuting Patterns (Inflow and Outflow)……………………………. 28 4. Distribution of Household Income (United Way of the Plains Service Area and State). 38 5. Average Monthly Unemployment - 2009…………………………………………………… 40 6. Average Monthly Unemployment - 2012…………………………………………………... 40 7. Average Monthly Unemployment - 2013….……………………………………………….. 41 8. Department for Children and Families (DCF) Regions…………………………………… 43 9. Cash Assistance - Temporary Assistance for Needy Families………………………….. 47 10. Cash Assistance - Food Assistance………………………………………………………... 49 11. Cash Assistance - Child Care Assistance…………………………………………………. 51
Education
12. Highest Level of Educational Attainment, Population 25 Years or Older………………. 98 13. Median Earnings Income Per Geographic Area and Median Annual Earnings Per Highest Level of Educational Attainment Per Geographic Area…………………. 99
Crime
14. Violent Crimes Reported in 2011 (National)……………………………………………….. 109 15. 2011 Crime Clock Statistics…………………………………………………………………. 109 16. Patrol West Bureau…………………………………………………………………………. 116 17. Patrol West, Beat 15……………………………………………………………………….. 117 18. Beat 15 Crime Statistics…………………………………………………………………… 117 19. Wichita Arrests (Total, Adult and Juvenile) 2009 – 2012………………………………… 117
Environmental Scan 2013 - Page xiv Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Table of Figures
Figure Crime (Continued) Page
Wichita – Number of Arrests (2009-2012) 20. For Murder…………………………………………………………………………………. 118 21. For Rape…………………………………………………………………………………… 118 22. For Robbery……………………………………………………………………………….. 118 23. For Aggravated Assault ………………………………………………………………….. 119 24. For Burglary……………………………………………………………………………….. 119 25. For Motor Vehicle ………………………………………………………………………… 119 26. For Larceny ……………………………………………………………………………….. 120 Wichita – Number of Reported Crimes (2008-2012) 27. Homicides………………………………………………………………………………….. 121 28. Rapes………………………………………………………………………………………. 121 29. Robberies………………………………………………………………………………….. 122 30. Aggravated Assaults……………………………………………………………………… 122 31. Burglaries………………………………………………………………………………….. 122 32. Auto Thefts………………………………………………………………………………… 123 33. Larcenies…………………………………………………………………………………... 123 34. Forgeries…………………………………………………………………………………… 123 35. Wichita Police Department Density Map of Gang Related Incidents (2012)…………… 125
Housing
36. Total Home Sales, Wichita Area……………………………………………………………. 146 37. Building Permits, Wichita Area……………………………………………………………… 147 38. Sales of Existing Homes, Sedgwick County……………………………………………….. 147 39. Sales of New Homes (Including Under Construction), Sedgwick County……………… 148
Life Cycle
40. Safe Place Rescues – Wichita Children’s Home Street Outreach Services…………… 166 41. Wichita – Number of Reported Runaways (2008 – 2012)……………………………….. 167
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page xv United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Table of Tables
Figure Health Care and Health Access Page
42. Insured and Uninsured Kansas Residents, By Age Category (2011) 182 43. Age of Practicing Physicians (United States) 190 44. Death by Selected Causes, State of Kansas, 2011 192 45. Death by Selected Causes, United Way of the Plains Service Area, 2011 192 46. Patients Served by Hospice in the United States: 1982 to 2011 205 47. Visioneering Health Alliance Strategic Priorities 208
Environmental Scan 2013 - Page xvi Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
ENVIRONMENTAL SCAN
2013
COMMUNITY NEEDS ASSESSMENT: Part 1
Introduction
Beginning in 1988, United Way of the Plains had been involved in a needs assessment process approximately every five years (1993, 1997, 2004 and 2006). In 2009, United Way's Community Planning Committee directed that because of changes occurring in the community, conducting the Community Needs Assessment on a three-year time frame would be of benefit to United Way and to other community entities which rely on its information in their decision making. The 2010 Community Needs Assessment was the first completed on this revised, three-year schedule. The 2013 report is the seventh such survey of Wichita/Sedgwick County residents providing information and perceptions of the social service needs of Wichita and those who live and/or work in the surrounding area, the third such needs assessment to include the residents of Butler and Harvey counties, the second such needs assessment to include the residents of Reno and Sumner counties, and the second such assessment completed on the new three- year timeframe.
County Residents Included In Community Needs Assessment (Community Survey) Year Sedgwick Butler Harvey Sumner Reno 1988 X 1993 X 1997 X 2004 X 2006 X X X 2010 X X X X X 2013 X X X X X
In each case, after the results have been collected and tabulated, the information is used by United Way of the Plains' community volunteers to establish priorities for the allocation of United Way resources toward agency programs supplying social services to those in need.
The 2013 process represents the pilot year of a three-way collaboration between Via Christi Health, the Sedgwick County Health Department and United Way of the Plains in accomplishing the Community Needs Assessment. Among the core functions of the Sedgwick County Health Department is assessing community needs and perceptions related to health. Via Christi's interest in the collaboration is derived from its mission of special concern for those who are vulnerable and its core value of stewardship. In addition, this assessment helps meet the new requirement of the federal Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act which requires not-for-profit health systems, such as Via Christi, to conduct community health needs assessments every three years and to develop a plan to help build healthier communities in the areas where they own and operate hospitals.
These three mission-driven organizations are interested in community participation. Joining forces helps ensure that good use is being made of our community's charitable resources by identifying the most urgent health care needs of the underserved. In turn, this maximizes effort, reduces costs and coordinates research findings into a comprehensive document for use by others.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 1 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
The actual needs assessment process is divided into three major parts.
I. Environmental Scan
The environmental scan consists mostly of secondary data about the community. It is a view of our community and service area based on data supplied by a wide range of organizations at the national, state and local levels. The report consists of seven subsections: Demographics; Education; Economic Outlook; Crime; Housing; Life Cycle; and Health Care and Health Access. Source citations appear at the end of the report, in the Endnotes section. The Environmental Scan should assist in providing a picture of the status of the community based on these already collected data.
II. Needs Survey
The Needs Survey gathers data from three sources:
Community Respondents: a random sample of residents of the Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area (e.g., Sedgwick, Butler, Harvey and Sumner counties) and of Reno County. NOTE: Kingman County was added to the Wichita MSA after the survey was conducted.) Community Leaders: elected and/or appointed government officials and presidents/chief executive officers from the area's largest businesses Agency Executives: Chief executive officers of social services agencies through the area
By design, the needs assessment seeks to assess needs of the overall community, beyond those needs directly impacted by United Way-funded programs.
III. Priority Study
The results of the needs assessment are then used to establish priorities for the allocation of United Way resources, yielding the third part of the needs assessment process, the Priority Study. As its purpose, this study will assist the United Way Board of Directors and various United Way committees in awareness, planning, funding, coordination and general provision of services to the community.
United Way of the Plains and its collaborative partners strive to continually improve its process of identifying and impacting community needs. To that end, we welcome constructive comments and suggestions from report users.
2013
Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 2 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
United Way of the Plains Service Area
A community needs assessment is a structured, data-driven process designed to identify the extent and depth of community concerns. Requests for information are usually based on a desire to educate the public, obtain federal or state assistance, estimate the number of people affected, or obtain grants. All of these requests are deemed appropriate and reflect United Way’s desire to continue to proactively identify and impact critical human needs.
United Way of the Plains serves individuals who live and work in Sedgwick County, Kansas. This eight- county area includes Sedgwick County and the seven counties contiguous with it, including Butler, Cowley, Harper, Harvey, Kingman, Reno and Sumner counties in South Central Kansas.
Figure 1. United Way of the Plains Service Area
For the most part, information presented in this report has been compiled from the most recent data sources available at the time of publication (for example, the 2011 U.S. Census, the 46th edition of the Kansas Statistical Abstract (2011), and the Kansas Department of Health and Environment’s 2011 Kansas Annual Summary of Vital Statistics).
For the 2000 Census, in addition to the basic survey questions, additional questions were asked of a sample of persons and housing units (generally 1 in 6 households) on topics such as income, education, place of birth and more. These questions were not included in the 2010 Census. Therefore, this report presents a combination of 2010 Census data where available and supplemental data from the 2006-2010 five-year estimates from the American Community Survey, where necessary.
Although the American Community Survey (ACS) produces population, demographic and housing unit estimates, for 2010, the 2010 Census provides the official counts of the population and housing units for the nation, states, counties, cities and towns. For 2006 to 2009, the Population Estimates Program provides intercensal estimates of the populations for the nations, states and counties. With each new release of annual estimates, the entire time series of ACS estimates is revised for all years back to the last census. In any discrepancy between Census data and ACS data, the Census data are “official.”
The Endnotes section of this report contains source citations. As more current information becomes available, report users are encouraged to seek out and use the most current data available.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 3 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Demographics
Population Characteristics
United Way of the Plains is located in Wichita, the largest city in Kansas. Programs receiving funding from United Way of the Plains chiefly serve those individuals who live and work in Sedgwick County, serving residents of Sedgwick County and the seven surrounding counties including Butler, Cowley, Harper, Harvey, Kingman, Reno and Sumner counties. As much as possible, data are presented from this eight- county area.
A responsibility of United Way of the Plains is to monitor and assess the social service needs of the community and to allocate program support to meet these needs. The social characteristics of the area being served are relevant to the allocation of support for needed programs.
Area Population
In the five-year period between 2007 and 2011, the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves was home to slightly more than one in four Kansans, while Sedgwick County residents comprised a little more than 17 percent of the state's total population.
During this time period, Sedgwick County experienced the region's largest population gain in number (n = 23,213 individuals), while Cowley County had the region’s largest population gain percentagewise (6.1 percent increase). The net population gain of the entire United Way of the Plains service area was 31,498 individuals, a 4.5 percent increase from 2007 to 2011.
Table 1. Total Population (2007-2011) County 2007 1a 2008 1a 2009 1b 2010 1c 2011 1d Butler 62,879 63,562 64,084 65,880 65,880 Cowley 34,208 34,065 33,634 36,311 36,311 Harper 5,827 5,857 5,667 6,034 6,034 Harvey 33,471 33,675 34,247 34,684 34,684 Kingman 7,831 7,719 7,571 7,858 7,858 Reno 63,090 63,427 63,357 64,511 64,511 Sedgwick 475,149 482,863 490,864 498,365 498,365 Sumner 23,822 23,616 23,488 24,132 24,132 UWP Service Area 706,277 714,784 722,912 737,775 737,775 State of Kansas 2,777,382 2,802,134 2,818,747 2,853,118 2,853,118
Sedgwick County as % of Kansas 17.1% 17.2% 17.4% 17.5% 17.5% UWP Service Area as % of Kansas 25.4% 25.5% 25.6% 25.9% 25.9%
Page 4 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Demographics
Population Density
Table 2. Population Density (1990-2010) In 2010, Cowley, Sumner, Population 1990 - 2010 Kingman and Harper Land Area Population Density2 Population3 counties had population Per per Square Mile % Change densities below the state County Square Mile 1990 2000 2010 1990-2010 average and these four Butler 1,430 35.4 41.7 46.1 30.2 counties experienced a Cowley 1,126 32.8 32.2 32.3 -1.6 net loss of population Harper 801 8.9 8.2 7.5 -15.3 between 2000 and 2010. Harvey 540 57.6 60.9 64.3 11.8 In that same time period, Kingman 863 9.6 10.0 9.1 -5.2 Butler and Sedgwick Reno 1,255 49.8 51.6 51.4 3.4 counties experienced the Sedgwick 998 403.7 453.2 499.6 23.5 area’s largest percentage Sumner 1,182 21.9 22.0 20.4 -6.6 population increases. State of Kansas 81,759 30.3 32.9 34.9 15.2
Rural/Urban Populations
Table 3. Percentage of Urban Population4 In 2010 (as in 2000), all
(Census Years 1980-2010) residents of Harper County County 1980 1990 2000 2010 and the majority of the Butler 45.3% 46.3% 55.9% 59.5% people in Kingman and Sumner counties lived in Cowley 65.0% 66.9% 65.6% 69.0% rural settings, while the Harper 34.2% 35.3% --* --* majority of those living in Harvey 63.4% 63.5% 68.8% 69.1% Sedgwick, Harvey, Cowley, Kingman 39.8% 38.5% 36.8% 37.9% Reno and Butler counties lived in urban (i.e. city Reno 62.0% 63.0% 68.4% 68.7% or town) settings. Sedgwick 88.8% 89.3% 91.2% 92.4% Sumner 38.0% 37.2% 37.6% 37.2% State of Kansas 66.7% 69.1% 71.4% 74.2%
*No urban land within the county.
Rural/Urban Land Area
Between 2000 and Table 4. Land Area by Percentage Urban and Rural Residence (2000-2010) 2010, Kansas 5 6 remained primarily a 2000 2010 rural state in terms of County Urban Rural Urban Rural land area, with only Butler 1.3% 98.7% 1.5% 98.5% 1.2 percent of the Cowley 1.2% 98.8% 1.4% 98.6% overall land area Harper 0.0% 100.0% 0.0% 100.0% dedicated to urban Harvey 2.5% 97.5% 2.2% 97.8% residences. Kingman 0.2% 99.8% 0.2% 99.8% Reno 1.7% 98.3% 1.7% 98.3% Sedgwick 17.3% 82.7% 20.7% 79.3% Sumner 0.5% 99.5% 0.4% 99.6% State of Kansas 1.1% 98.9% 1.2% 98.8%
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 5 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Demographics
Agricultural Land Use
Table 5. Farms: Land Area and Number In 2007, approximately Proportion of Number 13.6 percent of all Land Area in Farms 7 of Farms 8 Kansas farms were in County 1997 2002 2007 2007 the area served by Butler 83.0 76.7 86.2 1,427 United Way of the Cowley 89.1 95.7 79.9 1,027 Plains.
Harper 89.9 91.5 93.9 495 In each 1997, 2002 Harvey 93.0 100.0 98.0 829 and 2007, a large Kingman 94.2 100.0 98.9 876 percentage of the Reno 82.4 91.6 97.2 1,749 total land area in Sedgwick 84.3 83.5 80.0 1,419 each county remained Sumner 88.2 96.8 93.8 1,099 in use as farmland. UWP Service Area ------8,921 State of Kansas 88.0 90.2 88.6 65,531
Sedgwick County ------2.2% as % of Kansas UWP Service Area ------13.6% as % of Kansas
Population Trends
Table 6. Total Population, 2000 and 2010 In the decade between County 20009 201010 % Change the 2000 Census and Butler 59,482 65,880 10.8% the 2010 Census, Butler Cowley 36,291 36,311 0.1% Sedgwick and Harvey Harper 6,536 6,034 -7.7% counties experienced Harvey 32,869 34,684 5.5% the largest percentage Kingman 8,573 7,858 -8.3% of population growth. Reno 64,790 64,511 -0.4% Sedgwick 452,869 498,365 10.0% Kingman, Harper, and Sumner 25,946 24,132 -7.0% Sumner, counties UWP Service Area 687,356 737,775 7.3% experienced a decrease State of Kansas 2,688,418 2,853,118 6.1% in population during that time, Sedgwick County while the population of 16.8% 17.5% -- Reno and Cowley counties as % of Kansas UWP Service Area remained relatively flat. 25.6% 25.9% -- as % of Kansas
Page 6 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Demographics
Annually, the Kansas Division of the Budget is responsible for the certification of Kansas population data to the Secretary of State. This certification is done by July 1st of each year. In the period from the 2000 U.S. Census and the year most currently certified by the Kansas Division of the Budget (2012), the population of the eight-county area served by United Way of the Plains increased by 27,328 individuals.
Table 7. Population Estimates and Change11 (2000-2012) Population During this time period, Population Estimates % Change the population gains for Butler and Sedgwick County April 1, 2000 July 1, 2012 2000-2012 counties outpaced the Butler 59,482 65,817 10.7% increase percentage of change Cowley 36,291 36,272 0.1% decrease for Kansas overall. Harper 6,536 5,993 8.3% decrease Harvey 32,869 34,846 6.0% increase The population of Kingman 8,673 7,853 9.5% decrease Harvey County also Reno 64,790 64,607 0.3% decrease increased during this Sedgwick 452,869 501,076 10.6% increase time period, although Sumner 25,946 23,787 8.3% decrease at a slower rate than UWP Service Area 687,456 740,251 7.7% increase the state, as a whole. State of Kansas 2,688,418 2,871,238 6.8% increase
Sedgwick County 16.8% 17.5% -- as % of Kansas UWP Service Area 25.6% 25.8% -- as % of Kansas
Population Projections
By state statute, on July 1 of each year Kansas certifies as the official state population the U.S. Census Bureau’s most recent population estimates for subcounty areas. Unlike the annual certification, the state’s population projections are not required to be produced each year. As a general rule, the Kansas Division of the Budget publishes updated population projections every three to five years. 12
Based on projections by the Kansas Division of the Budget, Table 8 presents changes in population estimated for the eight counties through the year 2021.
Table 8. Population Projections 2011 – 2021 13 Between 2011 and 2021, County 2011 2016 2021 Cowley, Sumner, Harper, Butler 65,044 67,160 68,900 Kingman and Reno counties Cowley 34,521 33,662 32,832 are predicted to lose Harper 5,696 5,346 4,992 population, while Sedgwick, Harvey 34,629 35,527 36,491 Butler, and Harvey counties Kingman 8,075 7,886 7,695 are expected to gain Reno 63,948 63,795 63,753 population, for a net gain Sedgwick 478,581 491,124 503,158 in the region of 26,431. Sumner 23,633 23,267 22,737
UWP Service Area 714,127 727,767 740,558
From 2011 to 2021, the Kansas Division of the Budget estimates a population increase in the eight- county area of 3.7 percent, or 26,431 individuals. Understanding which segments of the population have increased helps in anticipating needs and capacities of the community.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 7 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Demographics
Composition of Population by Gender
In both the 2000 Census and the 2010 Census, the county, area and state populations were divided nearly evenly between the two genders. In 2000 in United Way of the Plains’ eight-county service area, there were 7,106 more females than males, a ratio of 50.5 percent to 49.5 percent.
In 2010 in the same eight-county area, there were 6,765 more females than males, again a ratio of 50.5 percent to 49.5 percent.
Table 9. Population by Gender, 2000 and 2010 20009 201010 Male Female Male Female County Count % Count % Count % Count % Butler 29,876 50.2% 29,606 49.8% 33,178 50.4% 32,702 49.6% Cowley 17,747 48.9% 18,544 51.1% 18,111 49.9% 18,200 50.1% Harper 3,161 48.4% 3,375 51.6% 2,985 49.5% 3,049 50.5% Harvey 15,968 48.6% 16,901 51.4% 16,937 48.8% 17,747 51.2% Kingman 4,254 49.0% 4,419 51.0% 3,898 49.6% 3,960 50.4% Reno 32,534 50.2% 32,256 49.8% 32,315 50.1% 32,196 49.9% Sedgwick 223,870 49.4% 228,999 50.6% 246,042 49.4% 252,323 50.6% Sumner 12,765 49.2% 13,181 50.8% 12,039 49.9% 12,093 50.1% UWP Service Area 340,175 49.5% 347,281 50.5% 365,505 49.5% 372,270 50.5% State of Kansas 1,328,474 49.4% 1,359,944 50.6% 1,415,408 49.6% 1,437,710 50.4%
Sedgwick County 16.9% 16.8% 17.4% 17.6% as % of Kansas UWP Service Area 25.6% 25.5% 25.8% 25.9% as % of Kansas
Composition of Population by Age
Table 10 presents the population in recent U.S. Census years (1990, 2000 and 2010) by age categories: children younger than five years old, children five to 17 years old, adults 18 to 64 years old, and seniors age 65 and older.
In 1990, more than one in every four Kansas children lived in the eight-county area served by United Way of the Plains, including 50,283 children younger than five years old and 121,726 children between the ages of five and 17 years.
In 2000, 27.1 percent of Kansas children lived in the United Way of the Plains eight-county service area, including 51,067 children younger than five years old and 138,649 children between the ages of five and 17 years (increases of 784 children and 16,923 children, respectively, over 1990).
In 2010,26.9 percent of Kansas children lived in the United Way of the Plains eight-county service area, including 55,224 children younger than five years old and 140,504 children between the ages of five and 17 years (increases of 4,157 children and 1,855 children, respectively, over 2000).
Page 8 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Demographics
Table 10. Population by Age Category, 199014, 20009 and 201010
1990 Population by Age, in Years 2000 Population by Age, in Years 2010 Population by Age, in Years County Under 5 5 - 17 18 - 64 65+ Under 5 5 - 17 18 - 64 65+ Under 5 5 - 17 18 - 64 65+
Butler 3,822 10,785 29,203 6,770 4,131 12,906 34,962 7,483 4,367 13,384 39,802 8,327
Cowley 2,594 7,192 21,109 6,020 2,312 7,132 21,077 5,770 2,459 6,411 21,715 5,726
Harper 472 1,334 3,667 1,651 369 1,243 3,405 1,519 406 1,022 3,299 1,307
Harvey 2,130 6,040 17,759 5,099 2,167 6,388 18,802 5,512 2,371 6,482 19,888 5,943
Kingman 591 1,705 4,352 1,644 528 1,750 4,598 1,697 457 1,443 4,388 1,570
Reno 4,298 11,593 36,379 10,119 4,138 11,714 38,320 10,618 4,254 10,982 38,281 10,994
Sedgwick 34,422 77,537 245,717 45,986 35,697 91,838 273,760 51,574 39,302 96,074 306,020 56,969
Sumner 1,954 5,540 14,031 4,316 1,725 5,678 14,529 4,014 1,608 4,706 14,032 3,786
UWP Svc Area 50,283 121,726 372,217 81,605 51,067 138,649 409,453 88,187 55,224 140,504 447,425 94,622
State of KS 188,390 473,224 1,473,389 342,571 188,708 524,285 1,619,196 356,229 205,492 521,447 1,750,063 376,116
SG CO 18.3% 16.4% 16.7% 13.4% 18.9% 17.5% 16.9% 14.5% 19.1% 18.4% 17.5% 15.1% as % of KS
UWP Svc Area 26.7% 25.7% 25.3% 23.8% 27.1% 26.4% 25.3% 24.8% 26.9% 26.9% 25.6% 25.2% as % of KS
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 9 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Demographics
Distribution Trend of Sedgwick County Population, by Age and Gender
Figure 2 displays the age and gender distribution of the Sedgwick County population in the three most recent Census years (1990, 2000 and 2010). This population pyramid presents a clear picture of a population's age-gender composition, using a paired bar chart-type graphic and shows the number of males and females in each age group.
Demographers sometimes refer to the graphic representation of the movement of the Baby Boomer generation (those born between 1964 and 1946)15 as the "lump in the snake." At the time of the 1990 Census, Boomers would have been 26 to 44 years old. At the time of the 2000 Census, their age range would have been 36 to 54 years old, and by the 2010 Census, Boomers ages would range from 46 to 64 years. In 2010, Baby Boomers accounted for approximately 25.3 percent of the Sedgwick County population and 71.1 percent of the adult Sedgwick County population.
Kansas Population Projections by Age Group
The Population Projections Branch of the U.S. Census Bureau projected that the overall population of Kansas would increase by 347,000 residents from 2005 to 2025.
Table 11. Kansas Population Projections 16 (1995-2025; Numbers in Thousands) The population of Kansans Population Age 1995 2000 2005 2015 2025 at least 65 years of age is projected to experience a 0 - 4 years 183 183 187 201 203 65.3 percent increase 5 - 17 years 509 515 513 517 548 (239,000 seniors), from 18 - 24 years 248 269 287 284 282 366,000 seniors in 2005 25 - 64 years 1,275 1,342 1,408 1,490 1,470 to 605,000 seniors twenty 65+ years 350 359 366 447 605 years later. Total 2,565 2,668 2,761 2,939 3,108
Sedgwick County Senior Population Estimates
Table 12 presents annual data regarding Sedgwick County senior population estimates. By 2010, more than one in every five (22.6 percent) Sedgwick County residents was at least 55 years old. Similarly, more than one in every ten (11.4 percent) Sedgwick County residents was at least 65 years old.
Table 12. Senior Population Estimates (Sedgwick County; 199014, 20009 and 201010) Age Categories 1990 2000 2010 Total Sedgwick Count 403,662 459,902 498,365 County population Percent 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 55 to 59 years Count 16,914 26,095 30,969 Percent 4.2% 5.7% 6.2% 60 to 64 years Count 16,141 17,209 24,471 Percent 4.0% 3.7% 4.9% 65 to 74 years Count 27,305 26,070 29,289 Percent 6.8% 5.7% 5.9% 75 to 84 years Count 14,092 18,887 19,389 Percent 3.5% 4.1% 3.9% 85 years, plus Count 4,589 5,107 8,291 Percent 1.1% 1.1% 1.7%
Page 10 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Demographics
Figure 2. Distribution Trend of Sedgwick County Population, by Age and Gender 199014, 20009 and 201010
1990 2000 2010
85 + years 85 + years 80-84 years 80-84 years 75-79 years 75-79 years 70-74 years 70-74 years 65-69 years 65-69 years 60-64 years 60-64 years 55-59 years 55-59 years 50-54 years 50-54 years 45-49 years 45-49 years 40-44 years 40-44 years 35-39 years 35-39 years 30-34 years 30-34 years 25-29 years 25-29 years 20-24 years 20-24 years 15-19 years 15-19 years 10-14 years 10-14 years 5-9 years 5-9 years Under 5 Under 5 years years 20,000-20,000 -10,00010,000 0 10,00010,000 20,00020,000 20,000-20,000 -10,00010,000 0 10,00010,000 20,00020,000 20,000 10,000 0 10,000 20,000 Sedgwick County Residents Sedgwick County Residents Sedgwick County Residents
Male Female
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan - Page 11 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Demographics
Between 2000 and 2010, the number of Sedgwick County residents 55 years of age and older increased by 19,041 individuals. By 2010, 22.6 percent of Sedgwick County residents were at least 55 years old, and 11.4 percent of the residents were at least 65 years old.
Table 13. Sedgwick County Senior Population 199014, 20009 and 201010 Age Categories 1990 2000 2010 55 years and older Count 79,041 93,368 112,409 Percent 19.6% 20.3% 22.6% 65 years and older PercentCount 45,986 50,064 56,969 Count 11.4% 10.9% 11.4%
Composition of Population by Race
Estimates made by the U.S. Census Bureau of the numbers of persons in the major race categories can assist in understanding the changing composition of the local populations. Table 14 provides a comparison of the data for 1990-2000 and for 2000-2010. Note that the "Other" category is not provided in this information. Because of this and because these estimates are continually being revised by the Census Bureau, the data should not be regarded as the precise count. Nevertheless, the general picture the estimates depict is a reasonable portrayal of the changing composition of the populations. The estimates of the difference in percentages in total population between 1990 and 2000 and between 2000 and 2010 for each county provide useful numbers against which to measure the magnitude of change for the racial populations within each county.
Table 14. County Population Estimates and Percentage Difference by Race (199014, 20009 and 201010) Racial Background Butler Cowley Harper Harvey Kingman Reno Sedgwick Sumner White 1990 49,311 34,290 7,036 29,300 8,213 58,612 345,173 24,869 2000 56,471 32,708 6,355 29,924 8,452 59,320 359,489 24,551 % Diff. 1990-2000 14.5% -4.6% -9.7% 2.1% 2.9% 1.2% 4.1% -1.3%
2010 61,576 31,317 5,711 31,693 7,611 58,469 380,482 22,705 % Diff. 2000-2010 9.0% -4.3% -10.1% 5.9% -10.0% -1.4% 5.8% -7.5%
Black 1990 367 1,060 13 551 9 1,712 36,061 140 2000 819 979 15 522 18 1,865 41,367 183 % Diff. 1990-2000 123.2% -7.6% 15.4% -5.3% 100.0% 8.9% 14.7% 30.7%
2010 1,096 1,004 22 564 14 1,930 46,167 230 % Diff. 2000-2010 33.8% 2.6% 46.7% 8.0% -22.2% 3.5% 11.6% 25.7%
Native 1990 459 714 46 145 24 359 4,556 288 American 2000 541 713 54 171 50 379 5,041 273 % Diff. 1990-2000 17.9% -0.1% 17.4% 17.9% 108.3% 5.6% 10.6% -5.2%
2010 636 724 69 251 47 438 5,739 282 % Diff. 2000-2010 17.6% 1.5% 27.8% 46.8% -6.0% 15.6% 13.8% 3.3%
Asian 1990 169 330 5 212 10 210 8,728 72 2000 239 557 9 171 21 291 15,137 57 % Diff. 1990-2000 41.4% 68.8% 80.0% -19.3% 110.0% 38.6% 73.4% -20.8%
2010 467 586 5 256 36 309 20,385 56 % Diff. 2000-2010 95.4% 5.2% -44.4% 49.7% 71.4% 6.2% 34.7% -1.8%
Total 1990 50,580 36,915 7,124 31,028 8,292 62,389 403,662 25,841 2000 59,482 36,291 6,536 32,869 8,673 64,790 452,869 25,946 % Diff. 1990-2000 17.6% -1.7% -8.3% 5.9% 4.6% 3.8% 12.2% 0.4%
2010 65,880 36,311 6,034 34,684 7,858 64,511 498,365 24,132 % Diff. 2000-2010 10.8% 0.1% -7.7% 5.5% -9.4% -0.4% 10.0% -7.0%
Page 12 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Demographics
Between 1990 and 2000, the African American population of Butler County more than doubled, from 367 in 1990 to 819 in 2000. More than three-fourths of the increase can be explained by the population of the correctional facilities in Butler County. The U.S. Census websites notes that for the Decennial Census, people in prisons and other correctional institutions, such as federal detention centers and local jails, are counted at the institution as a component of the group quarters institutionalized population. In the 2000 Census, Butler County had a correctional facility population of 1,059. The 396 black inmates comprised 37.4 percent of the inmate population.
In the 1990 Census, Butler County had a correctional facility population of 120. If the ratio of black inmates was the same as in 2000 (37.4 percent), there would have been approximately 45 black inmates included in the 1990 Census. The difference between the 1990 and 2000 correctional facility population accounts for 351 (or 396 - 45) of the 452 increase in African Americans in Butler County between the 1990 and 2000 Census years. In the 2010 Census, Butler County had a correctional facility population of 1,379, an increase of 320 over the 2000 Census.
Composition of Population by Hispanic Origin
The federal government treats Hispanic origin and race as separate and distinct concepts. In surveys and censuses, separate questions are asked on Hispanic origin and race. The question on Hispanic origin asks respondents if they are Spanish, Hispanic or Latino. Starting with Census 2000, the question on race asked respondents to report the race or races they consider themselves to be. Hispanics may be of any race.17
Table 15 provides a comparison of the data for 1990-2000 and for 2000-2010. The estimates of the difference in percentages in total population between ten-year increments for each county provide useful numbers against which to measure the magnitude of the difference in percentages for the populations of Hispanic origin within each county. Again, because these estimates are continually being revised by the Census Bureau, the data should not be regarded as the precise count. Nevertheless, the general picture the estimates depict is a reasonable portrayal of the changing composition of the populations.
Table 15. County Population Estimates and Percentage Difference by Hispanic Origin (199014 - 20009 and 2000 – 201010) Hispanic Origin* Butler Cowley Harper Harvey Kingman Reno Sedgwick Sumner 1990 742 1,097 105 1,616 77 2,478 17,435 888 2000 1,336 1,304 70 2,620 125 3,661 36,397 929 % Diff. 1990-2000 80.1% 18.9% -33.3% 62.1% 62.3% 47.7% 108.8% 4.6%
2010 2,602 3,292 298 3,747 199 5,209 64,363 1,097 % Diff. 2000-2010 94.8% 152.5% 325.7% 43.0% 59.2% 42.3% 76.8% 18.1%
*Hispanic origin is not considered a race category. Persons identifying themselves as Hispanic may be of any race.
Between 2000 and 2010, every county in the eight-county United Way of the Plains service area experienced a net gain in population of Hispanic origin. The population of Hispanic origin in Harper County increased more than 300 percent, from 70 to 298. Other counties experienced increases in the percentage of population of Hispanic origin ranging from an 18.1 percent increase in Sumner County to a 152.5 percent increase in Cowley County.
The U.S. Census estimated four counties in Kansas had reached "minority-majority" status, where the majority was a group "not single-race, non-Hispanic white" 22 and the non-Hispanic white populations were in the minority. Between 2007 and 2008, Finney County 23 joined Seward, Ford and Wyandotte counties in their minority-majority status. In addition to Census data, the estimates were based on births, deaths and migration data from the Internal Revenue Service and Medicare.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 13 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Demographics
Wichita Minority Residence Patterns
According to the U.S. Census, the population of the city of Wichita in 2000 was 344,284 individuals,9 of whom 258,900 (75.2 percent) were nonminority (i.e., White). By the next Decennial Census (2010), the population of the city of Wichita grew to 382,368 individuals,10 of whom 275,080 (71.9 percent) were nonminority. This growth represented a 6.2 percent increase in the nonminority population at the same time the overall population increased by 11.1 percent.
Traditionally members of the minority population in Wichita resided in the central and northeast portions of the city. According to 2010 U.S. Census data, 12 of 26 Wichita postal Zone Improvement Plan (ZIP) codes were comprised of at least 25 percent minority populations.
Table 16. Percent of Minority Population (Wichita, 2010) Residence % Minority Residence % Minority ZIP Code Population 10 ZIP Code Population 10 67214 69.2% 67218 33.5% 67208 42.7% 67211 32.2% 67220 41.6% 67216 30.9% 67207 40.6% 67204 27.5% 67219 39.3% 67202 26.6% 67210 37.0% 67203 25.1%
In general, these ZIP codes are located in the vicinity of the north/south corridor through Wichita (I-135), in the northeast portion of the city, in the core of the city, and in the southwest portion of the city including the area near McConnell Air Force Base (67210).
Several of the more affluent ZIP codes around the edges of the city have minority populations of 10 percent or less. In 2010, 98.3 percent of the 67227 population, 95.1 percent of the 67223 population, and 92.7 percent of the 67235 population was white.
Summary
United Way of the Plains is located in Wichita, the largest city in Kansas. Programs supported by United Way of the Plains chiefly serve those who live and work in Sedgwick County, primarily serving residents of Sedgwick County and the seven surrounding counties including Butler, Cowley, Harper, Harvey, Kingman, Reno and Sumner counties.
Population density ranges from a low of 7.5 persons per square mile in Harper County to a high of 499.6 persons per square mile in Sedgwick County. In all eight counties, at least four-fifths of the land was still in agricultural use in 2007.
According to population estimates by the U.S. Bureau of the Census, during the past decade Sedgwick County increased from a population of 452,869 in 2000 to 498,365 in 2010, an increase of 45,496 individuals or 10.0 percent. At the same time, the population of Kansas increased by 164,700 individuals, a 6.1 percent increase.
Population projections by the Kansas Division of the Budget for the year 2021 predict that five counties will lose population, while Butler, Harvey and Sedgwick counties are expected to gain population.
The population in the eight-county area continues to become more racially and ethnically diverse. In the eight-county area during the ten-year period from 2000 to 2010, all counties experienced an increase in population of Hispanic origin. Increases in the percentage of population of Hispanic origin ranged from 18.1 percent in Sumner County to 325.7 percent in Harper County.
Page 14 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
National Economy
Regarding the national economy, proposed changes in health care coverage due to the Affordable Care Act and the ensuing uncertainty occupied much of the nation’s attention.
Changes in Health Care Coverage (Affordable Care Act/Obamacare)
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (PPACA), commonly called either the Affordable Care Act or Obamacare is a United States federal statute signed into law by President Barack Obama on March 23, 2010.1 On June 28, 2012, in the case of National Federation of Independent Business versus Sebelius, the United States Supreme Court upheld the constitutionality of most of the Affordable Care Act.
The Affordable Care Act is aimed at increasing the affordability and rate of health insurance coverage for Americans and reducing the overall costs of health care for individuals and for the government. It provides a number of mechanisms including mandates, subsidies and tax credits to employers and individuals to increase the coverage rate and health insurance affordability. It requires insurance companies to cover all applicants within new minimum standards and to offer the same rates, regardless of pre-existing conditions.
The purpose of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act is to ensure that all Americans have access to quality, affordable health care and to create the transformation within the health care system necessary to contain costs. The Congressional Budget Office has determined that the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act will provide coverage to more than 94 percent of Americans.1
Proponents say that the Affordable Care Act has been fully funded, will stay under the $900 billion limit established by President Obama, will bend the health care cost curve and will reduce the deficit over the next ten years and beyond.1 They express satisfaction that everyone will have access to health care and affordable coverage.
Opponents say that Obamacare adds nearly 18 million Americans to Medicaid rolls without a corresponding increase in medical providers, creating bottlenecks for appointments and coverage and driving public insurance beneficiaries to emergency rooms for even routine health care.2 They express concern that the gap between insurance “haves” and “have nots” will grow wider and that those with low or no income will remain without health care coverage, in spite of available subsidies and tax credits.
The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act contains nine titles, each addressing an essential component of reform: 1 Quality, affordable health care for all Americans The role of public programs Improving the quality and efficiency of health care Prevention of chronic disease and improving public health Health care workforce Transparency and program integrity Improving access to innovative medical therapies Community living assistance services and supports Revenue provisions
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 15 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
In order to make health care coverage more affordable,1 new, refundable tax credits will be available for Americans with incomes between 100 and 400 percent of the federal poverty line (FPL) (about $88,000 for a family of four).
Out of pocket maximums ($5,950 for individuals and $11,900 for families) 1 are reduced to one third for those with income between 100-200 percent FPL, one half for those with incomes between 200-300 percent FPL, and two thirds for those with income between 300-400 percent FPL.
Credits are available for eligible citizens and legally-residing immigrant aliens.1 A new credit will assist small businesses with fewer than 25 workers for up to 50 percent of the total premium cost.
The Affordable Care Act levies a new excise tax of 40 percent on insurance companies and plan administrators for any health coverage plan with an annual premium that is above the threshold of $8,500 for single coverage and $23,000 for family coverage.1 The tax applies to self-insured plans and plans sold in the group market, and not to plans sold in the individual market (except for coverage eligible for the deduction for self-employed individuals). The tax applies to the amount of the premium in excess of the threshold.
Key parts of the health care law were scheduled to take effect in 2014,3 at which time individuals, families and small businesses would access health insurance through an “Exchange” or “Marketplace.” Beginning Oct. 1, 2013, individuals in every state will be able to shop for health insurance and compare plans through the Marketplace.
A signature provision of the federal health care overhaul is the Affordable Care Act’s “employer mandate”103 which would have required firms with more than 50 full-time employees to provide affordable health insurance or face a penalty of $2,000 per employee in 2014, when the law was set to be fully implemented. However, on July 2, 2013, the Obama administration announced that it would delay enforcement of the “employer mandate” until 2015.
According to the Kaiser Family Foundation,103 96 percent of United States businesses have fewer than 50 employees and are already exempt from the mandate. An estimated 94 percent of firms with 50 to 199 employees already provide health care coverage, as do 98 percent of firms with 200 or more workers.
However, under the law, employees who work 30 or more hours per week are considered “full time,” and one-third of nearly 900 employers surveyed in June 2013 by the health care consulting firm Mercer103 don’t currently offer coverage to those employees. These businesses and those with workforces hovering near the 50-employee threshold faced a host of important financial decisions about their health plan enrollment that had to be made by October 2013.
Proponents of the Affordable Care Act characterized the delayed enforcement of the employer mandate as allowing employers to have more time to comply with the new rules, which require extensive reporting about the specifics of employees’ coverage in order to assess the penalties. Randy Johnson,103 senior vice president of labor, immigration and employee benefits at the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, noted, “The administration has finally recognized the obvious – employers need more time and clarification of the rules of the road before implementing the employer mandate.”
Opponents of the Affordable Care Act were less charitable regarding reasons for the employer mandate’s delayed enforcement. Said House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio,103 “This is a clear acknowledgment that the law is unworkable, and it underscores the need to repeal the law and replace it with effective patient-centered reforms.”
Either way, the delayed implementation of the employer mandate moves the expected backlash from the business community well past the 2014 congressional midterm elections.
The Affordable Care Act increased the funding available to community health centers nationwide.3 In Kansas, 16 health centers operate 48 sites, providing preventive and primary health care services to
Page 16 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
147,489 people. Health Center grantees in Kansas have received $40,871,865 under the Affordable Care Act to support ongoing health center operations and to establish new health center sites, expand services, and/or support major capital improvement projects.
As a result of investments through the Affordable Care Act and the Recovery Act,3 the numbers of clinicians in the National Health Service Corps are at all-time highs with nearly 10,000 Corps clinicians providing care to more than 10.4 million people who live in rural, urban, and frontier communities. The National Health Service Corps repays educational loans and provides scholarships to primary care physicians, dentists, nurse practitioners, physician assistants, behavioral health providers, and other primary care providers who practice in areas of the country that have too few health care professionals to serve the people who live there. As of September 30, 2012, there were 138 Corps clinicians providing primary care services in Kansas compared to 44 in 2008.
For more than 160 years, the American Medical Association has served as the self-appointed chief lobbying group for doctors. But the AMA’s status has been under threat over the last several years. In fact, according to a recent survey by physician recruitment firm Jackson & Coker,2 the AMA now only counts about 17 percent of doctors as members. Of those who have terminated their membership, 47 percent cited the organization’s continued backing of the health care law as the primary reason.
Just 13 percent of doctors agree with their trade association’s (i.e., AMA’s) support of the health reform law, and nine of ten physicians think ObamaCare will have a negative impact on their profession.2
By 2019, Medicaid will cover at least an additional 18 million Americans.2 All these new beneficiaries may have nominal insurance coverage, but the expectation is that they’ll struggle to secure a doctor’s appointment. As the number of doctors who will treat them dwindles, the fear is that beneficiaries of public insurance may have to resort to costly alternatives like expensive and already over-worked emergency rooms, even if they only need routine care.
As key parts of the Affordable Care Act take effect in 2014, the ultimate long-term impact of the adoption and implementation of the Affordable Care Act remains to be seen.
Sequester
The public experienced increased awareness of a new term in 2012: “the sequester.”
The term “Bush Tax Cuts” refers to a series of temporary income tax relief measures enacted by former President George W. Bush in 2001 and 2003.100 The tax cuts lowered federal income tax rates for everyone, decreased the marriage penalty, lowered capital gains taxes, lowered the tax rate on dividend income, increased the child tax credit from $500 to $1,000 per child, eliminated the phase-out on personal exemptions for higher-income taxpayers, eliminated the phase-out on itemized deductions and eliminated the estate tax.100
Because these tax cuts were in place for so many years, they began to feel permanent rather than temporary. Originally the tax cuts were due to expire in 2010, but were extended an additional two years. Taxpayers and politicians raised a major outcry as their expiration date approached. Those who wanted to let the tax cuts expire as scheduled argued that the government needed the extra tax revenue in the face of massive budget deficits. Those who wanted to extend the tax cuts or make them permanent argued that because taxes reduce economic growth and stifle entrepreneurship and incentives to work, effectively increasing taxes during a recession was a bad idea.100
The sequester -- originally passed as part of the Budget Control Act of 2011, better known as the debt ceiling compromise -- is a group of cuts to federal spending which took effect March 1, 2013. It was intended to serve as incentive for the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction (or “Supercommittee”) to come to a deal to cut $1.5 trillion over 10 years. If the committee had done so, and Congress had passed it by December 23, 2011, then the sequester would have been averted.101
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 17 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
The Budget Control Act of 2011 originally stipulated that the sequester cuts would take effect January 1, 2013. Together with the expiration of the Bush tax cuts and the payroll tax cut, this would have amounted to a giant fiscal contraction, predicted to possibly throw the United States into another recession. The combination of policies came to be known as “the fiscal cliff.” A deal was reached to avert the cliff, in which the effective date for the sequester was delayed to March 1, 2013.101
The cuts necessitated by the sequester were evenly split between domestic and defense programs, with half affecting defense discretionary spending (weapons purchases, base operations, construction work, etc.) and the rest affecting both mandatory (which generally means regular payouts like Social Security or Medicaid) and discretionary domestic spending. Only a few mandatory programs like the unemployment trust fund and, most notably, Medicare (more specifically its provider payments) were affected. The bulk of cuts were borne by discretionary spending for either defense or domestic functions.101
Most mandatory programs, like Medicaid and Social Security, and in particular low-income programs like Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF or welfare) and the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP or food stamps) were exempt from the sequester. However some low-income programs were subject to cuts, such as aid for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) and the Low Income Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP).101
The 2013 sequester included a total of $85.4 billion in cuts including:101 . $42.7 billion in defense cuts (a 7.9 percent cut). . $28.7 billion in domestic discretionary cuts (a 5.3 percent cut). . $9.9 billion in Medicare cuts (a 2.0 percent cut). . $4 billion in other mandatory cuts (a 5.8 percent cut to nondefense programs, and a 7.8 percent cut to mandatory defense programs).
Additional cuts are slated to occur in 2014 and later. From 2014 to 2021, the sequester will cut $87 to $92 billion from the discretionary budget every year, by a total of $109 billion a year over that same time period. Currently, no programs are actually being eliminated. The desired effect is to reduce the scale and scope of existing programs rather than to zero out any of them.
Military salaries are exempt from the sequester; however, benefits like tuition assistance and the TRICARE program (which provides health care to military personnel and their families, among others) are not.
The Congressional Research Service has written that a sequester may not “reduce or have the effect of reducing the rate of pay an employee is entitled to” under their federal pay scale. However, furloughs ordered as a result of the sequester amount to unpaid time off, basically resulting in a pay cut.
Looking down the road at what might take the place of the sequester:
Democrats in the House of Representatives proposed replacing the $85 billion in 2013 sequester cuts with a mix of tax increases - including a minimum tax on income above $1 million and repeal of tax subsidies for oil companies - and spending cuts, including a reduction in farm subsidy payments to farmers and an increase in flood insurance premiums. Most of these policies would be spread over a decade rather than scheduled to fall mainly in 2013. Democrats in the Senate introduced the American Family Economic Protection Act, which would replace the 2013 sequester with $110 billion in spending cuts and tax increases, spread out over the course of a decade. Like the House plan, these policies include a minimum tax on income over $1 million, the closure of tax loopholes for oil companies and cuts to farm subsidies. Additionally, the Senate bill cuts military spending in excess of the sequester’s cuts.
Page 18 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
President Obama has suggested that, in lieu of a bigger deficit reduction deal, he wants to see the 2013 sequester replaced with a package of tax increases (including loophole closures and increases on the wealthy) and spending cuts. What Republicans want in a temporary replacement includes no tax increases, no defense cuts and considerable domestic spending reductions, perhaps in proportion to the discretionary savings achieved in any proposed legislation.
Predicted effects of the sequester expected in Kansas included but were not limited to:102
Education: Kansas will lose approximately $5.5 million in funding for primary and secondary education, putting around 80 teacher and aide jobs at risk. Funding will be available to serve approximately 7,000 fewer students, and approximately 40 fewer schools will receive funding. In addition, Kansas will lose approximately $5.3 million in funds for about 60 teachers, aides, and staff who help children with disabilities. Military Readiness: In Kansas approximately 8,000 civilian Department of Defense employees will be furloughed, reducing gross pay by around $36.7 million in total. The army base operation funding will be cut by about $78 million in Kansas, and funding for Air Force operations in Kansas will be cut by about $1 million. Law Enforcement and Public Safety: Kansas will lose about $149,000 in Justice Assistance Grants that support law enforcement, prosecution and courts, crime prevention and education, corrections and community corrections, drug treatment and enforcement, and crime victim and witness initiatives. Vaccines for Children: Due to reduced funding for vaccinations of about $85,000, in Kansas funding will be available for approximately 1,240 fewer children to receive vaccines for diseases such as measles, mumps, rubella, tetanus, whooping cough, influenza, and Hepatitis B.
State Economy
After President Obama’s reelection in 2012, Republicans are looking to reenergize their party and their voting base in preparation for the presidential elections in 2016. At a time when the Republican party is formatting a policy to adapt to and to appeal to a broader social and demographic changes in the county, the Kansas state legislature is arguably the most conservative in the United States. In fact, some party conservatives make the point that Republicans lost in 2012 because the party wasn't conservative enough.4
All 125 House seats in the Kansas legislature were up for re-election in 2010. 5 The roster for the 2013- 2014 legislative session for the Kansas House of Representatives indicated that of the 125 representatives, 33 were Democrat and 92 were Republican. The similar roster for the Kansas Senate indicated that of the 40 Senators, 8 were Democrat and 32 were Republican.6
Sam Brownback is the 46th governor of the state of Kansas.7 When Bob Dole resigned his seat in the U.S. Senate in 1996 to campaign for the presidency, Sheila Frahm was appointed to fill it. Brownback defeated her in the 1996 Republican primary and went on to win the general election. In 1998, Brownback was elected to a full six-year term and won reelection in the 2004 Senate election.
According to the Governor’s website,7 Brownback is “focused on getting the state’s economy growing again and creating jobs through improved regulations, controlled spending, and lower taxes,” noting: “When he took office in 2011, Kansas was in its third straight year of declining revenues, had more than 110,000 Kansans out of work, and faced a $500 million budget shortfall. He worked with the Kansas Legislature to turn that deficit into a nearly $500 million ending balance in one year.”
The Governor’s website notes:7 “Since taking office, his administration has held down state spending, eliminated state agencies and outdated programs, cut taxes on all working Kansans and small business
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 19 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
owners, and enacted laws that protect the sanctity of life. These efforts have resulted in balanced budgets, targeted incentive programs and historic tax reform, which will save Kansans and small businesses $1.1 billion and create nearly 23,000 new jobs. The state’s economy is growing and more Kansans are working.” Governor Brownback believes “the only lasting solution to Kansas’ fiscal crisis is sustained economic growth and new job creation. Getting more Kansans working again and businesses growing will lead to increased revenues, less reliance on government, and funding for core state programs and services.”
Kansas Budget Process8
According to Kansas state statute KSA 75-3721, in Kansas, the Governor must present spending recommendations to the Legislature. The Governor’s Budget Report reflects expenditures for both the current and upcoming fiscal years and identifies the sources of financing for them. The Legislature uses The Governor’s Budget Report as a guide as it appropriates the money necessary for state agencies to operate. Only the Legislature can authorize expenditures by the State of Kansas. The Governor recommends spending levels, while the Legislature chooses whether to accept or modify those recommendations. The Governor may veto legislative appropriations, although the Legislature may override any veto by a two-thirds majority vote.
Producing the budget for the state of Kansas is a continuous process; however, it does have certain discrete phases. In the Executive Branch, the budget process begins as soon as the legislative session ends. At that time, the budget staff prepares The Comparison Report. This report compares the budget recommended by the Governor for the current and budget fiscal years to the budget approved by the Legislature.
In June, the Division of the Budget distributes budget instructions to state agencies, which submit a capital budget on July 1, including their five-year plan.
Agency strategic plans are completed concurrent with preparation of financial segments of the agency budget and submitted in September. Agency strategic plans establish a clear definition of mission and a direction for the future; develop agency-wide work plans and agency-specific objectives as well as strategies for fulfilling the agency mission; and allocate resources according to priority and ensure accountability for the use of those resources.
Agencies are requested to prepare and submit one complete operating budget on September 15. Budgets submitted by state agencies show program expenditures with appropriate funding sources for each program within the agency. These data are shown for the actual fiscal year, the current year, and the budget year.
Beginning September 15, analysts in the Division of the Budget review agency budget requests. Based on those analyses, the Division of the Budget recommendations are provided to each state agency by November 10. The agencies then have ten days to determine whether to appeal those recommendations to the Secretary of Administration.
Once the appeal process has been completed, the Division of the Budget staff prepares its presentations for the Governor. The Governor uses this information to make budget determinations for all Executive Branch agencies. The Division of the Budget then aggregates final recommendations and prepares The Governor’s Budget Report.
Between September 15 and commencement of the legislative session in January, the Legislative Research Department’s fiscal staff also analyzes agency budgets. Following receipt of the Governor’s recommendations, legislative fiscal analysts update their analysis for each agency to reflect the recommendations of the Governor.
The Governor’s budget recommendations are drafted into appropriation language by the Office of the Revisor of Statutes. Appropriations are usually divided into three parts: supplemental appropriations,
Page 20 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
capital improvement appropriations, and budget year expenditure authority for all agencies except biennial agencies, whose expenditure authorizations cover a two-year period. The appropriations are simultaneously considered by the Ways and Means Committee of the Senate and the Appropriations Committee of the House. The appropriations are then presented to either the House or Senate, which may amend or reject them.
Upon completion of consideration of the appropriations by both chambers, the bills typically go to a conference committee so that differences between the House and Senate versions can be reconciled. Each chamber then votes to accept or reject this appropriation bill. If either chamber rejects the conference committee report on the appropriation bill, it is returned to the conference committee for further review and for possible modification.
Traditionally an Omnibus Appropriation Bill is the last appropriation bill of the session. It contains any appropriation necessary to carry out the intent of the Legislature that has not yet been included in another appropriation bill. Since the advent of the statutory requirement for an Omnibus Reconciliation Spending Limit Bill to be passed at the end of the session, the Omnibus Appropriation Bill has served as the reconciliation bill.
As previously stated, the Governor may veto legislative appropriations, although the Legislature may override any veto by a two-thirds majority vote.
Kansas Budget for Fiscal Years 2014 and 2015
Governor Brownback signed House Bill 2213,9 the 2013 Kansas Public Employees Retirement System (KPERS) Omnibus bill into law June 7, 2013, which modified KPERS, the Retirement System for Judges, and the Kansas Police and Fireman’s Retirement System and Senate Bill 246, which reconciled amendment to statutes that have been amended more than once during the 2013 Legislative Session and previous sessions.
On June 15, 2013,10 Governor Brownback signed Senate Bill 171 into law, approving the state’s two-year budget for Fiscal Years 2014 and 2015; however, he returned the SB 171 with line item vetoes including the FY15 budget for the Department of Corrections, because it was considered “inadequate.” The Governor noted that he looked forward to “with the 2014 Legislature in finding the Department sufficient resources to ensure public safety is not imperiled.”
The elimination of vacant positions in the Department of Administration was vetoed because of the expected impact on increased overtime at agencies.10 Also, the enrollment management proviso for the University of Kansas Medical Center (UKMC) was vetoed because of unintended consequences on the UKMC campuses in Salina and Wichita.
Approval of a two-year budget was seen as a way of providing state agencies and school districts a greater level of funding certainty, allowing them to extend their planning horizons and strengthen their focus on improving services.10
Impacts of Legislative Actions
Recent budget actions can be expected to have long-ranging impacts on many issues for Kansans, with the long-term effects still to be determined. Although not an exhaustive list, a few key issues to monitor include K-12 education, higher education, funding for the arts, privatized Medicaid (KanCare), proposed Medicaid expansion, Kansas income tax and Kansas sales tax.
K-12 Education: According to a report from the State of Kansas Department of Education, Kansas legislators didn't authorize enough spending for schools for FY 2014 and FY 2015. The report says the budgets are $650 million short of what the law requires.11
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 21 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
State statutes require base state aid per pupil, the benchmark for education funding, to be $4,492 per student in 2015.11 All funding levels are subject to legislative appropriation and the actual dollar amount is $3,852, an increase of $14 over the 2013 and 2014 amounts. To fund the law would require more than $430 million in additional state spending. Legislators also are required to reimburse schools for 92 percent of the excess cost of providing special education services, a level that would require an additional $72 million in 2015.
The matter is being discussed in court, and a district court has ordered legislators to make up the differences in spending. In January 2013, a three-judge panel met with attorneys representing parents and school districts seeking increased education funding. Attorneys for the state argued that legislators did their best to protect education funding during the recent recession and that cuts were mitigated by using federal funds and allowing school districts to tap reserve accounts.11
Higher Education: State lawmakers decided to trim about $33 million a year in FY 2014 and FY 2015, impacting the 2013-2014 and 2014-2015 academic years. As a result, the Kansas Regents approved what has been called “a sweeping package of tuition increases” for the state’s public universities. They noted that in the field of higher education, Kansas does not operate in a vacuum and that Kansas’ main competitors – Missouri, Oklahoma, Colorado, Iowa and Nebraska – all increased state support for their university systems for FY 2014.12
Table 17 presents the approved increases in tuition and fees, by percentage and by cost for one semester, for a resident undergraduate taking 15 credit hours.
Table 17. Increase in State Institution Tuition and Fees12 State Institution Percent Cost* Wichita State University 8.1% $3,463 Kansas University 4.4%* $4,639 Kansas State University 6.7% $4,293 Emporia State University 6.5% $2,807 Fort Hays State University 3.0% $2,179 Pittsburg State University 7.5% $2,953 *Cost for one semester, resident undergraduate, 15 credit hours; does not include students who locked in rates as freshmen
Wichita State University (WSU) President John Bardo noted that it’s always painful to raise tuition but that universities are facing much higher costs than they did years ago because of the need to acquire and constantly update technology for teaching and research. Wichita State’s tuition increase was the biggest percentage increase among the universities, much of which was because the tuition at WSU started out lower than the state’s other two research-oriented universities, the University of Kansas and Kansas State University. He noted that while a lower tuition increase would make the university more accessible to students, “Access without quality is no bargain.”12
Funding for The Arts: In 2012, Kansas became the first state in the nation to stop funding the arts when Governor Brownback vetoed $700,000 for the Kansas Arts Commission, contending that arts programs should rely more on private dollars, leaving tax dollars to finance core government functions.13 The move cost the state about $1.2 million in grants, including $800,000 from the NEA, and $400,000 from the Mid- America Arts Alliance, as Kansas no longer met their criteria for partnership (e.g., a state arts plan, an experienced staff and a budget).
Page 22 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
The budget for FY 2013 included funding for a new Creative Arts Industries Commission,13 combining the un-funded Kansas Arts Commission and the Kansas Film Commission within the Department of Commerce. Even so, Kansas was left with a series of steps to complete in order to become eligible again for NEA and Mid-America Arts Alliance funding by 2014
Of the process of cutting funding to the arts and then reinstating it, Wayne Bryan, producing artistic director for Music Theatre of Wichita, noted that “Kansas seems always to have to fight a perception by others that we are not at the forefront of cultural awareness,” adding “This points us back in the right direction.”13
Privatized Medicaid (KanCare): By 2012 in Kansas, the cost of Medicaid public health care benefits rose at an annual rate of 7.4 percent during the preceding decade, to about $2.8 billion.14 The state has paid approximately $1.1 billion of that, with the federal government paying the rest.14 Governor Brownback’s administration estimated the program would save the state more than $1 billion in the first five years of operation.14
Medicaid benefits which had been coordinated through the state were privatized in Kansas on January 1, 2013 under the newly-formed KanCare program. The three companies selected by the state to manage KanCare were Amerigroup Kansas Inc., Sunflower State Health Plan Inc., and UnitedHealthcare Community Plan of Kansas.14 This change affected approximately 380,000 low-income and disabled Kansans and was accomplished with the goal of controlling costs and improving quality.14
Medicaid Expansion: In 2013, Governor Brownback’s administration considered participating in the Medicaid expansion that was part of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act (ACA), signed into law in 2010.14 The federal government agreed to pay 100 percent of the cost of the expansion through 2016 and 90 percent of the costs thereafter.15
There are an estimated 365,000 uninsured people in the state.14 The proposed expansion would make Medicaid benefits available to those making 138 percent of the federal poverty level: less than $31,809 a year for a family of four.15 Expanding Medicaid in the state in line with the ACA would raise the eligibility threshold in Kansas to $30,660 in household income for a family of four.14
Expanding Medicaid in Kansas would require revenue commitment, and the dollar amount cited varies significantly from study to study. For example, in a December 2012 study, the Kansas Health Institute projected that the cost to the state would equal about $170.9 million in the first six years. The Kansas Policy Institute put the added cost at $2.16 billion for the same time period. According to a report commissioned by the Kansas Department of Health and Environment, expanding Medicaid in Kansas could cost the state $1.1 billion in the first 10 years.15
A number of factors help determine the cost variation including how many newly-eligible individuals choose to enroll and how much each costs in terms of health care bills. In addition, the federal government will not reimburse states for any Medicaid recipients who are currently eligible and who sign up due to heightened publicity and awareness of the program, only for those Medicaid recipients who would be newly covered.15
However, at the end of the 2013 legislative session, no move had been made toward expanding Medicaid coverage, to bring the state in line with the Affordable Care Act. In fact, lawmakers added language to the budget that bars the state from expanding Medicaid unless authorized by the Legislature.16
Kansas Income Tax: In 2012, the tax package law collapsed Kansas’ three-bracket income tax system into two brackets and lowered income tax rates. It also boosted the standard deduction for married couples and single parents and exempted the owners of partnerships, sole proprietorships and selected other businesses from income taxes.17
Conservative Republicans pushed the initial cuts through in 2012 while acknowledging that the plan was an aggressive one and would need refinement in 2013. The tax package passed during the 2013 session
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 23 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
was viewed as completing what Governor Brownback sought to do when the first phase of tax cuts were enacted (2012).17 Brownback has said he hopes eventually to eliminate the state income tax entirely.17
Phase two included decreasing income tax deductions over time as overall rates drop, as well as giving a less generous standard deduction for married couples and single parents.17 The 2013 Legislature set income tax rates to be gradually lowered over the following five years. The state also will gradually reduce itemized deductions, except for charitable contributions.16
Kansas Sales Tax: The Kansas state sales tax was raised to 6.3 percent in 2010, as a temporary move to cover budget shortfalls due to the recession.18 The rate was scheduled to be rolled back in July 2013 to 5.7 percent, but the 2013 Legislature voted instead to set the rate at 6.15 percent, with the goal – along with what’s considered a relatively high sales tax18-- of raising an estimated $777 million over a five-year period.17
Critics of the bill saw it more as a tax shift than a tax cut. To them, the bill meant that the state would look less to income taxes to pay for government services as it continued a reliance on sales taxes. Sales tax critics argued that income taxes offered a more progressive way to collect revenue from those who can most afford to pay. Sales taxes, they said, tended to hit the poor hardest.18
Additional Legislative Issues: 16
The state enacted a new law requiring drug tests for welfare recipients and anyone applying for unemployment benefits. Anyone failing the test will be required to complete a drug treatment and job skills program to qualify for unemployment or welfare benefits. Legislators passed a law barring public employee unions from deducting political donations from paychecks. The 2013 legislature modified the state’s concealed weapons law to allow school districts and state universities to designate licensed employees to carry concealed guns. In addition, lawmakers expanded the state’s concealed weapons law to allow concealed firearms into state and municipal buildings unless they set up security checkpoints. The state enacted a new law requiring drug tests for welfare recipients and anyone applying for unemployment benefits. Anyone failing the test will be required to complete a drug treatment and job skills program to qualify for unemployment or welfare benefits.
Local Economy
Similar to the situations of the nation and state, local economies are in a state of change and uncertainty, whether at city, county or regional levels. This section will examine overall area employment as well as the impact of the aviation industry and of unions. Recently, two highly visible items had impacts on the economy in the eight-county area served by United Way of the Plains, in terms of job creation/loss and infrastructure improvements: the opening of the Kansas Star Casino and the announcement that Boeing Defense, Space & Security would be closing its Wichita operations.
Kansas Star Casino
In August 2007,19 Sedgwick County voters defeated a proposal to establish a casino in Sedgwick County. Churches and several grassroots organizations opposed the gambling question. In addition, the board of the Wichita Metro Chamber of Commerce and several prominent local businessmen (including entrepreneur Jack DeBoer, Intrust Bank Chairman Charlie Chandler and former Cessna Aircraft Co. chairman Russ Meyer) endorsed a "no" vote. Both sides crafted professional campaigns including television advertisements and direct mail pieces, and money doesn't appear to have been a deciding factor.19
Page 24 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
In Sedgwick County, an election on a local casino was held August 7, 2007 and certified August 13, 2007. Out of a total of 103,445 votes, 56.1 percent (58,035) voted in opposition to a casino in Sedgwick Count while 43.9 percent (n=45,410) voted in the casino’s favor.20
At the same time, a vote on electronic gaming machines at the racetrack also fell short of acceptance, however, by a smaller margin, with 50.1 percent (51,868 of 103,492 voters) in opposition and 49.9 percent (n=51,624) in support.20
In 2007 the Kansas Legislature passed the Kansas Expanded Lottery Act (KELA), establishing four commercial casino licenses in four gaming zones. The act gave the Kansas Racing and Gaming Commission (KRGC) the responsibility for regulating the operation of expanded lottery gaming facilities in Kansas.21
A Review Board (i.e., the Kansas Lottery Gaming Facility Review Board)22 was organized under K.S.A. 74-8735 and placed within the Kansas Racing and Gaming Commission for staffing purposes. The Review Board is comprised of seven members, whose purpose it is to review the applications forwarded from the Lottery Commission to determine the “best possible contract” in each of the four gaming zones, and to forward that contract on to the Kansas Racing and Gaming Commission for approval.
Having been unsuccessful in Sedgwick County, developers began looking farther south and proposed a casino project in Sumner County. In 2008, three groups submitted applications for constructing a casino facility in the South Central zone: Sumner Gaming Joint Venture, Marvel Gaming and Penn Sumner. On August 22, 2008, the Review Board selected Sumner Gaming Joint Venture as the facility manager in the South Central zone. Sumner Gaming Joint Venture received four votes, with Marvel Gaming receiving two votes and Penn Sumner receiving one. Sumner Gaming Joint Venture had proposed to invest $535 million in a facility located in Mulvane. The facility would have had 2,000 slot machines and 300 table game positions. However, on November 17, 2008 Sumner Gaming Joint Venture withdrew its management application, citing economic factors.
In 2009, the Review Board received a contract from Chisholm Creek to develop a facility in the South Central zone. The Review Board was not able to find that the Chisholm Creek contract was the “best possible contract” and, as a result, sent the Chisholm Creek contract back to the Lottery Commission for renegotiation. The Review Board was dormant and would remain as such until the Lottery Commission agreed to a contract with the Chisholm Creek group or re-opened the bidding in the South Central zone, or until a new bidder emerged in the Southeast zone. In April 2010, the applicant withdrew from the process prior to approval by the Lottery Review Board.23
On October 19, 2010, the Review Board received two contracts in the South Central zone – one by Peninsula Gaming Partners and a separate contract from Global Gaming KS. (Peninsula Gaming proposed building and managing a casino near Mulvane, to be phased in over four years and to include an equestrian complex; Global Gaming planned a casino near Wellington, to be phased in over 12 years and to include an auto race track.24) In determining the best possible contract, the Review Board held three live meetings and three teleconferences, all of which were public meetings. The live meetings took place in Wellington and Topeka, from October 28 until December 15, 2009.21
On December 15, 2010 the Review Board voted 6-1 in favor of the Peninsula Gaming Partners contract as the “best possible contract” in the South Central zone. That contract was subsequently forwarded to the KRGC the next day, December 16, for the Commission to perform background investigations on the applicant and its key employees. The background was approved by the Commission on January 14, 2011.21 This cleared the way for the Kansas Racing and Gaming Commission to approve a 15-year contract between Peninsula Gaming Partners (i.e., Kansas Star Casino) and the state.24 The Sumner County’s Board of Commissioners had endorsed and actively supported Global Gaming KS’s proposal. The Sumner County counselor, Jack Potucek, reported the commissioners were disappointed with the vote, but would work with Peninsula to make the Kansas Star a success.24
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 25 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Originally slated to open in February 2012,21 the Kansas Star Casino in Mulvane began operations December 20, 2011 with limited hours in the arena casino while construction of the main casino facility continued. In January 2012, the arena casino began operating 24 hours a day, seven days a week. In October 2012, Kansas Star opened a connecting hotel with 150 deluxe rooms.25
The permanent main casino facility was expected to open in January 2013,26 but opened early, in December 2012. It offers 1,825 electronic gaming machines, 45 table games and a poker room along with a steakhouse, sports bar, buffet and snack bar The Kansas Star Casino employs over 880 full- and part- time staff members. 25
The final construction phase is expected to be completed in 2015 and include an additional 150 hotel rooms. The equestrian center is also expected to open in 2015 following conversion from the arena casino and the construction of other facilities. 25
In May 2012, Las Vegas-based Boyd Gaming Corp. began the process of purchasing five casinos managed by the Dubuque, Iowa-based Peninsula Gaming, including the Kansas Star Casino.104 In November 2012, the Kansas Racing and Gaming Commission unanimously approved Boyd Gaming’s suitability to manage the Kansas Star Casino.105 The 4-0 vote by the commission was the last hurdle for the merger of Boyd and Peninsula Gaming LLC, which previously managed the casino. The Racing and Gaming Commission’s role in the state’s approval process involved a background investigation.105 The commission also approved transferring Peninsula’s management contract with the state to Boyd.104
In its first full year of operation (2012), the Kansas Star Casino reported more than $183 million in total gaming revenue, of which 3 percent or approximately $5.5 million was distributed to local area governments.25
Table 18. Kansas Star Casino25 2012 Total Gaming Revenue $183,199,913 Distribution to Governments included: State (22%) $ 40,303,981 Locals (3%) $ 5,495,997 Problem Gambling Fund (2%) $ 3,663,998
Boeing Defense, Space & Security
Boeing is the world's largest aerospace company and leading manufacturer of commercial jetliners and defense, space and security systems. With corporate offices in Chicago, in 2013 Boeing employed more than 170,000 people across the United States and in 70 countries.27
Wichita’s history with Boeing began with its predecessor, Stearman Aircraft Company, which was founded by Lloyd Stearman in California in 1926.28 The company moved to Wichita in 1927 and started up shop in a 14,000-square-foot, one-story building north of town. In 1929, Stearman became part of the United Aircraft and Transport Corporation (UAT), a parent company previously known as the Boeing Airplane and Transport Company, Seattle. A year later, Stearman moved into a new facility south of Wichita at the present site of Boeing Wichita's operations.
In 1934, Stearman Aircraft Company was pulled out of UAT and became instead a wholly-owned subsidiary of the Seattle-based Boeing Aircraft Company. The Stearman firm continued to build its own designs in Wichita under its own name and model designations. This continued until 1938, when it became the Stearman Division of Boeing Airplane Company (then, The Boeing Company).28
Employment at Boeing has seen peaks and valleys over the years. In December 1943, as a result of World War II Boeing’s Wichita workforce peaked at 29,795 employees.28 Less than three years later, after the war, Plant II was closed and Boeing employment totaled about 1,000 at the company-owned Plant I.
Page 26 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Plant II was reactivated in March 1948 for modernizing and modifying B-29s and B-50s, and when B-47 production began six months later, 1,400 people were on the payroll. Employment rose through the years until it passed 35,000 in 1957.28 In 2004, the company — which employed 12,400 people in Wichita — said it planned to sell its commercial aircraft division. It closed a deal with Onex Corp. in 2005, forming Spirit AeroSystems.29
Boeing is organized into two business units: Boeing Commercial Airplanes and Boeing Defense, Space & Security. Boeing Defense, Space & Security provides end-to-end services for large-scale systems for global military, government and commercial customers that enhance air-, land-, sea- and space-based platforms.27 Boeing Wichita is the base for the company's Global Transport & Executive Systems business and its B-52 and 767 International Tanker programs. The Wichita facility also provides support for flight mission planning and integrated logistics.30
For decades, Boeing has been a major Wichita employer, and generations of Kansans have worked there. Boeing spent more than $3.2 billion in Kansas in 2011, working with approximately 475 Kansas suppliers.30
On January 4, 2012, the Boeing Company announced that it would be closing the Boeing Defense, Space & Security (BDS) facility in Wichita by the end of 2013. The Wichita facility employed more than 2,160 employees at the time of the announcement.30
Mark Bass, vice president and general manager for BDS' Maintenance, Modifications & Upgrades division, said: "The decision to close our Wichita facility was difficult but ultimately was based on a thorough study of the current and future market environment and our ability to remain competitive while meeting our customers' needs with the best and most affordable solutions.”30 "In this time of defense budget reductions, as well as shifting customer priorities, Boeing has decided to close its operations in Wichita to reduce costs, increase efficiencies, and drive competitiveness," said Bass. "We will begin program transitions in the coming months, with the complete closure of the site scheduled for the end of 2013. We do not anticipate job reductions as a result of this decision until early in the third quarter of 2012." 30
Future aircraft maintenance, modification and support work will be placed at the Boeing facility in San Antonio. Engineering work will be placed at the Boeing facility in Oklahoma City, and work on the KC-46 tanker will be performed in Puget Sound, Washington.30
Regional Commuting Patterns31
The eight counties served by United Way of the Plains are interconnected, both geographically and economically. According to commuting patterns developed from responses to the 2010 U.S. Census, a total of 56,644 individuals worked in Sedgwick County but lived outside the county. There were 32,241 Sedgwick County residents who worked outside the county.
