1 / 98

Changing Demographics In Southeast Michigan

Explore the evolving population landscape in Southeast Michigan and Detroit region, analyzing demographic shifts, migration patterns, employment trends, and age distribution. Uncover the impact of changing demographics on urban planning and community development initiatives.

rgarvey
Download Presentation

Changing Demographics In Southeast Michigan

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Changing Demographics In Southeast Michigan Presentation to Detroit Strategic Framework Plan Technical Team At DEGC August 3, 2010

  2. Population HistorySoutheast Michigan and Detroit Region Source: U.S. Census Bureau, SEMCOG

  3. Year Built by 5 Acre Gridcells 1920 and Earlier 1921 - 1940 1941 - 1960 1961 - 1980 1981 - 1990 1991 - 2000 2001 - 2004 DevelopmentHistory

  4. 2008 Land UseDetroit

  5. Cumulative Percent Change in Population2000-2009 United States Source: U.S. Census Bureau

  6. Annual MigrationCity of Detroit, 2000, 2005, 2008 Source: Census 2000, ACS 2005 and 2008

  7. Destinations of Out MigrationCity of Detroit, 2008 The Rest of Michigan 30,653 (43%) Outside Michigan 15,351 (22%) Balance of Wayne County 25,179 (35%) Source: ACS 2008

  8. Population and EmploymentSoutheast Michigan, 2000-2035 2010 Population Employment Source: SEMCOG

  9. Population 4,900,507

  10. Average Annual Change in Households, 1990-2005 (-3,422 to 1,113) Decrease, more than 20 loss (10) Little change, 19 loss to 20 gain (75) Moderate increase, 21 to 70 gain (79) Large increase, 70 to 150 gain (30) Very large increase, more than 150 gain (35) Average Annual Household Change from 1990 to 2005

  11. Average Annual Change in Households, 2005-2020 (-3,313 to 327) Decrease, more than 20 loss (9) Little change, 19 loss to 20 gain (147) Moderate increase, 21 to 70 gain (53) Large increase, 70 to 150 gain (15) Very large increase, more than 150 gain (5) Average Annual Household Change from 2005 to 2020

  12. Average Annual Change in Households, 2020-2035 (-402 to 368) Decrease, more than 20 loss (1) Little change, 19 loss to 20 gain (124) Moderate increase, 21 to 70 gain (63) Large increase, 70 to 150 gain (23) Very large increase, more than 150 gain (18) Average Annual Household Change from 2020 to 2035

  13. Population by AgeSoutheast Michigan Female Male “Baby boomers”

  14. Regional Implications 2000 1. Dramatic increase of senior population 2. Labor shortage 3. Decline of school enrollment 2035

  15. Percent Population 65 and OlderSoutheast Michigan 2000 2035 10% or less More than 10% to 15% More than 15% to 20% More than 20% to 25% More than 25%

  16. Inbound Commuting for Detroit, 2008Place of Residence for those Working in Detroit St. Clair 3,308 Oakland 45,468 Macomb 35,973 Livingston Less than 1,500 Outside Region 18,672 Washtenaw 3,445 Detroit 80,321 Wayne 55,742 Monroe 1,857 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2008 LED.

  17. Outbound Commuting for Detroit, 2008Place of Work for Detroit Residents St. Clair 707 Oakland 45,435 Macomb 20,240 Livingston 1,269 Outside Region 20,841 Washtenaw 3,386 Detroit 80,321 Wayne 38,281 Monroe Less than 700 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2008 LED.

