oklahomaworks.gov · web viewwhites, constituting 77.1% of the 40-64 years of age cohort,...

EQUAL OPPORTUNITY:

The Oklahoma Workforce System

2

Policy, Research & Economic Analysiswww.oklahomaworks.gov

This page intentionally left blank.

Table of ContentsKey Findings1Introduction1Disability:2Current Workforce: 18 to 64 years2Future Workforce: Under 18 years5Age and Gender, 15 to64 years8Race and Ethnicity, 15 to 64 years10English Language Learners, 18 to 64 years13Religion15Unemployment, 40 to 64 years18Maps22Percentage of the Population with a Disability, by County, 18 to 64 years22Percentage of the Population with a Disability, by County, Under 18 years23Percentage of Population, 18-64 years, who speak English “Not Well” or “Not at All”24Minority Population, by County, 15 to 64 years25U.S. Census Bureau Oklahoma Public Use Microdata Area map26Appendix A: State of Oklahoma Data27Disability, 18 to 64 years27Disability, Under 18 years28Age and Gender, 15 to64 years30Race and Ethnicity, 15 to 64 years32English Language Learners, 18 to 64 years33Religious Affiliation, 200934Unemployment, 40 to 64 years35Appendix B: Public Use Microdata Area (PUMS) Data37Unemployment, 40 to 64 years37Appendix C: Workforce Development Area Level Data, sorted by Workforce Area61Central Oklahoma Workforce Development Area61Eastern Oklahoma Workforce Development Area69Northeast Oklahoma Workforce Development Area78South Central Oklahoma Workforce Development Area86Southern Oklahoma Workforce Development Area94Tulsa Workforce Development Area102Western Oklahoma Workforce Development Area109Appendix D: Comparison of Workforce Development Area Level Data, sorted by topic117 Disability, 18 to 64 years117Disability, Under 18 years120Age and Gender, 15 to64 years125Race and Ethnicity, 15 to 64 years136English Language Learners, 18 to 64 years148Religious Affiliation, 2009150Appendix E: County Level Data153 Adair153Alfalfa162Atoka171Beaver180Beckham189Blaine198Bryan207Caddo216Canadian225Carter234Cherokee243Choctaw252Cimarron261Cleveland270Coal279Comanche288Cotton298Craig307Creek316Custer325Delaware334Dewey343Ellis352Garfield361Garvin370Grady379Grant388Greer397Harmon406Harper415Haskell424Hughes433Jackson442Jefferson451Johnston460Kay469Kingfisher478Kiowa487Latimer496Le Flore505Lincoln514Logan523Love532McClain541McCurtain550McIntosh559Major568Marshall577Mayes586Murray595Muskogee604Noble613Nowata622Okfuskee631Oklahoma640Okmulgee649Osage658Ottawa667Pawnee676Payne685Pittsburg694Pontotoc703Pottawatomie712Pushmataha721Roger Mills730Rogers739Seminole748Sequoyah757Stephens766Texas775Tillman784Tulsa793Wagoner803Washington812Washita821Woods830Woodward839

Policy, Research & Economic Analysis18www.oklahomaworks.gov

Key Findings

Introduction

The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) is tasked with enforcing federal laws that make it illegal to discriminate against job applicants and employees who are included in several diverse categories. These protected groups include age, disability, national origin, race/color, religion, and sex, among others (www.eeoc.gov).

The purpose of this report is to bring awareness of cohorts of Oklahoma citizens possibly at risk for discrimination. Data and analyses are presented for five categories specifically associated with Equal Opportunity enforcement. Age ranges and locations are aligned as closely as possible contingent upon data availability. These categories include:

· Disability (18 to 64 years; Under 18 years);

· Age (15 to 64 years)

· Gender (15 to 64 years)

· Race and Ethnicity (15 to 64 years);

· English Language Learners (18 to 64 years);

· Religion (no age parameter); and,

· Unemployment (40 to 64 years; limited to data for the State as a whole, and the 28 Oklahoma Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMs) Areas defined by the Oklahoma Department of Commerce for the U. S. Census Bureau).

Analyses highlights are presented within each topic according to analysis level: statewide, workforce area or PUMs, and county. State maps illustrating Disability Rates, English Language Learner Proficiency, and Minority Population by County immediately follow the analysis summary. An additional graphic produced by the U. S. Census Bureau illustrating the Oklahoma PUMs Areas is also included. Finally, full data tables are available for review in the following appendices:

1. Appendix A: Statewide data;

2. Appendix B: Selected data for PUMs Areas;

3. Appendix C: Local workforce development area (WFDA) data, sorted by Workforce Area;

4. Appendix D: WFDA data, sorted by topic; and,

5. Appendix E: County-level data.

Disability

Source: American Community Survey, 2016, 5-year Estimates

The U.S. Census Bureau collects disability data aggregated by disability type, termed “difficulties.” Six unique difficulty categories are utilized:

· Hearing;

· Vision;

· Cognitive;

· Ambulatory;

· Self-Care; and,

· Independent Living.

The data is self-reported by American Community Survey respondents based upon their perception of the existence of a disability/difficulty. It should be noted that this survey methodology may introduce biases into the statistical results. Some respondents may perceive themselves as experiencing a disability which, under actual medical examination, may not be substantiated. As a result, these individuals may not meet the parameters for possessing a disability for the purpose of, for example, participating in programs aimed at assisting individuals with disabilities. Conversely, when responding to the survey, some individuals may be reluctant to disclose the existence of a disability/difficulty that could result in similar programmatic qualification. This may be due to a number of factors such as the desire for personal confidentiality in response to a mandatory governmental survey, the personal denial of an existing condition, or the rationalization of an existing condition being attributable to, for example, normal aging, and therefore not consequential. As a result, the data reported must be considered solely as the opinion or perception of the survey respondents.

Under the survey methodology, each respondent may select as many as six difficulties. As a result, the total number of disabilities/difficulties reported will exceed the total number of survey respondents. Statistics are provided for two age categories: 18 to 64 years and Under 18 years. While the 18- to 64-year age bracket represents the current workforce, and is therefore the most relevant information for the purposes of this report, the statistics included for the Under 18-years cohort provide insight into the characteristics of the future workforce.

Current Workforce, 18 to 64 years

Statewide Data Findings

· Overall, the state population is estimated at 3,794,815, of which, 2,301,565 (60.7%) report being between the ages of 18 and 64. Of that 2.3M, over 319,900 report a disability in at least one of the categories indicated above resulting in a state-wide disability rate of 13.9% for this age group. Due to the exclusion of the 65-year-and-older age brackets, this disability rate is significantly lower than the overall 15.7% disability rate for the state which includes all Oklahoma citizens.

· The Oklahoma statewide disability rate of 13.9% for the age 18-64 cohort is significantly higher than the national rate of 10.3% for the same age group. Across the nation, Oklahoma citizens, age 18-64, report the 6th highest disability rate. Only Alabama (14.5%), Mississippi (14.8%), Arkansas (15.0%), Kentucky (15.8%), and West Virginia (17.4%) report higher disability rates for this age group.

· Disability rates are comparable for gender – 15.8% for males versus 15.6% for females.

· Disability rates for specific races and ethnicities in this age group vary significantly. Oklahomans who identify themselves as American Indian or Alaska Native report the highest rate of disability at 17.4%. Asians report the lowest incidence of disability at only 4.4%. Individuals of Hispanic ethnicity, regardless of race, experience a disability rate of 8.5%.

· Within the 18-64 age bracket, ambulatory difficulties are reported most frequently. Of the 319,000 individuals reporting a disability, 53% report experiencing ambulatory difficulties, equivalent to an estimated 169,490 residents. This figure translates into 7.4% of the total state population, age 18-64.

Cognitive difficulties rank second in prevalence at 38.9%; equal to 5.4% of the total state population age 18-64. Self-Care is the least frequently reported difficulty among individuals with disabilities at 16.7%. These patterns of prevalence of disability type are also reflected at the workforce development area and county levels.

Workforce Area Data Findings:

· Central Oklahoma WFDA exhibits the largest number of individuals with reported disabilities in the 18-64 age bracket at 103,191; however, this only accounts for 12.4% of the total population in that age range. Tulsa WFDA exhibits a similar disability rate of 12.5% but, due to population size in this age group, this percentage only accounts for 57,688 individuals.

· In a comparison of workforce development areas, the greatest variance in disability rates is found among respondents reporting a visual difficulty. Southern Oklahoma WFDA reports the highest incidence rate at 27.3% while the Eastern Oklahoma WFDA only exhibits a reported rate of 19.3% -- an eight percentage-point different.