The largest labor exchange was between Butler and Sedgwick counties. Approximately one in four (24.6 percent) individuals who lived outside Sedgwick County lived in Butler County (n = 13,936), and 13.4 percent of the individuals who lived in Sedgwick County and worked somewhere else, worked in Butler County (n = 4,334).
A total of 3,914 Sumner County residents commuted into Sedgwick County to work, while a corresponding 1,180 Sedgwick County residents commuted into Sumner County to work, resulting in a net increase of 2,734 workers in Sedgwick County. Similarly, a total of 4,161 Harvey County residents commuted into Sedgwick County to work, while a corresponding 1,592 Sedgwick County residents commuted into Harvey County to work, resulting in a net increase of 2,569 workers in Sedgwick County.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 27 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Figure 3. Sedgwick County Commuting Patterns31
Inflow from other counties 23,741 Outflow to other counties 19,574 outflow to Inflow from other states 4,524 other states 2,287
Area Employment
For each of the past five years, 16 to 17 percent of the state's civilian work force has been employed in Sedgwick County, and about one in every four (approximately 24-25 percent) in the state worked in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves.
For each of the past five years, employees in Sedgwick County have comprised two-thirds (approximately 67 percent) of the civilian work force in the United Way of the Plains service area.
Table 19. Average Annual Civilian Non-Farm Employment32 County 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Butler 30,964 29,999 29,439 29,078 29,080 Cowley 17,150 17,117 16,930 17,218 17,474 Harper 3,293 3,259 3,292 3,286 3,598 Harvey 17,192 16,801 16,242 16,134 16,135 Kingman 4,294 4,328 4,273 4,399 4,535 Reno 32,639 32,725 32,565 32,538 30,939 Sedgwick 240,717 235,144 227,898 226,541 226,560 Sumner 11,036 10,547 10,344 10,081 10,082 UWP Service Area 357,285 349,920 340,983 339,275 338,403 State of Kansas 1,415,541 1,401,704 1,399,805 1,401,055 1,403,989 Sedgwick County 17.0% 16.8% 16.3% 16.2% 16.1% as % of Kansas UWP Service Area 25.2% 25.0% 24.4% 24.2% 24.1% as % of Kansas Sedgwick County 67.4% 67.2% 66.8% 66.8% 66.9% as % of UWP Svc Area
Page 28 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Table 20 displays the area's ten largest employers in 2009 and in 2012.33 Eight of the area’s largest employers appear on the list for both years. However, in 2009, Boeing Defense, Space & Security was the area’s eighth largest employer; by 2012, it had dropped to the 12th spot, employing 2,100. Similarly, in 2009, Sedgwick County was the area’s ninth largest employer; by 2012, it had dropped to the 11th spot, employing 2,643.
In 2009, the ten largest area employers employed 56,303 individuals full-time. In 2012, the ten largest area employers employed 47,007, a decrease of 9,296 individuals (16.5 percent).33
In 2009, the nonfarm civilian employment of the Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA; that is, Sedgwick, Butler, Harvey and Sumner counties; Kingman County was added to the Wichita MSA in February 2013) was 292,491, with employees of the area's largest 10 employers comprising 19.2 percent of the area's labor force. In 2012, the nonfarm civilian employment of the Wichita MSA was 281,857, with employees of the area’s largest 10 employers comprising 16.7 percent of the area’s labor force.33
Table 20. Top Area Employers and Number of Employees (2009 and 2012) Top Area Employers in 200933 Employees* Top Area Employers in 201233 Employees* Cessna Aircraft Company 12,008 Spirit AeroSystems Inc. 10,800 Spirit AeroSystems Inc. 10,370 Via Christi Health 6,237 Hawker Beechcraft Corporation 7,500 Wichita Public Schools, USD 259 5,421 Wichita Public Schools, USD 259 5,508 Cessna Aircraft Company 5,000 Via Christi Health System 5,319 Hawker Beechcraft Corporation 4,500 State of Kansas 4,084 State of Kansas 3,967 City of Wichita 3,153 City of Wichita 2,924 Boeing Defense, Space & Security 3,000 Bombardier Learjet 2,800 Sedgwick County 2,821 United States Government 2,708 Bombardier Learjet 2,540 Koch Industries 2,650 Total 56,303 Total 47,007
*Full-time, Wichita-area employees
Area Layoffs
As a result of the economic downturn in 2008 and 2009, a number of area employers found it necessary to lay off a portion of their workforce. The Workforce Alliance of South Central Kansas serves many of the counties in the United Way of the Plains service area, with the exception of Harper and Reno counties. Among employers in these counties, Workforce Alliance has confirmed that between the date the majority of layoffs began (October 2008) and April 2012, employers laid off 22,594 individuals. These layoffs included both aviation and non-aviation manufacturing employees as well as employees in the service sector.34
Although manufacturing (and particularly aviation manufacturing) accounts for the largest number of layoffs since October 2008, the largest increase between September 2010 and April 2012 percentagewise are layoffs in the service sector, which experienced a 69.2 percent increase in layoffs, with an additional 1,470 receiving pink slips during that timeframe.34
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 29 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Table 21. Area Layoffs34 (Butler, Cowley, Harper, Kingman, Sedgwick and Sumner counties, Kansas) Number of Layoffs Difference Oct. 2008 Oct 2008 Sept. 2010 to April 2012 through through Number Percent Industry Sept. 2010 April 2012 Of Layoffs Increase Aviation Manufacturing 13,135 16,611 3,476 26.5% Non-Aviation Manufacturing 1,961 2,388 427 21.8% Services 2,125 3,595 1,470 69.2% Total Confirmed Layoffs 17,221 22,594 5,373 31.2%
In addition, the Workforce Alliance of South Central Kansas provides Rapid Response,35 a resource to help employers who are considering staff reductions explore ways to reduce or eliminate layoffs. When layoffs are unavoidable, Rapid Response staff meets with the employees and explain ways to find new jobs, identify training resources, and file for unemployment benefits.
Rapid Response staff conducts informational sessions for affected employees on-site at the businesses and provides employees with informational packets on the services available to assist them in their layoff. On occasion, Rapid Response staff provides monthly on-site liaison services, resume writing and interviewing workshops.35
Any company that is required by law to issue a Worker Adjustment and Retraining Notification (WARN) Act36 notice -- usually a plant closure or a company laying off more than 50 people or 33 percent of their workforce -- is required to offer Rapid Response services. For other employers, offering such services is optional. Some accept and some refuse.
Since April 2012,36 the Rapid Response team has provided Rapid Response services for a total of 2,363 individuals involved in area layoffs, with 80.0 percent of these layoffs (n=1,890) coming from aviation- related employers and the remaining 20.0 percent (n= 473) coming from other area employers (e.g., healthcare, manufacturing, education, nonprofit and government). These layoffs were in addition to the 22,594 confirmed layoffs reported in Table 21.
Aviation and the Local Economy
Historically the local economy has successfully avoided the expansions and contractions of the national economy or felt them to a lesser degree. However, much of the area's employment and economy has been closely tied to the aviation industry and its suppliers. Employment gains in aviation manufacturing bolster employment in other durable goods sectors, such as fabricated metals and machinery. Employment losses in aviation manufacturing can have the opposite effect.
In South Central Kansas, the aviation manufacturing sector consists of commercial airliners, general aviation and business jets. Commercial airliners are not built in Wichita, but Spirit AeroSystems and other suppliers provide parts and structures for both Boeing and Airbus, the two primary manufacturers of airliners. General aviation -- all non-commercial airplanes, including piston-powered airplanes (such as the Beechcraft Baron and Bonanza built in Wichita) and turboprop airplanes such as the Beechcraft King Air. Business jets - including the Beechcraft Premier and Hawker line of business jets, Cessna Citation jets and the Learjet series.
Page 30 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Between 2009 and 2013, the aviation manufacturing industry in South Central Kansas experienced growth in some areas, decline in some areas and several changes. Because the aviation industry is so pivotal to the South Central Kansas economy, a few highlights from the past five years includes: In the aviation sector in 2009, layoffs, furloughs and business contraction dominated the news.37 The global economic climate forced the need to lay off a significant number of workers, negatively impacting other areas of Wichita’s economy.
In April 2009, Textron, Inc.,38 the parent company of Cessna Aircraft Company, suspended work on the Citation Columbus wide-body jet project, and in July 2009, formally cancelled the project via a filing submitted to the Security and Exchange Commission. The project was to have built 600,000-square-foot final assembly building at Cessna where the majority of the $27 million business jet would be built. There was also to have been a 45,000-square-foot physical plant to serve the main building. Textron said it already had incurred about $50 million in capitalized tooling and facility costs related to the project.
In July 2009, the parent company of Cessna Aircraft Co., Textron, Inc., formally cancelled the Citation Columbus jet project.39
In January 2010, Boeing announced a restructuring and name change from Boeing Integrated Defense System (IDS) - Wichita to Boeing Defense, Space & Security (BDS) - Wichita.40
In January 2010, Hawker Beechcraft issued 60-day layoff notices to 85 employees.41 Bombardier Learjet said it would lay off about 100 employees over the next 90 days, and Boeing Wichita issued notices to seven workers.42
On February 24, 2010, Hawker Beechcraft Corporation opened a new facility in Chihuahua, Mexico.43
In July 2010,44 Bombardier Learjet announced it would assemble its new composite Learjet 85 business jet in Wichita, adding 300 new positions, in exchange for $27 million in bond financing from the state. The company agreed to not move any existing operations out of Wichita during the life of the bonds. Construction at the plant will take place in four stages: • A 28,000-square-foot expansion of the final-assembly facility to prepare for the first parts. • Construction of a 49,000-square-foot flight test building. • Construction of 33,000-square-foot paint facility • Construction of a 21,500-square-foot customer delivery center. The state incentive is in the form of bond financing repaid from the employees' income taxes that would have otherwise gone into the state's general fund. The time period for the length of the bond is still being determined. The penalty for breaking the agreement would be loss of some of the bond money.
In 2011,45 Cessna Aircraft Company delivered 689 aircraft, including 183 Citation business jets, and reported revenues of $2.990 billion.
On January 4, 2012, the Boeing Company announced that it would be closing the Boeing Defense, Space & Security facility in Wichita by the end of 2013, citing defense budget reductions, shifting customer priorities, and the need to remain competitive. The Wichita facility employed more than 2,160 employees at the time of the announcement.30 Future aircraft maintenance, modification and support work will be placed at the Boeing facility in San Antonio. Engineering work will be placed at the Boeing facility in Oklahoma City, and work on the KC-46 tanker will be performed in Puget Sound, Washington.30
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 31 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
On April 14, 2012,46 severe weather caused structural damage to the Spirit AeroSystems facility. All personnel were safely accounted for, and Spirit AeroSystems’ emergency management plan was implemented. Initial assessments indicated that damage was primarily limited to infrastructure, including buildings and utilities, and that production equipment appeared to be largely unaffected. Operations were suspended through April 22, 2012,47 to ensure worker safety, to complete the damage evaluation, and to finalize plans for systematically bringing production online. All employees returned to work on April 23, 2012.
On May 3, 2012,48 Hawker Beechcraft filed for Chapter 11, Title 11 reorganization in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court, a move to lighten the burdens of $2.5 billion in debt and about $125 million a year in cash interest expenses. Officials stressed that employment would not be directly affected by the bankruptcy, and that the company would continue to fill orders and serve customers. At the time, Hawker Beechcraft employed about 6,000 worldwide, including 4,700 in Wichita.
On May 3, 2012,49 Spirit AeroSystems Holdings, Inc. reported first quarter 2012 financial results reflecting solid core operating performance across the company as demand for large commercial airplanes remains strong. Spirit’s first quarter 2012 revenues were $1.266 billion, up 21 percent from $1.050 billion for the same period of 2011 as the company benefited from higher production deliveries during the quarter.
On June 6 2012,50 NetJets, Inc., a Berkshire Hathaway company, signed a purchase agreement with Cessna Aircraft Company delivery of up to 150 Citation Latitude business jets, with initial deliveries beginning in 2016. The Citation Latitude had a 2012 retail price of $14.9 million.
On July 17, 2012,51 a federal bankruptcy judge approved Hawker Beechcraft’s motion to enter into exclusive negotiations with Superior Aviation Beijing regarding a sale of the planemaker’s assets for at least $1.79 billion. The deal did not include Hawker Beechcraft’s defense business. Approval from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court allowed Hawker Beechcraft and Superior Aviation Beijing to spend 45 days in due diligence and negotiations.
October 18, 2012,52 Hawker Beechcraft announced that the deal for the sale of Hawker Beechcraft to Superior Aviation Beijing had collapsed, that the parties could not come to terms, and that it would proceed with a stand-alone plan of reorganization.
In November 2012,53,54 Cessna Aircraft Company tapped into what it expects to be the highest growth aviation market during the coming decade and entered into joint venture contracts with China Aviation Industry General Aircraft Company Ltd., (CAIGA) through CAIGA North China Aircraft Industry Co., Ltd., to conduct final assembly of Cessna Caravan utility turboprop aircraft in Shijiazhuang, China (November 27), and through CAIGA South China Aircraft Industry Co., Ltd., to conduct final assembly of Cessna Citation XLS+ aircraft in Zhuhai, China (November 14), for the Chinese market. These joint venture contracts stem from the strategic framework agreement that Cessna entered into with CAIGA parent company, Aviation Industry Corporation of China (AVIC), in March 2012. The joint venture contract also contemplates the possibility of designing and assembling new models of utility turboprop aircraft in the future. Cessna's Wichita operations will provide components and parts manufacturing and sub- assemblies for aircraft to be sold by the joint venture. Joint venture operations in China will be designed to conduct final assembly, paint, testing, interior installation, customization, flight testing and delivery of the Cessna aircraft to in-country customers.
Page 32 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
On November 27, 2012,55 VistaJet placed the largest business aircraft order in Bombardier’s history with orders for up to 142 Global business jets, which includes firm orders for 56 Global jets and options for a another 86 Global jets at a 2012 U.S. list price value of more than $7.8 billion, if all options are exercised. The value of the firm order is approximately $3.1 billion at 2012 list prices.
In 2012,43 Beechcraft Corporation delivered 204 business, military and general aviation aircraft. Worldwide, it employed 5,400.
In 2012,56 Cessna Aircraft Company delivered 571 aircraft, including 181 Citation business jets, and reported revenues of $3.111 billion.
On February 19, 2013,57 Beechcraft Corp. emerged from bankruptcy, shedding the Hawker Beechcraft name and the jet product line including the 4000, 900XP and Premier IA/Hawker 200, while retaining its propeller-driven airplane product line including the Bonanza, Baron and King Air product lines, the T-6 military trainer and the AT-6 light-attack airplane. New owners for the company as a result of the exit from bankruptcy57 include financial institutions that were its secured creditors, the largest of which were Angelo, Gordon & Co.; Capital Research & Management; Centerbridge Partners LP; and Sankaty Advisors, a division of Bain Capital. These secured creditors swapped the money owed them for an equity stake in Beechcraft. The pre-bankruptcy majority owners of Hawker Beechcraft (Onex Partners and Goldman Sachs’ GS Capital Partners) have equity in Beechcraft Corp. as well. The federal government’s pension insurer (The Pension Benefit Guaranty Corp.) is among the smaller creditors that account for the balance of the ownership stake in Beechcraft.
On May 2, 2013,58 Spirit AeroSystems Holdings, Inc. reported first quarter 2013 financial results reflecting continued strong demand for large commercial aircraft and strong core program operating performance. Spirit’s first quarter 2013 revenues were $1.442 billion, up 14 percent from $1.266 billion for the same period of 2012, driven by higher production volumes and model mix.
On May 20, 2013,59 Bombardier Aerospace announced the launch of its midsize Challenger 350 business jet, in partnership with NetJets, a fractional ownership company. NetJets has placed an order for 75 Challenger 350s, with an option for 125 more. Deliveries are to begin in 2014.
On June 18, 2013,60 VistaJet placed firm orders with Bombardier for 20 Challenger 350 jets and options for an additional 20 Challenger 350 jets. VistaJet is a world-leading luxury aviation company and exclusive operator of Bombardier business aircraft. The transaction for the firm aircraft order is valued at approximately $518 million based on 2013 list prices. If all the options are exercised, the total value of the order is approximately $1.035 billion, again based on 2013 list prices.
Any overview of the local aviation industry would be incomplete without an acknowledgement of unions and the role they play in the local economy. Historically unions have helped make life better for all working Americans.61 A few examples include helping to pass laws ending child labor, helping establish the eight-hour workday, helping protect workers’ safety and health, and helping create Social Security, unemployment insurance and minimum wage benefits. Union workers earn 30 percent more than nonunion workers and are more likely to receive health care and pension benefits than those without a union.61
United Way and the American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations (AFL-CIO) serve as partners in community development efforts and resource development for organizations who provide assistance to those in need. As community organizations, unions have a responsibility for the health and welfare of members and their families that extends beyond the workplace.61
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 33 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
The International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers (IAM & AW) is the collective bargaining unit representing aviation manufacturing workers (machinists) in the eight-county area in South Central Kansas served by United Way of the Plains. Similarly, engineers and technical workers are represented by SPEEA, the Society of Professional Engineering Employees in Aerospace and the International Federation of Professional and Technical Engineers (IFPTE).61 Selected union-related events in the local collective bargaining arena over the past five years (2009-2103) include:
On October 8, 2009, members of Spirit AeroSystems, Inc.'s engineers union (SPEEA, the Society of Professional Engineering Employees in Aerospace) approved a new work contract after having twice rejected contract offers from Spirit. SPEEA represents more than 700 engineers at Spirit.61
In June 2010, machinists union members at Spirit AeroSystems rejected the company's offer of a 10-year contract on Friday, but lacked the votes required for a strike. As a result, members ratified the contract by default. Of those voting, 57 percent rejected the contract. Fifty-eight percent voted to strike, falling short of the two-thirds required for a work stoppage. The union represents about 6,000 Spirit hourly workers. Spirit's total Wichita work force is 10,500. The union's negotiating team recommended members accept the contract.62 In the contract, Spirit AeroSystems agreed to keep major manufacturing operations in Wichita for 10 years. Additional items in the agreement included: a 1 percent wage increase in four of the 10 years of the contract; addition of a zero-cost health care plan (with employees' share of the costs increasing from 10 to 20 percent over the life of the contract); and a clause that would keep the contract in place, should the company be sold.62
On August 19, 2010,63 contract talks between Hawker Beechcraft and its machinists opened early, a year before the current contract is set to expire. Hawker Beechcraft CEO at the time Bill Boisture said the market for business aircraft was 30 percent to 40 percent smaller than it was in late 2008. Amid speculation and published reports indicating the company was considering moving jobs out of Wichita, the proposed contract included a 10 percent pay cut, paying a greater share of their health care insurance costs and other concessions aimed at keeping Hawker Beechcraft from moving out of Kansas. In an October 16 contract vote that required a simple majority for approval, 55 percent of machinist members voted to reject the contract offer.64 Bob Wood, spokesman for Hawker Beechcraft, said that negotiations on a new contract will begin next August, when the current contract expires. The machinists union now represents about 2,600 workers, compared to 5,200 in 2008. On August 20, 2010,65 contract talks began between Cessna Aircraft Co. and the International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers Local Lodge 774, representing 2,300 hourly workers at Cessna in Wichita. In a vote held September 18, 2010,66 58 percent of the workers rejected the proposed seven-year contract. However, the vote to strike fell short at 49 percent and the contract was accepted by default. The existing contract was due to expire September 19, 2010.
As was previously mentioned, on January 4, 2012, the Boeing Company announced it would be closing the Boeing Defense, Space & Security facility in Wichita by the end of 2013.30 As of Summer 2013, union effects bargaining was taking place – acknowledging that while certain decisions are within the management’s right to make, those decision have an impact or effect on the workers and those impacts are being bargained.67 The current expectation is that a skeleton crew will remain into 2014 to maintain the facility long enough to complete Air Force One (President Obama’s airplane) and possibly Air Force Two and that the doors should close by June 2014.68
Page 34 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Although falling outside the field of aviation, on February 20, 2013,69 the U.S. Postal Service announced plans to close the remote encoding center in Wichita later in the year. Among current employees, 417 were covered by collective bargaining agreements (American Postal Workers Union) and were to be offered available positions with the Postal Service, locally or outside the state. Job counseling was to be offered to the other 380 employees not represented by the union, to help them find other employment. The job eliminations and transfers were slated to occur over time, rather than all at once. The center was slated to close on or after September 1. At the height of the remote encoding program, there were 55 centers processing 19 billion images a year. Wichita was one of two remaining remote encoding centers for the Postal Service. The other, in Salt Lake City, was to remain open for the present. Between Wichita and Salt Lake City, 2.4 billion images were processed in 2012.69
In 2012 at Bombardier Learjet, negotiators for the Machinists union (International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, IAM & AW) recommended its members there reject the company’s proposal of a five-year labor contract and vote to strike.70 The offer gave no raises in the first year of the contract and a 1 percent raise in each of the four years after. It retained pension plans for the represented workers, but increased health insurance care costs. The union sought a three-year contract period as opposed to the five-year one offered. On Saturday, October 6, 2012, Machinists union members rejected the company’s contract offer and voted to strike. Strikers from Bombardier Learjet’s hourly workforce began walking the picket line at 12:01 a.m. Monday, October 8, when the existing three-year contract expired. Seventy-nine percent of union members voted in favor of rejecting the company’s proposal, and 79 percent voted in favor of a strike.71 In November 2012,72 a federal mediator asked both parties to return to the negotiating table and they were able to reach an agreement which included no wage increases in the first year and a 1 percent increase in each of the next four years; lump-sum payments of $2,500 in the first year, $1,000 in year two and potential payouts through an employee incentive plan in years three, four and five; and lowered costs of health care premiums as compared to the originally-rejected proposal. The revised contract received the unanimous endorsement of the IAM Negotiating Committee,73 which recommended that members accept the contract, and on Saturday, November 10, they did. The vote, which was 70 percent in favor, ended a five-week strike at the Wichita plant.74 The union’s Local Lodge 639 represents 825 hourly workers at Bombardier’s Learjet plant in west Wichita.73 The new contract is due to expire at 12:01 a.m. on October 9, 2017.68
Aviation Employment
Aviation manufacturing is a significant factor in the economy of South Central Kansas. Table 22 presents employee information for the largest area aviation manufacturing firms over five recent years. As a result of layoffs and downsizings in the local aviation manufacturing workforce, employment at these five manufacturers decreased between 2008 and 2009 by 9,030 (25.3 percent), from 35,749 to 26,719. Total employment continued its downward trend in 2010 and 2011.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 35 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Table 22. Number of Full-Time Wichita Area Employees at Aviation Manufacturing Firms 75 Manufacturing Firm 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Spirit AeroSystems, Inc. 10,900 10,500 10,300 10,300 10,700 Boeing Defense, Space & Security-Wichita* 3,005 3,000 2,700 2,300 2,100 Cessna Aircraft Company 11,242 12,017 6,036 6,073 4,709 Hawker Beechcraft Corp. 6,767 7,692 5,224 5,000 4,600 Bombardier Learjet 2,250 2,540 2,459 2,000 2,700 Total Employment 34,164 35,749 26,719 25,673 24,809 *Name changed in 2009 from Boeing Integrated Defense Systems, Inc. – Wichita (2007 and 2008)
Many area companies serve as subcontractors to the aviation industry, both locally and in other markets. Tracking employment at even the top five is difficult due to company mergers as well as expansions and contractions in employment. Table 23 presents the top five area aviation subcontractors aside from Spirit Aerosystems, Inc., whose employment data were detailed in Table 22.
Table 23. Number of Full- Time Wichita Area Aviation Subcontractors Employees at Aviation (excluding Spirit AeroSystems, Inc.) Subcontracting Firms 76 Top Five Aviation Subcontractors in 2009 Aeroflex Inc. 366 Precision Pattern Interiors* 300 Center Industries Corp. 284 Wescon Products 250 Metal Finishing Company 220 Total Employment among Top Five (2009) 1,420
Top Five Aviation Subcontractors in 2011 Goodrich Cabin Systems Interiors* 500 Aeroflex Inc. 365 Nex-Tech Aerospace 300 Metal Finishing Company 280 TECT Aerospace 260 Total Employment among Top Five (2011) 1,705
Top Five Aviation Subcontractors in 2012 UTC Aerospace Systems* 500 Aeroflex Inc. 365 Metal Finishing Company 290 TECT Aerospace 289 KETCH (Kansas Elks Training Center 250 for the Handicapped, Inc.) Total Employment among Top Five (2012) 1,694 *In 2011, Precision Pattern Interiors combined with PCI Companies, listed as Goodrich Cabin Systems. In 2012, Goodrich Cabin Systems listed as UTC Aerospace Systems.
Page 36 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
The Kansas Labor Information Center reported that in 2008, there were an estimated 1,390,800 Kansans employed in "non-farm employment." Approximately 22.1 percent of those (n = approximately 307,900) were employed in the Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) of which Wichita is a part (including Sedgwick, Butler, Harvey and Sumner counties; NOTE: Kingman County was added to the Wichita MSA in February 2013.) By 2012, 21.0 percent of Kansans involved in nonfarm employment resided in the Wichita MSA.
As Table 24 shows, of those in "non-farm employment in the Wichita MSA in 2012, 52,800 were employed in manufacturing jobs, with 30,700 employed specifically in transportation equipment manufacturing jobs. Transportation equipment manufacturing employment represented 58.1 percent of all area manufacturing jobs and 10.7 percent of all non-farm employment.
Transportation equipment manufacturing employment in the Wichita MSA decreased by 25.8 percent (n=10,700 workers, or 41,400 - 30,700) over the five-year period from 2008 to 2012.
Table 24. Non-Farm Payroll Employment (2008 – 2012)77 Kansas Wichita MSA Employment Category 2008 2010 2012 2008 2010 2012 Total Non-Farm Employment 1,390,800 1,328,500 1,357,800 307,900 283,100 285,600 Manufacturing Employment 187,200 160,100 163,100 67,300 52,500 52,800 Transp. Equip. Mfg. Employment 52,800 41,200 41,000 41,400 31,000 30,700
Transportation Equipment Mfg. 28.2% 25.7% 25.1% 61.5% 59.0% 58.1% as % of all Mfg. Employment Transportation Equip. Mfg. 3.8% 3.1% 3.0% 13.4% 11.0% 10.7% as % of All Non-Farm Employment
In 2008 in Kansas78, the average weekly wage for an employee in the Transportation Equipment Manufacturing subsector was $1,208. This would be equivalent to $30.20 per hour or $62,816 per year, based on a 40-hour week worked year round.
In 2012 in Kansas, the average weekly wage for a Kansas78 employee in the Transportation Equipment Manufacturing subsector was $1,444, equivalent to $36.10 per hour or $75,088 per year, again based on a 40-hour week worked year round.
Prior to the economic recession, the projected employment in Kansas in the Transportation Equipment Manufacturing subsector was projected to increase 45.7 percent (n = 20,358 employees) between 2004 and 2014, from an estimated employment level of 44,524 in 2004 to a projected level of 64,882 employees in 2014.78 Regarding the immediate and long-term impact of the recession, only time will tell.
The long-term industry projections for the Transportation Equipment Manufacturing subsector in Kansas78 begin with an estimated statewide employment in 2010 of 41,163, which is expected to grow over a ten- year period to a projected employment of 43,637 in 2020, an average employment change within the subsector of 247 individuals (0.6 percent) per year.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 37 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Household Income
Slightly more than half (51.3 percent) of the households in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves have annual household income below $50,000. This represents 145,449 of 283,601 households. Similarly, slightly fewer than half (49.4 percent; 545,809 of 1,104,479) of all Kansas households have annual household income below $50,000.79
Figure 4. Distribution of Household Income79
$100K or Under $100 or Under Over, $25K, Over, $25K, 16.7% 23.7% 18.5% 22.8%
$50- $25-$50K, $50- $100K, $25-$50, 32.0% 27.6% $100, 32.1% 26.6%
United Way of the Plains Service Area State of Kansas
As Table 26 shows, more than one in every four (26.6 percent) Kansas households with annual income below $25,000 resided in the United Way of the Plains Service area in 2011. This represents 67,097 households.
Table 25. Annual Household Income79 Under $25,000 to $50,000 to $100,000 County $25,000 $49,999 $99,999 Or Over Butler 4,222 6,260 8,140 5,417 Cowley 3,807 4,084 3,942 1,656 Harper 810 851 722 277 Harvey 3,169 3,572 4,490 1,906 Kingman 747 1,072 1,149 389 Reno 6,685 8,560 7,711 2,871 Sedgwick 45,283 51,529 61,336 33,705 Sumner 2,374 2,424 3,175 1,266 UWP Service Area 67,097 78,352 90,665 47,487 State of Kansas 251,947 293,862 354,496 204,174 Sedgwick County 18.0% 17.5% 17.3% 16.5% as % of Kansas UWP Service Area 26.6% 26.7% 25.6% 23.3% as % of Kansas
Page 38 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Characteristics of the Unemployed
From 2008 to 2009, the number of persons residing in the United Way of the Plains service area who were unemployed nearly doubled, from 15,834 in 2008 to 31,364 in 2009. By 2012, the number of unemployed individuals residing the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves had decreased to 23,715, an average annual unemployment rate of 6.5. Much of this is driven by Sedgwick County, which accounts for approximately seven of ten of the area’s unemployed workers.
From 2010 to 2011 and again from 2011 to 2012, the number and percentage of unemployed individuals decreased in every county in United Way of the Plains service area, as well as in the state as a whole.
Table 26. Average Annual Unemployment -- 2009 - 201280 (Civilian Labor Force, Not Seasonally Adjusted) 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 County # % # % # % # % # % Butler 1,367 4.2 2,492 7.7 2,752 8.5 2,362 7.5 2,050 6.6 Cowley 766 4.3 1,338 7.3 1,397 7.6 1,212 6.6 1,059 5.7 Harper 104 3.1 183 5.3 190 5.5 167 4.8 137 3.7 Harvey 673 3.8 1,330 7.3 1,337 7.6 1,099 6.4 965 5.6 Kingman 143 3.2 269 5.9 269 5.9 236 5.0 224 4.7 Reno 1,344 4.0 2,123 6.1 2,169 6.2 2,010 5.8 1,782 5.4 Sedgwick 10,924 4.3 22,581 8.8 22,486 9.0 19,827 8.0 16,808 6.9 Sumner 513 4.4 1,048 9.0 1,037 9.1 799 7.3 690 6.4 UWP Service Area 15,834 4.2 31,364 8.2 31,637 8.5 27,712 7.6 23,715 6.5 State of Kansas 65,122 4.4 107,743 7.1 106,424 7.1 97,817 6.5 85,454 5.7 Sedgwick County 16.8% 21.0% 21.1% 20.3% 19.7% as % of Kansas UWP Service Area 24.3% 29.1% 29.7% 28.3% 27.8% as % of Kansas Sedgwick Co. as % 69.0% 72.0% 71.1% 71.5% 70.9% of UWP Svc. Area
Area unemployment in 2009 was fueled in large measure by mass layoffs in the aviation industry and its suppliers. Examination of monthly unemployment rates shows that unemployment in Wichita consistently exceeded the rate of unemployment in Sedgwick County, which in turn consistently exceeded the rate of unemployment in the Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), which in turn fairly consistently exceeded the rate of unemployment for the state. Unemployment spiked in July 2009, at which time the city of Wichita experienced an 11.7 percent unemployment rate; while the rates in Sedgwick County, the Wichita MSA and the state were 10.8, 10.6 and 8.1 percent, respectively.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 39 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Figure 5. Average Monthly Unemployment - 200980 (City of Wichita, Sedgwick County, Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area and Kansas)
12
11
10
9
8
7 Percent Percent Unemployment 6 Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009 2009
City of Wichita Sedgwick County Wichita MSA Kansas
In 2012, area unemployment trended slightly downward, with Wichita’s unemployment rate peaking in January and July at 8.2, paralleled by Sedgwick County’s unemployment rate, which also peaked in January and July at 7.6. The Wichita MSA’s unemployment rate closely tracked the Sedgwick County rate. In 2012, average monthly unemployment rate for the State of Kansas was lower than Wichita’s, Sedgwick County’s or the Wichita MSA’s consistently.
Figure 6. Average Monthly Unemployment - 201280 (City of Wichita, Sedgwick County, Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area and Kansas)
9
8
7
6 Percent Percent Unemployment 5 Jan Feb March April May June July Aug Sept Oct Nov Dec 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012 2012
City of Wichita Sedgwick County Wichita MSA Kansas
Page 40 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
After an initial spike in unemployment rates in all four geographic areas, the first four months of 2013 have demonstrated a downward trend in the rate of unemployment. (December 2012 data have been included for comparison purposes.) Unemployment rates in the city of Wichita continue to outpace those of Sedgwick County, the Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area or the state overall.
Figure 7. Average Monthly Unemployment - 201380 (City of Wichita, Sedgwick County, Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area and Kansas)
9
8
7
6 Percent Percent Unemployment 5 Dec 2012 Jan. Feb. March April 2013 2013 2013 2013
City of Wichita Sedgwick County Wichita MSA Kansas
The most current year for which comprehensive data are available regarding minority status of unemployed Kansas workers is 2010, reflected in Table 27 and Table 28, drawn from the Kansas Department of Labor's 2010 Kansas Affirmative Action Report.81
In general for 2010, unemployment was more prevalent among members of Kansas' minority populations. As Table 27 shows, in 2010 in Sedgwick County, 3,886 black residents who would otherwise have been in the civilian work force were unemployed, comprising 19.9 percent of the county's unemployed population. Overall, 32.6 percent of Kansas' 11,911 unemployed black residents lived in Sedgwick County in 2010.
Other minority populations exceeded the state's 2007 average annual unemployment rate of 4.1, as well. Nearly half (46.9 percent; n = 1,103 of 2,352) of the state's unemployed Asian/Pacific Islander residents lived in Sedgwick County in 2010.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 41 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Table 27. Composition of Unemployed Civilian Work Force by Race (2010)81 Total American Asian/Pacific Unemployed White Black Indian Islander Other County # # % # % # % # % # % Butler 2,036 1,908 93.7% 32 1.6% 2 0.1% 20 1.0% 74 3.6% Cowley 1,115 965 86.5% 36 3.2% 8 0.7% 76 6.8% 30 2.7% Harper 119 98 82.4% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% 21 17.6% Harvey 874 771 88.2% 0 0.0% 7 0.8% 0 0.0% 96 11.0% Kingman 125 113 90.4% 0 0.0% 12 9.6% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Reno 1,533 1,349 88.0% 87 5.7% 7 0.5% 0 0.0% 90 5.9% Sedgwick 19,528 12,607 64.6% 3,886 19.9% 176 0.9% 1,103 5.6% 1,756 9.0% Sumner 812 699 86.1% 78 9.6% 33 4.1% 0 0.0% 2 0.2% UWP Svc Area 26,142 18,510 70.8% 4,119 15.8% 245 0.9% 1,199 4.6% 2,069 7.9% St. of Kansas 88,898 67,118 75.5% 11,911 13.4% 853 1.0% 2,352 2.6% 6,664 7.5%
Sg. Co. as % of 22.0% 18.8% 32.6% 20.6% 46.9% 26.4% Kansas UWP Svc. Area 29.4% 27.6% 34.6% 28.7% 51.0% 31.0% as % of Kansas Sg. Co. as % of 74.7% 68.1% 94.3% 71.8% 92.0% 84.9% UWP Svc. Area
Similarly, in many counties unemployment was more prevalent among Kansas residents of Hispanic or Latino origin. In 2010 in Sedgwick County, 2,629 residents with Hispanic or Latino ethnicity who would otherwise have been in the civilian work force were unemployed. These unemployed Hispanic/Latino residents represented 13.5 percent of Sedgwick County's unemployed civilian population. In 2010, 24.9 percent of Kansas' 10,578 residents of Hispanic or Latino ethnicity lived in Sedgwick County and 30.6 percent lived in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains served.
Table 28. Unemployed Civilian Work Force by Hispanic or Latino Ethnicity (2010) 81 Total Hispanic or Latino Origin County # # % Butler 2,036 76 3.7% Cowley 1,115 66 5.9% Harper 119 18 15.1% Harvey 874 235 26.9% Kingman 125 0 0.0% Reno 1,533 192 12.5% Sedgwick 19,528 2,629 13.5% Sumner 812 23 2.8% UWP Service Area 26,142 3,239 12.4% State of Kansas 88,898 10,578 11.9% Sedgwick County as % 22.0% 24.9% of Kansas UWP Service Area as % 29.4% 30.6% of Kansas Sedgwick County as % 74.7% 81.2% Of UWP Service Area
Page 42 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Public Assistance
The Kansas Department for Children and Families (formerly, SRS)82 was established in 1973 as an umbrella agency to oversee the delivery of social services and the provision of care to the vulnerable. Under Kansas Governor Robert Docking’s Executive Reorganization Order Number 1 issued in 1973, the Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services (SRS) was created to replace the state board and department of social welfare. The existing system of county administration and state supervision meant that Kansas lacked a uniform welfare program across the board. In the same year (1973), legislation was passed to transfer all welfare programs from the individual counties to SRS, creating an umbrella agency administering all social welfare programs in the state.
By 1977, the SRS umbrella agency was comprised of divisions of administration; mental health and retardation; income maintenance, including Medicaid; vocational rehabilitation; children, youth and adults; and special programs including alcohol and drug abuse, services to the blind, child support enforcement, and emergency preparedness.
In March 2012, Kansas Governor Sam Brownback appointed Phyllis Gilmore as the Secretary of SRS. On July 1, 2012, the Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services was renamed to became the Department for Children and Families (DCF). Its mission is “to protect children, promote healthy families and encourage personal responsibility.” This transition marked a more central focus on the well-being of children and families in Kansas. DCF retained its children and adult protection services, adoption services, foster care support, child support services, welfare and food assistance programs, as well as services dedicated to vocational rehabilitation. Today, the Agency serves more than 500,000 Kansans. The Disability and Behavioral Health Services division of SRS as well as oversight of the five state hospitals moved to the newly named Department for Aging and Disability Services.
Prior to the organizational transformation, Sedgwick County was the single county overseen by the Wichita Regional SRS Office. In 2012, the area of responsibility for the Wichita Regional Office was expanded to also include Barber, Butler, Cowley, Elk, Greenwood, Harper, Kingman, Pratt and Sumner counties. Figure 8 displays the four current regions defined for service delivery for the Department for Children and Families83 (i.e., Wichita, Kansas City, East Kansas and West Kansas).
Figure 8. Department for Children and Families (DCF) Regions
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 43 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Residents in the United Way of the Plains service area receive services through two regional offices. The Wichita Regional Office serves Butler, Cowley, Harper, Kingman, Sedgwick and Sumner counties residents, while residents of Harvey and Reno counties are served by the West Regional Office.
The Kansas Department for Children and Families (DCF) provides various types of assistance to Kansans in need. This report will overview three types of assistance -- Temporary Assistance for Needy Families, Food Assistance, and Child Care Assistance. These programs do not represent an exhaustive listing of all programs and assistance available through DCF
Temporary Assistance for Needy Families
On August 22, 1996, the federal government passed the Personal Responsibility and Work Opportunity Reconciliation Act, replacing the 60-year-old Aid to Families with Dependent Children (AFDC) program with a block grant to states to finance a cash welfare program, Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF). This Welfare Reform Law, as it was commonly called, 1) eliminated the federal entitlement to cash assistance for income-eligible families, and 2) gave states unprecedented flexibility in designing and managing their cash assistance programs.84
As originally stated, the four primary purposes of the federal TANF program were to : 1. provide assistance to needy families so that children may be cared for in their own homes or in the homes of relatives; 2. end the dependence of needy parents on government benefits by promoting job preparation, work and marriage; 3. prevent and reduce the incidence of out-of-wedlock pregnancies and 4. encourage the formation and maintenance of two parent families.85
One of the biggest changes under this law was the 60-month lifetime limit. Families who had received assistance for five cumulative years were ineligible for cash aid under the new welfare law. The law required recipients to work after two years on assistance, with few exceptions. Families with a child younger than one year old were exempt, as were children with no adult present.86
By October 1996, Kansas had crafted a state plan, entitled Temporary Assistance to Families (TAF), to comply with federal mandates. The Kansas TAF plan promised an undergirding of supports to assist welfare recipients in the transition from cash assistance to gainful employment. These included subsidized child care, medical assistance, food assistance, enhanced child support enforcement and employment preparation services. Like most states, Kansas tied TAF payments to requirement for work, work search or enrollment in programs designed to prepare adults on assistance for jobs.86
Currently, “cash assistance” is also known as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), a support available under the Successful Families Program.87 This program offers employment services and support services to low-income families; that support may include cash assistance.
To qualify for assistance from the Successful Families Program,87 households must meet certain income and limited resource requirements. For the purposes of this program, families are defined as including a child who may be living with a parent, a relative or a person named by a court to take care of the child, such as a guardian, conservator, or custodian. Families must have at least one child in the home under the age of 18; this can include an unborn baby.
Adults must work or participate in work activities in order to receive cash assistance for their family, unless they take care of a child under 6 months of age or take care of a disabled household member. Families can only get cash assistance for 48 months in a lifetime and cannot use their cash benefits to purchase alcohol, tobacco or lottery tickets.87
Page 44 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Families may qualify to receive cash assistance while they look for work as long as they meet program requirements. One of these requirements includes cooperating with DCF Child Support Services Division. Families who receive cash assistance may also qualify to receive medical benefits and child care assistance.87
The amount of cash benefit provided depends upon the family’s income and the county where the family lives. Table 29 presents the maximum monthly cash benefit a family can receive, based on family size:
Table 29. Maximum Monthly Cash Benefit Temporary Assistance for Needy Families87 State Fiscal Year 2013 (State Fiscal Year - July 1 to June 30) County Designation High Cost/ High High Cost Family Size High Population Population Rural Rural One $267 $241 $229 $224 Two $352 $326 $314 $309 Three $429 $403 $391 $386 Four $497 $471 $459 $454 Families of 5 or more: add $61 for each additional person
In the United Way of the Plains service area: 88 High Population County Sedgwick, Butler and Reno counties High Population/High Cost County Harvey County Rural County Cowley, Harper, Kingman, Sumner counties High Cost Rural County None
In State Fiscal Year 2012, the Kansas Department for Children and Families’ annual expenditure for Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Cash Assistance was $42,114,608, a decrease of $5,930,384 (12.3 percent) from SFY 2008 and a decrease of $9,888,457 (19.0 percent) from SFY 2011.
In SFY 2008, one in three (33.0 percent) Kansas families receiving TANF Cash Assistance resided in the eight-county United Way of the Plains Service Area; by SFY 2012 families receiving TANF Cash Assistance had deceased to 30.0 percent, a decrease of 1,043 families receiving TANF Cash Assistance, on average, per month.
The number of families receiving TANF Cash Assistance benefits decreased in every county in the United Way of the Plains service area between FY 2011 and FY 2012, representing 1,735 fewer families, on average, being assisted per month.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 45 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Table 30. Cash Assistance-Temporary Assistance for Needy Families89 Average Number of Persons Assisted per Month State Fiscal Years 2008 to 2012 (State Fiscal Year - July 1 to June 30) County SFY 2008 SFY 2009 SFY 2010 SFY 2011 SFY 2012 Butler 497 497 502 517 469 Cowley 467 446 476 599 469 Harper 43 36 31 23 18 Harvey 271 264 277 344 291 Kingman 45 43 45 64 59 Reno 921 749 849 948 710 Sedgwick 8,401 7,365 8,458 8,582 7,424 Sumner 166 154 221 241 143 UWP Service Area 10,811 9,554 10,859 11,318 9,583 State of Kansas 32,773 31,828 36,972 38,963 31,730
Sedgwick County 25.6% 23.1% 22.9% 22.0% 23.4% as % of Kansas UWP Service Area 33.0% 30.0% 29.4% 29.0% 30.2% as % of Kansas
Program Service $48,044,992 $45,222,313 $49,917,941 $52,003,065 $42,114,608 Dollars (Kansas)
Some years, the average number of persons served during a fiscal year provides an incomplete picture of the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) Cash Assistance program, as the numbers served per month vary considerably within a 12-month period. For example, although an average of 31,730 persons received Cash Assistance statewide during SFY 2012, monthly averages ranged from a high of 37,174 in August 2012 to a low of 24,801 in June 2013.
Figure 9 displays the number of persons statewide receiving TANF Cash Assistance each month for SFY 2010, SFY 2011, SFY 2012 and the first ten months of SFY 2013. The monthly average is represented by the horizontal bar for each year.
In SFY 2013, decreases are being seen in the number of persons receiving TANF Cash Assistance. At the beginning of the fiscal year, 24,658 persons were receiving this benefit monthly, while by the 10th month of the fiscal year, 19,755 were, a decrease of 4,903 persons or 19.9 percent.
Page 46 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Figure 9. Cash Assistance - Temporary Assistance for Needy Families Number of Persons Assisted by Month90 State Fiscal Years 2010-2012 (July to June) and Partial State Fiscal Year 2013 (July 2012 to April 2013)
45,000
40,000
35,000
30,000
25,000
20,000
15,000
36,972 38,863 31,730 22,501 Average Average Average Average
SFY 2010 SFY 2011 SFY 2012 SFY 2013 July 09-June 10 July 10-June 11 July 11-June 12 July 12-April 13
Food Assistance Program
The United States Department of Agriculture’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as the Food Stamp Program, provides qualifying low-income households with food benefits, access to a healthy diet and education on food preparation and nutrition. In Kansas, the program is administered through the Kansas Department for Children and Families (DCF) and is known as the Food Assistance Program.91
The Food Assistance Program provides a plastic debit card (i.e., Kansas Benefit card or Vision card) to eligible persons for use in purchasing food and plants to grow food from local grocery stores and selected farmers’ markets. The program provides crucial support to elderly households, to low-income working households, to other low income households that include the unemployed or disabled and to households transitioning from welfare to work.
Any single individual, household or group of individuals who live and eat together, whose income and resources are low and who meet certain basic program requirements can qualify. This may include persons who work but have a low income, persons who are unemployed, persons 60 years of age and older, and persons with disabilities.
Food assistance income limits go up as household size increases. The amount of assistance eligible persons receive is based on household size and amount of income after deductions. Household members do not have to be related to be considered part of the household.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 47 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
In FY 2012, the Kansas Department for Children and Families’ annual expenditure for Food Assistance was $454,499,052, more than double the $205,419,709 expended in FY 2008.
In FY 2008, 33.8 percent of the State of Kansas customers receiving Food Assistance resided in the eight-county United Way of the Plains service area. FY 2012 saw a similar proportional rate, with 33.9 percent of those receiving Food Assistance residing in the United Way of the Plains service area. However, in FY 2008, the United Way service area represented 46,287 of 187,375 Kansans; in FY 2012, the comparable number had grown to 76,604 of 303,257 Kansans.
The number of customers receiving Food Assistance increased in every county in the United Way of the Plains service area between FY 2008 and FY 2012, with the exception of Sumner and Kingman counties.
Table 31. Cash Assistance - Food Assistance - SNAP89 Average Number of Customers Assisted per Month State Fiscal Years 2008 to 2012 (State Fiscal Year - July 1 to June 30) County SFY 2008 SFY 2009 SFY 2010 SFY 2011 SFY 2012 Butler 3,366 3,763 4,633 5,566 5,772 Cowley 3,624 3,818 4,530 5,159 5,330 Harper 357 412 482 495 529 Harvey 2,030 2,066 2,819 3,305 3,309 Kingman 311 340 502 593 574 Reno 5,883 6,122 7,178 7,942 8,298 Sedgwick 46,287 50,721 64,365 74,683 76,604 Sumner 1,539 1,701 2,185 2,500 2,475 UWP Service Area 63,397 68,943 86,694 100,243 102,891 State of Kansas 187,375 208,007 259,609 296,542 303,257
Sedgwick County 24.7% 24.4% 24.8% 25.2% 25.3% as % of Kansas UWP Service Area 33.8% 33.1% 33.4% 33.8% 33.9% as % of Kansas
Program Service $205,419,709 $263,141,527 $383,275,641 $442,290,000 $454,499,052 Dollars (Kansas)
The average number of persons served during a fiscal year provides an incomplete picture of those benefitting from the Food Assistance public assistance program, as the numbers served per month vary considerably within a 12-month period. The number of persons receiving Food Assistance statewide continues to trend upward, leveling off somewhat in FY 2012 and the first 10 months of FY 2013.
Figure 10 displays the number of persons statewide receiving Food Assistance each month for SFY 2010, SFY 2011, SFY 2012 and the first 10 months of SFY 2010. The monthly average is represented by the horizontal bar for each year.
In April 2013, 317,392 persons in Kansas benefitted from receiving Food Assistance.
Page 48 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Figure 10. Cash Assistance - Food Assistance Number of Persons Assisted by Month90 State Fiscal Years 2010-2012 (July to June) and Partial State Fiscal Year 2013 (July 2012 to April 2013)
335,000
315,000
295,000
275,000
255,000
235,000
259,609 296,542 303,257 315,994 Average Average Average Average
SFY 2010 SFY 2011 SFY 2012 SFY 2013 July 09-June 10 July 10-June 11 July 11-June 12 July 12-April 13
Child Care Assistance Program
The Child Care Subsidy Program92 administered through the Kansas Department for Children and Families helps pay for child care costs for families who receive TANF (Temporary Assistance for Needy Families); low-income, working families; teen parents completing high school or a General Equivalency Diploma (GED), as well as some families in education or training activities to keep a job or get a better job.
If the family’s income meets program standards, they may qualify for child care assistance. Most families must pay part of the child care costs, using this assistance towards the cost of the care from their chosen child care provider. The family and the child must live in Kansas, and the child must be under age 13. If a child age 13 to 18 years old cannot provide self-care, the family may, in certain cases, qualify for assistance. Children overseen by the court may also qualify for assistance. If a parent is absent from the home, the parent who is in the home must work with Child Support Enforcement.
In this program, a subsidy amount goes to the parent or other qualified adult based on the number of children served. Benefits are paid to the eligible applicant through the Electronic Benefit transfer (EBT) Vision card, to be applied to child care costs. Benefits may or may not cover the entire cost of child care charged by a provider. Assistance amounts vary by family based on individual case circumstances.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 49 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Table 32. Maximum Monthly Income Guidelines For Child Care Assistance92 State Fiscal Year 2013 (State Fiscal Year - July 1 to June 30) Maximum Maximum Maximum Family Size Income Family Size Income Family Size Income Two $2,392 Six $4,871 Ten $7,350 Three $3,012 Seven $5,491 Eleven $7,970 Four $3,632 Eight $6,111 Twelve $8,590 Five $4,251 Nine $6,730
Types of child care which may qualify for assistance92 include a licensed child care center, a licensed family child care home, a licensed group child care home, a provider who comes into the child’s home or a child’s relative when the child goes to the relative’s home. Assistance is not provided for a person caring for his or her own children or for providers who live in the same household as the child.
In Fiscal Year 2012, the Kansas Department for Children and Families' annual expenditure for Child Care Assistance was $64,611,126, a decrease of $13,449,125 (17.2 percent) from FY 2008.
In FY 2008, 38.8 percent of Kansas children benefitting from Child Care Assistance resided in the eight- county United Way of the Plains service area; by FY 2012, that had decreased to 36.3 percent, a decrease of 1,826 area children per month benefitting from Child Care Assistance over the five-year period.
Between FY 2011 and FY 2012, only Kingman County showed an increase in the number of children benefitting from Child Care Assistance. The number decreased in the other seven counties over that same time period, with an overall year-to-year result of 652 fewer children benefitting from Child Care Assistance in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves.
Table 33. Cash Assistance - Child Care Assistance89 Average Number of Children Benefitting Per Month State Fiscal Years 2008 to 2012 (State Fiscal Year - July 1 to June 30) County SFY 2008 SFY 2009 SFY 2010 SFY 2011 SFY 2012 Butler 411 394 370 344 327 Cowley 300 279 246 254 210 Harper 42 41 45 23 18 Harvey 246 227 217 218 204 Kingman 19 24 30 31 33 Reno 587 591 577 535 499 Sedgwick 6,515 6,469 5,931 5,553 5,028 Sumner 117 118 100 105 92 UWP Service Area 8,237 8,143 7,516 7,063 6,411 State of Kansas 21,211 20,964 20,319 19,734 17,682
Sedgwick County 30.7% 30.9% 29.2% 28.1% 28.4% as % of Kansas UWP Service Area 38.8% 38.8% 37.0% 35.8% 36.3% as % of Kansas
Program Service $78,060,251 $76,786,510 $78,551,070 $70,970,882 $64,611,126 Dollars (Kansas)
Page 50 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Figure 11 displays the number of children statewide benefitting from Child Care Assistance each month for SFY 2010, SFY 2011, SFY 2012 and the first ten months of SFY 2013. The monthly average is represented by the horizontal bar for each year.
Decreases in the number of children benefitting from this program may be reflective of the downturn in the economy. If parents or other adult caregivers are unable to secure or retain employment, they do not qualify for this benefit on behalf of their children.
Figure 11. Cash Assistance - Child Care Assistance Number of Children Benefitting by Month90 State Fiscal Years 2010-2012 (July to June) and Partial State Fiscal Year 2013 (July 2012 to April 2013)
25,000
22,500
20,000
17,500
15,000
20,319 19,734 17,682 16,421 Average Average Average Average
SFY 2010 SFY 2011 SFY 2012 SFY 2013 July 09-June 10 July 10-June 11 July 11-June 12 July 12-April 13
Local Indicators of Poverty
According to the 2011 American Community Survey, 12.6 percent of Kansans had income in the past 12 months below the federal poverty level. For the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves, Butler County had the lowest percentage of individuals living below the poverty level (7.6 percent), and only in Butler, Harvey (11.1 percent) and Kingman (11.4 percent) counties was the percentage lower than for the state of Kansas as a whole.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 51 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Table 34. Poverty Status of Individuals in Past 12 Months by County93 Total Above Below % Below County Persons Poverty Poverty Poverty Butler 63,222 58,427 4,795 7.6% Cowley 34,459 28,675 5,784 16.8% Harper 5,822 5,011 811 13.9% Harvey 32,942 29,301 3,641 11.1% Kingman 7,620 6,754 866 11.4% Reno 60,834 52,905 7,929 13.0% Sedgwick 485,418 417,405 68,013 14.0% Sumner 23,657 20,682 2,975 12.6% UWP Service Area 713,974 619,160 94,814 13.3% State of Kansas 2,746,674 2,399,490 347,184 12.6%
Sedgwick County 17.7% 17.4% 19.6% as % of Kansas UWP Service Area 26.0% 25.8% 27.3% as % of Kansas
Poverty Guidelines
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) poverty guidelines are adjusted to reflect annual increases in prices for the previous calendar year as measured by the Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers. The poverty guidelines are calculated each year from the latest published Census Bureau poverty thresholds, not from the previous year's guidelines. Besides the inflation adjustment, the guidelines are also rounded and adjusted to standardize the differences between family sizes.
The same calculation procedure was used this year as in previous years. The poverty guidelines continue to be derived from the Census Bureau's current official poverty thresholds. The guidelines in this 2013 notice reflect the 2.1 percent price increase between calendar years 2011 and 2012. After this inflation adjustment, the guidelines are rounded and adjusted to standardize the differences between family sizes.
Table 35. 2013 Poverty Guidelines94 (for the 48 Contiguous States and the District of Columbia) Size of Poverty Guideline Size of Poverty Guideline Family Unit* (Annual Income) Family Unit* (Annual Income) 1 11,490 5 27,570 2 15,510 6 31,590 3 19,530 7 35,610 4 23,550 8* 39,630
*For family units with more than 8 members, add $4,020 for each additional member.
Underemployment
A variety of economic factors – uncertainty about overhauling the health care system and its impact on part-time employment, the continued volatility of the aircraft industry, and a sluggishly recovering job market, to name but a few -- have impacted the national and local economy. While layoffs and the accompanying uncertainty have led to unemployment for many, for others, they have led to "underemployment," a term which refers to taking part-time or temporary work, often for a lower salary.
Page 52 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Some under-employed employees would prefer to work full-time but are unable to because of slack business conditions, seasonal declines in demand, or other difficulty finding full-time work. In other cases, workers might have to accept a lower-paying full-time job than that for which they had been educated or trained. Likewise, they might have to accept work in a different field than that in which they had been working. Such a situation could easily take its toll on bill paying and money management on individuals and families, as the underemployed attempt to live with less income. It is stressful to deal with uncertainty and the lack of job stability. In addition to the harm such underemployment might cause to self esteem, other potential problems could include alcoholism, depression, loss of health insurance and so on.
According to the U.S. Department of Labor's Bureau of Labor Statistics,95 because of the difficulty of developing an objective set of criteria, no official government statistics are available on the total number of persons who might be viewed as underemployed. Even if many or most could be identified, it would still be difficult to quantify the effect on the economy of such underemployment.
Philanthropic Giving
Historically, the Giving USA report has utilized a consistent methodology to collect and analyze the data, making it a useful tool in identifying trends or turning points. Overall, charitable giving has not experienced significant change in the last three years and continues to follow the trend of limited growth. Nonprofits can expect to continue to endure limited donor contributions for the next five to ten years.96
Dr. Richard Waters, University of San Francisco professor in Nonprofit and Public Administration, stated, “Despite the rough year the American economy experienced in 2011, people saw the need for philanthropic support in their communities, and they responded. Nonprofit organizations need to take an important lesson away …donor cultivation is vital to their livelihood and longevity. Corporations and foundations are not the cornerstone of the nonprofit sector; the individual donor is. Nonprofits must shift their fundraising priorities to getting to know individuals at greater levels than ever before, listening and responding to their questions and concerns, and truly becoming partners with their donors rather than viewing them as a marketing outlet and potential contribution.“96
According to Giving USA 2013, across the nation total philanthropic increased to $316.2 billion in 2012, a 3.5 percent increase from the $305.5 billion donated in 2011.97 This represented just a 1.5 percent increase when adjusted for inflation. This includes donations in support of the arts, health, religion and other activities.
Donations were still down about 8 percent from their 2007 peak of $344.5 billion. Giving levels fell sharply during the subsequent recession. Gregg Carlson, chair of the Giving USA Foundation,97 noted that, as a general rule, giving follows the economy and consumer confidence, noting, “In 2012, Americans were feeling better - but not great."
As has been the case since 1959,98 living individuals accounted for almost three-quarters of the total estimate of charitable contributions. Individuals in the United States donated $228.9 billion in 2012, a 3.9 percent increase from $220.3 billion in 2011.97 The balance of charitable contributions was obtained via foundations, corporations and bequests.
To some degree, individual giving in 2012 may have been constrained by widespread unemployment, underemployment and worries about the economy.97 The 2012 fiscal cliff and proposed changes in the charitable tax deduction at year’s end may have affected how some individuals chose to give – some may have decided to give in 2012, while others may have taken a “wait and see” approach.99
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 53 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Economic Outlook
Companies and their foundations increased their giving by 12.2 percent to nearly $18.2 billion in 2012, compared with $16.2 billion the year before.97 Giving by charitable foundations, up 4.4 percent, added another $45.7 billion in 2012, and bequeathed gifts,
Giving USA’s 2013 Annual Report on Philanthropy in America noted that if charitable giving continues to grow at recent rates, it will take at least another six years to return to pre-recession (i.e., 2007) levels.99
Summary
The area employment situation and services for low-income poverty remain two important economic indicators.
In the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves, the rate of persons who were unemployed has decreased from the levels recorded in 2009 and 2010. Area unemployment spiked in July 2009, at which time the city of Wichita experienced an 11.1 percent unemployment rate; with comparable rates in Sedgwick County (10.3 percent), the Wichita MSA (10.0 percent) and the state (7.8 percent).
In 2012, the average unemployment rate was 7.5 in the city of Wichita, 6.9 in Sedgwick County, 6.5 in the eight-county United Way of the Plains Service area and 5.7 in Kansas, overall.
In terms of usage of public assistance programs administered through the Department for Children and Families, in State Fiscal Year 2009 the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves was home to: 30.2 percent of the Kansas families receiving Temporary Assistance for Needy Families 33.9 percent of the Kansas customers receiving Food Assistance 36.3 percent of the Kansas customers receiving Child Care Assistance
In the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves in SFY 2008, an average of 63,397 customers per month received Food Assistance; in SFY 2012, the number had increased to an average of 102,891 customers per month, an increase of 39,494 (62.3 percent) customers per month. Statewide trends indicate continued increases in the average number of customers receiving Food Assistance well into SFY 2013.
Statewide, total expenditures for Temporary Assistance to Families decreased nearly $10 million ($9,888,457) between SFY 2011 and SFY 2012, from $52,003,065 to $42,114,608. The number of families receiving TANF Cash Assistance benefits decreased in every county in the United Way of the Plains service area between FY 2011 and FY 2012. A total of 1,735 fewer area families were receiving this benefit per month, on average.
For 2011, 12.6 percent of Kansans had income in the past 12 months below the federal poverty level. For the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves, Butler, Harvey and Kingman counties had lower percentages of individuals living below the poverty level than did the state of Kansas as a whole.
The economy has impacted charitable giving. The expectation in 2013 is that it will take about another six or seven years for charitable giving levels to return to pre-recession levels. Area nonprofit organizations are attempting to serve the needs of more clients with fewer resources. Some organizations are tailoring their message to the community regarding their mission and need for funding; others are modifying their programs to adapt to funding opportunities which become available.
Page 54 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
It is hard to imagine a more important task than educating the next generation -- our future workforce, our future voters, our future leaders. By educating the broadest range of residents, we create a more prosperous, engaged and stable society. The goal of education is the transference of ideas and skills from many to many, from many to one, from one to many and from one to one. It is widely accepted that the process of education begins at birth -- or before -- and continues throughout life. Ultimately, all that we experience serves as a form of education.
The term education often refers solely to "formal education," which occurs when society or a group or an individual sets up a curriculum to educate people, usually the young.
United Way and many community partners are focused on the importance of early childhood development, improving school readiness so young children can enter school ready to succeed. United Way Success By 6® includes early learning programs, child care, parent education, health literacy and family resource center programs. Educational and child development programs such as Head Start and Early Head Start are targeted toward children before they enter Kindergarten. United Way also coordinates two community programs in support of childhood literacy: Dolly Parton Imagination Library and Raising a Reader. The focus of the Dolly Parton Imagination Library is to provide new books monthly to preschool children to stimulate their imaginations and encourage reading at an early age and the focus of Raising a Reader is to encourage preschoolers to develop a life-long love of reading and to encourage interaction with family members to reinforce such behavior.
United Way and its community partners are also focused on the importance of remaining in school, completing a high school education, and establishing a solid educational base that will provide long-term financial stability to individuals and their families.
According to the Global Partnership for Education,1 investing in education is the single most effective means of reducing poverty. Education is more than reading, writing, and arithmetic. It is one of the most important investments a country can make in its people and its future. Education is critical to reducing poverty and inequality because it: Gives people critical skills and tools to help them better provide for themselves and their children; Helps people work better and can create opportunities for sustainable and viable economic growth now and into the future; Helps fight the spread of HIV/AIDS and other diseases, reduces mother and child mortality and helps improve health; and Encourages transparency, good governance, stability and helps fight against graft and corruption.
The impact of investment in education is profound: education results in raising income, improving health, promoting gender equality, mitigating climate change, and reducing poverty. 1
This section will focus on primary and secondary (Kindergarten through 12th), post-secondary and technical education.
Kindergarten through 12th Grade
In addition to the traditional "Three R's" -- reading, writing and arithmetic -- primary and secondary schools attempt to teach the basic knowledge of subjects such as history, geography, mathematics, physics, chemistry and politics, encouraging mastery of a wide range of skills.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 55 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
This section on primary and secondary education will examine the federal No Child Left Behind legislation, five-year trends in school enrolment, racial and ethnic composition of student enrollment, Free and Reduced Meals (FARM) as an indicator of student/family poverty, incidence of dropouts, and nonpublic education such as private schools, religious based schools and homeschooling.
The No Child Left Behind Act
The No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act 2 was legislation designed to lead to higher standards and greater accountability throughout the Nation's school systems, to ensure that all children received a high quality education so that no child was left behind. The intent of NCLB was to provide greater flexibility to states and school districts, allowing them to use resources where they were needed most.
Under the NCLB Act, schools and school districts were given the responsibility to assure children were learning and would be held accountable for results. All children were to learn to read on grade level by the third grade. Students were to be tested every year in reading and math in grades 3 through 8 and at least once in high school (i.e., state assessments).
Schools meeting state reading and math goals achieved Adequate Yearly Progress. No Child Left Behind allowed parents to transfer children to another public school if the state determined the child's original school was "in need of improvement." It also provided children with free tutoring and extra help with schoolwork if the state determined the child's school has been "in need of improvement" for at least 2 years (i.e., Supplemental Educational Services).
Adequate Yearly Progress (AYP) was the process for making judgment as to whether or not all public elementary and secondary schools, districts, and states were reaching the annual targets to ensure that all students achieved Kansas' definition of proficiency by 2013-2014.3 In the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act of 20013, Adequate Yearly Progress was based on the premise that in 12 years, every child would be at a minimum proficiency on the state reading and mathematics assessments. The NCLB Act required that every student be tested. By testing all children, parents and teachers would know the academic achievement of every child, every group of students, and all students. This would have enabled parents and teachers to work together to ensure that no child would be left behind and to ensure not only school- wide and individual progress, but also student group progress.
No Child Left Behind State Waivers
Subject to the restrictions and conditions in Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA),4 Section 9401, as amended by the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 (Public Law 107-110), the federal Secretary of Education may waive statutory or regulatory requirements of the ESEA that are applicable to State Educational Agencies, local educational agencies, Indian tribes, or schools. Section 9401(b) of the ESEA details the information that a waiver applicant must submit to the Department. Section 9401(c) specifies certain requirements that the Secretary may not waive.
In 2011, the State of Kansas requested a waiver of state maintenance of financial support under the section of the legislation denoting “exceptional or uncontrollable circumstances.” 5 In July 2012, President Obama approved a request for a waiver from the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) Act from Kansas 6 in exchange for a state-developed plan to prepare all students for college and career, focus aid on the neediest students, and support effective teaching and leadership.
Elementary and Secondary Education Act
According to President Barrack Obama, “Every child in America deserves a world-class education.” Calling a “world class education both a “prerequisite for success” and “a moral imperative,” 7 in response to the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, the Obama administration has proposed a blueprint for reform (e.g., The Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act) builds on the changes already begun in four areas: 8
Page 56 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Improving teacher and principal effectiveness; Providing information to families to help them evaluate and improve their children's schools; Implementing college- and career-ready standards; and Improving student learning and achievement in America's lowest-performing schools by providing intensive support and effective interventions.
Citing his plan as an “outline for a re-envisioned federal role in education,” the President went on to note:7 “America was once the best educated nation in the world. A generation ago, we led all nations in college completion, but today, 10 countries have passed us. It is not that their students are smarter than ours. It is that these countries are being smarter about how to educate their students. And the countries that out- educate us today will out-compete us tomorrow.”
School Enrollment Five-Year Trends
Kansas9
In Kansas schools, the total enrollment for public, private and religious-based schools has primarily been trending upward over the past five years, with an average annual enrollment of 509,962 students. The percentage of white students attending schools in Kansas continued a downward trend, with 3.1 percent fewer white students (n = 11,074) attending in the 2012-2013 academic year than attended in the 2008- 2009 academic year. Student populations of Black and Native American students also trended downward during the five-year period, with 7.2 percent fewer Black students (n = 2,767) and 14.2 percent fewer Native American students (n = 891).
Hispanic and multi-racial student populations both trended strongly upward between the 2008-2009 and the 2012-2012 academic years with increases of 24,973 Hispanic students (38.2 percent) and 1,221 Asian students (9.3 percent). Statewide, there were 575 more multi-racial students during the 2012-2013 academic year than five years prior, an increase of 2.5 percent.
Table 36. State of Kansas School Enrollment by Group;9 Grades K - 12 Public, Private and Religious-Based Schools (2008-2009 Academic Year to 2012-2013 Academic Year)* 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 Group Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent
White 356,606 70.9% 353,592 69.5% 350,918 68.7% 347,765 67.9% 345,532 67.2% Black 38,498 7.7% 37,080 7.3% 36,565 7.2% 36,096 7.0% 35,731 7.0% Hispanic** 65,379 13.0% 78,913 15.5% 82,721 16.2% 87,020 17.0% 90,352 17.6% Native Am. 6,280 1.2% 6,525 1.3% 6,414 1.3% 5,683 1.1% 5,389 1.0% Asian 13,074 2.6% 13,114 2.6% 13,770 2.7% 14,053 2.7% 14,295 2.8% Multi-racial 23,194 4.6% 19,500 3.8% 20,757 4.1% 21,408 4.2% 22,619 4.4% Total w/race 503,031 100.0% 508,724 100.0% 511,145 100.0% 512,025 100.0% 513,918 100.0% Total 503,229 -- 509,018 -- 511,258 -- 512,201 -- 514,103 --
Column percentages may not sum to exactly 100 percent due to rounding error. *Due to incomplete data on the Kansas State Department of Education website regarding student race, percentages have been calculated by year on student base for which race was reported, rather than on total student base **Kansas State Department of Education records accept Hispanic origin as a race category, rather than an ethnic
background.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 57 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Sedgwick County9
In Sedgwick County overall, the total annual enrollment for public, private and religious-based schools for the past five years has averaged 85,253 students, varying up or down from that average by a few hundred students each year. Similar to what was occurring at the State level, the percentage of white students attending schools in Sedgwick County trended downward, with 9.5 percent fewer white students (n = 4,779) attending in the 2012-2013 academic year than attended in the 2008-09 academic year. Student populations of Sedgwick County Black and Native American students also trended downward during the five-year period, with 9.8 percent fewer Black students (n = 1,010) and 38.0 percent fewer Native American students (n = 622).
In addition, in Sedgwick County, the number of students identified as multi-racial decreased 14.2 percent (n=761) students during in the five year period, with 6,127 in the 2008-2009 academic year and 5,366 in the 2012-2013 academic year.
Hispanic and Asian student populations both trended upward, with increases of 4,989 Hispanic students and 96 Asian students (or 36.1 percent and 2.7 percent, respectively).
Table 37. Sedgwick County School Enrollment by Group;9 Grades K - 12 Public, Private and Religious-Based Schools (2008-2009 Academic Year to 2012-2013 Academic Year)* 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 Group Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent
White 50,146 58.6% 50,160 57.9% 47,814 56.1% 46,274 54.9% 45,367 54.4% Black 10,281 12.0% 10,108 11.7% 9,749 11.4% 9,530 11.3% 9,271 11.1% Hispanic** 13,817 16.2% 16,355 18.9% 17,650 20.7% 18,513 21.9% 18,806 22.5% Native Am. 1,635 1.9% 1,341 1.5% 1,178 1.4% 1,063 1.3% 1,013 1.2% Asian 3,527 4.1% 3,828 4.4% 3,857 4.5% 3,821 4.5% 3,623 4.3% Multi-racial 6,127 7.2% 4,915 5.7% 4,997 5.9% 5,150 6.1% 5,366 6.4% Total w/race 85,533 100.0% 86,707 100.0% 85,245 100.0% 84,351 100.0% 83,446 100.0%
Total 86,197 -- 86,887 -- 85,278 -- 84,401 -- 83,501 --
Column percentages may not sum to exactly 100 percent due to rounding error. *Due to incomplete data on the Kansas State Department of Education website regarding student race, percentages have been calculated by year on student base for which race was reported, rather than on total student base **Kansas State Department of Education records accept Hispanic origin as a race category, rather than an ethnic background.
