community profile: north tulsa 2014 prepared by the community service council, with support from the...

COMMUNITY PROFILE:

NORTH TULSA 2014Prepared by the Community Service Council, with support from the Metropolitan Human Services Commission

November 2014

3

Overview

Population shifting demographically

Well-being of children not so well Many strive for “living wage”…

and many must rely on public assistance to fill the gap

Continuing impact of social determinants of health

4 DEMOGRAPHIC TRENDS

Total Population 2010

Tulsa County has a 2010 population of 603,403

391,906 persons reside in the City of Tulsa

The areas of highest population concentrations are found in suburban areas, especially Owasso, Collinsville, Jenks, Glenpool, Sand Springs, East Tulsa and a handful of small areas in South Tulsa and Broken Arrow

The areas low in population are found in small areas across the City, especially North Tulsa and a pocket in Southeast Sand Springs/Berryhill

Apache

96th

66th

121st

91st

Admiral

31st

61st

Peor

ia

Min

go

49t h

W

151st

145t

h E

Garn

ett

Mem

oria

l

Yale

181st

Pine

36th

65th

W

193r

d E

Sher

idan

Harv

ard

Lew

is

129 t

h E

177t

h E

161s

t E

33rd

W

Uni

on

Elw

o od

97t h

W

81st

W

113t

h W

126th

9400.05

9400.06

95

55

59

78.02

56

77.02

58.08

66

54.0254.01

111

78.01

93

2

75.16

58.07

67.07

67.08

1

73.08

67.05

92

49

94.01

91.04

75.13

94.0290.03

65.07

29

77.01

91.01

34

76.24

76.38

65.06

75.15

90.07

62

90.09

67.03

27

57

88

79

67.01

25

58.05 58.06

75.0675.08

48

5

47

12 821614 6015

6

58.01

84

87

38

52

53

37

40

86

70

42 39

7

30

51

9

75.1176.35

17

85.02

76.37

74.09

76.36

90.08

8372

75.24

75.20

8

89

74.07

73.11

13

80.01

76.34

4546

80.02

76.25

44

31

10

71.0232 3635

3334

76.11

21

73.05

23.01

75.03

76.14 76.19

69.07

76.39

71.01

76.30

18

75.22

76.32

76.09

69.06

76.33

76.15

69.05

74.1574.1274.11 74.08

76.16

75.12

73.10

76.13

19

69.02

73.06

69.03

90.06

74.14

69.01

75.10

73.12

41.01

75.07

75.19

76.17

76.31

76.18

75.18

75.23

76.29

76.20 74.13 74.02

43.02

50.02

90.04

74.10

43.01

76.12

85.01

73.0920

73.04

68.01

50.01

76.4176.42

68.0368.04

76.08

Total Population, 2010Tulsa County and part Osage County by Census Tract

City of Tulsa

Total population

Less than 2,000

2,000 to 2,999

3,000 to 3,999

4,000 to 4,999

5,000 or more

Source: US Census Bureau, 2010 Census.Prepared by the Community Service Council,

with support from the Metropolitan Human Services Commission (12/12/2011)

Total population, 2010: Tulsa County: 603,403 City of Tulsa: 391,906

Source: US Census Bureau 2000 and 2010 Censuses.

6

Census Tracts Of Total Population Gain And Loss: 2000 to 2010

58% of Tulsa County's 175 census tracts lost population (102) between 2000 and 2010, while 65% of the City of Tulsa's 124 tracts declined in population (81).

Overall, the county’s population grew 7.1% from 563,299 to 603,403, while the city’s population actually declined .3% from 393,049 to 391,906 between 2000 and 2010.