· Overall disability rates, including all disability/difficulty types, for the workforce development areas vary from a low of 11.8% in the Western Oklahoma WFDA to a high of 18.5% in the Southern Oklahoma WFDA:

Workforce Development Area

Disability Rate

Central

12.4%

Eastern

17.2%

Northeast

15.8%

South Central

16.4%

Southern

18.5%

Tulsa

12.5%

Western

11.8%

· Workforce Areas reporting the highest incidence of disability type include:

Disability Type

Incidence of Disability Type


Hearing difficulty

26.0%

Northeast

Vision difficulty

27.3%

Southern

Cognitive difficulty

40.7%

Tulsa

Ambulatory difficulty

56.5%

Eastern

Self-Care difficulty

18.9%

Southern

Independent Living difficulty

35.9%

Southern

County Data Findings

· At the county level, overall disability rates vary from a low of 6.3% in Texas County to a high of 28.8% in Marshall County. A map illustrating the disability rates for every Oklahoma county follows this analysis summary.

· Counties reporting the highest incidence of disability type as a percentage of individuals with disabilities include:

Disability Type


County

Hearing difficulty

44.4%

Blaine

Vision difficulty

43.1%

Marshall


55.6%

Beckham


78.7%

Greer


32.1%

Beckham


64.2%

Love

· Counties reporting the lowest incidence of disability type as a percentage of individuals with disabilities include:

Disability Type


County

Hearing difficulty

13.2%

Greer

Vision difficulty

11.5%

Beckham


13.9%

Texas


35.4%

Blaine


5.5%

Greer


16.3%

Blaine

Future Workforce, Under 18 years


· Approximately 25% of the state’s population is under the age of 18; a total of 950,000 residents. Of these, 46,574 reported the existence of a disability, resulting in a disability rate of 4.9%. This rate is significantly lower than the state rate for 18 to 64 year-olds of 13.9%. Multiple factors may contribute to this differential. Many disabilities manifest as the individual grows older. Conversely, impediments are often difficult or impossible to diagnose in very young children. Some of the disabilities reported to the U.S. Census Bureau are inappropriate for certain age ranges, delaying the reporting of those disabilities.

· Disability rates for this cohort are higher in males as compared with females – 5.6% for males versus 4.1% for females.

· Disability rates for specific races vary significantly. Individuals who self-identify as American Indian or Alaskan Native report the greatest rate of disability for this age group at 5.9%.

Asians report the lowest incidence of disability (2.1%). Additional data indicate Asians also tend to exhibit the lowest disability rates at the WFDA area and county levels. Further research is necessary to determine if this trend presents an accurate representation of the disability rates for individuals of Asian descent or if other factors such as privacy concerns, a reluctance to report the existence of disabilities, or cultural beliefs may be skewing the data.

· Within the Under 18 age bracket, cognitive difficulties are reported most frequently. Of the 46,574 individuals reporting a disability, 65.8% report experiencing cognitive difficulties, an estimated 30,662 residents. This figure translates into 3.2% of the total state population Under 18 years. Vision difficulties rank second in prevalence at 22.3%; equal to 1.1% of the cohort population. Due to the age limitations, independent living difficulties are not applicable for this population. These patterns of prevalence of disability type are also reflected at the workforce development area and county levels.

Workforce Area Data Findings:

· Central Oklahoma WFDA exhibits the largest number of individuals with reported disabilities in the Under 18 age bracket at 15,701; however, this only accounts for 4.6% of the total population in that age range. Southern Oklahoma WFDA experiences the highest overall disability rate among the workforce development areas at 6.1%, with a total of 5,979 residents reporting some type of disability.

· As indicated previously, cognitive disabilities are reported most frequently; however, there is a large variance in the rates among different workforce development areas. Northeast Oklahoma WFDA experiences the highest rate of this difficulty at 73.9%. While it is still the most prevalent disability type in Southern Oklahoma WFDA, cognitive issues are only reported by 58.7% among residents with disabilities – a differential of 15.2 percentage points.

· Overall disability rates, including all disability/difficulty types, for the workforce development areas vary from a low of 3.6% in the South Central Oklahoma WFDA to a high of 5.6% in the Southern Oklahoma WFDA:


Disability Rate

Central

4.1%

Eastern

4.4%

Northeast

4.5%

South Central

3.6%

Southern

5.6%

Tulsa

3.7%

Western

3.9%

· Workforce Areas reporting the highest incidence of disability type include:

Disability Type



Hearing difficulty

22.5%

Western

Vision difficulty

26.8%

Southern


73.9%

Northeast


14.3%

Eastern


16.1%

Eastern


Not Applicable for this Age Cohort


· At the county level, overall disability rates vary from a low of 1.0% in Roger Mills County to a high of 14.5% in Marshall County. Ellis County also reports a relatively low disability rate of 1.7%. The second highest disability rate is exhibited by Murray County at 8.7%, nearly six percentage points below the top-ranked Marshall County. A map illustrating the disability rates in this age group for every Oklahoma county follows this analysis summary.

· Some counties report 0.0% disability rates for individuals under the age of 18, particularly for ambulatory difficulties. Of those counties reporting disabilities, the highest incidence of disability type among individuals with disabilities include:

Disability Type


County

Hearing difficulty

44.4%

Blaine

Vision difficulty

45.3%

Caddo


100.0%

Roger Mills


78.7%

Greer


32.1%

Beckham


64.2%

Love

· Not including those counties that report 0.0% disability rates for this age cohort, counties reporting the lowest incidence of disability type, calculated as a percentage of total individuals with disabilities include:

Disability Type


County

Hearing difficulty

13.2%

Greer

Vision difficulty

11.5%

Beckham


13.9%

Texas


35.4%

Blaine


5.5%

Greer


16.3%

Blaine

· As indicated previously, the prevalence of particular types of disabilities at the county level generally mirror the state and WFDA results, with Cognitive difficulties most frequently reported for the Under 18 age group. Ten counties exhibit exceptions to this trend:

County

Most Prominent Disability


Comparative Percentage of Cognitive Difficulty

Caddo

Vision difficulty

45.3%

43.6%

Dewey

Vision difficulty

53.1%

31.3%

Ellis

Hearing difficulty

Vision difficulty

47.1%*

35.3%

Greer

Hearing difficulty

43.0%

40.5%

Harper

Vision difficulty

80.8%*

0.0%

Kingfisher

Hearing difficulty

36.8%

28.6%

Love

Vision difficulty

44.7%

30.9%

Marshall

Vision difficulty

37.6%

30.9%

Texas

Vision difficulty


52.8%

52.8%

Woodward

Hearing difficulty

47.1%

19.7%

* Small population of in this age group with disabilities.

Age and Gender, 15 to 64 years

Source: EMSI, Version 2018.1

EMSI reports population data base upon 5-year age brackets. In order to best represent the current workforce, ten age brackets were selected ranging from 15 to 19 years of age through 60 to 64 years of age.


· The Oklahoma workforce is contracting, with fewer workers projected in this age range within the next 10 years. The total 2017 estimated statewide population for the 15- to 64-year-old age group was just over 2.53 million. By 2027, that number is expected to decline by 0.9% to 2.51 million. In 2017, this age group accounted for 64.2% of the total population; by 2027, it will only account for 61.5%.

· The population of the state is aging. The number of residents over the age of 65 is expected to increase by 21.7% in the next 10 years. During that same time frame, the number of youth under the age of 15 will only increase by 3.2%.

· Regarding gender, in 2017, the age group is split relatively equally – 50.2% male and 49.8% female. While the overall population is anticipated to decrease by 2027, that decline disproportionately affects females. The gap between the genders will widen by 0.2 percentage points, 50.4% male compared with 49.6% female.

· Five of the ten age brackets examined will experience a decline in population, ranging from 4.6% to 15.8%. The greatest decline is in the 55 to 59 years of age bracket with the population dropping from 256,000 in 2017 to 216,000 in 2027.

Workforce Area Data Findings

· Six of the seven workforce development areas are anticipated to experience a decline in the population for the 15- to 64-year age bracket. These losses range from a low of 0.2% in Tulsa WFDA, a decline in population of approximately 10,000 residents, to a high of 4.8% in South Central Oklahoma WFDA, a loss of 9,700 residents. Only the Central Oklahoma WFDA is expected to experience an increase in population for this age range, growing by 22,300 individuals (2.4%).

· While overall experiencing population declines, there is growth in particular age ranges in each workforce development area. These are predominantly found in the prime working ages between 30 to 49 years. The areas containing the two major metropolitan regions – Central Oklahoma WFDA and Tulsa WFDA – experience growth in the workforce at young ages, 15 to 24 years. As a result, the workforce in these two areas trends younger.

· Both male and female populations decline in six of the seven workforce areas. As indicated previously, only Central Oklahoma WFDA experiences an overall increase in population for this age group. In that area, males will increase by 3.0% while females only increase by 1.8%.


· Over 85% of counties in the state will experience a decline in the population age 15-64 by 2027. Only 11 counties (Canadian, McClain, Oklahoma, Bryan, Cleveland, Logan, Payne, Love, Tulsa, Wagoner, and Marshall) will experience increases in population for this age group. These increases range from a low of 0.1% in Marshall County to a high of 8.0% in Canadian County.