Wichita Public Schools (USD 259)9
The Wichita Public School system is the largest public school district in the eight-county area. Total enrollments have trended upward over the past five years, with an average annual enrollment of 49,719.
The population of students of Hispanic ethnicity was the only group to show an increase from the 2008- 2009 academic year to the 2012-2013 academic year, rising by 4,549 students which represented a 39.1 percent increase.
All other race categories of students showed declines over the past five years, from decreases of 44.0 percent for Native American students (n=538) and 13.0 percent for multi-racial students (n=637) to decreases of 9.6 percent for Asian students (n=250); 5.7 percent for Black students (n = 554) and 5.6 percent for White students (n=1,055).
Page 58 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 38. Wichita School Enrollment by Group,9 Grades K - 12, Public Schools (2008-2009 Academic Year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) 2008-2009 2009-2010 2010-2011 2011-2012 2012-2013 Group Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent
White 18,710 38.3% 19,164 38.7% 18,284 36.8% 17,821 35.8% 17,655 35.1% Black 9,704 19.9% 9,673 19.5% 9,508 19.1% 9,248 18.6% 9,150 18.2% Hispanic** 11,642 23.9% 13,568 27.4% 14,765 29.7% 15,545 31.2% 16,191 32.2% Native Am. 1,223 2.5% 910 1.8% 780 1.6% 713 1.4% 685 1.4% Asian 2,611 5.4% 2,510 5.1% 2,454 4.9% 2,426 4.9% 2,361 4.7% Multi-racial 4,903 10.0% 3,659 7.4% 3,951 7.9% 4,087 8.2% 4,266 8.5% Total w/race 48,793 100.0% 49,484 100.0% 49,742 100.0% 49,840 100.0% 50,308 100.0%
Total 48,914 -- 49,658 -- 49,779 -- 49,888 -- 50,357 --
Column percentages may not sum to exactly 100 percent due to rounding error. *Due to incomplete data on the Kansas State Department of Education website regarding student race, percentages have been calculated by year on student base for which race was reported, rather than on total student base **Kansas State Department of Education records accept Hispanic origin as a race category, rather than an ethnic background.
Student Enrollment - Racial and Ethnic Composition
United Way of the Plains Service Area9
Table 39 presents a one-year snapshot of total 2012-2013 enrollment in public, private and religious- based schools in state of Kansas and in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves.
Although during the 2012-2013 academic year, USD 259 educated 9.8 percent of the state's total students overall, Wichita School District students comprised: 25.6 percent of the state's Black students, 16.5 percent of the state's Asian students, 18.9 percent of the state's multi-racial students, 17.9 percent of the state's Hispanic students, 16.5 percent of the state's Asian students, and 12.7 percent of the state's Native American students.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 59 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 39. School Enrollment - Grades K - 12* (2012-2013 Academic Year)* Public, Private and Religious-Based Schools 9 Total** White Black Hispanic*** County Count Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent Butler 13,698 11,841 86.5% 197 1.4% 790 5.8% Cowley 6,274 4,381 69.8% 161 2.6% 997 15.9% Harper 1,064 882 82.9% 3 0.3% 129 12.1% Harvey 3,622 2,896 80.0% 56 1.5% 505 13.9% Kingman 630 588 93.3% 2 0.3% 25 4.0% Reno 10,394 8,118 78.1% 305 2.9% 1,472 14.2% Sedgwick 83,501 45,367 54.4% 9,271 11.1% 18,806 22.5% Sumner 4,104 3,542 86.3% 60 1.5% 288 7.0% UWP Service Area 123,287 77,615 63.0% 10,055 8.2% 23,012 18.7% State of Kansas 514,103 345,532 67.2% 35,731 7.0% 90,352 17.6%
Wichita, USD 259 50,357 17,655 35.1% 9,150 18.2% 16,191 32.2%
Wichita, USD 259 as % 9.8% 5.1% 25.6% 17.9% of Kansas Sedgwick County as % 16.2% 13.1% 25.9% 20.8% of Kansas UWP Service Area as % 24.0% 22.5% 28.1% 25.5% of Kansas
Table 39. School Enrollment - Grades K - 12* (2012-2013 Academic Year)* Public, Private and Religious-Based Schools 9 Native American Asian Multi-Racial County Count Percent Count Percent Count Percent
Butler 151 1.1% 253 1.8% 463 3.4% Cowley 237 3.8% 133 2.1% 365 5.8% Harper 25 2.3% 4 0.4% 21 2.0% Harvey 27 0.7% 28 0.8% 109 3.0% Kingman 2 0.3% 1 0.2% 12 1.9% Reno 52 0.5% 65 0.6% 379 3.6% Sedgwick 1,013 1.2% 3,623 4.3% 5,366 6.4% Sumner 50 1.2% 10 0.2% 154 3.8% UWP Service Area 1,557 1.3% 4,117 3.3% 6,869 5.6% State of Kansas 5,389 1.0% 14,295 2.8% 22,619 4.4% Wichita, USD 259 685 1.4% 2,361 4.7% 4,266 8.5% Wichita, USD 259 12.7% 16.5% 18.9% as % of Kansas Sedgwick County 18.8% 25.3% 23.7% as % of Kansas UWP Service Area 28.9% 28.8% 30.4% as a % of Kansas
Refer to table notes on following page.
Page 60 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Notes for Table 39 on preceding page:
Data include the following students: Special Education, Special Education 3 and 4 year olds, nongraded and 4-year-old at-risk. *Due to incomplete data on the Kansas State Department of Education website regarding student race, percentages have been calculated by year on the student base for which race was reported, rather than on the total student base. **Total column includes all students, regardless of whether race information was provided, and does not sum to the individual racial categories. ***Kansas State Department of Education records accept Hispanic origin as a race category, rather than an ethnic background.
Sedgwick County 9
From the 2008-2009 academic year to the 2012-2013 academic year, the makeup of the student population in Sedgwick County overall became more prominently Hispanic and to a lesser degree, Asian; the proportions of white, black, multi-racial and Native American students in Sedgwick County decreased.
Table 40. Sedgwick County School Enrollment 9 Grades K-12 -- Public, Private and Religious-Based (2008-2009 Academic Year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Group 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
Black 10,281 9,271 1,010 decrease -9.8% Hispanic** 13,817 18,806 4,989 increase 36.1% Native American 1,635 1,013 622 decrease -38.0% Asian 3,527 3,623 96 increase 2.7% Multi-racial 6,127 5,366 761 decrease -12.4% Subtotal 35,387 38,079 2,692 increase 7.6% White 50,146 45,367 4,779 decrease -9.5% Total Students (with Race Information) 85,533 83,446 2,087 decrease -2.4% Minority Students as % Of Total Enrollment 41.4% 45.6% -- -- White Students as % Of Total Enrollment 58.6% 54.4% -- --
*Due to incomplete data on the Kansas State Department of Education website regarding student race, information has been presented by year on the student base for which race was reported, rather than on the total student base
**Kansas State Department of Education records accept Hispanic origin as a race category, rather than an ethnic background.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 61 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
County Public School Districts9
The eight-county United Way of the Plains service area is home to 46 public school districts.
Table 41. Number of Public School Districts Per County (2010)9 Sedgwick County 10 Butler County 9 Sumner County 7 Reno County 6 Cowley County 5 Harvey County 5 Harper County 2 Kingman County 2 Total Public School Districts 46
Within the eight counties encompassing the United Way of the Plains service area, the racial and ethnic makeup of the public school districts varies. The race and ethnicity data in the following sections have been compiled based on the KS Individual Data on Students (KIDS) System, the Superintendent's SO66 Reports and the Principals' Building Reports, as submitted to the Kansas State Department of Education (KSDE).
In the 2012-2013 academic year, only in the Wichita public school district does a minority majority of students exist. That is, only in USD 259 (where racial and ethnic minorities comprise 64.9 percent of the student enrollment) are more “students of color” found than white students.
In most south central Kansas public school districts, white students comprise at least seven in ten students, with the exception of the Arkansas City (59.5 percent), Newton (64.5 percent) and Hutchinson (68.9 percent) unified school districts (and the Wichita public school district, as previously noted).
The 2010 Environmental Scan noted that during the 2009-2010 academic year, in eight public school districts (Mulvane, Augusta, Rose Hill, Kingman-Norwich, Cheney, Buhler and Renwick), at least 19 in 20 students were white. During the 2012-2013 academic year, in no public school districts in south central Kansas were at least 95 percent of the students white. However, in 15 of the public school districts, at least 90 percent of the student body was white.
Table 42. White Students as a Percentage of Total Enrollment – Public School Districts in United Way of the Plains Service Area 9 (2008-2009 and 2012-2013 Academic Years) Sorted in Order of 2012-2013 Academic Year County Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Sedgwick Wichita, USD 259 38.3% 35.1% Cowley Arkansas City, USD 470 62.9% 59.5% Harvey Newton, USD 373 70.2% 64.5% Reno Hutchinson, USD 308 74.0% 68.9% Sedgwick Derby, USD 260 79.9% 73.3% Sedgwick Haysville, USD 261 86.7% 74.3% Cowley Winfield, USD 465 82.8% 74.5% (Continued on next page)
Page 62 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 42. White Students as a Percentage of Total Enrollment Public School Districts in United Way of the Plains Service Area 9 (2008-2009 and 2012-2013 Academic Years) Sorted in Order of 2012-2013 Academic Year County Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Sedgwick Maize, USD 266 84.1% 80.5% Sumner Wellington, USD 353 87.6% 80.5% Butler Remington Whitewater, USD 206 89.7% 81.0% Harper Anthony-Harper, USD 361 89.0% 81.5% Sumner South Haven, USD 509 87.7% 82.1% Butler Andover, USD 385 88.6% 82.5% Sedgwick Goddard, USD 265 84.7% 82.6% Reno Nickerson, USD 309 85.8% 83.0% Harvey Hesston, USD 460 90.3% 83.2% Sedgwick Valley Center, USD 262 88.7% 84.0% Cowley Central, USD 462 88.5% 84.4% Butler El Dorado, USD 490 83.7% 84.6% Sumner Caldwell, USD 360 92.8% 86.1% Harvey Burrton, USD 369 85.4% 86.6% Cowley Dexter, USD 471 89.8% 87.8% Sedgwick Mulvane, USD 263 92.5% 87.9% Butler Rose Hill, USD 394 94.2% 88.0% Harvey Halstead, USD 440 90.6% 88.1% Sumner Oxford, USD 358 92.1% 88.3% Butler Augusta, USD 402 92.6% 88.5% Butler Douglass, USD 396 94.5% 88.8% Butler Circle, USD 375 92.8% 89.4% Reno Fairfield, USD 310 93.2% 89.6% Cowley Udall, USD 463 91.6% 89.7% Harper Attica, USD 511 94.0% 90.7% Reno Haven, USD 312 92.6% 90.8% Harvey Sedgwick, USD 439 94.0% 90.9% Reno Pretty Prairie, USD 312 94.5% 90.9% Sedgwick Clearwater, USD 264 92.2% 91.1% Butler Bluestem, USD 205 87.3% 91.5% Reno Buhler, USD 313 90.5% 91.5% Butler Flinthills, USD 492 92.7% 91.5% Sedgwick Cheney, USD 268 97.0% 91.6% Sumner Conway Springs, USD 356 95.9% 91.7% Sumner Belle Plaine, USD 357 94.0% 92.4% Sumner Argonia, USD 359 97.4% 92.4% Kingman Kingman-Norwich, USD 331 95.6% 93.0% Sedgwick Renwick, USD 267 96.9% 93.3% Kingman Cunningham, USD 332 95.7% 94.4%
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 63 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
The following sections of the report present the racial and ethnic makeup of the various public school districts in the eight counties encompassing the United Way of the Plains service area for the 2008-2009 and the 2012-2013 academic years.
Sedgwick County Public School Districts9
There are ten public school districts in Sedgwick County. From the 2008-2009 academic year to the 2012-2013 academic year, the makeup of the overall USD 259 student population became more prominently Hispanic, while the proportion of other student subgroups (white, black, and Native American) decreased.
Suburban public schools districts have student bodies much less racially diverse than does Wichita. For example, during the 2012-2013 academic year, while white students represented 35.1 percent of the Wichita public school district's student body, they accounted for about three in four students -- or more -- in the Derby, Haysville, and Maize public school districts.
Nearly one in five (18.2 percent) Wichita public school students was black. Fewer than one in 22 (4.6 percent) Derby public school students was, and the ratios of black students in Maize (2.4 percent) and Haysville (1.5 percent) were even smaller.
Similarly, while 32.2 percent of Wichita public school students were Hispanic, other Sedgwick County school districts were less so. (Derby, 12.4 percent; Haysville, 12.3 percent; and Maize, 9.4 percent).
From the 2008-2009 academic year to the 2012-2013 academic year, the student populations in every Sedgwick County public school district became more racially diverse, with the proportion of white students to total enrollments decreasing in each public school district.
Table 43.A. Sedgwick County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
Cheney, USD 268 Black 2 2 No change 0.0% Hispanic** 8 32 24 increase 300.0% Native American 7 5 2 decrease -28.6% Asian N/A 2 N/A N/A Multi-racial 8 27 19 increase 237.5% Subtotal 25 68 43 increase 172.0% White 795 741 54 decrease -6.8% Total Students (with Race Information) 820 809 11 decrease -1.3% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 3.0% 8.4% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 97.0% 91.6% -- -- (Continued on next page)
Page 64 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 43.A. Sedgwick County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
Clearwater, USD 264 Black 9 3 6 decrease -66.7% Hispanic** 29 52 23 increase 79.3% Native American 11 12 1 increase 9.1% Asian N/A 7 N/A N/A Multi-racial 55 31 24 decrease -43.6% Subtotal 104 105 1 increase 1.0% White 1,235 1,078 157 decrease -12.7% Total Students (with Race Information) 1,339 1,183 156 decrease -11.7% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 7.8% 8.9% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 92.2% 91.1% -- -- Derby, USD 260 Black 341 317 24 decrease -7.0% Hispanic** 507 863 356 increase 70.2% Native American 86 103 17 increase 19.8% Asian N/A 311 N/A N/A Multi-racial 313 260 53 decrease -16.9% Subtotal 1,247 1,854 607 increase 48.7% White 4,967 5,089 122 increase 2.5% Total Students (with Race Information) 6,214 6,943 729 increase 11.7% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 20.1% 26.7% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 79.9% 73.3% -- -- Goddard, USD 265 Black 106 97 9 decrease -8.5% Hispanic** 256 404 148 increase 57.8% Native American 62 71 9 increase 14.5% Asian N/A 151 N/A N/A Multi-racial 331 209 122 decrease -36.9% Subtotal 755 932 177 increase 23.4% White 4,181 4,417 236 increase 5.6% Total Students (with Race Information) 4,936 5,349 413 increase 8.4% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 15.3% 17.4% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 84.7% 82.6% -- -- (Continued on next page)
*Due to incomplete data on the Kansas State Department of Education website regarding student race, information has been presented by year on the student base for which race was reported, rather than on the total student base
**Kansas State Department of Education records accept Hispanic origin as a race category, rather than an ethnic background.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 65 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 43.A. Sedgwick County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
Haysville, USD 261 Black 121 78 43 decrease -35.5% Hispanic** 381 662 281 increase 73.8% Native American 119 54 65 decrease -54.6% Asian N/A 192 N/A N/A Multi-racial 0 396 396 increase 100.0% Subtotal 621 1,382 761 increase 122.5% White 4,047 3,988 59 decrease -1.5% Total Students (with Race Information) 4,668 5,370 702 increase 15.0% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 13.3% 25.7% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 86.7% 74.3% -- --
Maize, USD 266 Black 143 167 24 increase 16.8% Hispanic** 383 658 275 increase 71.8% Native American 59 83 24 increase 40.7% Asian N/A 274 N/A N/A Multi-racial 419 187 232 decrease -55.4% Subtotal 1,004 1,369 365 increase 36.4% White 5,318 5,646 328 increase 6.2% Total Students (with Race Information) 6,322 7,015 693 increase 11.0% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 15.9% 19.5% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 84.1% 80.5% -- -- Mulvane, USD 263 Black 24 17 7 decrease -29.2% Hispanic** 61 89 28 increase 45.9% Native American 24 27 3 increase 12.5% Asian N/A 15 N/A N/A Multi-racial 31 72 41 increase 132.3% Subtotal 140 220 80 increase 57.1% White 1,738 1,600 138 decrease -7.9% Total Students (with Race Information) 1,878 1,820 58 decrease -3.1% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 7.5% 12.1% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 92.5% 87.9% -- -- (Continued on next page)
*Due to incomplete data on the Kansas State Department of Education website regarding student race, information has been presented by year on the student base for which race was reported, rather than on the total student base
**Kansas State Department of Education records accept Hispanic origin as a race category, rather than an ethnic background.
Page 66 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 43.A. Sedgwick County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
Renwick, USD 267 Black 3 1 2 decrease -66.7% Hispanic** 22 78 56 increase 254.5% Native American 10 15 5 increase 50.0% Asian N/A 4 N/A N/A Multi-racial 27 30 3 increase 11.1% Subtotal 62 128 66 increase 106.5% White 1,932 1,795 137 decrease -7.1% Total Students (with Race Information) 1,994 1,923 71 decrease -3.6% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 3.1% 6.7% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 96.9% 93.3% -- --
Valley Center, USD 262 Black 26 39 13 increase 50.0% Hispanic** 137 261 124 increase 90.5% Native American 29 31 2 increase 6.9% Asian N/A 20 N/A N/A Multi-racial 104 85 19 decrease -18.3% Subtotal 296 436 140 increase 47.3% White 2,316 2,284 32 decrease -1.4% Total Students (with Race Information) 2,612 2,720 108 increase 4.1% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 11.3% 16.0% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 88.7% 84.0% -- -- Wichita, USD 259 Black 9,704 9,150 554 decrease -5.7% Hispanic** 11,642 16,191 4,549 increase 39.1% Asian 1,223 685 538 decrease -44.0% Native Am. 2,611 2,361 250 decrease -9.6% Multi-racial 4,903 4,266 637 decrease -13.0% Subtotal 30,083 32,653 2,570 increase 8.5% White 18,710 17,655 1,055 decrease -5.6% Total Students (with Race Information) 48,793 50,308 1,515 decrease 3.1% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 61.7% 64.9% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 38.3% 35.1% -- --
*Due to incomplete data on the Kansas State Department of Education website regarding student race, information has been presented by year on the student base for which race was reported, rather than on the total student base
**Kansas State Department of Education records accept Hispanic origin as a race category, rather than an ethnic background.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 67 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Butler County Public School Districts9
There are nine public school districts in Butler County, excluding the El Dorado Correctional Facility. During the five year period from the 2008-2009 academic year to the 2012-2013 academic year, the Andover public school district experienced a net gain of 897 students, 461 of them white. More than eight in ten (82.5 percent) Andover public school students are white.
The enrollment of Hispanic students in Andover public schools grew from 127 to 374 during the same time period.
Table 43.B. Butler County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
Andover, USD 385 Black 72 106 34 increase 47.2% Hispanic** 127 374 247 increase 194.5% Native American 32 28 4 decrease -12.5% Asian N/A 244 N/A N/A Multi-racial 294 209 85 decrease -28.9% Subtotal 525 961 436 increase 83.0% White 4,067 4,528 461 increase 11.3% Total Students (with Race Information) 4,592 5,489 897 increase 19.5% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 11.4% 17.5% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 88.6% 82.5% -- -- Augusta, USD 402 Black 26 12 14 decrease -53.8% Hispanic** 82 131 49 increase 59.8% Native American 35 23 12 decrease -34.3% Asian N/A 18 N/A N/A Multi-racial 27 86 59 increase 218.5% Subtotal 170 270 100 increase 58.8% White 2,140 2,068 72 decrease -3.4% Total Students (with Race Information) 2,310 2,338 28 increase 1.2% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 7.4% 11.5% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 92.6% 88.5% -- -- (Continued on next page)
*Due to incomplete data on the Kansas State Department of Education website regarding student race, information has been presented by year on the student base for which race was reported, rather than on the total student base
**Kansas State Department of Education records accept Hispanic origin as a race category, rather than an ethnic background.
Page 68 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 43.B. Butler County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
Bluestem, USD 205 Black 12 5 7 decrease -58.3% Hispanic** 24 24 No change 0.0% Native American 10 5 5 decrease -50.0% Asian N/A 2 N/A N/A Multi-racial 32 9 23 decrease -71.9% Subtotal 78 45 33 decrease -42.3% White 536 483 53 decrease -9.9% Total Students (with Race Information) 614 528 86 decrease -14.0% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 12.7% 8.5% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 87.3% 91.5% -- --
Circle, USD 375 Black 29 22 7 decrease -24.1% Hispanic** 42 74 32 increase 76.2% Native American 31 32 1 increase 3.2% Asian N/A 18 N/A N/A Multi-racial 15 57 42 increase 280.0% Subtotal 117 203 86 increase 73.5% White 1,502 1,710 208 increase 13.8% Total Students (with Race Information) 1,619 1,913 294 increase 18.2% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 7.2% 10.6% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 92.8% 89.4% -- -- Douglass, USD 396 Black 6 8 2 increase 33.3% Hispanic** 11 37 26 increase 236.4% Native American 5 4 1 decrease -20.0% Asian N/A 1 N/A N/A Multi-racial 23 34 11 increase 47.8% Subtotal 45 84 39 increase 86.7% White 766 664 102 decrease -13.3% Total Students (with Race Information) 811 748 63 decrease -7.8% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 5.5% 11.2% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 94.5% 88.8% -- -- (Continued on next page)
*Due to incomplete data on the Kansas State Department of Education website regarding student race, information has been presented by year on the student base for which race was reported, rather than on the total student base
**Kansas State Department of Education records accept Hispanic origin as a race category, rather than an ethnic background.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 69 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 43.B. Butler County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
El Dorado, USD 490 Black 31 51 20 increase 64.5% Hispanic** 56 139 83 increase 148.2% Native American 17 31 14 increase 82.4% Asian N/A 11 N/A N/A Multi-racial 237 83 154 decrease -65.0% Subtotal 341 315 26 decrease -7.6% White 1,756 1,727 29 decrease -1.7% Total Students (with Race Information) 2,097 2,042 55 decrease -2.6% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 16.3% 15.4% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 83.7% 84.6% -- --
Flinthills, USD 492 Black 4 8 4 increase 100.0% Hispanic** 0 3 3 increase 100.0% Native American 4 4 No change 0.0% Asian N/A 0 N/A N/A Multi-racial 14 9 5 decrease -35.7% Subtotal 22 24 2 increase 9.1% White 280 258 22 decrease -7.9% Total Students (with Race Information) 302 282 20 decrease -6.6% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 7.3% 8.5% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 92.7% 91.5% -- -- Remington Whitewater, USD 206 Black 17 16 1 decrease 5.9% Hispanic** 24 46 22 increase 91.7% Native American 12 17 5 increase 41.7% Asian N/A 7 N/A N/A Multi-racial 1 21 20 increase 2,000.0% Subtotal 54 107 53 increase 98.1% White 469 457 12 decrease -2.6% Total Students (with Race Information) 523 564 41 increase 7.8% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 10.3% 19.0% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 89.7% 81.0% -- -- (Continued on next page)
*Due to incomplete data on the Kansas State Department of Education website regarding student race, information has been presented by year on the student base for which race was reported, rather than on the total student base
**Kansas State Department of Education records accept Hispanic origin as a race category, rather than an ethnic background.
Page 70 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 43.B. Butler County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
Rose Hill, USD 394 Black 28 21 7 decrease -25.0% Hispanic** 55 91 36 increase 65.5% Native American 14 21 7 increase 50.0% Asian N/A 27 N/A N/A Multi-racial 2 45 43 increase 2,150.0% Subtotal 99 205 106 increase 107.1% White 1,600 1,504 96 decrease -6.0% Total Students (with Race Information) 1,699 1,709 10 increase 0.6% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 5.8% 12.0% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 94.2% 88.0% -- --
*Due to incomplete data on the Kansas State Department of Education website regarding student race, information has been presented by year on the student base for which race was reported, rather than on the total student base
**Kansas State Department of Education records accept Hispanic origin as a race category, rather than an ethnic background.
Cowley County Public School Districts9
There are five public school districts in Cowley County. During the five year period from the 2008-2009 academic year to the 2012-2013 academic year, Cowley County schools experienced the loss of 423 white students and a gain of 289 minority students, for a net loss of 134 students.
The diversification in the composition of the student body in Cowley County public school districts continues. During the 2008-2009 academic year, 82.8 percent of students in the Winfield district and 91.6 percent of the students in the Udall district were white. During the 2012-2013 academic year, these percentages were 74.5 and 89.7, respectively.
Table 43.C. Cowley County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
Arkansas City, USD 470 Black 102 106 4 increase 3.9% Hispanic** 520 670 150 increase 28.8% Native American 144 184 40 increase 27.8% Asian N/A 20 N/A N/A Multi-racial 294 144 150 decrease -51.0% Subtotal 1,060 1,124 64 increase 6.0% White 1,799 1,650 149 decrease -8.3% Total Students (with Race Information) 2,859 2,774 85 decrease -3.0% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 37.1% 40.5% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 62.9% 59.5% -- -- (Continued on next page)
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 71 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 43.C. Cowley County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
Central, USD 462 Black 3 2 1 decrease -33.3% Hispanic** 8 30 22 increase 275.0% Native American 8 8 No change 0.0% Asian N/A 0 N/A N/A Multi-racial 21 13 8 decrease -38.1% Subtotal 40 53 13 increase 32.5% White 307 287 20 decrease -6.5% Total Students (with Race Information) 347 340 7 decrease -2.0% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 11.5% 15.6% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 88.5% 84.4% -- -- Dexter, USD 471 Black 3 3 No change 0.0% Hispanic** 4 5 1 increase 25.0% Native American 10 5 5 decrease -50.0% Asian N/A 1 N/A N/A Multi-racial 1 6 5 increase 500.0% Subtotal 18 20 2 increase 11.1% White 159 144 15 decrease -9.4% Total Students (with Race Information) 177 164 13 decrease -7.3% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 10.2% 12.2% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 89.8% 87.8% -- --
Udall, USD 463 Black 8 2 6 decrease -75.0% Hispanic** 7 16 9 increase 128.6% Native American 9 9 No change 0.0% Asian N/A 1 N/A N/A Multi-racial 10 10 No change 0.0% Subtotal 34 38 4 increase 11.8% White 370 332 38 decrease -10.3% Total Students (with Race Information) 404 370 34 decrease -8.4% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 8.4% 10.3% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 91.6% 89.7% -- -- (Continued on next page)
Page 72 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 43.C. Cowley County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
Winfield, USD 465 Black 114 48 66 decrease -57.9% Hispanic** 177 250 73 increase 41.2% Native American 61 31 30 decrease -49.2% Asian N/A 111 N/A N/A Multi-racial 73 191 118 increase 161.6% Subtotal 425 631 206 increase 48.5% White 2,047 1,846 201 decrease -9.8% Total Students (with Race Information) 2,472 2,477 5 increase 0.2% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 17.2% 25.5% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 82.8% 74.5% -- --
*Due to incomplete data on the Kansas State Department of Education website regarding student race, information has been presented by year on student base for which race was reported, rather than on total student base **Kansas State Department of Education records accept Hispanic origin as a race category, rather than an ethnic background.
Harper County Public School Districts9
Harper County has two public school districts, Anthony-Harper and Attica, both of which experienced net increases in student enrollment during the five year period from the 2008-2009 academic year to the 2012-2013 academic year.
During that five-year time period, both public school districts in Harper County saw a decrease in the percentage of white students enrolled, although during the 2012-2013 academic year, in the Attica district nearly nine in ten students were white, as were more than eight in ten in the Anthony-Harper district.
Table 43.D. Harper County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
Anthony-Harper, USD 361 Black 13 3 10 decrease -76.9% Hispanic** 65 116 51 increase 78.5% Native American 16 25 9 increase 56.3% Asian N/A 4 N/A N/A Multi-racial 1 19 18 increase 1,800.0% Subtotal 95 167 72 increase 75.8% White 771 735 36 decrease -4.7% Total Students (with Race Information) 866 902 36 increase 4.2% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 11.0% 18.5% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 89.0% 81.5% -- -- (Continued on next page)
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 73 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 43.D. Harper County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
Attica, USD 511 Black 0 0 No change 0.0% Hispanic** 5 13 8 increase 160.0% Native American 1 0 1 decrease -100.0% Asian N/A 0 N/A N/A Multi-racial 3 2 1 decrease -33.3% Subtotal 9 15 6 increase 66.7% White 140 147 7 increase 5.0% Total Students (with Race Information) 149 162 13 increase 8.7% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 6.0% 9.3% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 94.0% 90.7% -- --
*Due to incomplete data on the Kansas State Department of Education website regarding student race, information has been presented by year on student base for which race was reported, rather than on total student base **Kansas State Department of Education records accept Hispanic origin as a race category, rather than an ethnic background.
Harvey County Public School Districts9
There are five public school districts in Harvey County. During the five year period from the 2008-2009 academic year to the 2012-2013 academic year, the Newton and Hesston public school districts saw increases of 110 and 8 students respectively. Although the Halstead, Sedgwick and Burrton public school districts experienced decreases of 37, 37 and 14 students, respectively, Harvey County experienced an overall net increase of 30 students.
This same five-year period saw a decrease of 303 in the number of white students in Harvey County public schools and an increase of 333 in the number of minority students, again representing a net increase of 30 students.
Newton public school district experienced a decrease of 135 white students and an increase of 245 minority students, mostly driven by the increased enrollment of Hispanic students, which grew by 242 students, from 776 to 1,018, during the same five-year time period.
Page 74 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 43.E. Harvey County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
Burrton, USD 369 Black 8 1 7 decrease -87.5% Hispanic** 26 16 10 decrease -38.5% Native American 3 5 2 increase 66.7% Asian N/A 0 N/A N/A Multi-racial 1 11 10 increase 1,000.0% Subtotal 38 33 5 decrease -13.2% White 222 213 9 decrease -4.1% Total Students (with Race Information) 260 246 14 decrease -5.4% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 14.6% 13.4% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 85.4% 86.6% -- --
Halstead, USD 440 Black 4 4 No change 0.0% Hispanic** 56 57 1 increase 1.8% Native American 4 8 4 increase 100.0% Asian N/A 3 N/A N/A Multi-racial 14 23 9 increase 64.3% Subtotal 78 95 17 increase 21.8% White 754 700 54 decrease -7.2% Total Students (with Race Information) 832 795 37 decrease -4.4% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 9.4% 11.9% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 90.6% 88.1% -- -- Hesston, USD 460 Black 12 16 4 increase 33.3% Hispanic** 37 85 48 increase 129.7% Native American 4 5 1 increase 25.0% Asian N/A 14 N/A N/A Multi-racial 29 24 5 decrease -17.2% Subtotal 82 144 62 increase 75.6% White 766 712 54 decrease -7.0% Total Students (with Race Information) 848 856 8 increase 0.9% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 9.7% 16.8% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 90.3% 83.2% -- --
Newton, USD 373 Black 119 96 23 decrease -19.3% Hispanic** 776 1,018 242 increase 31.2% Native American 17 28 11 increase 64.7% Asian N/A 31 N/A N/A Multi-racial 173 157 16 decrease -9.2% Subtotal 1,085 1,330 245 increase 22.6% White 2,550 2,415 135 decrease -5.3% Total Students (with Race Information) 3,635 3,745 110 increase 3.0% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 29.8% 35.5% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 70.2% 64.5% -- -- (Continued on next page)
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 75 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 43.E. Harvey County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
Sedgwick, USD 439 Black 2 0 2 decrease -100.0% Hispanic** 9 25 16 increase 177.8% Native American 5 4 1 decrease -20.0% Asian N/A 0 N/A N/A Multi-racial 17 18 1 increase 5.9% Subtotal 33 47 14 increase 42.4% White 521 470 51 decrease -9.8% Total Students (with Race Information) 554 517 37 decrease -6.7% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 6.0% 9.1% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 94.0% 90.9% -- --
*Due to incomplete data on the Kansas State Department of Education website regarding student race, information has been presented by year on student base for which race was reported, rather than on total student base **Kansas State Department of Education records accept Hispanic origin as a race category, rather than an ethnic background.
Kingman County Public School Districts9
Kingman County has two public school districts, Cunningham and Kingman-Norwich, both of which experienced net decreases in student enrollment during the five year period from the 2008-2009 academic year to the 2012-2013 academic year.
During that five-year time period, both public school districts in Harper County saw a decrease in the percentage of white students enrolled. For the 2012-2013 academic year, the vast majority of both Cunningham and Kingman-Norwich students were white.
Table 43.F. Kingman County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
Cunningham, USD 332 Black 2 1 1 decrease -50.0% Hispanic** 3 6 3 increase 100.0% Native American 3 0 3 decrease -100.0% Asian N/A 0 N/A N/A Multi-racial 0 3 3 increase 100.0% Subtotal 8 10 2 increase 25.0% White 180 168 12 decrease -6.7% Total Students (with Race Information) 188 178 10 decrease -5.3% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 4.3% 5.6% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 95.7% 94.4% -- -- (Continued on next page)
Page 76 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 43.F. Kingman County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
Kingman-Norwich, USD 331 Black 7 2 5 decrease -71.4% Hispanic** 18 37 19 increase 105.6% Native American 17 4 13 decrease -76.5% Asian N/A 6 N/A N/A Multi-racial 6 24 18 increase 300.0% Subtotal 48 73 25 increase 52.1% White 1,054 963 91 decrease -8.6% Total Students (with Race Information) 1,102 1,036 66 decrease -6.0% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 4.4% 7.0% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 95.6% 93.0% -- --
*Due to incomplete data on the Kansas State Department of Education website regarding student race, information has been presented by year on student base for which race was reported, rather than on total student base. **Kansas State Department of Education records accept Hispanic origin as a race category, rather than an ethnic background.
Reno County Public School Districts9
Reno County has six public school districts. Half experienced increases in student enrollment during the five year period from the 2008-2009 academic year to the 2012-2013 academic year (Hutchinson, Buhler and Pretty Prairie), while half experienced decreases in student enrollment (Haven, Fairfield and Nickerson). Overall, Reno County public school districts saw a net increase of 332 students.
White students as a percentage of total student enrollment decreased in five on the six public school districts, with only Buhler public schools reflecting an slight increase in the percentage of white students (from 90.5 to 91.5 percent).
During the five year period, in Reno County public schools the number of white students decreased by 70 students while the number of minority students increased by 402 students, a net increase of 332 Reno County public school students. The Hutchinson public schools experienced an increase of 12 white students accompanied by an increase of 271 Hispanic students.
Table 43.G. Reno County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
Buhler, USD 313 Black 60 35 25 decrease -41.7% Hispanic** 98 103 5 increase 5.1% Native American 10 4 6 decrease -60.0% Asian N/A 20 N/A N/A Multi-racial 45 32 13 decrease -28.9% Subtotal 213 194 19 decrease -8.9% White 2,027 2,097 70 increase 3.5% Total Students (with Race Information) 2,240 2,291 51 increase 2.3% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 9.5% 8.5% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 90.5% 91.5% -- -- (Continued on next page)
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 77 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 43.G. Reno County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
Fairfield, USD 310 Black 1 0 1 decrease -100.0% Hispanic** 14 23 9 increase 64.3% Native American 0 1 1 increase 100.0% Asian N/A 0 N/A N/A Multi-racial 6 5 1 decrease -16.7% Subtotal 21 29 8 increase 38.1% White 288 250 38 decrease -13.2% Total Students (with Race Information) 309 279 30 decrease -9.7% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 6.8% 10.4% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 93.2% 89.6% -- -- Haven, USD 312 Black 22 8 14 decrease -63.6% Hispanic** 37 40 3 increase 8.1% Native American 7 7 No change 0.0% Asian N/A 3 N/A N/A Multi-racial 10 33 23 increase 230.0% Subtotal 76 91 15 increase 19.7% White 953 896 57 decrease -6.0% Total Students (with Race Information) 1,029 987 42 decrease -4.1% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 7.4% 9.2% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 92.6% 90.8% -- -- Hutchinson, USD 308 Black 399 240 159 decrease -39.8% Hispanic** 779 1,050 271 increase 34.8% Native American 53 28 25 decrease -47.2% Asian N/A 27 N/A N/A Multi-racial 5 251 246 increase 4,920.0% Subtotal 1,236 1,596 360 increase 29.1% White 3,521 3,533 12 increase 0.3% Total Students (with Race Information) 4,757 5,129 372 increase 7.8% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 26.0% 31.1% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 74.0% 68.9% -- -- Nickerson, USD 309 Black 43 20 23 decrease -53.5% Hispanic** 112 115 3 increase 2.7% Native American 11 5 6 decrease -54.5% Asian N/A 6 N/A N/A Multi-racial 3 51 48 increase 1,600.0% Subtotal 169 197 28 increase 16.6% White 1,020 962 58 decrease -5.7% Total Students (with Race Information) 1,189 1,159 30 decrease -2.5% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 14.2% 17.0% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 85.8% 83.0% -- -- (Continued on next page)
Page 78 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 43.G. Reno County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
Pretty Prairie, USD 312 Black 0 1 1 increase 100.0% Hispanic** 0 12 12 increase 100.0% Native American 0 8 8 increase 100.0% Asian N/A 0 N/A N/A Multi-racial 15 5 10 decrease -66.7% Subtotal 15 26 11 increase 73.3% White 258 259 1 increase 0.4% Total Students (with Race Information) 273 285 12 increase 4.4% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 5.5% 9.1% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 94.5% 90.9% -- --
*Due to incomplete data on the Kansas State Department of Education website regarding student race, information has been presented by year on student base for which race was reported, rather than on total student base **Kansas State Department of Education records accept Hispanic origin as a race category, rather than an ethnic background.
Sumner County Public School Districts9
There are seven public school districts in Sumner County. During the five year period from the 2008-2009 academic year to the 2012-2013 academic year, these districts experienced a decline in student enrollment, with a net decrease of 265 Sumner County students, comprised of a decrease of 444 white students and an increase of 179 minority students.
During the five-year period, public school districts in Sumner County were predominantly white. More than nine in ten students in the Argonia, Belle Plaine, and Conway Springs public school districts were white. In the other four districts, white students represented at least eight in ten students.
Table 43.H. Sumner County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
Argonia, USD 359 Black 0 3 3 increase 100.0% Hispanic** 4 8 4 increase 100.0% Native American 0 0 No change 0.0% Asian 0 0 N/A N/A Multi-racial 1 2 1 increase 100.0% Subtotal 5 13 8 increase 160.0% White 190 158 32 decrease -16.8% Total Students (with Race Information) 195 171 24 decrease -12.3% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 2.6% 7.6% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 97.4% 92.4% -- -- (Continued on next page)
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 79 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 43.H. Sumner County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
Belle Plaine, USD 357 Black 7 8 1 increase 14.3% Hispanic** 18 17 1 decrease -5.6% Native American 12 5 7 decrease -58.3% Asian N/A 1 N/A N/A Multi-racial 7 19 12 increase 171.4% Subtotal 44 50 6 increase 13.6% White 687 606 81 decrease -11.8% Total Students (with Race Information) 731 656 75 decrease -10.3% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 6.0% 7.6% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 94.0% 92.4% -- -- Caldwell, USD 360 Black 3 3 No change 0.0% Hispanic** 11 12 1 increase 9.1% Native American 2 12 10 increase 500.0% Asian N/A 1 N/A N/A Multi-racial 1 8 7 increase 700.0% Subtotal 17 36 19 increase 111.8% White 218 223 5 increase 2.3% Total Students (with Race Information) 235 259 24 increase 10.2% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 7.2% 13.9% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 92.8% 86.1% -- -- Conway Springs, USD 356 Black 4 2 2 decrease -50.0% Hispanic** 7 23 16 increase 228.6% Native American 11 6 5 decrease -45.5% Asian N/A 0 N/A N/A Multi-racial 4 21 17 increase 425.0% Subtotal 26 52 26 increase 100.0% White 613 575 38 decrease -6.2% Total Students (with Race Information) 639 627 12 decrease -1.9% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 4.1% 8.3% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 95.9% 91.7% -- -- Oxford, USD 358 Black 9 10 1 increase 11.1% Hispanic** 5 19 14 increase 280.0% Native American 3 5 2 increase 66.7% Asian N/A 1 N/A N/A Multi-racial 11 8 3 decrease -27.3% Subtotal 28 43 15 increase 53.6% White 327 325 2 decrease -0.6% Total Students (with Race Information) 355 368 13 increase 3.7% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 7.9% 11.7% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 92.1% 88.3% -- -- (Continued on next page)
Page 80 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 43.H. Sumner County School Enrollment 9 Grades K – 12 Public School Districts (2008-2009 academic year to 2012-2013 Academic Year*) Public School District 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change
South Haven, USD 509 Black 0 0 No change 0.0% Hispanic** 3 12 9 increase 300.0% Native American 3 4 1 increase 33.3% Asian N/A 1 N/A N/A Multi-racial 23 18 5 decrease -21.7% Subtotal 29 35 6 increase 20.7% White 207 160 47 decrease -22.7% Total Students (with Race Information) 236 195 41 decrease -17.4% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 12.3% 17.9% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 87.7% 82.1% -- --
Wellington, USD 353 Black 47 34 13 decrease -27.7% Hispanic** 100 190 90 increase 90.0% Native American 13 18 5 increase 38.5% Asian N/A 6 N/A N/A Multi-racial 57 78 21 increase 36.8% Subtotal 217 326 109 increase 50.2% White 1,530 1,349 181 decrease -11.8% Total Students (with Race Information) 1,747 1,675 72 decrease -4.1% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 12.4% 19.5% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 87.6% 80.5% -- --
*Due to incomplete data on the Kansas State Department of Education website regarding student race, information has been presented by year on student base for which race was reported, rather than on total student base **Kansas State Department of Education records accept Hispanic origin as a race category, rather than an ethnic background.
Indicator of Poverty -- Free and Reduced Meals (FARM)
Several Child Nutrition Programs are federally subsidized through the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Regulations define a household's eligibility to participate on either a full paid, reduced price or free basis. The guidelines are intended to direct benefits to those children most in need and are revised annually to account for changes in the Consumer Price Index.
During the 2012-2013 academic year, in the Wichita public schools in Kindergarten through 12th grade, the average daily participation in the school meals program was 10,910 breakfasts and 32,687 lunches. As of October 2011, 74.3% of K-12 students enrolled in Wichita Public Schools qualify for free or reduced meals. 10
In the Wichita school district, Nutrition Services currently operates: the K-12 School Breakfast program the K-12 School Lunch program the Pre-kindergarten and Child Development Center Breakfast, Lunch and Snack the After School Care Snack program the Summer Food Service program Special Diets Meals, and the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable program.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 81 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Wichita school district students in households getting Food Assistance, Temporary Assistance for Families (TANF), or Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR) can receive free meals regardless of income. Free meals are available to foster children; in addition, students in a household can get free meals if the household’s gross income is within the free limits on the Federal Income Eligibility Guidelines. Households where the income exceeds the limits on the Federal Income Chart for free meals may still qualify for reduced price meals. If a child’s household size goes up or the household income goes down, applications for benefits can be submitted at any time during the academic year. In addition, if parents or caregivers lose their jobs, children may qualify to receive reduced price or free meals during the unemployment period. Children and/or their parents do not have to be United States citizens for a child to qualify to receive reduced price or free meals.11
Table 44 presents the federal government's gross household income eligibility limits for the 2012-2013 academic year.
Table 44. Federal Income Chart -- Child Nutrition Program Benefits 12 Effective July 1, 2012 - June 30, 2013 Household Household Income Household Household Income Size Annual Monthly Weekly Size Annual Monthly Weekly One $20,665 $1,723 $398 Six $57,295 $4,775 $1,102 Two $27,991 $2,333 $539 Seven $64,621 $5,386 $1,243 Three $35,317 $2,944 $680 Eight $71,947 $5,996 $1,384 Four $42,643 $3,554 $821 Each Additional $ 7,326 $ 611 $ 141 Five $49,969 $4,165 $961 Household Member
Although not 100 percent accurate, information regarding percentage of students qualifying for free and reduced enrollment and meals often serves as a proxy for students' household poverty levels. As such, the assumption follows that a county in which 32.8 percent of students qualify to receive free and reduced meals (Butler County) would have fewer household poverty-related issues with which to deal than would counties in which nearly two-thirds (Harper, 64.1 percent and Cowley, 63.1 percent) of the students qualify to receive free and reduced meals.
Similarly, a school district in which nearly eight in ten (Wichita, 76.7 percent for 2012-2013 academic year) students receive free and reduced meals would expect to deal with more household poverty related issues than would a district in which fewer than one in ten (Andover, 11.8 percent; Renwick, 16.8 percent and Maize, 19.1 percent) students receives such meals.
During the 2008-2009 academic year, 41.0 percent of Kansas students (206,232 of 503,229) qualified for free or reduced enrollment and meals. During the 2012-2013 academic year, nearly half (48.0 percent; 246,764 of 514,103) of Kansas students qualified for free or reduced enrollment and meals.
Over the five year period from the 2008-2009 academic year to the 2012-2013 academic year, the number of Kansas students increased by 2.2 percent (10,874 students) statewide. Over that same time period, the number of Kansas students qualifying for free/reduced enrollment and meals increased by 19.7 percent (40,532 students) statewide.
The number of Wichita public school students qualifying to receive free or reduced enrollment and meals increased by 4,717 students during the five-year period between the 2008-2009 and the 2012-2013 academic years. That is, during the 2008-2009 academic year, 16.4 percent of the Kansas students who qualified to receive free or reduced enrollment and meals attended a Wichita public school. During the 2012-2013 academic year, 15.7 percent did.
Page 82 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 45. Total Students and Students Qualifying to Receive Free and Reduced Enrollment and Meals (FARM) - Grades K - 12 9 2008-2009 Academic Year 2012-2013 Academic Year Total Students qualifying Total Students qualifying Students to receive FARM Students to receive FARM County Count Count Percent Count Count Percent Butler 14,438 3,712 25.7% 13,698 4,499 32.8% Cowley 6,548 3,327 50.8% 6,274 3,956 63.1% Harper 1,022 569 55.7% 1,064 682 64.1% Harvey 6,321 2,648 41.9% 6,226 3,162 50.8% Kingman 1,433 582 40.6% 1,344 642 47.8% Reno 10,471 5,133 49.0% 10,745 6,075 56.5% Sedgwick 89,248 43,406 48.6% 92,273 51,916 56.3% Sumner 4,338 1,738 40.1% 4,104 2,117 51.6% UWP Service Area 133,819 61,115 45.7% 135,728 73,049 53.8% State of Kansas 503,229 206,232 41.0% 514,103 246,764 48.0%
Wichita, USD 259 48,914 33,904 69.3% 50,357 38,621 76.7%
Wichita, USD 259 9.7% 16.4% 9.8% 15.7% as % of Kansas Sedgwick County 17.7% 21.0% 17.9% 21.0% as % of Kansas UWP Service Area 26.6% 29.6% 26.4% 29.6% as % of Kansas
Free and Reduced Meals (FARM) – United Way of the Plains Service Area9
Table 46 presents the total number of students for each public school district in the United Way of the Plains Service Area and the number and percentage of students who qualified to receive free and reduced enrollment and meals in the 2008-2009 and the 2012-2013 academic years.
Table 46. Total Students and Students Qualifying to Receive Free and Reduced Enrollment and Meals - Grades K - 12 Public School Districts 9 2008-2009 Academic Year 2012-2013 Academic Year Total Students Qualifying Total Students Qualifying Students To Receive FARM Students To Receive FARM County Count Count Percent Count Count Percent Butler County Andover, USD 385 4,729 558 11.8% 5,489 910 16.6% Augusta, USD 402 2,331 707 30.3% 2,338 977 41.8% Bluestem, USD 205 615 209 34.0% 528 293 55.5% Circle, USD 375 1,631 408 25.0% 1,915 569 29.7% Douglass, USD 396 812 264 32.5% 748 280 37.4% El Dorado, USD 490 2,107 968 45.9% 2,043 1,146 56.1% Flinthills, USD 492 303 113 37.3% 282 115 40.8% Remington-Whitewater, USD 206 529 141 26.7% 564 235 41.7% Rose Hill, USD 394 1,717 371 21.6% 1,709 529 31.0% (Continued on next page)
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 83 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 46. Total Students and Students Qualifying to Receive Free and 9 Reduced Enrollment and Meals - Grades K – 12; Public School Districts 2008-2009 Academic Year 2012-2013 Academic Year Total Students Qualifying Total Students Qualifying Students To Receive FARM Students To Receive FARM County Count Count Percent Count Count Percent Cowley County Arkansas City, USD 470 2,875 1,742 60.6% 2,774 1,985 71.6% Central, USD 462 349 160 45.8% 340 211 62.1% Dexter, USD 471 177 60 33.9% 164 104 63.4% Udall, USD 463 405 126 31.1% 370 138 37.3% Winfield, USD 465 2,602 1,193 45.8% 2,477 1,463 59.1%
Harper County Anthony-Harper, USD 361 873 495 56.7% 902 610 67.6% Attica, USD 511 149 74 49.7% 162 72 44.4% Harvey County Burrton, USD 369 260 131 50.4% 246 161 65.4% Halstead, USD 440 834 302 36.2% 795 382 48.1% Hesston, USD 460 853 215 25.2% 856 283 33.1% Newton, USD 373 3,678 1,798 48.9% 3,746 2,074 55.4% Sedgwick, USD 439 554 159 28.7% 517 192 37.1% Kingman County Cunningham, USD 332 188 83 44.1% 178 84 47.2% Kingman-Norwich, USD 331 1,105 448 40.5% 1,036 515 49.7%
Reno County Buhler, USD 313 2,265 749 33.1% 2,291 949 41.4% Fairfield, USD 310 310 198 63.9% 279 194 69.5% Haven, USD 312 1,030 387 37.6% 987 434 44.0% Hutchinson, USD 308 4,791 2,874 60.0% 5,132 3,486 67.9% Nickerson, USD 309 1,204 681 56.6% 1,159 745 64.3% Pretty Prairie, USD 311 274 91 33.2% 285 104 36.5% Sedgwick County Cheney, USD 268 824 157 19.1% 809 264 32.6% Clearwater, USD 264 1,347 246 18.3% 1,183 357 30.2% Derby, USD 260 6,544 2,415 36.9% 6,943 2,837 40.9% Goddard, USD 265 5,066 928 18.3% 5,349 1,437 26.9% Haysville, USD 261 4,917 2,094 42.6% 5,370 2,922 54.4% Maize, USD 266 6,572 906 13.8% 7,015 1,339 19.1% Mulvane, USD 263 1,888 516 27.3% 1,824 707 38.8% Renwick, USD 267 1,996 290 14.5% 1,923 324 16.8% Valley Center, USD 262 2,630 719 27.3% 2,722 1,003 36.8% Wichita, USD 259 48,914 33,904 69.3% 50,357 38,621 76.7% Sumner County Argonia, USD 359 274 91 33.2% 171 67 39.2% Belle Plaine, USD 357 733 290 39.6% 656 331 50.5% Caldwell, USD 360 235 119 50.6% 259 149 57.5% Conway Springs, USD 356 639 185 29.0% 627 253 40.4% Oxford, USD 358 355 118 33.2% 368 193 52.4% South Haven, USD 509 237 94 39.7% 195 97 49.7% Wellington, USD 353 1,755 824 47.0% 1,675 971 58.0%
Page 84 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Of the 46 public school districts in the eight county United Way of the Plains Service Area, the percentage of students qualifying for free or reduced enrolment and meals during the 2012-2013 academic year was below the state average in 25 of those districts, and above the state average in 21, as Table 47 shows. The information has been sorted in order of 2012-2013 academic year.
Table 47. Total Students and Students Qualifying to Receive Free and Reduced Enrollment and Meals – Grades K – 12; Public School Districts 9 Academic Year 2008-2009 2012-2013 County Public School District Percent Percent Butler Andover, USD 385 11.8% 16.6% Sedgwick Renwick, USD 267 14.5% 16.8% Sedgwick Maize, USD 266 13.8% 19.1% Sedgwick Goddard, USD 265 18.3% 26.9% Butler Circle, USD 375 25.0% 29.7% Sedgwick Clearwater, USD 264 18.3% 30.2% Butler Rose Hill, USD 394 21.6% 31.0% Sedgwick Cheney, USD 268 19.1% 32.6% Harvey Hesston, USD 460 25.2% 33.1% Reno Pretty Prairie, USD 311 33.2% 36.5% Sedgwick Valley Center, USD 262 27.3% 36.8% Harvey Sedgwick, USD 439 28.7% 37.1% Cowley Udall, USD 463 31.1% 37.3% Butler Douglass, USD 396 32.5% 37.4% Sedgwick Mulvane, USD 263 27.3% 38.8% Sumner Argonia, USD 359 33.2% 39.2% Sumner Conway Springs, USD 356 29.0% 40.4% Butler Flinthills, USD 492 37.3% 40.8% Sedgwick Derby, USD 260 36.9% 40.9% Reno Buhler, USD 313 33.1% 41.4% Butler Remington-Whitewater, USD 206 26.7% 41.7% Butler Augusta, USD 402 30.3% 41.8% Reno Haven, USD 312 37.6% 44.0% Harper Attica, USD 511 49.7% 44.4% Kingman Cunningham, USD 332 44.1% 47.2% STATE OF KANSAS 41.0% 48.0% Harvey Halstead, USD 440 36.2% 48.1% Sumner South Haven, USD 509 39.7% 49.7% Kingman Kingman-Norwich, USD 331 40.5% 49.7% Sumner Belle Plaine, USD 357 39.6% 50.5% Sumner Oxford, USD 358 33.2% 52.4% Sedgwick Haysville, USD 261 42.6% 54.4% Harvey Newton, USD 373 48.9% 55.4% Butler Bluestem, USD 205 34.0% 55.5% Butler El Dorado, USD 490 45.9% 56.1% Sumner Caldwell, USD 360 50.6% 57.5% Sumner Wellington, USD 353 47.0% 58.0% Cowley Winfield, USD 465 45.8% 59.1% (Continued on next page)
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 85 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 47. Total Students and Students Qualifying to Receive Free and Reduced Enrollment and Meals – Grades K – 12; Public School Districts 9 Academic Year 2008-2009 2012-2013 County Public School District Percent Percent Cowley Central, USD 462 45.8% 62.1% Cowley Dexter, USD 471 33.9% 63.4% Reno Nickerson, USD 309 56.6% 64.3% Harvey Burrton, USD 369 50.4% 65.4% Harper Anthony-Harper, USD 361 56.7% 67.6% Reno Hutchinson, USD 308 60.0% 67.9% Reno Fairfield, USD 310 63.9% 69.5% Cowley Arkansas City, USD 470 60.6% 71.6% Sedgwick Wichita, USD 259 69.3% 76.7%
Dropouts
Kansas state statute (K.S.A. 72-1111)13 requires that a child who has reached the age of seven years and is under the age of 18 years be enrolled in and attend school continuously each year. Any student who leaves school and does not enroll in another school or program that culminates in a high school diploma is considered to be a dropout.
According to the State of Kansas Department of Education’s 2012-2013 Kansas Graduation and Dropout Information Handbook, 14 a dropout is any student who:
Exits school between October 1 and September 30 with a dropout D27: EXIT/Withdrawal type of 14, 16, 17, 19 or 20, and Does not re-enroll in school by September 30.
In order to track data on dropouts and graduations, the Kansas State Department of Education relies on the Kansas Individual Data on Students (KIDS) system, a web-based application by which schools submit their student data several times a year for state and federal reporting purposes. Data uploaded from the student information system to KIDS are used to populate the Dropout Graduation Summary Report (DGSR).14
EXIT records provide information for graduation and dropout counts and for rates calculated and used in Annual Yearly Progress (AYP) determinations. Only students with a value in D10: Current Grade Level of code 13 (e.g., eighth grade) or above may have an EXIT record with a D27: Exit/Withdrawal Type of 8 (e.g., graduated with regular diploma) or 22 (e.g., student with disabilities who met the district graduation requirements for a regular high school diploma, but is remaining in school to receive transitional services deemed necessary by the IEP [Individualized Education Program] team.) Any unresolved exits in grades 7-12 are also counted in the dropout calculation.14
The D27: EXIT/Withdrawal types referenced above include: 14 Discontinued schooling 16 Moved within US, not known to be continuing 17 Unknown 19 Transfer to an adult education facility (i.e. for General Equivalency Diploma or GED Completion) 20 Transferred to a juvenile or adult correctional facility where educational services are not provided.
Page 86 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
The dropout rate is not the inverse of the graduation calculation because: The annual dropout rate is calculated using one year of data while the graduation rate is calculated using four years of data. The dropout rate is calculated on students in grades 7-12, while the graduation rate is calculated on students in grades 9-12
For the State of Kansas, overall, the rate of students dropping out of school while in grades 7 through 12 held steady from the 2008-2009 academic year to the 2011-2012 academic year at a rate of 1.4 per 100 students dropping out of schools. 15 This translated into 3,003 of 218,687 students leaving school during the 2008-2009 academic year but before completing their high school education and 3,114 of 219,166 such students during the 2011-2012 academic year.
During the 2011-2012 academic year, several counties in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves experienced dropout rates that met or exceeded the state average of 1.4, including Cowley (2.0), Kingman (1.6), Sedgwick (1.6) and Harper (1.4).
During the 2008-2009 academic year, Sedgwick County accounted for 16.5 percent of the state's students and 17.4 percent of the state's dropouts, grades 7 through 12 (a total of 523 dropouts). For the 2011-2012 academic year, the rate of dropouts for Sedgwick County (1.6) exceeded the state average (1.4). In that academic year, Sedgwick County accounted for 15.9 percent of Kansas students and 17.7 percent of Kansas dropouts (a total of 550 dropouts).
At 2.1 and 2.4, the Wichita Public School District exceeded the state's average dropout rate (1.4) for both the 2008-2009 and 2011-2012 academic years.
Table 48. Dropouts - Public, Private and Religious-Based Schools 15 Grades 7 - 12 (2008-2009 to 2011-2012 Academic Years) 2008- 2009 Academic Year 2011 - 2012 Academic Year* Students Dropouts Students Dropouts County # # Rate # # Rate Butler 6,707 52 0.8 6,654 50 0.8 Cowley 2,868 43 1.5 2,640 53 2.0 Harper 425 4 0.9 418 6 1.4 Harvey 2,788 43 1.5 2,216 28 1.3 Kingman 652 11 1.7 429 7 1.6 Reno 4,467 67 1.5 4,387 56 1.3 Sedgwick 36,105 523 1.4 34,912 550 1.6 Sumner 1,917 10 0.5 1,812 15 0.8 UWP Service Area 55,929 753 1.3 53,468 765 1.4 State of Kansas 218,687 3,003 1.4 219,166 3,114 1.4
Wichita, USD 259 19,108 399 2.1 19,663 475 2.4
Wichita, USD 259 8.7% 13.3% -- 9.0% 15.3% -- as % of Kansas Sedgwick County 16.5% 17.4% -- 15.9% 17.7% -- as % of Kansas UWP Service Area 25.6% 25.1% -- 24.4% 24.6% -- as a % of Kansas
*Dropout data are not yet available for the 2012-2013 school year.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 87 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Black Dropouts15
During the 2011-2012 academic year, there were 15,616 black students enrolled in Kansas schools, 2.5 percent of whom dropped out of grades 7 through 12. This is a slightly higher rate than the statewide rate for black students for the 2008-2009 academic year (2.3).
During the 2008-2009 academic year, black students in Sedgwick County schools represented 26.3 percent of all black students in Kansas schools and accounted for 21.2 percent of those who dropped out. During that academic year, 79 black students dropped out of Wichita Public Schools.
During the 2011-2012 academic year, black students in Sedgwick County schools represented 25.5 percent of all black students in Kansas schools and accounted for 28.0 percent of those who dropped out. During that academic year, 107 black students dropped out of Wichita Public Schools.
Table 49. Dropouts (Black) - Public, Private and Religious-Based Schools15 Grades 7 - 12 (2008-2009 to 2011-2012 Academic Years) 2008- 2009 Academic Year 2011 - 2012 Academic Year* Students Dropouts Students Dropouts County # # Rate # # Rate Butler 88 0 0.0 73 0 0.0 Cowley 73 0 0.0 76 0 0.0 Harper 7 0 0.0 1 0 0.0 Harvey 66 2 3.0 55 0 0.0 Kingman 6 2 33.3 0 0 0.0 Reno 213 10 4.7 135 6 4.4 Sedgwick 4,487 85 1.9 3,988 111 2.8 Sumner 26 0 0.0 21 1 4.8 UWP Service Area 4,966 99 2.0 4,349 118 2.7 State of Kansas 17,072 401 2.3 15,616 397 2.5
Wichita, USD 259 4,182 79 1.9 3,812 107 2.8
Wichita, USD 259 24.5% 19.7% -- 24.4% 27.0% -- as % of Kansas Sedgwick County 26.3% 21.2% -- 25.5% 28.0% -- as % of Kansas UWP Service Area 29.1% 24.7% -- 27.8% 29.7% -- as a % of Kansas
*Dropout data are not yet available for the 2012-2013 school year.
Hispanic Dropouts 15
During the 2011-2012 academic year, there were 32,848 Hispanic students enrolled in Kansas schools, 1.9 percent of whom dropped out of grades 7 through 12. This is a lower rate than the statewide rate for Hispanic students for the 2008-2009 academic year (2.1), although it represented 615 students in 2011- 2012 and 509 students in 2008-2009.
During the 2008-2009 academic year, Hispanic students in Sedgwick County schools represented 20.5 percent of all Hispanic students in Kansas schools and accounted for 20.2 percent of those who dropped out. During that academic year, 100 Hispanic students dropped out of Wichita Public Schools.
Page 88 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
During the 2011-2012 academic year, Hispanic students in Sedgwick County schools represented 20.6 percent of all Hispanic students in Kansas schools and accounted for 21.8 percent of those who dropped out. During that academic year, 124 Hispanic students dropped out of Wichita Public Schools.
Table 50. Dropouts* (Hispanic**)-Public, Private and Religious-Based Schools15 Grades 7 - 12 (2008-2009 to 2011-2012 Academic Years) 2008- 2009 Academic Year 2011 - 2012 Academic Year* Students Dropouts Students Dropouts County # # Rate # # Rate Butler 179 0 0.0% 318 1 0.3% Cowley 295 7 2.4% 409 8 2.0% Harper 25 1 4.0% 36 2 5.6% Harvey 353 5 1.4% 324 2 0.6% Kingman 9 0 0.0% 10 0 0.0% Reno 445 11 2.5% 594 6 1.0% Sedgwick 5,028 103 2.0% 6,755 134 2.0% Sumner 76 1 1.3% 116 0 0.0% UWP Service Area 6,410 128 2.0% 8,562 153 1.8% State of Kansas 24,525 509 2.1% 32,848 615 1.9%
Wichita, USD 259 4,175 100 2.4% 5,636 124 2.2%
Wichita, USD 259 17.0% 19.6% -- 17.2% 20.2% -- as % of Kansas Sedgwick County 20.5% 20.2% -- 20.6% 21.8% -- as % of Kansas UWP Service Area 26.1% 25.1% -- 26.1% 24.9% -- as a % of Kansas
*Dropout data are not yet available for the 2012-2013 school year.
***Kansas State Department of Education records accept Hispanic origin as a race category, rather than an ethnic background.
Non-Public Education in the United States
Although much of the data contained in this report pertain to public schools, it is important to remember that the non-public education community in this area and in the United States as a whole provides parents with important options for the education of their children. These options include private schools, home instruction or home schooling, charter schools and virtual schools.
Private Schools
Choice is a defining characteristic of private schools as families may freely choose private education, and private schools generally choose which students to accept. Although nonpublic governance and enrollment choices are features that all private schools share, private schools vary widely.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 89 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Catholic Schools -- All Catholic schools within the eight-county area served by United Way of the Plains are under the auspices of the Wichita Catholic Diocese.
Five-Year Enrollment Trend (Catholic Schools) - In the five-year period between the 2008-2009 academic year and the 2012-2013 academic year, Catholic schools in the eight-county area served by United Way of the Plains showed a net decrease of 165 students. Catholic schools in Cowley, Butler, Harvey and Kingman counties showed increases in enrollment, while Catholic schools in Reno, Sedgwick and Sumner counties experienced enrollment decreases.
Table 51. Wichita Catholic Diocese Enrollment 16 - Grades PreK - 12 (2008-2009 Academic Year to 2012-2013 Academic Year) 2008-2009 2012-2013 Enrollment County Schools Students Schools Students Net Change % Change Butler 1 121 1 130 9 increase 7.4% Cowley 2 137 2 147 10 increase 7.3% Harper 0 N/A 0 N/A N/A Harvey 1 169 1 171 2 increase 1.2% Kingman 1 156 1 158 2 increase 1.3% Reno 3 676 2 572 104 decrease -15.4% Sedgwick 20 8,005 21 7,934 71 decrease -0.9% Sumner 1 134 1 121 13 decrease -9.7% UWP Service Area 29 9,398 29 9,233 165 decrease -1.8%
Student Enrollment - Racial and Ethnic Composition (Catholic Schools) - In the five-year period between the 2008-2009 academic year and the 2012-2013 academic year, the number of white students enrolled in Catholic schools in the eight-county area served by United Way of the Plains decreased by 400 students. Over the same time period, the number of minority students experienced a net increase of 235 students.
The Hispanic student segment showed the largest increase in number, growing by 142 students, from 1,292 Hispanic students in the 2008-2009 academic year to 1,434 Hispanic students in the 2012-2013 academic year. The Asian student segment experienced the second largest increase in number, growing by 128 students during the five-year period, from 600 to 728 students, a 21.3 percent increase.
Table 52. Wichita Catholic Diocese Enrollment 16 Racial and Ethnic Composition, Grades PreK – 12 Catholic School Enrollment - (2008-2009 Academic Year to 2012-2013 Academic Year) Racial and Ethnic Composition (Total) 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change United Way of the Plains Service Area Black 309 273 36 decrease -11.7% Hispanic 1,292 1,434 142 increase 11.0% Native American 55 56 1 increase 1.8% Asian 600 728 128 increase 21.3% Subtotal 2,256 2,491 235 increase 10.4% White 7,142 6,742 400 decrease -5.6% Total Student Enrollment 9,398 9,233 165 decrease -1.8% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 24.0% 27.0% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 76.0% 73.0% -- --
Page 90 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 53 presents county-by-county racial and ethnic composition information for students enrolled in Catholic schools. Harper County has no Catholic school for prekindergarten through high school students.
Table 53. Wichita Catholic Diocese Enrollment 16 Racial and Ethnic Composition, Grades PreK - 12 Catholic School Enrollment - (2008-2009 Academic Year to 2012-2013 Academic Year) Racial and Ethnic Composition 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change Butler County Black 4 1 3 decrease -75.0% Hispanic 9 8 1 decrease -11.1% Native American 2 0 2 decrease -100.0% Asian 2 4 2 increase 100.0% Subtotal 17 13 4 decrease -23.5% White 104 117 13 increase 12.5% Total Student Enrollment 121 130 9 increase 7.4% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 14.0% 10.0% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 86.0% 90.0% -- -- Cowley County Black 3 5 2 increase 66.7% Hispanic 29 39 10 increase 34.5% Native American 0 0 No change No change Asian 0 0 No change No change Subtotal 32 44 12 increase 37.5% White 105 103 2 decrease -1.9% Total Student Enrollment 137 147 10 increase 7.3% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 23.4% 29.9% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 76.6% 70.1% -- -- Harvey County Black 8 9 1 increase 12.5% Hispanic 59 64 5 increase 8.5% Native American 0 0 No change No change Asian 6 1 -5 decrease -83.3% Subtotal 73 74 1 increase 1.4% White 96 97 1 increase 1.0% Total Student Enrollment 169 171 2 increase 1.2% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 43.2% 43.3% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 56.8% 56.7% -- -- Kingman County Black 0 0 No change No change Hispanic 3 11 8 increase 266.7% Native American 0 1 1 increase 100.0% Asian 0 0 No change No change Subtotal 3 12 9 increase 300.0% White 153 146 7 decrease -4.6% Total Student Enrollment 156 158 2 increase 1.3% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 1.9% 7.6% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 98.1% 92.4% -- -- (Continued on next page)
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 91 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 53. Wichita Catholic Diocese Enrollment 16 Racial and Ethnic Composition, Grades PreK – 12 Catholic School Enrollment - (2008-2009 Academic Year to 2012-2013 Academic Year) Racial and Ethnic Composition 2008-2009 2012-2013 Net Change %Change Reno County Black 16 7 9 decrease -56.3% Hispanic 195 163 32 decrease -16.4% Native American 0 0 No change No change Asian 4 15 11 increase 275.0% Subtotal 215 185 30 decrease -14.0% White 461 387 74 decrease -16.1% Total Student Enrollment 676 572 104 decrease -15.4% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 31.8% 32.3% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 68.2% 67.7% -- --
Sedgwick County Black 278 251 27 decrease -9.7% Hispanic 996 1,148 152 increase 15.3% Native American 51 55 4 increase 7.8% Asian 588 708 120 increase 20.4% Subtotal 1,913 2,162 249 increase 13.0% White 6,092 5,772 320 decrease -5.3% Total Student Enrollment 8,005 7,934 71 decrease -0.9% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 23.9% 27.2% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 76.1% 72.8% -- --
Sumner County Black 0 0 No change No change Hispanic 1 1 No change No change Native American 2 0 2 decrease -100.0% Asian 0 0 No change No change Subtotal 3 1 2 decrease -66.7% White 131 120 11 decrease -8.4% Total Student Enrollment 134 121 13 decrease -9.7% Minority Students as % of Total Enrollment 2.2% 0.8% -- -- White Students as % of Total Enrollment 97.8% 99.2% -- --
Page 92 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Approximately seven in ten (69.9 percent) students who attend private or parochial schools in the eight- county United Way of the Plains service area attend Catholic schools. Approximately another two in ten (19.3 percent) attend other religious-based private schools.
Table 54. Students in Private Accredited and Non-Accredited Schools * (2012-2013 Academic Year) Total School Type Private School Other Non- County Students Catholic Religious sectarian Butler 70 70 0 0 Cowley 125 91 34 0 Harper 0 0 0 0 Harvey 138 138 0 0 Kingman 107 107 0 0 Reno 540 540 0 0 Sedgwick 14,017 9,517 2,864** 1,636*** Sumner 129 107 22 0 UWP Service Area Count of Students 15,126 10,570 2,920 1,636 Percent of Students 100.0% 69.9% 19.3% 10.8%
* Most data included in Table 54 come from either Kansas State Department of Education, K-12 School Reports, County Headcount Enrollment by Grade, Race and Gender, from the Superintendent's SO66 Report and the Principals' Building Reports, www.ksbe.state.ks.us; from Great Schools, http://www.greatschools.org/Kansas; or from Private Schools Report, http://schools.privateschoolsreport.com/.
** Includes 800 students attending Sunrise Christian Academy, http://sunrisechristian.org/aboutus/ and 130 students attending Classical School of Wichita, http://cswsaints.com/ (About/School Profile)
*** Includes 1,000 students attending Wichita Collegiate, http://www.wcsks.com/home.asp; 515 students attending The Independent School (2012 Book of Lists, Wichita Business Journal); and 86 students attending Wichita Montessori School, Email, May 21, 2013; Jane Saunders, Director of Admissions, Wichita Montessori School (students enrolled, ages 3 through 11).