Widespread loss…

9400.05

9400.06

95

55

59

78.02

56

77.02

58.08

66

54.02

111

54.01

78.01

93

2

75.16

58.07

67.07

67.08

1

73.08

67.05

92

49

94.01

91.04

75.13

94.0290.03

65.07

29

77.01

91.01

34

76.24

76.38

65.06

75.15

62

90.09

90.07

67.03

27

57

88

79

67.01

25

58.05 58.06

75.0675.08

48

5

47

12 821614 6015

6

58.01

87

84

38

52

53

86

40

37

3942

70

7

30

51

9

75.1176.35

17

85.02

74.09

76.37 76.36

90.08

8372

75.24

75.20

8

8973.11

74.07

13

80.01

45

76.34

46

80.02

76.25

44

31

10

71.0232 363534

33

76.11

21

73.05

23.01

75.03

76.14 76.19

76.39

76.30

76.32

69.06

71.01

74.11

18

75.22

74.12

76.09

69.07

69.05

74.08

76.33

76.13 76.16

74.15

76.15

69.01

73.10

75.19

75.12

75.10

19

69.03

74.14

73.06

76.18

90.06

69.02

41.01

76.17

76.31

75.07

73.12

74.13

75.18

76.20

76.29

50.02

75.23

43.02 90.04

74.02

74.10

43.01

76.12

85.01

73.0920

73.04

68.01

50.01

76.4176.42

68.0368.04

76.08

Source: US Census Bureau, 2000 and 2010 Censuses.Prepared by the Community Service Council, with support from the Metropolitan Human Services Commission (5.20.2014)

Apache

96th

66th

111th

81st

Admiral

41st

61st

Peor

ia

Min

go

49t h

W

131st

145t

h E

Gar

nett

Mem

oria

l

Yale

181st

Pine

36th

65th

W

193r

d E

Sher

idan

Harv

ard

Lew

is

129 t

h E

177t

h E

161s

t E

33rd

W

Uni

on

Elw

o od

97t h

W

81st

W

113t

h W

126th

Population Gain or Loss, 2000 to 2010Tulsa County, by Census Tract

Tulsa Public Schools

City of Tulsa

Change in population

Gain

Loss

Source: US Census Bureau 2000 and 2010 Censuses.

Population Trends and Projections by Age Group: Oklahoma, 1970-2030

1970

1980

1990

2000

2010

2020

2030

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

7.7%

7.7%

7.2%

6.8%

7.0%

6.6%

6.4%

25.1%

20.5%

19.4%

19.0%

17.7%

17.2%

16.8%

11.6%

13.3%

10.2%

10.3%

10.2%

9.3%

9.0%

43.8%

46.0%

49.7%

50.6%

51.5%

50.0%

49.0%

10.8%

11.3%

12.0%

11.6%

11.9%

14.9%

16.3%

0.9%

1.1%

1.5%

1.7%

1.7%

2.1%

2.5%

0-4 5-17 18-24 25-64 65-84 85+

Source: US Census Bureau, 1970, 1980, 1990, 2000, and 2010 Censuses; Oklahoma Department of Commerce, 2012 Demographic State of the State Report: Oklahoma State and County Population Projections through 2075.

pro

ject

ions

8

Race Comparison for Total Population and Young Children, Tulsa and North Tulsa, 2010

22702157.9%

6123015.6%

194735.0%

96772.5%

192394.9%

5526614.1%

White Black American Indian & Alaska Native Asian 2+ races Hispanic

1974529.5%

2710640.6%

36015.4%

3480.5%

37045.5%

1232018.4%

Tulsa total population = 391,906 North Tulsa total population = 66,824

Source: Census Bureau, 2010 Census.

11 STATUS OF CHILDREN

13

Family Type for Children under Age 6 by Race and Ethnicity: City of Tulsa and North Tulsa, 2010

Total Black Nat.Amer. NH White Hispanic Asian0%

20%

40%

60%

80%

100%

58.2%

43.3%

25.6%20.8%

46.8%38.9%

66.3%

44.4%

70.2% 73.3%

87.8%

63.6%

10.1%

11.1%

10.5%9.2%

14.0%

14.6%

9.6%

15.6%

10.2%9.1%

5.1%

0.0%

31.7%

45.6%

64.0% 70.0%

39.2%46.5%

24.1%

40.0%

19.5% 17.6%7.1%

36.4%

Married couple Male-headed Female-headed

Source: US Census Bureau, 2010 Census.

Note: Blue shaded bars represent North Tulsa.

16

Summary of Risk Factors for Infants, Tulsa County, 2013

Premature (<37 weeks gest.)

Very short birth spacing (<18 mos. apart)

Short birth spacing (<24 mos. apart)

Very low birthweight (<1500 grams)

Low birthweight (1500-2499 grams)

Mother w/ <12th grade education

Poor prenatal care (3rd tri. or no care)

Unmarried

Teen mother (15-19)

0.0% 10.0% 20.0% 30.0% 40.0% 50.0%

11.7%

13.1%

25.8%

1.3%

7.3%

20.8%

9.8%

42.1%

7.8%729

1,081

NA

NA

117

674

1,911

873

3,888

Source: Oklahoma State Department of Health, Vital Statistics 2013, OK2SHARE, accessed on 11/20/14.