Conversely, the greatest loss of population in this age group will occur in Cimarron County, a decline of 21.3%, -245 residents. It should be noted Cimarron County reports the lowest population in the state in 2017 and exhibits a population density of only 2 persons per square mile. For all age brackets, the county is expected to lose 313 residents by 2027, an overall decline of 15%.

· Like the WFDAs, the population in the 30-49 years-of-age brackets is increasing in 87% of Oklahoma counties. In comparison, less than one-half of the counties are projected to increase populations in the 15-24 years-of-age bracket.

· Examining the population changes by gender reveals that women are adversely affected at a higher rate than men. In two-thirds of the counties, the loss of population for females exceeds that of males, with a differential of up to 9.2 percentage points. Cimarron County experiences the greatest gap with a 16.8% loss among males in the 15-64 years-of-age cohort compared with a loss of 26.0% for females. Coal County also experiences a large differential of 7.8 percentage points, anticipating an 8.8% drop for males and a 16.6% drop in the population of females.

This trend is also applicable to many of the counties that are anticipated to increase in population for this age cohort. Of the 11 counties listed previously, six experience a lower rate of growth for females than for males. Wagoner County exhibits a 2.0% growth in the number of males by 2027 while predictions indicate the population of females will decline by -1.1% -- a gap of 3.1 percentage points. Tulsa’s population by gender will grow equally, reflecting an increase of 0.8% for both males and females. On the other end of the spectrum, McClain County is predicted to provide the greatest differential in which females will grow at a higher rate than males – 7.4% versus 4.7% respectively.

Race and Ethnicity, 15 to 64 years


The racial and ethnic categories utilized in this report are designated by the U.S. Census Bureau. Data are generally self-reported to the Bureau by survey respondents who are instructed to select the racial/ethnic categories with which they most closely identify. Respondents may select multiple races, but only one ethnicity.

Racial categories utilized include:

· American Indian or Alaskan Native;

· Asian;

· Black or African American;

· Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander

· Two or more races; and,

· White.

Ethnicity categories are limited to:

· Hispanic; or,

· Non-Hispanic.


· According to EMSI, in 2017 an estimated 2,537,445 Oklahoma citizens are between the ages of 15 and 64, approximately 64.2% of the total population.

· The most prevalent race, regardless of ethnicity, is reported as White, representing 74.3% of this age group. American Indian or Alaskan Native ranks second, accounting for 9.3% of the age 15-64 population. Only 4,855 Oklahomans self-identify as Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, less than 1% of the total population.

· When ethnicity is considered in conjunction with race, White, Non-Hispanic describes the largest group with 65.8% representation. American Indian or Alaskan Native, Non-Hispanic ranks second with 8.5%. The racial/ethnic combination of Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, Hispanic represents the smallest cohort at less than 1% of the age-group population – a total of only 1,018 individuals.

· A comparison of ethnicity, regardless of race, indicates that Non-Hispanics are approximately nine times more prevalent than Hispanics – 89.8% compared with 10.2%, respectively.

· Projections for 2027 reveal that the overall population in this age bracket will decrease by 0.9% and the racial and ethnic diversity will change significantly:

· Regarding ethnicity, the Non-Hispanic population is anticipated to decrease by 2.8% while the Hispanic population increases by 16.4%.

· The White racial category is predicted to maintain its majority of the population, but decline by 1.4 percentage points to 72.9%. White is the only racial category anticipated to decrease at the statewide level.

· The Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander and Asian races will grow substantially, by 24.9% and 16.4% respectively. Despite these gains, representation by these two races among this age population will remain small with a combined total of only 3.3% of the population.

· The representation of multiracial Oklahomans is also expected to increase, growing from 5.3% in 2017 to 5.9% by 2027.


· The population of White, Non-Hispanics is projected to decrease in every workforce area. This decline ranges from a low of 2.2% in the Central Oklahoma WFDA to a high of 7.7% across the Western Oklahoma WFDA.

· Four of the seven WFDAs are projected to report a loss in the Black or African American population. These include Eastern Oklahoma WFDA, South Central Oklahoma WFDA, Southern Oklahoma WFDA, and Tulsa WFDA. No other race is expected to decline in that many areas.

· Regarding ethnicity, six of the seven workforce development areas will experience a loss in the number of Non-Hispanic residents. Only Central Oklahoma WFDA is anticipated to report an increase in this demographic of 0.1% or 600 residents. Conversely, the Hispanic population will grow in every WFDA. The Central Oklahoma and Tulsa WFDAs will experience the greatest growth in Hispanics at 19.1%. The lowest Hispanic growth rate of 5.0% is found in South Central Oklahoma WFDA.


· As discussed previously at the statewide and WFDA levels, the population of the White racial group (regardless of ethnicity) trends downward in most of Oklahoma’s counties. Only six of Oklahoma’s 77 counties are projected to experience increases in this racial cohort including Canadian (+6.5%), McClain (+5.6%), Logan (+0.9%), Oklahoma (+0.8%), Bryan (+0.5%), and Payne (+0.2%). Five of these six counties are home to cities with populations in excess of 20,000 residents, with Bryan County the exception. The largest city in Bryan County is Durant with an estimated population of 16,700.

As a major metropolitan area, the population of Oklahoma County/Oklahoma City MSA, is anticipated to grow in all racial categories except Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islanders, which is projected to decrease by 4.8%. Due to the small overall population in this racial cohort, this loss equates to only -29 residents.

Tulsa County, while home to a major metropolitan area similar to Oklahoma County, is predicted to experience a decline in the White racial category of -2.1%, a loss of 6,523. As a result, Tulsa’s population will become more diverse with significant increases in the Asian (+25.9%), Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander (+35.8%), and Two or More Races (+13.3%) cohorts. These increases equate to an additional 7,100 Tulsa County residents.

· The Hispanic population (regardless of race) is expected to increase in most Oklahoma counties by 2027. The representation of this ethnic population, in this age bracket, is predicted to grow in 71 counties. That growth ranges from 1.6% in Okfuskee County to 45.6% (+278 Hispanic residents) in Blaine County. Five counties will experience losses in this population including Murray (-34.5%, a loss of 194 Hispanic residents), Grady (-18.4%, -390 residents), Harmon (-7.6%, -37), Washita (-5.5%, -37) and Atoka (-4.9%, -15).

Conversely, most counties are projected to experience a decline in Non-Hispanic populations. Only six counties are expected to report increases in the Non-Hispanic population by 2027: Canadian (+6.7%), McClain (+5.2%), Bryan (+1.6%), Payne (+0.9%), Cleveland (+0.8%), and Logan (+0.7%).

English Language Learners, 18 to 64 years


The U.S. Census Bureau collects data regarding English usage and perceived fluency via the American Community Survey. Survey recipients are first requested to identify the primary language spoken in their home. Language choices are limited to “Spanish,” “Other Indo-European Language,” “Asian and Pacific Island Language,” or “Other Language.”

Respondents who indicate they speak a language other than English are then asked to estimate their level of fluency in English (“How well does this person speak English?”). Four responses are available to this question: “Very Well,” “Well,” “Not Well,” or “Not at All.”


· Over 254,000 Oklahoma residents between the ages of 18 and 64 report speaking a primary language other than English in their home. This represents 10.8% of the population in this age bracket. Conversely, 89.2% of respondents indicated they spoke “English Only” in the home.

· Spanish is the most commonly reported primary language other than English. Over 66% of non-native English speakers report speaking Spanish at home. Asian and Pacific Island Languages rank second in prevalence, but at a much lower level of 16.2%.

· Statewide, approximately 74.9% of non-native English speakers indicated they speak English either “Very Well” or “Well.” An additional 18.5% rate their level of English proficiency at “Not Well,” with 6.6% reporting that they are unable to speak English at all.

· As a whole, native Spanish speakers rate their perceived English proficiency the lowest with 31.1% indicating they speak English either “Not Well” or “Not at All.” In comparison, individuals who report they speak “Other Indo-European Languages” report low English proficiency levels at only 6.9%.

· “Other Language” speakers report a low English proficiency level of 5.8%. While this proficiency level is below that of those who speak “Other Indo-European Languages” reported previously, there is no indication of the types of languages this category includes. It can be assumed that the variety of languages and dialects is very broad. As a result, this data point provides limited insight into identifying Oklahomans who may or may not be at risk of being marginalized due to language preferences.


· Workforce Areas that encompass the state’s two major metropolitan districts exhibit the highest non-native English speaking populations. The Central Oklahoma WFDA, including the Oklahoma City Metropolitan Statistical Area (MSA), and Tulsa WFDA, incorporating a majority of the Tulsa MSA, report non-native English speaking rates of 13.5% and 12.2% respectively. Those individuals in the Tulsa WFDA exhibit a lower level of English proficiency than in any other Area with 29.7% of non-native English speakers indicating they speak English either “Not Well” or “Not at All,” – 8.1% are unable to speak any English.