Homeschooling
In the United States, providing a child's elementary and secondary education at home rather than in public or private schools is a trend that is seeing increasing numbers, from 850,000 students in 1999 to approximately 1.1 million students in 2003 and approximately 1.5 million students in 2007. 17,18
Table 55. Home-Schooled Elementary and Secondary Age Students in the United States, 1999 - 2007 Number of Percent of Home-Schooled School-Age Academic Year Students Population Spring 200717 1,508,000 2.9% Spring 200317,18 1,096,000 2.2% Spring 199917 850,000 1.7%
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 93 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Although not comparable, more current data exist on the U.S. Department of Education’s website regarding the number of students homeschooled, one estimate was that 2,040,000 Kindergarten through 12th grade students were homeschooled in the United States during the spring semester of 2010. 19 This would have accounted for approximately 3.8 percent of all K-12 students. The researcher was “highly confident” that the true number lay between 1,734,000 and 2,346,000 students. 19
Parents give various reasons for the decision to educate their children at home. According to the National Home Education Research Institute, reasons given most commonly for homeschooling include: 19 customize or individualize the curriculum and learning environment for each child, accomplish more academically than in schools, use pedagogical approaches other than those typical in institutional schools, enhance family relationships between children and parents and among siblings, provide guided and reasoned social interactions with youthful peers and adults, provide a safer environment for children and youth, because of physical violence, drugs and alcohol, psychological abuse, and improper and unhealthy sexuality associated with institutional schools, and teach and impart a particular set of values, beliefs, and worldview to children and youth.
Homeschooling in Kansas 20 Unlike some states, Kansas does not -- by state statute -- specifically authorize "home schooling" or "home instruction." It does, however, recognize nonaccredited private schools. By definition, a nonaccredited elementary or secondary private school is one that satisfies the state's compulsory school attendance laws, but which is not accredited by the state board of education.20
Such schools must hold classes for a period of time substantially equivalent to the time public schools are in session in the area in which the nonaccredited school is located (at least 186 days of not less than 6 hours per day, or 1116 hours per year for grades 1-11). Compulsory school attendance laws apply to children between the ages of 7 and 18, as well as younger children if identified as handicapped. 20
Private nonaccredited high schools issue their own diplomas; their students do not receive a diploma from the state. These diplomas are not recognized by the State of Kansas as meeting any requirements. Colleges and universities determine their own criteria for admission of students who graduate from a nonaccredited school.21
Non-accredited private schools are not required to employ teachers who are licensed by the state, and registering a school does not mean the school has been “approved” by the State of Kansas Board of Education.21
Although homeschools are required to register basic information with the state,20 the Kansas State Department of Education does not maintain data on nonaccredited private schools (including students being home schooled or receiving home instruction) other than the name of the school, the school address and the custodian of record. In addition, no follow-up is completed with the schools, so the Kansas State Department of Education does not know whether nonaccredited private schools are active or not, or if active, how many children attend. 22
Charter Schools23
In Kansas, charter schools are independent public schools that operate within a school district. They are operated free-of-charge to parents and are open to all students. While a charter school is separate and distinct, with its own building number, state assessment scores and demographic information, a charter school may be housed in an existing school facility with another school as long as it is operated separately.
Page 94 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Every charter school in Kansas is subject to the accreditation requirements of the state board of education and must be accredited to maintain its charter.
For the 2012-2013 academic year, Kansas lists 15 approved charter schools, of which four are located in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves:
Table 56. Charter Schools in United Way of the Plains Service Area 24 (2012-2013 Academic Year) Location School District School Name Harvey County Newton, USD 373 Walton Rural Life Center (K-5) Reno County Haven, USD 312 Yoder Charter Elementary School (K-8) Reno County Haven, USD 312 Pleasantview Charter Academy - Elementary (1-8) Reno County Haven, USD 312 Pleasantview Charter Academy - High School (9-12)
Virtual Schools 25
In Kansas, virtual schools are also referred to as online courses and distance learning. Online students are enrolled in virtual courses and access the course materials primarily through the Internet from any location outside the district’s school building. Online students differ from traditional students in that traditional students attend "brick and mortar" schools with teachers teaching in a classroom using "synchronous" (or "at the same time") learning. Online students take classes online with teachers teaching remotely (e.g., not in a classroom), using asynchronous learning. Online students are not required to be physically present in a classroom for all or part of the course. A student taking an online course within the same district would be counted as a traditional student if the majority of the time is in the brick and mortar school.
The skills students need to be a successful online learner are the same ones needed in traditional schooling: preparation, organization and self-discipline. The difference is in how each of these skills is used. Online learning requires as much time and effort as regular schooling. It is recommended that online students set aside at least thirty hours per week, six hours daily.
Without the structure of weekly class meetings, students may be tempted to put off school work until the last minute. Instead, students should give themselves extra time to do the work, because technology can slow down the process. Without an instructor and fellow students nearby to offer help and support, students will be relying on themselves more than ever.
In Kansas, educational programs that qualify as "virtual schools" mean any school or educational program that: 26 Is offered for credit. Uses distance-learning technologies which predominately use internet-based methods to deliver instruction. Involves instruction that occurs asynchronously with the teacher and pupil in separate locations. Requires the pupil to make academic progress toward the next grade level and matriculation from kindergarten through high school graduation. Requires the pupil to demonstrate competence in subject matter for each class or subject in which the pupil is enrolled as part of the virtual school. Requires age-appropriate pupils to complete state assessment tests.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 95 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
For the 2012-2013 academic year, Kansas lists 88 approved virtual schools/educational programs, of which nine are located in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves:
Table 57. Virtual Schools/Educational Programs in United Way of the Plains Service Area 27 (2012-2013 Academic Year) Accepts Programs Offered* School Grade Out of General Credit Advanced County District School/Program Levels District Education Recovery Courses Wichita Learning2 eSchool Sedgwick 1-12 Yes X X X USD 259 of Wichita Derby Sedgwick Derby Public Virtual 6-12 Yes X X X USD 260 Valley Center The Learning Center 3-12 Sedgwick Yes X X USD 262 At Valley Center Nongraded Maize Sedgwick Maize Virtual High 9-12 No X X USD 266 Maize Maize Virtual Preparatory Sedgwick K-9 Yes X X USD 266 (Opened 2011) Haven Pleasant View Academy Reno 9-12 Yes X X USD 312 High School Haven Pleasant View Academy Reno K-8 Yes X USD 312 Grade School Andover Andover eCademy Butler K-12 Yes X X X USD 385 (Opened 2010) Newton, Heartland Virtual Harvey K-8 Yes X USD 373 Academy (Opened 2011)
Post-Secondary Education
Although life-long or adult education has become more widespread, education is still seen by many as something aimed at children, and adult education is often branded as adult learning, adult basic education or lifelong learning. Among the many choices and challenges young adults face are the choices between entering the job market with high school level skills or pursuing further education to prepare themselves with skills marketable at higher earnings.
Post-secondary education can serve as a gateway to better options and more opportunity. As opposed to generations of the past, today's high school graduates find themselves unable to obtain the high-paying jobs that were once available. The U.S. has been transformed from a manufacturing-based economy to an economy based on knowledge, and the importance of a college education today can be compared to that of a high school education forty years ago.28
The stimulation of post-secondary education can encourage students to think, ask questions, and explore new ideas. When students experience a post secondary education, they have the opportunity to read the ideas and listen to the lectures of top experts in their fields. This additional growth and development can provide college graduates with an edge in the job market over those who have not experienced a higher education.28
In many cases, post-secondary education allows students to gain valuable resources. The connections made during their college careers can result in options when they begin their job search. After starting a career, having a college degree often provides for greater promotion opportunity.28
Page 96 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Colleges and Universities - United Way of the Plains Service Area
More than 40,000 individuals attend post-secondary courses at one of the nine colleges or universities offering two- and four-year academic programs with their main physical campuses located in the eight- county United Way of the Plains service area. During the Spring 2010 semester, student enrollment was split fairly evenly between full-time (50.2 percent, n = 21,182) and part-time (49.8 percent, n = 20,972).
Table 58. Colleges and Universities - United Way of the Plains Service Area Spring 2010 Enrollment Student Enrollment Student Name of Full- Part- Full-Time Location Type of Institution Institution Total Time Time Equivalencies Sedgwick County State University Wichita State 29 14,898 9,933 4,965 11,662 Butler County Community College Butler 30 9,930 4,247 5,683 6,261 Cowley County Community College Cowley 30 4,388 2,429 1,959 3,115 Reno County Community College Hutchinson 30 6,159 2,586 3,573 3,747 Cowley County Independent College Southwestern 31 1,637 544 1,093 840 Harvey County Independent College Bethel 31 472 451 21 487 Harvey County Independent College Hesston 31 443 381 62 403 Sedgwick County Independent University Newman 31 3,108 1,264 1,844 1,985 Sedgwick County Independent University Friends 31 2,502 1,570 932 1,951 Total Student Enrollment 43,537 23,405 20,132 30,451
In addition, many other colleges and universities offer undergraduate and graduate courses and programs within the region via satellite campuses/locations or online/distance learning programs. (e.g., Sterling College, Tabor College, Baker University, Webster University, National American University, University of Phoenix, etc.).
Level of Educational Attainment
Nationwide, Kansas, Sedgwick County and Wichita
According to the American Community Survey, Table 59.A presents the numbers of adults at least 25 years old in the United States overall, in Kansas, in Sedgwick County and in the city of Wichita detailed by their highest level of educational attainment. 32
Table 59.A. Population 25 Years and Over - 2011 (Count) 32 Sedgwick Highest Level of Education United States Kansas County Wichita Less than high school 29,518,935 191,248 37,218 31,931 High school graduate 57,861,283 517,560 86,979 65,520 Some college < year 42,350,233 437,905 78,763 59,796 Associate degree 15,344,048 134,072 20,994 15,275 Bachelor's degree 35,852,277 355,192 59,433 45,168 Graduate or professional degree 21,121,347 186,423 27,722 21,592 Total population, 25 years and over 202,048,123 1,822,400 311,109 239,282
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 97 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Similarly, Table 59.B presents the percentage of adults at least 25 years old in each of the four geographic areas by their highest level of educational attainment, again, according to the 2011 American Community Survey. At 18.9 percent and 19.1 percent Wichita and Sedgwick County exceed the national average (17.7 percent) for bachelor's degrees attained. 32
Table 59.B. Population 25 Years and Over - 2011 (Percent) 32 Highest Level of Education United States Kansas Sedgwick Wichita Less than high school 14.6% 10.5% 12.0% 13.3% High school graduate 28.6% 28.4% 28.0% 27.4% Some college < year 21.0% 24.0% 25.3% 25.0% Associate degree 7.6% 7.4% 6.7% 6.4% Bachelor's degree 17.7% 19.5% 19.1% 18.9% Graduate or professional degree 10.5% 10.2% 8.9% 9.0% Total population 100.0% 100.0% 100.0% 100.0%
Looked at another way, Figure 12 displays the breakdown of the highest level of educational attainment for these four geographies among the population at least 25 years old.
Figure 12. Highest Level of Educational Attainment Population 25 Years or Older - 2011 32
Wichita
Sedgwick County
Kansas
United States
0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100% Percent of Adult Population, 25 Years or Older
Less than high school High school graduate Some college Associate degree Bachelor degree Graduate or professional degree
United Way of the Plains Service Area
In 2011, by the time they reached 25 years of age, 53,264 individuals in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves had completed less than a high school education. These individuals represented 11.2 percent of the area's total population 25 years old and over and excluded those who completed a high school equivalency examination, such as a General Equivalency Diploma or GED. Looked at another way, 278,654 individuals in the eight-county service area (at least 25 years old) went on to attend at least some college or post-secondary school education after completing high school. This represents 59.6 percent of the area's total population 25 years old and over. 32
Page 98 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 60. Highest Level of Educational Attainment (2011) 32
Population 25 Years Old and Over Population Less Than High Some Associate Bachelor's Advanced County 25 Yr. Plus High School School* College*** Degree Degree Degree**** Butler 41,870 3,272 12,230 11,925 3,883 7,320 3,240 Cowley 23,470 3,011 7,257 6,278 2,343 2,931 1,650 Harper 4,191 548 1,380 1,276 289 416 282 Harvey 22,469 2,288 7,175 5,405 1,818 3,628 2,155 Kingman 5,468 589 1,738 1,604 466 730 341 Reno 43,093 4,897 13,187 12,536 4,079 5,803 2,591 Sedgwick 311,109 37,218 86,979 78,763 20,994 59,433 27,722 Sumner 15,962 1,441 5,768 4,577 1,236 2,128 812 UWP Service Area 467,632 53,264 135,714 122,364 35,108 82,389 38,793 State of Kansas 1,822,400 191,248 517,560 437,905 134,072 355,192 186,423
*Includes high school equivalency **Some college, no degree ***Graduate or professional degree
Table 61 presents the percentages by county of residents at least 25 years old who had attained at least a high school education (whether by diploma or equivalency) as well as those who had completed at least a bachelor's degree.
Butler, Harvey and Sumner counties exceeded the State of Kansas' average rate of residents who had at least graduated from high school (89.5 percent). None of the counties in the United Way of the Plains service area exceeded the State of Kansas' average for residents’ attainment of at least bachelor's degrees (29.7 percent), although at 28.0 percent, Sedgwick County came closest.
Table 61. Attainment of High School Education and/or Bachelor's Degree (2011) 32 Population 25 Years Old and Over High School Bachelor's Degree County Graduate or Higher or Higher Butler 92.2% 25.2% Cowley 87.2% 19.5% Harper 86.9% 16.7% Harvey 89.8% 25.7% Kingman 89.2% 19.6% Reno 88.6% 19.5% Sedgwick 88.0% 28.0% Sumner 91.0% 18.4% UWP Service Area 88.6% 25.9% State of Kansas 89.5% 29.7%
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 99 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Impact of Post-Secondary Education
Over the past three decades, higher education has become a virtual “must” for American workers. The Georgetown Public Policy Institute notes that between 1973 and 2008, the share of jobs in the U.S. economy which required postsecondary education increased from 28 percent to 59 percent, with the future promising more of the same. The share of jobs requiring postsecondary education is expected to increase to 63 percent over the next decade.33
High school graduates and dropouts will find themselves largely left behind in the coming decade as employer demand for workers with postsecondary degrees continues to surge. Nine out ten workers with a high school education or less are limited to three occupational clusters that either pay low wages or are in decline, including food and personal services; sales and office support; and blue collar occupations.33
In Kansas, 64 percent of all jobs in Kansas will require some postsecondary training beyond high school in 2018. Currently Kansas ranks 15th in terms of the proportion of its 2018 jobs that will require a Bachelor’s degree, and is 32nd in jobs for high school dropouts. 34
Average Annual Earnings
In 2010, the median of the earnings for young adults with a bachelor's degree was $45,000, while the median was $21,000 for those without a high school diploma or its equivalent, $29,900 for those with a high school diploma or its equivalent, and $37,000 for those with an associate's degree. In other words, young adults with a bachelor's degree earned more than twice as much as those without a high school diploma or its equivalent in 2010 (i.e., 114 percent more), 50 percent more than young adult high school completers, and 22 percent more than young adults with an associate's degree. 35
In 2010, the median of the earnings for young adults with an advanced degree (graduate or professional) was $54,700, some 21 percent more than the median for young adults with a bachelor's degree.35
Median Annual Earnings by Level of Educational Attainment 36
On average, in 2011 Sedgwick County workers earned $648 (1.8 percent) per year less than workers in the United States overall (i.e., $35,337 – $34,689).
This discrepancy became more noticeable among those with bachelor or advanced degrees. At the bachelor level, Sedgwick County residents earned $4,629 (i.e., $49,683 - $45,054; or 9.3 percent) per year less than bachelor degree holders nationwide, and at the advanced degree level, Sedgwick County residents earned $8,029 (i.e., $65,369 - $57,340; or 12.3 percent) per year less than those holding graduate or professional degrees nationwide.
The median earnings of Sedgwick County residents exceeded those of Kansas residents overall for each category of educational attainment, with the exception of those with less than a high school education. Similarly, the median annual earnings of Sedgwick County residents exceeded those of Wichita residents overall for each category of educational attainment.
Page 100 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Table 62. Median Annual Earnings Per Geographic Area* and Median Annual Earnings Per Highest Level of Educational Attainment Per Geographic Area* 36 Sedgwick United States Kansas County Wichita Median earnings, all educational levels $35,337 $33,557 $34,689 $32,732 Highest Level of Education Less than high school graduate $19,627 $20,923 $20,258 $19,743 High school graduate (incl. equivalency) $27,640 $26,583 $27,392 $26,051 Some college or associate's degree $34,045 $31,437 $33,311 $31,962 Bachelor's degree $49,683 $44,068 $45,054 $44,293 Graduate or professional degree $65,369 $56,420 $57,340 $56,427 *2011 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars
Figure 13 provides a visual display of the median earnings for each of the four geographic areas as compared to median annual earnings for each level of educational attainment:
Figure 13. Median Earnings Income Per Geographic Area* and Median Annual Earnings Per Highest Level of Educational Attainment Per Geographic Area* 36
United States Kansas
$70,000 $70,000 $60,000 $60,000 $50,000 $50,000 Median: Median: $40,000 $35,337 $40,000 $33,557 $30,000 $30,000 $20,000 $20,000 $10,000 $10,000 $0 $0 < HS HS Grad College Bachelor Advanced < HS HS Grad College Bachelor Advanced
Sedgwick County City of Wichita
$70,000 $70,000 $60,000 $60,000 $50,000 $50,000 Median: Median: $40,000 $34,689 $40,000 $32,732 $30,000 $30,000 $20,000 $20,000 $10,000 $10,000 $0 $0 < HS HS Grad College Bachelor Advanced < HS HS Grad College Bachelor Advanced
*2011 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 101 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Wage disparity36 is evident between the genders. While the nation's average annual wage was $35,337 in 2011 inflation-adjusted dollars, males earned an average of $41,661 per year and females earned an average of $29,422 per year. On average nationwide, males with a bachelor's degree earned $19,905 more than females with a bachelor's degree (i.e., $60,951 - $41,046).
Nationwide, on average, males with an advanced degree earned $27,677 more than females with an advanced degree (i.e., $82,216 - $54,539).
In Kansas, males earned an average $40,872 per year and females earned an average of $26,940 per year, while the state's overall average annual earnings were $33,557. On average, Kansas males with a bachelor degree earned $18,466 more than Kansas females with a bachelor degree (i.e., $55,014 - $36,548).
On average, Kansas males with an advanced degree earned $24,074 more than Kansas females with an advanced degree (i.e., $72,070-$47,996).
Relationship between Educational Attainment and Unemployment Rate
In 2010, about 74 percent of young adults with a bachelor's degree or higher were employed full time, compared with 65 percent of those with an associate's degree, 56 percent of those with some college education, 55 percent of high school completers, and 41 percent of those without a high school diploma or its equivalent. Additionally, a smaller percentage of young adults with a bachelor's degree or higher were unemployed than were their peers with lower levels of education. 37
As recent economic events have shown, no particular level of educational attainment has proven to be unemployment-proof. For the most part, educational attainment and the unemployment rate appear to be inversely related; that is, as the level of education increased, the unemployment rate decreased.
According to the U.S. Department of Labor’s Bureau of Labor Statistics, in 2012 the unemployment rate for all workers was 6.8 percent. Table 63 presents unemployment rates for various categories of educational attainment.
Table 63. National Unemployment Rate Per Highest Level of Educational Attainment 38 Unemployment Rate Overall, all workers 6.8% Highest Level of Education Less than high school diploma 12.4% High school diploma (incl. equivalency) 8.3% Some college 7.7% Associate’s degree 6.2% Bachelor's degree 4.5% Master’s degree 3.5% Professional degree 2.1% Doctoral degree 2.5%
Page 102 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Technical Education and Skills
While our society demands that some professionals (i.e., doctors, dentists, lawyers) follow a certain academic path for which there are no alternative options, for other occupations, a four-year degree is not required. Area production demands for avionics and other aviation-related equipment require a highly skilled work force. For people interested in a trade, modern technical education may be most appropriate. The same may be true of people whose interest calls them toward the performing or creative arts, where experience may outweigh classroom education.
Aviation is important to Kansas. The aviation industry employs 40,000 people, and another 142,350 jobs are supported by aviation directly and indirectly. For businesses to compete and remain in Kansas, they need a skilled workforce. 39
South Central Kansas has several technical training opportunities available, including the National Center for Aviation Training, Wichita Area Technical College and the Workforce Alliance of South Central Kansas, to highlight but a few.
National Center for Aviation Training (NCAT) 40,41
The National Center for Aviation Training (NCAT) is a world-class training and research facility which provides students the opportunity to receive hands-on, real-world training in the areas of general aviation manufacturing and aircraft and power plant mechanics. NCAT was built to address the critical shortage of skilled aviation workers and to help meet the aviation manufacturing workforce demand. Programming was designed to meet changing aviation/manufacturing business and workforce needs, by bringing research and technical training under one roof and blending them to address industry needs.
NCAT consists of three buildings: the Advanced Manufacturing Technology Center, the Aviation Service Center, and the Assessment and Administration Center for admissions, student services and employment placement. Located at 4004 North Webb Road in east Wichita, NCAT features a hangar with runway access to Jabara Airport. The facility includes 21 classrooms, 24 laboratories, two industrial autoclaves and more than 200 offices and workspaces. NCAT has the capacity to serve 1,500 students.
Through its managing partner, Wichita Area Technical College, the National Center for Aviation Training offers a variety of aviation degree and certificate programs to begin the path toward becoming a skilled professional in an aviation-related field. Preparation is provided for careers in Aerostructures, Avionics, Composites, Robotics, Aerospace Coatings and Paint, Engineering Design Technology, Electromechanical Systems, as an FAA-approved Aviation Maintenance Technician, and dozens of other career paths. Degree paths offered include Associate of Applied Science, Technical Certificate or Certificate of Completion. In addition, individual courses can be taken as needed for those currently in the aviation field who want to advance their career or update technical knowledge. Many of the offerings can be taken as either credit or non-credit courses.
Wichita Area Technical College (WATC)
Wichita Area Technical College (WATC) has been providing education in South Central Kansas since 1965. Its mission is to provide quality higher education and leadership in workforce training that supports economic development for a global economy. 42 It seeks to be the leading provider of higher education, specializing in the delivery of career technical education, utilizing state of-the-art facilities with highly qualified faculty, and offering a competitive advantage that drives economic development in the region. 42
As of October 2008, Wichita Area Technical College has been fully accredited by The Higher Learning Commission, which is part of the North Central Association of Colleges and Schools, one of six regional institutional accreditors in the United States. 42
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 103 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
WATC has three campus locations 43 – the main campus at 4004 North Webb Road; the Southside location at 4501 East 47th Street South; and the Grove location (south of Wichita East High School) at 301 S. Grove. Customized training is also offered at places of employment or other locations. WATC offers the choice of over 75 programs of study with both short-term and long-term programs, day or evening courses, face-to-face or online instruction. Programs have been developed and implemented in collaboration with local employers. WATC offers courses in the areas of aviation, business and technology, health care, manufacturing, design, and business, technology and general education. In addition, customized training solutions are offered for both business training (i.e., Six Sigma, American Production and Inventory Control Society-APICS) and industry training (i.e., composites, virtual paint).
Offered in cooperation with the National Center for Aviation Training, WATC offers degree paths in a variety of aviation degree and certificate programs including Associate of Applied Science (AAS, typically a two-year program); Technical Certificate (TC, typically a one-year program) or Certificate of Completion (CC, usually completed in less than one semester). 44
WATC student enrollment has trended basically upward annually since 2008, both in headcount and in full-time equivalency enrollment. Between 2008 and 2012, student headcount showed an increase of 38.2 percent, by 740 students.
Table 64. Wichita Area Technical College Annual Student Headcount and Full-Time Equivalency Students Enrollment 45 Fall Semester 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 Headcount 1,937 2,612 2,127 2,137 2,677 Full-Time Equivalency Enrollment 1,486 1,628 1,604 1,627 1,869
WATC is the fastest-growing college in Kansas and has achieved new record enrollments for five consecutive years. By offering high-wage, high-tech training for in-demand jobs in the Wichita area, WATC plays a critical role in helping local residents take a step up in their careers and in creating a pipeline of skilled job candidates for local employers. 51
Workforce Alliance of South Central Kansas
Following the passage of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998, the Workforce Alliance of South Central Kansas was designated the Area IV Local Workforce Investment Board (LWIB) to manage federal job training funds and oversee the workforce development system in South Central Kansas serving Sedgwick, Butler, Cowley, Harper, Kingman, and Sumner counties. Its vision is growing the regional economy through a skilled workforce, and its mission is supporting and advancing a competitive workforce. It operates the One-Stop Career Centers for the region. (Kansas WorkforceONE, the LWIB for western Kansas, serves Harvey and Reno counties.) 46
According to their annual report, in 2012, the Workforce Alliance of South Central Kansas’ Business Team provided services to 212 employers and posted 2,080 jobs to KANSASWORKS.com. At the Workforce Centers, the team also took 5,610 applications/pre-employment screens from 4,077 individuals for 61 employers. In addition, in 2012: 47 78,558 individuals received services from the Workforce Centers of South Central Kansas. 1,937 individuals earned a Kansas WORKReady! Certificate (a nationally recognized certificate that indicates job candidates skills in reading, locating information and mathematics). 22,605 adult and dislocated workers, eligible for Workforce Investment Act (WIA) services, reported employment. 230 youth participated in the WIA program 104 youth participating in the WIA program earned a degree or certificate. 1,564 individuals attended job search success workshops to enhance their resumes and interview skills.
Page 104 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Programs and initiatives coordinated by the Workforce Alliance of South Central Kansas - among others - include the Preparation for Advanced Career Employment System (PACES) project, Community partnerships and the Kansas Composites WIRED (Workforce Innovations in Regional Economic Development) initiative.
Preparation for Advanced Career Employment System46 -- The Preparation for Advanced Career Employment System 46 project (PACES, formerly the Preparation for Aviation Career Employment System project) is a collaborative effort to increase the available skilled labor pool through a regional funding collaborative to strengthen and expand workforce partnerships. Partners include the National Fund for Workforce Solutions, the Workforce Alliance of South Central Kansas, the John S. and James L. Knight Foundation, United Way of the Plains, the City of Wichita, Spirit AeroSystems, the Glass Family Foundation and the Lattner Family Foundation.
PACES is offered as a solution to increase the human capital in the available labor pool. Its mission is to create a more accessible and flexible employment and training system to move both unemployed and under-employed workers into high demand and high skill careers in the aviation industry. PACES operates a dual-customer approach: evaluating what employers need and what skills and abilities potential workers possess.
Partially supported by a National Fund for Workforce Solutions grant, PACES funds are used to leverage local public and private dollars. 48 Now approaching its fifth year in existence, the project operates with a three-pronged focus: Securing high-paying jobs for lower skilled/lower income individuals that align with employer needs. Developing cross-cutting, sustainable relationships that can improve the system. Influencing public policy to strengthen workforce development.
According to the Workforce Alliance’s 2012 Annual Report, that year marked the fourth year for the PACES project, which it described as “a sector strategy utilizing industry-recognized credentials and career pathways.”47 Despite the past few years’ challenging economic conditions, the report noted that hundreds of job seekers received support and services needed to find work or advance their skills, adding that the PACES project: Moved 411 unemployed and underemployed workers into high-demand and high-skill careers in the aviation and healthcare industries. Matched skilled workers with more than 25 employer partners. Served as a catalyst in increasing access and capacity of the region’s adult education programs. Awarded more than $140,000 in capacity building grants to four adult education programs in the region. Provided 1,109 job seekers with the support and services needed to find work or advance their skills.
Kansas Engineering Excellence Program49 -- In partnership with Wichita State University’s College of Engineering, grant funds awarded by the U.S. Department of Labor are being used in the Kansas Engineering Excellence Program (KEEP) to train long‐term unemployed, women or minority participants in engineering programs to obtain Bachelors, Masters or Doctorate (PhD) degrees. Funds are available to help participants pay for tuition, books, and internship/work experiences. The grant’s period of performance runs from November 2011 to November 2015.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 105 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Education
Jobs and Innovation Accelerator49 -- Funds granted to Wichita State University from the U.S. Department of Education, the U.S. Department of Labor and the Small Business Administration are used to provide training though a career accelerator and to support advanced manufacturing innovators to get commercially viable processes and products into production faster through an enterprise accelerator. The grant’s period of performance runs from October 2011 to September 2015.
Community Partnerships47 - An ongoing partnership between Workforce Alliance of South Central Kansas and Butler Community College Adult Basic Education made it possible for participants in the Workforce Investment Act Youth Program to attend General Educational Development preparation sessions at the Wichita Workforce Center.
In 2012, 23 youth enrolled in one or more General Educational Development preparation sessions with Butler Community College. Three of these youth earned a General Equivalency Diploma (GED), and 16 increased Comprehensive Adult Student Assessment Systems (CASAS) assessment scores by at least one functioning level.47
Summary
This community offers a variety of educational opportunities, extending from pre-school through adult and continuing education courses and covering the range of public, private and religious based education as well as urban/suburban/rural education choices.
Robert Reich, Professor of Public Policy at the University of California at Berkeley and former U.S. Secretary of Labor having served under former President Bill Clinton, characterizes the labor market of the future as having to do with analyzing, manipulating and communicating through numbers, shapes, words and ideas, saying: 50
"We should stop pining after the days when millions of Americans stood along assembly lines and continuously bolted, fit, soldered or clamped what went by. Those days are over.
"Want to blame something? Blame new knowledge. Knowledge created the electronic gadgets and software that can now do almost any routine task. This goes well beyond the factory floor.
"Any job that’s even slightly routine is disappearing from the U.S. But this doesn’t mean we are left with fewer jobs. It means only that we have fewer routine jobs, including traditional manufacturing. When the U.S. economy gets back on track, many routine jobs won’t be returning - but new jobs will take their place. A quarter of all Americans now work in jobs that weren’t listed in the Census Bureau’s occupation codes in 1967."
Reich cautions against seeing only the loss of old jobs, while overlooking all the new ones, saying, "The reason they’re so easy to overlook is that so much of the new value added is invisible. A growing percent of every consumer dollar goes to people who analyze, manipulate, innovate and create. These people are responsible for research and development, design and engineering. Or for high-level sales, marketing and advertising. They’re composers, writers and producers. They’re lawyers, journalists, doctors and management consultants."
Perhaps truer now than ever before, as the advances of medicine and technology continue to change and shape our tomorrows, flexibility in educational and career options will continue to play an increasingly important role.
Page 106 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Crime statistics provide information about the environment within which the members of our community live. The statistics indicate the likelihood that a given individual will be a victim of crime. Social services often are provided both to the victims and the perpetrators of criminal acts.
Crime Index Offenses
Crime is a sociological phenomenon influenced by a variety of factors. The Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) collects data from numerous agencies in order to generate a reliable set of crime statistics for use in law enforcement administration, operation and management. The FBI discourages users from using the data as a measurement of law enforcement effectiveness. However, the data do provide valuable information on the fluctuations in the level of crime from year to year, for trending purposes.
The Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program of the Federal Bureau of Investigation collects data on violent crimes and property crimes to serve as an Index in measuring change in the overall volume and rate of crimes reported to law enforcement. It is a nationwide cooperative statistical effort of more than 18,000 city, university and college, county, state, tribal, and federal law enforcement agencies voluntarily reporting data on crimes brought to their attention. 1
In 2011, law enforcement agencies active in the UCR Program represented more than 304 million United States inhabitants, 97.8 percent of the total population). The coverage amounted to 98.8 percent of the population in Metropolitan Statistical Areas, 92.3 percent of the population in cities outside metropolitan areas, and 93.1 percent of the population in nonmetropolitan counties. 1
The UCR Program collects offense information Part I offenses, that is, crimes that are serious crimes by nature and/or by volume. Not all crimes, such as embezzlement, are readily brought to the attention of the police. Also, some serious crimes, such as kidnapping, occur infrequently. The UCR Program reports offenses in eight selected crime classifications: for murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny-theft, motor vehicle theft, and arson.2
The following sections describe the definitions of violent and property crimes as they are reported to state and federal bureaus of investigation. 3
Violent Crimes Criminal Homicide, including murder and non-negligent manslaughter, is "the willful killing of one human being by another." Not included in the count for this offense classification are deaths caused by negligence, suicide or accident; justifiable homicides; and attempts to murder or assaults to murder, which are scored as aggravated assaults. Forcible Rape is "the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will." Rapes by force and attempts or assaults to rape, regardless of the age of the victim, are included. Statutory offenses (no force used; victim under age of consent) are excluded. Robbery is "the taking or attempting to take anything of value from the care, custody or control of a person or persons by force or threat of force or violence and/or by putting the victim in fear." Aggravated Assault is "an unlawful attack by one person upon another for the purpose of inflicting severe or aggravated bodily injury. This type of assault is usually accompanied by the use of a weapon or by means likely to produce death or great bodily harm. Simple assaults are excluded."
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 107 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Property Crime Burglary (breaking or entering) is "the unlawful entry of a structure to commit a felony or theft." Attempted forcible entry is included. Larceny-Theft (except motor vehicle theft) is "the unlawful taking, carrying, leading, or riding away of property from the possession or constructive possession of another." Examples are thefts of bicycles, motor vehicle parts and accessories, shoplifting, pocket-picking, or the stealing of any property or article that is not taken by force and violence or by fraud. Attempted larcenies are included. Embezzlement, confidence games, forgery, check fraud, etc., are excluded. Motor Vehicle Theft is "the theft or attempted theft of a motor vehicle." A motor vehicle is self- propelled and runs on land surface and not on rails. Motorboats, construction equipment, airplanes, and farming equipment are specifically excluded from this category. Arson is "any willful or malicious burning or attempt to burn, with or without intent to defraud, a dwelling house, public building, motor vehicle or aircraft, personal property of another, etc. (Although arson data are included in the trend and clearance tables, sufficient data are not available to estimate totals for this offense at the city, county or MSA level.)
The data presented in Crime in the United States reflect the Hierarchy Rule, which requires that only the most serious offense in a multiple-offense criminal incident be counted. 4
A recent development in the Uniform Crime Reporting Program 1 is that in the fall of 2011, the Advisory Policy Board (APB) recommended and FBI Director Robert Mueller III approved changing the definition of rape. Since 1929, in the Summary Reporting System, forcible rape has been defined as “the carnal knowledge of a female forcibly and against her will,” (UCR Handbook, 2004, p. 19). Beginning with the 2013 data collection, the Summary Reporting System’s definition for the violent crime of forcible rape will be modified to:
“Penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”
The FBI is developing reporting options for law enforcement agencies to meet this requirement which will be built into the redeveloped data collection system.
In addition to approving the new definition of rape for the Summary Reporting System, the APB and Director Mueller approved removing the word “forcible” from the name of the offense and also replacing the phrase “against the person’s will” with “without the consent of the victim” in other sex-related offenses in the Summary Reporting System, the National Incident-Based Reporting System, the Hate Crime Statistics Program and Cargo Theft.
Information collected at the national level indicated that in 2011, firearms were used in 67.7 percent of the nation’s murders, 41.3 percent of robberies, and 21.2 percent of aggravated assaults. 1
Statistical Summary of Criminal Offenses
United States
The Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program's Crime Index is composed of selected offenses used to gauge fluctuations in the volume and rate of crime reported to law enforcement. The Crime Index was composed of violent crimes of murder, nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery and aggravated assault and property crimes of burglary, larceny theft and motor vehicle theft.
Page 108 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
In 2011, there were an estimated 386.3 Crime Index violent crime offenses for each 100,000 people in the United States, 5 compared with 454.5 6 in 2008 and 466.9 in 2007. 7 The rates were lowest in rural counties and highest in metropolitan areas.
In 2011, the total number of reported violent crimes represented a decrease of 3.8 percent from the 2010 estimate, at 1,203,564 in 2011. 5 Figure 14 displays the relative distribution of violent crimes reported in 2011:
Figure 14. Violent Crimes Reported in 2011 (National) 5
Murder Rape 1.2% 6.9%
Aggravated assaults 62.4%
Robbery 29.4%
According to the FBI's Crime Clock, 8 for the year 2011, violent and property crimes were committed in the United States at the specified average time intervals:
Figure 15. 2011 Crime Clock Statistics8
The Crime Clock conveys the annual reported crime experience by showing the relative frequency of occurrence. It should not be taken to imply a regularity in the commission of crime.
Kansas
Table 65 presents estimations made by the FBI from available data for selected crimes in the State of Kansas. Rates are standardized per 100,000 population, based on annual state population.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 109 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Table 65. Kansas Crime Rate Per 100,000 Population Kansas Violent Crime Property Crime Murder Year Population Number Rate Number Rate Number Rate 2011 12 2,871,238 10,162 353.9 88,438 3,080.1 110 3.8 2010 11 2,853,118 10,531 369.1 89,015 3,119.9 100 3.5 2009 10 2,818,747 11,278 400.1 90,420 3,207.8 119 4.2 2008 9 2,802,134 11,505 410.6 94,635 3,377.2 113 4.0
Data for 2012 have not been included; only preliminary semiannual data (January through June) are available for 2012; data that are available do not include statewide information presented in Table 65.
Kansas - Juvenile Arrests - The number of arrests of juveniles (persons under the age of 18) is one measure of the efficacy of prevention and intervention programs aimed at youths. Depicting the social characteristics of juvenile offenders may assist in targeting populations of young people most at risk of committing crimes.
According to the 2011 American Community Survey, in 2011, 13 Kansas was home to 718,585 individuals under the age of 18 years, who comprised 25.4 percent of the state’s population. Approximately 17.1 percent (n = 123,093) of these were 15- to 17-year-olds. For comparison purposes, in 2008, 14 the 699,509 individuals under the age of 18 residing in Kansas made up 25.0 percent of the state’s population. Approximately 17.5 percent (n = 122,669) of these were 15- to 17-year-olds.
As shown in Table 66, property crimes committed by juveniles far outpaced violent crimes, with theft being the crime committed most frequently by youth. In Kansas, theft accounted for 29.7 percent of all juvenile arrests in 2011, as compared to 20.1 percent in 2008.
Table 66. State of Kansas - Juvenile Arrests 2008 14 and 2011 13 (In order of number of 2008 Juvenile Arrests) Total Total Offense 2008 2011 Offense 2008 2011 Total Arrests 15,352 11,843 Crime Index Arrests 4,083 3,522 Other Arrests (continued) Theft 3,083 2,629 Drugs/drug equipment 1,582 1,621 Burglary 378 373 Disorderly conduct 1,042 703 Aggravated assault 325 248 Criminal damage 840 591 Motor vehicle theft 114 101 DUI 296 158 Robbery 75 61 Trespassing 232 319 Arson 54 37 Intimidation 185 133 Rape 47 66 Stolen property/forgery/ 162 138 Murder 7 7 credit cards/fraud Weapons violation 145 157 Other Arrests Sex offense arrests 141 149 Simple assault/battery 1,796 1,528 Kidnapping/abduction 16 6 Liquor violations/drunkenness 1,732 1,310 All other offenses 3,100 1,508
Counties
Table 67 presents the number of homicide deaths by county of residence at the time of death, regardless of where the victims were murdered. Sedgwick County, with the largest urban population, had the largest number of homicide victims. With 17.5 percent of the state’s population in 2011, Sedgwick County experienced 19.2 percent of the state’s homicide deaths (as compared to 17.2 percent of the state’s population and 25.4 percent of the state’s homicide deaths in 2008.
Page 110 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Table 67. Homicide Deaths by County of Residence18 Population (2011) 17 Homicide Deaths County As % of State 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Butler 2.3% 1 0 1 1 1 Cowley 1.3% 1 0 2 0 0 Harper 0.2% 0 0 0 0 0 Harvey 1.2% 0 0 0 1 0 Kingman 0.3% 0 0 0 0 0 Reno 2.3% 1 4 1 2 2 Sedgwick 17.5% 46 29 28 20 23 Sumner 0.8% 0 1 0 0 2 UWP Service Area 25.9% 49 34 32 24 28 State of Kansas 100.0% 114 114 127 108 120
Sedgwick County as % of Kansas 17.5% 40.4% 25.4% 22.0% 18.5% 19.2% UWP Service Area as % of Kansas 25.9% 43.0% 30.0% 25.2% 22.2% 23.3%
The Kansas Bureau of Investigation (KBI) compiles reports from various law enforcement agencies across the state and compiles annual statistics on crime offenses. The KBI noted that some agencies did not report, reported partial data or reported summary data. The available KBI county data for 2011 and 2008 are summarized in Table 68.
Selected Violent and Table 68. Crime: Reported Crime Offenses, 2011 19 and 2008 20 Property Crimes Butler Cowley Harper Harvey Kingman Reno Sedgwick Sumner 2011 Murder (#) 2 1 0 1 1 1 26 2 Rape (#) 20 6 1 9 2 23 273 9 Robbery (#) 12 5 0 7 0 28 507 4 Agg. Assault (#) 115 118 4 108 8 195 2,439 50 Burglary (#) 275 227 22 179 49 511 4,367 214 Theft (#) 1,180 825 29 425 83 2,233 15,058 463 Vehicle Theft (#) 82 47 2 29 12 136 2,001 51
Crime Index 2011 Population 66,298 36,890 4,590 34,861 7,908 64,921 495,365 27,747 Number 1,686 1,229 58 758 155 3,127 24,671 793 Rate per 1,000 inhabitants 25.4 33.3 12.6 21.7 19.6 48.2 49.8 28.3
2008 Murder (#) 1 0 0 1 0 4 32 1 Rape (#) 20 19 3 20 2 33 302 4 Robbery (#) 6 7 1 14 0 23 503 2 Agg. Assault (#) 158 124 5 94 14 265 2,443 60 Burglary (#) 407 224 37 188 36 582 4,466 180 Theft (#) 1,406 696 44 613 62 2,077 15,767 529 Vehicle Theft (#) 119 41 5 21 11 102 2,010 34
Crime Index 2008 Population 62,989 34,090 5,178 33,874 7,744 63,103 473,596 28,078 Number 2,117 1,111 95 951 125 3,086 25,523 810 Rate per 1,000 inhabitants 33.6 32.6 18.3 28.1 16.1 48.9 53.9 28.8
Regarding the data in Table 68, the responsibility for data submission rests with the individual law enforcement agency. Data from jurisdictions submitting no data or data for less than 12 months have been excluded from the Crime Index calculations.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 111 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Peer Cities/Peer Metropolitan Statistical Areas
In an effort to examine the City of Wichita and the Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) in contrast to Midwestern cities and MSAs with similar-sized characteristics, the peer cities of Colorado Springs, Colorado; Omaha, Nebraska; and Tulsa, Oklahoma and their accompanying MSAs were identified. Table 69 presents an overview of the number of counties in each MSA, the 2011 area population, the number of square miles included in the MSA, and the population density per square mile.
Encompassing the Kansas counties of Butler, Harvey, Sedgwick and Sumner, the Wichita MSA had the smallest population of the four peer MSAs examined. With an average of 151 individuals per square mile, its population density matched that of the Tulsa MSA.
Although the Colorado Springs MSA is made up of only two counties and has the smallest geographic area of the four peer MSAs examined, it has the highest population density, with an average of 245 individuals per square mile.
Table 69. Peer Cities and Peer Metropolitan Statistical Areas Metropolitan Statistical Number of Population Square Miles Population Per Areas (MSAs) Counties (2011) 21 In MSA 22 Square Mile Wichita (KS) 4* 627,017 4,149 151 Tulsa (OK) 7 947,512 6,282 151 Omaha (NE) 8 872,617 4,363 200 Colorado Springs (CO) 2 656,862 2,684 245
*Kingman County was added to the Wichita MSA in February 2013, which will bring the county count to five in future reports.
The picture of crime in an area is more complex than a simple review of top-line data. 23 The comparison of such top-line data does not provide insight into any of the numerous variables that mold crime in a particular city, county or region. Valid assessments are possible only with careful study and analysis of the range of unique conditions affecting each local law enforcement jurisdiction. The data in Table 70 and Table 72 should be viewed as one tool in the assessment of area crime, rather than as the whole picture.
Table 70 presents the number of violent and property crime offenses committed in various geographic areas in 2011. Data presented reflect the Hierarchy Rule, which requires that in a multiple offense criminal incident, only the most serious offense be counted. Violent crimes are those which involve force or the threat of force. In the FBI’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program, the descending order of violent crimes is murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery and aggravated assault. These are followed by the property crimes of burglary, larceny-theft and motor vehicle theft.
Nationwide in 2011, there were an estimated 386.3 violent crimes per 100,000 inhabitants. 5 The rates of the Colorado Springs MSA (372.8) and the Omaha MSA (383.8) were just below the national average. The Tulsa MSA’s rate of 554.1 violent crimes per 100,000 inhabitants exceeded the national average. At 577.2 violent crimes per 100,000 inhabitants, the Wichita MSA’s rate was the highest among the four peer cities examined. 21
Nationwide in 2011, aggravated assaults accounted for 62.4 percent of violent crimes. Robbery comprised 29.4 percent of violent crimes, forcible rape accounted for 6.9 percent, and murder accounted for 1.2 percent. 5
In the City of Wichita, aggravated assaults accounted for 74.5 percent of violent crimes in 2011. Robbery comprised 16.6 percent of violent crimes; forcible rape accounted for 8.1 percent and murder accounted for 0.8 percent. 21
Page 112 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Table 70. Population, Violent Crimes and Property Crimes in Wichita and Identified Peer Cities (2011) 21 Violent Crime Property Crime Violent Murder and Property Motor Crime Nonnegligent Forcible Aggravated Crime Larceny- Vehicle Geographic Area Population (Total) Manslaughter Rape Robbery Assault (Total) Burglary Theft Theft City (2011) Wichita 384,796 2,950 25 238 490 2,197 19,456 4,005 13,550 1,901 Tulsa 396,101 3,960 49 266 1,090 2,555 21,923 7,353 12,136 2,434 Omaha 412,608 2,309 43 220 696 1,350 18,764 3,321 12,793 2,650 Colorado Springs 423,680 1,865 26 319 449 1,071 15,866 3,323 11,375 1,168
Metropolitan Statistical Area (2011) Wichita 627,017 3,619 31 312 529 2,747 24,709 5,204 17,318 2,187 Tulsa 947,512 5,250 64 399 1,236 3,551 33,176 10,324 19,575 3,277 Omaha 872,617 3,349 51 366 789 2,143 29,276 5,618 19,995 3,663 Colorado Springs 656,862 2,449 31 395 478 1,545 19,159 4,144 13,623 1,392
Rate Per 100,000 Inhabitants – Metropolitan Statistical Area(2011) Wichita 577.2 4.9 49.8 84.4 438.1 3,940.7 830.0 2,762.0 348.8 Tulsa 554.1 6.8 42.1 130.4 374.8 3,501.4 1,089.6 2,065.9 345.9 Omaha 383.8 5.8 41.9 90.4 245.6 3,355.0 643.8 2,291.4 419.8 Colorado Springs 372.8 4.7 60.1 72.8 235.2 2,916.7 630.9 2,074.0 211.9
Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA): Wichita (KS) MSA = Butler, Harvey, Sedgwick and Sumner counties; NOTE: Kingman County was added to the Wichita MSA in February 2013. Tulsa (OK) MSA = Creek, Okmulgee, Osage, Pawnee, Rogers, Tulsa, and Wagoner counties Omaha (NE)/Council Bluffs (IA) MSA = Harrison, Mills, and Pottawattamie counties in Iowa and Cass, Douglas, Sarpy, Saunders, and Washington counties in Nebraska Colorado Springs (CO) MSA = El Paso and Teller counties
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 113 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
In 2011 among the identified peer cities,21 the City of Wichita had the highest ratio of aggravated assaults with 74.5 percent of violent crimes attributable to that category; The City of Tulsa was next, at 64.5 percent. However, the City of Wichita had lower rates of both murders and robberies than any of the other peer cities. Although the City of Wichita’s rapes as a percentage of all violent crimes (8.1 percent) was less than the City of Colorado Springs (17.1 percent) and the City of Omaha (9.5 percent), it did exceed those of the City of Tulsa (6.7 percent).
Similarly, in 2011 among the Metropolitan Statistical Areas associated with the identified peer cities,21 the Wichita MSA had the highest ratio of aggravated assaults with 75.9 percent of violent crimes attributable to that category, followed by the Tulsa MSA at 67.6 percent. However, the Wichita MSA had lower ratios of murders and robberies than the MSAs associated with the other peer cities. Although the Wichita MSA’s ratio of rapes (8.6 percent of violent crimes) was less than the Colorado Springs MSA (16.1 percent) and the Omaha MSA (10.9 percent), it did exceed that of the Tulsa MSA (7.6 percent).
Kansas Cities/Kansas Metropolitan Statistical Areas
Continuing the examination of the City of Wichita and the Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) in contrast to cities and MSAs in Kansas, the area cities of Lawrence, Overland Park, Topeka and Kansas City, Kansas, and their accompanying MSAs were identified, as well as the MSA for the Manhattan area. (The Kansas City MSA includes both Overland Park and Kansas City, Kansas; information for the City of Manhattan was not provided independently of its MSA information.) Table 71 presents an overview of the number of counties in each MSA, the 2011 area population, the number of square miles included in the MSA, and the population density per square mile.
Encompassing the Kansas counties of Butler, Harvey, Sedgwick and Sumner, the Wichita MSA had a larger population than the Lawrence, Manhattan or Topeka MSAs, but a smaller population than the Kansas City MSA. The population density somewhat mirrored this information, with the Wichita MSA having an average of 151 individuals per square mile, a greater density than the Topeka and Manhattan MSAs (at 45 and 70 individuals per square mile, respectively) and a lower density than the Lawrence and Kansas City MSAs (at 245 and 261 individuals per square mile, respectively).
Table 71. Kansas Cities and Kansas Metropolitan Statistical Areas Metropolitan Statistical Number of Population Square Miles Population Per Areas (MSAs) Counties (2011) 21 In MSA 22 Square Mile Wichita (KS) 4* 627,017 4,149 151 Kansas City (MO-KS) 15 2,045,034 7,827 261 Lawrence (KS) 1 111,530 456 245 Manhattan (KS) 3 127,888 1,836 70 Topeka (KS) 5 146,712 3,233 45
*Kingman County was added to the Wichita MSA in February 2013, which will bring the county count to five in future reports.
Table 72 presents the number of violent and property crime offenses committed in selected Kansas geographic areas in 2011.
Nationwide in 2011, there were an estimated 386.3 violent crimes per 100,000 inhabitants.5 The rate of violent crimes in the Manhattan (288.5), Lawrence (349.7) and Topeka (376.0) MSAs were below the national average. The Kansas City MSA’s rate of 476.8 violent crimes per 100,000 inhabitants exceeded the national average. At 577.2 violent crimes per 100,000 inhabitants, the Wichita MSA’s rate was the highest among the five Kansas MSAs examined.21
Page 114 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Table 72. Population, Violent Crimes and Property Crimes in Wichita and Other Kansas Cities (2011) 21 Violent Crime Property Crime Violent Murder and Property Motor Crime Nonnegligent Forcible Aggravated Crime Larceny- Vehicle Geographic Area Population (Total) Manslaughter Rape Robbery Assault (Total) Burglary Theft Theft City (2011) Wichita 384,796 2,950 25 238 490 2,197 19,456 4,005 13,550 1,901 Topeka 128,283 698 15 53 235 395 7,529 1,727 5,213 589 Kansas City, Kansas 146,712 947 27 95 291 534 7,883 1,827 4,792 1,264 Lawrence 88,200 335 0 33 37 265 3,793 502 3,098 193 Overland Park 174,473 289 2 60 38 189 4,015 468 3,237 310
Metropolitan Statistical Area (2011) Wichita 627,017 3,619 31 312 529 2,747 24,709 5,204 17,318 2,187 Topeka 235,354 885 15 66 242 562 9,911 2,425 6,775 711 Kansas City 2,045,034 9,750 161 730 2,462 6,397 69,682 15,241 46,852 7,589 Lawrence 111,530 390 0 39 40 311 4,488 642 3,632 214 Manhattan 127,888 369 5 49 47 268 2,561 628 1,863 70
Rate Per 100,000 Inhabitants – Metropolitan Statistical Area(2011) Wichita 577.2 4.9 49.8 84.4 438.1 3,940.7 830.0 2,762.0 348.8 Topeka 376.0 6.4 28.0 102.8 238.8 4,211.1 103.4 2,878.6 302.1 Kansas City 476.8 7.9 35.7 120.4 312.8 3,407.4 745.3 2,291.0 371.1 Lawrence 349.7 0.0 35.0 35.9 278.8 4,024.0 575.6 3,256.5 191.9 Manhattan 288.5 3.9 38.3 36.8 209.6 2,002.5 491.1 1,456.7 54.7
Metropolitan Statistical Areas (MSA): Wichita (KS) MSA = Butler, Harvey, Sedgwick and Sumner counties NOTE: Kingman County was added to the Wichita MSA in February 2013. Topeka (KS) MSA = Jackson, Jefferson, Osage, Shawnee, Wabaunsee counties Kansas City (MO-KS) MSA = Franklin, Johnson, Leavenworth, Linn, Miami, and Wyandotte counties in Kansas and Bates, Caldwell, Cass, Clay, Clinton, Jackson, Lafayette, Platte, and Ray counties in Missouri Lawrence (KS) MSA = Douglas County Manhattan (KS) MSA = Geary, Pottawatomie and Riley counties
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 115 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Nationwide in 2011, aggravated assaults accounted for 62.4 percent of violent crimes. Robbery comprised 29.4 percent of violent crimes, forcible rape accounted for 6.9 percent, and murder accounted for 1.2 percent. 5
In the City of Wichita, aggravated assaults accounted for 74.5 percent of violent crimes in 2011. Robbery comprised 16.6 percent of violent crimes; forcible rape accounted for 8.1 percent and murder accounted for 0.8 percent. 21
In 2011 among the identified Kansas cities,21 the City of Lawrence had the highest ratio of aggravated assaults with 79.1 percent of violent crimes attributable to that category, followed by Wichita (74.5 percent), Overland Park (64.5 percent), Topeka (56.6 percent) and Kansas City, Kansas (56.4 percent).
The City of Wichita had a lower ratio of murder and non-negligent manslaughter to violent crimes than did Kansas City, Kansas or Topeka, although a higher ratio for each category than did Lawrence or Overland Park. Similarly, the City of Wichita had a lower ratio of robbery to violent crimes than did Topeka or Kansas City, Kansas, although a higher ratio than did Lawrence or Overland Park.
For the City of Wichita, the ratio of forcible rapes to all violent crimes was 8.1 percent, as compared to Overland Park (20.8 percent); Kansas City, Kansas (10.0 percent) and Lawrence (9.9 percent). Only Topeka reported a lower ratio of forcible rapes to all violent crimes, at 7.6 percent.
Similarly, in 2011 among the Metropolitan Statistical Areas associated with the identified Kansas cities,21 the Lawrence MSA had the highest ratio of aggravated assaults with 79.7 percent of violent crimes attributable to that category, followed by the Wichita MSA (75.9 percent); the Manhattan MSA (72.6 percent); the Kansas City MSA (65.6 percent); and the Topeka MSA (63.5 percent).
The Lawrence MSA recorded no murders or instances of non-negligent manslaughter in 2011. Beyond that, the Wichita MSA had a lower ratios of murder/non-negligent homicide than did the other three MSAa. Robberies in the Wichita MSA represented 14.6 percent of all violent crime, a lower ratio than in the Topeka (27.3 percent) or Kansas City, Kansas (25.3 percent) MSAs, but a higher ratio than in the Manhattan (12.7 percent) or Lawrence (10.3 percent) MSAs.
The Wichita MSA’s ratio of forcible rapes (8.6 percent) to all violent crimes) exceeded both the Topeka MSA and the Kansas City MSA, at 7.5 percent each; it was, however, less than either the Manhattan (13.3 percent) or Lawrence (10.0 percent) MSA’s ratio of forcible rape to all violent crimes.
Wichita Figure 16. Patrol West Bureau
The City of Wichita's Police Department provided its annual Crime Statistics annual reports for the five-year period rom 2008 to 2012.24 Its website provides additional data, both within the four main patrol bureaus -- North, South, East and West -- and for the City overall.
For the various bureaus, the user selects a bureau, and receives a map of that bureau’s patrol beats.
Page 116 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Each bureau has nine patrol beats, for which maps and crime Figure 17. Patrol West, Beat 15 statistics can be viewed. Statistics are provided at both the patrol and beat levels for 2008 through 2012.
Figure 18. Beat 15 Crime Statistics
Wichita - Arrests 25
The Wichita Police Department tracks statistics on the number of arrests each year for Part I offenses as identified by the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) program including violent crimes (murder, rape, robbery and aggravated assault) and property crimes (burglary, larceny, motor vehicle theft and arson). It also tracks arrests for disorderly conduct, drug violations and driving under the influence (DUI) offenses.
A separate category containing unspecified “other” offenses has been excluded from Figure 19. This “other” category included an average of 30,004 offenses per year, including 34,694 in 2009; 30,742 in 2010; 27,641 in 2011; and 26,939 in 2012.
The summaries of arrest statistics in Figures 19 through 26 do not count distinct persons, but rather arrest charges. For example, if a person were to be arrested on robbery and auto theft offenses, that person would be counted once in each category, rather than as one arrest.
Wichita Arrests 25 Figure 19. Wichita Arrests (Total, Adult and Juvenile) 2009 - 2012 The Wichita Police 15,000 Department reports an average of approximately 12,500 9,968 adult arrests per 10,000 Total year and approximately 7,500 1,617 juvenile arrests per Adult 5,000 year, excluding arrests for Juvenile “other” offenses. 2,500 . 0 2009 2010 2011 2012
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 117 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Wichita Murders 25
Figure 20. Wichita – Number of Arrests for Murder (2009-2012)
50 From 2009 to 2012, an average of approximately 40 33 arrests were made per year by the Wichita Police 30 Total Department for the crime Adult of murder. 20 Juvenile 10
0 2009 2010 2011 2012
Wichita Rapes 25 Figure 21. Wichita – Number of Arrests for Rape (2009-2012) From 2009 to 2012, an 125 average of approximately 82 arrests were made per year 100 by the Wichita Police Total Department for the crime of 75 rape, consisting of an annual 50 Adult average of approximately 69 Juvenile adult arrests and 13 juvenile 25 arrests. 0 2009 2010 2011 2012
Wichita Robberies 25
Figure 22. Wichita – Number of Arrests for Robbery (2009-2012) From 2009 to 2012, an 200 average of approximately 165 arrests were made per year by the Wichita Police 150 Department for the crime of Total robbery, consisting of 100 Adult an annual average of Juvenile approximately 134 adult 50 arrests and 31 juvenile arrests. 0 2009 2010 2011 2012
Page 118 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Wichita Aggravated Assaults 25 Figure 23. Wichita – Number of Arrests for Aggravated Assault (2009-2012) From 2009 to 2012, an 700 average of approximately 600 644 arrests were made per year by the Wichita Police 500 Total Department for the crime of 400 aggravated assault. These 300 Adult arrests consisted of an 200 Juvenile annual average of 575 adult 100 arrests and 69 juvenile 0 arrests. 2009 2010 2011 2012
Wichita Burglaries 25
Figure 24. Wichita – Number of Arrests for Burglary (2009-2012) From 2009 to 2012, an 500 average of approximately 455 arrests were made per 400 year by the Wichita Police Department for the crime of 300 Total burglary, consisting of Adult an annual average of 200 Juvenile approximately 333 adult 100 arrests and 122 juvenile arrests. 0 2009 2010 2011 2012
Wichita Motor Vehicle Thefts 25 Figure 25. Wichita – Number of Arrests for Motor Vehicle Theft (2009-2012) From 2009 to 2012, an 150 average of approximately 96 arrests were made per year 125 by the Wichita Police 100 Total Department for the crime of 75 motor vehicle theft. These Adult 50 arrests consisted of an Juvenile annual average of 80 adult 25 arrests and 16 juvenile 0 arrests. 2009 2010 2011 2012
Over the four-year period, the number of arrests for stolen motor vehicles more than doubled, from 62 in 2009 to 144 in 2012. Growth was noted both in adult arrests (51 in 2009, 121 in 2012) and in juvenile arrests (11 in 2009; 23 in 2012).
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 119 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Wichita Larcenies 25
Figure 26. Wichita – Number of Arrests for Larceny (2009-2012) From 2009 to 2012, an 3,500 average of approximately 2,804 arrests were made 3,000 per year by the Wichita 2,500 Police Department for the 2,000 Total crime of larceny, consisting 1,500 Adult of an annual average of 1,000 Juvenile approximately 1,974 adult arrests and 830 juvenile 500 arrests. 0 2009 2010 2011 2012
Wichita - Juvenile Arrests – Larceny (theft) is the unlawful taking, carrying, leading or riding away of property from the possession of another when not taken by force and violence or by fraud, while burglary is the unlawful entry of a structure to commit a felony or theft. 3 Focusing on the number of arrests of persons under the age of 18, larceny (theft) was the crime committed most frequently by youth in Wichita, representing 56.5 percent of all juvenile arrests in 2009; 46.0 percent in 2010; 51.2 percent in 2011; and 51.0 percent in 2012 (excluding the “other juvenile offenses” category).
When taking “other juvenile offenses” into account, larceny (theft) represented 18.9 percent; 15.7 percent; 20.2 percent and 22.9 percent of all juvenile crimes for the four years, respectively.
Consistently over the four-year period, juveniles were arrested second most often for drug violation offenses, and third most often, for burglary offenses.
Table 73. Juvenile Arrests (2009 – 2012) 25 Wichita Police Department Year Offense 2009 2010 2011 2012 Larceny (Theft) 998 701 768 855 Drug Violations 435 534 432 416 Burglary 140 116 105 125 Disorderly Conduct 8 17 41 107 Aggravated Assault 73 75 64 63 Robbery 48 19 16 40 Driving Under Influence (DUI) 33 32 31 24 Auto Theft 11 15 16 23 Rape 8 8 18 18 Arson 3 3 6 6 Murder 10 4 4 0 Subtotal 1,767 1,524 1,501 1,677 Other Juvenile Offenses 3,506 2,930 2,296 2,059 Total Juvenile Offenses 5,273 4,454 3,797 3,736
Page 120 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Wichita - Reported Crimes - When viewing data contained in Figures 27 through 34, one should keep in mind that different types of crimes are reported at different rates. For example, burglaries, robberies and larceny may be reported more frequently because insurance companies request police report documentation, whereas crimes of a sensitive nature, such as rape, may be underreported due to reluctance of victims to report these crimes.
Compared to 2008, in 2009, the number of reported murders, rapes, burglaries, auto thefts, larcenies and forgeries decreased in Wichita, while the number of reported robberies and aggravated assaults increased during the same time period, as shown in Figures 27 through 34.
Wichita – Number of Reported Homicides28
Figure 27. Wichita – Number of Reported Homicides (2008-2012) Homicides include both 50 murders and “justifiable” homicides.
40 Between 2008 and 2012, Wichita experienced an 30 33 average of approximately 27 28 26 reported homicides 20 26 annually.
18 10 The number of homicides reported in 2010 (18) were 0 significantly lower than in 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2008, when 33 homicides were reported.
Wichita – Number of Reported Rapes28
Figure 28. Wichita – Number of Reported Rapes (2008-2012) From 2008 to 2012, Wichita experienced an 300 average of approximately 250 283 252 reported rapes 251 261 annually. 200 237 229
During the past five 150 years, the number of reported rapes trended 100 downward for four years, 50 to a low of 229 in 2011, then rose increasing to 0 261 in 2012. 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 121 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Wichita – Number of Reported Robberies28
Figure 29. Wichita – Number of Reported Robberies (2008 – 2012)
On average, approximately 600 500 robberies per year were reported in Wichita 500 538 491 493 510 during the five-year period 400 469 between 2008 and 2012. 300
200
100
0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Wichita – Number of Reported Aggravated Assaults28
Figure 30. Wichita – Number of Reported Aggravated Assaults (2008–2012)
The number of aggravated 1,600 assaults reported in Wichita 1,400 averaged approximately 1,398 1,457 1,200 1,333 1,358 1,350 1,379 per year during the 1,000 five-year period from 2008 to 2012. 800 600 Aggravated assaults 400 include those committed both with and without 200 firearms, and include 0 drive-by assaults employing 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 firearms.
Wichita – Number of Reported Burglaries 28
Figure 31. Wichita – Number of Reported Burglaries (2008 – 2012)
Over the five-year period 5,000 from 2008 to 2012, Wichita experienced an average 4,000 of 4,106 reported burglaries 4,148 4,091 4,247 4,066 annually. 3,977 3,000 Burglaries include thefts from residences, non-residences 2,000 and vehicles. 1,000
0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Page 122 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Wichita – Number of Reported Auto Thefts 28
Figure 32. Wichita – Number of Reported Auto Thefts (2008 – 2012)
2,500 The number of auto thefts reported in Wichita has 2,000 averaged approximately 1,817 1,687 each year from 2008 1,500 1,849 1,754 1,597 to 2012. 1,416 1,000
500
0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Wichita – Number of Reported Larcenies28
Figure 33. Wichita – Number of Reported Larcenies (2008 – 2012)
From 2008 to 2012, the 20,000 number of larcenies reported in Wichita 15,000 averaged 14,709 per year. 16,241 14,822 14,787 14,328 13,368 The number of reported 10,000 larcenies has shown annual increases since 5,000 2010, with reporting in 2012 representing a five-year high. 0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Wichita – Number of Reported Forgeries28
Figure 34. Wichita – Number of Reported Forgeries (2008 – 2012) The number of forgeries 500 reported in Wichita between 2008 and 2012 averaged 400 approximately 325 per year, 406 380 393 with a basically increasing 300 trend basically increasing 269 over that time period. 200 179 Forgeries are included as a 100 subset of Class 1 Crimes reported as larcenies. 0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 123 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Gang Activity29
In Wichita, the response to street gang activity is coordinated by the Wichita Police Department's Gang/Felony Assault section. Kansas Statute K.S.A. 21-4226 defines criminal street gang members, associates, activities and gang-related incidents. It makes it illegal to use intimidation to keep a person as a member or to recruit new members and defines conditions to be in violation. It requires a minimum $50,000 bond on new felony charges for a documented gang member.
A criminal street gang is an ongoing organization, association or group of three or more persons, whether formal or informal, which both: has a common name or identifying signs, colors or symbols, and has members or associates who individually or collectively engage in or have engaged in: homicide, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, arson, drive-by shooting, kidnapping, burglary, auto theft, weapons arrests, witness intimidation, narcotic and drug law violations, prostitution, simple assault, vandalism, bias or hate crimes.
A criminal street gang member is a person who: admits to street gang membership meets three or more of the following criteria. is identified as a criminal street gang member by a parent or guardian is identified as a criminal street gang member by a state, county or city law enforcement or correctional officer or documented reliable informant is identified as a criminal street gang member by an informant of previously untested reliability and such information is collaborated by independent information resides in or frequents a criminal street gang's area and adopts such gang's style of dress, color, use of hand signs or tattoos and associates with known criminal street gang members has been arrested more than once in the company of identified criminal street gang members for offenses which are consistent with usual street gang activity, is identified as a criminal street gang member by physical evidence including but not limited to photographs or other documentation has been stopped in the presence of criminal street gang members two or more times has participated in or undergone activities self-identified or identified by a reliable informant as a criminal street gang initiation ritual.
A criminal street gang associate: admits to criminal street gang association meets less than three of the defining criteria for street gang membership.
There are five categories of criminal street gang membership: Active - documented as a gang member and continues to be involved in gang activities or gang crimes; Inactive - gang member not arrested for gang crimes or gang activity for past three years since identification date; Incarcerated - gang member in custody of federal, state or local prison system, to include parole and probation; Deceased - gang member who has died for any reason; and Associate - gang member who meets the associate criteria presented above.
Page 124 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Gangs receive their power through fear and intimidation. The Wichita Police Department addresses gangs through prevention, intervention and suppression activities: 29 Prevention activities include education, information and assistance in recognizing the hazards of gang related activity; involving youth in activities that provide an alternative to gang membership; and mentoring. Intervention activities include trying to break the contact between the individual and the gang; counseling; and being part of the solution rather than the problem. Suppression activities include enforcement such as community policing, Special Community Action Teams (SCAT); Targeted Offender Program (TOP) and the Gang Unit. Suppression activities also include prosecution at the municipal, state and federal levels.
Figure 35, a map generated by the Wichita Police Department’s Information Services,30 illustrates the prevalence of gang-related incidents that occurred in Wichita in 2012. The darker the color on the map, the greater the number of gang-related incidents in that geographic area.
Figure 35. Wichita Police Department Density Map of Gang Related Incidents (2012)
Crimes Against Children (Wichita - Sedgwick County Exploited and Missing Child Unit)
The 1982 Missing Children's Act 31 defines a missing child as any individual younger than 18 years of age whose whereabouts are unknown to the child's legal custodian. Cases involving missing children typically fall into one of four categories: family abductions, non-family child abductions, ransom child abductions, and mysterious disappearances of children. The circumstances surrounding the child's disappearance must indicate that the child may possibly have been removed by another from the control of his or her legal custodian without the custodian's consent, or the circumstances of the case must strongly indicate that the child is likely to have been abused or sexually exploited.
In South Central Kansas, the Wichita - Sedgwick County Exploited and Missing Child Unit (EMCU)32 is a joint program comprised of investigators from the Sedgwick County Sheriff's Office and the Wichita Police Department and the social workers from the State of Kansas Department for Children and Families’ Child Protective Services. The Forensic Computer Crimes Unit and the Kansas Internet Crimes Against Children Investigators work within the EMCU structure.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 125 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
The mission of the Exploited and Missing Child Unit32 is to investigate allegations of child abuse and neglect, child exploitation, and reports of missing or abducted children. Investigators strive to identify offenders and present evidence for the prosecution of violators while minimizing trauma to the child victims. EMCU staff also strives to provide services and make effective resource referrals to victims and their families.
The Exploited and Missing Child Unit works as a team to investigate over 2,000 cases a year of child abuse, missing and abducted children, internet exploitation and crimes against children. This specialized unit assists all law enforcement agencies in Sedgwick County as well as other agencies throughout the state of Kansas. In recognition of the sensitive nature of these cases, EMCU staff receives specialized training for crimes against children that enables them to perform their duties with the least amount of trauma to the child victims. There are multiple phases to any investigation - these can include interviewing the victim, witnesses, and the perpetrator; identifying corroborating (or supporting) evidence; presenting evidence for the prosecution of the offender; and to provide services and resources to the child and their caregivers. 33
The AMBER Alert Program34 is a voluntary partnership between law-enforcement agencies, broad- casters, and transportation agencies to activate an urgent bulletin in the most serious child-abduction cases. Broadcasters use the Emergency Alert System to air a description of the abducted child and suspected abductor. The goal of an AMBER Alert is to instantly galvanize the entire community to assist in the search for and safe recovery of the child. As of April 2013, there had been 642 successful recoveries nationwide, attributable to the issuance of AMBER Alerts.
The days are past when someone capable of harming a child might be identified by the caricature of a dirty, unkempt, older man wearing a raincoat. Parents and children should remember that a computer-sex offender can be any age or gender. As Louis J. Freeh,35 Director of the Federal Bureau of Investigation noted:
"Unfortunately the same advances in computer and telecommunication technology that allow our children to reach out to new sources of knowledge and cultural experiences are also leaving them vulnerable to exploitation and harm by computer-sex offenders."
The following section includes information on various technology-based crimes including social networking media, computer and intellectual property crime and identify theft. With the recent proliferation of electronic devices, children, youth, adults and seniors all need to be increasingly aware of information they are sharing – whether willingly or unknowingly – with whoever has the technical savvy to view it.