Total births = 9,243

Sapulpa

Tulsa

Bixby

Skiatook

OwassoSperry

Broken Arrow

J enks

Liberty

Collinsville

Union

Sand Springs

Sand Springs

Berryhill

Glenpool

74070

74063

74066

74014

74047

74008

74021

74015

74055

74073

74107

74011

74127

74012

74126

7411674115

74037

7413374132

74117

74033

74134

74137

74131 74136

74108

74105

74106

74041

74112

741457413574146

74114 74129

74128

74110

74130

741047412074119

74103

Keystone

Source: Tulsa County Health Dept., unpublished data.Prepared by the Community Service Council, with support from the Metropolitan Human Services Commission (8.14.14)

Births to Teens by Zip Code with Overlay of School District Boundaries, Tulsa Area, 2009-12

200 or more births to teens

125 to 199 births to teens



Less than 25 births to teens

School district boundaries

Tulsa County 2013

Tulsa County births to teens = 3,987Area zip codes total births to teens = 4,326

Note: Area zip codes total births to teens exceeds that of the county due to zip codes extending into neighboring counties.

25

Adverse Childhood Experiences…

Recurrent physical abuse

Recurrent emotional abuse

Sexual abuse

An alcohol or drug abuser

An incarcerated household member

Someone who is chronically depressed, suicidal, institutionalized or mentally ill

Mother being treated violently

Living with one or neither parent

Emotional or physical neglect

Smoking

Overeating

Physical inactivity

Heavy alcohol use

Drug use

Promiscuity

Nicotine addiction

Alcoholism

Drug addiction

Obesity

Depression

Suicide

Injuries

Unintentional pregnancy

Adolescent pregnancy

Heart disease

Cancer

Chronic lung and liver disease

Stroke

Diabetes

Fetal death

Sexually transmitted diseases

Source: The Adverse Childhood Experiences Study website: www.acestudy.org, “What are Adverse Childhood Experieinces (ACE’s).”

…GROWING UP IN A HOUSEHOLD WITH

ADVERSE CHILDHOOD EXPERIENCES: …ADOPTION OF

HEALTH RISK BEHAVIORS…

…DISEASE, DISABILITY AND SOCIAL PROBLEMS

IN ADULTHOOD

26

The Adverse Childhood Experiences (ACE) Study Pyramid

Early Death

Disease, Disability and Social ProblemsAdoption of

Health-risk Behaviors

Social, Emotional and Cognitive Impairment

Disrupted Neurodevelopment

Adverse Childhood Experiences

Conception

Death

Mechanisms by which Adverse Childhood Experiences Influence Health and Well-being

throughout the LifespanSource: The Adverse Childhood Experiences Study website: www.acestudy.org, “About the Adverse Childhood Experiences Study.”

28

Percentage of 4th Graders NOT Proficient in Reading by Race and Hispanic Origin: United States: 2011

Source: Annie E. Casey Foundation, “KIDS COUNT Data Book, 2013.”

Average Freshman Graduation Rates by Race: Tulsa Public Schools, 2012-13 School Year

White

Hispanic

Asian

American Indian

Black

All students

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

62.3%

51.4%

86.4%

43.2%

50.3%

54.1%

Source: Office of Educational Quality and Accountability, based on data provided by the Oklahoma State Department of Education.

Note: "Average freshman graduation rate" refers to the number of graduating seniors as a proportion of the average number of students enrolled in 8th, 9th, and 10th grades for that graduating cohort.

29

Senior Graduation Rates by High School: Tulsa Public Schools, 2012-13 School Year

B.T. Washington

Hale

McLain

Edison

Webster

East Central

Memorial

Central

TRAICE

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

99.0%

97.5%

94.1%

94.0%

93.0%

89.8%

89.2%

81.8%

78.1%


Note: “Senior graduation rate" refers to the number of graduating seniors as a proportion of the number of students who were enrolled at the beginning of senior year.

30

Four-Year Dropout Rates by High School: Tulsa Public Schools, 2012-13 School Year

B.T. Washington

Hale

Edison

McLain

Webster

East Central

Memorial

Central

TRAICE

0% 20% 40% 60% 80% 100%

1.3%

12.7%

12.7%

25.9%

27.3%

29.0%

34.7%

37.7%

47.0%


Note: "Average freshman graduation rate" refers to the number of graduating seniors as a proportion of the average number of students enrolled in 8th, 9th, and 10th grades for that graduating cohort.