· The highest rates of English proficiency (“Very Well” or “Well”) among non-native English speakers are reported in the Northeast and South Central Oklahoma WFDAs at 84.9% and 84.7%, respectively.

· In every WFDA, the majority of non-native English speakers speak Spanish in the home. Over 74% of non-native English speakers in the Western Oklahoma WFDA speak Spanish. The lowest percentage of native Spanish speakers (53.0%) reside in Northeast WFDA where a relatively significant percentage of non-English speakers report the use of other Indo-European Languages (14.3%).

· In all WFDAs, native Spanish speakers, and to a much lesser degree, native Asian/Pacific Island language speakers, rate their English proficiency lowest – between 19% and 32% indicate they speak English “Not Well” or “Not at All.” Conversely, residents who speak other Indo-European Languages or Other Languages in general, report a range of between 1% and 10% who speak English at that same level.


· In 14 of Oklahoma’s 77 counties, fewer than 10% of the non-native English speakers rate themselves as “Not Well” or “Not at All.”

· No Cotton County residents reported speaking English either “Not Well” or “Not at All.” Approximately 2.3% of Cotton County residents report being non-native English speakers, predominantly speaking Spanish in the home.

· Greer County also reports a very low percentage of individuals who feel they speak English either “Not Well” or “Not at All” at 1.7%.

· Harper County reported the highest percentage of non-native English speakers who felt they spoke English either “Not Well” or “Not at All” at 50.2%. Overall, Harper County reported 486 residents – 22.7% of the age 18-64 cohort – who spoke a primary language other than English, most of whom spoke Spanish (94.7%).

· Texas County also experiences a high level of non-native English speakers who indicate their English proficiency is either “Not Well” or “Not at All” at 39.9%. This equates to 2,077 county residents, 15.7% of the 18-64 years of age cohort.

Religious Affiliation, 2009

While religion is a key component of concern for discrimination regarding equal opportunity, data pertaining to religious beliefs and affiliations is limited. Privately-conducted surveys are the predominant source of information available including the Pew Research Center Religious Landscape Study (http://www.pewforum.org/religious-landscape-study/state/oklahoma/), a 2009 Religious Affiliation study conducted by InfoGroup and reported via Social Explorer at the University of Wisconsin Extension (https://fyi.uwex.edu/community-data-tools/2011/12/05/detailed-data-on-religion-by-county/), and a 2010 Gallup Poll that quantifies perceived feelings of religious discrimination. Additional information is referenced in this report from local newspaper articles and the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunities Commission (EEOC). Despite the limitations of these sources, the statistics included in this report can assist in building a framework for the context of Oklahomans’ religious beliefs, and help to identify the potential for increased risk factors of religious discrimination.

The surveys grouped religious families into categories identifying major religious traditions. These included:

1. Evangelical Protestant;

2. Mainline Protestant;

3. Historically Black Protestant;

4. Roman Catholic;

5. Jewish Congregations;

6. Latter-Day Saint (Mormon);

7. Islamic;

8. Hindu;

9. Buddhist;

10. Orthodox Christian;

11. Jehovah’s Witnesses; and,

12. Other (including the non-religious categories of atheist and agnostic).


· Most Oklahomans identify with the Evangelical Protestant church. Over 4,200 congregations exist with nearly one million members – 56.7% of all survey respondents. Another 18% identify themselves as Mainline Protestant while 8.4% are Roman Catholic. While there are 66 Latter-Day Saint (Mormon) congregations identified in the state, the membership of those congregations constitutes only 0.7%.

· As indicated above, Roman Catholicism only accounted for 8.4% of the total state religious affiliation, but at 804 members per congregation, presents the highest average congregation size. This congregation size is 2.3 times the size of the next largest, Hindu at 350 average members and Mainline Protestants at 346 average members per congregation. In short, while reporting fewer religious institutions, the Roman Catholic faith draws greater average numbers of members to each institution from the surrounding geographic area.

· At the time of the studies, there was minimal representation in Oklahoma of Non-Christian faiths. Less than one percent each of Oklahomans identified their religion as Islam, Hindu, or Buddhist. Together, these faiths only accounted for nine congregations with a total combined membership of less than 2,000. Further research, however, indicates that these faiths may have grown significantly since the surveys were conducted. According to a 2015 article in the Tulsa World (http://www.tulsaworld.com/how-many-mosques-in-oklahoma/image_72e4dd94-4a33-5c7c-8ed4-ae352eb968b8.html), Islam now boasts nine religious centers, predominantly located in Oklahoma City and Tulsa, but with one each in Stillwater and Edmond as well as two in Lawton. Likewise, temples of the Hindu faith appear to have increased from one to three since the survey, those being located in Oklahoma City, Tulsa, and Edmond.

· A 2010 Gallup Poll survey indicated that 48% of Muslim respondents believed they had experienced religious discrimination. Thirty-one percent of Latter Day Saint (Mormon) followers held the same belief. Only 20% of Catholics and 18% of Protestants felt they had experienced some type of bias based upon their religion. (http://news.gallup.com/poll/157082/islamophobia-understanding-anti-muslimsentiment-west.aspx).

· While EEOC data does not appear to be available at the state level, nationally, religion-based discrimination charges filed with the EEOC rose steadily from 1997 to 2016. In 1997, the EEOC received 1,709 filings based upon perceived discrimination due to religion; 20 years later, in 2016, the EEOC received 3,825 filings, an increase of more than 123%. Additionally, the mixture of findings has altered with significant monetary impact. In 1997, 12.1% of charges received merited resolutions with a monetary benefit total of $2.2 million dollars ($3.3M in 2016 dollars). After reaching a peak at 24.1% merit resolutions with monetary benefits of $6.4M 2007 ($7.5M 2016), merit resolutions dropped in 2016 to 14.9%. Despite this 2016 drop in the percentage of claims upheld, awards rose as monetary benefits reached $10.1 million dollars. Clearly, while merit was found in a lesser number of religion-based EEOC claims in 2016, the average damage award/settlement per merited finding increased. (https://www.eeoc.gov/eeoc/statistics/enforcement/religion.cfm).


· Workforce Area trends generally mimic the statewide trends. Evangelical Protestant members account for the majority of congregations as well as congregational membership at this geographical level of examination. Membership rates for this religion vary from a low of 48.2% in Tulsa WFDA, where the diversity of reported religious affiliation is significantly greater, to a high of 68.8% in the South Central WFDA.

· Roman Catholicism represents a greater percentage of members in the Central Oklahoma and Tulsa WFDA at 11.7% and 9.6% respectively. These figures are predominantly based upon a greater concentration of Catholic institutions in the metropolitan areas. Likewise, non-Christian faiths are centered in the metropolitan areas. As a result, the Central Oklahoma and Tulsa WFDAs must be cognizant of a higher risk of religious discrimination against those of Roman Catholic, Islamic, Hindu, and Buddhist faiths.

· As a percentage of overall congregational membership, the Southern Oklahoma WFDA boasts the largest concentration of Jehovah’s Witnesses. In terms of membership counts, at over 5,500 members, this equates to a greater number of congregational members than those identified in all WFDAs except the Central Oklahoma WFDA (6,900 members).

· Members of the Church of Latter-Day Saints (Mormon) are concentrated more heavily in the Northeast WFDA with an overall representation of 1.2%; the Western Oklahoma WFDA ranks second in member percentage for this religion at 1.0%. Between these two WFDAs, the survey reports Mormon religious membership totaling more than 3,000.

County Area Data Findings

· Again, at the county level, most Oklahomans identify with the Evangelical Protestant religion. Across the state, this faith represents 63.6% of all congregations and 56.7% of religious membership. On average, there are 55 Evangelical Protestant congregations in every county, each reporting an average of 232 members.

· Latimer County reports the highest concentration of Evangelical Protestant congregations representing 85.7% of all religious congregations located in the county. Alfalfa County is unique in that not only does it report the lowest percentage of Evangelical Protestant congregations at 46.7%, the second-ranked religion in the county accounts for nearly as many congregations – Mainline Protestant at 43.3%.

· At the county level, most of the religious categories exhibited very low levels of concentration. These included Jewish Congregations, Latter-Day Saint (Mormon), Islamic, Hindu, Buddhist, Orthodox Christian, and Jehovah’s Witnesses. In most counties, congregations for these religions were non-existent. In those counties where congregations were reported, it was in very low numbers, totaling between one and three congregations across all seven religions. The metropolitan areas were the exception with greater diversity of religious preference reported in Oklahoma and Tulsa Counties, and to a lesser extent, in Cleveland County (Norman).

Unemployment – 40 to 64 years

With regard to unemployment figures, data concerning individuals in the protected age category of 40 and over is difficult to extract. Most sources provide data broken into age ranges inconsistent with these protected class parameters. The data provided in this report was mined via the Data Ferret application from the U.S. Census Bureau’s 2016 American Community Survey Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMs). Unfortunately, the data from this Sample is only available at the national, regional, state and the PUMs levels; not at the county level.