Technology-Based Crime (Social Networking Media; Computer and Intellectual Property Crime; and Identity Theft)
As adolescents and other children move away from the total control of parents and seek to establish new relationships outside their families, they are sometimes interested in and curious about sexuality and sexually explicit material. Because of this curiosity, children and adolescents sometimes use their on-line access to actively seek out such materials and individuals. Sex offenders can use and exploit these characteristics and needs.
Children can be indirectly victimized through conversation, i.e. "chat," as well as the transfer of sexually explicit information and material. Computer-sex offenders may also evaluate children with whom they come into contact online for future face-to-face contact and direct victimization.
Some adolescent children may also be attracted to and lured by on-line offenders closer to their age who, although not technically child molesters, may be dangerous. They may have been manipulated by a clever offender and not fully understand or recognize the potential danger of these contacts.
Page 126 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Social Networking Media
According to a recent study by comScore, an internet technology company that measures what people do as they navigate the digital world,36 social networking sites now reach 82 percent of the world’s online population, representing 1.2 billion users around the world. In October 2011, “social networking” ranked as the most popular content category in worldwide engagement, accounting for 19 percent of all time spent online. Nearly 1 in every 5 minutes spent online is now spent on social networking sites. This stands in stark contrast to the March 2007 findings, when social networking accounted for only 6 percent of time spent online. A relatively new phenomenon, social networking websites such as Facebook, Twitter and Pinterest have captured the consciousness of generations of internet users.
Facebook37 invites users to “Connect with friends and the world around you on Facebook.” It provides a Data Use Policy most recently revised December 11, 2012. There are three categories of information: Public, meaning that anyone, including people off of Facebook, will be able to see or access it; Friends, meaning that those “friended” on Facebook will be able to see or access it; and Custom, meaning only the audience you designate will be able to see or access it. However, Facebook cautions, “Always think before you post. Just like anything else you post on the web or send in an email, information you share on Facebook can be copied or re-shared by anyone who can see it.” Also, depending on actions you or your friends take, it is possible that others will be able to “see your story no matter what audience you selected.” The responsibility for what and how much information to share ultimately rests with the user. Facebook does not share information with advertisers without users' permission, adding, “We may share your information when we have removed from it anything that personally identifies you or combined it with other information so that it no longer personally identifies you.”
Twitter38 describes itself as a real-time information network that connects users to the latest stories, ideas, opinions and news about what they find interesting. Twitter is used by people in nearly every country in the world and is available in more than 20 languages. All Twitter messages – or “tweets” -- are public and the recipient decides what sort of messages he or she wants to receive. Messages are quick to write, easy to read, public, controlled by the recipient and exchangeable anywhere. The team at Twitter values online security and works constantly to protect account security and keep Twitter safe for everyone. This is accomplished in part through a “community effort” of a group of independent security researchers who volunteer time to help spot potential issues. 39
Twitter lets you write and read messages of up to 140 characters, or the very length of this sentence, including all punctuation and spaces.
Pinterest 40 describes itself as “a tool for collecting and organizing things you love.” Pinterest is one of the newer social networking models, founded in March 2010. Activity begins with a “pin,” which is the process of adding an image or a video to Pinterest. A “board” is where pins are organized by topic. Each account has a “home feed,” which is a collection of pins from the pinners and boards that the account chooses to follow. When someone is “followed,” their pins show up in follower’s Pinterest home feed. All or part of someone's boards can be followed. The home feed is updated every time someone being followed adds a pin. Basically, content that is posted on Pinterest still belongs to the poster, but Pinterest can show it to people and others can re-pin it.
Researchers say a growing number of children are flouting age requirements on social networking sites which currently require users to be at least 13 years old but have no practical way to verify ages and that many young users pretend to be older when signing up.41 Pinterest 42 notes: “Any use or access by anyone under the age of 13 is prohibited.” Facebook notes that it maintains “added protections and security settings for teens (age 13-17) 43 that ensure their timelines and posts don’t show up in public search results. Still, it encourages parents to “have conversations about safety and technology early and often” in the same way parents talk to their kids about “being safe at school, in the car, riding public transportation, or playing sports.” Parents are encouraged to “Set ground rules, and enforce them.”
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 127 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Computer ("Cyber") and Intellectual Property Crimes 44
The United States Department of Justice has established a Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section (CCIPS) responsible for implementing the Department's national strategies in combating computer and intellectual property crimes worldwide.
The Computer Crime Initiative is a comprehensive program designed to combat electronic penetrations, data thefts, and cyberattacks on critical information systems. CCIPS prevents, investigates, and prosecutes computer crimes by working with other government agencies, the private sector, academic institutions, and foreign counterparts. Section attorneys work to improve the domestic and international infrastructure -- legal, technological and operational -- to pursue network criminals most effectively.
Intellectual Property (IP) has become one of the principal U.S. economic engines, and the nation is a target of choice for thieves of material protected by copyright, trademark, or trade-secret designation. CCIPS's enforcement responsibilities against intellectual property crimes are similarly multi-faceted. In pursuing all these goals, CCIPS attorneys regularly run complex investigations, resolve unique legal and investigative issues raised by emerging computer and telecommunications technologies; litigate cases; provide litigation support to other prosecutors; train federal, state, and local law enforcement personnel; comment on and propose legislation; and initiate and participate in international efforts to combat computer and intellectual property crime.
Identity Theft
Identity theft occurs when someone uses personal identifying information, like someone's name, Social Security number or credit card number, without permission, to commit fraud or other crimes. Based on consumer complaints received by the Federal Trade Commission (FTC), identity theft was the number one complaint category in terms of frequency. The FTC received 2,061,495 complaints in 2012. Nearly one in five (17.9 percent, n= 369,132) were regarding identify theft.45
Skilled identity thieves use a variety of methods to obtain personal information, including: Dumpster Diving. They rummage through trash looking for bills or other paper with personal information on it. Skimming. They steal credit/debit card numbers by using a special storage device when processing cards. Phishing. They pretend to be financial institutions or companies and send spam or pop-up messages to get the user to reveal personal information. Changing Your Address. They divert billing statements to another location by completing a change of address form. Old-Fashioned Stealing. They steal wallets and purses; mail, including bank and credit card statements; pre-approved credit offers; and new checks or tax information. They steal personnel records, or bribe employees who have access. Pretexting. They use false pretenses to obtain personal information from financial institutions, telephone companies, and other sources.
The crime of identity theft can take many forms. Identity thieves may rent an apartment, obtain a credit card, or establish a telephone account in someone else's name. The victim may not find out about the theft until a credit report or a credit card statement is reviewed and charges are noticed that the individual did not make. In other cases, the individual first learns of the identify theft upon contact by a debt collector.
Page 128 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Some identity theft victims can resolve their problems quickly. Others must spend a lot of time and hundreds of dollars repairing damage to their name and credit record. Some consumers victimized by identity theft may lose out on job opportunities or be denied loans for education, housing or cars because of negative information on their credit reports. They may even be arrested for crimes they did not commit.
When an individual's identify is stolen, a police report should be filed, credit reports should be checked, creditors should be notified and any unauthorized transactions should be disputed. These steps should be taken immediately or as soon as possible to clear up confusion, misunderstanding and fraud.
The Federal Trade Commission (FTC) does not resolve individual consumer complaints. However, complaints filed with the FTC are entered into Consumer Sentinel, a secure online database that is used by thousands of civil and criminal law enforcement authorities worldwide to help detect patterns of wrong- doing and can help lead to investigations and prosecution. A complaint form can be filed directly with the Federal Trade Commission by visiting https://www.ftccomplaintassistant.gov/ and clicking FTC Complaint Assistant or by calling 1-877-FTC-HELP.46
Between January 1 and December 31, 2012,46 the Federal Trade Commission received 2,077 consumer complaints from Kansas detailing credit card fraud, government benefit fraud, employee-related fraud, phone or utilities fraud, bank fraud, loan fraud, and other identify theft and attempted identify theft. This resulted in a rate of 72.0 complaints per 100,000 Kansas residents. The number of complaints and the rate of complaints per 100,000 Kansans have been trending upward.
During that same time period, the FTC received 504 consumer complaints from the Wichita metropolitan area, or 80.9 per 100,000 Wichita area residents. As with the state overall, the number of complaints and the rate of complaints per 100,000 Wichitans have been basically trending upward.
Table 74 Identity Theft Complaints (State of Kansas and Wichita Metropolitan Area) Identity Theft Complaints Identity Theft Complaints State of Kansas Wichita Metropolitan Area Number of Rate Per 100,000 Number of Rate Per 100,000 Year Complaints Population Complaints Population 201246 2,077 72.0 504 80.9 201147 1,914 67.1 393 65.9 201048 1,717 60.2 397 66.6
For 2012, among the 50 states, Kansas ranked Number 3046 in complaints regarding identify theft, based on the rate of 72.0 complaints per 100,000 population. States experiencing the highest and lowest rates of complaints regarding identify theft in 2012 were:
Table 75. Identity Theft Complaints Per 100,000 Population49 Identity Theft Identity Theft Rank Complaints Per Rank Complaints Per in 2012 State 100,000 Population in 2012 State 100,000 Population 1 Florida 361.3 46 Maine 50.1 2 Georgia 193.9 47 Montana 49.8 3 California 122.7 48 Hawaii 47.3 4 Michigan 122.2 49 North Dakota 41.2 5 New York 110.1 50 South Dakota 39.6
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 129 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Elder Abuse/Neglect
The National Research Council50 defines elder abuse and mistreatment as "(a) intentional actions that cause harm or create a serious risk of harm to a vulnerable elder by a caregiver or other person who stands in a trust relationship to the elder, or (b) failure by a caregiver to satisfy the elder's basic needs or to protect the elder from harm." This definition includes financial exploitation of the elderly as well as physical abuse or neglect.
In the United States, the issue of elder mistreatment is garnering the attention of the law enforcement, medical, and research communities as more people are living longer than ever before. The aging population will require increased care and protection.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) identify elder maltreatment as “a significant public health problem” and estimate that in the United States, over 500,000 older adults are believed to be abused or neglected each year.51 This includes the financial exploitation of adults over the age of 60. The CDC notes that these statistics are likely an underestimate because many victims are unable or afraid to tell the police, family, or friends about the violence.
A set of universally accepted definitions regarding elder abuse or elder maltreatment does not exist. In the past, elder maltreatment has been poorly or imprecisely defined; defined specifically to reflect the unique statutes or conditions present in specific geographic locations; or defined specifically for research purposes. Consistency in definition would help to monitor the incidence of elder maltreatment; examine trends over time; determine the magnitude of elder maltreatment; and enable comparisons of the problem across locations.52
The CDC identifies six types of maltreatment 53 that occur in people over the age of 60, including:
Physical Abuse - when an elder is injured (e.g., scratched, bitten, slapped, pushed, hit, burned, etc.), assaulted or threatened with a weapon (e.g., knife, gun, or other object), or inappropriately restrained. Sexual Abuse or Abusive Sexual Contact - any sexual contact against an elder’s will, including acts which the elder is unable to understand or if the elder is unable to communicate. Abusive sexual contact is defined as intentional touching (either directly or through the clothing), of the genitalia, anus, groin, breast, mouth, inner thigh, or buttocks. Psychological or Emotional Abuse - when an elder experiences trauma after exposure to threatening acts or coercive tactics, including humiliation or embarrassment; controlling behavior (e.g., prohibiting or limiting access to transportation, telephone, money or other resources); social isolation; disregarding or trivializing needs; or damaging or destroying property. Neglect -- the failure or refusal of a caregiver or other responsible person to provide for an elder’s basic physical, emotional, or social needs, or failure to protect them from harm. Examples include not providing adequate nutrition, hygiene, clothing, shelter, or access to necessary health care; or failure to prevent exposure to unsafe activities and environments. Abandonment -- willful desertion of an elderly person by caregiver/other responsible person. Financial Abuse or Exploitation - unauthorized or improper use of the resources of an elder for monetary or personal benefit, profit, or gain. (e.g., forgery, misuse or theft of money or possessions; use of coercion or deception to surrender finances or property; or improper use of guardianship or power of attorney).
In addition, studies estimate that for every reported case of elder abuse, neglect, exploitation, or self- neglect, as many as five incidences may go unreported. 54
Page 130 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Public Safety
Public safety involves the prevention of and protection from events that could endanger the safety of the general public from significant danger, injury/harm or damage, such as crimes or disasters (natural or man-made). Some core public safety functions include but are not limited to: Police services - including crime prevention, suppression and investigation, uniformed patrol and response; Fire services - including fire prevention and suppression, rescue services and hazardous material (HAZMAT) response; Ambulance and Emergency Medical (EMS) services - including provision of emergency medical transportation; Emergency communications - including operation of the public interface emergency communications telephone system by providing 911 and Enhanced 911 emergency numbers; Inspections and code enforcement services - including building/construction safety (e.g., electrical, etc.) and vehicle inspections; and Animal control services - including wildlife officers, game wardens and dog catchers.
Three of the largest public safety entities in South Central Kansas include the Wichita Police Department, the Wichita Fire Department and the Sedgwick County Sheriff's Office.
Wichita Police Department
The Wichita Police Department is the largest police department in the state of Kansas, serving a population base of over 360,000 citizens and visitors with a departmental annual budget of approximately $71 million.55 Its mission is to provide professional and ethical public safety services in partnership with citizens to identify, prevent and solve the problems of crime, fear of crime, social disorder and neighborhood decay, thereby improving quality of life in the community.
The City’s Police Department has a solid rate of solving violent crimes. Clearance rates for homicides, rapes, and aggravated assaults are substantially higher than the FBI averages. Nearly seven of every ten violent crimes (67%) were solved in 2011; this is 8% better than the International City/County Management Association Center for Performance Management (ICMA-PCM) average.56
In its 2013-2014 approved budget, the Wichita Police Department has 843 total authorized positions, including 508 on beat patrol: 57
Table 76. Wichita Police Department Total Authorized Positions 57 2011 2012 2013 General Fund 841 832 840 State/Federal Grant Fund 13 11 3 Total Authorized Positions 854 843 843
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 131 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
Wichita Fire Department
The Wichita Fire Department 58 serves a population base estimated at over 382,000. In addition to the City of Wichita, the department also provides emergency responses throughout the metropolitan area through automatic and mutual aid agreements with surrounding jurisdictions. The Department's mission is to provide excellent, proactive fire and life safety services through prevention, education, and protection.
The Department demonstrates community value by providing a broad range of emergency services to the public: emergency medical response, fire suppression, fire investigation, fire prevention, public education, public health services as well as occupational safety and fire department training internal and external customer service.
Fire Department personnel respond to fires and other emergencies and provide emergency service from the city’s 22 fire station locations strategically covering over 165 square miles. In 2012, the Wichita Fire Department provided over 73,000 emergency responses to nearly 47,000 calls for service with an average response time of 4 minutes and 32 seconds. Ninety percent of the City was served in less than seven minutes.59
In 2010 and 2011, the number of residential fires per 1,000 structures remained 33 percent lower than the 2007-2009 period, while the City equaled the ICMA-CPM benchmark for solving arson cases. 56
Sedgwick County Sheriff's Office
The mission of the Sedgwick County Sheriff’s Office, in partnership with the citizens of Sedgwick County, is to provide effective public service to all individuals in an impartial, ethical and professional manner.60 Fulfillment of this mission takes many roles.
The Sheriff’s Office is organized into three bureaus: the Law Enforcement Bureau, the Detention Bureau and the Reserve Bureau. 60
The Reserve Bureau consists of citizen volunteers who donate their time and effort as commissioned law enforcement officers. In 2011, these volunteers contributed 8,616 hours on patrol, warrants, administration and on special and other assignments.
The Detention Bureau assures the efficient operation of detention facilities with the Operations Division addressing the day-to-day work and concerns of housing its inmates in a safe, secure and humane manner and the Support Division providing necessary services to augment and support the Operations Division.
In 2011, the Sedgwick County detention facility housed over 1,500 inmates. The Bureau is responsible for the main facility located at 141 W. Elm and the Work Release Facility at 701 W. Harry. To meet the needs of Sedgwick County, inmates are currently housed in 19 other counties across the state, due to overcrowding.
The Law Enforcement Bureau consists of three divisions: Patrol, Investigations and Judicial. In 2011 the Law Enforcement Bureau underwent a significant restructuring. The Training Section was placed within Administration; the Offender Registration Unit and the Records Section were placed in the Investigations Division; and Property and Evidence were placed within the Judicial Division.
The Patrol Division has jurisdiction within all 1,008 square miles of Sedgwick County. Its primary mission is to detect or prevent violations of criminal and traffic laws and respond to 911 calls for service. It serves as first responder to calls for service originating within the
Page 132 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
unincorporated areas of Sedgwick County and assists other area law enforcement agencies whenever needed. It includes three duty watches that provide 24 hour coverage.
In 2011, the Patrol Division issued 30,455 traffic citations, an increase of 2,399 or 8.6 percent over 2010. A total of 3,826 arrests were accomplished, an increase of 340 or 9.8 percent over 2010. The number of responses to injury and non-injury accidents was down 5.2 percent in 2011, with 61 fewer accidents.
Table 77. Patrol Division, Sedgwick County 2009 2010 2011 Traffic Citations Issued 28,228 28,056 30,455 Fatality Victims 13 18 6 Accidents Injury 360 312 268 Non‐Injury 935 866 849 Total 1,295 1,178 1,117 Arrests Felony 478 647 613 Misdemeanor 2,079 1,881 2,015 Warrant 770 958 1,198 Total 3,327 3,486 3,826
The Judicial Division is vital to courtroom security for the 18th Judicial District Court. The deputies assigned to the court docket transport prisoners from the detention facility to various court appearances or other court‐ordered activities, returning them to the detention facility, and maintaining custody and security of the prisoners at all times in a timely manner and without incident. Deputies in this section are also called to arrest persons in courtrooms at the direction of judges.
Warrant deputies locate persons for whom arrest warrants have been issued throughout the 18th Judicial District and other jurisdictions, serve arrest warrants and comply with the orders of the court. In 2011, the Judicial Division served 9,780 fewer papers and court orders than in 2010, a 12.2 percent decrease.
Table 78. Judicial Division, Sedgwick County 2009 2010 2011 Civil Papers Served 104,349 80,469 75,132 Court Orders Served (evictions, 14,236 11,426 6,974 probate, protective orders) Total Papers and Orders Served 118,585 91,895 82,106 Warrant Section Warrants Received 14,485 15,082 16,124 Warrants Cleared 14,715 15,814 15,700 Warrants Received (Out of County 2,675 321 227 and Out of State) Warrants Cleared by Arrest 8,412 10,928 11,231 Warrants Cleared by Recall, 2,361 4,221 4,664 Appearance, Payment of Dismissal
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 133 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Crime
On September 29 and 30 and October 1, 2011, the 18th Judicial District Court, Sedgwick County District Attorney’s Office, and the Sedgwick County Sheriff’s Office conducted an Amnesty Program for Traffic Warrants. The program offered people with outstanding Sedgwick County Traffic Warrants the opportunity to pay a reduced fine, and or court fees, without being arrested. A total of 209 warrants were cleared and over $35,800 in fines were collected.
The Investigations Division is responsible for the investigation and case preparation of criminal cases that have been reported to the sheriff’s office. The Division is comprised of detectives who work many varied tasks that include: General investigations Drug Enforcement Administration (DEA) Task Force Forensics laboratory Exploited and Missing Child Unit (EMCU) Intelligence FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force Narcotics Internal Revenue Service (IRS) Task Force Records Offender Registration Unit (ORU)
During 2011, the Sheriff’s Office completed its upgrades to both office and in-car computer systems. In- car video recorders were further enhanced with better storage media and increased network connectivity county-wide, allowing deputies to submit paperwork wirelessly. Twenty speed radars were replaced, many of which were approaching 15 years old. 61
Because Sedgwick County contains 20 cities, there are numerous law enforcement agencies in the area in addition to the Sedgwick County Sheriff’s Office and the Wichita Police Department. The Sheriff’s Office patrols the unincorporated portions of Sedgwick County. 62
Summary
In 2012, the Wichita Police Department experienced an increase over 2011 in several categories in the number of arrests made for criminal offenses: murder, robbery, larceny and motor vehicle theft. In fact, over the four-year period of 2009 to 2012, the number of arrests for stolen motor vehicles more than doubled; with the increase noted both in adult and in juvenile arrests.
Similarly, in 2012 the Wichita Police Department experienced an increase over 2011 in several categories in the number of crimes reported: murder, rape, aggravated assault, robbery, larceny and burglary.
From 2008 to 2011, the State of Kansas saw a decrease of 3,509 (or 22.9 percent) in the number of juvenile arrests for all offenses, from 15,352 in 2008 to 11,843 in 2011. More than half of the juvenile arrests in 2011 came from three offense categories: theft (with 2,629 arrests); simple assault/battery (with 1,732 arrests) and liquor violations/drunkenness (with 1,732 arrests).
In South Central Kansas, the safety of the general public rests in the hands of law enforcement agencies, fire departments and other public safety officials who work toward the prevention of and protection from events that could endanger that safety. Although synopses for only three entities (Wichita Police Department, Wichita Fire Department, and Sedgwick County Sheriff's Office) have been included in this analysis, remaining South Central Kansas communities also benefit from their local law enforcement, fire department and emergency medical services personnel.
As in other parts of the country, these agencies monitor the incidence of gang activity, crimes against children, cyber crime including identify theft and elder abuse and neglect. The prevalence of mobile phones, iDevices and other electronic tools increase the opportunities for theft, for identify theft, and for sharing of appropriate and inappropriate information via social media such as Facebook, Twitter or Pinterest.
Page 134 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
The U.S. Census Bureau categorizes available housing units according to the following definitions:1
Housing unit - A house, an apartment, a mobile home or trailer, a group of rooms, or a single room occupied as separate living quarters, or if vacant, intended for occupancy as separate living quarters. Separate living quarters are those in which the occupants live separately from any other individuals in the building and which have direct access from outside the building or through a common hall. For vacant units, the criteria of separateness and direct access are applied to the intended occupants whenever possible. Occupied housing unit - A housing unit is classified as occupied if it is the usual place of residence of the person or group of people living in it at the time of enumeration Vacant housing unit - A housing unit is vacant if no one is living in it at the time of enumeration, unless its occupants are only temporarily absent. Units temporarily occupied at the time of enumeration entirely by people who have a usual residence elsewhere are also classified as vacant. Specified owner-occupied housing units - Total number of owner-occupied housing units described as either a one family home detached from any other house or a one family house attached to one or more houses on less than 10 acres with no business on the property. Renter-occupied housing unit - All occupied units which are not owner-occupied, whether they are rented for cash rent or occupied without payment of cash rent, are classified as renter- occupied.
In 2000, 16.9 percent of the housing units in the State of Kansas were located in Sedgwick County; similarly, 25.5 percent of the state's housing units were located in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves. At the time of the 2000 Census, 22,863 housing units in United Way of the Plains' service area were sitting vacant. This represented 7.9 percent of the area's 288,984 total housing units.2
As Table 79 shows, in 2010, 17.2 percent of the housing units in the State of Kansas were located in Sedgwick County; similarly, 25.5 percent of the state's housing units were located in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves. At the time of the 2010 Census, 28,416 housing units in United Way of the Plains' service area were sitting vacant. This represented 9.0 percent of the area's 314,281 total housing units.
Table 79. Housing Units - 20104 Owner- Renter- County Total Occupied Vacant occupied occupied Butler 26,058 23,992 2,066 18,354 5,638 Cowley 16,030 13,940 2,090 9,540 4,400 Harper 3,116 2,545 571 1,874 671 Harvey 14,527 13,411 1,116 9,480 3,931 Kingman 3,818 3,227 591 2,509 718 Reno 28,274 25,794 2,480 17,764 8,030 Sedgwick 211,593 193,502 18,091 126,535 66,967 Sumner 10,865 9,454 1,411 7,134 2,320 UWP Service Area 314,281 285,865 28,416 193,190 92,675 State of Kansas 1,233,215 1,112,096 121,119 753,532 358,564
Sedgwick County 17.2% 17.4% 14.9% 16.8% 18.7% as % of Kansas UWP Service Area 25.5% 25.7% 23.5% 25.6% 25.8% as % of Kansas
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 135 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
In 2010, the percentage of owner-occupied housing units sitting vacant in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves ranged from 1.7 to 2.7 percent, while the percentage of vacant renter-occupied housing units ranged from a low of 7.5 percent in Reno County to a high of 15.4 percent in Harper County. Five counties (e.g., Harper, Cowley, Kingman, Sumner and Sedgwick) exceeded the rental vacancy rate for the state of Kansas as a whole (10.1 percent).
Table 80. Housing Unit Vacancy Rates4 (2010) County Homeowner Rental Butler 1.8% 8.2% Cowley 2.6% 13.6% Harper 2.7% 15.4% Harvey 1.7% 9.5% Kingman 1.6% 10.9% Reno 1.7% 7.5% Sedgwick 2.2% 10.6% Sumner 2.2% 10.8% State of Kansas 2.1% 10.1%
Home Values
The median home value of owner-occupied housing units increased in each of the eight counties in United Way of the Plains’ service area between 2000 and 2010, with increases ranging from 31.4 percent in Reno County to 44.5 percent in Butler County.
Table 81. Median Home Value: Owner-Occupied Units Change County 20002 20103 (2000 – 2010) Butler $83,900 $121,200 44.5% Cowley $54,100 $ 76,900 42.1% Harper $44,100 $ 61,400 39.2% Harvey $76,400 $103,300 35.2% Kingman $56,800 $ 77,100 35.7% Reno $66,600 $ 87,500 31.4% Sedgwick $83,600 $117,300 40.3% Sumner $62,100 $ 82,400 32.7% State of Kansas $83,500 $122,600 46.8%
Affordable Housing
An affordable unit is one in which a household at the defined income threshold can rent without paying more than 30 percent of its income on housing and utility costs,5 although safety and accessibility are important housing criteria, as well. According to the 2000 Census, 7.0 percent of Sedgwick County families (8,309 of 118,663 families) lived at or below the federal poverty level, as the federal government defines poverty. These 8,309 families represented 42,605 individuals or 9.5 percent of Sedgwick County's 446,559 residents.6 The median 1999 household income for Sedgwick County was $42,485.9
Page 136 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
According to the 2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, in Sedgwick County 10.4 percent of families (13,001 of 125,002 families)7 and 13.9 percent of individuals (66,552 of 480,145 individuals)8 for whom poverty status was determined lived at or below the poverty level, as the federal government defines poverty.7 In that ten-year span, the median annual household income for Sedgwick County increased $5,363 or 12.6 percent, to $47,848.10
In the 2000 Census, the household income of 58.3 percent of Sedgwick County households (n = 103,034) was below $50,000 annually, while 41.7 percent had annual household income at or above $50,000 (n = 73,566). By 2010, the percentage of households with annual income of at least $50,000 had increased to 48.1 percent (91,737 households), with 99,095 households (or 51.9 percent) with annual income below that level. Table 82 presents annual income levels for all Sedgwick County households.
Table 82. Annual Household Income - Sedgwick County 2000 Census2 20104 Annual Household Income Households Percent Households Percent Less than $10,000 13,867 7.9% 13,171 6.9% $10,000 to $14,999 10,062 5.7% 10,546 5.5% $15,000 to $24,999 22,862 12.9% 23,003 12.1% $25,000 to $34,999 24,351 13.8% 21,986 11.5% $35,000 to $49,999 31,892 18.1% 30,389 15.9% $50,000 to $74,999 38,336 21.7% 36,381 19.1% $75,000 to $99,999 19,135 10.8% 23,279 12.2% $100,000 to $149,999 11,139 6.3% 21,045 11.0% $150,000 to $199,999 2,379 1.3% 6,133 3.2% $200,000 or more 2,577 1.5% 4,899 2.6% Total 176,600 100.0% 190,832 100.0%
Sedgwick County Homeowners
Beginning with the 2000 U.S. Census, selected monthly homeowner costs were calculated from the sum of payment for mortgages, real estate taxes, various insurances, utilities, fuels, mobile home costs, and condominium fees. Listing the items separately improves accuracy and provides additional detail. When combined with income, a new item is created - Selected Monthly Owner Costs as a Percentage of Household Income. This item is used to measure housing affordability and excessive shelter costs. For example, many government agencies define excessive as costs that exceed 30 percent of household income.11
The 2000 U.S. Census indicated there were 101,543 specified owner-occupied units in Sedgwick County. Of those, the monthly costs of 15,362 units (or 15.1 percent) equaled or exceeded 30 percent of the household's income. In Sedgwick County, the average selected monthly homeowner costs for units with a mortgage was $899 per month and for units without a mortgage, $276 per month.11
In 2010, there were 127,710 specified owner-occupied units in Sedgwick County of which 70.7 percent had a mortgage and 29.3 percent did not. Among the 127,140 owner-occupied units for which monthly costs as a percentage of household income were computed, the monthly costs of 26,328 units (or 20.7 percent) equaled or exceeded 30 percent of the household's income, including 24.6 percent (n = 22,176)
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 137 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
of units with a mortgage and 11.2 percent (n = 4,152) of those without a mortgage. 12 In 2010 in Sedgwick County, the median selected monthly homeowner costs for units with a mortgage was $1,179 per month and for units without a mortgage, $390 per month.13
Table 83. Selected Monthly Costs As Percentage of Household Income Sedgwick County Owner-Occupied Units Percent of Monthly 200011 201012 Household Income All Units Units With Mortgage Units Without Mortgage Less than 20 percent 62,629 61.7% 41,145 45.6% 29,118 77.8% 20 to 24 percent 14,268 14.1% 16,181 17.9% 2,345 6.3% 25 to 29 percent 8,670 8.5% 10,572 11.7% 1,451 3.9% 30 to 34 percent 4,820 4.7% 6,536 7.2% 1,131 3.0% 35 percent or more 10,542 10.4% 15,640 17.3% 3,021 8.1% Not computed 614 0.6% 202 0.2% 368 1.0% Total 101,543 100.0% 90,276 100.0% 37,434 100.0%
As might be expected, when looking at the 15,362 households from the 2000 Census where the selected monthly costs equaled or exceeded 30 percent of the household's income, a larger proportion of lower income homeowners fell into this category. Seven in ten (70.2 percent) Sedgwick County homeowners with annual income of $10,000 or less pay at least 30 percent of their annual income toward selected monthly housing costs, compared to only 3.1 percent of homeowners with income of $150,000 or more.
In 2010, 98.2 percent of Sedgwick County homeowners with mortgages on their homes and with annual income below $20,000 paid at least 30 percent of their annual income toward selected monthly housing costs, as did 52.5 percent of these low-income Sedgwick County homeowners without mortgages.
Table 84. Percent of Homeowners at Specified Income Levels Who Pay at Least 30 Percent of Income Toward Selected Monthly Housing Costs Sedgwick County Owner-Occupied Units 200011 201014 Annual Household Income - Units With Units Without Sedgwick County Homeowners All Units Mortgages Mortgages Less than $10,000 3,811 70.2% 4,516 98.2% 3,666 52.5% $10,000 to $19,999 7,456 44.8% $20,000 to $34,999 16,218 28.0% 6,781 72.6% 424 5.7% $35,000 to $49,999 18,295 15.0% 5,514 42.6% 62 1.0% $50,000 to $74,999 26,996 5.7% 3,807 17.6% 0 0.0% $75,000 to $99,999 15,442 2.5% $100,000 to $149,999 9,338 1.4% 1,558 3.8% 0 0.0% $150,000 or more 3,987 3.1%
Page 138 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
Rent Expense
According to the 2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, the median monthly gross rent expense was below the state median of $671 in each of the eight counties in the United Way of the Plains service area. Across Kansas, the gross rent expense per month consumed at least 30 percent of a household's income in 44.4 percent of the state's rental households.
Gross rent expense consumed at least 30 percent of the annual income in 48.2 percent (n = 28,827) of Sedgwick County's 59,800 rental households in 2010. In the state overall, 44.4 percent (n = 137,010) of the state's 308,626 rental households expended at least 30 percent of their annual income for gross rent expense. The median monthly gross rent expense for the state ($671) exceeded Sedgwick County’s median of $639 by $32 per month. The area’s highest median monthly gross rent was in Butler County, $7 below the state median, at $664.
Table 85. Gross Rent Expense per Household - 20103 Median Gross Rent as Percentage of Household Income* Rent < 20 20 to 29 30 to 34 35 percent County (Gross) percent percent percent or more Butler $664 28.5% 34.0% 9.1% 28.4% Cowley $573 33.1% 24.2% 5.9% 36.8% Harper $491 27.4% 41.1% 7.1% 24.4% Harvey $588 28.2% 26.5% 9.9% 35.4% Kingman $483 57.1% 14.5% 3.9% 24.5% Reno $578 32.6% 27.8% 7.2% 32.4% Sedgwick $639 28.4% 23.4% 9.9% 38.3% Sumner $539 33.4% 26.0% 9.0% 31.6% UWP Service Area -- 29.2% 24.7% 9.4% 36.7% State of Kansas $671 30.1% 25.5% 8.6% 35.8%
* Occupied units paying rent (excluding units where gross rent as a percentage of household income cannot be computed)
Sedgwick County Renters
For renters, the 2000 U.S. Census indicated Sedgwick County had 59,432 specified renter-occupied units.13 Table 86 presents the number of renter-occupied households by gross rent as a percentage of household income (i.e., by how much of the monthly income goes toward rent expense). Among these renter-occupied units, the costs of 18,860 units (or 31.7 percent) equaled or exceeded 30 percent of the household's income. The median rent in Sedgwick County was $511 per month.
According to the 2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, in 2010, there were 63,122 renter- occupied units in Sedgwick County. Among the 59,800 renter-occupied units for which gross rent as a percentage of household income was calculated, the monthly costs of 28,827 units (or 48.2 percent) equaled or exceeded 30 percent of the household's income. The median rent in Sedgwick County in 2010 was $639 per month.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 139 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
Table 86. Gross Rent As Percentage of Household Income Percentage of Household Income- (Sedgwick County Renter-Occupied Households) Sedgwick County Renters 200011 20103 Less than 15 percent 12,972 21.8% 8,167 13.7% 15 to 19 percent 10,136 17.1% 8,794 14.7% 20 to 24 percent 7,659 12.9% 8,124 13.6% 25 to 29 percent 6,319 10.6% 5,888 9.8% 30 to 34 percent 3,835 6.5% 5,904 9.9% 35 percent or more 15,025 25.3% 22,923 38.3% Not computed 3,486 5.9% -- -- Total 59,432 100.0% 59,800 100.0% Not computed -- -- 3,322 --
Column percentages may not sum to exactly 100 percent due to rounding error.
Public Housing - Wichita
The City of Wichita Public Housing Division is administered by the Housing and Community Services Department and is governed by the City Council, which serves as the Housing Authority. The Division is funded by a combination of federal funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) and tenant rent collections. Public Housing leases, maintains and modernizes 352 single-family dwellings and 226 apartments for low- to moderate-income families.16
Rent is based upon 30 percent of a household's adjusted gross income or a flat market rent. The number of families currently on the waiting list for low- to moderate-income families is around 1,100. According to the City of Wichita website, the application process has been closed since May 29, 1998, except for individuals aged 50 and over, households with four or more family members and disabled heads of households. 17
Public Housing has a maintenance staff that makes rental units ready for rent when unit turnover occurs. In 2010, approximately 88 units were prepared for new tenants in accordance with HUD Uniform Property Condition Standards. Separate maintenance crews complete maintenance work orders generated by tenant requests and property inspections. In 2010, maintenance completed approximately 5,900 separate work orders.16
Table 87 outlines the maximum family income that will qualify applicants for low- to moderate- income public housing:17
Table 87. Maximum Family Income To Qualify for Low-To-Moderate Income Public Housing Family Size 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 Maximum Family $36,400 $41,600 $46,800 $52,000 $56,200 $60,350 $64,500 $68,650 Income
The Public Housing Division also receives a federal U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Capital Fund Grant, which is used to improve the physical condition of public housing properties and to upgrade the management and operations of the Division to better serve public housing tenants.
Page 140 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
Section 8 Housing – Wichita
In Wichita, the Section 8 division16 is a division of the Housing and Community Services Department and the City of Wichita Housing Authority and is federally funded through the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program assists 2,364 families with rental assistance by contracting with over 775 private landlords.
The Wichita Housing Authority Section 8 Division administers the following programs in accordance with HUD rules and regulations and the Section 8 Administrative Plan:
Designated Housing Program Housing Choice Voucher Program Family Self-Sufficiency Program Mainstream Housing Program Family Unification Program Shelter Plus Care Program Housing Choice Voucher Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing Choice Homeownership Program Voucher Program
Section 8 Housing - Sedgwick County
In Sedgwick County, the Housing Authority18 is the core program of the Housing Department and receives federal dollars directly from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development to assist more than 340 very low- and extremely low-income families with rental housing and, in some cases, utility payments.
The Authority’s jurisdiction covers Sedgwick County outside Wichita, and Butler and Harvey Counties. Applications are taken once a month. Families may remain on the waiting list up to 12 to 24 months depending on how soon existing clients exit the program. More than 100 landlords participate in the program.
Housing Choice Voucher Program – Wichita and Sedgwick County
The housing choice voucher program19 is the federal government's major program for assisting very low- income families, the elderly, and the disabled to afford decent, safe, and sanitary housing in the private market. Since housing assistance is provided on behalf of the family or individual, participants are able to find their own housing, including single-family homes, townhouses and apartments. The participant is free to choose any housing that meets the requirements of the program and is not limited to units located in subsidized housing projects.
Housing choice vouchers are administered locally by public housing agencies. The public housing agencies receive federal funds from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to administer the voucher program.
A family that is issued a housing voucher is responsible for finding a suitable housing unit of the family's choice where the owner agrees to rent under the program. This unit may include the family's present residence. Rental units must meet minimum standards of health and safety. A housing subsidy is paid to the landlord directly on behalf of the participating family. The family then pays the difference between the actual rent charged by the landlord and the amount subsidized by the program.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 141 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
Eligibility for a housing voucher is determined by the public housing agency based on the total annual gross income and family size and is limited to United States citizens and specified categories of non- citizens who have eligible immigration status. In general, the family's income may not exceed 50 percent of the median income for the county or metropolitan area in which the family chooses to live. By law, a public housing agency must provide 75 percent of its voucher to applicants whose incomes do not exceed 30 percent of the area median income. Median income levels are published by HUD and vary by location.
Table 88 outlines the 2012 federal adjusted income limits at 30 percent and at 50 percent, based on area median income for Wichita, Kansas.20
Table 88. Maximum Family Income Limits at 30 and 50 Percent20 Wichita, Kansas; Federally Adjusted (2012) Maximum Family Size Family Income 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 at 30 percent $13,650 $15,600 $17,550 $19,500 $21,120 $22,650 $24,200 $25,750 at 50 percent $22,750 $26,000 $29,250 $32,500 $35,100 $37,700 $40,300 $42,900
The Wichita Housing Authority administers the housing choice voucher program for residents of the City of Wichita, and Sedgwick County Housing Authority operates throughout Butler, Harvey and Sedgwick counties with the exception of the City of Wichita.21
Community Investments Division - Wichita
In Wichita, the Community Investments Division16 is responsible for the administration of federal funds for housing and community development programs that strengthen Wichita and its neighborhoods. Community Investments programming is funded through the federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) and Emergency Shelter Grant (ESG) programs. The City also receives Home Investment Partnerships (HOME) funds that are administered by the HOME Program Division of Housing and Community Services.
Program activities are provided by City departments and nonprofit organizations. Community Investments Division staff executes and monitors contracts and memoranda of agreement with these service providers. To ensure that federal funds are expended in accordance with applicable regulations and guidelines, Community Investments staff monitor recipients of funds and provide technical assistance as needed.
HOME Investment Partnerships Program - Wichita
In Wichita, the HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME Program)16 was created by the National Affordable Housing Act of 1990, and has been amended several times by subsequent legislation. The objective or intent of the HOME Program is to: Provide decent affordable housing opportunities to lower-income households; Expand the capacity of nonprofit housing providers; Strengthen the ability of state and local governments to provide housing; and Leverage private-sector participation.
The City of Wichita has been a “Participating Jurisdiction” in the HOME program since its inception. HOME funds are allocated by formula to participating jurisdictions. The formula is based in part on certain factors, including age of housing units, substandard occupied housing units, number of families below the poverty rate, and population.
Page 142 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
Homeownership – Sedgwick County
The Sedgwick County Housing Department18 administers grants that rehabilitate homes belonging to low- income families residing in Sedgwick County outside the City of Wichita. It coordinates neighborhood revitalization plans developed by cities in the County.
Statewide,18 the Kansas Local Government Statewide Homeownership Program and Kansas Mortgage Savers Program promote homeownership for low- and moderate-income families throughout Kansas. Currently, more than 50 mortgage lenders operating in nearly 200 neighborhood locations participate in 104 counties and 327 cities. Mortgage lenders loan program dollars to low- and moderate-income homebuyers for the purchase of their first house by providing a subsidy for a down payment and/or closing costs equal to 4 percent of the mortgage amount for eligible loan applicants in the Kansas Local Government Statewide Homeownership Program and a mortgage credit certificate in the Kansas Mortgage Savers Program.
The Sedgwick County Housing Department administers the Kansas Local Government Statewide Homeownership Program and Kansas Mortgage Savers Program locally.18 It also administers the Neighborhood Stabilization Program, which authorizes governmental or nonprofit entities to purchase foreclosed properties from banks and/or other financial institutions. The properties can either be rehabilitated or demolished and redeveloped. Funds awarded to Sedgwick County are earmarked for acquisition and rehabilitation/redevelopment of foreclosed properties that might otherwise have become sources of abandonment and blight. The houses will then be sold to qualified home buyers at a discounted price.22 In 2009, Sedgwick County was awarded approximately $4.6 million to build and/or acquire and redevelop foreclosed-upon properties. Through this program, 25 houses were either built or purchased and rehabilitated.23
National Housing Market
According to the National Association of Home Builders/First American Improving Markets Index (September 2012),24 the number of metro areas showing signs of real estate market improvement increased to 99 metro areas, a growth that Barry Rutenberg, chairman of the National Association of Home Builders, characterized as “solid,” adding that it was “an encouraging sign that housing continues on a slow but steady recovery path that is gradually advancing from one local market to the next."
The index identifies metro areas that have shown improvement in housing permits, employment, and home prices for at least six consecutive months. Although the list includes several midwestern cities (including Lincoln, Nebraska; Lawton and Tulsa, Oklahoma; Kansas City, Missouri; and several cities in Iowa -- Ames, Des Moines, Iowa City and Sioux City), it does not include the Wichita metro area, nor any Kansas metro areas.
The housing bubble and the mortgage and credit crisis was caused by the inability of a large number of homeowners to pay their mortgages as their low introductory-rate mortgages reverted to regular interest rates. The housing market shifted away from relatively safe loan categories to relatively riskier loan categories. 25 The origination market product mix shifted from relatively safe mortgages (such as Federal Housing Administration loans, U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs loans and conventional conforming mortgages typically sold to the government-sponsored enterprises such as Freddie Mac) toward riskier mortgages, including subprime loans, low documentation or Alt-A loans, and second lien home equity loans.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 143 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
Subprime lending occurred for persons with blemished or limited credit histories. Subprime loans carry a higher rate of interest than prime loans to compensate for increased credit risk.26 The percentage of subprime mortgages rose from the historical 8 percent or lower range to approximately 20 percent from 2004 to 2006.25 A high percentage of these subprime mortgages were adjustable-rate mortgages, which are more likely to default than fixed rate mortgages because the required monthly payments can dramatically increase as short-term interest rates increase, whereas borrowers’ capacity to pay (i.e., monthly income) typically does not increase as short-term interest rates increase. Also, adjustable-rate mortgages often feature low initial teaser rates which reset to higher floating rates.
Low documentation loans,27 also called alternate loans or Alt-A loans, are an alternative for home buyers who cannot meet the qualification of prime (A paper) mortgage because they are deficient in a certain area. For example, their credit score may be just slightly too low, or they may not have enough asset documentation to qualify for the A paper loan. Alt-A loans are the borrower classification between subprime and prime. Alt-A loans usually have a higher interest rate than prime loans. Alt-A loans also have the ability to borrow a lower percentage of the home value than prime loans.
If one owns a home outright and takes out a home equity loan, it is considered a first mortgage because it is first in line to receive payment if the home is sold or a borrower defaults.28 If an existing first mortgage is refinanced and some of the equity is pledged to receive cash in hand, there is still one first mortgage, just a larger one. In this loan, generally called a “cash out re-fi,” the dollar difference between the original mortgage and the refinanced mortgage is the home equity loan amount.
A secondary mortgage28 is a loan secured by a house that already has at least one other mortgage or lien (i.e., second lien home equity loan). Taking out a home equity loan in addition to a first mortgage places a second lien against the home. The law prohibits a homeowner from having more than one home equity loan at a time, although a homeowner may have secondary liens from other sources, such as a home improvement loan or a tax lien.
A collapse of the U.S. housing bubble has a direct impact not only on home valuations, but also on the nation's mortgage markets, home builders, real estate, home supply retail outlets, and other financial institutions. Housing bubbles can occur in local, national or global real estate markets. In their late stages, they are typically characterized by rapid increases in the valuation of real property, relative to incomes, price-to-rent ratios, and other economic indicators of affordability. This may be followed by decreases in home prices that result in many owners finding themselves in a position of negative equity, that is, a mortgage debt higher than the value of the property.25
Many homeowners find themselves in a position of owing more on their homes than their homes are worth, a situation described as “underwater.” Speculation that the nation’s battered housing market might be holding back the economic recovery led to a number of proposals, including helping reduce the monthly mortgage payments of “underwater” homeowners by allowing such borrowers to refinance their mortgages at ultra-low interest rates near 4 percent.29
MakingHomeAffordable.gov19 is an official program of the U.S. Department of the Treasury and the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, part of a broad strategy with the stated purpose of helping homeowners avoid foreclosure, stabilize the country’s housing market and improve the nation’s economy. These are being accomplished through a variety of programs including:
Page 144 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
Home Affordable Modification Program (HAMP) – designed to lower monthly mortgage payments to make them more affordable and sustainable for the long term. The program was modified June 1, 2012, to expand the population of homeowners who might be eligible for the program, including: - Homeowners applying for a modification on a home that is not their primary residence, but the property is currently rented or the homeowner intends to rent it; - Homeowners who previously did not qualify for HAMP because their debt-to- income ratio was 31 percent or lower; - Homeowners who previously received a HAMP trial period plan but defaulted in their payments; and - Homeowners who previously received a HAMP permanent modification, but defaulted in their payments. Principal Reduction Alternative (PRA) – designed so participating mortgage servicers can evaluate homeowners for reducing the principal amount owed on homes, thus reducing monthly mortgage payments. Over 100 servicers participate in the program including Bank of America, CitiMortgage, JP Morgan Chase and Wells Fargo. A few of the criteria for participation include that the mortgage is not owned or guaranteed by Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac; more is owed on the home than it is worth; the mortgage payment is more than 31 percent of gross, pre-tax monthly income; and that a financial hardship is being experienced and the homeowner is either delinquent or in danger of falling behind in mortgage payments. Second Lien Modification Program (2MP) – designed to work in tandem with those whose first mortgage was permanently modified under HAMP and hold a second mortgage on the same property. The second mortgage may be eligible for a modification or principal reduction, in order to decrease monthly mortgage payments and increase long-term affordability and sustainability. Eligible participants may not have missed three consecutive monthly payments on their HAMP modification and must not have been convicted within the last 10 years of felony larceny, theft, fraud or forgery, money laundering or tax evasion in connection with a mortgage or real estate transaction. The program is scheduled to end December 31, 2013. The Federal Housing Administration, the U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs and the U.S. Department of Agriculture each offer mortgage modification programs for struggling homeowners designed to lower monthly mortgage payment to no more than 31 percent of the homeowner's verified monthly gross (pre-tax) income. Each agency determines guidelines for the loans that the agency insures or guarantees. Home Affordable Refinance Program (HARP) – designed to help homeowners with mortgages owned or guaranteed by either Freddie Mac or Fannie May receive new, more affordable, more stable mortgages through reduced interest rates. HARP refinance loans require a loan application and underwriting process, and refinance fees apply. Not all mortgage servicers participate in the program. The borrower must be current on the mortgage at the time of refinance with a good payment history in the past 12 months, and the mortgage must have been sold to Fannie Mae or Freddie Mac on or before May 31, 2009. The program is scheduled to end December 31, 2013. Federal Housing Administration (FHA) Refinance for Borrowers with Negative Equity (FHA Short Refinance) -- is designed to help homeowners refinance into more stable FHA-insured mortgages, when more is owed on the home than it is worth. Eligible program participants must occupy the house as their primary residence and be current on their mortgage payments. When current lenders agree to participate in this refinance program, they are required to reduce the amount owed on a first mortgage to no more than 97.75 percent of the home's current value. The participation of mortgage servicers is voluntary.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 145 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
Home Affordable Unemployment Program (UP) – designed to assist unemployed homeowners by reducing mortgage payments to 31 percent of income or suspending them altogether for 12 months or more. Program participants must be eligible for unemployment benefits, occupy the house as a primary residence and have obtained the mortgage on or before January 1, 2009. The program is not currently available for homeowners with mortgages held by Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, both of which have their own forbearance arrangements for unemployed homeowners. The program is scheduled to end December 31, 2013. Housing Finance Agency Innovation Fund for the Hardest Hit Housing Markets (HHF) – designed to provide aide for homeowners in the states hit hardest by the economic recession. The Hardest Hit Fund® was designed to stabilize local housing markets and help families avoid foreclosure. Programs vary from state to state and may include: - Mortgage payment assistance for unemployed or underemployed homeowners; - Principal reduction to help homeowners get into more affordable mortgages; - Funding to eliminate homeowners' second lien loans; and - Help for homeowners who are transitioning out of their homes and into more affordable places of residence. Eighteen states plus the District of Columbia received this funding allocation, including: -Alabama -Florida -Indiana -Mississippi -North Carolina -Rhode Island -Arizona -Georgia -Kentucky -Nevada -Ohio -South Carolina -California -Illinois -Michigan -New Jersey -Oregon -Tennessee
Based on the S&P/Case-Shiller® U.S. National Home Price Index, the decline in national house prices began in December 2006.30 Nationwide, housing prices peaked in early 2006, started to decline in 2006 and 2007, and reached new lows in 2012.31
Wichita Housing Market32
According to Wichita State University’s Center for Real Estate,32 home sales in the Wichita market in 2010 fell to their lowest level in a decade (7,825 home sales). For 2011, area home sales were on pace to fall another 5.6 percent, to 7,390. The forecast for 2012 was for sales to begin to rebound, rising by 10.0 percent, to 8,130, while still remaining below the 2009 level.
Figure 36. Total Home Sales, Wichita Area32
10,000 8,617 7,825 8,130
8,000 7,390
6,000
4,000 Homes
2,000
0 2009 2010 2011 Forecast 2012 Forecast
Page 146 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
From 2009 to 2010, the number of building permits issued for new home construction dropped 48.2 percent, from 1,256 to 651. The number of permits was forecast to increase approximately 9.8 percent in 2011, then remain fairly level in 2012. The Center for Real Estate 32 noted that existing home sales activity will need to show sustained gains before new home construction will pick up again.
Figure 37. Building Permits, Wichita Area32
1,400 1,256 1,200 1,000 715 710 800 651 600 400 200 0 2009 2010 2011 Forecast 2012 Forecast
The average price of a home in the Wichita Area was $10 less in 2010 than in 2009, from $132,175 in 2009 to $132,165 in 2010. The forecast from the Center for Real Estate was for a 2.2 percent (or $2,908) decrease in 2011 (to an average price of $129,257), followed by a negligible 0.2 percent decrease in 2012.32
According to the Wichita Area Association of Realtors, in 2006 Sedgwick County set a new record for sales of existing homes, with a slight decrease in 2007 existing home sales and a more substantial decrease in 2008. The decreasing trend continued through 2011, with 5,316 existing homes sold in Sedgwick County that year, a number comparable to a little more than half (52.1 percent) of the homes sold in 2006.
Figure 38. Sales of Existing Homes, Sedgwick County33
12000 10,212 10,125 10000
8000 6,390 5,818 6000 5,336 5,316 4000
2000 Existing Existing Homes Sold 0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 147 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
Data from the Wichita Area Association of Realtors also included existing homes sold in Butler, Cowley and Harvey counties. The sale of these homes has not been included in Figure 38.
Table 89. Sales of Existing Homes33’ (Butler, Cowley and Harvey Counties) County 2008 2009 2010 2011 Butler 833 677 698 703 Cowley 229 185 173 181 Harvey 397 332 341 311
The pace of new home sales was predicted to continue to slow from a high of 2,106 homes in 2006; the downward trend has continued steadily. Approximately one-fifth as many new homes were sold in Sedgwick County in 2011 as were in 2006.
Figure 39. Sales of New Homes (Including Under Construction), Sedgwick County 33
2,400 2,106
2,000 1,812 1,600 1,277
1,200 932 800 701 433
New New Homes Sold 400 0 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011
Data from the Wichita Area Association of Realtors also included new homes sold in Butler, Cowley and Harvey counties. The sale of these homes has not been included in Figure 39.
Table 90. Sales of New Homes 33 (including Under Construction) (Butler, Cowley and Harvey Counties) County 2008 2009 2010 2011 Butler 190 96 78 59 Cowley 10 5 6 0 Harvey 65 43 25 19
Page 148 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
Homelessness
Historically, according to the U.S. Code utilized by the U.S. House of Representatives,34 the general definition of a homeless individual was someone who:
Lacked a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence; and Who had a primary nighttime residence that was - a supervised publicly or privately operated shelter designed to provide temporary living accommodations (including welfare hotels, congregate shelters, and transitional housing for the mentally ill); an institution that provides a temporary residence for individuals intended to be institutionalized; or a public or private place not designed for, or ordinarily used as, a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings.
The term “chronically homeless” as defined by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD), described an unaccompanied person who had a disabling condition and had also been either continuously homeless for at least a year OR had had at least four episodes of homelessness in the past three years.35
The “chronically homeless” are a subset population of the broader homeless population, the latter including many other subsets such as couples, families, and children, the episodically and situationally homeless, victims of domestic violence, and displaced persons, among others. The chronically homeless have typically been on the streets the longest, are the most resistant to services, and usually suffer from a complex layering of problems – frequently including mental illness – which results in their long and frequent periods of homelessness.35
Historically, a Continuum of Care was a local or regional system for helping people who were homeless or at imminent risk of homelessness by providing housing and services appropriate to the whole range of homeless needs in the community, including homeless prevention, emergency shelter and permanent housing.36
Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act
The Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing Act of 2009 (HEARTH Act) was enacted into law on May 20, 2009.37 The HEARTH Act amends and reauthorizes the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act with substantial changes, including:
A consolidation of HUD's competitive grant programs (including the Supportive Housing program, the Shelter Plus Care program, and the Moderate Rehabilitation/Single Room Occupancy (SRO) program); The creation of a Rural Housing Stability Assistance Program to replace the Rural Homelessness Grant program; A change in HUD's definition of homelessness and chronic homelessness; A simplified match requirement; An increase in prevention resources;
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 149 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
An increase in emphasis on performance; Codification in law of the Continuum of Care planning process, long a part of HUD’s application process to assist homeless persons by providing greater coordination in responding to their needs; and A revision to the Emergency Shelter Grants program, renamed to the Emergency Solutions Grants program, to broaden existing emergency shelter and homelessness prevention activities and to add rapid rehousing activities.
Revised Definitions
According to the Federal Register published December 5, 2011, the revised definition of homeless38 is:
(1) An individual or family who lacks a fixed, regular, and adequate nighttime residence, meaning: (i) An individual or family with a primary nighttime residence that is a public or private place not designed for or ordinarily used as a regular sleeping accommodation for human beings, including a car, park, abandoned building, bus or train station, airport, or camping ground; (ii) An individual or family living in a supervised publicly or privately operated shelter designated to provide temporary living arrangements (including congregate shelters, transitional housing, and hotels and motels paid for by charitable organizations or by federal, state, or local government programs for low-income individuals); or (iii) An individual who is exiting an institution where he or she resided for 90 days or less and who resided in an emergency shelter or place not meant for human habitation immediately before entering that institution; (2) An individual or family who will imminently lose their primary nighttime residence, provided that: (i) The primary nighttime residence will be lost within 14 days of the date of application for homeless assistance; (ii) No subsequent residence has been identified; and (iii) The individual or family lacks the resources or support networks, e.g., family, friends, faith-based or other social networks, needed to obtain other permanent housing; (3) Unaccompanied youth under 25 years of age, or families with children and youth, who do not otherwise qualify as homeless under this definition, but who: (i) Are defined as homeless under specified legislative acts; 39 (ii) Have not had a lease, ownership interest, or occupancy agreement in permanent housing at any time during the 60 days immediately preceding the date of application for homeless assistance; (iii) Have experienced persistent instability as measured by two moves or more during the 60-day period immediately preceding the date of applying for homeless assistance; and (iv) Can be expected to continue in such status for an extended period of time because of chronic disabilities; chronic physical health or mental health conditions; substance addiction; histories of domestic violence or childhood abuse (including neglect); the presence of a child or youth with a disability; or two or more barriers to employment, which include the lack of a high school degree or General Equivalency Diploma (GED), illiteracy, low English proficiency, a history of incarceration or detention for criminal activity, and a history of unstable employment; or
Page 150 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
(4) Any individual or family who: (i) Is fleeing, or is attempting to flee, domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault, stalking, or other dangerous or life-threatening conditions that relate to violence against the individual or a family member, including a child, that has either taken place within the individual’s or family’s primary nighttime residence or has made the individual or family afraid to return to their primary nighttime residence; (ii) Has no other residence; and (iii) Lacks the resources or support networks, e.g., family, friends, and faith-based or other social networks, to obtain other permanent housing.
Person with disabilities 38 means a household composed of one or more persons at least one of whom is an adult who has a disability. (1) A person shall be considered to have a disability if he or she has a disability that: (i) Is expected to be long-continuing or of indefinite duration; (ii) Substantially impedes the individual’s ability to live independently; (iii) Could be improved by the provision of more suitable housing conditions; and (iv) Is a physical, mental, or emotional impairment, including an impairment caused by alcohol or drug abuse, posttraumatic stress disorder, or brain injury. (2) A person will also be considered to have a disability if he or she has a developmental disability, as defined in this section. (3) A person will also be considered to have a disability if he or she has acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) or any conditions arising from the etiologic agent for acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, including infection with the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). (4) Notwithstanding the preceding provisions of this definition, the term person with disabilities includes, except in the case of the SRO component, two or more persons with disabilities living together, one or more such persons living with another person who is determined to be important to their care or well-being, and the surviving member or members of any household described in the first sentence of this definition who were living, in a unit assisted under this part, with the deceased member of the household at the time of his or her death. (In any event, with respect to the surviving member or members of a household, the right to rental assistance under this part will terminate at the end of the grant period under which the deceased member was a participant.)
The final rule also integrates the recordkeeping requirements37 for the Shelter Plus Care program and the Supportive Housing Program.
According to the Federal Register published July 31, 2012, the revised definition of chronically homeless40 is: (1) An individual who: (i) Is homeless and lives in a place not meant for human habitation, a safe haven, or in an emergency shelter; and (ii) Has been homeless and living or residing in a place not meant for human habitation, a safe haven, or in an emergency shelter continuously for at least one year or on at least four separate occasions in the last 3 years; and
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 151 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
(iii) Can be diagnosed with one or more of the following conditions: substance use disorder, serious mental illness, developmental disability (as defined in section 102 of the Developmental Disabilities Assistance Bill of Rights Act of 2000 (42 U.S.C. 15002)), post-traumatic stress disorder, cognitive impairments resulting from brain injury, or chronic physical illness or disability; (2) An individual who has been residing in an institutional care facility, including a jail, substance abuse or mental health treatment facility, hospital, or other similar facility, for fewer than 90 days and met all of the criteria in paragraph (1) of this definition, before entering that facility; or (3) A family with an adult head of household (or if there is no adult in the family, a minor head of household) who meets all of the criteria in paragraph (1) of this definition, including a family whose composition has fluctuated while the head of household has been homeless.
The Continuum of Care Program interim rule37 establishes the regulations for the new Continuum of Care (CoC) Program and focuses on regulatory implementation of the Continuum of Care Program, including the Continuum of Care planning process. This rule became effective August 30, 2012. The existing homeless assistance programs that comprise the Continuum of Care Program are: the Supportive Housing program, the Shelter Plus Care program, and the Moderate Rehabilitation/Single Room Occupancy (SRO) program. The final Homeless Definition is in effect for administration of the CoC Program interim rule. HUD published the Continuum of Care Program interim rule in the Federal Register on July 31, 2012.
As defined,41 Continuum of Care and Continuum mean the group organized to carry out the responsibilities required under the interim rule that is composed of representatives of organizations, including nonprofit homeless providers, victim service providers, faith-based organizations, governments, businesses, advocates, public housing agencies, school districts, social service providers, mental health agencies, hospitals, universities, affordable housing developers, law enforcement, organizations that serve homeless and formerly homeless veterans, and homeless and formerly homeless persons to the extent these groups are represented within the geographic area and are available to participate.
Point-In-Time Counts of Homeless Individuals
Communities receiving funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) for housing and services for people experiencing homelessness are required to conduct a Point-In-Time Count at least bi-annually. Point-in-time count means a count of sheltered and unsheltered homeless persons carried out on one night in the last 10 calendar days of January or at such other time as required by HUD.40
A Point-In-Time Count provides a "snapshot" of what was occurring on a specific day. As with any methodology, the Point-In-Time Count has some flaws, Undoubtedly the count misses some individuals and potentially double-counts others, who may present at both a shelter and a service provider during the time period during which the data are collected.
Because of its design and by definition, a Point-In-Time Count does not attempt to track homeless individuals over time. Although it is not a perfect system for identifying and completing a census of the community's homeless individuals, typically the Point-In-Time Count is a community's most inclusive indicator of the extent and characteristics of the homeless population. In addition, when the same methodology is repeated year after year, the reliability of the annual trend data increases.42
United States
The recently enacted Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act will redefine services provided to homeless persons nationwide. Because of the myriad changes required in definitions, service provision, recordkeeping, and reporting, much of the historical homeless data will not be comparable to homeless data moving forward.
Page 152 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
Nationwide, the number of people experiencing homelessness on a single night in January 2009 was 643,067 and in January 2010, 649,917. The sheltered homeless count remained the same, while the unsheltered count increased by 2.8 percent. California, New York, and Florida accounted for 40 percent of the total homeless population on the night of the January 2010 Point-In-Time Count.43
Almost two-thirds of people homeless on the night of the 2010 Point-In-Time Count were homeless as individuals, not as members of a family household. Individuals who were homeless were almost equally likely to be staying in shelters or on the streets on the night of the count.43
Following guidance from the U.S. Office of Management and Budget,43 the largest city in each metropolitan or micropolitan statistical area is designated a “principal city.” Other cities within a metropolitan or micropolitan statistical area may also be designated “principal cities,” if specified population size and employment requirements are met.
Estimates of the sheltered homeless population in 201043 indicated that nationwide almost two-thirds (63.8 percent) of all sheltered homeless people were located in principal cities, and a little more than one- third (36.2 percent) were in suburban or rural jurisdictions.
Homeless individuals are particularly likely to be in urban areas.43 Emergency shelters located in principal cities have a higher utilization rate than shelters in suburban or rural areas. However the reverse is true for the turnover rate: suburban and rural areas have a higher turnover rate. This means that, while emergency shelters in suburban and rural areas are not as close to capacity as principal cities on an average night, they are serving more people per available bed over the course of the year. Emergency shelter users in suburban and rural areas are not staying in the shelter for as long a period of time as in principal cities, but more of them use emergency shelters per available bed at some point during the year.
Kansas
In 2008, United Way of the Plains was approached by the Kansas Housing Resources Corporation and the Kansas Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services - Disability and Behavioral Health Services to coordinate a statewide Point-In-Time Count of homeless individuals in January 2009.44 This was the state's first coordinated effort conducting a Count with a consistent survey instrument, methodology and definition for "homeless" across Kansas' five Continua of Care (Johnson County, Shawnee County, Sedgwick County, Wyandotte County, and the 101 counties that comprise the Balance of State).
This Kansas Point-In-Time Count was designed as a pilot project with 40 of the 105 counties in Kansas invited to participate. About 600 volunteers from across the state assisted on the day of the Count, January 28, 2009. Volunteers canvassed 23,208 square miles.
The Count identified a total of 1,811 individuals who met the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's (HUD's) definition of homeless. This included 1,170 survey respondents, 430 persons who were accompanying the homeless survey respondents, and an extrapolated 211 persons (to account for homeless persons in the counties not participating in this pilot project).
As a result of the various Point-In-Time Counts conducted in 2007, the state's five Continua of Care reported a total of 2,111 literally homeless individuals to HUD. The 2009 data indicate a 14.2 percent decease (n = 300) of literally homeless individuals from 2007 to 2009. A coordinated statewide Point-In- Time Count has not been conducted since 2009.
Wichita and Sedgwick County
A Continuum of Care is a local or regional system for helping people who are homeless or at imminent risk of homelessness by providing housing and services appropriate to the whole range of homeless needs in the community, including homeless prevention, emergency shelter and permanent housing.45 Wichita/Sedgwick County comprises one of the five Kansas Continua of Care.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 153 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
In addition to the shelters that provide transitional and permanent supporting housing, ten emergency shelters that serve the Wichita/Sedgwick County area providing day and/or overnight shelter include:
Harbor House Union Rescue Mission Inter-Faith Inn United Methodist Open Door Homeless Resource Center St. Anthony Family Shelter Wichita Children's Home/Emergency Residential The Salvation Army Homeless Services Wichita Children’s Home/Oz (Opportunity Zone) Ti'Wiconi Safe Haven YWCA
Prior to 2007, annual Point-In-Time homeless counts were based primarily on self-reports from emergency shelters and other homeless service providers. In 2006, the Point-In-Time process relied on 14 volunteers who conducted street surveys and a limited number of site-based surveys.46
In comparison, the 2007 Point-In-Time process had 115 volunteers who completed at least one shift/assignment. The increased number of volunteers allowed the 2007 Point-In-Time survey to standardize the count across the sites by asking emergency shelter providers and other sites to allow Point-In-Time volunteers to conduct the interviews with guests of each facility. In addition, the increased number of volunteers in 2007 allowed the extension of the street coverage to a larger geographic area and to make repeated contacts of all geographic sectors to better account for variations in the time people utilized services agencies or otherwise left their regular living space.46
In Wichita/Sedgwick County, the same basic methodology was used in the 2007, 2008 and 2009 Point-In- Time Counts. Table 91 presents the information provided to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development in its annual grant application, regarding Sedgwick County's homeless population:
Table 91. Point In Time Count of Homeless Individuals Wichita/Sedgwick County, Kansas Point-In-Time Count Homeless (Count) Chronically Homeless (Count) Date Conducted Total Sheltered Unsheltered Total Sheltered Unsheltered January 30, 2012 50b 538 467 71 91 67 24 January 25, 2012 50a 550 475 75 142 109 33 January 26, 2011 49 634 526 108 140 97 43 2010 – no Count occurred ------January 28, 2009 47 384 352 32 71 60 11 January 30, 2008 48 473 445 28 93 85 8 January 23, 2007 48 526 473 53 56 51 5 January 25, 2006 48 589 394 195 173 108 65 January 26, 2005 48 730 533 197 184 136 48 February 19, 2004 48 703 501 202 87 52 35 January 17, 2003 48 618 503 115 164 49 115
No Point-In-Time Count took place in Wichita/Sedgwick County in 2010, although one was initially scheduled to occur Thursday, June 24, but subsequently cancelled.
In 2011,49 the format of the Point-In-Time Count changed significantly. The majority of the information was gathered from people attending an event conducted as part of the Count, modeled after Project Homeless Connect with the purpose of helping link participants with needed services and support. To be inclusive of individuals not attending the event, experienced homeless outreach providers were on the streets from 5:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. canvassing locations where people experiencing homelessness had previously been encountered. Additional information was gathered through electronic surveys from residents at two area domestic violence shelters and extracted from the Wichita-Sedgwick County Continuum of Care computer database operated by United Way of the Plains on behalf of homeless service providers.
Page 154 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
Incorporating a service component to help connect persons who are homeless to needed health care, housing and other resources as part of the annual homeless street count was identified in 2011 at the regional level as a “best practice” by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.51
The 2012 Point-In-Time Count50a was an activity of the Wichita-Sedgwick County Continuum of Care Coordination Team, a 46 member community coalition that monitors and supports the Wichita-Sedgwick County Continuum of Care system. The 2012 Count again included a service component to help connect Count participants with essential services and supports as well as a street count conducted by experienced homeless outreach providers, electronic surveys from area domestic violence shelters, and data extracted from the Homeless Management Information System.
The 2013 Point-In-Time Count50b was again an activity of the Wichita-Sedgwick County Continuum of Care Coordination Team and included a service component to help connect Count participants with essential services and supports as well as a street count, electronic surveys from area domestic violence shelters, and data extracted from the Homeless Management Information System.
Plans underway for the 2014 Count include consolidating the annual Stand Down activity (for addressing the needs of United States Veterans) with the service component which already exists for the Point-In- Time Count of homeless individuals.
United Way of the Plains Service Area
In addition to Sedgwick County, four counties in the area United Way of the Plains serves participated in the 2009 Kansas Point-In-Time Count of homeless individuals. These counties were Butler, Cowley, Harvey and Reno County. While the other three counties (Harper, Sumner and Kingman) did not participate in the 2009 Kansas Point-In-Time Count, the number of homeless individuals was extrapolated for each of these counties, based on information from participating counties with similar population and economic characteristics.
Table 92 presents the estimated number of individuals in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves who met the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development's definition of "literally homeless"52 during the 2009 Kansas Point-In-Time Count. This includes people who for various reasons have found it necessary to live in emergency shelters or transitional housing for some period of time. This category also includes unsheltered homeless people who sleep in places not meant for human habitation (for example, streets, parks, abandoned buildings, and subway tunnels) and who may also use shelters on an intermittent basis.
Table 92. Number of Literally County Homeless Persons44 (2009) Butler 13 Cowley 9 Harper 3 Harvey 16 Kingman 3 Reno 58 Sedgwick 384 Sumner 8 UWP Service Area 494
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 155 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
Task Force to End Chronic Homelessness in 2006, Deann Smith of United Methodist Open Door and then-chair of Wichita's Community Council on Homeless Advocacy (CCHA) contacted the City Manager of the City of Wichita and the County Manager of Sedgwick County, requesting that a committee be established to develop a community strategic plan to end homelessness, with a priority on those experiencing chronic homelessness.42 The request was based on the premise that using data and planning for outcomes would allow the community to utilize its resources wisely and address and identify barriers to stable housing.
On August 9, 2006, a coalition of 15 community leaders and advocates for the homeless were appointed by County Manager Bill Buchanan and City Manager George Kolb53 to a task force to end chronic homelessness. Members included the religious community, schools, United Way of the Plains and other nonprofit organizations, businesses, and neighborhood and city leaders, as well as homeless and formerly homeless individuals.
This group, the Task Force to End Chronic Homelessness (or TECH), was chaired by Jack Focht. The group met nearly every other week for 18 months and focused its work on the chronically homeless for the following reasons:
. Serving the chronically homeless requires a disproportionate amount of resources. . In other communities, addressing chronic homelessness has freed up resources for serving other homeless individuals. . Current funding is inadequate to solve ALL homelessness, so address what we can.
Ultimately, TECH's plan to end chronic homelessness was based on five strategies:
Develop a one–stop Resource and Referral Center. Using the “Housing First” model, provide permanent supportive housing units with services. Identify emergency housing options for people until permanent supportive housing is available. Identify sustainable funding sources. Develop an Oversight Committee (five to seven representatives appointed by City and County managers for two-year terms) to oversee plan implementation.
The plan was endorsed in March 2009 by the Wichita City Council and the Sedgwick County Commission and appears on the Sedgwick County website which also provides a quick overview of what the plan entails, including updates.54
Progress on Strategies55
Strategy 1: Develop a one–stop Resource and Referral Center.