31

32 FINANCIAL SELF-SUFFICIENCY

33

Comparison of Self-Sufficiency Wage to Poverty Guidelines, by Family Size: Tulsa County, 2014

Family Size

Self-Sufficiency Wage (annual)

Poverty Guidelines (annual)

Dollar Difference

Self-Sufficiency Percent of Poverty

One person

$21,764($10.30/hour)

$11,670($5.53/hour)

$10,094 186%

Two persons

$38,995($18.46/hour)

$15,730($7.45/hour)

$23,265 248%

Three persons

$44,627($21.13/hour)

$19,790($9.37/hour)

$24,837 226%

Four persons

$52,318($24.77/hour)

$23,850($11.29/hour)

$28,468 219%

Notes: For the self-sufficiency wages shown in table, family of two consists of one adult and one preschooler; family of three consists of one adult, one preschooler and one schoolage child; family of four consists of two adults, one preschooler and one schoolage child. Hourly wages given assume full-time, year-round employment.

Source: Oklahoma Association of Community Action Agencies and the Oklahoma Asset Building Coalition, December 2009, The Self-Sufficiency Standard for Oklahoma 2009; Federal Register Notice, 01/22/2014, Annual Update of the HHS Poverty Guidelines; Bureau of Labor Statistics, July 2014.

34

Wage Comparison: Self-Sufficiency, Welfare, Minimum, Poverty and 185% of Poverty, and Median Family Income: Family of Three, Tulsa County 2014

Welfare wage Minimum wage

Poverty wage 185% poverty wage

Median family income

$-

$10,000

$20,000

$30,000

$40,000

$50,000

$60,000

$70,000

$80,000

$10,800 $15,312

$19,790

$36,612

$21,296

37479

54001

76755Self-sufficiency

wage: $44,627

($21.13/hour)

Female-headed families

Male-headed families

Married couple families

All families

Annual wage

Notes: For self-sufficiency wage, family of three consists of one adult, one preschooler and one school-age child. Hourly wages given assume full-time, year-round employment. Welfare wage is the combined value of TANF, SNAP, & WIC. Median family income represents families with children under age 18. Values shown for median family income are midpoint estimates within a 90% confidence range, which can be very wide.

Source: Oklahoma Association of Community Action Agencies and the Oklahoma Asset Building Coalition, December 2009, The Self-Sufficiency Standard for Oklahoma 2009; Federal Register Notice, 01/22/2014, Annual Update of the HHS Poverty Guidelines; Bureau of Labor Statistics, July 2014; Oklahoma State Dept. of Human Services; US Census Bureau, 2008-12 American Community Survey. (American Community Survey data are estimates based on a sample of the population. These estimates are midpoint values within a 90% confidence range, which can be very large, especially for smaller geographies.)

($5.11/hr.) ($7.25/hr.)($9.37/hr.)

($17.33/hr.)

($10.08/hr.)

($17.75/hr.)

($25.57/hr.)

($36.34/hr.)

35

Total population Under 6 Total population Under 60.0%

20.0%

40.0%

60.0%

80.0%

100.0%

19.7%

34.5% 34.5%

49.5%42.8%

64.5% 67.0%

87.7%

100% 200%

Source: US Census Bureau, 2008-12 American Community Survey.

Ratio of Income to Poverty by Age: Tulsa and North Tulsa, 2008-12

Tulsa North Tulsa

US

Hw

y 7

5

US

Hw

y 1

69

St a

te H

wy 1

1

State Hwy 67

Che

roke

e E

xpy

N M

ingo

Va

lley E

xp

y

E 151st St S

S M

em

oria

l D

r

Okm

ulg

ee

Exp

y

E0590 Rd

S 8

1st E

Ave

N P

eori

a A

ve

Broken Arrow S Lp

N 1

3th

E A

ve

E 46th St N

W 151st St S

E 36th St N

Creek Tpke

I- 44

US

Hw

y 1

69

US

Hw

y 7

5

9400.05

9400.06

Tulsa

Poverty rate totalLess than 10%

10 to 24%

25 to 32%

33% or higher

Poverty Rates by Census TractCity of Tulsa, 2008-12

Source: US Census Bureau, 2008-12 American Community Survey.Prepared by the Community Service Council, with support from the Metropolitan Human Services Commission (5/6/2014).