As the Bureau’s designated State Data Center, the Oklahoma Department of Commerce designates the extent of each PUMs Area (PUMA). The latest delineation of PUMAs took place in 2010. Currently, 28 PUMAs are defined for the state of Oklahoma including six for the Oklahoma City area and four for the Tulsa area.

Due to population requirements for the designation of a PUMs Area, each PUMA may include several counties or only a single part of a county, but are not defined or limited by county geographical boundaries. As a result, parts of a single county may be allocated to multiple different PUMAs. This methodology eliminates the ability to either 1) aggregate data into a WFDA, or 2) disaggregate data applicable to individual counties. A U.S. Census Bureau graphic of Oklahoma PUMAs is provided following the analysis section of this report.

For the purposes of this report, data is provided and analyzed at the state level and at the PUMA level. At the county level, when a county is split between multiple PUMAs, an attempt is made to determine in which PUMA the greatest population and the largest population centers lie. No analysis is provided at this quasi-county level, however unemployment data for individuals age 40 and over is provided in each county section of Appendix D with the notation that the data is applicable to the entire PUMA in which that county can best be represented.


· Nearly 1.2 million Oklahoma citizens report being between the ages of 40 and 64; of that cohort, 843,779 are included in the labor force. This equates to a labor force participation rate of 70.4%. This participation rate is significantly lower than the national rate of 74.3% for the same age group.

· In 2016, statewide, 38,871 respondents reported they were unemployed, representing an overall unemployment rate of 4.6%. Nationally, for a comparable period, the unemployment rate was lower than the Oklahoma rate, at 4.1%.

· Females were 8% less likely to be unemployed than males. Of the total male population within this age cohort, 4.8% reported being unemployed. For females, the unemployment rate was 4.4%.

· With regards to race, respondents self-identifying as Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander reported the highest unemployment rate at 49.4%. It must be noted, however, that this is a very small population in this age cohort, accounting for only 2,200 residents or approximately 1/5th of 1%. Those respondents of Black or African American race reported the second highest unemployment rate at 8.9%. This equated to 4,590 individuals participating in the labor market, but without a job.

· Asians reported the lowest incidence of unemployment at 3.5%. Again, while not as limited a population as those in the Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander category, respondents self-reporting as Asian only account for 1.8% of the cohort.

· Whites, constituting 77.1% of the 40-64 years of age cohort, experienced an unemployment rate of 3.7%.

· Respondents identifying themselves as of Hispanic ethnicity are more likely to be unemployed than Non-Hispanics, 5.1% and 4.6% respectively. Hispanics represent 7.4% of the 40-64 years’ age bracket.

· Individuals in this age cohort who self-identify as possessing a disability participate in the labor force at only 36.3% and the unemployment rate is 10.4%. In comparison, individuals without a disability exhibit a 79.2% labor force participation rate and a 3.9% unemployment rate.

PUMA Data Findings

· The highest labor force participation rates for the 40-64 years’ bracket are found in the Roger (Central) and Wagoner (West) Counties – Claremore City PUMA at 80.8%. Similar rates are found in two of the six Oklahoma City PUMAs:

· Oklahoma County (Northwest) – Oklahoma City (Northwest Central) and Bethany Cities PUMA at 80.6%; and,

· Oklahoma County (Northeast) – Edmond and Oklahoma City (North Central) Cities PUMA at 80.7%.

The four Tulsa County PUMAs also report relatively high labor force participation rates varying between 72.6% in the north Owasso city area to 79.3% in the southeast Broken Arrow area. Both of these metropolitan areas boast labor force participation rates significantly higher than the state average. This result would be anticipated based upon the increased variety and density of jobs in these large metropolitan areas.

· At 58.8%, the lowest labor force participation rate among the 28 state PUMAs is reported in the PUMA aggregated from Adair, Cherokee, and Sequoyah counties. These three counties, located in the Eastern Oklahoma WFDA are predominantly rural with population densities ranging from 40 to 63 persons per square mile. Only one city in the PUMA boasts a population greater than 10,000 residents – Tahlequah, with an estimated population of 16,300 residents.

· Unemployment rates vary significantly from one PUMA to another, ranging from 1.3% in the Carter, Garvin, Murray, Love and Pontotoc (West) Counties PUMA to 10.4% in the Stephens, Caddo, Comanche (North), Tillman, Jefferson and Cotton Counties PUMA.

Several large employers offer opportunities within commuting distance of the Carter, Garvin, Murray, Love and Pontotoc (West) Counties, including Michelin North America Inc., Mercy Rehabilitation Services and Mercy Hospital, all located in Ardmore in Carter County. The city of Ada, located in Pontotoc County, is the site of the Mercy Hospital (Ada), Chickasaw Nation Medical Center, Legal Shield, and Solo Cup Company.

Employment in the Stephens, Caddo, Comanche (North), Tillman, Jefferson and Cotton Counties PUMA is spearheaded by Halliburton Energy Services Inc., located in Duncan. Due to the oil and gas industry downturn of the last few years, Halliburton was forced to lay off hundreds of employees, contributing to the significant unemployment rate in the PUMA. While the oil and gas industry is rebounding, the area still experiences overall high unemployment rates for all age ranges.

· With regard to gender:

· Males in this age cohort experience the lowest unemployment rates in the Carter, Garvin, Murray, Love and Pontotoc (West) Counties PUMA at 1.2%. As indicated previously, this PUMA boasts the lowest overall unemployment, regardless of gender.

· Conversely, males are least likely to be employed in the Stephens, Caddo, Comanche (North), Tillman, Jefferson, and Cotton Counties PUMA. The unemployment rate for men in this PUMA in 2016 was reported at 14.3%. As discussed previously, the major employer in this area is involved in the Energy industry. Statistically, in Oklahoma, males are 3.7 times more likely to be employed in the Energy Ecosystem than are females. As a result, the downturn in the oil and gas industry would be expected to disproportionately impact men in this PUMA.

· Female unemployment rates in this age bracket range from 0.0% to 13.7%. Extraordinarily, women in the Southwest Oklahoma PUMA – encompassing the 8-county district of Beckham, Custer, Greer, Harmon, Jackson, Kiowa, Roger Mills, and Washita – reported a 0.0% unemployment rate. According to the female survey respondents, they were either not participating in the labor force (40.2%) or they were employed.

· The highest unemployment rate for females in this age cohort (13.7%) was reported in Central Comanche County/City of Lawton where 1,200 females reported participating in the labor force but unable to achieve employment. In this same PUMA, the unemployment rate for males was reported at only 1.7% (160 unemployed individuals) – a disparity of 12 percentage points.

Based upon NAICS codes, business data indicate the presence of numerous establishments in a variety of industries including education, medical, tribal gaming/entertainment, finance, and retail, all employing between 250 and 2,200 individuals in the Lawton MSA. Data for the area, for all age groups, indicate that females represent a majority – and in some cases a dominant – percentage of employment in some of these industries. Over 80% of Healthcare and Social Assistance staff in this area are reported to be female; likewise, 74% of Finance and Insurance, and 65% of Educational Services industry staff are women. Residents employed in retail are equally distributed between the genders. Further research would be required to determine the cause of this significant level of female unemployment.

· As indicated previously, unemployment rates reported based upon race may be disproportionately affected by the small size of a given population. This is a particular issue at the PUMA level where survey responses received may number in the single- or double-digit range. For racial categories of workforce participation greater than 1,000, the highest unemployment rate reported was 34.6%. This occurred in the Oklahoma County (Northeast) – Edmond and Oklahoma City (North Central) Cities PUMA for individuals self-reporting as Black or African American. The second highest rate utilizing these same parameters was 29.3% for American Indian or Alaskan Natives in the Payne, Seminole, Creek (Southwest), Hughes and Okfuskee Counties – Stillwater City PUMA.

· The PUMA reporting the highest level of unemployment among individuals with a disability was Oklahoma County (Northeast) – Edmond and Oklahoma City (North Central) Cities PUMA at 33.4%.

· Three PUMAs reported a 0.0% unemployment rate for individuals with disabilities:

· Cherokee, Sequoyah and Adair Counties PUMA where, it must be noted that the disability labor force participation rate is only 13.9%;

· Southwest Oklahoma PUMA; and,

· Canadian County – Oklahoma City (West) PUMA.

· The highest labor force participation rate among the 28 PUMAs for individuals with disabilities is reported at 57.9% in the Cleveland County – Norman, Oklahoma City (South) and Moore Cities PUMA. The lowest labor force participation rate for the 40- to 64-year-old cohort with disabilities, as noted previously, is 13.9% in the Cherokee, Sequoyah and Adair Counties PUMA.