United Methodist Open Door (UMOD) operated a drop-in center to provide a “place to be” for homeless individuals in a convenient location. However, it was only open weekdays from 7:00 a.m. to 1:00 p.m. and had a capacity to serve 50 people at a time. UMOD requested and received supplemental funding from United Way of the Plains to extend its hours of operation. Beginning November 1, 2007, the drop-in center was open 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. weekdays.
In February 2012, UMOD opened its Homeless Resource Center in the new Resource and Referral Center at the northeast corner of North Topeka and East Second Street North in Wichita. This program is now able to serve 150 adult clients at any time. The Homeless Resource Center offers
Page 156 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
client services such as a day shelter, food, basic clothing, mailing addresses, shower and laundry facilities and storage for personal belongings. Partner agencies are co-located, providing services to clients in the same facility.
Hours of operation are 7:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday. More than 3,000 unduplicated individuals receive services annually, with approximately one in four clients being female.
Strategy 2: Using the “Housing First” model, provide permanent supportive housing units with services.
“Housing First” 56 is a national best practice model designed to end chronic homelessness by direct or near direct placement of chronically homeless individuals into permanent housing. Accompanying this placement, supportive services are offered but not required using a low-demand approach in which relapse does not automatically affect an individual’s housing status. Services are provided onsite at the individual’s apartment building as opposed to expecting an individual to show up at an agency for services.
In 2008,56 United Way of the Plains implemented a Housing First pilot project in partnership with H.O.P.E., Inc. and COMCARE of Sedgwick County. Seven tenants successfully participated in the project. The pilot project led to the implementation of the Wichita and Sedgwick County Housing First program. At the conclusion of the pilot project, five tenants transitioned into the new program.
Funding 56 was approved for rent subsidies for 64 existing housing units by the Wichita City Council and the Sedgwick County Commission; this funding became available January 1, 2009. This program provided rent guarantees to landlords from the time a client moved in until one month after the client moved out, as well as utility costs, as needed, and other costs associated with housing such as application fees, deposits and moving expenses. These one-bedroom and studio housing units were at scattered sites throughout Sedgwick County and were identified as being accessible to transportation and other services such as grocery stores, drug stores, etc. As of December 31, 2011, ten ZIP codes were represented among scattered site locations, and 26 apartment complex/property owners had been utilized.
As of December 31, 2011,56 122 persons had been housed through the Wichita/Sedgwick County Housing First program. Of those persons, 59 remained successfully housed; 31 “positively exited” the program; 31 exited the program and 1 applicant was approved for housing and was apartment hunting. A “positive exit” is when a client leaves the program for reasons related to self-sufficiency or self-improvement such as: securing a steady source of income and no longer requiring the rent assistance of the program; receipt of a Section 8 or HUD-Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing voucher; inpatient treatment; or moving to be near family.
Strategy 3: Identify emergency housing options for people until permanent supportive housing is available.
In its Plan to End Chronic Homelessness in Wichita/Sedgwick County (2010),55 the Task Force to End Chronic Homelessness (TECH) identified what it described as a need for 25 to 50 additional shelter beds, above the 335 available at the time in the community. The plan suggested that additional emergency housing options should only be utilized when all other shelters were at capacity.
The Advocates to End Chronic Homelessness (AECH)57 coordinated an emergency overflow shelter – the Warming Souls Winter Overflow Shelter -- during the winter months (usually November 1 to March 31) of 2008-2009, 2009-2010, 2010-2011 and 2011-2012. Nine different churches have volunteered the use of their facilities to house the shelter. These churches -- along with other churches, organizations and individuals -- donated meals, clothing, personal items and funding. Staff
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 157 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
from Inter-Faith Ministries oversaw shelter operations. Many area nonprofit organizations provided medical, legal, mental health and other services.
In 2011-2012, the men’s shelter moved to a different church each month: St. Paul’s United Methodist, Grace United Methodist, First United Methodist, Holy Savior Catholic Church and the Christian Faith Centre. A smaller women’s shelter was housed at Mosaic Church for the entire season. Beginning with the 2012-2013 winter season, Inter-Faith Ministries agreed to take on the responsibility for this project, with financial support and assistance in fundraising from AECH.57
Strategy 4: Identify sustainable funding sources.
At the time the Taskforce to End Chronic Homelessness (TECH) was meeting (2006-2008),55 it was estimated that the Wichita/Sedgwick County community was spending more than $10 million per year on homelessness. TECH’s plan to end chronic homelessness called for capital costs ranging from $2.83 to $4.23 million and an additional $1 million in annual operating costs. It was anticipated that funding would need to continue to come from many sources, including government at the local, state and federal levels, foundations, businesses, United Way, the faith community and individuals.
United Way continues to oversee the annual submission to the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development on behalf of the Wichita/Sedgwick County community in support of the Continuum of Care Competition for Homeless Assistance awards. This process typically has brought approximately $2 million per year into the area community for provision of housing and other services for the homeless. The impact of the new HEARTH (Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing Act of 2009) Act remains to be seen.
Strategy 5: Develop an Oversight Committee (five to seven representatives appointed by City and County managers for two-year terms) to oversee plan implementation.
In May 2009, an oversight committee was appointed to oversee and monitor the implementation of the Task Force's plan.58 The functions of this Committee were to: ensure implementation of Plan/amendments (establish standards and outcomes, manage contracts, monitor/report progress), and study funding needs and make recommendations to City Council, County Commission, and other potential funders.
This committee has also been charged with conducting quarterly educational meetings to inform decision makers and the general public about homelessness in Wichita and Sedgwick County.59
Homeless Management Information System
In approximately 1998, the agencies and organizations that serve the Sedgwick County area's homeless population recognized the need for a management information system. United Way of the Plains began data collection on the homeless services in 1999. Among the needs identified were to: Improve service to the area's homeless population; Identify duplicate requests for services; Facilitate information collection and data exchange among the area's homeless shelters; Provide accurate statistics for grant writing to secure future funding; and Identify trends and gaps in services for community planning.
Page 158 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Housing
The servers for the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) were purchased through a U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) three-year grant beginning in 2002. United Way of the Plains maintains the server and hosts the Internet access for data collection. This HMIS system has the capability to interface with the computer systems at area homeless shelters as well as 20-plus other service providers.
In Sedgwick County, data have been collected on the homeless population since 2000. The area homeless service providers are at various stages of participation in the implementation, training and usage portions of this project.
When the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing Act of 2009 (HEARTH Act), was enacted into law on May 20, 2009,37 it required HUD to establish standards related to the Homeless Management Information Systems (HMIS), including standards related to encryption of the data collected and the rights of persons receiving services under the McKinney-Vento Act. The proposed rule for the HMIS Requirements60 was published in the Federal Register on December 9, 2011. This proposed rule provides for: Uniform technical requirements of HMIS; Proper collection of data and maintenance of the database; and Confidentiality of the information in the database.
The public comment period closed on February 7, 2012. This proposed rule is not yet in effect. HMISs currently in operation must continue to use the standards currently in place (e.g., the 2004 Technical Standards and the 2010 Data Standards) until the HMIS rule is published as final.
Summary
Housing that is safe, accessible and affordable is one of the most basic of needs. It impacts the health and well-being of children and families. Without decent and affordable housing, families may experience difficulties in managing their daily lives. As a results, the health, safety and development of their children may suffer.
Families who pay more for housing than they can realistically afford are almost certain to have too little left to cover life's other necessities such as food, health care and clothing. Lacking sufficient funds to cover child care and transportation, families may find it harder to go to work or school each day. As a long-term result, families may end up becoming homeless or living in substandard housing.
Social service and governmental programs are in place to help individuals along the entire housing spectrum, including prevention of homelessness; provision of emergency shelter, daytime drop-in centers for youth and for adults, transitional housing and permanent housing with wrap-around, supportive services available; assistance in obtaining new or better housing (e.g., first-time homeowner and Section 8 programs); and retention of existing housing (e.g., financial/credit counseling, housing counseling, reverse mortgages).
In many cases, a little assistance can yield far-reaching benefits. For example, a program that provides a low-income family with a daily hot meal may free up resources to provide a family with better housing, or a program that provides financial assistance with gas or electric bills may help tide a family over a through rough patch between jobs and help keep a roof over their heads.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 159 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Life Cycle
Issues Associated with Age Groups
This section of the 2013 Environmental Scan addresses areas of concern to members of different age groups. While some issues presented in this section can represent a problem for persons of any age (i.e., disability), many of the issues are specific to different stages of the life cycle.
Table 93 presents the number of persons in specified age categories per county. For example, the 289,150 Sedgwick County adults who were 20 to 64 years old represented 17.5 percent of all 20- to 64- year olds in Kansas, and the 423,008 adults living in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves who were 20 to 64 years old represented 25.6 percent of all 20- to 64-year-old Kansans.
Similarly, the 38,457 Sedgwick County children four years old or younger represented 19.1 percent of all children within that age group in Kansas.
Table 93. Age Groups - 20111 Pre School Youth Adults Seniors Total County 0 - 4 years 5 - 19 20 - 64 65 - 74 75+ Butler 4,303 15,349 37,419 4,118 4,118 65,307 Cowley 2,453 7,905 20,242 2,892 2,745 36,237 Harper 410 1,098 3,227 615 672 6,022 Harvey 2,292 7,506 18,671 2,571 3,352 34,392 Kingman 463 1,539 4,267 745 883 7,897 Reno 4,177 12,813 36,446 5,010 5,761 64,207 Sedgwick 38,457 108,123 289,150 28,740 27,518 491,988 Sumner 1,516 5,374 13,586 1,766 1,873 24,115 UWP Service Area 54,071 159,707 423,008 46,457 46,922 730,165 State of Kansas 201,206 602,308 1,655,427 186,020 186,024 2,830,985 Sedgwick Co. - Age Group 19.1% 18.0% 17.5% 15.4% 14.8% 17.4% as % of Total KS Population UWP Svc Area - Age Group 26.9% 26.5% 25.6% 25.0% 25.2% 25.8% as % of Total KS Population
Issues will be discussed as they relate to the following life cycle categories:
Pre-School: Infants and Toddlers (under 5 years old) Children and Youth (5 to 19 years old) Adults (20 to 64 years old), including Baby Boomers (born between 1946 and 1964) Older Persons (at least 65 years old)
Page 160 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Life Cycle
Pre-School: Infants and Toddlers
According to the 2011 American Community Survey, the 54,071 children four years old and younger who lived in the eight South Central Kansas counties United Way of the Plains serves comprised 7.4 percent of the area's population, ranging from a low of 5.9 in Kingman County to a high of 7.8 percent in Sedgwick County.
Table 94. Population: Pre School: Infants and Toddlers1 (2011) Total Population Under 5 Years County Population Count Percent Butler 65,307 4,303 6.6% Cowley 36,237 2,453 6.8% Harper 6,022 410 6.8% Harvey 34,392 2,292 6.7% Kingman 7,897 463 5.9% Reno 64,207 4,177 6.5% Sedgwick 491,988 38,457 7.8% Sumner 24,115 1,516 6.3% UWP Service Area 730,165 54,071 7.4% State of Kansas 2,830,985 201,206 7.1% Sedgwick County as 17.4% 19.1% -- percent of Kansas UWP Service Area as 25.8% 26.9% -- percent of Kansas
Head Start is a federal program that promotes school readiness of children ages birth to 5 from low- income families by enhancing their cognitive, social and emotional development. Head Start programs provide comprehensive services to enrolled children and their families, which include health, nutrition, social services and other services determined to be necessary by family needs assessments, in addition to education and cognitive development services.The Head Start program is administered by the Office of Head Start in the Administration for Children and Families area of the U. S. Department of Health and Human Services. 2
The Head Start program provides grants to local public and private nonprofit and for-profit agencies to provide comprehensive child development services to economically disadvantaged children and families, with a special focus on helping preschoolers develop the early reading and math skills they need to be successful in school.2
Head Start grants are awarded directly to public or private non-profit organizations, including community- based and faith-based organizations, or for-profit agencies within a community that wish to compete for funds, are eligible to apply for Head Start funding. 3
The Head Start program serves children, families, and pregnant women in all 50 States, the District of Columbia, and six territories. The term "Head Start" refers to the Head Start program as a whole, including: Head Start services to preschool children; Early Head Start services to infants, toddlers, and pregnant women; services to families by American Indian and Alaskan Native programs; and services to families by Migrant and Seasonal Head Start programs. 4
American Indian and Alaska Native (AIAN) funding is awarded to American Indian and Alaska Native tribes. AIAN programs are funded to serve children in 26 States, of which Kansas is one. AIAN funding and enrollment is based on the state in which the tribe is headquartered; some tribes serve children across state lines. 4
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 161 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Life Cycle
Migrant and Seasonal Head Start programs serve children birth to 5 and their families who move geographically with agricultural work. Thus, allocations and enrollment for these services are not attributed to individual states. 4
Table 95 presents the total allocations and funded enrollment of Head Start programs aggregated by the state of Kansas. Head Start programs are required to contribute 20 percent of the total cost of their program from non-federal funds, unless a waiver is granted. Some programs meet this requirement by using State funds or other funding sources to directly support enrollment slots for children and pregnant women. These funds and enrollment slots are included in Table 95. States may provide additional funding to local Head Start programs, either for quality improvements or to serve additional children, neither of which is reflected in this table.4
Between October 1, 2008 and September 30, 2012, funded enrollment in Head Start programs in Kansas increased by 7.0 percent (n = 573), while annual funding for the program (excluding additional local funding) increased 16.9 percent, or nearly $8.7 million.
Table 95. Head Start Program Allocations and Enrollment 4 (Kansas) FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 FY 2012 Head Start Enrollment 8,178 8,324 8,178 8,776 8,751 Head Start Allocation $51,136,866 $51,060,945 $52,655,405 $56,493,661 $59,800,770
AIAN* Enrollment ------84 84 AIAN* Allocation ------$984,892 $1,072,632
Data represent federal fiscal year (Oct. 1 to Sept. 30) *AIAN - American Indian and Alaska Native
Table 96 presentss the average annual number of Head Start enrollment slots available per 100 children three and four years of age living in families with incomes below the U.S. poverty threshold. Consistently, data place Sedgwick County far below the state's average number of enrollment slots available for children to participate in Head Start programs. In Federal Fiscal Year 2011, out of every 100 Sedgwick County children living below the poverty threshold, Head Start slots/services were available for 26.7 of them. This represented the lowest percentage in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves with the exception of Harper County, which did not provide a Head Start program for poverty-level children. Sumner, Harvey, Cowley, Reno and Butler counties all exceeded Kansas' average rate of having slots available for 45.1 children per hundred to participate.
Table 96. Head Start Enrollment Slots Available- By County (3- and 4-Year Olds, Living Below Poverty Threshold) Participation Rate per 100 Children 5 County FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 Butler 65.7 67.0 57.5 56.7 56.9 Cowley 68.1 69.3 57.5 73.9 66.4 Harper 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Harvey 88.2 96.2 71.2 71.0 74.3 Kingman 93.5 112.0 38.7 39.6 28.1 Reno 72.8 76.7 65.3 69.5 64.4 Sedgwick 32.5 31.7 28.5 30.1 26.7 Sumner 100.4 96.8 91.7 93.2 84.0 State of Kansas 56.6 58.5 48.5 49.0 45.1
Data represent federal fiscal year (Oct. 1 to Sept. 30)
Page 162 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Life Cycle
Early Head Start -- The reauthorization of the Head Start Act in 1994 made it possible to establish Early Head Start as a program to serve pregnant women and infants and toddlers under the age of three. Early Head Start provides early, continuous, intensive and comprehensive child development and family support services to low-income infants and toddlers and their families and to pregnant women and their families. 6
The principles of the Early Head Start program are designed to nurture healthy attachments between parent and child (and child and caregiver), emphasize a strengths-based, relationship-centered approach to services, and encompass the full range of a family's needs from pregnancy through a child's third birthday. As infants and toddlers grow and change and as family needs evolve, diverse program options can support them over time. This ensures that families can grow within a consistent, supportive setting, buttressed by strong relationships and developmentally-appropriate care and services. 6
All Early Head Start programs serve families through a full day, full year program option that best meets the needs of their families. Program options provide them with the ability to comprehensively and flexibly meet the needs of families. These program options include center-based services, home-based services; family child care services, and a combination of these services. 6
Table 97 presents the average annual number of Early Head Start enrollment slots available per 100 children birth through 3 years of age living in families with incomes below the U.S. poverty threshold. As recently as Fiscal Year 2011, several counties (Butler, Cowley, Harper, and Harvey) had no Early Head Start enrollment slots available. Similar to the Head Start program, data consistently place Sedgwick County below the state's average rate of Early Head Start enrollment slots available for low income children. In Federal Fiscal Year 2011, out of every 100 Sedgwick County children living below the poverty threshold, Early Head Start slots/services were available for 4.0 of them. Reno and Sumner counties exceeded Kansas' average rate of having slots available for 6.6 children per hundred to participate.
Table 97. Early Head Start Enrollment Slots Available- By County (0 to 3-Year Olds, Living Below Poverty Threshold) Participation Rate per 100 Children 5 County FY 2007 FY 2008 FY 2009 FY 2010 FY 2011 Butler 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Cowley 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Harper 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Harvey 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 Kingman 0.0 6.9 6.2 6.4 4.8 Reno 10.6 10.7 8.8 14.1 13.7 Sedgwick 3.8 3.7 3.3 4.4 4.0 Sumner 27.3 28.1 25.9 26.3 25.0 State of Kansas 6.5 6.9 5.8 7.2 6.6
Data represent federal fiscal year (Oct. 1 to Sept. 30)
Youth
According to the 2011 American Community Survey, the 159,707 children and youth five to 19 years old who lived in the eight South Central Kansas counties United Way of the Plains serves comprised 21.9 percent of the area's population, ranging from a low of 18.2 percent in Harper County to a high of 23.5 percent in Butler County.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 163 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Life Cycle
Table 98. Population: Children and Youth (2011) 1 Total Population 5 to 19 Years County Population Count Percent Butler 65,307 15,349 23.5% Cowley 36,237 7,905 21.8% Harper 6,022 1,098 18.2% Harvey 34,392 7,506 21.8% Kingman 7,897 1,539 19.5% Reno 64,207 12,813 20.0% Sedgwick 491,988 108,123 22.0% Sumner 24,115 5,374 22.3% UWP Service Area 730,165 159,707 21.9% State of Kansas 2,830,985 602,308 21.3%
Sedgwick County as % of Kansas 17.4% 18.0% -- UWP Service Area as % of Kansas 25.8% 26.5% --
Births to Single Mothers - Of the 39,628 births in Kansas in 2011, 14,749 (37.2 percent) were to unwed mothers. Statewide, 63.6 percent of out-of wedlock births were to single mothers 20 to 29 years old (n = 9,387, i.e., 5,983+3,404), and 20.4 percent were to single mothers 15 to 19 years old (n =3,012) 3,012).
In 2011 in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves, Cowley, Sedgwick and Reno counties showed the greatest propensity for out-of-wedlock births. In Cowley County, slightly more than half of the births (51.2 percent) were to single mothers.
Table 99. Total Live Births and Out-of-Wedlock Births By Age Group of Mother, 2011 8 All Out-of Percent Age of Mother (Years) Live Wedlock of All County Births 7 Births Births 10-14 15-19 20-24 25-29 30-34 35-39 40+ Butler 725 237 32.7% 0 38 104 68 21 3 3 Cowley 467 239 51.2% 0 63 101 47 19 8 1 Harper 68 27 39.7% 0 6 13 5 0 3 0 Harvey* 428 138 32.2% 0 44 38 32 16 7 1 Kingman 71 28 39.4% 0 6 10 6 6 0 0 Reno 759 320 42.2% 2 61 141 80 21 13 2 Sedgwick 7,818 3,488 44.6% 15 720 1,382 808 398 130 35 Sumner 263 101 38.4% 0 29 41 18 7 4 2 UWP Svc Area 10,599 4,578 43.2% 17 967 1,830 1,064 488 168 44 St. of Kansas 39,628 14,749 37.2% 51 3,012 5,983 3,404 1,550 593 156
Sedg. Co. as % of KS 19.7% 23.6% -- 29.4% 23.9% 23.1% 23.7% 25.7% 21.9% 22.4% UWP Service Area 26.7% 31.0% -- 33.3% 32.1% 30.6% 31.3% 31.5% 28.3% 28.2% as % of Kansas
In 2011 in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves, white mothers accounted for 57.7 percent of all out-of-wedlock births, while black mothers accounted for 16.8 percent and mothers of other races and ethnic backgrounds accounted for 25.5 percent of out-of-wedlock births.
Black mothers in Sedgwick County accounted for 37.3 percent of out-of-wedlock births to black Kansas mothers in 2011.
Page 164 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Life Cycle
Table 100. Out-of-Wedlock Births by Race of Mother* (2011) 8 Race of Mother Out-of- Other Race/ Wedlock White Black Ethnicity** County Births # % # % # % Butler 237 201 84.8% 4 1.7% 32 13.5% Cowley 239 184 77.0% 3 1.3% 52 21.8% Harper 27 23 85.2% 0 0.0% 4 14.8% Harvey 138 108 78.3% 1 0.7% 29 21.0% Kingman 28 28 100.0% 0 0.0% 0 0.0% Reno 320 253 79.1% 12 3.8% 55 17.2% Sedgwick 3,488 1,751 50.2% 747 21.4% 990 28.4% Sumner 101 94 93.1% 1 1.0% 6 5.9% UWP Service Area 4,578 2,642 57.7% 768 16.8% 1,168 25.5% State of Kansas 14,749 8,676 58.8% 2,003 13.6% 4,070 27.6%
Sedg. Co. as % of KS 23.6% 20.2% 37.3% 24.3% UWP Service Area 31.0% 30.5% 38.3% 28.7% as % of Kansas
* Race of mother not stated for 8 Kansas births, although none in eight county United Way of the Plains service area ** Includes Hispanic mothers and those for whom race not stated
When out-of-wedlock births are compared to the total number of births by race, black mothers were far more likely to be single than were white or other non-white races. In 2011 in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves, 80.9 percent of all births to black mothers were out-of-wedlock births. Much of this was attributable to Sedgwick County, whose 747 black out-of-wedlock births accounted for 97.3 percent of the 768 black out-of-wedlock births in the United Way of the Plains service area.
Also in the eight-county United Way of the Plains service area, slightly more than half (50.5 percent) of all births to mothers other than white or black mothers were out-of-wedlock births, as were 36.0 percent of all births to white mothers. In Sedgwick County, this represented 1,751 white out-of-wedlock births and 990 out of wedlock births to mothers other than white or black in 2011.
Table 101. Total Live Births 7 and Out-of-Wedlock Births 8 by Race of Mother* (2011) White Black Other Race/Ethnicity** Total Out-of-Wedlock Total Out-of-Wedlock Total Out-of-Wedlock County Births # % Births # % Births # % Butler 654 201 30.7% 6 4 66.7% 65 32 49.2% Cowley 369 184 49.9% 6 3 50.0% 92 52 56.5% Harper 61 23 37.7% 0 0 0.0% 7 4 57.1% Harvey 351 108 30.8% 5 1 20.0% 72 29 40.3% Kingman 69 28 40.6% 0 0 0.0% 2 0 0.0% Reno 655 253 38.6% 16 12 75.0% 88 55 62.5% Sedgwick 4,930 1,751 35.5% 914 747 81.7% 1,974 990 50.2% Sumner 246 94 38.2% 2 1 50.0% 15 6 40.0% UWP Service Area 7,335 2,642 36.0% 949 768 80.9% 2,315 1,168 50.5% State of Kansas* 28,382 8,676 30.6% 2,708 2,003 74.0% 8,538 4,070 47.7%
Sedg. Co. as % of KS 17.4% 20.2% 33.8% 37.3% 23.1% 24.3% UWP Service Area 25.8% 30.5% 35.0% 38.3% 27.1% 28.7% as % of Kansas
* Race of mother not stated for 8 Kansas births, although none in eight county United Way of the Plains service area ** Includes Hispanic mothers and those for whom race not stated.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 165 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Life Cycle
Runaways - The Wichita Children's Home9 is an emergency, temporary residential shelter serving children from Wichita, the surrounding counties and the state of Kansas. Their website notes: "The Children's Home is Wichita's oldest charitable institution. It was founded in August, 1888, as the city's first orphanage for the 'support and care of destitute and homeless children.' “The Wichita Children's Home offers the only emergency, temporary residential center for children in the Sedgwick County community. As such, it is open 24 hours a day, seven days a week and serves children from birth to 22 years of age. Children can self-admit or be admitted by parents, by law enforcement or by social workers. A parent in crisis who has no one to care for their child can receive respite child care services at the Home.
From July 1, 2011 through June 30, 2012,10 the Wichita Children’s Home served 1,949 children and youth in emergency and family foster care; 62 youth in Phase 1 of its BRIDGES program and 54 youth in Phase 2 of its BRIDGES program (28 residents without children and 26 young parents). Thirty-five children of BRIDGES parents were also served. In order to increase awareness of options available, danger and violence prevention programs were presented to 1,089 youth through the schools.
Runaway and homeless children and youth 21 years or younger who are need of immediate help can seek out locations that post the “Safe Place” logo including Quik Trips and fire stations and either call 316-262-HOME (i.e., 316-262-4663) or ask an employee to call the Wichita Children’s Home Street Outreach Services staff.
10 From July 1, 2011 through June 30, 2012, the Street Outreach Services program staff conducted 266 “safe place” rescues. This represents a 62.2 percent increase over the 164 rescues conducted in 2008
Figure 40. Safe Place Rescues Wichita Children’s Home Street Outreach Services 11, 12, 13
300 266 250 203 200 164 165 171 150 100 50 0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Over the past five years, the Wichita Police Department has received an average of approximately 1,364 reports each year of runaway children and youth. Figure 41 displays the number of runaway reports received per year. Numbers may be duplicated within a year; that is, repeat runners are recounted each time they run.
Page 166 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Life Cycle
Figure 41. Wichita – Number of Reported Runaways (2008 – 2012) 14
2,000 1,502 1,394 1,500 1,299 1,284 1,342
1,000
500
0 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012
Adults
According to the 2011 American Community Survey, the 423,008 adults 20 to 64 years old who lived in the eight South Central Kansas counties United Way of the Plains serves comprised 57.9 percent of the area's population, ranging from a low of 54.0 percent in Kingman County to a high of 58.8 percent in Sedgwick County.
Table 102. Population: Adults (2011) 1 Total Population 20 to 64 Years County Population Count Percent Butler 65,307 37,419 57.3% Cowley 36,237 20,242 55.9% Harper 6,022 3,227 53.6% Harvey 34,392 18,671 54.3% Kingman 7,897 4,267 54.0% Reno 64,207 36,446 56.8% Sedgwick 491,988 289,150 58.8% Sumner 24,115 13,586 56.3% UWP Service Area 730,165 423,008 57.9% State of Kansas 2,830,985 1,655,427 58.5%
Sedgwick County as % of Kansas 17.4% 17.5% -- UWP Service Area as % of Kansas 25.8% 25.6% --
As they assume responsibilities as productive members of families and society, adults between 20 and 64 years of age face a number of issues. This section will examine features of adult lives as they pertain to family and social relationships, attainment of economic goals and maintaining a state of health. It also introduces the phenomenon of the Baby Boomer generation, adults in their "middle years" with some achieving “senior citizen” status. The attainment of educational goals was discussed in the Education section of this report.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 167 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Life Cycle
Family Composition - For U.S. Census purposes,15 a "family" household is defined as a householder living with one or more people related to him or her by birth, marriage or adoption. The householder and all people in the household related to him are family members. A "nonfamily" household is a householder living alone or with nonrelatives only.
A "child" includes a son or daughter by birth, a stepchild, or an adopted child of the householder, regardless of the child's age or marital status. It includes natural-born and adopted sons/daughters, stepsons/stepdaughters. The category excludes sons-in-law, daughters-in-law, and foster children. “"Own children" include children under 18 years who are a son or daughter by birth, a stepchild, or an adopted child of the householder.15
According to the American Community Survey in 2011 in the eight county area United Way of the Plains serves, nearly one in three (31.3 percent; n = 88,649) households has children related to the householder and under the age of 18
Table 103. Household Composition - Family/Non-Family (2011) 16 Total Family Households Non-Family Households Family Own Children in Household Households Households Less than < 6 and 6-17 yr. No Children w/ Children 6 yr. 6-17 yr. only In HH Butler 24,039 8,274 1,464 1,853 4,948 9,251 6,514 Cowley 13,489 3,647 722 514 2,407 5,256 4,586 Harper 2,660 733 201 142 390 1,053 874 Harvey 13,137 3,772 720 890 2,161 5,173 4,192 Kingman 3,357 907 278 206 423 1,402 1,048 Reno 25,827 7,075 1,648 1,507 3,920 9,959 8,793 Sedgwick 191,853 61,447 14,501 14,071 32,874 62,569 67,837 Sumner 9,239 2,794 542 559 1,693 3,477 2,968 UWP Svc Area 283,601 88,649 20,078 19,743 48,816 98,140 96,812 State of Kansas 1,104,479 339,690 79,827 72,354 187,509 390,441 374,348 Sedg. County 17.4% 18.1% 18.2% 19.4% 17.5% 16.0% 18.1% as % of KS UWP Svc Area 25.7% 26.1% 25.2% 27.3% 26.0% 25.1% 25.9% as % of KS
Page 168 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Life Cycle
Marriages - In Kansas for the five-year period from 2007 to 2011, 6.5 marriages occurred, on average, for every 1,000 population. During this time, the five-year rate of marriages in Sumner, Reno, Harper, Sedgwick, Cowley and Harvey counties exceeded the state average, while the five-year rate of marriages in Kingman and Butler counties were below the state average.
17 Table 104. Marriages by Number and Rate (2007 - 2011) (per 1,000 population) Year Five- 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year County # Rate # Rate # Rate # Rate # Rate Rate Butler 401 6.4 364 5.7 401 6.3 397 6.0 394 6.0 6.1 Cowley 245 7.2 237 7.0 244 7.3 219 6.0 257 7.1 6.9 Harper 42 7.2 47 8.0 50 8.8 36 6.0 37 6.2 7.2 Harvey 226 6.7 249 7.4 238 6.9 240 6.9 228 6.5 6.9 Kingman 52 6.6 42 5.4 42 5.5 43 5.5 41 5.2 5.7 Reno 480 7.6 477 7.5 421 6.6 434 6.7 488 7.6 7.2 Sedgwick 3,558 7.5 3,644 7.5 3,488 7.1 3,393 6.8 3,311 6.6 7.1 Sumner 187 7.8 182 7.7 187 8.0 192 8.0 163 6.9 7.7 UWP Svc Area 5,191 -- 5,242 -- 5,071 -- 4,954 -- 4,919 -- -- St. of Kansas 18,910 6.8 18,717 6.7 18,268 6.5 18,150 6.4 17,897 6.2 6.5 Sedgwick County 18.8% 19.5% 19.1% 18.7% 18.5% -- as % of Kansas UWP Svc Area 27.5% 28.0% 27.8% 27.3% 27.5% -- as % of KS
Marriage Dissolutions - In Kansas for the five-year period from 2007 to 2011, 3.6 of every 1,000 marriages were dissolved through divorce or annulment. During this time, the five-year rate of marriage dissolutions in Sedgwick, Reno and Cowley counties exceeded the state average, while dissolutions in Harper, Harvey and Butler counties were below the state average. At 3.6 dissolutions per 1,000 population, Kingman and Sumner counties matched the state average.
Table 105. Marriage Dissolutions by Number and Rate (2007-2011) 18 (per 1,000 population) Year Five- 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year County # Rate # Rate # Rate # Rate # Rate Rate Butler 167 2.6 192 3.0 169 2.6 155 2.4 197 3.0 2.7 Cowley 139 4.1 152 4.5 131 3.9 60 4.1 155 4.3 4.2 Harper 23 40 23 3.9 14 2.5 17 2.8 24 4.0 3.4 Harvey 105 3.1 91 2.7 100 2.9 93 2.7 105 3.0 2.9 Kingman 29 3.7 25 3.2 27 3.6 29 3.7 30 3.8 3.6 Reno 296 4.7 327 5.2 329 5.2 331 5.1 278 4.3 4.9 Sedgwick 2,595 5.5 2,596 5.4 2,706 5.5 2,508 5.0 2,483 5.0 5.3 Sumner 105 4.4 73 3.1 95 4.0 89 3.7 61 2.6 3.6 UWP Svc Area 3,459 -- 3,479 -- 3,571 -- 3,282 -- 3,333 -- -- St. of Kansas 9,347 3.4 9,818 3.5 10,333 3.7 10,579 3.7 10,446 3.6 3.6 Sedgwick County 27.8% 26.4% 26.2% 23.7% 23.8% -- as % of Kansas UWP Svc Area 37.0% 35.4% 34.6% 31.0% 31.9% -- as % of KS
In 2011, Sedgwick County accounted for 18.5 percent of Kansas marriages and 23.8 percent of Kansas marriage dissolutions.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 169 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Life Cycle
Table 106. Marriages and Marriage Dissolutions
The five-year rates Five-Year (2007-2011) Rate (Per 1,000 Population) for marriages versus Marriages 17 Dissolutions 18 marriage dissolutions Five-Year Five-Year Net show a net increase County Rate Rate Change in each county in the Butler 6.1 2.7 3.4 United Way of the Cowley 6.9 4.2 2.7 Plains service area, Harper 7.2 3.4 3.8 from 1.8 per 1,000 in Harvey 6.9 2.9 4.0 Sedgwick County to Kingman 5.7 3.6 2.1 4.1 per 1,000 in Reno 7.2 4.9 2.3 Sumner County. Sedgwick 7.1 5.3 1.8 Sumner 7.7 3.6 4.1 State of Kansas 6.5 3.6 2.9
Attaining Economic Goals - For many people, obtaining and retaining a job that pays a living wage are essential to meeting a person's or a family's basic needs -- shelter, food, clothing and health care. Beyond those basics, individuals and families define stability and success by other measures -- often by achievement of other material goals. The state of the local economy, unemployment, affordable housing and educational achievement are discussed in previous sections of this report.
In this section, the report examines housing ownership and renting, annual income and earnings characteristics, vehicle availability, telephone service, incidence of complete kitchen and plumbing facilities and various health issues and trends.
Housing Ownership and Renting - The U.S. Census defines a "housing unit" as "a house, an apartment, a mobile home, a group of rooms, or a single room occupied as separate living quarters, or if vacant, intended for occupancy as separate living quarters." 15 The occupants may be a single family, one person living alone, two or more families living together, or any other group of related or unrelated people who share living arrangements. In the 2010 Census data products, the count of households or householders equals the count of occupied housing units. Separate living quarters are those in which the occupants live separately from any other people in the building and which have direct access from the outside of the building or through a common hall.
In the Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) in 2011, there were a total of 261,726 housing units: 72.3 percent owner occupied, 27.7 percent renter occupied, and 9.0 percent vacant. Compared to the nation as a whole, this represented a lower percentage of vacant (national: 12.4 percent) and renter- occupied units (national, 29.7 percent) and a higher percentage of owner-occupied units (national, 57.9 percent).
In Sedgwick County, 66.6 percent of the 191,853 occupied housing units were occupied by the owners of those units; 33.4 percent were occupied by renters. These percentages paralleled the national averages (owner-occupied: 66.1 percent; renter-occupied 33.9 percent), although representing somewhat less occupancy by unit owners than the state of Kansas, overall (owner-occupied: 69.0 percent; renter- occupied: 31.0 percent). At $660 per month, the median monthly gross rent expense in the Wichita MSA fell below the state average ($699) by $39 per month. The average rent in the Wichita MSA was $211 less per month or $2,532 less per year than in the nation as a whole.
Page 170 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Life Cycle
Table 107.A. Housing Characteristics – 2011 Sedgwick Wichita United Description County MSA Kansas States Total Population 1 491,988 615,802 2,830,985 306,603,772 Total Families 20 124,016 160,327 19 730,131 76,507,230 # Housing Units 21 210,423 261,726 1,228,959 131,034,946 # Occupied Units 191,853 238,268 1,104,479 114,761,359 Owner Occupied 127,706 172,268 761,874 75,896,759 Renter Occupied 64,147 66,000 342,605 38,864,600 # Vacant Units 18,570 23,458 124,480 16,273,587 Median Home Value 21 $120 ,400 $118,000 23 $125 ,500 $186 ,200 Median Monthly Rent 21 $662 $660 24 $699 $871 Housing Units 21 % Owner Occupied 60.7% 35.8% 62.0% 57.9% % Renter Occupied 30.5% 25.2% 27.9% 29.7% % Vacant 8.8% 9.0% 10.1% 12.4%
Table 107.B and Table 107.C present similar housing information for the United Way of the Plains service area, and the seven counties contiguous to Sedgwick County.
Table 107.B. Housing Characteristics – 2011 Butler Cowley Harper Harvey Description Count County County County Total Population 1 65,307 36,237 6,022 34,392 Total Families 20 17,525 8,903 1,786 8,945 # Housing Units 21 25,924 16,026 3,123 14,470 #Occupied units 24,039 13,489 2,660 13,137 Owner Occupied 18,662 9,642 1,926 9,746 Renter Occupied 5,377 3,847 734 3,391 # Vacant units 1,885 2,537 463 1,333 Median Home Value 21 $122 ,500 $79, 900 $64, 100 $106 ,700 Median Monthly Rent 21 $690 $594 $520 $622 Housing Units 21 % Owner Occupied 72.0% 60.2% 61.7% 67.4% % Renter Occupied 20.7% 24.0% 23.5% 23.4% % Vacant 7.3% 15.8% 14.8% 9.2%
Table 107.C. Housing Characteristics – 2011 Kingman Reno Sumner UWP Service Area Description County County* County (Incl. Sedgwick County) Total Population 1 7,897 64,207 24,115 730,165 Total Families 20 2,309 17,034 6,271 186,789 # Housing Units 21 3,811 28,249 10,909 312,935 #Occupied units 3,357 25,827 9,239 283,601 Owner Occupied 2,528 18,266 7,141 195,617 Renter Occupied 829 7,561 2,098 87,984 # Vacant units 454 2,422 1,670 29,334 Median Home Value 21 $81, 300 $88, 700 $84, 700 -- Median Monthly Rent 21 $575 $601 $559 -- Housing Units 21 % Owner Occupied 66.3% 64.7% 65.5% 62.5% % Renter Occupied 21.8% 26.8% 19.2% 28.1% % Vacant 11.9% 8.6% 15.3% 9.4% *Column percentages do not sum to 100 percent due to rounding error.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 171 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Life Cycle
Annual Income and Earnings - The U.S. Census and the American Community Survey present a variety of income data, including median household income, median family income and per capita income. For census purposes 15, a "household" includes all the people who occupy a housing unit as their usual place of residence. A "family" includes a householder and one or more people living in the same household who are related to the householder by birth, marriage or adoption. All people in a household who are related to the householder are regarded as members of his or her family. A family household may contain people not related to the householder, but those people are not included as part of the householder's family in census tabulations. a household can contain only one family, and not all households contain families, since a household may comprise a group of unrelated people or one person living alone.
The "median income" divides the income distribution into two equal groups, one group having incomes above the median and the other group having incomes below the median. Therefore, "median household income" represents the income of all persons living in a particular housing unit, and "median family income" represents the income of all family members living in a particular housing unit. "Per capita income" is the average obtained by dividing the aggregate income by the total population of an area. 1
In 2011 inflation-adjusted dollars, Sedgwick County median household income, median family income and per capita income all fell below the national and state median levels. In the United States, the median earnings of men who were employed full-time 12 months out of the year outpaced similar women's earnings by $10,389 per year. In Sedgwick County and in the Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), this difference was even more pronounced, at $12,639 and $14,052 respectively.
Table 108.A. Income and Earnings Characteristics 20 - 2011 Sedgwick Wichita United Description County MSA Kansas States Median household income $49,451 $50,122 22 $50,594 $52,762 Median family income $63,110 $61,050 23 $64,256 $64,293 Per capita income $25,832 $25,183 24 $26,545 $27,915 Median earnings, full-time year round worker Male $46,828 $36,912 25 $44,987 $47,549 Female $34,189 $22,860 25 $33,656 $37,160 Difference $12,639 $14,052 25 $11,331 $10,389
Table 108.B and Table 108.C present similar 2011 American Community Survey income and earnings data for other counties within the United Way of the Plains service area.
Table 108.B. Income and Earnings Characteristics20 - 2011 Butler Cowley Harper Harvey Description Count County County County Median household income $57,573 $40,924 $42,021 $48,880 Median family income $69,190 $51,891 $47,593 $64,347 Per capita income $26,710 $20,855 $22,805 $23,574 Median earnings, full-time year round worker Male $52,084 $38,931 $36,775 $44,786 Female $34,389 $27,494 $27,339 $31,943 Difference $17,695 $11,437 $ 9,436 $12,843
Page 172 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Life Cycle
Table 108.C. Income and Earnings Characteristics - 2011 20 Kingman Reno Sumner Description County County County Median household income $45,817 $42,207 $48,060 Median family income $55,615 $51,325 $63,441 Per capita income $23,714 $22,578 $22,778 Median earnings, full-time year round worker Male $41,239 $40,208 $42,929 Female $32,534 $28,055 $31,697 Difference $8,705 $12,153 $11,232
Transportation plays an important role in obtaining and retaining a job, and for many Americans, transportation means having ready access to a functioning vehicle. For Census purposes, "vehicles available" include the number of passenger cars, vans, and pickup or panel trucks of one-ton capacity or less kept at home and available for the use of household members. Vehicles rented or leased for 1 month or more, company vehicles, and police and government vehicles are included if kept at home and used for non-business purposes. Dismantled or immobile vehicles are excluded. Vehicles kept at home but used only for business purposes are excluded. 26
According to the 2000 U.S. Census,27 nationwide, 10.3 percent of households had no vehicle available for their personal use. In Sedgwick County, 6.4 percent of households (e.g., 11,276 of 176,744 households) had no such available vehicle.
According to the 2008 American Community Survey,28 nationwide, 8.8 percent of households had no vehicle available for their personal use. In Sedgwick County, 6.3 percent of households (e.g., 12,162 of 193,747 households) had no such available vehicle.
According to the 2011 American Community Survey,21 nationwide, 8.9 percent of households had no vehicle available for their personal use. In Sedgwick County, 6.2 percent of households (e.g., 11,912 of 191,853 households) had no such available vehicle.
Table 109.A. Vehicle Availability - 2011 Description Sedgwick County Wichita MSA 29 Kansas United States Occupied 191,853 100.0% 238,268 100.0% 1,104,479 100.0% 114,761,359 100.0% Housing Units21
# Vehicles Available None 11,912 6.2% 14,163 5.9% 57,747 5.2% 10,264,658 8.9% One 62,973 32.8% 74,831 31.4% 334,722 30.3% 38,361,818 33.4% Two 76,071 39.7% 93,578 39.3% 436,352 39.5% 43,379,295 37.8% 3 or more 40,897 21.3% 55,696 23.4% 275,658 25.0% 22,755,588 19.8%
Base = Occupied Housing Units (Both Owner- and Renter-Occupied
According to the 2011 American Community Survey,21 5.9 percent of the occupied housing units in the eight-county United Way of the Plains service area had no vehicle available for their personal use, which closely paralleled the 2000 U.S. Census, when 6.0 percent of the occupied housing units in the United Way of the Plains service area had no such vehicle.
In 2011, this represented 16,729 area households without transportation. Lack of an available vehicle ranged from a low of 3.2 percent (n = 86 households) in Harper County to a high of 6.2 percent in Cowley (n=839 households) and Sumner (n=572 households) counties.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 173 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Life Cycle
Table 109.B. Vehicle Availability - 2011 21 Description Butler County Cowley County Harper County Harvey County Occupied 24,039 100.0% 13,489 100.0% 2,660 100.0% 13,137 100.0% Housing Units
# Vehicles Available None 1,009 4.2% 839 6.2% 86 3.2% 670 5.1% One 5,419 22.5% 3,881 28.8% 799 30.0% 3,980 30.3% Two 9,409 39.1% 4,658 34.5% 976 36.7% 4,860 37.0% 3 or more 8,202 34.1% 4,111 30.5% 799 30.0% 3,627 27.6%
Table 109.C. Vehicle Availability - 2011 21 UWP Service Area Description Kingman County Reno County Sumner County Incl. Sedgwick Co. Occupied 3,357 100.0% 25,827 100.0% 9,239 100.0% 283,601 100.0% Housing Units
# Vehicles Available None 160 4.8% 1,481 5.7% 572 6.2% 16,729 5.9% One 971 28.9% 8,809 34.1% 2,459 26.6% 89,291 31.5% Two 1,157 34.5% 9,567 37.0% 3,238 35.0% 109,936 38.8% 3 or more 1,069 31.8% 5,970 23.1% 2,970 32.1% 67,645 23.9%
Base = Occupied Housing Units (Both Owner- and Renter-Occupied)
Household Facilities - Kitchen and Plumbing - The U.S. Census defines "complete plumbing facilities" as including: (1) hot and cold piped water; (2) a flush toilet; and (3) a bathtub or shower, noting that all three facilities must be located in the housing unit. It defines "complete kitchen facilities" as including: (1) cooking facilities, (2) a refrigerator, and (3) a sink with piped water.26 When it comes to the "comforts of home," nearly all U.S. households have full kitchen and plumbing facilities. Fewer than 1 percent of all housing units report having less than full kitchen and plumbing facilities -- whether at the national, state, county or city level.
Table 110.A. Household Facilities (Kitchen and Plumbing)21- 2011 Description Sedgwick County Wichita MSA Kansas United States Occupied 191,853 100.0% 238,268 100.0% 1,104,479 100.0% 114,761,359 100.0% Housing Units Lack complete facilities: Plumbing 534 0.3% 689 30 0.3% 4,022 0.4% 639,418 0.6% Kitchen 1,268 0.7% 1,769 31 0.7% 8,977 0.8% 1,000,070 0.9%
Base = Occupied Housing Units (Both Owner- and Renter-Occupied)
According to the 2011 American Community Survey, nearly all occupied housing units in the eight-county United Way of the Plains service area had complete kitchen and plumbing facilities. On average, 0.8 percent (n = 2,208 households) lacked complete kitchen facilities and 0.3 percent (n = 915 households) lacked complete plumbing facilities, as Table 110.B and Table 110.C show.
Page 174 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Life Cycle
Table 110.B. Household Facilities (Kitchen and Plumbing)21 - 2011 Description Butler County Cowley County Harper County Harvey County Occupied 24,039 100.0% 13,489 100.0% 2,660 100.0% 13,137 100.0% Housing Units Lack complete facilities: Plumbing 63 0.3% 144 1.1% 0 0.0% 52 0.4% Kitchen 207 0.9% 142 1.1% 24 0.9% 195 1.5%
Table 110.C. Household Facilities (Kitchen and Plumbing)21 - 2011 UWP Service Area Description Kingman County Reno County Sumner County Incl. Sedgwick Co. Occupied 3,357 100.0% 25,827 100.0% 9,239 100.0% 283,601 100.0% Housing Units Lack complete facilities: Plumbing 6 0.2% 76 0.3% 40 0.4% 915 0.3% Kitchen 41 1.2% 232 0.9% 99 1.1% 2,208 0.8%
Base = Occupied Housing Units (Both Owner- and Renter-Occupied)
Telephone Service - The U.S. Census defines having "telephone service available" as households which have a telephone in working order and able to both make and receive calls. Households whose service has been discontinued for nonpayment or other reasons are not counted as having telephone service available. 26 This includes telephone service provided both via land lines and cellular/mobile telephone service.
Nationwide in 2011, 3.1 percent of the households had no phone service; percentages of households without telephone service were comparable in Kansas (3.0 percent) and slightly higher in the Wichita Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA) and in Sedgwick County, at 3.6 percent and 3.8 percent, respectively.
Table 111.A. Telephone Service 2011 (including Land Lines and Cellular/Mobile Telephones) Description Sedgwick County Wichita MSA 32 Kansas United States Occupied Housing 191,853 100.0% 238,268 100.0% 1,104,479 100.0% 114,761,359 100.0% Units 21 No phone service 7,311 3.8% 8,602 32 3.6% 33,538 3.0% 3,501,686 3.1%
Base = Occupied Housing Units (Both Owner- and Renter-Occupied)
According to the 2011 American Community Survey, 3.7 percent of the occupied housing units in the eight-county United Way of the Plains service area lacked phone service, up from 2.9 percent in the 2000 U.S. Census. The 2011 information represented a total of 10,483 occupied housing units that were unable to make and receive telephone calls due to not having either a landline or cellular/ mobile telephone in working order.
Table 111.B. Telephone Service - 2011 21 (including Land Lines and Cellular/Mobile Telephones) Description Butler County Cowley County Harper County Harvey County Occupied Housing 24,039 100.0% 13,489 100.0% 2,660 100.0% 13,137 100.0% Units No phone service 481 2.0% 380 2.8% 68 2.6% 558 4.2%
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 175 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Life Cycle
Table 111.C. Telephone Service - 2011 21 (including Land Lines and Cellular/Mobile Telephones) Kingman Reno Sumner UWP Service Area Description County County County Incl. Sedgwick Co. Occupied Housing 3,357 100.0% 25,827 100.0% 9,239 100.0% 283,601 100.0% Units No phone service 125 3.7% 1,308 5.1% 252 2.7% 10,483 3.7%
Base = Occupied Housing Units (Both Owner- and Renter-Occupied)
"Baby Boomers" - Young males returning to the United States following tours of duty overseas during World War II began families, which brought about a significant number of new children into the world. This dramatic increase in the number of births from 1946 to 1964 is called the Baby Boom. 34
In the 1930s to early 1940s, new births in the United States averaged around 2.3 to 2.8 million each year. In 1945, the number was 2.8 million births. In 1946, the first year of the Baby Boom, new births in the U.S. skyrocketed to 3.47 million births. 34 New births continued to grow throughout the 1940s and 1950s, leading to a peak in the late 1950s with 4.3 million births in 1957 and 1961. (There was a dip to 4.2 million births in 1958) By the mid-sixties, the birth rate began to slowly fall. In 1964 (the final year of the Baby Boom), 4 million babies were born in the U.S. and in 1965, there was a significant drop to 3.76 million births. From 1965 on, there was a plunge in the number of births. 34
In 2013, the oldest Baby Boomers are turning 67 years old. Preceding the Baby Boom was the cohort called the Silent Generation (including those born from 1925-1945). Following the Baby Boom was Generation X (those born 1964-1979); Generation Y (those born 1980 to the mid-1990s) and either Generation Z or Generation Next for the babies of the late 1990s through today. 34
In 2011 (the most recent year for which American Community Survey data are available), those born between 1946 and 1964 would have been approximately 47 to 65 years old. According to the 2011 American Community Survey and as a subset of the total adult population, the 171,985 Baby Boomers 47 to 64 years old who lived in the eight South Central Kansas counties United Way of the Plains serves comprised 23.6 percent of the area's population, ranging from a low of 22.9 percent in Sedgwick County to a high of 26.3 percent in Sumner County.
Table 112. Boomer Population1 (2011) Boomer Population Total 47 to 65 Years County Population Count Percent Butler 65,307 16,174 24.8% Cowley 36,237 8,869 24.5% Harper 6,022 1,566 26.0% Harvey 34,392 8,256 24.0% Kingman 7,897 2,070 26.2% Reno 64,207 15,981 24.9% Sedgwick 491,988 112,722 22.9% Sumner 24,115 6,347 26.3% UWP Service Area 730,165 171,985 23.6% State of Kansas 2,830,985 664,805 23.5%
Sedgwick County as % of Kansas 17.4% 17.0% -- UWP Service Area as % of Kansas 25.8% 25.9% --
Page 176 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Life Cycle
The Baby Boom generation - the cohort of Americans born between 1946 and 1964 - has long commanded the attention of demographers, politicians, marketers, and social scientists. Seventy-six million strong, Baby Boomers represent the largest single sustained growth of the population in the history of the United States. 35
Most of this age group is experiencing its peak earning years, income-wise. As this group ages, a smaller group of younger adults can expect to find itself facing the additional burden of providing social security and other benefits and services for this larger, aging group.
The dramatic increase in births during the Baby Boom helped to lead to exponential rises in the demand for consumer products, suburban homes, automobiles, roads, and services. The metropolitan areas of the United States exploded in growth and led to huge suburban developments. 34
The mass of the Baby Boomers alone has had an enormous impact on the national psyche, political arena and social fabric. From the youth culture of the 1960s and 1970s to the dual-income households of the 1980s and 1990s, this generation has reinterpreted each successive stage of life. As the oldest of the Baby Boomers approach later adulthood, they are again poised to redefine the next stage, retirement. 18
Older Persons
The impact of the Baby Boomers as they transition into senior life is expected to be felt in many ways beyond simple population growth including social services program design and delivery; health care and prescription medication programs; second (or third) careers; housing and long-term health care options; and social, recreational and travel opportunities. In many cases, grandparents may find themselves "parenting" a generation of grandchildren. Expect even the terminology to change, as the Baby Boom generation redefines "seniors," "the elderly" and "older persons" in ways not yet envisioned.
According to the 2011 American Community Survey, the 46,457 adults 65 to 74 years old who lived in the eight South Central Kansas counties United Way of the Plains serves comprised 6.4 percent of the area's population, while the 46,922 adults at least 75 years old comprised an additional 6.4 percent of that area’s population.
Table 113. Population: Older Persons (2011) 1 Total 65 to 74 years 75 Years or More County Population Count Percent Count Percent Butler 65,307 4,118 6.3% 4,118 6.3% Cowley 36,237 2,892 8.0% 2,745 7.6% Harper 6,022 615 10.2% 672 11.2% Harvey 34,392 2,571 7.5% 3,352 9.7% Kingman 7,897 745 9.4% 883 11.2% Reno 64,207 5,010 7.8% 5,761 9.0% Sedgwick 491,988 28,740 5.8% 27,518 5.6% Sumner 24,115 1,766 7.3% 1,873 7.8% UWP Service Area 730,165 46,457 6.4% 46,922 6.4% State of Kansas 2,830,985 186,020 6.6% 186,024 6.6%
Sedg. Co. as % of KS 17.4% 15.4% -- 14.8% -- UWP Service Area 25.8% 25.0% -- 25.2% -- as % of Kansas
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 177 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Life Cycle
Grandparents Raising Grandchildren - According to the U.S. Census,26 a new question/data category was added for the 2000 Census and continued in the 2010 Census. It quantified “grandparents as caregivers” by defining them as "grandparent(s) who provide most of the basic care of their grandchildren on a temporary or permanent live-in basis.” Data were collected on whether any grandchild lived in the household and whether the grandparent had responsibility for the basic needs of the grandchild (i.e., financially responsible for food, shelter, clothing, day care, etc.).
Across the state in 2011, 45.3 percent of the 44,246 grandparents who lived in a household with their own young grandchildren were responsible for those grandchildren (n=20,045). In the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves, this amounted to 5,757 households, with nearly 70.0 percent of those households (4,018) in Sedgwick County.
Table 114. Grandparents Raising 33 Grandchildren (2011) Grandparent Living Grandparent Grandparent in Household with Responsible for Responsible for Own Grandchildren Grandchildren Grandchildren County < 18 years (#) (Number) (Percent) Butler 1,104 573 51.9% Cowley 766 403 52.6% Harper 55 28 50.9% Harvey 280 101 36.1% Kingman 157 114 72.6% Reno 863 347 40.2% Sedgwick 9,041 4,018 44.4% Sumner 372 173 46.5% UWP Service Area 12,638 5,757 45.6% State of Kansas 44,246 20,045 45.3% Sedgwick County as % of Kansas 20.4% 20.0% -- UWP Service Area as % of Kansas 28.6% 28.7% --
Summary
Several factors -- the effect of the aging Baby Boomer population; tightened funding at the federal, state and county levels; uncertainty of the economy and the job market -- all combine to create economic and social challenges for individuals of all ages and for their families and caregivers. No single age group of residents -- whether infants and toddlers, youth, adults or older adults -- is free to be complacent regarding choices for today and future opportunities for tomorrow.
Page 178 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
Overview
Similar to health care at the national level, the face of health care at the local level is constantly changing and evolving. In United Way of the Plains 2006 Community Needs Assessment (of Sedgwick, Butler and Harvey counties) and its 2010 Community Needs Assessment (of Sedgwick, Butler, Harvey, Reno and Sumner counties), the need for health care was identified most often by respondents overall as an important need facing the community.
A number of for-profit health care providers served the area population, alongside several governmental entities and not-for-profit health care providers including Federally Qualified Health Centers (FQHCs), rural health clinics and numerous smaller clinics. The area was also home to Via Christi Health (comprised of acute care hospitals, rehabilitation hospital, behavioral health center, numerous medical clinics, outpatient centers and senior care residences), Wesley Medical Center and the Robert J. Dole Veterans Affairs Medical Center, as well as smaller general care community hospitals and specialty hospitals in Sedgwick County and the surrounding counties.1
Health Care for the Uninsured and Underinsured
In Wichita and Sedgwick County,2 five clinics and two government entities comprise the Coalition of Community Health Clinics and have a principal role in serving the primary care health needs of the community's uninsured and underinsured:
Center for Health and Wellness GraceMed Health Clinic Sedgwick County Children’s Dental Clinic E.C. Tyree Health & Dental Clinic Guadalupe Clinic COMCARE of Sedgwick County Hunter Health Clinic
Other members of the Coalition include America’s Dentists Care Foundation, Central Plains Regional Health Care Foundation (Project Access, doing business as Central Plains Health Care Partnership), EmberHope (formerly United Methodist Youthville), the Kansas Department for Children and Families, Medical Service Bureau, the Medical Society of Sedgwick County, the Sedgwick County Health Department, United Way of the Plains, the University of Kansas School of Medicine - Wichita (i.e., Wichita Center for Graduate Medical Education) and the Wichita Public Schools (USD 259).
Until its closing in August 2010,2 Healthy Options for Kansas Communities (HOP: Healthy Options for Planeview) was a clinic member. October 1, 2010, Good Samaritan Health Ministries became a satellite site for GraceMed Health Clinic. On December 1, 2011, GraceMed Health Clinic assumed responsibility for the Via Christi Immediate Care-Mother Mary Anne Clinic.
On January 7, 2013, GraceMed Health Clinic opened a satellite location, the first community health clinic to establish a facility to serve west Wichita residents. The Dodge Family Clinic located at Dodge Elementary School offers primary medical services for children, students, adults and senior adults as well as dental hygiene services. It is a school-based clinic project, in collaboration with the Wichita School District, USD 259. In addition, GraceMed plans to open a school-based clinic at Cloud Elementary School in September 2013. This clinic will replace the Evergreen Clinic which has been operating since 1998 in northwest Wichita. Also, in September 2013, a new school-based clinic will open at Gardiner Elementary School to replace the clinic that has operated in a double-wide trailer at Lincoln Elementary School since 1995. Also on GraceMed’s drawing board are four additional school-based clinics, all scheduled to open during 2014, and planned for Oaklawn Elementary School in the Derby School District, USD 260; Jardine Middle School in Planeview; and two clinics adjacent to high schools at Wichita High School South and Wichita High School West. With the addition of these sites, GraceMed will have eleven clinics to provide care for the areas underserved residents.
Page 179 - Environmental Scan Research compiled by: 2013 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
In January 2011, the volunteer-staffed Mayflower Clinic4 opened near the intersection of Douglas and Rutan in Wichita. The clinic originated as a way for members of the medical community who have immigrated to the United States to “give back” to the local community, with a special focus on the “working uninsured.” Physicians have been donating their time, providing medical care on the weekends. The clinic reported it saw more than 1,000 people in 2012. In early 2013, the clinic relocated to the downtown area’s Sutton Place at 209 East William, with the goal of offering more services and weekday hours. The clinic was then to be open seven days a week and begin offering mental health services.
According to the Bureau of Primary Health Care's Uniform Data System (UDS),5 "patient encounters" are defined as documented, face-to-face contacts between a patient and a provider who exercises independent professional judgment in the provision of services to the patient. To be included as an encounter, services rendered must be documented in a chart in the possession of the health care provider. In addition to physician encounters, this can include: nurse practitioner encounters, physician assistant encounters, certified nurse midwife encounters, nurse encounters (medical), dental services encounters, mental health encounters, substance abuse encounters, other professional encounters, case management encounters, and health education encounters (If encounter was one-on-one between a health education provider and a patient. Health education encounters do not include participants in health education classes.). Screenings at health fairs, immunization drives for children or the elderly and similar public health efforts do not result in encounters regardless of the level of documentation.
In 2009,2 these health care entities were completing a total of approximately 43,419 patient encounters per quarter, of which half or more were for individuals not covered by health insurance. These patient encounters included the provision of medical, dental, substance abuse and mental health services.
In 2010, a total of approximately 42,793 patient encounters per quarter were completed; as were approximately 47,458 per quarter in 2011 and 46,955 per quarter in 2012.2
Table 115. Coalition of Community Health Clinics Patient Encounters – 2009 – 20122 Uninsured Total Insured* Count Percent 2009 1st Quarter 44,270 22,204 22,066 49.8% 2nd Quarter 45,331 21,248 24,083 53.1% 3rd Quarter 42,662 19,926 22,736 53.3% 4th Quarter 41,412 19,355 22,057 53.3% Total - 2009 173,675 82,733 90,942 52.4%
2010 1st Quarter 43,652 19,751 23,901 54.8% 2nd Quarter 41,758 18,339 23,419 56.1% 3rd Quarter** 40,422 18,242 22,180 54.9% 4th Quarter 45,341 20,117 25,224 55.6% Total - 2010 171,173 76,449 94,724 55.3%
2011 1st Quarter 47,213 21,969 25,244 53.5% 2nd Quarter 47,223 22,446 24,777 52.5% 3rd Quarter 46,633 22,929 23,704 50.8% 4th Quarter 48,763 25,736 23,027 47.2% Total -2011 189,832 93,080 96,752 51.0% (Continued on next page)
Page 180 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
Table 115. Coalition of Community Health Clinics Patient Encounters2 – 2009 – 2012 Uninsured Total Insured* Count Percent 2012 1st Quarter 48,662 23,717 24,945 51.3% 2nd Quarter 48,359 22,965 25,394 52.5% 3rd Quarter 47,952 25,163 22,789 47.5% 4th Quarter 42,845 21,729 21,116 49.3% Total - 2012 187,818 93,574 94,244 50.2%
* Includes coverage by private and public providers **Excludes data from Healthy Options for Kansas Communities (HOP) and Good Samaritan Health Ministries Note: These data do not provide an unduplicated patient count, either within or between Clinics.
From 2007 to 2011, the estimated number of Kansans not covered by health insurance ranged from approximately 345,000 in 2007 and 2008 to approximately 380,000 in 2011 and represented from 12.6 to 13.5 percent of the state's total population.
Table 116. Health Insurance Coverage, All People (2007 - 2011)6 (Numbers in thousands) Year 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Kansas # % # % # % # % # % Insured 2,376 87.3% 2,376 87.3% 2,398 86.7% 2,420 87.4% 2,434 86.5% Uninsured 345 12.7% 345 12.7% 367 13.3% 350 12.6% 380 13.5%
If the 2011 statewide percentage held true for Sedgwick County, then 13.5 percent of Sedgwick County's 2011 total population (n = 498,365) or 67,279 Sedgwick County residents would have been uninsured part or all of 2011.6,7
Looking now at Kansas children under the age of 19 years whose households were at or below 200 percent of the federal poverty level, from 2007 to 2011, the number of children not covered by health insurance ranged from 35,000 in 2010 to 57,000 in 2008 and represented from 9.9 to 18.7 percent of the children whose households matched that socio-economic description.
Table 117. Health Insurance Coverage, Children Under 19 At Or Below 200 Percent of Poverty (2004 - 2008)8 (Numbers in Thousands) 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Kansas # % # % # % # % # % Total Children 747 -- 742 -- 760 -- 759 -- 746 --
Total Children at or below 200% of poverty 295 -- 305 -- 310 -- 355 -- 333 -- Insured 257 86.8% 248 81.3% 268 86.2% 320 90.1% 289 86.8% Uninsured 39 13.2% 57 18.7% 43 13.8% 35 9.9% 44 13.2% Number of insured and uninsured children may not sum to total children at or below 200 percent of poverty due to rounding error.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 181 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
According to the 2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, in Sedgwick County 10.4 percent of families (13,001 of 125,002 families) for whom poverty status was determined lived at or below the poverty level, as the federal government defines poverty.9 If there were 146,580 children10 living in Sedgwick County in 2011 and 10.4 percent of those children lived in households whose income was below the poverty level, then 15,244 Sedgwick County children lived in households which matched that socio-economic description.
Then, if the 2011 statewide percentage of uninsured children held true for Sedgwick County, the 13.2 percent of Sedgwick County's 2011 children living in poverty (n = 15,244) would represent 2,012 Sedgwick County children from low-income households who were uninsured part or all of 2011.
Looking more in depth at the 2011 information, among all Kansas residents,11 86.5 percent (n = approximately 2,434,000) were covered with some type of health insurance.
Adults 19 to 64 years old represented the largest segment of uninsured individuals. In Kansas in 2011, an estimated 1,376,000 adults were between the ages of 18 and 64 years old. An estimated 312,000 adult Kansans (or approximately 18.5 percent) did not have health insurance coverage for part or all of 2011.
Of the 720,000 Kansas children and youth under 18 years of age in 2011, an estimated 68,000 (or approximately 9.4 percent) were without health insurance coverage for part or all of the year.
Figure 42. Insured and Uninsured Kansas Residents, By Age Category (2011)11
All people 2,434,000 380,000
65 years or over 406,000 0
18-64 years 1,376,000 312,000
Under 18 years 652,000 68,000
0 1,000,000 2,000,000 3,000,000
Covered Not Covered
Another source for information regarding the uninsured is the U.S. Census Bureau’s Small Area Health Insurance Estimates,12 which examined insured and uninsured residents younger than age 65 at the state and county levels. The August 2012 data presented in Table 118 summarize uninsured Kansans for 2010; the release of the 2011 estimates is planned for late summer 2013.
Page 182 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
In 2010, one in four (24.9 percent) Kansas children and youth without health insurance coverage lived in the eight-county United Way of the Plains service area,12 as did similar but slightly higher percentages of Kansas adults ages 19 to 39 years old (27.5 percent) and 40 to 64 years old (27.6 percent). An estimated 9,625 Sedgwick County children and youth and 64,800 Sedgwick County adults were without health insurance coverage in 2010.
Table 118. Estimated Uninsured Kansas Individuals - 2010 12 (Younger than 65 Years Old) County Under 18 years 18 – 39 years 40 – 64 years Total Butler 1,117 3,951 2,504 7,572 Cowley 606 2,294 1,732 4,632 Harper 169 361 345 875 Harvey 652 2,151 1,505 4,308 Kingman 156 401 374 931 Reno 1,030 4,002 2,664 7,696 Sedgwick 9,625 41,540 23,260 74,425 Sumner 459 1,397 1,093 2,949 UWP Service Area 13,814 56,097 33,477 103,388 State of Kansas 55,368 203,951 121,248 380,567 Sedgwick County as 17.4% 20.4% 19.2% 19.6% percent of Kansas UWP Service Area 24.9% 27.5% 27.6% 27.2% as percent of Kansas
State Children's Health Insurance Program (KanCare)
Health care coverage is available for children birth to 18 or 21 years old, based on family income. The Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP)13 was created in 1997 through an amendment to the Social Security Act to provide health care coverage to low-income children not already eligible for Medicaid. Like Medicaid, CHIP is jointly financed by states and the federal government.
Prior to 2013, the Children’s Health Insurance Program in Kansas was known as HealthWave and had been administered through the Kansas Department of Health and Environment’s Division of Health Care Finance. On January 1, 2013, HealthWave became KanCare.14
The Kansas Department of Health and Environment (KDHE) and the Kansas Department for Aging and Disability Services (KDADS) administer KanCare. KDHE maintains financial management and contract oversight of the KanCare program while KDADS administers the Medicaid waiver programs for disability services, mental health and substance abuse, as well as operating the state hospitals and institutions.15
KanCare is how low income Kansas families receive Medicaid services. KanCare is managed care that combines health care like doctor visits with community long-term services and supports such as receiving help in the home.16 Under managed care, patient services are coordinated by the patient’s primary care doctor and a service coordinator.
Similar to Health Maintenance Organizations (HMOs), Managed Care Organizations (MCOs)14 agree to provide most Medicaid benefits to people in exchange for a monthly payment from the state. In a managed care delivery system, people receive most or all of their Medicaid/health care services from an
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 183 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
organization under contract with the state. In Kansas, contracts were established with three MCOs: Amerigroup of Kansas, Inc. (Amerigroup), Sunflower State Health Plan (Sunflower), and United Healthcare Community Plan of Kansas (United).
The goals of the KanCare program15 are to improve overall health outcomes while slowing the rate of cost growth over time. This is to be accomplished by providing the right care, in the right amount, in the right setting, at the right time. The health plans focus on ensuring that consumers receive the preventive services and screenings they need along with ongoing help to manage chronic conditions.
Incidence of Health Care Providers
Examination of the number of health professionals in a geographic area is motivated by the need to identify health care professional shortage areas, to determine what areas in Kansas, if any, are medically underserved. The Kansas State Board of Healing Arts17 tracks five designations of licensing for health care professionals: active, exempt, federal active, inactive and military licenses.
Active licenses are renewable annually and are issued persons engaged in the practice of medicine and surgery, osteopathic medicine and surgery, chiropractic or podiatry. Exempt licenses are issued to persons not regularly engaged in the practice of the healing arts or podiatry in Kansas and who do not hold themselves out to the public as being professionally engaged in such practice. They may serve as a coroner or as a paid employee of a local health department as defined by Kansas Statute, may practice as a charitable health care provider for an indigent health care clinic as defined by Kansas Statute, or may perform administrative functions. Exempt licenses are renewable annually. Federal Active licenses are issued only to persons who meet all the requirements for a license to practice the healing arts in Kansas and who practiced that branch of the healing arts solely in the course of employment or active duty in the United States government or any of its departments, bureaus or agencies or who, in addition to such employment or assignment, provides professional services as a charitable health care provider. Inactive licenses are issued to persons who are not regularly engaged in the practice of the healing arts in Kansas and who do not hold oneself out to the public as being professionally engaged in such practice. Such persons are no longer engaged in rendering professional services as health care providers. Inactive licenses are renewable annually. Military licenses are issued to persons who have been in active duty in the military service and for six months following release from such service. Licensees who desire to engage in or practice an occupation or profession in this state after release from military service shall apply for another license designation.
Table 119 presents the number of health care professionals licensed in the state of Kansas, detailed by medical specialty (medical doctors, osteopathic doctors, respiratory therapists, physical therapists, etc.).
Page 184 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
In 2009, the State of Kansas reported 15,811 licensed health care professionals; in 2013, the number of licensed health care professionals had increased by 52.3 percent, to 24,078. The largest percentage increases were seen in osteopathic doctors (103.0 percent), occupational therapists (85.3 percent), medical doctors (70.6 percent) and podiatric doctors (51.6 percent).
Table 119. Health Care Professionals Licensed in the State of Kansas Includes Licenses that were Active, Federal Active, Military, Exempt and Inactive (updated June 2009 and 2013) Medical Osteopathic Chiropractic Podiatric
State of Kansas Doctors Doctors Doctors Doctors June 200918 6,123 600 933 95 June 201319 10,444 1,218 1,237 144 # Increase 2009-2013 4,321 618 304 49 % Increase, 2009-2013 70.6% 103.0% 32.6% 51.6%
Occupational Physicians Respiratory Occupational Therapy State of Kansas Assistant Therapists Therapists Assistants June 200918 732 1,408 1,122 285 June 201319 983 1,872 1,470 528 # Increase 2009-2013 251 464 348 243 % Increase, 2009-2013 34.3% 33.0% 31.0% 85.3%
Physical Athletic Radiologic Naturopathic Total State of Kansas Therapists Trainers Technologists Doctors Licensees June 200918 1,614 313 2,586 N/A in 2009 15,811 June 201319 2,407 409 3,366 29 24,078* # Increase 2009-2013 793 96 780 -- 8,267 % Increase, 2009-2013 49.1% 30.7% 30.2% -- 52.3% *Excluding naturopathic doctors (licensed 2013)
In addition, the Kansas State Board of Healing Arts registers (rather than licenses) health care professionals in specific categories.