  18. Top 5 Places of Work for Detroit Residents2008 Source: U.S. Census Bureau, 2008 LED.

  19. Income*2000, 2009 * Note: All 2000 monetary values are adjusted to 2009 dollars using U.S. Consumer Price Research Series Index for All Urban Consumers (CPI-U-RS) from 1999 to 2009. Source: U.S. Department of Labor

  20. Michigan Per Capita IncomeDeviation from National Average, 1969-2008 State ranking in U.S., including D.C. Source: BEA 38

  21. Xuan Liu Manager of Data Center Liu@semcog.org (313) 324-3441 Kathleen Lomako Deputy Executive Director Lomako@semcog.org (313) 324-3309 Southeast Michigan Council of Governments 535 Griswold St., Suite 300 Detroit, MI 48226 www.semcog.org

  22. Southeast Michigan Council of Governments

  23. Starfish’s Request to Data Driven Detroit Assessment of most pressing needs of at risk children and families living in Starfish service area Identification of geographical areas of greatest need in the 12 Starfish communities Identification of resources available to meet the needs Specification of gaps between need and resources Delineation of strategic implications for Starfish

  24. Why Focus on At Risk Children and Families? According to a 2010 Urban Institute report: “Because poverty status at birth is linked to worse adult outcomes, targeting resources to children born into poverty and their families would help particularly vulnerable people,’ [the authors] observe. They say education, training, and work supports (such as child care subsidies) for parents could brighten children’s prospects by providing needy families with economic security and stability. Other supports for parents, such as home-visiting programs, could help children by improving family functioning and the home environment.” Source: summary of findings from “Childhood Poverty Persistence: Facts and Consequences,” Caroline Ratcliffe and Signe-Mary McKernan, Urban Institute, 2010

  25. Outline of Presentation • Overview of Wayne County Trends for Context • Introduction to the Starfish service area • Examination of barriers facing Starfish children and families • Financial barriers • Lack of parental resources • Population instability • Inadequacy of educational and community resources • Access • Stress index NEXT STEPS • Availability of services to meet critical needs • Gaps between needs and available services • Implications of gap analysis for Starfish programming

  26. Data Sources Utilized in Assessment • U.S. Bureau of the Census • Demographics Now and Claritas • United Way for Southeastern Michigan • SEMCOG • Michigan Department of Community Health • Michigan Department of Human Services • Michigan Dept. of Labor & Economic Growth • MI Ctr for Educational Performance and Information • Five focus groups • Starfish staff • Youth advisory group • Parents of Starfish clients • Community members • Life Span staff

  27. Out-Wayne’s Population Growth Post-1990 Came to a Halt in 2002 Source: Census Bureau and SEMCOG

  28. Wayne County’s Net Out-Migration Has Resulted in the Largest Population Loss of Any County in the Country Source: Census Bureau

  29. While Births Have Decreased by 15.4 Percent in Out-Wayne County, They Have Dropped 51.2 Percent in Detroit Source: MI Dept. of Community Health

  30. Decreasing Births Have Reduced the Size of the Cohort Under Age 5Births Down 34% in County, 11% in Starfish Region 8.0% 7.4% 6.6% Source: Census Bureau

  31. The Unemployment Rate for Detroit Runs About Three Times That of Out-Wayne County Source: MI Labor Market Information

  32. The Number of Wayne County Residents Receiving Food Stamps Increased by 137% Over the Decade1 of Every 3 Households (38%) in August 2010 Source: Michigan Dept. of Human Services

  33. Nearly Half of All Wayne County Children, 5 Years and Under, Were in Food Stamp Households in June 2010 Source: MI Department of Human Services

  34. Introduction to the Starfish Service Area

  35. The Population of 0-4 Year Olds Decreased From 2000 to 2009 In All Starfish Communities Except Canton and Northville Townships

  36. Barriers for Families and Children

  37. Barrier 1:Lack of Financial Resources

  38. Annual Unemployment Rate, 2009

  39. Another indicator of stress on a community is the number of calls to United Way’s 2-1-1 telephone referral service. The next slide illustrates that financial concerns motivate many of these calls from Inkster residents. This is true in all the Starfish communities. Source: United Way for Southeastern Michigan

  40. Free and Reduced Lunch Program Three of the Four School Districts Serving Inkster Had the Highest Percentages of Students Eligible for the Program Source: Center for Educational Performance and Information (CEPI)

More Related