Appendix A: State of Oklahoma Data

Sources for data are cited for each table. Data is rounded to the nearest whole number or the nearest tenth, as appropriate. As a result, some columns may not sum exactly to the total reported. Negative numbers are cited in red and are bracketed by parentheses.

Disability

18 to 64 Years – Current Workforce Age Bracket

Disability Rate, 18 to 64 years

Total Population, Age 18-64

Reporting no Disability

Percentage Reporting no Disability

Reporting a Disability

Disability Rate

2,301,565

1,981,629

86.1%

319,936

13.9%

Source: American Community Survey,2016, 5-year Estimates

Prevalence of Disability by Type, 18 to 64 years *

Disability Type


Percentage of Total State Population

Percentage of Disabled Population

Hearing difficulty

73,649

3.2%

23.0%

Vision difficulty

68,373

3.0%

21.4%


124,393

5.4%

38.9%


169,490

7.4%

53.0%


53,538

2.3%

16.7%


104,526

4.5%

32.7%

* NOTE: Individuals may select more than one disability type. The total number of disabilities reported will exceed the total population. Source: American Community Survey,2016, 5-year Estimates

Prevalence of Disability by Gender, 18 to 64 years

Gender

Population


Disability Rate

Male

1,133,383

159,936

14.1%

Female

1,168,182

160,000

13.7%

TOTAL

2,301,565

319,936

13.9%


Prevalence of Disability by Race, 18 to 64 years

Race

Population


Disability Rate

American Indian or Alaska Native

168,038

29,196

17.4%

Asian

53,404

2,361

4.4%

Black

169,479

27,272

16.1%

Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander

2,994

269

9.0%

Some Other Race

61,518

5,121

8.3%

Two or More Races

146,972

23,542

16.0%

White

1,699,160

232,175

13.7%

TOTAL

2,301,565

319,936

13.9%


Disability Rate Comparison, Highest 10: Oklahoma versus Nation and other States

Geographical Area

Population


Disability Rate

United States

195,226,024

20,188,257

10.3%

West Virginia

1,118,913

194,175

17.4%

Kentucky

2,685,216

424,996

15.8%

Arkansas

1,761,350

264,545

15.0%

Mississippi

1,780,669

263,938

14.8%

Alabama

2,935,565

424,918

14.5%

Oklahoma

2,301,565

319,936

13.9%

Maine

821,334

112,122

13.7%

Tennessee

3,997,479

545,573

13.6%

Louisiana

2,817,139

371,289

13.2%

New Mexico

1,234,232

158,777

12.9%


Under 18 years – Future Workforce Age Bracket

Disability Rate, Under 18 years

Total Population Under 18 years

Reporting no Disability

Percentage Reporting no Disability


Disability Rate

950,318

903,744

95.1%

46,574

4.9%


Prevalence of Disability by Type, As a Percentage of Individuals with Disabilities, Under 18 years *

Disability Type


Percentage of Total State Population

Percentage of Disabled Population

Hearing difficulty

8,342

0.9%

17.9%

Vision difficulty

10,400

1.1%

22.3%

Cognitive difficulty**

30,662

4.5%

65.8%

Ambulatory difficulty**

5,419

0.8%

11.6%

Self-Care difficulty**

6,368

0.9%

13.7%


Not Applicable

*Individuals may select more than one disability type. The total number of disabilities will exceed the total population.

**Some disability types are not applicable to all age-ranges.


Prevalence of Disability by Gender, Under 18 years

Gender

Population


Disability Rate

Male

485,738

27,365

5.6%

Female

464,580

19,209

4.1%

TOTAL

950,318

46,574

4.9%


Prevalence of Disability by Race, Under 18 years

Race

Population


Disability Rate

American Indian or Alaska Native

87,893

5,191

5.9%

Asian

17,494

359

2.1%

Black

74,316

4,316

5.8%

Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander

1,622

62

3.8%

Some Other Race

34,850

1,418

4.1%

Two or More Races

126,779

7,227

5.7%

White

607,364

(28,001

4.6%

TOTAL

950,318

46,574

4.9%


Age and Gender, 15 to 64 years

Age Comparison, 15 to 64 years

Age Bracket

2017 Population

Percent of 2017 Population Age 15-64

2027 Projected Population

Percent of 2027 Projected Population Age 15-64

Growth Rate

15 to 19 years

265,288

10.5%

277,279

11.0%

4.5%

20 to 24 years

275,540

10.9%

281,449

11.2%

2.1%

25 to 29 years

276,149

10.9%

255,445

10.2%

(7.5%)

30 to 34 years

273,189

10.8%

260,735

10.4%

(4.6%)

35 to 39 years

254,733

10.0%

274,615

10.9%

7.8%

40 to 44 years

231,018

9.1%

264,453

10.5%

14.5%

45 to 49 years

228,777

9.0%

245,005

9.7%

7.1%

50 to 54 years

241,687

9.5%

219,951

8.7%

(9.0%)

55 to 59 years

256,529

10.1%

215,952

8.6%

(15.8%)

60 to 64 years

234,535

9.2%

220,495

8.8%

(6.0%)

TOTAL

2,537,445

100.0%

2,515,378

100.0%

(0.9%)


Gender by Age, 15 to 64 years

Gender/Age

2017 Population

Percent of Total 2017 Population Age 15-64


Percent of Total 2027 Projected Population Age 15-64

Growth Rate

MALE

15 to 19 years

136,669

5.4%

143,088

5.7%

4.7%

20 to 24 years

143,090

5.6%

145,780

5.8%

1.9%

25 to 29 years

140,095

5.5%

129,949

5.2%

(7.2%)

30 to 34 years

137,884

5.4%

132,480

5.3%

(3.9%)

35 to 39 years

128,864

5.1%

137,545

5.5%

6.7%

40 to 44 years

116,061

4.6%

132,883

5.3%

14.5%

45 to 49 years

114,637

4.5%

123,744

4.9%

7.9%

50 to 54 years

119,936

4.7%

109,706

4.4%

(8.5%)

55 to 59 years

124,818

4.9%

106,530

4.2%

(14.7%)

60 to 64 years

112,699

4.4%

106,866

4.2%

(5.2%)

MALE SUB-TOTAL

1,274,754

50.2%

1,268,571

50.4%

(0.5%)

FEMALE

15 to 19 years

128,619

5.1%

134,190

5.3%

4.3%

20 to 24 years

132,450

5.2%

135,668

5.4%

2.4%

25 to 29 years

136,054

5.4%

125,497

5.0%

(7.8%)

30 to 34 years

135,305

5.3%

128,255

5.1%

(5.2%)

35 to 39 years

125,869

5.0%

137,069

5.4%

8.9%

40 to 44 years

114,956

4.5%

131,570

5.2%

14.5%

45 to 49 years

114,140

4.5%

121,261

4.8%

6.2%

50 to 54 years

121,751

4.8%

110,245

4.4%

(9.5%)

55 to 59 years

131,711

5.2%

109,422

4.4%

(16.9%)

60 to 64 years

121,836

4.8%

113,629

4.5%

(6.7%)

FEMALE SUB-TOTAL

1,262,691

49.8%

1,246,807

49.6%

(0.0%)

OVERALL TOTAL

2,537,445

100.0%

2,515,378

100.0%

(0.9%)

Race and Ethnicity, Age 15-64

Race/Ethnicity Combinations, 15 to 64 years

Race/Ethnicity

2017 Population




Growth Rate

American Indian or Alaskan Native, Non-Hispanic

216,650

8.5%

216,468

8.6%

(0.1%)

Asian, Non-Hispanic

64,303

2.5%

74,768

3.0%

16.3%

Black or African American, Non-Hispanic

199,864

7.9%

198,829

7.9%

(0.5%)

Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, Non-Hispanic

3,837

0.2%

4,871

0.2%

27.0%

Two or More Races, Non-Hispanic

123,832

4.9%

134,939

5.4%

9.0%

White, Non-Hispanic

1,669,724

65.8%

1,583,852

63.0%

(5.1%)

American Indian or Alaskan Native, Hispanic

19,934

0.8%

25,357

1.0%

27.2%

Asian, Hispanic

1,792

0.1%

2,153

0.1%

20.2%

Black or African American, Hispanic

8,210

0.3%

9,762

0.4%

18.9%

Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, Hispanic

1,018

0.0%

1,192

0.0%

17.1%

Two or More Races, Hispanic

11,801

0.5%

14,164

0.6%

20.0%

White, Hispanic

216,481

8.5%

249,023

9.9%

15.0%

TOTAL

2,537,445

100.0%

2,515,378

100.0%

(0.9%)


Race Only, Regardless of Ethnicity, 15 to 64 years

Race

2017 Population




Growth Rate

American Indian or Alaskan Native

236,584

9.3%

241,826

9.6%

2.2%

Asian

66,094

2.6%

76,921

3.1%

16.4%

Black or African American

208,074

8.2%

208,591

8.3%

0.2%

Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander

4,855

0.2%

6,063

0.2%

24.9%

Two or More Races

135,633

5.3%

149,104

5.9%

9.9%

White

1,886,205

74.3%

1,832,874

72.9%

(2.8%)