Table 120. Health Care Professionals Registered in the State of Kansas Includes Active Registrants (updated June 2009 and 2013) Physical Contact Therapist Naturopathic Lens Total State of Kansas Assistants Doctors Distributors Registrants 18 June 2009 929 15 0 929* 19 June 2013 1,448 N/A in 2013 6 1,454 # Increase 2009 to 2013 519 -- 6 525 % Increase, 2009 to 2013 55.9% -- 100.0% 56.5% *Excluding naturopathic doctors (registered 2009)
The number of naturopathic doctors in Kansas increased from 15 who were registered in 2009 to 29 who were licensed in 2013, a 93.3 percent increase.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 185 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
Because the previous data regarding Kansas licenses for health care professionals include a variety of licensing designations, Table 121 presents statewide data regarding the number of active, exempt, federal active, inactive and military Kansas licenses current at June 2013, providing a snapshot view of the prevalence of each type of licensing designation.
For example, the 20,640 active licenses represented 85.6 percent of the total licenses in Kansas at June 2013 (n = 24,107),19 followed by the 1,888 inactive licenses, which represented an additional 7.8 percent of all licenses issued to Kansas health care professionals in 2013.
Table 121. License Designations for Kansas Health Care Professionals at December 201319 Federal Licensees Active Exempt Active Inactive Military Total Medical Doctors 7,715 1,006 308 1,389 26 10,444 Osteopathic Doctors 952 77 38 144 7 1,218 Chiropractic Doctors 1,057 64 0 115 1 1,237 Podiatric Doctors 120 6 5 13 0 144 Physician Assistants 895 0 37 51 0 983 Respiratory Therapists 1,872 0 0 0 0 1,872 Occupational Therapists 1,469 0 0 0 1 1,470 Occupational Therapy Assistants 528 0 0 0 0 528 Physical Therapists 2,247 0 0 158 2 2,407 Athletic Trainers 391 0 0 18 0 409 Radiologic Technologist 3,365 0 0 0 1 3,366 Naturopathic Doctors 29 0 0 0 0 29 Total Licensees 20,640 1,153 388 1,888 38 24,107
Area Shortages of Health Professionals
The Shortage Designation Branch of the Health Resources and Services Administration (HRSA)20 of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services develops shortage designation criteria and uses them to decide whether or not a geographic area, population group or facility is a Health Professional Shortage Area or a Medically Underserved Area or Population.
Health Professional Shortage Areas (HPSAs) may be designated as having a shortage of primary medical care, dental or mental health providers. They may be urban or rural areas, population groups or medical or other public facilities. HPSAs may be geographic (a county or service area), demographic (low income population) or institutional (comprehensive health center, federally qualified health center or other public facility). Medically Underserved Areas may be a whole county or a group of contiguous counties, a group of county or civil divisions or a group of urban census tracts in which residents have a shortage of personal health services. Medically Underserved Populations are areas or populations designated by HRSA as having too few primary care providers, high infant mortality, high poverty and/or high elderly population and may include groups of persons who face economic, cultural or linguistic barriers to health care.
Page 186 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
Table 122 presents Health Professional Shortage Areas (HPSAs) by county for primary medical care, dental care and mental health care. It also presents areas and populations with the various counties that are designated as medically underserved.
Several entire counties have been designated as Health Professional Shortage Areas for primary medical care, including Cowley, Harper, Kingman and Reno and Sedgwick counties. Similarly, Cowley, Harper and Kingman counties have been designated as Health Professional Shortage Areas for dental services, and six counties (Cowley, Harper, Harvey, Kingman, Reno and Sumner) have been designated HPSAs for mental health services. Within each county, additional areas or populations have been designated "medically underserved."
When an X appears on the county line (such as in the primary medical column for Kingman County, it indicates the entire county has been designated a Health Professional Shortage Area. In some cases a subpopulation within the county has been identified as having a shortage in health professionals (such as dentists serving the low income population in Cowley County). Certain areas or populations have also been designed as “medically underserved,” such as East Kingman in Kingman County, the Dexter area in Cowley County and the Caldwell area in Sumner County. Examples of populations designed as “medically underserved” include the low income populations of Hutchinson (Reno County) and Mt Hope (Sedgwick County).
Table 122. Health Professional Shortage Areas And Medically Underserved Areas & Populations Health Professional Medically Shortage Areas20 Underserved Primary Mental Areas and Medical Dental Health Populations21 Butler County Area Rural Health Clinic-Augusta Family Practice X X X Rural Health Clinic-El Dorado Clinic X Rural Health Clinic-Via Christi Clinic PA X Mental Health Catchment Area 17 X Cowley County X X X Population: Low Income X X Service Area: Dexter Area Harper County X X X Area Population: Low Income X X Mental Health Catchment Area 21 X Harvey County X Comprehensive Health Ctr-Health Ministries Clinic X X X Mental Health Catchment Area 16 X Population: Low Income Population Kingman County X X X Area Population: Low Income X Mental Health Catchment Area 21 X Service Area: East Kingman Area Reno County X X Population: Low Income X Comprehensive Health Ctr-Prairie Star Health Ctr X X X Population: Low Income (Hutchinson) Population Mental Health Catchment Area 21 X Service Area: Western Reno Area (Continued on next page)
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 187 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
Table 122. Health Professional Shortage Areas and Medically Underserved Areas and Populations Health Professional Shortage Areas20 Medically Primary Mental Underserved21 Medical Dental Health Areas & Populations Sedgwick County X Comprehensive Health Ctr-Hunter X X X Comprehensive Health Ctr-GraceMed X X X Comprehensive Health Ctr-Ctr for Health & Wellness X X X Medicaid Eligible (Wichita) X Central/Northcentral Area: 8 census tracts 31 census Southeast Wichita (low income) Area: 3 census tracts tracts Population: Low Income (Mt. Hope) Population Sumner County X Rural Health Clinic-Caldwell Family Clinic X X X Area: Caldwell Area
Incidence of Physicians
Population-to-Practitioner Ratio (Physicians)- In the five-year period from 2007 to 2011, the population-to- practitioner ratio for physicians (that is, medical doctors and doctors of osteopathy) became slightly more favorable for Harvey County residents and less favorable for residents in the other seven counties in the United Way of the Plains service area.
In the state of Kansas overall, in 2007, there was one practicing physician for every 472 Kansans; in 2011, there was one practicing physician for every 500 Kansans. In 2011, only two counties in the United Way of the Plains service area had a more favorable person per physician ratio than the state as a whole: Sedgwick County at 491 persons per physician and Harvey County at 491 persons per physician. At the other extreme, with a total of ten practicing physicians in 2011, Sumner County had a ratio of one practicing physician per every 2,379 county residents.
Table 123. Practicing Physicians* - Medical Doctors and
Doctors of Osteopathy (2007 - 2011) 200722 201123 Physicians Persons per Physicians Persons per County MD DO Physician MD DO Physician Butler 50 8 1,084 50 7 1,155 Cowley 32 4 948 26 5 1,170 Harper 5 2 820 4 2 999 Harvey 63 5 494 64 7 491 Kingman 2 3 1,554 2 3 1,571 Reno 110 7 539 104 4 598 Sedgwick 1,042 121 408 1,029* 93 447 Sumner 7 5 1,980 7 3 2,379 UWP Service Area 1,311 155 -- 1,286 124 -- State of Kansas 5,309 569 472 5,243 502 500
Sedgwick County as % of KS 19.6% 21.3% -- 19.6% 18.5% -- UWP Service Area as % of KS 24.7% 27.2% -- 24.5% 24.7% * Practicing physicians include Kansas licensed active physicians with primary place of work in Kansas. Data do not include federal physicians.
Page 188 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
A population-to-practitioner ratio for primary care physicians of 2,000 to 1 has been described as necessary to meet an area's need for primary care providers.24 Of course the primary care needs of an individual community will vary by a number of factors such as the age of the community's population. Furthermore, it is important to note that there is no generally accepted benchmark for a physician to population ratio.24 In 2011 in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves, the population-to- primary care physician ratio for all counties would exceed the threshold of 2,000 to 1, with the exception of Sumner County.
Primary medical care is basic or general health care traditionally provided by doctors trained in family practice, pediatrics, internal medicine, and occasionally gynecology. Secondary medical care is the medical care provided by a physician who acts as a consultant at the request of the primary physician. Tertiary medical care is specialized consultative care, usually on referral from primary or secondary medical care personnel, by specialists working in a center that has personnel and facilities for special investigation and treatment.25
Hospital referral regions (HRRs)26 are a way of categorizing and comparing regional health care markets for tertiary medical care that generally requires the services of a major referral center. These regions were defined nationally by determining where patients were referred for major cardiovascular surgical procedures and for neurosurgery. The Wichita Area HRR includes the entire United Way of the Plains Service Area and most of the state of Kansas with the exception of the Topeka and Kansas City HHRs, and a corner of far northwest Kansas.
According to the Dartmouth Atlas,26 the Wichita HRR has fewer physicians in all areas with the exception of family practice physicians, cardiovascular/thoracic surgeons and general surgeons when compared to national averages. The national average for physicians per 100,000 residents is 202.0, the Wichita HRR has 159.1. Shortages for Wichita include psychiatrists, pediatricians, internal medicine, obstetricians/ gynecologists and primary care physicians.
The Future of Health Care
Even if most communities in South Central Kansas currently appear to have adequate medical services available, the future of health care offers no guarantees.
An “adequate” supply of physicians could be defined as having the right number of physicians, with the right skills, in the right place, at the right time. The adequacy of supply has medical specialty, geographic and time dimensions. The appropriate number and mix of physicians has been examined, as well as how the state of Kansas and the nation can improve the geographic distribution of physicians—especially in underserved rural and urban areas. In addition, beliefs on what constitutes an “adequate” physician supply will differ by the various participants in the health care system. What society thinks is adequate could be quite different from what the marketplace, insurers, physicians, non-physician clinicians or patients think is adequate.27
Prior to the enactment of the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act, requirements for physicians nationwide were projected to grow approximately 976,600 (22 percent) between 2005 and 2020, while the full-time equivalency (FTE) supply was projected to grow approximately 926,600 (14 percent), suggesting a modest but growing shortfall of approximately 50,000 physicians by 2020, if today’s level of health care services is extrapolated to the future population. 27
The supply of primary care physicians was growing slightly faster than demand. The projections suggested a growing shortage of specialists, with demand growing by approximately 62,000 more physicians than would be supplied. Surgical specialties accounted for more than half of the shortfall; non- surgical specialties such as cardiology and pathology also showed demand growing faster than supply. 27
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 189 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
By another estimate, the Association of American Medical Colleges placed the United States already in the midst of a physician shortage in 2012. By 2025, the shortage is projected to grow by between 140,000 and 214,000 physicians – a deficit of between 15 to 25 percent.28
Physician demand, driven primarily by population growth and a growing number of elderly, is projected to grow slightly faster than supply under the assumption that the health care system continues to provide the current level of care using current patterns of care delivery. If additional demand for physician services is spurred by increased public expectations and ability to pay, then a significant shortfall of physicians could develop over the next few years in the absence of increased output from United States medical schools, increased recruitment of foreign-trained physicians or both.27
Physicians remain at the center of the healthcare system, ably aided in their efforts by nurses, therapists, and a host of other qualified healthcare professionals. It is primarily physicians who diagnose patients, admit them to the hospital, order tests, perform procedures, and supervise treatments.
A 2012 survey of practicing physicians conducted by Merritt Hawkins on behalf of The Physicians Foundation showed that physicians are working fewer hours, seeing fewer patients and limiting access to their practices in light of significant changes to the medical practice environment. Over the next one to three years, more than 50 percent of physicians will either cut back on patients seen, work part-time, switch to concierge medicine, retire or take other steps likely to reduce patient access (such as closing their practice to new patients.)
Figure 43. Age of Practicing Physicians According to the AMA’s (American Medical 28 Association) physician master file, over 72 (United States) of all practicing physicians in the United 60 years States are 40 years old or older. The or older, average age of all AMA-listed physicians is 22.3% 49.2 years.
Looked at another way, 22.3 percent of all practicing physicians are at least 60 years Under 50 old. years, 52.6% Of practicing physicians surveyed, 63.0 50 to 59 percent of those over 40 said they would years, retire today if they had the ability to do so. 25.1%
The prevalence of aging baby Boomers in need of health care will only worsen the situation. The first of the Boomers turned 65 in 2010. By 2020, the American Hospital Association estimated that Boomers will account for four in 10 office visits to physicians, if they can find them.29
Incidence of Dentists
Because dental health is closely tied to an individual's overall physical well-being, the incidence of dental health professionals is another important factor in determining geographic areas that are medically underserved. Providing essential health care services to vulnerable populations, regardless of patients' ability to pay, is an indispensable component of any health system. Kansas has an established network of safety net dental services for residents who are uninsured and underinsured. These clinics work closely with communities to offer a range of essential professional dental services, which include prevention and restoration of oral health.
Page 190 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
These dental clinics accept Medicaid/KanCare or work with patients to establish fees for services based on the patient’s ability to pay. Medicaid only pays for emergency dental care when a person has mouth pain, injury, infection, or a loose tooth. Dental services covered by Medicaid may include x-ray, examination, and tooth extraction.30
Within the eight county United Way of the Plains service area, Oral Health Kansas identifies four clinics in Sedgwick County providing dental services to uninsured and underinsured area residents (E. C. Tyree Health and Dental Clinic; Grace Med Health Clinic; and Hunter Health Clinic) as well as one Reno County dental clinic (Prairie Star in Hutchinson).30
Population-to-Practitioner Ratio (Dentists) - In the five-year period from 2007 to 2011, in the eight-county area United Way serves, in only Butler and Cowley counties did the ratio of the general population to dentists became more favorable. In the other six counties in the United Way of the Plains service area, the ratio of active dentists to the population decreased.
Table 124. Active Dentists (2007 - 2011) 200731 201132 Active Persons per Active Persons per County Dentists Dentist Dentists Dentists Butler 16 3,930 20 3,291 Cowley 12 2,845 13 2,790 Harper 2 2,871 2 2,997 Harvey 15 2,242 13 2,680 Kingman 2 3,886 2 3,927 Reno 31 2,033 26 2,485 Sedgwick 229 2,075 233 2,151 Sumner 12 1,980 9 2,643 UWP Service Area 319 -- 318 -- State of Kansas 1,335 2,079 1,338 2,146 Sedgwick County as % of Kansas 17.2% -- 17.4% -- UWP Service Area as % of Kansas 23.9% -- 23.8% --
In developing shortage designation criteria and using them to decide whether or not geographic areas, population groups or facilities are Health Professional Shortage Areas (HPSA), the Health Resources and Services Administration of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services bases its determinations of dental HPSAs on a dentist to population ratio of 1:5,000.24 In other words, in order to meet an area's need for dental care, the target threshold is fewer than 5,000 people per dentist. When there are 5,000 or more people per dentist, an area is eligible to be designated as a dental HPSA.
In 2011 in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves, the population-to-practitioner ratio for dentists fell below the threshold for Health Professional Shortage Areas for all counties in the United Way of the Plains service area.
Causes of Death
In 2011, 25,114 Kansas residents died. Reflecting national trends, the leading causes of death in Kansas are due to cardiovascular diseases and cancer.33 The cardiovascular category includes diseases of the circulatory system as well as hypertension, cerebrovascular diseases and arteriosclerosis and with 7,343 deaths, accounted for 29.2 percent of Kansas deaths in 2011.
The cancer category includes all cancer sites (breasts, digestive organs, respiratory organs) as well as leukemia and with 5,423 deaths, accounted for 21.6 percent of all Kansas deaths in 2011.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 191 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
Chronic lung disease (6.6 percent), accidents besides motor vehicle accidents (3.8 percent) and Alzheimer's disease (3.2 percent) rounded out the top five causes of death for Kansans; these five categories accounted for nearly two-thirds (64.3 percent) of all deaths in the state in 2011.
Figure 44. Death by Selected Causes, State of Kansas, 201133
10,000
8,000 7,343
6,000 5,423 5,099
4,000 1,654 2,000 942 794 708 639 577 555 416 384 254 120 115 91 0
In 2011, 6,655 persons from the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves died, closely reflecting statewide trends. The cardiovascular and cancer categories accounted for 27.1 and 21.4 percent (n = 1,804 and n = 1,422) of the area's deaths, respectively. Along with chronic lung disease (7.2 percent), accidents other than motor vehicle accidents (4.5 percent) and diabetes (3.2 percent), these five categories accounted for 63.4 percent of all deaths in the UWP service area.
Figure 45. Death by Selected Causes, United Way of the Plains Service Area, 201133
2,000 1,804
1,422 1,500 1,406
1,000
479 500 298 216 192 188 161 154 103 89 60 29 28 26 0
Page 192 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
Mental Health
Good mental health is as important as good physical health. Mental illness affects individuals but when left untreated, becomes a community issue. The mental health needs of the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves are addressed by a combination of public and private providers including psychiatrists, psychologists, counselors, school support staff members and the designated Community Mental Health Center for each county. Often, treatment options hinge on factors such as insurance coverage, methods of payment and severity of conditions.
Residents in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves receive mental health services from a variety of Community Mental Health Centers.34
Table 125. Community Mental Health Centers34 County Community Mental Health Center Main Center Satellite Centers Butler South Central Mental Health Counseling Center El Dorado Andover, Augusta Cowley Cowley Community Mental Health Center Winfield Harper Horizons Mental Health Center Hutchinson Anthony Harvey Prairie View, Inc. Newton Kingman Horizons Mental Health Center Hutchinson Kingman Reno Horizons Mental Health Center Hutchinson Sedgwick COMCARE of Sedgwick County Wichita Sumner Sumner County Mental Health Center Wellington
Mental disorders are common and widespread. An estimated 54 million Americans have been diagnosed with some form of mental disorder in a given year. A mental illness is a disease that causes mild to severe disturbances in thought and/or behavior, resulting in an inability to cope with life's ordinary demands and routines. There is no line which separates the mentally healthy from the unhealthy. There are more than 200 classified forms of mental illness. Some of the more common forms of mental illness are depression, anxiety disorder, bipolar disorder, dementia and schizophrenia.35
Mental health problems may be related to excessive stress due to a particular situation or series of events. As with cancer, diabetes and heart disease, mental illnesses are often physical as well as emotional and psychological. Mental illnesses may be caused by a reaction to environmental stresses, genetic factors, biochemical imbalances, or a combination of factors. With proper care and treatment many individuals learn to cope or recover from a mental illness or emotional disorder.35
In Sedgwick County, COMCARE of Sedgwick County is the designated Community Mental Health Center and local mental health authority, providing a wide array of mental health and substance abuse services to residents of Sedgwick County. In 2012, COMCARE passed the 50-year mark in service to the residents of Sedgwick County, from its beginnings in 1962 as a mental health clinic located within the Wichita- Sedgwick County Department of Public Health. COMCARE is the largest of the Community Mental Health Centers in the State of Kansas, serving individuals in the community with the help of a significant number of community partners. COMCARE is the safety net for individuals in need of mental health services that cannot afford to obtain them elsewhere in the community. COMCARE's comprehensive services are prioritized and provided for all citizens regardless of ability to pay.36
A few of the services COMCARE provides include:36
Medical Services: During 2012, COMCARE employed seven psychiatrists and nine advanced practice registered nurses who performed more than 20,000 medical appointments and saw nearly 8,966 patients. Additionally, COMCARE employed 21 nurses to assist patients receiving needed care, including triage and assessment of mental health status, assistance with medication side effects and refills, lab services and injections.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 193 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
Addiction Treatment Services: In 2012, Sedgwick County residents were provided outpatient and intensive outpatient drug and alcohol treatment, specializing in the treatment of clients having both mental health and co-occurring substance use disorders. Addiction Treatment Services has partnered with the judicial system for the treatment of offenders referred by the City of Wichita Municipal Drug Court since 1998 and by the Sedgwick County District Drug Court since its implementation in 2008. In 2012, Addiction Treatment Services served 3,117 residents of Sedgwick County.
Children’s Services: In 2012, a total of 64,623 services were delivered that included wrap around services, case management, parent support, psychosocial rehabilitation, attendant care, therapy and medication services. A total of 2,200 clients were served through this program.
Homeless Services: The Center City Homeless Program was established in 1988 to serve adults with a serious mental illness who were considered underserved and living in emergency shelters and places not considered adequate shelter. Over the years, treatment options were expanded with the implementation of a transitional housing program for homeless people who have a severe and persistent mental illness and co-occurring chemical dependency. Outreach is conducted to those still on the streets to engage them in services. Center City is co-located with United Methodist Open Door’s Homeless Resource Center at Topeka and East Second Street North in Wichita. In 2012, 368 consumers were served and 92 percent of the clients who remained in treatment for at least six months obtained housing.
Crisis Services: The 24-hour Crisis and Suicide Prevention Hotline receives more than 60,000 phone calls over the course of a year. Each year Crisis Services provides unscheduled face-to-face crisis assessments to more than 5,000 individuals, including those referred by schools and law enforcement officers.
Suicide
Suicidal behavior exists along a continuum. At one end is "suicidal ideation" which includes thinking about ending one's life or developing a plan. Farther along the spectrum is a "suicide attempt," a non-fatal self- directed potentially injurious behavior with any intent to die as a result of the behavior. Finally, a "suicide" is a death caused by self-directed injurious behavior with any intent to die as a result of the behavior.37
In the United States in 2010, there were 38,364 suicides --an average of 105 each day.38 On average in the United States, there is one suicide for every 25 attempted suicides. However, this varies based on age. For example among 15-to 24-year-olds there are approximately 100-200 attempts for every completed suicide, while among adults at least 65 years old, there are approximately four suicide attempts for every completed suicide.39
The incidence of suicide varies based on age. Suicide is the third leading cause of death among persons aged 15-24 years. Among this age group, suicide accounts for 20 percent of all deaths annually.09 Among persons aged 25-34 years, suicide is the second leading cause of death. It is also the fourth leading cause of death among persons aged 35-54 years and the eighth leading cause of death among persons 55-64 years.38
Men represent 79.0 percent of all U.S. suicides; they take their own lives at four times the rate that females do. Most commonly (56 percent), males use firearms as their method of committing suicide.38 Among males, suicide rates are highest among those at least 75 years old, where 36.0 men per 100,000 in the population commit suicide.38
Females are more likely than males to have had suicidal thoughts.40 Most commonly, women use poisoning as their method of committing suicide.38 For females, suicide rates are highest among 45- to- 54-year-olds, where 9.0 women per 100,000 in the population commit suicide. 38
Page 194 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
While accurate data are not available to describe the number of people who suffer from mental illness or distress, the number of people who committed suicide is known. In the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves, the number of residents who committed suicide ranged from 110 in 2007 to 89 in 2011 and averaged 97 per year.
Table 126. Suicides (2007 - 2011)41 County 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Butler 11 4 6 12 13 Cowley 11 4 5 3 3 Harper 1 2 2 0 1 Harvey 3 8 4 8 3 Kingman 0 0 0 1 0 Reno 14 9 4 10 11 Sedgwick 68 64 67 61 58 Sumner 2 5 5 2 0 UWP Service Area 110 96 93 97 89 State of Kansas 380 350 376 409 384
Sedgwick County as % of Kansas 17.9% 18.3% 17.8% 14.9% 15.1% UWP Service Area as % of Kansas 28.9% 27.4% 24.7% 23.7% 23.2%
Emergency Medical Services
Sedgwick County Emergency Medical Service (EMS)42 is the primary agency responsible for providing advanced-level out-of-hospital care and transportation of persons within Sedgwick County who become acutely ill or injured and are in need of ambulance transport to a hospital. Additionally Sedgwick County EMS provides scheduled ambulance transportation services for persons who require routine transfer by ambulance based on a medical necessity.
Sedgwick County EMS provides 24 hour emergency medical care to all areas of Sedgwick County including the city of Wichita. It serves a population of approximately 498,000 in a geographic area of approximately 1,000 square miles.42 The EMS fleet consists of 18 frontline ambulances stationed at 15 post locations throughout the County that are either owned in whole or shared with another agency.43
In 2012, Sedgwick County EMS received a total of 56,566 calls (an average of approximately 155 calls per day) for service.44 Nearly nine in ten of these calls (89.8 percent, n=50,773) were regarding emergent needs, while 10.2 percent (n=5,793 calls) were regarding non-emergent needs.
Transport was completed on 38,180 of those calls with 85.9 percent (n=32,810) of those transports for emergent needs and 14.1 percent (5,370 transports) for non-emergent needs.44
Sedgwick County EMS is a regional Basic Life Support Training Center for the American Heart Association and paramedics offer Cardio-Pulmonary Resuscitation (CPR) classes for the community. EMS has also been proactive in the community to enhance the public's knowledge and understanding of services. In addition to CPR classes, Sedgwick County EMS frequently participates in programming in local schools. One of the most popular programs includes EMS paramedics visiting classrooms to educate children on accessing the emergency system, demonstrating EMS equipment used during service, and a tour of the ambulance. This program is designed to make them more familiar with EMS should they ever need to access the system. In addition to these programs, safety belt and child safety seats are a part of EMS injury prevention efforts. EMS staff promotes proper usage during school programs and community events.43
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 195 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
Pre-School: Infants and Toddlers
Live Birth Rate
Between 2008 and 2011, the live birth rate in Kansas experienced a decline, from 15.1 live births per 1,000 population in 2008 to 13.8 live births per 1,000 population in 2011. Over this five-year period, only Sedgwick County consistently exceeded the annual state birth rate. In 2009 at a rate of 14.8 (84 births) Harper County slightly exceeded the state rate of 14.7 per 1,000 population, a single-year occurrence.45
Table 127. Live Births by Number and Rate per 1,000 Population (2007 - 2011)45 Five 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Year County # Rate # Rate # Rate # Rate # Rate Rate Butler 835 13.2 840 13.2 799 12.5 805 12.2 725 11.0 12.4 Cowley 457 13.3 505 14.8 489 14.5 487 13.4 467 12.9 13.8 Harper 73 12.5 74 12.6 84 14.8 72 11.9 68 11.3 12.6 Harvey 461 13.8 466 13.8 458 13.4 463 13.3 428 12.6 13.3 Kingman 94 12.0 91 11.8 96 12.7 79 10.1 71 9.0 11.1 Reno 843 13.4 851 13.4 847 13.4 762 11.8 759 11.7 12.7 Sedgwick 8,244 17.3 8,262 17.1 8,293 16.9 8,058 16.2 7,818 15.6 16.6 Sumner 291 12.2 333 14.1 283 12.0 312 12.9 263 11.1 12.5 UWP Svc Area 11,298 -- 11,422 -- 11,349 -- 11,038 -- 10,599 -- -- St. of Kansas 41,951 15.1 41,815 14.9 41,388 14.7 40,439 14.2 39,628 13.8 14.5
Sedg. County 19.7% 19.8% 20.0% 19.9% 19.7% -- as % of KS UWP Svc Area 26.9% 27.3% 27.4% 27.3% 26.7% -- as % of KS
Infant Mortality
Infant mortality rates (death of a liveborn infant which occurs within the first year of life) are often cited as an indication of the status of the health of a society and are often linked to the standard of living in a society. The average infant death rate for Kansas for the five-year period from 2007 to 2011 was 6.9 per 1,000 population. Only three counties in the United Way of the Plains service area had five-year infant mortality rates below the state average: Kingman County at 4.6, Sumner County at 6.1 and Butler County at 6.5. The number of infant deaths in Kansas decreased each year of the five-year period, from a high of 333 in 2007 to a low of 247 in 2011.46
Table 128. Infant Mortality Rates per 1,000 (2007-2011)46 Year Total Infant Infant Death County 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 Deaths Rate Butler 6 6 3 8 3 26 6.5 Cowley 11 3 4 5 4 27 11.2 Harper 0 1 1 1 0 3 8.1 Harvey 2 2 4 3 2 13 5.7 Kingman 0 0 0 0 2 2 4.6 Reno 6 6 7 7 7 33 8.1 Sedgwick 76 55 69 60 52 312 7.7 Sumner 2 1 2 1 3 9 6.1 UWP Svc Area 103 74 90 85 73 425 -- St. of Kansas 333 303 290 253 247 1,426 6.9
Sedgwick County 22.8% 18.2% 23.8% 23.7% 21.1% 21.9% -- as % of Kansas UWP Service Area 30.9% 24.4% 31.0% 33.6% 29.6% 29.8% -- as % of Kansas
Page 196 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
Low Birth Weight and Premature Births
Low birth weight is associated with prematurity and developmental delays. The Kansas Department of Health and Environment defines low birth weight as under 2,500 grams (5.5 pounds); normal birth weight as between 2,500 and 4,499 grams (5.5 and 9.9 pounds); and heavy birth weight as over 4,499 grams (9.9 pounds).47
The Kansas Department of Health and Environment’s Coordinating Council on Early Childhood Development Services, Bureau of Family Health, recognizes that both very "low birth weight" (less than 1,500 grams) and "prematurity" (less than 34 weeks gestation)48 pose a biological risk for developmental delays.
In 2011, the state average for very low and low birth weights combined was 7.2 percent of live births. In Harper (11.8), Sedgwick (8.4), Harvey (7.7) and Sumner (7.6) counties, the percentage of birth weights classified as very low or low exceeded the state average.47
Table 129. Live Births by Weight in Grams by County of Residence (2011)47 Very Low Low Normal Heavy Birth Weight Birth Weight Birth Weight Birth Weight Under 1,500 1,500 to 2,499 2,500 to 4,999 5,000 or more Total County # % # % # % # % # % Butler 3 0.4% 48 6.6% 673 92.8% 1 0.1% 725 100.0% Cowley 5 1.1% 28 6.0% 433 92.7% 1 0.2% 467 100.0% Harper 1 1.5% 7 10.3% 60 88.2% 0 0.0% 68 100.0% Harvey 9 2.1% 24 5.6% 394 92.1% 1 0.2% 428 100.0% Kingman 0 0.0% 4 5.6% 67 94.4% 0 0.0% 71 100.0% Reno 9 1.2% 39 5.1% 710 93.5% 1 0.1% 759 100.0% Sedgwick 116 1.5% 542 6.9% 7,154 91.5% 6 0.1% 7,818 100.0% Sumner 4 1.5% 16 6.1% 242 92.0% 1 0.4% 263 100.0% UWP Svc Area 147 1.4% 708 6.7% 9,733 91.8% 11 0.1% 10,599 100.0% St. of Kansas 527 1.3% 2,340 5.9% 36,707 92.6% 47 0.1% 39,628* 100.0%
Sedg. Co. 22.0% 23.2% 19.5% 12.8% 19.7% as % of KS UWP Svc Area 27.9% 30.3% 26.5% 23.4% 26.7% as % of KS
*Birth weight not known for 7 total births in state, although none from the United Way of the Plains service area.
In 2011 in Kansas, 5.4 percent of all live births occurred at less than 36 weeks of gestation. In the eight- county area served by United Way of the Plains, the rate of premature births to area residents exceeded the state average in five counties – Harper at 11.8 percent; Sumner at 8.7 percent; Harvey and Sedgwick at 6.5 percent; and Butler at 5.7 percent.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 197 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
Table 130. Premature Births by County of Residence (2011)49 Total Less than 36 weeks County # # % Butler 725 41 5.7% Cowley 467 25 5.4% Harper 68 8 11.8% Harvey 428 28 6.5% Kingman 71 0 0.0% Reno 759 41 5.4% Sedgwick 7,818 509 6.5% Sumner 263 23 8.7% UWP Service Area 10,599 675 6.4% State of Kansas 39,628 2,155 5.4% Sedgwick County 19.7% 23.6% as % of Kansas UWP Service Area 26.7% 31.3% as % of Kansas
Youth
Two primary health concerns facing children and youth include alcohol and drug usage and teen or pre- teen pregnancies.
Alcohol and Drug Usage
Risk and protective factors provide a necessary focus and structure for prevention. According to Greenbush,50 research has found that an interrelationship exists between adolescent drug abuse, delinquency, school dropout, and violence. In order to prevent problem behaviors from occurring, the factors that protect against problem behaviors need to be identified and increased and the factors that increase the risks need to be identified and reduced.
The Kansas Communities That Care (KCTC)50 student survey has been administered annually by Greenbush throughout the state since 1994, with funding by Addiction and Prevention Services of the Kansas Department for Children and Families. The student survey tracks teen use of harmful substances such as alcohol, tobacco and other drugs, in addition to teen perceptions about school and community involvement, bullying, gambling, and guns. The survey provides a baseline for teen participation in, perception of, and attitudes toward both pro-social and anti-social behavior at the peer, school, family, and community levels.
The survey gathers information from students in the sixth, eighth, tenth and twelfth grades and includes sections on demographics and school climate, peer influences, drug/alcohol/tobacco usage, community- based perceptions, and students’ families. Resulting data are available to school and community leaders to help assess current conditions and prioritize areas of greatest need to help in planning prevention and intervention programs.50
Page 198 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
It is important to remember that students are being asked to self-report these behaviors, and appropriate caution should be exercised in examining the data. In addition, for most counties, participation in the survey is inversely proportional to the students' age; that is, as the students get older, smaller percentages participate. For example, in 2010 in Cowley County, only 37.7 percent of students in grade 12 participated in the KCTC survey; in Sedgwick County in 2010, only 36.1 percent of 12th graders participated. 51
In addition, it is important to note that response rate among Wichita School District students are extremely low (perhaps 5 to 7 percent per grade level), due in part to a USD 259 policy that dictates parental approval prior to student participation. The Quality Improvement Services office of the Wichita Public Schools notes that participation is optional and parents must sign a permission form for their student(s) to take the survey due to its content. Parents are encouraged to give permission but many decline or do not return the permission form. With such low representation from Wichita, a limited ability exists to generalize to all students from the small samples obtained.52
Tables 131, 132 and 133 present only rates of alcohol, marijuana and methamphetamine usage per county, per grade and per year, as the actual counts of participating students who responded to each question in the Kansas Communities that Care survey are not provided.50
Alcohol Use - Table 131 presents the rate of alcohol usage (at least one drink), when 6th, 8th, 10th and 12th grade students were asked on how many occasions (if any) they had beer, wine or hard liquor during the past 30 days.
Table 131. 30-Day Prevalence Rate of Substance Use (Alcohol) by Student Grade Level (2009 and 2013) 53 6th Grade 8th Grade 10th Grade 12th Grade County 2009 2013 2009 2013 2009 2013 2009 2013 Butler 7.9 5.6 20.5 13.2 35.0 31.7 46.6 35.5 Cowley 10.3 3.9 20.2 12.6 32.9 27.8 54.0 40.7 Harper 5.9 6.3 32.6 17.3 40.3 37.7 35.7 54.0 Harvey 7.2 5.6 20.0 11.4 31.9 26.4 36.7 38.1 Kingman 9.6 2.6 20.8 13.2 50.5 36.6 62.5 43.6 Reno 7.0 3.9 26.0 13.5 28.5 24.0 38.8 38.1 Sedgwick 6.6 5.2 22.9 15.3 34.4 28.3 44.8 37.7 Sumner 8.7 5.6 21.4 11.6 41.2 27.1 54.3 40.2 State of Kansas 8.5 5.0 21.2 13.4 36.2 29.2 49.5 42.2
These data present trends in two ways. First, the differences from 2009 to 2013 within the same grade provide a view of changes in young people's patterns of drug and alcohol use in general. For example, the rate of alcohol use among sixth graders increased from 2009 to 2013 in Harper County, but decreased in the other counties in the United Way of the Plains service area. Additionally, the differences from lower to higher grades within the same year afford the opportunity to see whether usage patterns differ when comparing younger students to older students.
The prevalence of alcohol usage tended to increase with the age of the student. While in most counties, nearly 5 percent of the students who were sixth-graders in 2013 reported having used alcohol within the past 30 days, among students in 12th grade, approximately two in every five students reported alcohol usage in that same time period.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 199 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
Drug Use – Marijuana – Table 132 presents the rate of marijuana usage (at least once), when students were asked on how many occasions (if any) they had used marijuana during the past 30 days.
Table 132. 30-Day Prevalence Rate of Substance Use (Marijuana) by Student Grade Level (2009 and 2013)54 6th Grade 8th Grade 10th Grade 12th Grade County 2009 2013 2009 2013 2009 2013 2009 2013 Butler 0.6 0.7 3.7 3.4 14.0 12.2 16.5 15.2 Cowley 0.0 1.2 3.4 8.4 11.0 13.9 19.1 15.0 Harper 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 13.4 7.6 9.5 14.3 Harvey 0.5 0.9 1.8 4.3 13.0 11.1 7.4 12.7 Kingman 1.4 1.4 1.3 7.1 8.8 10.8 10.1 9.0 Reno 0.0 0.6 6.9 3.1 7.6 14.1 11.5 13.7 Sedgwick 1.0 1.2 6.1 7.4 13.2 14.7 16.5 16.7 Sumner 0.0 0.0 3.2 1.6 8.5 8.5 10.5 12.6 State of Kansas 1.0 0.8 4.6 4.6 12.5 13.3 16.7 17.3
Again, these data present trends in two ways. The differences from 2009 to 2013 within the same grade provide a view of changes in young people's patterns of marijuana use in general. For example, the prevalence rate of marijuana use among tenth graders increased from 2009 to 2013 in Cowley, Kingman, Reno and Sedgwick counties; decreased in Butler, Harper, and Harvey counties; and remained relatively constant in Sumner County.
The prevalence of marijuana usage tended to increase with the age of the student; for example; in Sedgwick County in 2013, while only 1.2 percent of the sixth grade students reported having used marijuana within the past 30 days, 7.4 percent of the 8th graders, 14.7 percent of the 10th graders and 16.7 percent of 12th graders reported marijuana usage in that same time period.
When comparing younger students to older students, the prevalence of marijuana usage tended to increase with the age of the student. The prevalence rates of marijuana usage among the cohort group of students who were in 8th grade in 2009 and 12th grade in 2013 increased in all counties for which data were presented. For example, while in 2009, 3.4 percent of Cowley County 8th graders reported marijuana usage, by 2013, 15.0 percent of Cowley County 12th graders did so. During that same time period, the prevalence rate of marijuana usage in Butler County increased from 3.7 percent (2009 8th graders) to 15.2 percent (2013 12th graders).
Drug Use - Methamphetamines - Table 133 presents the percentage of students who indicated they had used taken methamphetamines at least once in their lifetimes.
Table 133. Lifetime Methamphetamine Usage (2009 - 2013)24 Students in Grades 6, 8, 10 and 12 Combined County 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 Butler 0.7 0.9 0.3 0.6 0.1 Cowley 1.4 2.0 2.1 1.4 2.3 Harper 1.5 2.4 1.0 2.0 2.8 Harvey 2.1 1.7 2.2 1.3 1.6 Kingman 2.1 1.4 0.7 1.7 2.7 Reno 2.1 1.4 0.7 1.7 2.7 Sedgwick 2.5 2.6 2.4 2.2 2.1 Sumner 2.1 2.0 1.6 1.7 0.8 State of Kansas 0.7 0.6 0.5 0.7 0.5
Page 200 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
Again, it is important to remember that students are being asked to self-report these behaviors, and appropriate caution should be exercised in examining the data. In addition, for most counties, participation in the survey is inversely proportional to the students' age; that is, as the students get older, a smaller percentage of students participate. For example, in 2010 in Cowley County, only 37.7 percent of students in grade 12 participated in the KCTC survey; in Sedgwick County in 2010, only 36.1 percent of 12th graders participated. 51 Also, any potential impact of methamphetamine usage on dropout rates was not taken into account; only students still in school participated in the KCTC survey for any given year.
Although not included here, similar trending information for prevalence rates and lifetime substance usage appears on the Communities that Care website (http://beta.ctcdata.org/)51 for:
- Smokeless tobacco; - Inhalants (sniffing glue, breathing - Cigarettes; contents of aerosol spray can, - Cocaine or crack; inhaling other gases or sprays); - Heroin; - Prescription pain medications, - LSD or other psychedelics; tranquilizers or stimulants; and - MDMA (Ecstasy); - Steroids.
Births to Teens and Pre-Teens
Problems often associated with adolescent pregnancy include dropping out of school, a lifetime of depressed earnings and an increased potential for welfare dependency. A pregnancy, whether planned or unplanned, can present powerful personal and social issues that may have serious effects throughout the balance of the mother's life, her future access to education, promising employment and an emotionally stable family life. Early pregnancy poses risks not only for the mother-to-be and her family, but also for the community as a whole.
In 2007, the pregnancy rates for Sedgwick, Harper, Reno and Cowley counties for females age 10 to 19 years exceeded the state’s average rate of 27.8 per 1,000. In 2007 in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves, 1,521 girls between the ages of 10 and 19 years old became pregnant, 1,132 in Sedgwick County alone. These data include live births, stillbirths and abortions.
Table 134. Teen and Pre-Teen Pregnancy Rates (2007)55 Total Pregnancies Teen/Pre-Teen Mother's Age (Years) Total Pregnancy County 10-14 15-19 (10-19 yr.) Rate* Butler 0 98 98 21.4 Cowley 1 76 77 29.5 Harper 0 11 11 30.8 Harvey 1 47 48 20.7 Kingman 0 10 10 18.9 Reno 0 115 115 29.7 Sedgwick 13 1,119 1,132 33.9 Sumner 0 30 30 16.9 UWP Service Area 15 1,506 1,521 -- State of Kansas 70 5,198 5,268 27.8 Sedgwick County 18.6% 21.5% 21.5% -- as % of Kansas UWP Service Area 21.4% 29.0% 28.9% -- as % of Kansas
*Rate per 1,000 female age-group population.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 201 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
In the state of Kansas, the teen/pre-teen pregnancy rate declined between 2007 and 2011, from 27.8 per 1,000 females age 10 to 19 years in 2007 to 20.9 in 2011. In several counties in the United Way of the Plains Service area, the rate increased during that time period, including Sumner, Harper and Harvey counties. In 2011, the teen and pre-teen pregnancy rates for Harper, Cowley, Sedgwick, Sumner and Harvey counties exceeded that of the state as a whole, 20.9 per 1,000 females age 10 to 19 years. In 2011 in the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves, 1,202 girls between the ages of 10 and 19 years old became pregnant, 892 in Sedgwick County alone. These data include live births, stillbirths and abortions.
Table 135. Teen and Pre-Teen Pregnancy Rates (2011)56 Total Pregnancies Teen/Pre-Teen Mother's Age (Years) Total Pregnancy County 10-14 15-19 (10-19 yr.) Rate* Butler 0 53 53 10.6 Cowley 0 72 72 28.3 Harper 0 6 6 32.3 Harvey 0 53 53 21.6 Kingman 0 9 9 16.1 Reno 2 78 80 19.6 Sedgwick 17 875 892 25.7 Sumner 0 37 37 22.2 UWP Service Area 19 1,183 1,202 -- State of Kansas 70 4,025 4,095 20.9 Sedgwick County 24.3% 21.7% 21.8% -- as % of Kansas UWP Service Area 27.1% 29.4% 29.4% -- as % of Kansas
*Rate per 1,000 female age-group population.
Older Persons
Selected health concerns facing older persons include the needs of the frail and homebound elderly, health care costs for seniors, and end-of-life care issues such as hospice and palliative care.
Needs of the Frail and Homebound Elderly57
Kansas has a variety of programs promoting independent living in safe, healthy environments. Individuals age 65 or older who meet Medicaid income eligibility guidelines and meet the Medicaid long-term care threshold and who qualify functionally have an option to receive community based services as an alternative to nursing facility care through the Home & Community Based Services program for the Frail Elderly. Services include personal care, household tasks and health services. The program promotes independence within the community and helps to offer residency in the most integrated environment. In Kansas, this program is administered by the Kansas Department for Aging and Disability Services.
Services offered through the Home & Community Based Services Program – Frail Elderly are based upon customer need as determined by the customer and case manager;57 they include:58 Adult Day Care - a service to maintain a person's optimal social functioning. Depending on the personal plan of care and chosen provider, this service may include daily supervision, no more than two meals a day and/or assistance with eating, toileting or mobility.
Page 202 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
Attendant Care Services (Level I and II) - provided by an attendant trained to assist with activities the client cannot perform or for which the client may need some assistance. Nursing Evaluation Visit - completed by a registered nurse to evaluate health care needs and determine the appropriate assistance to be provided by the attendant(s). Personal Emergency Response - provides consumers whose health status may require immediate attention with 24-hour on-call support. Persons with heart conditions, diabetes, epilepsy, breathing difficulties, or those prone to falls and injuries may be candidates for this service. Medication Reminder - a system that provides a scheduled reminder to a customer when it’s time for him/her to take medications. The reminder may be a phone call, an automated recording or an automated alarm; depending on the system. Wellness Monitoring - a registered nurse visits in the home to provide health assessment, education, counseling and monitoring of any treatment program prescribed by health care professionals. Case Management - to help assess, coordinate and obtain needed services. The case manager ensures that services are appropriate, adequate and of high quality. A case manager may advocate with health care providers and other agencies on behalf of the client.
Selected services previously available (Assistive Technology, Comprehensive Support, Oral Health and Sleep Cycle Support) have been suspended indefinitely unless a crisis exception is met.57
Services can be provided in seniors’ homes or in the community. In-home services include home- delivered meals; respite, homemaker or attendant care; minor home repair; and case management. Services provided to older adults in the community include information and assistance; pre-screening for nursing home placement; transportation; legal service; counseling, wellness programs and senior dining centers. The Kansas Department for Aging and Disability Services website lists 21 senior centers in Sedgwick County, as well as 12 in Butler, eight in Cowley; four in Harper; six in Harvey; five in Kingman; 12 in Reno; and 11 in Sumner counties.59
Health Care Costs for Seniors
In 1965 and after lengthy national debate, Congress passed legislation establishing the Medicare program (Title XVIII) and Medicaid program (Title XIX) of the Social Security Act. When first implemented in 1966, Medicare (designated “Health Insurance for the Aged and Disabled”) covered most persons age 65 or over. 60
Medicare60 was established in response to the specific medical care needs for people age 65 or older, with coverage made available in 1973 for persons entitled to Social Security or Railroad Retirement disability cash benefits for at least 24 months, most persons with end-stage renal disease (ESRD), and certain otherwise non-covered aged persons who elect to pay a premium for Medicare coverage.
Medicare has three primary parts for beneficiaries that qualify:
Part A Hospital Insurance - Most people don't pay a premium for Part A because they or a spouse already paid for it through their payroll taxes while working. Medicare Part A (Hospital Insurance) helps cover inpatient care in hospitals, including critical access hospitals, and skilled nursing facilities (not custodial or long-term care). It also helps cover hospice care and some home health care. Beneficiaries must meet certain conditions to get these benefits.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 203 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
Part B Medical Insurance - Most people pay a monthly premium for Part B. Medicare Part B (Medical Insurance) helps cover doctors' services and outpatient care. It also covers some other medical services that Part A doesn't cover, such as some of the services of physical and occupational therapists, and some home health care. Part B helps pay for these covered services and supplies when they are medically necessary.
Prescription Drug Coverage - Most people pay a monthly premium for this coverage. Starting January 1, 2006, new Medicare prescription drug coverage became available to everyone with Medicare. Medicare Prescription Drug Coverage is insurance. Private companies provide the coverage. Beneficiaries choose the drug plan and pay a monthly premium. If a beneficiary decides not to enroll in a drug plan when they are first eligible, he or she may pay a penalty if choosing to join later.
When Medicare began on July 1, 1966, approximately 19 million people enrolled.60
Within the eight-county United Way of the Plains service area, 109,864 individuals received Medicare benefits in 2010, with 83.1 percent (n = 91,302) qualifying because of their age and 16.9 percent (n = 18,562) qualifying due to a disability.
Table 136. Medicare Recipients at July 1, 201062 County Aged Disabled Total Butler 7,670 1,373 9,043 Cowley 4,946 964 5,910 Harper 1,120 140 1,260 Harvey 5,858 762 6,620 Kingman 1,385 177 1,562 Reno 10,592 1,869 12,461 Sedgwick 55,977 12,628 68,605 Sumner 3,754 649 4,403 UWP Service Area 91,302 18,562 109,864
End-of-Life Care (Hospice and Palliative Care)
End-of-life care63 focuses on patients' comfort and symptom relief, while incorporating spiritual and psychological counseling to help prepare for a good death. Preparing for death may involve drawing up legal documents (i.e., a will, advanced directives, medical power of attorney) as well as making burial plans and planning hospice care.
Resolving financial issues and distributing assets through a will can help patients and families focus on matters other than finances. A legal will regulates how a patient's assets should be distributed. Although the law varies from state to state, without a will, assets usually fall to the spouse, or if widowed, children and then descendants. A living will (often called an advanced directive) defines the patient's wishes in regards to prolonging life. A patient designating a medical power of attorney will allow someone to make medical decisions in the event the patient is unable to communicate his or her own wishes.
Choosing before death between burial, cremation or entombment options can often alleviate family members of the burden of funeral decisions and budget constraints. Funeral expenses can exceed thousands of dollars, and emotional overspending is common during grief. Details concerning burial location, funeral services and provider as well as any preparations should be put in writing and, ideally, discussed with family members.
Page 204 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
When medical care cannot offer a cure, hospice provides care, comfort and support for persons with life- limiting conditions as well as their families. To receive hospice, physicians must -- in most cases -- be willing to state that death can be expected within 6 months if the disease follows its normal course. This does not mean that care will only be provided for 6 months; hospice can be provided as long as the person’s physician and hospice team certifies that their condition remains life-limiting. The hospice team works to make the person comfortable and relieve their symptoms and pain. Hospice care is a family- centered team approach that can include a doctor, nurse, social worker, counselor, chaplain, home health aide and trained volunteers. They work together focusing on the dying person’s needs—physical, psychological, social and spiritual. The goal is to help keep the person as pain and symptom-free as 64 possible while offering spiritual and supportive counseling to the patient and family members.
The hospice movement in the past decade has drawn attention to the benefits of palliative care. To palliate65 means to make comfortable by treating a person’s symptoms from an illness. Hospice and palliative care both focus on helping a person be comfortable by addressing issues causing physical or emotional pain, or suffering. Hospice and other palliative care providers have teams of people working together to provide care. The goals of palliative care are to improve the quality of a seriously ill person’s life and to support that person and their family during and after treatment.
Hospice focuses on relieving symptoms and supporting patients with a life expectancy of months not years, and their families. However, palliative care may be given at any time during a patient’s illness, from diagnosis on.65
In 2011, an estimated 1.651 million patients received services from hospice,66 including: 1,059,000 patients who died under hospice care in 2011 313,000 “carryover” patients who remained on the hospice census at the end of 2011 278,000 patients who were discharged alive in 2011 (“live discharges”) for reasons including extended prognosis, desire for curative treatment, etc.
As Figure 46 illustrates, the number of hospice patients has trended steadily upward since the early 1980s, when 25,000 individuals received hospice care nationally.
Figure 46. Patients Served by Hospice in the United States: 1982 to 201166
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 205 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization (NHPCO)67 is the largest nonprofit membership organization representing hospice and palliative care programs and professionals in the United States. For 2011,68 NHPCO estimates that approximately 44.6% of all deaths in the United States were under the care of a hospice program. This estimate was calculated by dividing the number of deaths in hospice (as estimated by NHPCO) by the total number of deaths in the United States, as reported by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.69
The trend toward shorter lengths of service has been consistent over the past several years68 In 2011, the median length of time hospice patients remained in care was 19.1 days, a decrease from 19.7 days in 2010. The median, or the 50th percentile, means that half of hospice patients received care for less than approximately three weeks and half received care for more than approximately three weeks. The proportion of patients who remained under hospice care for longer than 180 days decreased slightly in 2011 as compared to 2010 (11.4 in 2011; 11.8 percent in 2010). In 2011, slightly larger proportions of hospice patients (approximately 35.7%) died or were discharged within seven days of admission when compared to 2010 (35.3%) Slightly larger proportions of patients died or were discharged within 14 days of admission in 2011 (50.1 percent) when compared to 2010 (49.4 percent).
The Medicare hospice benefit enacted by Congress in 1982 is the predominate source of payment for hospice care. In 2011, the Medicare hospice benefit covered 84.1% of hospice patients and 87.9 percent of hospice patient days.68
Selected Health Trends
The scope of this report does not permit an examination of all current health trends affecting Kansans and does not intend to duplicate more detailed efforts of others. This report has chosen to focus on a description of selected existing community health-related resources, on the work of the Visioneering Health Alliance and on a summary of the prevalence of infectious diseases reportable to the Centers for Disease Control occurring within the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves.
Existing Community Health-Related Resources
In the Spring off 2013,70 the Sedgwick County Health Department updated its Community Health Improvement Plan, available at: http://www.sedgwickcounty.org/healthdept/materials/CHIP.web.pdf.
In addition to informing the strategic planning process for the Sedgwick County Health Department, the Community Health Improvement Plan identifies community health assets; monitors progress toward five health priorities established as a result of Visioneering Health Alliance activity in 2010; and focuses attention and resources on strategies designed to work toward positive health outcomes.
The report contains two categories of data designed to measure progress toward improving health: Performance Measures are collected as part of larger population health measures (e.g., the Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System). Strategy Measures are informed by data collected locally and more directly reflect how the community plans to influence priority health issues.
Page 206 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
The Sedgwick County Health Department also periodically compiles and publishes a Data Book,71 a source of comprehensive health information about Sedgwick County residents with data compiled for public use. It is available at: http://www.sedgwickcounty.org/health dept/reports/DataBook.pdf
The report compiles information on injury statistics, motor vehicle accidents, mortality rates, leading health indicators (physical activity, tobacco use, nutrition, etc.) and disease morbidity (that is, the incidence and prevalence of a disease, the state of acquiring a disease, or the severity of a disease), with information included regarding cancer, asthma, tuberculosis, oral health and more.
This resource notes that each health issue is an adaptive and complex challenge, adding that “to improve health outcomes, each issue will require individual health behavior and systems changes to help individuals make healthy choices.”
Via Christi Health is the largest provider of health care services in Kansas,72 serving Kansas and northeast Oklahoma through its doctors, hospitals, senior villages and health services. In fiscal year 2012, Via Christi Health provided $90.5 million in benefit to the communities it served. This included $46.8 million in charity care and $21.7 million in unpaid costs of Medicaid services provided.
Via Christi Villages73 is the seventh-largest Catholic provider of senior services in the United States. As part of their mission, Via Christi Health and Via Christi Villages seek to assist the elderly to live more fully by giving them greater independence and quality of life.74
Via Christi staff recently conducted an assessment of the health care needs for the elderly population living in and around communities where Via Christi Villages maintains facilities.74 These locations include Hays, Manhattan, Pittsburg and Wichita, Kansas as well as Ponca City, Oklahoma. Via Christi’s Aging Population Assessment is available at http://www.via-christi.org/ workfiles/community-benefit/Aging-Assessment-VCV-Markets.pdf
Some common themes were identified across the five locations (i.e., Hays, Manhattan, Pittsburg, Wichita and Ponca City), such as lack of transportation, difficulty in finding physicians willing to take new Medicare patients, having access to specialty or dental care and being able to afford home health care services.74
The assessment’s summary report is organized into sections for each location so that each community can have a better understanding of its needs and resources. Community sections include an executive summary, a description of the community, information regarding who was involved in the Aging Assessment and how the assessment was conducted, health needs identified, community assets for seniors and characteristics of focus group participants.74
Visioneering Health Alliance
The Visioneering Wichita process began in 2004, with the goals of providing citizens with a means of providing input to develop the future, to facilitate communications and to create a strategic plan “that ensures a quality of life and encourages our young people to live, learn, work and play in our regional community.”75
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 207 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
Originally six “Foundations” were established: economic, education, government, infrastructure, private sector leadership and quality of life. Health care; recreation; the arts; public safety; family and youth; a sense of community; racial diversity, opportunity and harmony; human services and older adults were all grouped under the “Quality of Life” foundation.75 Figure 47. Visioneering Health From that, one strategic alliance that developed was the Alliance Strategic Priorities Visioneering Health Alliance,70 which is focused on improving the health and quality of life for all people in the Wichita area. The Visioneering Health Alliance is a group of partners from public health, education, business, non-profit, health care, philanthropy and governmental sectors. As such, it convenes, catalyzes and collaborates to influence policies, environments and systems that lead to measurable improvement of the health of our residents.
In 2010, the Visioneering Health Alliance undertook a six-month process to help identify five strategic priorities for Wichita and Sedgwick County. These priorities are shown in Figure 4770 and include access to health care; obesity and diabetes; mental health; oral health; and health disparities. The health disparities category was deemed so significant that it was integrated within each of the other four priorities.
Notifiable Diseases
One responsibility of the Kansas Department of Health and Environment’s (KDHE) Bureau of Epidemiology and Public Health Informatics is the surveillance of notifiable infectious diseases. KDHE reports nationally notifiable diseases data to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) every week. Provisional data are published each week in the CDC’s Morbidity and Mortality Weekly Report (MMWR) to disseminate the most current national information, but are subject to change based on the outcome of further case investigation.
For some of the diseases reported, cases must be “confirmed,” or others, “probable” cases are also reported.76
In the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves, the number of reportable disease cases reported in 2012 totaled 1,171, or 15.4 percent of the cases reported for the state of Kansas as a whole.
Table 137. Cumulative Case Reports County Reportable Diseases* (2012)77 Butler 88 Cowley 62 Harper 10 Harvey 47 Kingman 26 Reno 141 Sedgwick 770 Sumner 27 UWP Service Area 1,171 State of Kansas 4,984 Sedgwick County as % of Kansas 15.4% UWP Service Area as % of Kansas 23.5% *As of May 15, 2013
Page 208 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
In the eight-county area United Way of the Plains serves, the number of reportable disease cases reported in 2012 totaled 1,171.77 Among these, the five diseases reported most often accounted for more than three-fourths (76.9 percent) of all disease cases reported.
Hepatitis C78 is a liver disease that results from infection with the Hepatitis C virus. It can range in severity from a mild illness lasting a few weeks to a serious, lifelong illness. Hepatitis C virus infection is the most common chronic bloodborne infection in the United States, and there is no vaccine for Hepatitis C. Varicella (Chickenpox)78 is a very contagious disease caused by the varicella-zoster virus. It causes a blister-like rash, itching, tiredness, and fever. Chickenpox can be serious, especially in babies, adults, and people with weakened immune systems. It spreads easily from infected people to others who have never had chickenpox or received the chickenpox vaccine. Chickenpox spreads in the air through coughing or sneezing. It can also be spread by touching or breathing in the virus particles that come from chickenpox blisters. Pertussis (Whooping Cough)78 is a highly contagious respiratory disease, caused by the bacterium Bordetella pertussis. Pertussis is known for uncontrollable, violent coughing which often makes it hard to breathe. After fits of many coughs, someone with pertussis often needs to take deep breaths which result in a "whooping" sound. Pertussis most commonly affects infants and young children. Salmonellosis (food poisioning)78 is an infection with bacteria called Salmonella. Most persons infected with Salmonella develop diarrhea, fever and abdominal cramps 12 to 72 hours after infection. The illness usually lasts 4 to 7 days, and most persons recover without treatment. However, in some persons, the diarrhea may be so severe that the patient needs to be hospitalized. In these patients, the Salmonella infection may spread from the intestines to the blood stream, and then to other body sites. The elderly, infants, and those with impaired immune systems are more likely to have a severe illness. Campylobacteriosis78 is an infectious disease caused by bacteria of the genus Campylobacter. Most people who become ill with campylobacteriosis get diarrhea, cramping, abdominal pain and fever within two to five days after exposure to the organism. The diarrhea can be accompanied by nausea and vomiting. Most cases are associated with eating raw or undercooked poultry meat or from cross-contamination of other foods by these items. Outbreaks of Campylobacter have most often been associated with unpasteurized dairy products, contaminated water, poultry, and produce. The illness typically lasts about one week.
Table 138. Most Often Reported Diseases77 Reportable Disease (United Way of the Plains Service Area, 2012) Hepatitis C, past or present infection 531 45.3% Varicella* 106 9.1% Pertussis* 94 8.0% Salmonellosis* 90 7.7% Campylobacteriosis* 80 6.8% Subtotal 901 76.9% Other Reportable Diseases 270 23.1% Total Reportable Diseases 1,171 100.0% *Case report counts include those that meet the confirmed or probable case definitions.
For Hepatitis C, case report counts include only those that meet the confirmed case definition. For Varicella, Pertussis, Salmonellosis, and Campylobacteriosis, case report counts include those that meet the confirmed or probable case definitions.76
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 209 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Health Care and Health Access
Summary
Proposed national health care coverage is in a state of flux. Any long-term forecasts or program service designs rely on the validity of the assumptions on which they are built, due to the uncertainty of the future of health care coupled with the uncertainty of the local, state and national economies.
Shortages of health care professionals now and in future years would seem to point to a system in crisis. On a more positive note, dedicated providers in both the for-profit and safety-net health care system serve thousands of Kansans daily; and numerous programs provide area seniors with services they need to help them live independently in the community.
Now as never before, the next few years will be pivotal to the landscape of health care locally, statewide and nationally.
Page 210 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
Endnotes
Demographics
1a Population in Kansas, by County (2000-2008), Kansas Statistical Abstract 2008, 43rd Edition, Institute for Policy and Social Research, University of Kansas, http://www.ipsr.ku.edu/ksdata/ksah/ KSA43.pdf 1b Population in Kansas, by County (2000-2009), Kansas Statistical Abstract 2009, 44th Edition, Institute for Policy and Social Research, University of Kansas, http://www.ipsr.ku.edu/ksdata/ksah/KSA44.pdf 1c Population in Kansas, by Age and County (2010), Kansas Statistical Abstract 2010, 45th Edition, Institute for Policy and Social Research, University of Kansas, http://www.ipsr.ku.edu/ksdata/ksah/ KSA45.pdf 1d Population in Kansas, by Age and County (2011), Kansas Statistical Abstract 2011, 46th Edition, Institute for Policy and Social Research, University of Kansas, http://www.ipsr.ku.edu/ksdata/ksah/ KSA46.pdf 2 Land Area and Population Density in Kansas by County, 1990, 2000, 2010, Kansas Statistical Abstract 2011, Enhanced Online Edition, 46th Edition, Policy Research Institute, The University of Kansas, September 2012, pp. 447-448, http://www.ipsr.ku.edu/ksdata/ksah/KSA46.pdf 3 Population and Population Change in Kansas, by County, 1990, 2000 and 2010, and Percent Change, Kansas Statistical Abstract 2011, Enhanced Online Edition, 46th Edition, Policy Research Institute, The University of Kansas, September 2012, pp. 430-431. http://www.ipsr.ku.edu/ksdata/ ksah/KSA46.pdf 4 Percentage of Urban Population in Kansas Counties, Census Years 1930 - 2010, Kansas Statistical Abstract 2011, Enhanced Online Edition, 46th Edition, Policy Research Institute, The University of Kansas, September 2012, pp. 455-456. http://www.ipsr.ku.edu/ksdata/ksah/KSA46.pdf 5 Land Area in Kansas, by Urban and Rural Residence and County, 2010, Kansas Statistical Abstract 2010, Enhanced Online Edition, 45th Edition, Policy Research Institute, The University of Kansas. http://www.ipsr.ku.edu/ksdata/ksah/KSA45.pdf 6 Land Area in Kansas, by Urban and Rural Residence and County, 2010, Kansas Statistical Abstract 2011, Enhanced Online Edition, 46th Edition, Policy Research Institute, The University of Kansas, September 2012, pp. 450-451. http://www.ipsr.ku.edu/ksdata/ksah/KSA46.pdf 7 Land Area and Percent in Farms for Kansas, 1997, 2002, and 2007, Kansas Statistical Abstract 2011, Enhanced Online Edition, 46th Edition, Policy Research Institute, The University of Kansas, Sept. 2012, pp. 42-43. http://www.ipsr.ku.edu/ksdata/ksah/KSA46.pdf 8 Selected Farm, Crop, and Livestock Information for Kansas by District and County,2007, Kansas Statistical Abstract 2011, Enhanced Online Edition, 46th Edition, Policy Research Institute, The University of Kansas, September 2012, pp. 45-46. http://www.ipsr.ku.edu/ksdata/ksah/KSA46.pdf 9 Table DP-1. Profile of General Demographic Characteristics: 2000, Census 2000 Summary File 1 (SF1), U.S. Census Bureau, http://factfinder.census.gov 10 Table DP-1. Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics: 2010, Census 2010 Demographic Profile Summary File, U.S. Census Bureau, http://factfinder2.census.gov/ 11 Kansas Certified Population, County Population, Kansas Division of the Budget, certified 7-1-2012, http://www.budget.ks.gov/files/FY2013/DOB_Certified_KS_Population_07-01-2012.pdf 12 Kansas Population Projections, Kansas Division of the Budget, The Governor's Economic and Demographic Report 2006-2007, certified 7-1-2006, p. 58, http://www.budget.ks.gov/publications/ FY2008/2007_Economic_Demographic_Report.pdf
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 211 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
13 Kansas Population Projections, by County, by Age Cohort for 2010 through 2021, Appendix L, Kansas Division of the Budget, certified 7-1-2012, http://www.budget.ks.gov/publications/ FY2011/Kansas%20 Population%20Projections--2010-2021.pdf 14 Table DP-1. General Population and Housing Characteristics: 1990, 1990 Summary Tape File 1 (STF1), U.S. Census Bureau, http://factfinder.census.gov 15 Baby Boomers Envision Their Retirement: AARP Segmentation Analysis, Exec. Summary, Part I, American Association of Retired Persons, Feb 1999. http://research.aarp.org/econ/boomer_seg_1/ 16 Projections of the Population By Age and Sex of State: 1995 - 2025, U.S. Census Bureau, Population Division, Population Projections Branch, 2000; http://www.census.gov/population/projections/state/ stpjage 17 Guidance on the Presentation and Comparison of Race and Hispanic Origin Data June 12, 2003, U.S. Census Bureau, http://www.census.gov/population/www/socdemo/compraceho.html
Economic Outlook
1 The Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act Detailed Summary, Responsible Reform for the Middle Class, http://www.dpc.senate.gov/healthreformbill/healthbill04.pdf NOTE: Letter from Douglas W. Elmendorf, Director, Congressional Budget Office, to Speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives, March 20, 2010, http://www.cbo.gov/sites/default/files/cbofiles/ ftpdocs/113xx/doc11379/amendreconprop.pdf: “House Resolution 3590 (the Patient Protection and Affordable Care Act or PPACA),would, among other things, establish a mandate for most residents of the United States to obtain health insurance…The Congressional Budget Office and the Joint Committee on Taxation estimate that by 2019, the combined effect of enacting House Resolution 3590 and the reconciliation proposal would be to reduce the number of nonelderly people who are uninsured by about 32 million, leaving about 23 million nonelderly residents uninsured (about one-third of whom would be unauthorized immigrants). Under the legislation, the share of legal nonelderly residents with insurance coverage would rise from about 83 percent currently to about 94 percent.”
