accurately measuring disadvantage in the inyo-mono region sierra water workgroup summit defining...
TRANSCRIPT
Accurately measuring disadvantage in the Inyo-Mono region
Sierra Water Workgroup Summit
Defining DACs Panel
June 13, 2013
Defining the Problem 2000 Decennial Census 2006-2010 American Community Survey (ACS) Data
Defining the Problem Mismatch between data and reality
Not all communities represented in the data Such as Native American Indian tribes
Inconsistency in data available (Census vs. ACS) Communities with similar characteristics differ in DAC status Census geographies differ from functional boundaries, such as
service areas DWR identified some communities as DACs that have no ACS
data and are clearly not DACs Missing data necessitate costly income surveys
More to disadvantage than income
Alternative Definitions Process:
Quantitative Data Qualitative Observations Test in 10 regional communities – known DACs and non-DACs Develop recommendations based on outcome of pilot tests
County Community2006-2010 ACS Pop
2010 DAC = $48,706
DWR recognized 2012?
2006-2010 ACS MHI
Unemployment rate (April 2013)
# Households receiving food stamps; 2011 ACS 5-year; 0% reflects no data
% of households w/ income below poverty level; 0% reflects no data
Mean travel time to work (min)
Cash Public Assistance Income - %
Educational Attainment: 25 and older, percent high school graduate or higher
California Statewide $ 48,706 9.0% 6.2% 10.8% 27 3.6% 80.8%Inyo AberdeenInyo Alabama Hills
Inyo Big Pine CDP 1682 57,109$ 8.1% 3.6% 5.3% 19.3 1.7% 90.4%Inyo Big Pine Paiute Tribe 262 y 43,214$ 9.4% 18.0% 20.2 3.9% 93.2%
Inyo Bishop 3826 y 37,005$ 6.7% 3.9% 13.0% 14.3 2.7% 83.7%Inyo Bishop Paiute Tribe 1828 y 46,384$ 18.0% 18.2% 18.8 6.7% 86.3%
Inyo Cartago CDP 54 66,250$ 20.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 92.4%Inyo Coso Junction
Inyo Darwin CDP 30 y y 30,893$ 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 70.0%Inyo Death Valley JunctionInyo Deep Springs
InyoDixon Lane-Meadow Creek CDP 2660 y y 48,542$ 3.2% 4.6% 7.2% 13.2 4.5% 81.6%
Inyo Dolomite
InyoFort Independence Tribe 81 y 30,417$ 4.9% 7.3% 0 0.0% 84.1%
Inyo Furnace Creek CDP 64 y y 27,813$ 30.4% 7.0% 10.5% 4 0.0% 94.4%
InyoHomewood Canyon CDP 109 y y 14,706$ 0.0% 58.1% 41.9% 0 58.1% 83.5%
Inyo Independence CDP 551 y y 47,883$ 8.5% 4.7% 10.1% 14.1 1.1% 91.4%
Inyo Keeler CDP 27 y y 44,500$ 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 94.3%Inyo LawsInyo Little Lake
Inyo Lone Pine CDP 2309 y y 40,176$ 10.2% 9.7% 13.1% 14.7 3.8% 87.5%
InyoLone Pine Paiute-Shoshone Reservation 148 y 37,188$ 26.0% 11.7% 21.4 0.0% 75.5%
Inyo Mesa CDP 368 55,909$ 8.5% 0.6% 9.6% 20.6 60.0% 92.1%
Inyo Olancha CDP 203 73,333$ 0.0% 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 74.4%Inyo Panamint SpringsInyo Pearsonville CDP 5 y y -$ 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 100.0%
Inyo Round Valley CDP 292 51,429$ 17.8% 2.5% 3.8% 31.9 6.9% 89.3%Inyo Rovana
Inyo Shoshone CDP 33 y y 28,750$ 24.6% 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 81.8%Inyo Stovepipe WellsInyo Swansea
Inyo Tecopa CDP 101 y y 21,806$ 30.4% 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 74.5%
InyoTimbisha-Shoshone Reservation 32 y 23,063$ 28.6% 42.9% 0 0.0% 73.7%
Inyo Valley Wells CDP 0 y y -$ 0.0% 0.0% 0 0.0% 0.0%
Inyo West Bishop CDP 2724 65,333$ 4.6% 1.6% 7.1% 13.2 0.0% 98.8%
Inyo Wilkerson CDP 563 y y 44,356$ 4.3% 0.0% 6.3% 26.2 0.0% 99.5%
Inyo 18434 44,808$ 7.5% 5.2% 10.2% 15.7 2.7% 88.8%
Problems with Quantitative Data Still based on census geographies (for ACS data) Inconsistencies in data coverage throughout State
Qualitative Observations Subjective metrics based on qualitative observations of
community Possible pitfall: different interpretations by different
observers
Putting it all together Use 10 communities (known DACs and non-DACs) as case
studies Develop recommendations based on results If applicable, propose changes to State definition
Questions to ponder1. Are we shooting for one number, such as an index?
2. What should be considered disadvantaged – i.e., how far away from the California average for any indicator?
3. How do we combine qualitative and quantitative information?
4. How can we keep the definition simple and not create a burden for DACs to identify themselves?
5. Is it realistic to aim to change the Statewide definition, or is this undertaking moot?
THANK YOU! Holly Alpert
760-709-2212
Janet Hatfield760-387-2747