TOTAL

2,537,445

100.0%

2,515,378

100.0%

(0.9%)


Ethnicity Only, Regardless of Race, 15 to 64 years

Ethnicity

2017 Population

Percent of Population Age 15-64



Growth Rate

Non-Hispanic

2,278,209

89.8%

2,213,727

88.0%

(2.8%)

Hispanic

259,236

10.2%

301,652

12.0%

16.4%

TOTAL

2,537,445

100.0%

2,515,378

100.0%

(0.9%)


English Language Learners, Age 18-64

Prevalence of Language Spoken at Home, 18 to 64 years

Language Spoken at Home

Percentage

Speak English only

89.2%

Speak a language other than English

10.8%

Of those that speak a language other than English, language spoken:

Spanish

7.2%

Other Indo-European Languages

1.0%

Asian and Pacific Island Languages

1.7%

Other Languages

0.9%

TOTAL

10.8%


Perception of Fluency of English Language Learners, 18 to 64 years

Language Spoken at Home

Speaks English:

Very Well

Well

Total of Very Well or Well

Not Well

Not At All

Total of Not Well or Not At All

Spanish

47.4%

21.5%

68.9%

22.3%

8.8%

31.1%

Other Indo-European Languages

78.7%

14.4%

93.1%

5.7%

1.3%

7.0%

Asian and Pacific Island Languages

50.9%

29.1%

80.0%

16.7%

3.3%

20.0%

Other Languages

80.7%

13.5%

94.2%

4.8%

1.0%

5.8%




Major Religious Category

Congregations

Percentage of Congregations

Member Count

Percentage of Members

Evangelical Protestant

4,223

63.6%

979,280

56.7%

Mainline Protestant

906

13.7%

313,093

18.1%

Historically Black Protestant

168

2.5%

39,577

2.3%

Roman Catholic

181

2.7%

145,581

8.4%

Jewish Congregations

12

0.2%

3,436

0.2%

Latter-Day Saint (Mormon)

66

1.0%

11,484

0.7%

Islamic

3

0.0%

835

0.0%

Hindu

1

0.0%

350

0.0%

Buddhist

5

0.1%

550

0.0%

Orthodox Christian

11

0.2%

2,551

0.1%

Jehovah’s Witnesses

97

1.5%

27,000

1.6%

Other

964

14.5%

203,645

11.8%

TOTAL

6,637

100.0%

1,727,382

100.0%

Source: University of Wisconsin “Social Explorer,” https://fyi.uwex.edu/community-data-tools/2011/12/05/detailed-data-on-religion-by-county/

Unemployment/Labor Force Participation, Age 40-64

Summary of Unemployment/Labor Force Participation, 40 to 64 years

State

In the Labor Force

Not In the Labor Force

Labor Force Participation Rate

Employed

Unemployed

Unemployment Rate

Oklahoma

843,779

355,365

70.4%

804,908

38,871

4.6%

Unemployment/Labor Force Participation by Presence of a Disability, 40 to 64 years

Presence of a Disability

In the Labor Force



Employed

Unemployed

Unemployment Rate

Disability

89,277

156,882

36.3%

80,028

9,249

10.4%

No Disability

754,502

198,483

79.2%

724,880

29,622

3.9%

TOTAL

843,779

355,365

70.4%

804,908

38,871

4.6%

Source: Public Use Microdata Sample (PUMs), American Community Survey, 2016

Unemployment/Labor Force Participation by Race Only, Regardless of Ethnicity, 40 to 64 years

Race

In the Labor Force



Employed

Unemployed

Unemployment Rate


57,712

27,474

67.7%

53,151

4,561

7.9%

Asian

18,205

3,627

83.4%

17,561

644

3.5%


51,606

27,054

65.6%

47,016

4,590

8.9%


2,054

151

93.2%

1,039

1,015

49.4%

Two or More Races

38,135

20,804

64.7%

35,964

2,171

5.7%

White

656,415

267,751

71.0%

632,090

24,325

3.7%

Some Other Race

19,652

8,504

69.8%

18,087

1,565

8.0%

TOTAL

843,779

355,365

70.4%

804,908

38,871

4.6%


Unemployment/Labor Force Participation by Ethnicity, Regardless of Race, 40 to 64 years

Ethnicity

In the Labor Force



Employed

Unemployed

Unemployment Rate

Hispanic

63,984

24,414

72.4%

60,751

3,233

5.1%

Non-Hispanic

779,795

330,951

70.2%

744,157

35,638

4.6%

TOTAL

843,779

355,365

70.4%

804,908

38,871

4.6%


Unemployment/Labor Force Participation by Gender, 40 to 64 years

Gender

In the Labor Force



Employed

Unemployed

Unemployment Rate

Male

450,821

143,674

75.8%

429,209

21,612

4.8%

Female

392,958

211,691

65.0%

375,699

17,259

4.4%

TOTAL

843,779

355,365

70.4%

804,908

38,871

4.6%


Appendix B: Public Use Microdata Sample Area (PUMA) Data Unemployment, Age 40 to 64 years

Sources for data are cited for each table. Data is rounded to the nearest whole number or the nearest tenth, as appropriate. As a result, some columns may not sum exactly to the total reported. Negative numbers are cited in red and are bracketed by parentheses.

Summary of Unemployment/Labor Force Participation, PUMA, 40 to 64 years

PUM Area

Included Counties

In the Labor Force



Employed

Un-

employed

Un-employment Rate

Northeast Oklahoma PUMA

Craig

Delaware

Mayes

Nowata

Ottawa

35,291

18,982

65.0%

33,518

1,773

5.0%

Cherokee, Sequoyah and Adair Counties PUMA

Adair

Cherokee

Sequoyah

19,173

13,451

58.8%

17,853

1,320

6.9%

Southeast Oklahoma PUMA

Choctaw

Haskell

Latimer

Le Flore

McCurtain

Pittsburg

Pushmataha

32,729

21,446

60.4%

31,379

1,350

4.1%

Southwest Oklahoma PUMA

Beckham

Custer

Greer

Harmon

Jackson

Kiowa

Roger Mills

Washita

21,861

11,315

65.9%

20,906

955

4.4%


Summary of Unemployment/Labor Force Participation, PUMA, 40 to 64 years (continued)

PUM Area

Included Counties

In the Labor Force



Employed

Un-

employed

Un-

employment Rate

Panhandle and Northwest Oklahoma PUMA

Alfalfa

Beaver

Blaine

Cimarron

Dewey

Ellis

Grant

Harper

Kingfisher

Major

Texas

Woods

Woodward

25,888

8,546

75.2%

24,258

1,630

6.3%

Comanche County (Central) – Lawton City PUMA

Comanche (part)

17,951

10,602

62.9%

16,589

1,362

7.6%

Stephens, Caddo, Comanche (North), Tillman, Jefferson, and Cotton Counties PUMA

Caddo

Comanche (part)

Cotton

Jefferson

Stephens

Tillman

24,358

12,277

66.5%

21,817

2,541

10.4%

Carter, Garvin, Murray, Love and Pontotoc (West) Counties PUMA

Carter

Garvin

Love

Murray

19,543

12,061

61.8%

19,295

248

1.3%



PUM Area

Included Counties

In the Labor Force



Employed

Un-

employed

Un-

employment Rate

Bryan, Pontotoc (East) Marshall, Atoka, Johnston and Coal Counties PUMA

Atoka

Bryan

Coal

Johnston

Marshall

Pontotoc

24,357

14,259

63.1%

23,175

1,182

4.9%

Canadian County – Oklahoma City (West) PUMA

Canadian

31,147

12,303

71.7%

29,471

1,676

5.4%

Cleveland County – Norman, Oklahoma City (South) and Moore Cities PUMA

Cleveland

62,554

19,015

76.7%

61,003

1,551

2.5%

Oklahoma County (Southwest) – Oklahoma City (West Central) PUMA

Oklahoma (part)

18,965

10,248

64.9%

18,221

744

3.9%

Oklahoma County (Northwest) – Oklahoma City (Northwest Central) and Bethany Cities PUMA

Oklahoma (part)

39,237

9,463

80.6%

37,489

1,748

4.5%

Oklahoma County (Northeast) – Edmond and Oklahoma City (North Central) Cities PUMA

Oklahoma (part)

35,224

8,416

80.7%

34,046

1,178

3.3%

Oklahoma County (East) – Midwest, Del and Oklahoma City (Northeast) Cities PUMA

Oklahoma (part)

27,248

12,304

68.9%

26,370

878

3.2%

Oklahoma County (Southeast) – Oklahoma City (East Central) PUMA

Oklahoma (part)