An estimated 75,636 Tulsa residents live in poverty, for a rate of 19.7%

2014 poverty guidelinesfor family of 3:

100% = $19,790130% = $25,727185% = $36,612200% = $39,580

US

Hw

y 7

5

US

Hw

y 1

69

St a

te H

wy 1

1

State Hwy 67

Che

roke

e E

xpy

N M

ingo

Va

lley E

xp

y

E 151st St S

S M

em

oria

l D

r

Okm

ulg

ee

Exp

y

E0590 Rd

S 8

1st E

Ave

N P

eori

a A

ve

Broken Arrow S Lp

N 1

3th

E A

ve

E 46th St N

W 151st St S

E 36th St N

Creek Tpke

I- 44

US

Hw

y 1

69

US

Hw

y 7

5

9400.05

9400.06

Tulsa

Poverty rate under 18Less than 10%

10 to 24%

25 to 32%

33 to 49%

50% or higher

Poverty Rates for Children Under 18by Census Tract, City of Tulsa, 2008-12


An estimated 28,883 Tulsa children under 18 live in poverty, for a rate of 30.8%

2014 poverty guidelinesfor family of 3:

100% = $19,790130% = $25,727185% = $36,612200% = $39,580

40

Unemployment Rates: Tulsa, 1990-2013

1990 1995 2000 2005 2010 20130.0

2.0

4.0

6.0

8.0

4.6

3.1

7.3

5.3

Source: Bureau of Labor Statistics, Local Area Unemployment Statistics.

42

School and Employment Status of Youth Age 16 to 19: City of Tulsa, 2008-12

1665077.7%

239711.2%

6553.1%

17408.1%

Enrolled in school Not enrolled in school: employedNot enrolled in school: unemployed Not enrolled in school: not in labor force

Source: US Census Bureau, 2008-12 American Community Survey.Prepared by the Community Service Council, with support from the Metropolitan Human Services Commission.

Not enrolled in school, and

either unemployed or

not in labor force

Total population age 16 to 19 = 21,442

43

School and Employment Status of Youth Age 16 to 19: North Tulsa, 2008-12

259965.3%

44811.3%

2576.5%

67717.0%


Source: US Census Bureau, 2008-12 American Community Survey.Prepared by the Community Service Council, with support from the Metropolitan Human Services Commission.



not in labor force

Total population age 16 to 19 = 3,981

44

I- 44

US

Hw

y 7

5

I- 244US Hwy 412US Hwy 64

US

Hw

y 1

69

State Hwy 51

Min

go

Val

ley

Exp

y

Keystone Expy

S U

nio

n A

ve

State Hwy 20

Creek Tpke

Broken Arrow Expy

Sta

te H

wy

11

Crosstown Expy

State Hwy 67

Che

roke

e E

xpy

N M

ingo

Va

lley

Exp

y

S M

emo

rial D

r

Red F

ork E

xpy

Okm

ulg

ee E

xpy

E 146th St N

N Y

ale

Ave

N P

eo r

ia A

ve

Gilcrease Expy

Sta

te H

wy

97

E 171st St SE 167th St S

Broken Arrow S Lp

N 4

th W

Ave

N 1

3th

E A

ve

21st St S

State Hwy 51

State Hwy 51US Hwy 412

US

Hw

y 7

5

I- 44

US Hwy 64

I- 244

Che

roke

e E

xpy

S U

nio

n A

ve

Creek Tpke

9400.05

9400.06

Tulsa

Disconnected YouthLess than 10%

10 to 24%

25 to 32%

33% or more

Percent Disconnected Youth Age 16 to19By Census Tract, 2008-12


Disconnected youth age 16 to 19:youth that are not enrolled in school and are either unemployed or notin the labor force.