2 Doctors And AMA Split Over Contentious Issue Of ObamaCare, Sally C. Pipes is President, CEO, and Taube Fellow in Health Care Studies at the Pacific Research Institute, Forbes, September 26, 2011. 3 How the Health Care Law is Making a Difference for the People of Kansas, Information for You, The Health Care Law and You, March 18, 2013, http://www.healthcare.gov/law/information-for-you/ks.html 4 Rogue State: How Far-Right Fanatics Hijacked Kansas, Gun Nuts,Anti-Abortion Zealots and Free- Market Cultists are Leading the State to the Brink of Disaster, Rolling Stone, June 12, 2013, http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/rogue-state-how-far-right-fanatics-hijacked-kansas- 20130612#ixzz2Wh3Q1guB 5 2010 Kansas Legislative Session is in the Books, The Wichita Eagle, Sat, May 29, 2010, www. kansas.com/2010/05/29/1335478/2010-kansas-legislative-session.html 6 Roster, Senate and Roster, House, 2013-2014 Legislative Session, Kansas Legislature, www.kslegis lature.org/li/b2013_14/chamber/senate/roster and kslegislature.org/li/b2013_14/chamber/house/roster 7 Governor Sam Brownback, Kansas Office of the Governor, https://governor.ks.gov/about-the-office/ governor-sam-brownback 8 Primer, The Budget Process, Governor Brownback Released His Latest Budget Proposal on January 16, 2013, http://budget.ks.gov/publications/FY2014/Vol1/Budget_Process.pdf 9 Governor signs KPERS Omnibus Bill, Front Page News, Kansas Office of the Governor, June 7, 2013, https://governor.ks.gov/frontpagenews/2013/06/07/governor-signs-kpers-omnibus-bill
Page 212 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
10 Brownback Signs Two-Year Budget; Vetoes FY15 Corrections Budget, Front Page News, Kansas Office of the Governor, June 15, 2013, https://governor.ks.gov/frontpagenews/2013/06/15/brownback- signs-two-year-budget-vetoes-fy15-corrections-budget 11 Report: Kansas K-12 Spending Short of Requirements, The Wichita Eagle, June 18, 2013, www. kansas.com/2013/06/18/2852931/report-kansas-k-12-spending-short.html#storylink=cpy 12 Regents Approve Big Tuition Increases, Blame Legislature for Cutting University Funding, The Wichita Eagle, June 19, 2013, http://www.kansas.com/2013/06/19/2854805/regents-approve-big- tuition-increases.html#storylink=cpy 13 Kansas Restores State Arts Funding, but Matching Funds Won’t Return Until 2014, The Wichita Eagle, June 6, 2012, http://www.kansas.com/2012/06/06/2362636/kansas-restores-state-arts- funding.html#storylink=cpy 14 Kansas Medicaid Becomes Privatized, Could Expand, Kansas City Business Journal, December 28, 2012, http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/print-edition/2012/12/28/kansas-medicaid-becomes- privatized.html 15 Expanding Medicaid Will Cost Kansas, But How Much Depends on the Study, Kansas City Business Journal, February 15, 2013, http://www.bizjournals.com/kansascity/print-edition/2013/02/15/xpanding- medicaid-will-cost-kansas.html 16 Winners and Losers from the 2013 Legislative Session, Kansas City Star, June 8, 2013, http://www. kansascity.com/2013/06/08/4281037/winners-and-losers-from-the-2013.html#storylink=cpy 17 Gov. Brownback Signs Kansas Income Tax Cut Bill, The Wichita Eagle, June 13, 2013, http://www. kansas.com/2013/06/13/2846532/gov-brownback-signs-kansas-income.html#storylink=cpy 18 Brownback Signs Kansas Tax Measure, The Kansas City Star, June 13, 2013, http://www.kansascity. com/2013/06/13/4290891/brownback-signs-tax-bill.html#storylink=cpy 19 Experts: Business Community Flexed its Political Muscle During Casino Vote, Wichita Business Journal, August 12, 2007, http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/stories/2007/08/13/story1.html 20 2007 Annual Report, Kansas Racing and Gaming Commission, http://krgc.ks.gov/annual-reports.html 21 2010 Annual Report, Kansas Racing and Gaming Commission, http://krgc.ks.gov/annual-reports.html 22 2008 Annual Report, Kansas Racing and Gaming Commission, http://krgc.ks.gov/annual-reports.html 23 2009 Annual Report, Kansas Racing and Gaming Commission, http://krgc.ks.gov/annual-reports.html 24 Casino Decision: It's Mulvane, Again, The Wichita Eagle, March 30, 2012, http://www.kansas.com/ 2010/12/15/1633906/no-decision-today.html 25 2012 Annual Report, Kansas Racing and Gaming Commission, http://krgc.ks.gov/annual-reports.html 26 2011 Annual Report, Kansas Racing and Gaming Commission, http://krgc.ks.gov/annual-reports.html 27 Boeing in Brief, About Us, Boeing, http://www.boeing.com/boeing/ 28 Boeing Wichita History, Kansas Aviation Legacy, http://www.wingsoverkansas.com/legacy/article. asp?id=375 29 Boeing Set to End 85-year History with Wichita, Planemaker to Close South Wichita Facility by 2013, The Wichita Eagle, January 4, 2012, http://www.kansas.com/2012/01/04/2162092/boeing-to-close- wichita-plant.html#storylink=cpy 30 Boeing to Close Wichita Facility by the End of 2013, Boeing News Release, January 4, 2012, http://boeing.mediaroom.com/ 31 Kansas Department of Labor, Labor Market Information Services, U.S. Census Bureau, OnTheMap Application and LEHD Origin-Destination Employment Statistics, July 11, 2012.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 213 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
32 Labor Force Employment, Not Seasonally Adjusted, Labor Force Employment and Unemployment (LAUS),Labor Force Data, Income and Wages, Kansas Labor Information Center, https://klic.dol.ks.gov/analyzer/ 33 Employers, Book of Lists, Wichita Business Journal, 2009, Volume 24, Number 48, p. 80, originally published January 9, 2009. 2012, Volume 26, Number 51, p. 44, originally published September 21, 2001. 34 Layoff Numbers, April 2012 Labor Report, South Central Kansas - Local Area IV (Butler, Cowley, Harper, Kingman, Sedgwick and Sumner Counties), May 19, 2012, Workforce Alliance of South Central Kansas, http://www.workforce-ks.com/Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=2248 35 2012 Annual Report, Workforce Alliance of South Central Kansas, http://www.workforce-ks.com/ Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=3251 36 Email, Linda Sorrell/Marcy Hall, June 13, 2013, Workforce Alliance of South Central Kansas 37 Wichita’s Economic Outlook, 2009 Review and 2010 Forecast, Center for Economic Development and Business Research, W. Frank Barton School of Business, Wichita State University, October 1, 2009, http://webfiles.wichita.edu/cedbr/2010_Wichita_Forecast_Article_FINAL.pdf 38 Textron Cancels Cessna Columbus Program, Wichita Business Journal, posted July 10, 2009; modified July 13, 2009, http://wichita.bizjournals.com/wichita/stories/2009/07/06/daily54.html 39 Textron: Cessna Citation Columbus Program Killed, KAKE News, KAKE Television - Channel 10, http://www.kake.com/home/ headlines/50492562.html, article pulled Sept. 1, 2009. 40 Boeing Defense Unit Realigns for Growth, Expansion Into New Markets, News Release, January 7, 2010; http://boeing.mediaroom.com/index.php?s=43&item=1024 41 70 Workers Let Go at Hawker Beechcraft, The Wichita Eagle, posted January 13, 2010, http://www kansas.com 42 More Layoffs at 3 Aircraft Companies, The Wichita Eagle, posted January 27, 2010, http://www kansas.com /business/aviation/story/1154439.html 43 About Us, History, Beechcraft, http://www.beechcraft.com/about_us/history/ 44 Bombardier Learjet to Add Jobs in Wichita, The Wichita Eagle, July 31, 2010, http://www.kansas.com/ 2010/07/31/1426799/learjet-to-add-jobs-in-wichita.html 45 Cessna and NetJets Sign Purchase Agreement for Up to 150 Citation Latitude Business Jets, News Release, Cessna, June 6, 2012, http://www.cessna.com/company-info/newsroom-and- events/cessna-and-netjets-sign-purchase-agreement-for-up-to-150-citation-latitude-business-jets 46 Spirit AeroSystems, Inc. Sustains Weather Related Damage to Wichita, Kansas Facility, News Release, Spirit AeroSystems, April 16, 2012, http://www.spiritaero.com/investor.aspx?baseID= 1117&id=5&p=irol-news%26amp%3bnyo%3d0 47 Spirit AeroSystems Returns to Full Operations, News Release, Spirit AeroSystems, April 24, 2012, http://www.spiritaero.com/investor.aspx?baseID=1117&id=5&p=irol-news%26amp%3bnyo%3d0 48 Court Approves Hawker Beechcraft’s Request to Stay Open During Bankruptcy, The Wichita Eagle, May 4, 2012, http://www.kansas.com/2012/05/04/2323048/court-approves-hawker- beechcrafts.html#storylink=cpy 49 Spirit AeroSystems Holdings, Inc. Reports First Quarter 2012 Financial Results; Reports Revenues of $1.266 billion and Fully Diluted EPS of $0.52 Per Share, News Release, Spirit Aerosystems, May 3, 2012, http://www.spiritaero.com/investor.aspx?baseID=1117&id=5&p=irol-news%26amp%3bnyo% 3d0
Page 214 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
50 Cessna and NetJets Sign Purchase Agreement for Up to 150 Citation Latitude Business Jets, News Release, Cessna, June 6, 2012, http://www.cessna.com/company-info/newsroom-and- events/cessna-and-netjets-sign-purchase-agreement-for-up-to-150-citation-latitude-business-jets 51 Hawker Beechcraft Cleared for Exclusive Negotiations with Superior Aviation Beijing, The Wichita Eagle, July 17, 2012, Read more here: http://www.kansas.com/2012/07/17/2411360/hawker- beechcraft-cleared-for.html#storylink=cpy 52 Hawker Beech, Flying Solo Now, Ponders Shedding Jets, Aviation International News, Zenith Jet, October 19, 2012, http://www.zenithjet.com/hawker-beech-flying-solo-now-ponders-shedding-jets/ 53 Cessna and CAIGA Sign Contract for Joint Venture to Assemble and Sell Utility Turboprops in China, News Release, Cessna, November 27, 2012, http://www.cessna.com/company-info/newsroom-and- events/cessna-and-caiga-sign-contract-for-joint-venture-to-assemble-and-sell-utility-turboprops-in- china 54 Cessna and CAIGA Sign Contract for Joint Venture to Assemble and Sell Citation XLS+ Business Jets in China, Cessna, November 14, 2012, http://www.cessna.com/company-info/newsroom-and- events/cessna-and-caiga-sign-contract-for-joint-venture-to-assemble-and-sell-citation-xls-business- jets 55 VistaJet Thinks Global with $7.8 Billion Bombardier Business Aircraft Order, Press Releases, Bombardier, November 27, 2012 56 Cessna Features Five Charities as Part of 2013 Discover Flying Challenge, News Release, Cessna Aircraft Company, June 14, 2013, http://www.cessna.com/company-info/newsroom-and- events/cessna-features-five-charities-as-part-of-2013-discover-flying-challenge 57 Beechcraft Emerges from Bankruptcy with New Focus, The Wichita Eagle, February 19, 2013, http://www.kansas.com/2013/02/19/2681658/beechcraft-emerges-from-bankruptcy.html#storylink=cpy 58 Spirit AeroSystems Holdings, Inc. Reports First Quarter 2013 Financial Results; Reports Revenues of $1.442 billion and EPS of $0.57, News Release, Spirit Aerosystems, May 2, 2013, http://www.spirit aero.com/investor.aspx?baseID=1117&id=5&p=irol-news%26amp%3bnyo%3d0. 59 Bombardier Launches New Midsize Business Jet, Challenger 350, The Wichita Eagle, May 20, 2013, http://www.kansas.com/2013/05/20/2810454/bombardier-launches-new-midsize.html#storylink=cpy 60 VistaJet Places Order for Up to 40 Bombardier Business Jets, Press Release, Paris, Bombardier, June 18, 2013, http://www.bombardier.com/en/corporate/media-centre/press-releases/details?docID= 0901260d802c56f0. 61 Email, Mario Cervantes, AFL-CIO Community Services Liaison, Department of Labor Participation, United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas, sent January 26, 2010. 62 Machinists Reject Spirit Contract but Don't Have Votes to Strike, The Wichita Eagle, June 26, 2010, http://www.kansas.com/2010/06/25/1377953/machinists-reject-spirit-contract.html 63 Hawker Beechcraft, Machinists Open Contract Talks, The Wichita Eagle, August 19, 2010, http://www.kansas.com/2010/08/19/1453982/hawker-beechcraft-machinists-open.html 64 Hawker Beechcraft MachinistsVote Against Contract, The Olympian, McClatchy Newspapers, October 16, 2010, http://www.theolympian.com/2010/10/16/1405951/hawker-beechcraft-machinists- vote.html 65 Cessna, Machinists Open Talks Today, The Wichita Eagle, August 20, 2010, http://www.kansas.com/ 2010/08/20/1454668/cessna-machinists-open-talks-today.html 66 Cessna Machinists Won’t Strike, KAKE-TV 12, KAKE.com, September 18, 2010, http://www.kake. com/aviation/headlines/103206704.html 67 Effects Bargaining Law and Legal Definition, Definitions, U.S. Legal, http://definitions.uslegal.com/ e/effects-bargaining/
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 215 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
68 Email, Mario Cervantes, AFL-CIO Community Services Liaison, Department of Labor Participation, United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas, sent June 18, 2013. 69 Postal Service to Close Wichita Encoding Center, Eliminating 380 jobs, The Wichita Eagle, February 20, 2013, http://www.kansas.com/2013/02/20/2683726/postal-service-to-close- wichita.html#storylink=cpy 70 Machinists Negotiators Recommend Rejection of Learjet Labor Contract and a Strike, The Wichita Eagle, October 4, 2012, http://blogs.kansas.com/aviation/2012/10/04/machinists-negotiators- recommend-rejection-of-learjet-labor-contract-and-a-strike/##storylink=cpy 71 Machinists Vote to Strike at Bombardier Learjet, The Wichita Eagle, Oct. 6, 2012, http://www.kansas. com/2012/10/06/2517127/machinists-vote-to-strike-at-bombardier.html##storylink=cpy 72 Machinists Vote to Accept Bombardier Learjet Contract Offer, Ending Strike, The Wichita Eagle, November 10, 2012, http://www.kansas.com/2012/11/11/2563546/machinists-vote-on-bombardier. html#storylink=cpy 73 Improved Agreement Ends Strike at Bombardier Learjet, 21st Century Labor Union, International Association of Machinists and Aerospace Workers, November 13, 2012, http://www.goiam.org/index. php/imail/latest/10785-improved-agreement-ends-strike-at-bombardier-learjet 74 Machinists at Bombardier Learjet Accept Contract, Ending Strike, Wichita Business Journal, November 10, 2012, http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/news/2012/11/10/machinists-at-bombardier- learjet.html 75 Manufacturing Firms, Book of Lists, Wichita Business Journal, 2008 Book of Lists, Volume 23, Number 48, p. 17; list originally published December 7, 2007(data for 2007); 2009 Book of Lists: Volume 24, Number 48, p. 15, list originally published December 5, 2008 (data for 2008); 2010 Book of Lists Volume 25, Number 50 (data for 2009); 2011 Book of Lists, Volume 26, Number 51, p. 69, list originally published December 3, 2010 (data for 2010); and 2012 Book of Lists, Volume 26, Number 51, p. 68, list originally published December 2, 2011 (data for 2011). 76 Aviation Subcontractors, Book of Lists, Wichita Business Journal, 2009 Book of Lists: Volume 24, Number 48, p. 33, list originally published September 25, 2009; 2011 Book of Lists, Volume 26, Number 51, p. 19, list originally published September 30, 2011; and 2012 Book of Lists, Volume 26, Number 51, p. 17, list originally published September 28, 2012. 77 Current Employment Statistics, Industry Data, Industry Data, Employment and Wage Data, Historical Data Analysis, Kansas Labor Information Center, Kansas Department of Labor, http://www.dol.ks. gov/LMIS/Default.aspx 78 Transportation Equipment Manufacturing Subsector , Industries by Sector, Industry Summary, Industry Profile, Labor Market Information Services, Kansas Department of Labor, U.S. Department of Employment and Training, Kansas Labor Information Center, http://www.dol.ks.gov/LMIS/Default. aspx 79 Table B19001, Household Income in the Past 12 Months (in 2011 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars), Universe: Households, 2007 2011 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, American Community Survey U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, http://factfinder2. census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?fpt=table 80 Labor Force Employment, Not Seasonally Adjusted, Labor Force Employment and Unemployment (LAUS),Labor Force Data, Income and Wages, Kansas Labor Information Center, https://klic.dol. ks.gov/analyzer/ 81 Labor Force Estimates by Sex and Minority Status, 2010 Kansas Affirmative Action Report, Labor Market Information Services, Kansas Department of Labor, http://www.dol.ks.gov/Files/PDF/2010 KansasAffirmAction.pdf
Page 216 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
82 Agency History, Agency Information, Kansas Department for Children and Families, State of Kansas, http://www.dcf.ks.gov/Agency/Pages/DCF-History.aspx 83 DCF Regional Map, email: Diane Bidwell, LSCSW; Regional Director; Wichita Region; Kansas Department for Children and Families, State of Kansas, August 8, 2012. 84 Struggle for Self-Sufficiency: Impact of Welfare Reform on Families with Children in Kansas, Kansas Action for Children, August 2000. 85 Cash Assistance in Transition: The Story of 13 States, Sheila Zedlewski, et. al., The Urban Institute. Washington, C.D., 1998. 86 Struggle for Self-Sufficiency: Impact of Welfare Reform on Families with Children in Kansas, Kansas Action for Children, August 2000. 87 Cash Assistance, Successful Families Program – TANF, Economic and Employment Services, Family Services Division, Department for Children and Families, State of Kansas, http://www.dcf.ks gov/services/ees/Pages/Cash/TAF.aspx 88 Email, Diane Bidwell, Regional Director, Wichita Region, Department for Children and Families, Wichita, Kansas, sent June 20, 2013. 89 County Packets, Department for Children and Families, State of Kansas, http://www.dcf. ks.gov/ Agency/Pages/CountyPackets/ 90 Public Assistance Report, Fiscal Years 2010, 2011, 2012 and 2013, Agency Reports, Economic and Employment Services, Family Services Division, Department for Children and Families, State of Kansas, http://www.dcf.ks.gov/services/ees/Pages/EESreports.aspx 91 Food Assistance, Economic and Employment Services, Family Services Division, Department for Children and Families, State of Kansas, http://www.dcf.ks.gov/services/ees/Pages/Food/Food Assistance.aspx 92 Child Care Subsidy, Economic and Employment Services, Family Services Division, Department for Children and Families, State of Kansas, http://www.dcf.ks.gov/services/ees/Pages/Child_Care/Child CareSubsidy.aspx 93 Table S-1701, Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months, 2007-2011 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, U.S. Census Bureau, http://factfinder2.census.gov 94 2013 Poverty Guidelines for the 48 Contiguous States and the District of Columbia, Annual Update of the HHS Poverty Guidelines, A Notice by the Health and Human Services Department; effective Date: January 24, 2013, https://www.federalregister.gov/articles/2013/01/24/2013-01422/annual-update-of- the-hhs-poverty-guidelines#t-1 95 Underemployment, Bureau of Labor Statistics, U.S. Department of Labor, http://www.bls.gov/cps/ cps_faq.htm 96 Annual Giving Report Released, Philanthropy Journal, Institute for Nonprofits at North Carolina State University June 21, 2012, http://www.philanthropyjournal.org/news/top-stories/annual-giving-report- released 97 Charitable Giving Grew in 2012, Albeit Modestly, Reutgers, June 18, 2013, http://www.reuters.com/ article/2013/06/18/us-usa-charity-idUSBRE95H02W20130618 98 U.S. Charitable Giving Estimated to be $307.65 Billion in 2008, Giving USA 2009, The Annual Report on Philanthropy for the Year 2008, 54th Annual Issue, Giving Institute, (formerly the American Association of Fundraising Council Trust for Philanthropy), Indianapolis, IN, http://www.aafrc.org/ press_releases/gusa/GivingReaches300billion.pdf 99 Highlights, Giving USA 2013, The Annual Report of Philanthropy in America, Researched and written by Lilly Family School of Philanthropy, Indiana University, June 18, 2013
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 217 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
100 Bush Tax Cuts, Definition and Explanation, Financial Dictionary, Investopedia US, A Division of ValueClick, Inc., http://www.investopedia.com/terms/b/bush-tax-cuts.asp 101 The Sequester: Absolutely Everything You Could Possibly Need to Know, in One FAQ; The Washington Post, March 1, 2013, http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/02/20/ the-sequester-absolutely-everything-you-could-possibly-need-to-know-in-one-faq/ 102 White House Estimates of State-by-State Impacts of Sequestration, Politics, The Washington Post, http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/special/politics/sequestration-state-impact/ 103 Obamacare ‘Employer Mandate’ Delayed Until 2015, McClatchy Washington Bureau, Tony Pugh, Tuesday, July 2, 2013, http://www.kansas.com/2013/07/02/2873082/obamacare-employer-mandate- delayed.html#storylink=cpy 104 Kansas Lottery Approves Merger of Gaming Companies, Fred Mann, The Wichita Eagle, November 14, 2012, http://www.kansas.com/2012/11/14/2568649/kansas-lottery-approves- merger.html#storylink=cpy 105 Kansas Panel Grants Final Approval to Boyd Gaming-Peninsula Merger, Wichita Business Journal, November 16, 2012, http://www.bizjournals.com/wichita/blog/2012/11/kansas-panel-grants-final- approval-to.html
Education
1 The Value of Education, Who We Are, Global Partnership for Education, http://www.globalpartner ship.org/who-we-are/the-value-of-education/ 2 No Child Left Behind, Facts and Terms Every Parent Should Know, U.S. Department of Education, September 19, 2005, http://www.ed.gov/nclb/overview/intro/parents/parentfacts.html 3 Adequate Yearly Progress, Kansas State Department of Education, http://www.ksde.org/Defaultaspx? tabid=403 4 Waivers, No Child Left Behind, Flexibility and Waivers, Elementary and Secondary Education, U.S. Department of Education, http://www2.ed.gov/nclb/freedom/local/flexibility/index.html 5 Letter, Kansas Waiver Request, Kansas Governor Sam Brownback to federal Secretary of Education Anne Duncan, August 17, 2011, http://www2.ed.gov/policy/speced/guid/idea/monitor/kswaiverrequest .pdf 6 Obama Administration Approves Seven More NCLB Flexibility Requests - 32 States and DC Now Approved for Waivers; Five States Currently Under Review: Other States Can Still Apply, Press Release, July 19, 2012, U.S. Department of Education, http://www.ed.gov/news/press- releases/obama-administration-approves-seven-more-nclb-flexibility-requests-32-states-and 7 A Letter from The President, The Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, A Blueprint for Reform, Elementary and Secondary Education, U.S. Department of Education, http://www2.ed.gov/policy/elsec/leg/blueprint/publication_pg2.html#part2 8 The Reauthorization of the Elementary and Secondary Education Act, A Blueprint for Reform, Elementary and Secondary Education, U.S. Department of Education, http://www2.ed.gov/ policy/elsec/leg/blueprint/publicationtoc.html 9 Headcount Enrollment by Grade, Race and Gender, Kansas State Department of Education, K-12 School Reports, County, from the KS Individual Data on Students (KIDS) System (2008-2009 and later), http://www.ksbe.state.ks.us 10 Nutrition Services, Wichita Public Schools, USD 259, http://nutrition.usd259.org/modules/groups/ group_pages.phtml?gid=1505378&nid=127930&sessionid=7958d89dc62120a985681d3ed1167bd 11 Application Instructions, Application for Free and Reduced Price Meal Benefits, Wichita Public Schools 2012- 2013, http://nutrition.usd259.org/modules/groups/homepagefiles/gwp/1521178/15
Page 218 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
05378/ File/Free%20and%20Reduced%20Documents/combined%201-6%20for%20website.pdf? sessionid =6afef4fdb34b982386631e233edc20c7 12 Nutrition Services, Federal Income Chart for Child Nutrition Program Benefits, Effective from July 1, 2012 to June 30, 2013, Wichita Public Schools, USD 259, http://nutrition.usd259.org/modules/groups/ group_pages.phtml?gid=1505378&nid=127327&sessionid=6afef4fdb34b982386631e233edc20c7 13 School Attendance, Curriculum and Accreditation, K.S.A. Education Statute 72-1111, https://svapp 15586.ksde.org/regs_statutes/Stat_Reg_Results.aspx?Statute=72-1111&Regulation=0 14 2012-2013 Kansas Graduation and Dropout Information Handbook, Kansas State Department of Education, http://www.ksde.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=HsWrIOsqmPM%3d&tabid=4606&mid =10955 15 Dropouts by Grade, Race and Gender, from the KS Individual Data on Students (KIDS) System, Kansas State Department of Education, http://svapp15586.ksde.org/k12/k12.aspx. 16 School Enrollment, Grades PreK - 12, Catholic School Office, Diocese of Wichita, Wichita, Kansas, email dated June 5, 2013. 17 Statistics About Non-Public Education In The United States, Office Of Non-Public Education, Office Of Innovation And Improvement, U.S. Department Of Education, http://www.Ed.Gov/About/Offices/ List/Oii/ Nonpublic/Statistics.Html#Private 18 1.1 Million Homeschooled Students in the United States in 2003, U.S. Department of Education, National Center for Education Statistics (NCES), Washington, D.C., 2004, http://www.ed.gov/nclb/ choice schools/onpefacts.html 19 2.04 Million Homeschool Students in the United States in 2010, National Home Education Research Institute, Brian D. Ray, PhD, January 3, 2011, http://nheri.org/HomeschoolPopulationReport2010.pdf 20 Home Schooling in Kansas, What You Need to Know; Kansas Department of Education, http://www. ksde.org/Default.aspx?tabid=1688 21 Homeschooling in Kansas, 2012-2013 Fact Sheet, Department of Education, State of Kansas, Revised August 23, 2012, http://www.ksde.org/LinkClick.aspx?fileticket=d3sYm3aiCzU%3d&tabid =3784&mid=8981 22 Email message, January 14, 2010, Donna Matthis, Title Programs & Services, Kansas State Department of Education. 23 Kansas Charter Schools, Kansas State Department of Education, http://www.ksde.org/Default.aspx? tabid=449 24 2012-2013 Charter Schools, Kansas State Department of Education, http://www.ksde.org/Portals/0/ Charter%20Schools/Charter%20Schools%2012-13%20(2).pdf 25 Virtual Schools, Kansas Department of Education, http://www.ksde.org/Default.aspx?tabid=455 26 Kansas Statute 72-3712; Article 37: Technology Education And Virtual Schools; Chapter 72: Schools. Kansas Statutes Annotated (K.S.A.), http://kansasstatutes.lesterama.org/Chapter_72/Article_37/ 27 Virtual School/Program List 2012-2013, Current Virtual Schools and Programs, Virtual School/ Program Information, Kansas Department of Education, http://www.ksde.org/ LinkClick.aspx?file ticket=0nolU_iupMk%3d&tabid=455&mid=6785 28 Importance of College Education, Why it is Important to go to College, College View, December 2009, http://www.collegeview.com/importance_of_college_education.html 29 Table I, State Universities and Washburn, Full/Part-time and Resident/Nonresident Headcount Enrollment and Enrollment FTE Totals, Fall 2012 Enrollment Reports, KHEER, Data Collections, Home, Data, Research & Planning, The Kansas Board of Regents, http://data.kansasregents.org/ public_doc/data_collections/KHEER/report2012fa/State_Universities/univT1FA2012.html
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 219 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
30 Table I, Public Two-Year Community Colleges, Full/Part-time and Resident/Nonresident Headcount Enrollment and Enrollment FTE Totals, Fall 2012 , Enrollment Reports, KHEER, Data Collections, Home, Data, Research & Planning, The Kansas Board of Regents, Data, Research & Planning, The Kansas Board of Regents, http://data.kansasregents.org/public_doc/data_collections/KHEER/report 2012fa/ Community_Colleges/CCT1FA2012.html 31 Table I, Independent Colleges and Universities, Full/Part-time and Resident/Nonresident Headcount Enrollment and Enrollment FTE Totals, Fall 2012 Enrollment Reports, KHEER, Data Collections, Home, Data, Research & Planning, The Kansas Board of Regents, Data, Research & Planning, The Kansas Board of Regents, http://data.kansasregents.org/public_doc/data_collections/ KHEER/report2012fa/Independent/IndependentT1FA2012.html 32 Table DP02 - Selected Social Characteristics in the United States, 2007-2011 American Community Survey 4-year Estimates, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, D.C., http://factfinder2.census.gov/ 33 Help Wanted: Projections of Jobs and Education Requirements Through 2018, Center on Education and the Workforce, Georgetown Public Policy Institute, Georgetown University, June 2010, http://cew.georgetown.edu/jobs2018/ 34 State-Level Analysis (Kansas), Help Wanted: Projections of Jobs and Education Requirements Through 2018, Center on Education and the Workforce, Georgetown Public Policy Institute, Georgetown University, June 2010, http://www9.georgetown.edu/grad/gppi/hpi/cew/pdfs/kansas.pdf 35 Annual Earnings of Young Adults (Indicator 49-2012), The Condition of Education, 2012, National Center for Education Statistics, Institute for Education Sciences, http://nces.ed.gov/programs/coe/ indicator_eya.asp 36 Table B20004: Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months (in 2001 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars) by Sex by Educational Attainment for the Population 25 Years and Over (with earnings) , 5-Year Estimates, American Community Survey, 2007-2011, http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/ pages/productview.xhtml ?fpt=table 37 Employment Outcomes of Young Adults (Indicator 18-2011), The Condition of Education, 2011, National Center for Education Statistics, Institute for Education Sciences, http://nces.ed.gov/programs /coe/indicator_eya.asp 38 Education pays … Employment Projections, Current Population Survey, 2012, Bureau of Labor Statistics, United States Department of Labor, http://www.bls.gov/emp/ep_chart_001.htm 39 National Center for Aviation Training (NCAT), Sedgwick County Fact Sheet, Sedgwick County Communications and Community Initiatives, Kansas, http://www.docstoc.com/docs/40376443/ National-Center-for-Aviation-Training 40 National Center for Aviation Training, http://ncatkansas.org/ 41 Technical Education, Community Development, 2013 Adopted Budget, Sedgwick County, page 641. http://www.sedgwickcounty.org/finance/Budget/2013_Budget/adopted/community_development/techn ical_education.pdf 42 Wichita Area Technical College, Admission, The College, May 2013, http://watc.edu/admissions/ college-catalog/the-college/ 43 Wichita Area Technical College, Campuses, May 2013, http://watc.edu/campuses/ 44 Wichita Area Technical College, Programs of Study, May 2013, http://watc.edu/admissions/programs- of-study/ 45 Community and Technical Colleges, Book of Lists, Wichita Business Journal, 2008, Volume 23, Number 48, p. 36, published October 17, 2008; 2009, Volume 24, Number 48, p. 35, published October 16, 2009.2010, Volume 25, Number 50, p. 35, published December 10, 2010; 2011, Volume 26, Number 51, p. 38, published December 16, 2011; and 2012, Volume 26, Number 51, p. 34, originally published December 14, 2012.
Page 220 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
46 Workforce Alliance of South Central Kansas, Wichita Workforce Center, http://www.workforce-ks.com 47 2012 Annual Report, Workforce Alliance of South Central Kansas, http://www.workforce-ks.com/ Modules/ShowDocument.aspx?documentid=3251 48 Summary of Proceedings, Kansas Career Pathways Institute, Wichita Hyatt Regency Hotel, April 17- 18, 2012 , http://www.workforce-ks.com/modules/showdocument.aspx?documentid=2310 49 2012 Grant Summaries, Workforce Alliance of South Central Kansas, last updated: April 4, 2012; email, May 13, 2013. 50 The Future of Manufacturing, GM, and American Workers (Part I), Robert Reich, Friday, May 29, 2009, http://robertreich.org/post/257310389/the-future-of-manufacturing-gm-and-american-workers 51 Joe Ontjes, Vice President, Marketing & Student Services, Wichita Area Technical College, email, May 28, 2013.
Crime
1 About the Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/ aboutucrmain. (accessed May 1, 2013) 2 Offense Information, Uniform Crime Reporting, Frequently Asked Questions, Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/frequently-asked- questions/ucr_faqs 3 Offense Definitions, Crime in the United States, 2011, Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.- 2011/offense-definitions 4 Violent Crime, Data Collection, Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, http://www.fbi. gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/violent-crime/violent-crime 5 Violent Crime, Overview, Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, http://www.fbi. gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/violent-crime/violent-crime 6 Crime in the United States 2008, Table 2: Crime in the United States by Community Type, 2008, Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2008/data/ table_02.html 7 Crime in the United States 2007, Table 2: Crime in the United States by Community Type, 2007, Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2007/data/ table_02.html 8 Crime in the United States 2011, 2011 Crime Clock Statistics, Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/ offenses-known-to-law-enforcement/crime-clock (Accessed May 1, 2013) 9 Crime in the United States, by State 2008, Table 5: Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2008/data/table_05.html 10 Crime in the United States, by State 2009, Table 5: Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, http://www2.fbi.gov/ucr/cius2009/data/table_05.html 11 Crime in the United States, by State 2010, Table 5: Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.- 2010/tables/10tbl05.xls 12 Crime in the United States, by State 2011, Table 5: Department of Justice, Federal Bureau of Investigation, http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.- 2011/tables/table-5.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 221 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
13 Table CP-O5, ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates: Kansas and Sedgwick County, 2007-2011 American Community Survey, U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, http://www. census.gov 14 Data Profile: ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates: Kansas and Sedgwick County, 2005-2009 American Community Survey, U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey, http://www. census.gov 15 Reported Juvenile Arrests by Agency, 2008, Kansas Bureau of Investigation, Kansas Incident Based Reporting System (KIBRS), http://www.accesskansas.org/kbi/stats/docs/pdf/Juvenile%20Arrests %202008.pdf 16 Reported Juvenile Arrests by Agency, 2011, Kansas Bureau of Investigation, Kansas Incident Based Reporting System (KIBRS),http://www.accesskansas.org/kbi/stats/docs/pdf/2011%20Juvenile %20Arrests.pdf 17 Population in Kansas, by Age and County (2011), Kansas Statistical Abstract 2011, 46th Edition, Institute for Policy and Social Research, University of Kansas, http://www.ipsr.ku.edu/ksdata/ksah/ KSA46.pdf 18 Selected Causes of Death by County of Residence, Kansas, Kansas Annual Summary of Vital Statistics, Office of Health Care Information, Kansas Department of Health and Environment. http://www.kdheks.gov/hci/annsumm.html 19 Reported Crime Offenses, 2011 Crime Index, Kansas Bureau of Investigation, Topeka, Kansas, http://www.accesskansas.org/kbi/stats/docs/pdf/Crime%20Index%202011.pdf 20 Reported Crime Offenses, 2008 Crime Index, Kansas Bureau of Investigation, Topeka, Kansas, http://www.accesskansas.org/kbi/stats/docs/pdf/Crime%20Index%202008.pdf 21 Table 6, Crime in the United States by Metropolitan Statistical Area (2011), Criminal Justice Information Services Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Department of Justice, http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/tables/table-6 22 Find a County, About Counties, National Association of Counties, http://www.naco.org/Template.cfm? Section=About_Counties 23 Caution Against Ranking, Criminal Justice Information Services Division, Federal Bureau of Investigation, U.S. Department of Justice, http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the- u.s/2011/crime-in-the-u.s.-2011/caution-against-ranking. 24 Crime Statistics, Field Services, Patrol West, Beat 15, 2008 to 2012 Counts, City of Wichita, Wichita Police Department, http://www.wichita.gov/Government/Departments/WPD/Pages/default.aspx 25 Counts of Arrests by Age Group and Offense, Information Services Unit, Police Department, City of Wichita, (2009-2012) May 2013. 28 Wichita Police Department Crime Statistics, Class 1 Summary, Reporting Month of December, 2012; December 2011; December 2010; and December 2009; Wichita Police Department, City of Wichita. 29 Gang Awareness PowerPoint Presentation, Street Gangs, Community Awareness, Gang/Felony Assault Section, Wichita Police Department, http://www.wichita.gov/NR/rdonlyres/EDE35A9E-969B- 494C-96F6-D69981003350/0/GangTrainingFaithBase.ppt#1390,1, Community Awareness 30 Crime and Gang Incident Counts, 2013, Captain Russell Leeds, presentation to West Wichita Promise Neighborhoods Coalition, April 25, 2013, Wichita Police Department. 31 Violent Crimes Against Children, Federal Bureau of Investigation, http://www.fbi.gov/about- us/investigate/vc_majorthefts/cac 32 Exploited & Missing Child Unit, Investigations, Wichita Police Department, http://www.wichita.gov/ Government/Departments/WPD/Pages/EMCU.aspx
Page 222 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
33 Wichita-Sedgwick County Exploited and Missing Child Unit, http://www.sedgwickcounty.org/emcu/ 34 Amber Alert Program, National Center for Missing & Exploited Children, http://www.missingkids.com/ Amber 35 A Parent's Guide to Internet Safety, http://www.sedgwickcounty.org/EMCU/parent_guide.htm 36 Social Networks Account for 20% of Time Spent Online, Wall Street Journal, Tech Europe, May 3, 2013, http://blogs.wsj.com/tech-europe/2011/12/22/social-networks-account-for-20-of-time-spent- online/ 37 Facebook, http://www.facebook.com/full_data_use_policy#onfb 38 About, Twitter, https://twitter.com/about 39 Security at Twitter, Twitter, https://twitter.com/about/security 40 Pining 101, Pinterest, http://about.pinterest.com/terms/ 41 Report: Time Spent on Social Networks, Blogs Triples in Past Year, Digital Media Wire, New York, September 24, 2009 - 9:25am, http://www.dmwmedia.com/news/2009/09/24/report:-time-spent- social-networks,-blogs-triples-past-year 42 Terms, Pinterest, http://about.pinterest.com/terms/ 43 Help, Help Your Teens Play It Safe, Safety and You, Parents, Facebook, http://www.facebook.com/ safety/groups/parents/ 44 About CCIPS (Computer Crime and Intellectual Property Section), U.S. Department of Justice, http://www.cybercrime.gov/ccips.html 45 Consumer Sentinel Network Data Book for January – December 2012, Federal Trade Commission, February 2013, http://ftc.gov/sentinel/reports/sentinel-annual-reports/sentinel-cy2012.pdf 46 Consumer Sentinel Network Data Book for January – December 2012, Federal Trade Commission, February 2013, http://ftc.gov/sentinel/reports/sentinel-annual-reports/sentinel-cy2012.pdf 47 Consumer Sentinel Network Data Book for January – December 2011, Federal Trade Commission, 2012, http://ftc.gov/sentinel/reports/sentinel-annual-reports/sentinel-cy2011.pdf 48 Consumer Sentinel Network Data Book for January – December 2010, Federal Trade Commission, 2011, http://ftc.gov/sentinel/reports/sentinel-annual-reports/sentinel-cy2010.pdf 49 Identity Theft Complaints, Consumer Sentinel Network State Complaint Rates, January 1 – December 31, 2012, Consumer Sentinel Network Data Book for January – December 2012, Federal Trade Commission, February 2013, http://ftc.gov/sentinel/reports/sentinel-annual-reports/sentinel- cy2012.pdf 50 Elder Abuse, Office of Justice Programs, U.S. Department of Justice, http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/ topics/crime/elder-abuse/welcome.htm 51 Elder Maltreatment Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, http://www.cdc.gov/ Features/ElderAbuse/. 52 Why is a Consistent Definition Important?, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, http://www. cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/eldermaltreatment/definitions.html 53 Elder Maltreatment: Definition, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, http://www.cdc.gov/ ViolencePrevention/eldermaltreatment/definitions.html 54 The National Elder Abuse Incidence Study, . Final report to the Administration on Children and Families and Administration on Aging, National Center on Elder Abuse., U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Grant No. 90–AM–0660, 1998.
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 223 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
55 Wichita Police Department, http://www.wichita.gov/Government/Departments/WPD/Pages/About. .aspx, May 1, 2012. 56 Adopted Budget, City of Wichita, Kansas; Jan. 1 – Dec. 31, 2013 and Jan. 1 – Dec. 31, 2014, http:// www.wichita.gov/Government/Departments/Finance/FinancialDocuments/ 2013-14%20Budget%20- %20Vol.%201.pdf page 26. 57 Ibid., pp. 197-198, 58 Fire Department, City of Wichita. http://www.wichita.gov/CityOffices/Fire/, November 24, 2009 59 2012 Wichita Service Overview, Wichita Fire Department, City of Wichita, http://www.wichita.gov/Gov ernment/Departments/Fire/FireDocuments/WFD%202012%20Wichita%20Service%20Overview.pdf 60 Sedgwick County, Government, Departments, Sheriff’s Office, About the Sheriff’s Office, http://www. sedgwickcounty.org/sheriff/about.asp, May 1, 2012 61 Sedgwick County Sheriff’s Office, 2011 Annual Report, http://www.sedgwickcounty.org/sheriff/2011 _annual_report.pdf 62 County Profile, 2013 Adopted Budget, Sedgwick County, page 22, http://www.sedgwickcounty.org/ finance/Budget/2013_Budget/adopted/county_profile.pdf
Housing
1 American FactFinder, Glossary, U.S. Census Bureau, http://factfinder2.census.gov/help 2 Table DP-3 - Profile of Selected Economic Characteristics: 2000, Summary File 3, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, D.C., http://factfinder.census.gov 3 Table DP-04, Selected Housing Characteristics, 2006-2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, U.S. Census Bureau, http://factfinder2.census.gov 4 Table DP-1. Profile of General Population and Housing Characteristics: 2010, Census 2010 Demographic Profile Summary File, U.S. Census Bureau, http://factfinder2.census.gov/ 5 The Shrinking Supply of Affordable Housing, Housing Spotlight, Volume 2, Issue 1, February 2012, National Low Income Housing Coalition, http://nlihc.org/sites/default/files/HousingSpotlight2-1.pdf 6 Table P-87, Poverty Status in 1999 By Age. Sedgwick County, Kansas, 2000, U.S. Census 2000, Summary File 3 (SF3), http://factfinder.census.gov 7 Table S-1702, Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months of Families, 2006-2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, U.S. Census Bureau, http://factfinder2.census.gov 8 Table S-1701, Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months, 2006-2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, U.S. Census Bureau, http://factfinder2.census.gov 9 Table P-53 Median Household Income in 1999 (Dollars), Sedgwick County, Kansas, U.S. Census 2000, Summary File 3 (SF3), http://factfinder.census.gov 10 Table DP-03, Selected Economic Characteristics, 2006-2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, U.S. Census Bureau, http://factfinder2.census.gov 11 Table H-97, Household Income in 1999 by Selected Monthly Owners Costs as a Percentage of Household Income in 1999, Owner-Occupied Housing Units, U.S. Census 2000, Summary File 3 (SF3), http://factfinder.census.gov 12 Table B-25091, Mortgage Status by Selected Monthly Owners Costs as a Percentage of Household Income in the past 12 Months, Owner-Occupied Housing Units, 2006-2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, http://factfinder2.census.gov/
Page 224 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
13 Table B-25088, Median Selected Monthly Owners Costs (Dollars) by Mortgage Status, Owner- Occupied Housing Units, 2006-2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, http://factfinder2.census.gov/ 14 Table B-25101, Mortgage Status by Monthly Housing Costs as a Percentage of Household Income in the Past 12 Months, Owner-Occupied Housing Units, Sedgwick County, Kansas, 2006-2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, http://factfinder2.census.gov/ 15 Kansas Certified Population, County Population, Appendix F, Kansas Division of the Budget, The Governor's Economic and Demographic Report 2009-2010, certified 7-1-2009, http://www.budget.ks. gov/publications/FY2011/2009-2010_Economic&Demographic_Report-updated_4-27-2010.pdf 16 City of Wichita, Kansas, Adopted Budget, 2012-2013, Housing and Community Services, http://www. wichita.gov/NR/rdonlyres/C6C86628-A08D-4043-8052-E9DFAD58CCD9/0/11Housing.pdf 16a Wichita Housing Authority Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher, Housing & Community Services, City of Wichita, http://www.wichita.gov./ CityOffices/Housing/Section8/ 17 Wichita Housing Authority Public Housing Program, Housing Services, City of Wichita, http://www. wichita.gov/ CityOffices/Housing/PublicHousing 18 Sedgwick County 2012 Adopted Budget, Community Development, Housing, http://www.sedgwick county.org/finance/Budget/2012_Budget/adopted/community_development/housing.pdf 19 Housing Choice Voucher Program Section 8, Housing Choice Vouchers Fact Sheet, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/topics/housing_ choice_voucher_program_section_8 20 2012 Federal Adjusted Income Limits, based on area median income for Wichita, Kansas, http://www.wichita.gov/NR/rdonlyres/BE4628F1-42E7-4A17-9D05-63E60C497024/0/2012Federal AdjustedIncomeLimits.pdf 21 Sedgwick County Housing Authority Jurisdiction, Housing Department, Sedgwick County, Kansas, http://www.sedgwickcounty.org/housing/jusidicition.asp 22 Neighborhood Stabilization Program Fact Sheet, May 2010, Sedgwick County, Kansas, http://www. sedgwick county.org/ housing/pdf/Neighborhood%20Stabilization%20Program.pdf 23 Making Home Affordable, Explore Programs, U.S. Department of the Treasury and U.S. Department for Housing and Urban Development. http://www.makinghomeaffordable.gov/programs/Pages/ default.aspx 24 Number of Improving Housing Markets Grows, Daily Real Estate News, Tuesday, Sept. 11, 2012, http://realtormag.realtor.org/daily-news/2012/09/11/number-improving-housing-markets-grows 25 Competition and Crisis in Mortgage Securitization, Michael Simkovic , Indiana Law Journal, Vol. 88, 201,3 Social Science Research Network , http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id= 1924831 26 Fair Housing and Equal Opportunity Subprime Lending, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, http://portal.hud.gov/hudportal/HUD?src=/program_offices/fair_housing_equal_opp/ lending/subprime 27 What is an Alt-A Loan?, Broker Outpost Mortgage Reference Library, http://brokeroutpost.com/ reference/149510.htm 28 Home Equity Loans: Frequently Asked Questions, Are there different kinds of home equity loans? Office of Consumer Credit Commissioner, http://www.occc.state.tx.us/pages/brochures/ home_equity_lending.html 29 Government announces new program to help ‘underwater’ homeowners, Washington Post, Oct. 24, 2012, , http://www.washingtonpost.com/business/economy/fhfa-announces-new-program-to-help- underwater-homeowners/2011/10/24/gIQAG1oUCM_story.html
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 225 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
30 Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac: Past, Present, and Future, Theresa R. DiVenti, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, www.huduser.org/portal/periodicals/cityscpe/vol11num3/ch11.pdf 31 Economic Indicators, Fact Sheet, Standard & Poors/Case-Shiller Home Price Indices, Standard & Poors Dow Jones Indicators, http://www.standardandpoors.com/servlet/BlobServer?blobheader name3=MDT-Type&blobcol=urldata&blobtable=MungoBlobs&blobheadervalue2=inline%3B+filename %3Dfs-sp-case-shiller-home-price-indices-ltr.pdf&blobheadername2=Content-Disposition&blob headervalue1=application%2Fpdf&blobkey=id&blobheadername1=content-type&blobwhere= 1244139651520&blobheadervalue3=UTF-8 32 Navigating the Turbulence, 2012 Kansas Housing Markets Forecast, Center for Real Estate, W. Frank Barton School of Business, Wichita State University, Wichita, Kansas, http://realestate.wichita edu/draft/research/Web/Forecast/2012/Forecast%202012%20-%20All%20Pages.pdf 33 Wichita Area Association of Realtors, Report for Full Year 2008, 2009, Existing Homes and New Homes (including Under Construction), South Central Kansas Multiple Listing Services, Inc., Wichita Area Association of Realtors, http://www.wichita-realtors.com/stats 34 U.S. Code Collection, The Public Health and Welfare, Title 42, Chapter 119, Subchapter I, Section 11302, Legal Information Institute, http://www4.law.cornell.edu/uscode/42/11302.html 35 Plan to End Chronic Homelessness, Wichita-Sedgwick County, Kansas, 2008, http://www.sedgwick county.org/homeless_taskforce/full%20plan%20with%20appendix.pdf 36 Evaluation of Continuums of Care for Homeless People: Final Report, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research, May 2002. 37 Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, http://www.hudhre.info/hearth/ 38 Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing: Defining ‘‘Homeless’’, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 24 CFR Parts 91, 582, and 583, [Docket No. FR– 5333–F–02], RIN 2506–AC26, Federal Register /Vol. 76, No. 233 /Monday, December 5, 2011 /Rules and Regulations, pp. 76013-76015. http://www.hudhre.info/documents/HEARTH_HomelessDefinition _FinalRule.pdf. 39 Homeless youth as defined under section 387 of the Runaway and Homeless Youth Act (42 U.S.C. 5732a), section 637 of the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C. 9832), section 41403 of the Violence Against Women Act of 1994 (42 U.S.C. 14043e–2), section 330(h) of the Public Health Service Act (42 U.S.C. 254b(h)), section 3 of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2012), section 17(b) of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786(b)), or section 725 of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11434a). 40 Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, http://www.hudhre.info/hearth/ 41 Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing: Continuum of Care Program, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 24 CFR Part 578, [Docket No. FR–5476–I–01], RIN 2506–AC29, Federal Register /Vol. 77, No. 147 /Tuesday, July 31, 2012 /Rules and Regulations, page 45443. http://www.hudhre.info/documents/CoCProgramInterimRule.pdf 42 An Overview of Homeless, Wichita/Sedgwick County, Kansas, United Way of the Plains, 2006. 43 The 2010 Annual Homeless Assessment Report to Congress, Office of Community Planning and Development, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, 2011, http://www.hudhre.info/ documents/2010HomelessAssessmentReport.pdf 44 2009 Kansas Point-In-Time Homeless Count, January 28, 2009. United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas, http://www.unitedwayplains.org/specialpublications/2009_homeless_count/pit_downloads /FullVolume1-KPITReport.pdf
Page 226 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
45 Evaluation of Continuums of Care for Homeless People: Final Report, U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development, Office of Policy Development and Research, May 2002. 46 Wichita/Sedgwick County 2007 Continuum of Care Point-In-Time Count of Homeless Persons, January 2007, United Way of the Plains, p. 7. 47 2009 Kansas Point-In-Time Homeless Count, January 28, 2009. United Way of the Plains, Sedgwick County Appendix, pp. A-20, A-23 48 Homeless Population and Subpopulations Chart; 2008, 2007, 2006, 2005, 2004, 2003, Continuum of Care Application for Wichita/Sedgwick County, Kansas, 49 2011 Wichita-Sedgwick County Point-In-Time Homeless Count, http://www.unitedwayplains.org/ index.php?option=com_docman&task=cat_view&gid=316&Itemid=96 50a 2012 Wichita-Sedgwick County Point-In-Time Homeless Count, A Snapshot of Homelessness in the Wichita-Sedgwick County area, http://www.unitedwayplains.org/index.php?option=com_docman&task =cat_view&gid=362&Itemid=96 50b Point In Time Summary for KS-502 – Wichita/Sedgwick County COC; Date of PIT Count: 1/30/2013; Population: Sheltered and Unsheltered Count. 51 Announcement, United Way of the Plains, Community Planning meeting, November 6, 2012. 52 A Guide to Counting Unsheltered Homeless People: Second Revision January 2008, U.S. Dept. of Housing and Urban Development’s Office of Community Planning and Development, 2.1; 4. 53 County, City Appoint Members to Homeless Task Force, Wichita Eagle (online), August 9, 2006, http://www.kansas.com 54 Ending Chronic Homelessness, Work of the Task Force, Sedgwick County, Kansas, www.sedgwickcounty.org/homeless_taskforce/ 55 Plan to End Chronic Homelessness in Wichita-Sedgwick County, Taskforce to End Chronic Homelessness, City of Wichita/Sedgwick County Fact Sheet, May 2010, http://www.sedgwickcounty.org/homeless_taskforce/homeless%20fact%20sheet%20updated%20Ma y%202010.pdf 56 Wichita & Sedgwick County Housing First Program, Presentation to Department of Social and Rehabilitation Services’ Community Project, January 5, 2012, City of Wichita Housing & Community Services and Sedgwick County Division of Human Services. 57 Help for the Homeless, Advocates to End Chronic Homelessness, Janis Cox and Denise Gunkel, The Wichita Eagle, May 17, 2012, http://www.kansas.com/2012/05/17/2337344/help-for-the-homeless. html#storylink=cpy 58 Panel Appointed to Oversee Plan for Homeless, Wichita Eagle (online), May 25, 2008, http://www. kansas.com 59 Plan to End Chronic Homelessness, Wichita-Sedgwick County, Kansas, 2008, http://www.sedgwick county.org/homeless_taskforce/full%20plan%20with%20appendix.pdf 60 Proposed Rule: Homeless Management Information Systems Requirements, Department of Housing and Urban Development, 24 CFR Parts 91, 576, 580, and 583, [Docket No. FR–5475–P–01], Federal Register /Vol. 76, No. 237 / Friday, December 9, 2011 / Proposed Rules, pp. 76917-76927, http://www.hudhre.info/documents/HEARTH_HMISRequirementsProposedRule.pdf
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 227 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
Life Cycle
1 Table DP-05. ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates, 2007 2011 American Community Survey 5- Year Estimates, American Community Survey U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml 2 Head Start, Office of Head Start, Administration for Children and Families, U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ohs 3 Funding Opportunities, Head Start, Office of Head Start, Administration for Children and Families, U. S. Department of Health and Human Services, http://www.acf.hhs.gov/programs/ohs 4 Head Start Program Fact Sheets, FY 2008 – FY 2012, Early Childhood Learning & Knowledge Center, Office of Head Start, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, http://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/hslc/mr/factsheets 5 KIDS COUNT Data Center, Data by State, Locations within Kansas, Annie E. Casey Foundation, http: //datacenter.kidscount.org/data/bystate/stateprofile.aspx?state=KS&loc=18 via U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Administration for Children and Families, Region VII, information provided by Kansas Action for Children. 6 About Early Head Start, Early Childhood Learning & Knowledge Center, Office of Head Start, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, http://eclkc.ohs.acf.hhs.gov/hslc/tta-system/ehsnrc/Early%20Head%20Start/about.html 7 Live Births by Population Group by County of Residence, Kansas 2011, Table 29, Kansas Annual Summary of Vital Statistics, Office of Health Care Information, Kansas Department of Health and Environment, http://www.kdheks.gov/hci/as/2011/AS_2011.pdf 8 Out-of-Wedlock Births by Age Group and Population Group of Mother by County of Residence, Kansas 2011, Table 30, Kansas Annual Summary of Vital Statistics, Office of Health Care Information, Kansas Department of Health and Environment, http://www.kdheks.gov/hci/as/ 2011/AS_2011.pdf 9 About, Wichita Children's Home, http://www.wch.org. 10 Fiscal Year 2012 Annual Report, Wichita Children’s Home, http://wch.org/assets/files/2012_Annual_ Report.pdf 11 For 2008: 2008 Wichita Children's Home Annual Report, Wichita Children's Home, http://www.wch org/images/ pdf/43060%20WCH%2007-08_AnnRpt.pdf 12 For 2009: Email correspondence, Risa Rehmert, Wichita Children's Home, February 10 and 11, 2010. 13 For 2010, 2011, 2012: Wichita Children’s Home Annual Report, Wichita Children’s Home, http://wch. org/assets/files/2012_Annual_ Report.pdf 14 Wichita Police Department Crime Statistics, Class 2 Summary, Reporting Month of December, 2012; December 2011; December 2010; and December 2009; Wichita Police Department, City of Wichita. 15 2010 Census Summary File 1, 2010 Census of Population and Housing, Technical Documentation, Issued September 2012, U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, Economics and Statistics Administration, Washington, D.C., http://www.census.gov/prod/cen2010/doc/sf1.pdf# page=504 16 Table S11-1 - Households and Families, 2007-2011, American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, American Community Survey U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml 17 Table 74: Marriages by Number and Rate by County of Marriage and by Peer Group, Kansas 2007- 2011, Kansas Annual Summary of Vital Statistics 2011, Office of Health Care Information, Kansas Department of Health and Environment, http://www.kdheks.gov/hci/annsumm.html
Page 228 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
18 Table 59, Marriage Dissolutions by Number and Rate by County of Action and by Peer Group, Kansas 2007-2011, Kansas Annual Summary of Vital Statistics 2011, Office of Health Care Information, Kansas Department of Health and Environment, http://www.kdheks.gov/hci/ann summ.html 19 Table P35: Families, Universe: Families, 2010 U.S. Census, Summary File 1, U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml 20 Table DP03: Selected Economic Characteristics, 2007 2011 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, American Community Survey U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml 21 Table DP04: Selected Housing Characteristics, 2007 2011 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, American Community Survey U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml 22 Table B19013: Median Household Income in the Past 12 Months (in 2011 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars), Universe: Households, 2007 2011 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, American Community Survey U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, http://factfinder2.census. gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml (Wichita MSA) 23 Table B19113: Median Family Income in the Past 12 Months (in 2009 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars), Universe: Families, 2005 2009 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, American Community Survey U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, http://factfinder2.census. gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml (Wichita MSA) 24 Table B19301: Per Capita Income in the Past 12 Months (in 2009 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars), Universe: Total Population, 2005 2009 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, American Community Survey U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, http://factfinder2.census. gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml (Wichita MSA) 25 Table B20002: Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months (in 2011 Inflation-Adjusted Dollars) by Sex, Universe: Population 16 Years And Over with Earnings in the Past 12 Months, 2007 2011 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, American Community Survey U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, http://factfinder2.census. gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml (Wichita MSA) 26 Glossary, Help, American FactFinder, U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, http:// factfinder2.census.gov/help/en/american_factfinder_help.htm#glossary/glossary.htm 27 Table DP-4, Profile of Selected Housing Characteristics: 2000, Summary File 3, U.S. Census Bureau, Washington, D.C., http://www. factfinder.census.gov 28 2008 Data Profile, Selected Housing Characteristics, American Community Survey Demographic and Housing Estimates: 2008, One-Year Estimates, American Community Survey, U.S. Census Bureau, http://www.factfinder.census.gov 29 Table B08201: Household Size by Vehicles Available, Universe: Households, Universe: Households, 2007 2011 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, American Community Survey U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/ jsf/pages/searchresults.xhtml?refresh=t (Wichita MSA) 30 Table B25048: Plumbing Facilities for Occupied Housing Units, Universe: Occupied Housing Units, 2007 2011 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, American Community Survey U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/ jsf/pages/searchresults.xhtml?refresh=t 31 Table B25052: Kitchen Facilities for Occupied Housing Units, Universe: Occupied Housing Units, 2007 2011 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, American Community Survey U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/ jsf/pages/searchresults.xhtml?refresh=t (Wichita MSA)
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 229 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
32 Table B25043: Tenure by Telephone Service Available By Age of Householder, Universe: Occupied Housing Units, 2007 2011 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, American Community Survey U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, , http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/ nav/ jsf/pages/searchresults.xhtml?refresh=t 33 Table DP04: Selected Social Characteristics, 2007 2011 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, American Community Survey U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml 34 Baby Boom, The Population Baby Boom of 1946-1964 in the United States, Matt Rosenberg, About. com Guide, March 26 2009, http://geography.about.com/od/populationgeography/a/babyboom. htm, accessed June 5, 2013 35 Baby Boomers Envision Their Retirement: AARP Segmentation Analysis, Exec. Summary, Part I, American Association of Retired Persons, Feb 1999. http://research.aarp.org/econ/boomer_seg_1/
Health Care and Health Access
1 Hospital Finder, Hospital Information Search Engine, Online Hospital Directory, Hospital Connect Search, http://www.hospitalconnect.com/hospitalconnect_app/hospitalfinder/search.jsp 2 Patient Encounters, Coalition of Community Health Clinics, Sedgwick County, Kansas, Fourth Quarter 2009, 2010, 2011, 2012 Report, data compiled by United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas. 3 Email, David Sanford, Executive Director, GraceMed Health Clinic, July 12, 2013. 4 Mayflower Clinic to Move to Sutton Place, The Wichita Eagle, December 31, 2012, http://blogs. kansas.com/ haveyouheard/2012/12/31/mayflower-clinic-to-move-to-sutton-place/#storylink=cpy 5 Uniform Data System (UDS), Calendar Year 2010, Updated January 3, 2011, Bureau of Primary Health Care, http://bphc.hrsa.gov/healthcenterdatastatistics/reporting/2010manual.pdf 6 Table HI06. Health Insurance Coverage Status by State for All People: 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011; Annual Social and Economic Supplement, U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/cpstables/0320xx/health/toc.htm 7 Population in Kansas, by Age and County (2011), Kansas Statistical Abstract 2011, 46th Edition, Institute for Policy and Social Research, University of Kansas, http://www.ipsr.ku.edu/ksdata/ ksah/KSA46.pdf 8 Table HI10. Number and Percent of Children Under 19 at or below 200% of Poverty by Health Insurance Coverage and State: 2007, 2008, 2009, 2010, 2011; Annual Social and Economic Supplement, U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, http://www.census.gov/hhes/ www/hlthins/ cps.html 9 Table S-1702, Poverty Status in the Past 12 Months of Families, 2006-2010 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, U.S. Census Bureau, http://factfinder2.census.gov 10 Table DP-05. ACS Demographic and Housing Estimates, 2007 2011 American Community Survey 5- Year Estimates, American Community Survey U.S. Census Bureau, U.S. Department of Commerce, http://factfinder2.census.gov/faces/nav/jsf/pages/index.xhtml 11 Table HI05. Health Insurance Coverage Status and Type of Coverage by State and Age for All People: 2011 Annual Social and Economic Supplement, U.S. Census Bureau, Current Population Survey, http://www.census.gov/hhes/www/hlthins/cps.html 12 2010 Health Insurance Coverage Status for Counties, August 29, 2012 release, Small Area Health Insurance Estimates, Interactive Tables, U.S. Census, http://www.census.gov/did/www/sahie/data/ interactive/
Page 230 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
13 Kansas Medicaid Statistics, Medicaid.gov, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, http://www. medicaid.gov/Medicaid-CHIP-Program-Information/By-State/kansas.html 14 KanCare Overview, January 23, 2013, http://www.kdheks.gov/testimony/download/KanCare_ Testimony_Jan_23_2013.pdf 15 What is KanCare?, About Us, Medicaid in Kansas, http://www.kancare.ks.gov/whats_kancare.htm 16 Frequently Asked Questions, Consumers, Medicaid for Kansas, KanCare, http://www.kancare.ks. gov/consumer_faqs.htm 17 License Designations for Healing Arts and Podiatry, Statistics for Kansas Counties, Updated June 2013, Kansas State Board of Healing Arts, http://www.ksbha.org/misc/status.html#act 18 Licensee/Registrant Statistics, Statistics for Kansas Counties, Updated June 2009, Kansas State Board of Healing Arts, http://www.ksbha.org/misc/county.html 19 Licensee/Registrant Statistics, Updated June 2013, Kansas State Board of Healing Arts, http://www.ksbha.org/statistics.html 20 Find Shortage Areas: HPSA by State & County, Health Resources and Services Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, updated July 9, 2013, http://hpsafind.hrsa.gov/ 21 Find Shortage Areas: MUA/P by State and County, (Medically Underserved Areas/Populations) Health Resources and Services Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, accessed July 10, 2013, http://muafind.hrsa.gov/ 22 Practicing Physicians in Kansas, by County, 2007-2009; Kansas Statistical Abstract, Kansas Statistical Abstract 2009, 44th Edition, Institute for Policy and Social Research, University of Kansas, http://www.ipsr.ku.edu/ksdata/ksah/KSA44.pdf 23 Practicing Physicians in Kansas, by County, 2009-2011; Kansas Statistical Abstract, Kansas Statistical Abstract 2011, 46th Edition, Institute for Policy and Social Research, University of Kansas, http://www.ipsr.ku.edu/ksdata/ksah/KSA/KSA46.pdf 24 Health Professional Shortage Areas , Shortage Designation: Health Professional Shortage Areas & Medically Underserved Areas/Populations, Health Resources and Services Administration, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, http://www.hrsa.gov/shortage/ 25 Tertiary Care Definition, Patient Care, Johns Hopkins Medicine, http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/ patient_care/pay_bill/insurance_footnotes.html 26 Hospital Referral Area, Data by Region, Hospital Capacity, 2006, The Dartmouth Atlas of Health Care, The Dartmouth Institute for Health Policy and Clinical Practice, http://www.dartmouthatlas.org/ data/region/ 27 The Physician Workforce: Projections and Research into Current Issues Affecting Supply and Demand, Bureau of Health Professions, Health Resources and Services Administration , U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, December 2008, http://bhpr.hrsa.gov/healthwork force/reports/physwfissues.pdf. 28 A Survey of America’s Physicians: Practice Patterns and Perspectives, survey conducted on behalf of The Physicians Foundation by Merritt Hawkins, September 24, 2012, Physician Shortage, Focus Areas, The Physicians Foundation, http://www.physiciansfoundation.org/uploads/default/Physicians_ Foundation_2012_Biennial_Survey.pdf 29 Will There Be Enough Doctors?, Health Leaders Media Magazine, Volume 10, Issue 10, October 2007, http://www.healthleadersmedia.com/magazine/issue-10/volume-10 30 Kansas Safety Net Dental Clinics, Oral Health Kansas, http://www.oralhealthkansas.org/ safetynet.html
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 231 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
31 Active Dentists in Kansas by County of Practice, 2007-2009; Kansas Statistical Abstract, Kansas Statistical Abstract 2009, 44th Edition, Institute for Policy and Social Research, University of Kansas, http://www.ipsr.ku.edu/ksdata/ksah/KSA44.pdf 32 Active Dentists in Kansas by County of Practice, 2009-2011; Kansas Statistical Abstract, Kansas Statistical Abstract 2011, 46th Edition, Institute for Policy and Social Research, University of Kansas, http://www.ipsr.ku.edu/ksdata/ksah/KSA/KSA46.pdf 33 Selected Causes of Death by County of Residence, Kansas, 2011, Table 73, Kansas Annual Summary of Vital Statistics, Bureau of Public Health Informatics, Kansas Department of Health and Environment, http://www.kdheks.gov/hci/as/2011/AS_2011.pdf 34 Community Mental Health Centers of Kansas, Counseling Services, Kansas State University, www. k-state.edu/counseling/topics/mhlinks_files/cmhc.html 35 Mental Health Association of South Central Kansas, http://www.mhasck.org/ 36 2012 Annual Report, COMCARE of Sedgwick County, http://www.sedgwickcounty.org/comcare/ reports/COMCARE.2012AR.pdf 37 Definitions, Self-Directed Violence, Injury Prevention and Control, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/suicide/definitions.html 38 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control, Web- based Injury Statistics Query and Reporting System (WISQARS), 2010, www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/ index. html via Suicide Facts at a Glance 2012, Injury Center: Violence Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pub/suicide_datasheet.html 39 Reducing Suicide: A National Imperative, S. K. Goldsmith, T. C. Pellmar, A.M. Kleinman, W. E. Bunney, editors; Washington, DC, National Academy Press; 2002, via Suicide: Facts at a Glance, Summer 2009, http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/Suicide-DataSheet-a.pdf 40 Suicidal Thoughts and Behaviors Among Adults Aged ≥18 Years-United States, 2008-2009, MMWR Surveillance Summaries 2011;60 (no. SS-13), www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ ss6013a1.htm?s_cid=ss6013a1_e via Suicide Facts at a Glance 2012, Injury Center: Violence Prevention, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/ pub/suicide_datasheet.html 41 Selected Causes of Death By County of Residence; 2007, Table 61; 2008, Table 61; 2009; Table 68; 2010, Table 73; 2011, Table 73; Kansas Annual Summary of Vital Statistics, Office of Health Care Information, Kansas Department of Health and Environment, http://www.kdheks.gov/hci/ 42 Emergency Medical Services, Public Safety, 2013 Adopted Budget, Sedgwick County, Adopted August 15, 2012 http://sedgwickcounty.org/finance/Budget/2013_Budget/adopted/public_safety/ ems.pdf 43 Sedgwick County Emergency Medical Service (SCEMS), Emergency Services Sector, Sector Specific Areas, 2010-2040 Hazards Analysis Plan for Sedgwick County, Updated December 2011, Sedgwick County, http://www.sedgwickcounty.org/emermgmt/planning/hazards_analysis_plan.pdf 44 Monthly Report, Emergency Medical Service, Sedgwick County, http://www.sedgwickcounty.org/ems/ about.asp#Monthly_Reports 45 Live Births by Number and Rate by County of Residence and Peer Group, Kansas 2007-2011, Table 9, Kansas Annual Summary of Vital Statistics, Office of Health Care Information, Kansas Department of Health and Environment, 2012, http://www.kdheks.gov/hci/as/2011/AS_2011.pdf 46 Infant Deaths by County of Residence and Peer Group, Kansas 2007-2011, Table 49, Kansas Annual Summary of Vital Statistics, Office of Health Care Information, Kansas Department of Health and Environment, http://www.kdheks.gov/hci/as/2011/AS_2011.pdf
Page 232 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
47 Live Births by Birth Weight in Grams by County of Residence, Kansas, 2011, Table 19, Kansas Annual Summary of Vital Statistics, Office of Health Care Information, Kansas Department of Health and Environment, http://www.kdheks.gov/hci/as/2011/AS_2011.pdf 48 Section XI, Eligibility Infant-Toddler Part C Manual, Kansas Infant-Toddler Services Procedure Manual, Kansas IDEA Part C Procedure Manual, Kansas Department of Health and Environment, 2013, http://www.ksits.org/download/part_c_manual/ELIGIBILITY.pdf 49 Live Births by Weeks Gestation County of Residence, Kansas 2011, Table 16, Kansas Annual Summary of Vital Statistics, Office of Health Care Information, Kansas Department of Health and Environment, http://www.kdheks.gov/hci/as/2011/AS_2011.pdf 50 Kansas Communities That Care (KCTC), Program Description, Greenbush Southeast Kansas Education Service Center, http://www.greenbush.org/index.php/programs/k/135-kansas-communities- that-care-kctc.html 51 2010 Participation Rates by County, Kansas Communities That Care Student Survey, Greenbush Southeast Kansas Education Service Center, http://beta.ctcdata.org/?page=static_files/county_select. html&nocache=410202426 52 Quality Improvement Services, Wichita Public Schools USD 259, email communication from Steve Batt, Executive Director, February 9, 2010. 53 30-Day Prevalence Rates of Substance Use, Kansas Communities that Care, Domain: Problem Behaviors; Type: Problem Behavior; Scale: 30 Day Prevalence, Alcohol; the Greenbush Data Navigator, CTC Survey, Beta 9.0, http://beta.ctcdata.org/index.php?page=static_files/intro.html& no_cache=1956041102 54 30-Day Prevalence Rates of Substance Use, Kansas Communities that Care, Domain: Problem Behaviors; Type: Problem Behavior; Scale: 30 Day Prevalence, Marijuana; the Greenbush Data Navigator, CTC Survey, Beta 9.0, http://beta.ctcdata.org/index.php?page=static_files/intro.html& no_cache=1956041102 55 Teenage Pregnancies By Age Group, Kansas 2007, Table 25, Kansas Annual Summary of Vital Statistics, Office of Health Care Information, Kansas Department of Health and Environment, http://www.kdheks.gov/hci/as/AS_2007.pdf 56 Teenage Pregnancies By Age Group, Kansas 2011, Table 33, Kansas Annual Summary of Vital Statistics, Office of Health Care Information, Kansas Department of Health and Environment, http://www.kdhe.state.ks.us 57 Home & Community Based Services for the Frail Elderly, HCBS Waiver - Frail Elderly, Kansas Department for Aging and Disability Services, http://www.kdads.ks.gov/Services/Programs/HCBS_ FE_Waiver.html 58 Home and Community Based Services for the Frail Elderly, Kansas Department on Aging, revised June 2009, Accessed July 1, 2013, www.kdads.ks.gov/Publications/Other/HCBSFE_0609_Web.pdf 59 Kansas Senior Centers, Centers by County, Kansas Department for Aging and Disability Services, updated July 1, 2013, http://www.kdads.ks.gov/SeniorServices/senior_centers.htm 60 Medicare and Medicaid, Title XVIII and Title XIX of The Social Security Act, as of November 1, 2009, Office of the Actuary, Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services, Department of Health and Human Services, http://www.cms.hhs.gov/MedicareProgramRatesStats/Downloads/MedicareMedicaid Summaries2009.pdf 62 Medicare Aged And Disabled By State And County As Of July 1, 2010, Medicare Beneficiary Database (MBD), Centers for Medicare & Medicaid Services , http://www.cms.gov/Research- Statistics-Data-and-Systems/Statistics-Trends-and-Reports/MedicareEnrpts/Downloads/ County2010.pdf
Research compiled by: Environmental Scan 2013 - Page 233 United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
Endnotes
63 Planning for Death, Cure: Cancer Updates, Research & Education, Summer Issue, Volume 5, Number 2, 2006, p. 26. 64 What is Hospice?, Caring Connections, National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization, http://www.caringinfo.org/userfiles/File/PDFs/HospiceCare/hospice_care.pdf 65 What is Pallative Care?, Hospice Outreach, National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization (NHPCO), http://www.caringinfo.org/i4a/pages/index.cfm?pageid=3387 66 NHPCO Facts and Figures: Hospice Care in America, Alexandria, VA: National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization, October 2012, http://www.nhpco.org/sites/default/files/public/Statistics _Research/2012_Facts_Figures.pdf 67 About NHPCO, National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization, http://www.nhpco.org/about- nhpco 68 2011, NHPCO National Data Set and/or NHPCO Member Database, via NHPCO Facts and Figures: Hospice Care in America, Alexandria, VA: National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization, October 2012, http://www.nhpco.org/sites/default/files/public/Statistics_Research/2012_Facts _Figures.pdf 69 Deaths: Preliminary Data for 2011, Hoyert D.L., Xu J, National Vital Statistics Reports, Volume 61, Number 6, National Center for Health Statistics, Centers for Disease Control, http://www.cdc.gov/ nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr61/nvsr61_06.pdf via NHPCO Facts and Figures: Hospice Care in America, Alexandria, VA: National Hospice and Palliative Care Organization, October 2012, http://www.nhpco org/sites/default/files/public/Statistics _Research/2012_Facts_Figures.pdf 70 Community Health Improvement Plan, Sedgwick County Health Department, http://www.sedgwickcounty.org/healthdept/materials/CHIP.web.pdf. 71 Data Book, Sedgwick County Health Department, Published April 2012, http://www.sedgwickcounty.org/healthdept/reports/DataBook.pdf 72 About Us, Via Christi Health Mission and Information, http://www.via-christi.org/about-us 73 Via Christi Villages, Via Christi Health Overview, Via Christi Health Mission and Information, http://www.via-christi.org/workfiles/vchs/via-christi-health-overview.pdf 74 Aging Population Assessment, September 19, 2012, Who We Serve, Community Benefit, Via Christi Health, http://www.via-christi.org/workfiles/community-benefit/Aging-Assessment-VCV-Markets.pdf 75 Visioneering Wichita, http://visioneeringwichita.com/ 76 A full list of which diseases include confirmed cases only, versus which include both confirmed and probable cases, can be found at: http://www.kdheks.gov/epi/download/About_KDHE_Case_Report_ Data.pdf. 77 Cumulative Case Reports of Notifiable Diseases by Kansas County, 2012 (as of May 15, 2013), http://www.kdheks.gov/epi/case_reports_by_county.htm 78 CDC A-Z Index, Centers for Disease Control, http://www.cdc.gov/az/h.html
Page 234 - Environmental Scan 2013 Research compiled by: United Way of the Plains, Wichita, Kansas
United Way of the Plains Main Office: 245 N. Water St. Wichita, KS 67202 (316) 267-1321 Butler County Office: 715 E. 13th St. Andover, KS 67002 (316) 733-6742 www.unitedwayplains.org Find help or volunteer: Dial 2-1-1 (toll free, statewide)