21,933

12,753

63.2%

20,602

1,331

6.1%

Oklahoma County (Central) – Oklahoma City (Central) PUMA

Oklahoma (part)

25,694

10,279

71.4%

24,827

867

3.4%



PUM Area

Included Counties

In the Labor Force



Employed

Un-

employed

Un-employment Rate

Grady, McClain and Pottawatomie (South) Counties PUMA

Grady

McClain

26,714

11,477

69.9%

26,071

643

2.4%

Pottawatomie (North), Logan and Lincoln Counties – Shawnee City PUMA

Lincoln

Logan

Pottawatomie

28,167

16,632

62.9%

26,416

1,751

6.2%

Tulsa County (Central) – Tulsa City (Central) PUMA

Tulsa (part)

45,963

14,454

76.1%

43,377

2,586

5.6%

Tulsa County (Southeast) – Tulsa (Southeast) and Broken Arrow (West) Cities PUMA

Tulsa (part)

52,941

13,804

79.3%

50,920

2,021

3.8%

Tulsa County (North) – Tulsa (North) and Owasso Cities PUMA

Tulsa (part)

27,929

10,532

72.6%

26,689

1,240

4.4%

Tulsa (West), Creek (Northeast) and Osage (Southeast) Counties – Tulsa City (West) PUMA

Tulsa (part)

43,589

14,377

75.2%

42,050

1,539

3.5%

Rogers (Central) and Wagoner (West) Counties – Claremore City PUMA

Rogers

Wagoner

33,016

7,850

80.8%

32,213

803

2.4%

Muskogee, Okmulgee, Wagoner (East) and McIntosh Counties PUMA

McIntosh

Muskogee

Okmulgee

29,431

16,016

64.8%

27,281

2,150

7.3%

Garfield, Kay and Noble Counties – Enid City PUMA

Garfield

Kay

Noble

27,799

7,946

77.8%

25,822

1,977

7.1%



PUM Area

Included Counties

In the Labor Force



Employed

Un-

employed

Un-

employment Rate

Payne, Seminole, Creek (Southwest), Hughes, and Okfuskee Counties – Stillwater City PUMA

Creek

Hughes

Okfuskee

Payne

Seminole

25,862

13,748

65.3%

24,836

1,026

4.0%

Washington, Osage (North and West), Pawnee, Creek (Northwest) Counties PUMA

Osage

Pawnee

Washington

19,215

10,809

64.0%

18,414

801

4.2%


Summary of Unemployment/Labor Force Participation by Race Only, Regardless of Ethnicity, PUMS, 40 to 64 years

PUM Area

Race

In the Labor Force



Employed

Un-employed

Un-employment Rate

Northeast Oklahoma PUM Area


6,488

3,093

67.7%

5,895

593

9.1%

Asian

340

137

71.3%

340

0

0.0%


101

145

41.1%

101

0

0.0%


156

0

100.0%

156

0

0.0%

Two or More Races

2,267

1,849

55.1%

2,154

113

5.0%

White

25,399

13,568

65.2%

24,470

929

3.7%

Some Other Race

540

190

74.0%

402

138

25.6%

Southeast Oklahoma PUM Area


2,680

1,481

64.4%

2,551

129

4.8%

Asian

145

63

69.7%

145

0

0.0%


1,400

677

67.4%

1,198

202

14.4%


606

0

100.0%

606

0

0.0%

Two or More Races

3,066

1,993

60.6%

2,902

164

5.3%

White

24,601

17,187

58.9%

23,746

855

3.5%

Some Other Race

231

45

83.7%

231

0

0.0%


Summary of Unemployment/Labor Force Participation by Race Only, Regardless of Ethnicity, PUMS, 40 to 64 years (continued)

PUM Area

Race

In the Labor Force



Employed

Un-employed

Un-employment Rate

Cherokee, Sequoyah, and Adair Counties PUM Area


6,734

3,394

66.5%

6,350

384

5.7%

Asian

36

41

46.8%

36

0

0.0%


497

190

72.3%

420

77

15.5%


0

0

0.0%

0

0

0.0%

Two or More Races

2,290

1,058

68.4%

1,700

590

25.8%

White

9,616

8,570

52.9%

9,347

269

2.8%

Some Other Race

0

198

0.0%

0

0

0.0%

Southwest Oklahoma PUM Area


141

267

34.6%

141

0

0.0%

Asian

0

0

0.0%

0

0

0.0%


268

1,664

13.9%

138

130

48.5%


0

0

0.0%

0

0

0.0%

Two or More Races

634

1,444

30.5%

634

0

0.0%

White

19,942

6,946

74.2%

19,117

825

4.1%

Some Other Race

876

994

46.8%

876

0

0.0%



PUM Area

Race

In the Labor Force



Employed

Un-employed

Un-employment Rate

Panhandle and Northwest PUM Area


381

163

70.0%

381

0

0.0%

Asian

0

0

0.0%

0

0

0.0%


239

101

70.3%

0

239

100.00%


0

0

0.0%

0

0

0.0%

Two or More Races

578

639

47.5%

578

0

0.0%

White

22,529

6,741

77.0%

21,693

836

3.7%

Some Other Race

2,161

902

70.6%

1,606

555

25.7%

Comanche County (Central) – Lawton City PUM Area


460

1,036

30.7%

460

0

0.0%

Asian

731

0

100.0%

731

0

0.0%


4,284

1,772

70.7%

3,831

453

10.6%


72

105

40.7%

72

0

0.0%

Two or More Races

1,626

805

66.9%

1,626

0

0.0%

White

10,385

6,536

61.4%

9,731

654

6.3%

Some Other Race

393

348

53.0%

138

255

64.9%



PUM Area

Race

In the Labor Force



Employed

Un-employed

Un-employment Rate

Stephens, Caddo, Comanche (North), Tillman, Jefferson and Cotton Counties PUM Area


2,959

927

76.1%

2,959

0

0.0%

Asian

0

23

0.0%

0

0

0.0%


262

514

33.8%

262

0

0.0%


0

0

0.0%

0

0

0.0%

Two or More Races

740

784

48.6%

740

0

0.0%

White

19,840

9,147

68.4%

17,351

2,489

12.5%

Some Other Race

557

882

38.7%

505

52

9.3%

Carter, Garvin, Murray, Love and Pontotoc (West) Counties PUM Area


1,014

806

55.7%

1,014

0

0.0%

Asian

0

0

0.0%

0

0

0.0%


547

464

34.7%

247

0

0.0%


0

0

0.0%

0

0

0.0%

Two or More Races

1,197

725

62.3%

1,197

0

0.0%

White

16,736

9,946

62.7%

16,488

248

1.5%

Some Other Race

349

120

74.4%

349

0

0.0%



PUM Area

Race

In the Labor Force



Employed

Un-employed

Un-employment Rate

Bryan, Pontotoc (East), Marshall, Atoka, Johnston, and Coal Counties – Ada City PUM Area


2,661

1,574

62.8%

2,624

37

1.4%

Asian

403

189

68.1%

403

0

0.0%


320

530

37.6%

221

99

30.9%


0

0

0.0%

0

0

0.0%

Two or More Races

2,097

866

70.8%

2,080

17

0.8%

White

18,703

11,077

62.8%

17,674

1,029

5.5%

Some Other Race

173

23

88.3%

173

0

0.0%

Canadian County – Oklahoma City (West) PUMA


530

541

49.5%

530

0

0.0%

Asian

939

319

74.6%

939

0

0.0%


409

409

50.0%

286

123

30.1%


0

0

0.0%

0

0

0.0%

Two or More Races

267

37

87.8%

267

0

0.0%

White

27,921

9,187

75.2%

26,368

1,553

5.6%

Some Other Race

1,081

1,810

37.4%

1,081

0

0.0%



PUM Area

Race

In the Labor Force



Employed

Un-employed

Un-employment Rate

Cleveland County – Norman, Oklahoma City (South) and Moore Cities PUM Area


2,333

236

90.8%

2,333

0

0.0%

Asian

2,973

966

75.5%

2,973

0

0.0%


1,621

988

62.1%

1,621

0

0.0%


29

0

100.0%

29

0

0.0%

Two or More Races

3,268

880

78.8%

2,827

441

13.5%

White

52,124

15,945

76.6%

51,014

1,110

2.1%

Some Other Race

206

0

100.0%

206

0

0.0%

Oklahoma County (Southwest) – Oklahoma City (West Central) PUM Area


1,403

496

73.9%

384

1,019

27.4%

Asian

1,085

0

100.0%

1,085

0

0.0%


1,075

1,188

47.5%

1,075

0

0.0%


0

0

0.0%

0

0

0.0%

Two or More Races

668

287

69.9%

379

289

43.3%

White

13,835

7,894

63.7%

13,764

71

0.5%

Some Other Race

899

383

70.1%

899

0

oklahomaworks.gov · web viewwhites, constituting 77.1% of the 40-64 years of age cohort,...

Documents