City of Tulsa: 11.2% (2,395)Tulsa County: 10.3% (3,356)

45

School and Employment Status of Youth Age 20 to 24: Central Tulsa County (part of City of Tulsa), 2008-12

663538.0%

817046.8%

4712.7% 2194

12.6%


Source: US Census Bureau, 2008-12 American Community Survey PUMS.Prepared by the Community Service Council, with support from the Metropolitan Human Services Commission.



not in labor force

Estimated population age 20 to 24 = 17,470

46

I- 44

US

Hw

y 7

5

I- 244US Hwy 412US Hwy 64

US

Hw

y 1

69

State Hwy 51

Min

go

Val

ley

Exp

y

Keystone Expy

S U

nio

n A

ve

State Hwy 20

Creek Tpke

Broken Arrow Expy

Sta

te H

wy

11

Crosstown Expy

State Hwy 67

Che

roke

e E

xpy

N M

ingo

Va

lley

Exp

y

S M

emo

rial D

r

Red F

ork E

xpy

Okm

ulg

ee E

xpy

E 146th St N

N Y

ale

Ave

N P

eo r

ia A

ve

Gilcrease Expy

Sta

te H

wy

97

E 171st St SE 167th St S

Broken Arrow S Lp

N 4

th W

Ave

N 1

3th

E A

ve

21st St S

State Hwy 51

State Hwy 51US Hwy 412

US

Hw

y 7

5

I- 44

US Hwy 64

I- 244

Che

roke

e E

xpy

S U

nio

n A

ve

Creek Tpke

9400.05

9400.06

Tulsa

Disconnected YouthLess than 10%

10 to 24%

25 to 32%

33 to 49%

50% or more

Percent Disconnected Youth Age 20 to 24By Census Tract, 2008-12


Disconnected youth age 20 to 24:youth that are either unemployed or not in the labor force.

City of Tulsa: 30.1% (9,315)Tulsa County: 29.1% (12,335)

The data do not indicate if the youth that are not working are enrolled in school.

A third of Tulsa's youthage 20 to 24 are enrolledin school.

47

Real hourly wage by educational attainmentUnited states, 1973-2012

$0

$5

$10

$15

$20

$25

$30

$35

$40

$45

Less than high school High school Some college College Advanced degree

2012 dollars

Source: Economic Policy Institute, The State of Working America, 12th Edition, table 4.14.

$29.56

$24.46

$18.06

$16.77

$14.63

$37.34

$28.28

$17.30

$15.78

$11.75

48

Educational Attainment for Persons Age 25 & over: Tulsa and North Tulsa, 2008-12

Advanced degree

Bachelor's degree

Associate degree

Some college

High school graduate

Less than high school

0.0% 5.0% 10.0% 15.0% 20.0% 25.0% 30.0% 35.0% 40.0%

10.2%

19.6%

7.3%

23.5%

26.1%

13.4%

2.1%

6.4%

5.2%

23.5%

37.4%

25.4%

North Tulsa

Source: US Census Bureau, 2008-12 American Community Survey.

50

Participation in Public Assistance ProgramsNumber of Participants and Percentage of Population Participating

During a Single Month, Tulsa County, 2012

116,415

76,569

3,829

9,063

3,667

89,325

2,720

34,358

6,314

19.3%

47%

43.5%

20.2%

8.2%

14.8%

1.8%

55.1%

10.1%

Soonercare Total (185%/100%)

Soonercare <19 (185%)

WIC Infants (185%)

WIC age 1-5 (185%)

Child Care Subsidy <5 (185%)

SNAP Total (130%)

TANF <18 (50%)

Elem. School Free Lunch (130%)

Elem. School Reduced Lunch (185%)

050,000100,000150,000

Number of Participants

0% 20% 40% 60% 80%

Percent of Population

Source: Oklahoma Dept. of Human Services, Statistical Bulletin, Jan. 2012; Oklahoma State Dept. of Education, Low Income Report for 2011-12; US Census Bureau, 2010 Census; Oklahoma State Department of Health-WIC Service, Caseload Report, Jan. 2012; Oklahoma Health Care Authority, Fast Facts, Jan.2012.

51

Elementary School Students Eligible for Free and Reduced Lunch Program: Selected North Tulsa Elementary Schools, 2012-13 school year

Kendall-Whittier

Penn

Gilcrease

Celia Clinton

Bell

Hamilton

Mitchell

McKinley

Owen

Springdale

Chouteau

TPS Elementary total

0.0% 20.0% 40.0% 60.0% 80.0% 100.0%

80.6%

100.0%

100.0%

99.4%

83.6%

96.0%

95.6%

95.0%

90.9%

100.0%

82.4%

81.4%

8.9%

0.0%

0.0%

0.6%

12.5%

4.0%

4.4%

5.0%

9.1%

0.0%

8.2%

9.2%

Free

Source: Oklahoma State Dept of Education, Low Income Report for 2013-14.

52 HEALTH STATUS

53

Overall Health Status Ranking: Oklahoma, 1990-2013

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 20120

10

20

30

40

50

32 32

3638

41 42

3941

4341

44

41

48

43 42

4644

4947

49

46 46 4644

Source: United Health Foundation, “America’s Health Rankings 2013.”

54

Oklahoma’s Rankings in Health Determinants, 2013

Primary care physicians

Immunization - children

Public health funding

Lack of health insurance

Children in poverty

Infectious disease

Occup. fatalities

Violent crime

HS graduation

Physical inactivity

Obesity

Drug deaths

Smoking

All Determinants

4848

2632

4618

4541

27444546

3943


1=Healthiest state 50=Least healthy state

Beh

avio

rs

Polic

y &

C

linic

al

Care

Com

mun

ity

&

En

vir

onm

ent

55

Oklahoma’s Rankings in Health Outcomes, 2013

Premature death

Cancer deaths

Cardiovascular deaths

Infant mortality rate

Disparity in health status (education)

Poor physical health days

Poor mental health days

Diabetes

All Outcomes

47

43

48

44

27

42

41

43

45


1=Healthiest state 50=Least healthy state

56

Low Health Status: Oklahoma and United States, 1996-2013

1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 20120%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

13.1%14.0%

13.4%12.6%

17.4%

15.3%

19.6%

17.7%17.8%

19.7%18.7%

20.2%19.2%18.7%

19.6%20.5%20.2%

19.0%

12.9%12.9%12.8%12.6%13.0%13.9%14.0%

14.7%14.7%14.9%14.8%14.7%14.9%14.4%14.5%14.7%

16.9%17.9%

Percent of adults reporting fair or poor health

Oklahoma


1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 2012

2632

2825

42

34

4541 41

44 4246

43 42 4245

4138

Oklahoma’s rank

Note: Data for 2011 and 2012 are not directly comparable to previous years because of changes in weighting and sampling.

57

Obesity Prevalence: Oklahoma and United States, 1990-2013

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 20120%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%

11.6%11.6%11.9%14.1%12.1%

13.2%13.5%16.8%15.1%

19.5%21.1%

19.7%

22.6%22.9%24.4%

24.9%26.8%

28.8%28.8%

31.0%

32.0%31.3%31.1%

32.2%

11.6%11.6%12.6%12.6%

13.7%14.4%15.9%

16.8%16.5%

18.3%19.6%20.0%

20.9%21.9%

22.9%23.2%

24.4%

25.1%26.3%

26.7%

26.9%

27.5%

27.8%

27.6%

Percent of adults estimated to be obese

Oklahoma


199019921994199619982000200220042006200820102012

23 23 22

37

14 14 12

27

14

35 37

22

38

29

37 37 3844 43

46 4640

45 45

Oklahoma’s rank

Note: Data for 2011 and 2012 are not directly comparable to previous years because of changes in weighting and sampling.

58

Smoking Prevalence: Oklahoma and United States, 1990-2013

1990 1992 1994 1996 1998 2000 2002 2004 2006 2008 2010 20120%

5%

10%

15%

20%

25%

30%

35%33.0%

28.7%28.7%

26.6%25.0%

26.1%

21.7%24.1%

24.6%

23.9%25.2%

23.3%

28.7%26.6%

25.1%26.1%

25.1%25.1%25.8%

24.7%25.5%

23.7%26.1%

23.3%

29.5%

25.2%25.2%22.7%

23.0%22.2%22.7%23.5%23.2%

22.9%22.8%23.2%

23.2%23.2%22.0%

20.9%20.6%20.1%

19.8%18.4%17.9%17.3%

21.2%19.6%

Percent of adults who are current smokers

Oklahoma


199019921994199619982000200220042006200820102012

44 42 42 4037

45

15

28

3632

41

27

49

4236

47 46 47 48 46 48 48 47

39

Oklahoma’s rank

Note: Data for 2011 and 2012 are not directly comparable to previous years because of changes in sampling methodology.

70 Conclusion

71

Melanie Poulter

Senior Planner, Demography and Geography

Community Service Council

www.csctulsa.org

918-295-1285

[email protected]

Contact Information:

http://www.csctulsa.org/

community profile: north tulsa 2014 prepared by the community service council, with support from the...

Documents